Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

A Systematic Literature Review on the Quality of MOOCs

  • C.M. Stracke*
  • , Giada Trisolini
  • *Corresponding author for this work

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

    6   Link opens in a new tab Citations (Web of Science)

    Abstract

    This paper presents the findings from a systematic literature review on the quality of massive open online courses (MOOCs). The main research question was “How can the quality criteria for MOOCs identified in the analysed studies from the systematic literature review be best organised in a categorisation scheme?” The systematic literature review was conducted using the PRISMA procedures. After conducting the screening and eligibility analysis according the
    pre-defined criteria, 103 studies were finally selected. The analysis was done in iterative cycles for continuous improvements of the assignments and clustering of the quality criteria. The final version was validated in consensus through the categorisation and assignment of all 103 studies in a consistent way to four dimensions (pedagogical, organisational, technological, and social) and their
    sub-categories. This quality framework can be re-used in future MOOC research and the discussion of the analysed studies provides a current literature overview on the quality of MOOCs.
    Original languageEnglish
    Article number5817
    Number of pages26
    JournalSustainability
    Volume13
    Issue number11
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 21 May 2021

    Keywords

    • DESIGN
    • HIGHER-EDUCATION
    • LEARNING-STRATEGIES
    • MOTIVATION
    • ONLINE COURSES MOOCS
    • PATTERNS
    • categorization framework
    • digital learning
    • distance education and learning
    • impact analysis and evaluation
    • instructional design
    • massive open online courses (MOOCs)
    • online education
    • quality criteria
    • systematic literature review

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'A Systematic Literature Review on the Quality of MOOCs'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this