Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Jul 8;22(7):e17318.
doi: 10.2196/17318.

Benefits of Massive Open Online Course Participation: Deductive Thematic Analysis

Elizabeth R Blum #  1 , Terese Stenfors #  1 , Per J Palmgren #  1
Affiliations

Benefits of Massive Open Online Course Participation: Deductive Thematic Analysis

Elizabeth R Blum et al. J Med Internet Res. .

Abstract

Background: Massive open online courses (MOOCs), as originally conceived, promised to provide educational access to anyone with an internet connection. However, the expansiveness of MOOC education has been found to be somewhat limited. Nonetheless, leading universities continue to offer MOOCs, including many in the health sciences, on a number of private platforms. Therefore, research on online education must include thorough understanding of the role of MOOCs. To date, studies on MOOC participants have focused mainly on learners' assessment of the course. It is known that MOOCs are not reaching the universal audiences that were predicted, and much knowledge has been gained about learners' perceptions of MOOCs. However, there is little scholarship on what learners themselves gain from participating in MOOCs.

Objective: As MOOC development persists and expands, scholars and developers should be made aware of the role of MOOCs in education by examining what these courses do offer their participants. The objective of this qualitative synthesis of a set of MOOC evaluation studies was to explore outcomes for MOOC learners, that is, how the learners themselves benefit from participating in MOOCs.

Methods: To explore MOOC learners' outcomes, we conducted a qualitative synthesis in the form of a deductive thematic analysis, aggregating findings from 17 individual studies selected from an existing systematic review of MOOC evaluation methods. We structured our inquiry using the Kirkpatrick model, considering Kirkpatrick levels 2, 3, and 4 as potential themes in our analysis.

Results: Our analysis identified six types of Kirkpatrick outcomes in 17 studies. Five of these outcomes (learning/general knowledge, skills, attitudes, confidence, and commitment) fit into Kirkpatrick Level 2, while Kirkpatrick Level 3 outcomes concerning behavior/application were seen in four studies. Two additional themes were identified outside of the Kirkpatrick framework: culture and identity outcomes and affective/emotional outcomes. Kirkpatrick Level 4 was not represented among the outcomes we examined.

Conclusions: Our findings point to some gains from MOOCs. While we can expect MOOCs to persist, how learners benefit from the experience of participating in MOOCs remains unclear.

Keywords: Kirkpatrick framework; MOOC; MOOC evaluation; MOOC outcomes; learner; online education; outcomes; qualitative; thematic analysis.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) flow diagram: systematic review (A) for a synthesis paper on MOOC learning outcomes (B). Modified from Alturkistani et al [21].
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Hollands FM, Tirthali D. Institute of Education Sciences. New York: Center for Benefit-Cost Studies of Education, Teachers College, Columbia University; 2014. [2020-05-14]. MOOCs: Expectations and Reality. Full Report https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED547237.pdf.
    1. de Freitas SI, Morgan J, Gibson D. Will MOOCs transform learning and teaching in higher education? Engagement and course retention in online learning provision. Br J Educ Technol. 2015 Apr 08;46(3):455–471. doi: 10.1111/bjet.12268. - DOI
    1. Zhu M, Sari A, Lee MM. A systematic review of research methods and topics of the empirical MOOC literature (2014–2016) Internet High Educ. 2018 Apr;37:31–39. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2018.01.002. - DOI
    1. Veletsianos G, Shepherdson P. A Systematic Analysis and Synthesis of the Empirical MOOC Literature Published in 2013–2015. IRRODL. 2016 Mar 01;17(2):198–221. doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v17i2.2448. - DOI
    1. Blanco Á, García-Peñalvo F, Sein-Echaluce M. A methodology proposal for developing Adaptive cMOOC. Conference: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Technological Ecosystem for Enhancing Multiculturality; November 2013; Salamanca, Spain. 2013. Nov, pp. 553–558. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262167521_A_methodology_proposa... - DOI

Publication types