This paper presents the findings from a systematic literature review on the quality of massive open online courses (MOOCs). The main research question was “How can the quality criteria for MOOCs identified in the analysed studies from the systematic literature review be best organised in a categorisation scheme?” The systematic literature review was conducted using the PRISMA procedures. After conducting the screening and eligibility analysis according the pre-defined criteria, 103 studies were finally selected. The analysis was done in iterative cycles for continuous improvements of the assignments and clustering of the quality criteria. The final version was validated in consensus through the categorisation and assignment of all 103 studies in a consistent way to four dimensions (pedagogical, organisational, technological, and social) and their sub-categories. This quality framework can be re-used in future MOOC research and the discussion of the analysed studies provides a current literature overview on the quality of MOOCs.

No abstract

No abstract

In May 2018 students attending the bachelor degree curriculum named "Expert in Social and Cultural Education" in the University of Bologna, and enrolling in a short course called "Information and technology for Education", have been involved in analysis activity aimed to identify MOOCs strength and weaknesses. The course has been developed in three phases: the first was related to the presentation of learning design concepts and online activity production; the second was expected the achievement of an individual task thought the analysis of two MOOCs provided by Italian platforms (EduOpen, EMMA, PoK); the third was dedicated to the identification of MOOCs strength and weaknesses, that has been shared through groups work. At the end, students were required to discuss in short groups about the individual results. These little discussions have been defined "back talk" by Lanzara and "back talk focus group" by Frisina. Each discussion has been recorded and transcripted in order to analyse students' contributions with NVivo 12 software and to support the results discussion. The results demonstrate that the main critical issues are related to learning design, assessment, interaction and communication tools, tutoring, inclusive dimension and certification. On the one hand, these aspects have been evaluated by students in a positive way, on the other hand, with a negative meaning. Some examples reported by students are: the video lectures, appreciated for their duration and clarity, at the same time are also considered as a weakness for their sameness; the absence of prerequisites that assure free access to the MOOCs is necessary for students in order to facilitate self-evaluation before enrolling; the communication tools as chat and forum to communication, sharing and collaboration with peer and teachers are the only way for social learning; the assessment is quite debated for the type of test that is mainly represented by multiple choice; the inclusive dimension is mainly considered for its weaknesses about the little presence of compensatory tools reserved to people with disabilities; the role of the Tutor is mandatory during the learning processes through individual feedback; the certificate of attendance represents a strength that could become a weakness for its little usefulness in the professional contexts.