Investigation of Research about Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs): A Thematic Content Analysis Study

Year 2020, Volume: 8 Issue: 16, 787 - 820, 20.10.2020

Burcu Haymana Gökhan Dağhan

https://doi.org/10.18009/jcer.772010

Cited By: 4

Abstract

The aim of this study is to integrate the results of the MOOC researches carried out in recent years, and to determine the general trends of the MOOC literature. Therefore, this research is carried out with a quantitative point of view and a content analysis study is conducted about the MOOCs. In this study, thematic content analysis is used as a content analysis type. In the searching process conducted on the Web of Science database, the articles to be reached were expected to be indexed in SSCI, AHCI, SCI-E and ESCI indexes. 123 articles obtained as a result of the searching process were examined in terms of the determined criterias and their contents were analyzed and classified. Research findings revealed the projection of the current state of MOOC research. The suggestions developed in the light of the findings and results are expected to offer practical tips and concrete advices for practitioners and designers.

Keywords

Open education, distance education, massive open online courses (MOOCs), thematic content analysis (meta-synthesis)

Kitlesel Açık Çevrimiçi Derslerle İlgili Yapılan Araştırmaların İncelenmesi: Tematik İçerik Analizi Çalışması

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, kitlesel açık çevrimiçi derslerle (KAÇD) ilgili olarak son yıllarda yapılan araştırmaların sonuçlarını toparlayıcı bir bakış açısıyla bütünleştirebilmek ve böylece genel eğilimleri belirleyebilmektir. Dolayısıyla nicel bir bakış açısıyla yürütülmüş olan bu araştırmada KAÇD’ler hakkında bir içerik analizi çalışması yapılmıştır. Bu çalışmada, bir içerik analizi türü olarak tematik içerik analizi kullanılmıştır. Web of Science veritabanı üzerinden yapılan taramada, ulaşılacak olan makalelerin SSCI, AHCI, SCI-E ve ESCI atıf indekslerinde taranması beklenmiştir. İnceleme sonucunda elde edilen 123 makale, belirlenen ölçütler bakımından ele alınmış ve içerikleri analiz edilerek sınıflandırılmıştır. Araştırma bulguları KAÇD araştırmalarının var olan durumunun projeksiyonunu ortaya koymuştur. Elde edilen bulgular ve sonuçlar ışığında geliştirilen önerilerin uygulayıcılara ve tasarımcılara dönük pratik ipuçları ve somut tavsiyeler sunması beklenmektedir.

Keywords

Açık eğitim, uzaktan eğitim, kitlesel açık çevrimiçi ders (KAÇD), tematik içerik analizi (meta-sentez)

References

• Baggaley, J. (2013). MOOC rampant. Distance Education, 34(3), 368-378. doi: 10.1080/01587919.2013.835768
• Baggaley, J. (2014). MOOC postscript. Distance Education, 35(1), 126-132. doi: 10.1080/01587919.2013.876142
• Bozkurt, A., Akgün-Özbek, E., & Zawacki-Richter, O. (2017). Trends and patterns in Massive Open Online Courses: Review and content analysis of research on MOOCs (2008-2015). International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(5), 118-146. doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v18i5.3080
• Bozkurt, A., Özdamar Keskin, N., & de Waard, I. (2016). Research trends in massive open online course (MOOC) theses and dissertations: Surfing the tsunami wave. Open Praxis, 8(3), 203-221. doi: 10.5944/openpraxis.8.3.287
• Chen, Y.-H., & Chen, P.-J. (2015). MOOC study group: Facilitation strategies, influential factors, and student perceived gains. Computers & Education, 86, 55-70. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2015.03.008
• Colvin, K. F., Champaign, J., Liu, A., Zhou, Q., Fredericks, C., & Pritchard, D. E. (2014). Learning in an introductory physics MOOC: All cohorts learn equally, including an on-campus class. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 15(4), 263-282. doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v15i4.1902
• Çalık, M. ve Sözbilir, M. (2014). İçerik analizinin parametreleri. Eğitim ve Bilim, 39(174), 33-38. doi: 10.15390/EB.2014.3412
• de Barba, P. G., Kennedy, G. E., & Ainley, M. D. (2016). The role of students’ motivation and participation in predicting performance in a MOOC. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32(3), 218-231. doi: 10.1111/jcal.12130
• Demiraslan Çevik, Y. (2015). Yeni (?) bir öğrenme kuramı olarak bağlantıcılık. B. Akkoyunlu, A. İşman ve H. F. Odabaşı (Ed.) içinde Eğitim teknolojileri okumaları 2015, (9. Bölüm, ss. 177-194). TOJET-The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology.
• Dillahunt, T., Wang, Z., & Teasley, S. D. (2014). Democratizing higher education: Exploring MOOC use among those who cannot afford a formal education. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning (IRRODL), 15(5), 177-196. doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v15i5.1841
• Dunaway, M. K. (2011). Connectivism: Learning theory and pedagogical practice for networked information landscapes. Reference Services Review, 39(4), 675-685. doi: 10.1108/00907321111186686
• Ebben, M., & Murphy, J. S. (2014). Unpacking MOOC scholarly discourse: A review of nascent MOOC scholarship. Learning, Media and Technology, 39(3), 328-345. doi: 10.1080/17439884.2013.878352
• Edwards, R. (1995). Different discourses, discourses of difference: Globalisation, distance education, and open learning. Distance Education, 16(2), 241-255. doi: 10.1080/0158791950160206
• Gašević, D., Kovanović, V., Joksimović, S., & Siemens, G. (2014). Where is research on massive open online courses headed? A data analysis of the MOOC research initiative. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(5), 134-176.
• Hone, K. S., & El Said, G. R. (2016). Exploring the factors affecting MOOC retention: A survey study. Computers & Education, 98(July 2016), 157-168. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2016.03.016
• Hood, N., Littlejohn, A., & Milligan, C. (2015). Context counts: How learners' contexts influence learning in a MOOC. Computers & Education, 91, 83-91. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2015.10.019
• İkinci, A. S. (2016). The salient components of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) as revealed in scholarly publications. İhsan Doğramacı Bilkent Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Ankara.
• Knox, J. (2014). Digital culture clash: “massive” education in the E-learning and Digital Cultures MOOC. Distance Education, 35(2), 164-177. doi: 10.1080/01587919.2014.917704
• Li, N., Verma, H., Skevi, A., Zufferey, G., Blom, J., & Dillenbourg, P. (2014). Watching MOOCs together: investigating co-located MOOC study groups. Distance Education, 35(2), 217-233. doi: 10.1080/01587919.2014.917708
• Lin, C.-H., & Zhang, Y. (2014). MOOCs and Chinese language education. Journal of Technology and Chinese Language Teaching, 5(2), 49-65.
• Liyanagunawardena, T. R., Adams, A. A., & Williams, S. A. (2013). MOOCs: A systematic study of the published literature 2008-2012. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 14(3), 202-227. doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v14i3.1455
• Liyanagunawardena, T. R., Lundqvist, K. Ø., & Williams, S. A. (2015). Who are with us: MOOC learners on a FutureLearn course. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(3), 557-569. doi:10.1111/bjet.12261
• Mackness, J., Waite, M., Roberts, G., & Lovegrove, E. (2013). Learning in a small, task–oriented, connectivist MOOC: Pedagogical issues and implications for higher education. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 14(4), 140-159.
• Naidu, S. (2019). The idea of open education. Distance Education, 40(1), 1-4. doi: 10.1080/01587919.2018.1564622
• Pilli, O., & Admiraal, W. (2016). A taxonomy of massive open online courses. Contemporary Educational Technology, 7(3), 223-240.
• Raffaghelli, J. E., Cucchiara, S., & Persico, D. (2015). Methodological approaches in MOOC research: Retracing the myth of Proteus. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(3), 488-509. doi:10.1111/bjet.12279
• Rodriguez, C. O. (2012). MOOCs and the AI-Stanford like courses: Two successful and distinct course formats for massive open online courses. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 3. http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/EJ982976.pdf adresinden 15.01.2018 tarihinde erişilmiştir.
• Sa’don, N. F., Alias, R. A., & Ohshima, N. (2014). Nascent research trends in MOOCs in higher educational institutions: A systematic literature review. 2014 International Conference on Web and Open Access to Learning (ICWOAL), 25-27 November 2014, Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
• Salmon, G., Gregory, J., Dona, K. L., & Ross, B. (2015). Experiential online development for educators: The example of the Carpe Diem MOOC. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(3), 542-556. doi:10.1111/bjet.12256
• Sanchez-Gordon, S., & Luján-Mora, S. (2014, March). MOOCs gone wild. Paper presented at the 8th International Technology, Education and Development Conference. Valencia, Spain.
• Sayın, Z., & Seferoğlu, S. S. (2015). Çevrim-içi öğrenmeye yeni bir bakış açısı: Kitlesel açık çevrimiçi dersler. B. Akkoyunlu, A. İşman ve H. F. Odabaşı (Ed.) içinde Eğitim teknolojileri okumaları 2015, (26. Bölüm, ss. 525-538). TOJET-The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology.
• Schreirer, M. (2012). Qualitative content analysis in practice. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.
• Siemens, G. (2005a). Connectivism: Learning as Network-Creation. 28.04.2016 tarihinde http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/networks.htm adresinden erişilmiştir.
• Siemens, G. (2005b). Connectivism: A learning theory for a digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1). http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Jan_05/article01.htm adresinden 20.02.2019 tarihinde alınmıştır.
• Siemens, G., & Downes, S. (2008). Connectivism & Connective Knowledge. http://connect.downes.ca/archive/08/09_08_thedaily.htm adresinden 01.02.2019 tarihinde erişilmiştir.
• Siemens, G. & Tittenberger, P. (2009). Handbook of emerging technologies for learning. http://www.aps.edu/educational-technology/documents/handbook-of-emerging-technologies-for-learning/at_download/file adresinden 23.03.2019 tarihinde erişilmiştir.
• Veletsianos, G., & Shepherdson, P. (2016). A systematic analysis and synthesis of the empirical MOOC literature published in 2013-2015. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(2), 198-221. doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v17i2.2448
• Watson, S. L., Loizzo, J., Watson, W. R., Mueller, C., Lim, J., & Ertmer, P. A. (2016). Instructional design, facilitation, and perceived learning outcomes: An exploratory case study of a human trafficking MOOC for attitudinal change. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64(6), 1273-1300. doi: 10.1007/s11423-016-9457-2
• Watson, W. R., Kim, W., & Watson S. L. (2016). Learning outcomes of a MOOC designed for attitudinal change: A case study of an animal behavior and welfare MOOC. Computers & Education, 96, 83-93. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2016.01.013
• Yousef, A. M. F., Chatti, M. A., Wosnitza, M., & Schroeder, U. (2015). A cluster analysis of MOOC stakeholder perspectives. RUSC. Universities and Knowledge Society Journal, 12(1), 74-90. doi: 10.7238/rusc.v12i1.2253
• Zhu, M., Sari, A., & Lee, M. M. (2018). A systematic review of research methods and topics of the empirical MOOC literature (2014–2016). The Internet and Higher Education, 37, 31-39. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2018.01.002