Where and what to improve? Design and application of a MOOC evaluation framework based on effective teaching practices

References

• Bailey, C. J., & Card, K. A. (2009). Effective pedagogical practices for online teaching: perception of experienced instructors. The Internet and Higher Education, 12(3-4), 152–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.08.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bailie, J. L. (2014). Do instructional protocols placed on online faculty correlate with learner expectations? Journal of Instructional Pedagogies, 13. https://aabri.com/manuscripts/131775.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Baran, E., Correia, A. P., & Thompson, A. (2011). Transforming online teaching practice: critical analysis of the literature on the roles and competencies of online teachers. Distance Education, 32(3), 421–439. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2011.610293
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bonk, C. J. (2020). Pandemic ponderings, 30 years to today: Synchronous signals, saviors, or survivors? Distance Education, 41(4), 589–599. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2020.1821610
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borrella, I., Caballero-Caballero, S., & Ponce-Cueto, E. (2022). Taking action to reduce dropout in MOOCs: Tested interventions. Computers & Education, 179, Article 104412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104412
   Google Scholar
• Chand, B., & Gabryszewska, M. (2021). Implementing Quality Matters in the political science online classroom. Journal of Political Science Education, 17, 486–502. https://doi.org/10.1080/15512169.2021.1921589
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheng, S. L., & Xie, K. (2018). The relations among teacher value beliefs, personal characteristics, and TPACK in intervention and non-intervention settings. Teaching and Teacher Education, 74, 98–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.04.014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dai, H. M., Teo, T., Rappa, N. A., & Huang, F. (2020). Explaining Chinese university students’ continuance learning intention in the MOOC setting: A modified expectation confirmation model perspective. Computers & Education, 150, Article 103850. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103850
   Google Scholar
• Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. The Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Egloffstein, M., Koegler, K., & Ifenthaler, D. (2019). Instructional quality of business MOOCs: Indicators and initial findings. Online Learning, 23(4), 85–105. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v23i4.2091
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fajardo, C. (2014). Best practices for teaching accounting courses online. Journal of Business and Educational Leadership, 5(1), 28–38.
   Google Scholar
• Garrison, D., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (1999). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2), 87–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6
   Google Scholar
• Giossos, Y., Koutsouba, M., Lionarakis, A., & Skavantzos, K. (2009). Reconsidering Moore’s transactional distance theory. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 2, 1–6. http://www.eurodl.org/?article=374
   Google Scholar
• Grandzol, J. R., & Grandzol, C. J. (2006). Best practices for online business education. The International Review of Research in Open & Distance Learning, 7(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v7i1.246
   Google Scholar
• Hendriks, R. A., de Jong, P. G. M., Admiraal, W. F., & Reinders, M. E. J. (2020). Instructional design quality in medical massive open online courses for integration into campus education. Medical Teacher, 42(2), 156–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2019.1665634
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hutchings, M., Hadfield, M., Howarth, G., & Lewarne, S. (2007). Meeting the challenges of active learning in Web-based case studies for sustainable development. Innovations in Education & Teaching International, 44(3), 331–343. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703290701486779
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Julia, K., Peter, V. R., & Marco, K. (2021). Educational scalability in MOOCs: Analysing instructional designs to find best practices. Computers & Education, 161, Article 104054. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104054
   Google Scholar
• Krusen, N. E. (2015). The intersection of exemplar professional accreditation standards and Quality Matters rubric standards for best practice in distance education. Internet Learning Journal, 4(2), 69–83. https://doi.org/10.18278/il.4.2.6
   Google Scholar
• Legon, R. (2015). Measuring the impact of the Quality Matters Rubric™: A discussion of possibilities. American Journal of Distance Education, 29(3), 166–173. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2015.1058114
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loafman, L., & Altman, B. W. (2014). Going online: Building your business law course using the Quality Matters rubric. Journal of Legal Studies Education, 31(1), 21–54. https://doi.org/10.1111/jlse.12008
   Google Scholar
• Lowenthal, P., & Hodges, C. (2015). In search of quality: Using Quality Matters to analyze the quality of massive, open, online courses (MOOCs). The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(5), 83–101. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v16i5.2348
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Margaryan, A., Bianco, M., & Littlejohn, A. (2015). Instructional quality of massive open online courses (MOOCs). Computers & Education, 80, 77–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.08.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meet, R. K., & Kala, D. (2021). Trends and future prospects in MOOC researches: A systematic literature review 2013-2020. Contemporary Educational Technology, 13(3), Article 312. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/10986
   Google Scholar
• Moore, M. (1993). Theory of transactional distance. In D. Keegan (Ed.), Theoretical principles of distance education (1st ed., pp. 22–38). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Moore, M. (2013). The theory of transactional distance. In M. G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of distance education (3rd ed., pp. 4–24). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Morris, L. V., & Finnegan, C. L. (2009). Best practices in predicting and encouraging student persistence and achievement online. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 10(1), 55–64. https://doi.org/10.2190/CS.10.1.e
   Google Scholar
• Oh, E. G., Chang, Y., & Park, S. W. (2019). Design review of MOOCs: Application of e-learning design principles. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 32(3), 130–142. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-019-09243-w
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pappano, L. (2012, November 4). The year of the MOOC. The New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/04/education/edlife/massive-open-online-courses-are-multiplying-at-a-rapid-pace.html
   Google Scholar
• Paton, R. M., Scanlan, J. D., & Fluck, A. E. (2018). A performance profile of learner completion and retention in Australian VET MOOCs. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 70(4), 581–599. https://doi.org/10.1080/13636820.2018.1463278
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pérez-Sanagustín, M., Hilliger, I., Alario-Hoyos, C., Kloos, C., & Rayyan, S. (2017). H-MOOC framework: Reusing MOOCs for hybrid education. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 29(1), 47–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-017-9133-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Quality Matters. (2020). Specific review standards from the QM higher education rubric (6th ed.). https://www.qualitymatters.org/sites/default/files/PDFs/StandardsfromtheQMHigherEducationRubric.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Rosewell, J., & Jansen, D. (2014). The OpenupEd quality label: Benchmarks for MOOCs. The International Journal for Innovation and Quality in Learning, 2(3), 88–100. https://www.openuped.org/images/docs/OpenupEd_Q-label_for_MOOCs_INNOQUAL-160-587-1-PB.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Shah D. (2020, November 30). By the numbers: MOOCS in 2020. The Report. https://www.classcentral.com/report/MOOC-stats-2020
   Google Scholar
• Stracke, C., & Trisolini, G. (2021). A systematic literature review on the quality of MOOCs. Sustainability, 13(11), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13115817
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tang, H. (2021). Teaching teachers to use technology through massive open online course: Perspectives of interaction equivalency. Computers & Education, 174, Article 104307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104307
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, Y., & Stein, D. (2021). Effects of online teaching presence on students’ cognitive conflict and engagement. Distance Education, 42(4), 547–566. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2021.1987837
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watson, W. R., Watson, S. L., & Janakiraman, S. (2017). Instructional quality of massive open online courses: A review of attitudinal change MOOCs. International Journal of Learning Technology, 12(3), 219–240. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJLT.2017.088406
   Google Scholar
• Wengrowicz, N., & Offir, B. (2013). Teachers’ perceptions of transactional distance in different teaching environments. American Journal of Distance Education, 27(2), 111–121. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2013.773701
   Google Scholar
• Wu, B., & Wang, Y. (2022). Formation mechanism of popular courses on MOOC platforms: A configurational approach. Computers & Education, 191, Article 104629. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104629
   Google Scholar
• Zhang, J., Gao, M., & Zhang, J. (2021). The learning behaviours of dropouts in MOOCs: A collective attention network perspective. Computers & Education, 167, Article 104189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104189
   Google Scholar
• Zhu, M., Sari, A. R., & Lee, M. M. (2020). A comprehensive systematic review of MOOC research: Research techniques, topics, and trends from 2009 to 2019. Educational Technology Research & Development, 68(4), 1685–1710. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09798-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar