Instructional design quality in medical Massive Open Online Courses for integration into campus education

Abstract

Purpose: Medical Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) are of interest for campus education. With growing interest in integrating medical MOOCs, their quality must be ensured. This however, has not been studied. We investigated if medical MOOCs meet the instructional design principles: problem-centeredness, activation, demonstration, application, integration, collective knowledge, collaboration, differentiation, authentic resources, feedback, and goal-setting. Methods: An overview of medical MOOCs and inclusion criteria were developed. Out of 410 MOOCs, 33 were selected. A data collection tool was compiled and calibrated. Investigators enrolled in selected MOOCs and coded presence of instructional design principles after examination of all course pages. Results: Application, authentic resources, problem-centeredness, and goal-setting were found to be present in many of the courses. Activation, collective knowledge, differentiation, and demonstration were present in less than half of the courses. Finally, integration, collaboration, and expert feedback were present in less than 15% of the courses. Conclusions: Medical MOOCs meet these principles in varying degree. Certain principles might be scarcely present due to a problematic fit with the MOOC concept or a need for further development in online settings. Assessment of instructional design quality is desired before integrating so that MOOC quality can be considered in relation to the quality of existing campus education.

MOOC Learning Assessment in Clinical Settings: Analysis from Quality Dimensions

“…MOOCs intend to expose students to new disciplines, stimulate new interests, learn ideas, and create a learning community [4]. In medical education, several MOOCs are now delivered as independent education or as a complement to classroom courses [5]. During COVID-19, MOOCs become an opportunity for distance learning about topics of interest to users.…”

The effects of using Merrill’s first principles of instruction on learning and satisfaction in MOOC

“…However, incorporating Merrill's first principles of instruction is sometimes neglected in designing MOOCs (Margaryan et al, 2015). Likewise, Hendriks et al (2020) showed that the activation and demonstration principles are less emphasised, and the integration is the most neglected principle in designing MOOCs. Also, Badali et al (2018) reported that Merrill's first principles of instruction are poorly incorporated in designing the MOOCs.…”

Study design and protocol for a comprehensive evaluation of a UK massive open online course (MOOC) on quality improvement in healthcare

“…Given the increasing number of medical and healthcare MOOCs available, it is important that they are evaluated properly to determine their success in achieving their short-term and long-term learning aims and objectives. This in turn will help to ensure that their quality or performance is upheld, and areas for improvement are identified for future learners 20 21. There is also a lack of qualitative work exploring why learners decided to do the course, whether it met their expectations and how it influenced their everyday practice.…”

“…Research into the quality of MOOCs has focused on the instructional design quality of MOOCs, and proposed various principles considered to be important for quality assurance check purposes 20 22 23. A recent study assessing the instructional design of medical MOOCs found that application, authentic resources, problem-centeredness and goal-setting existed in many courses, however, activation, collective knowledge, differentiation and demonstration were present in less than half of the courses, and integration, collaboration and expert feedback were only found in <15% of the MOOCs 20. According to Hood and Littlejohn (2016), a MOOC’s quality depends on the MOOC’s goals and the learner’s perspective.…”

“…According to Hood and Littlejohn (2016), a MOOC’s quality depends on the MOOC’s goals and the learner’s perspective. This suggests that a MOOC may be perceived as high quality if the learner achieved or learnt what they wanted to, and that MOOC completion rates may not necessarily be an appropriate indicator of quality 20 21. To build on the MOOC evaluation literature, we aim to present an evaluation framework, drawing on two commonly used approaches to evaluating the success of training courses—the RE-AIM24 25 and Kirkpatrick models26—to create a bespoke framework designed to identify whether the MOOC achieved its key aims and learning objectives, and the impact of the course on learner’s knowledge and behaviour in their professional or work practice.…”