Is quality assurance compatible with technological innovation? Case studies of massive open online courses (MOOCs) in United Kingdom higher education

References

• Akalu, G., 2016, ‘Higher education “massification” and challenges to the professoriate: do academics’ conceptions of quality matter?’, Quality in Higher Education, 22(3), pp. 260–76.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Al-Imarah, A. & Shields, A., 2019, ‘MOOCs, disruptive innovation and the future of higher education: a conceptual analysis’, Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 56(3), pp. 258–69.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beigi, M., Wang, J. & Shirmohammadi, M., 2014, ‘AHRD! Take the opportunity and pioneer vocational MOOCs’, Human Resource Development International, 18(2), pp. 203–12.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blackmore, J., 2009. ‘Academic pedagogies, quality logics and performative universities: evaluating teaching and what students want’, Studies in Higher Education, 34(8), pp. 857–72.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cole, R. & Matsumiya, T., 2007, ‘Too much of a good thing? Quality as an impediment to innovation’, California Management Review, 50(1), pp. 77–94.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Corbin, J. & Strauss, A., 1990, ‘Grounded theory research: procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria’, Qualitative Sociology, 13(1), pp. 3–21.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daniel, S., Cano, E. & Cervera, M., 2015, ‘The future of MOOCs: adaptive learning or business model?’, Universities and Knowledge Society Journal, 12(1), pp. 64–73.
   Google Scholar
• de Langen, F. & van den Bosch, H., 2014, ‘Massive open online courses: disruptive innovations or disturbing inventions?’, Open Learning, 28(3), pp. 216–26.
   Google Scholar
• Fernández, M., Silvera, J. & Meneses, E., 2015, ‘Comparative between quality assessment tools for MOOCs: ADECUR vs Standard UNE 66181: 2012ʹ, Universities and Knowledge Society Journal, 12(1), pp. 131–44.
   Google Scholar
• Flavin, M., 2016, ‘Technology-enhanced learning and higher education’, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 32(4), pp. 632–45.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox, A., 2013, ‘Viewpoint from MOOCs to SPOCs supplementing the classroom experience with small private online courses’, Association for Computing Machinery, 56(12), pp. 38–41.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldie, J.G.S., 2016. ‘Connectivism: a knowledge learning theory for the digital age?’, Medical Teacher, 38(10), pp. 1064–69.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gore, H., 2014, ‘Massive open online courses (MOOCs) and their impact on academic library services: exploring the issues and challenges’, New Review of Academic Librarianship, 20(1), pp. 4–28.
   Google Scholar
• Gregori, E.B., Zhang, J., Galvan-Fernandez, C. & Fernandez-Navarro, F.A., 2018, ‘Learner support in MOOCs: identifying variables linked to completion’, Computers and Education, 122, pp. 153–68.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guidelines for Quality Assurance and Accreditation of MOOCs, 2016, The Commonwealth of Learning. Available at: http://oasis.col.org/handle/11599/2362 (accessed 1 July 2016).
   Google Scholar
• Hartmann, E., 2017, ‘Quality assurance and the shift towards private governance in higher education: Europeanisation through the back door?’, Globalisation, Societies and Education, 15(3), pp. 309–24.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayes, S., 2015, ‘MOOCs and quality: a review of the recent literature’, QAA MOOCs Network. Available at: http://publications.aston.ac.uk/26604/1/MOOCs_and_quality_a_review_of_the_recent_literature.pdf (accessed 24 August 2020).
   Google Scholar
• Hoang, D. & Igel, B., 2006, ‘The impact of total quality management on innovation, findings from a developing country’, International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 23(9), pp. 1092–17.
   Google Scholar
• Hood, N. & Littlejohn, A., 2016. ‘MOOC quality: the need for new measures’, Journal of Learning for Development, 3(3), pp. 28–42.
   Google Scholar
• Hope, A., 2014, ‘Book review: Quality Assurance in Distance Education and E-Learning: Challenges and solutions from Asia, by I. Jung, T.M. Wong & T. Belawati’, Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 29(1), pp. 86–88.
   Google Scholar
• Hughes, A., 2012, ‘Book Review: Quality Assurance and Accreditation in Distance Education and E-Learning: Models, policies and research, by I. Jung and C. Latchem’, British Journal of Educational Studies, 60(3), pp. 291–93.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hyman, P., 2012, ‘In the year of disruptive education’, Communications of the ACM, 55(12), pp. 20–23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jung, Y. & Lee, J., 2018, ‘Learning engagement and persistence in massive open online courses (MOOCS)’, Computers & Education, 122, pp. 9–22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, D., Kumar, V. & Kumar, U., 2012, ‘Relationship between quality management practices and innovation’, Journal of Operations Management, 30, pp. 295–315.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kovanović, V., Joksimović, S., Poquet, O., Hennis, T., Čukić, I., de Vries, P., Hatala, M., Dawson, S., Siemens, G. & Gašević, D., 2019, ‘Examining communities of inquiry in Massive Open Online Courses: the role of study strategies’, The Internet and Higher Education, 40, pp. 20–43.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, N. & Lings, I., 2008, Doing Business Research (London, Sage).
   Google Scholar
• Lee, S.M, 2015, ‘The age of quality innovation’, International Journal of Quality Innovation, 1(1), pp. 1–5.
   Google Scholar
• Lopez-Mielgo, N., Montes-Peon, J.M. & Vazquez-Ordas, C., 2009, ‘Are quality and innovation management conflicting activities?’, Technovation, 29, pp. 537–45.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mackney, S. & Shields, R., 2019, ‘Learning analytics for student success at university: trends and dilemmas’, in Jules, T.D. & Salajan, F.D. (Eds.), 2019, The Educational Intelligent Economy: Big data, artificial intelligence, machine learning and the internet of things in education, pp. 251–68 (Bingley, Emerald).
   Google Scholar
• Marcy, M., 2014, ‘Beyond hype and backlash: innovation, technology, and the future of higher education’, Change, 46(5), pp. 57–59.
   Google Scholar
• Margaryan, A., Bianco, A. & Littlejohn, A., 2015, ‘Instructional quality of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs)’, Computers & Education, 80, pp. 77–83.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marshall, S., 2014, ‘Exploring the ethical implications of MOOCs’, Distance Education, 35(2), pp. 250–62.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martensson, K., Roxa, T. & Stensaker, B., 2014, ‘From quality assurance to quality practices: an investigation of strong microcultures in teaching and learning’, Studies in Higher Education, 39(4), pp. 534–45.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, M. & Stella, A., 2007, External Quality Assurance in Higher Education: Making choices (Paris, UNESCO/International Institute for Educational Planning).
   Google Scholar
• Massaro, V., 2010, ‘Cui bono? The relevance and impact of quality assurance’, Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 32(1), pp. 17–26.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Massy, W.F. & French, N.J., 2001, ‘Teaching and learning quality process review: what the programme has achieved in Hong Kong’, Quality in Higher Education, 7(1), pp. 33–45.
   Google Scholar
• Miles, B.M. & Huberman, M., 1994, Qualitative Data Analysis: An expanded sourcebook, second edition (Thousand Oaks, California, Sage).
   Google Scholar
• Mueller, F. & Carter, C., 2005, ‘The scripting of total quality management within its organisational biography’, Organisation Studies, 26(2), pp. 221–47.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perna, L.W., Ruby, A., Boruch, R.F., Wang, N., Scull, J., Ahmad, S. & Evans, C., 2014, ‘Moving through MOOCs: understanding the progression of users in massive open online courses’ Educational Researcher, 43(9), pp. 421–32.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rampelt, F., Niedermeier, H., Röwert, R., Wallor, L. & Berthold, C., 2018, ‘Digital anerkannt. Möglichkeiten und Verfahren zur Anerkennung und Anrechnung von in MOOCs erworbenen Kompetenzen’, Arbeitspapier Nr. 34 (Berlin, Hochschulforum Digitalisierung).
   Google Scholar
• Ruane, J., 2005, Essentials of Research Methods (Oxford, Blackwell).
   Google Scholar
• Scholz, R. & Tletje, O., 2002, Embedded Case Study Methods (London, Sage).
   Google Scholar
• Tempelaar, D.T., Rienties, B. & Giesbers, B., 2015 ‘In search for the most informative data for feedback generation: learning analytics in a data-rich context’ Computers in Human Behavior, 47, 157–67.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vivian, R., Falkner, K. & Falkner, N., 2014, ‘Addressing the challenges of a new digital technologies curriculum: MOOCs as a scalable solution for teacher professional development’, Research in Learning Technology, 22, pp. 1–19.
   Google Scholar
• Xiao, C., Qiu, H. & Cheng, S.M., 2019, ‘Challenges and opportunities for effective assessments within a quality assurance framework for MOOCs’, Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, 24, pp. 1–16.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yin, R., 2014, Case Study Research: Design and methods, fifth edition (London, Sage).
   Google Scholar
• Zeng, J., Phan, C. & Matsui, Y., 2015, ‘The impact of hard and soft quality management on quality and innovation performance: an empirical study’, International Journal of Production Economics, 162, pp. 216–26.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar