Examining MOOCs: A Comparative Study among Educational Technology Experts in Traditional and Open Universities

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v18i2.2789

Keywords:

Massive Open Online Courses, educational technology, open learning, e-learning, qualitative methodology

Abstract

The proliferation of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) in recent years has generated much debate. MOOCs have been presented as technology-based educational practices, but many researchers question if this kind of open courses really respects some of the consolidated principles behind the education offered at universities. In light of this situation, consulting the teachers most closely tied to this type of course can provide an authoritative view of the issue and can allow the most important elements to be highlighted in order to carry out further research. Using a qualitative methodology based on an open questionnaire, this work presents the opinions and perceptions of teachers/lecturers in educational technology regarding these new courses key elements. These key elements are analysed through analysing its controversial definition, their pedagogical advantages and limitations, the functions of a tutor in a MOOC and their assessment (or accreditation). In addition, a comparison is made between the contributions of teachers from a traditional university with a face-to-face model and those from a distance university, which is based entirely on a virtual training offer and which has a greater possibility of coming into direct competition with these Massive Open Online Courses.

Author Biography

Nati Cabrera, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya

Psychology and Education Sciences Department.

Professor

Additional Files

Published

2017-04-04

How to Cite

Cabrera, N., & Fernández Ferrer, M. (2017). Examining MOOCs: A Comparative Study among Educational Technology Experts in Traditional and Open Universities. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(2). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v18i2.2789

Issue

Section

Research Articles

Publication Facts

Metric
This article
Other articles
Peer reviewers 
5
2.4

Reviewer profiles  N/A

Author statements

Author statements
This article
Other articles
Data availability 
N/A
16%
External funding 
No
32%
Competing interests 
N/A
11%
Metric
This journal
Other journals
Articles accepted 
86%
33%
Days to publication 
319
145

Indexed in

Editor & editorial board
profiles
Academic society 
N/A
Publisher 
Athabasca University Press