The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
MOOCs: A systematic study of the published literature 2008-2012
Open accessAbstract
Massive open online courses (MOOCs) are a recent addition to the range of online learning options. Since 2008, MOOCs have been run by a variety of public and elite universities, especially in North America. Many academics have taken interest in MOOCs recognising the potential to deliver education around the globe on an unprecedented scale; some of these academics are taking a research-oriented perspective and academic papers describing their research are starting to appear in the traditional media of peer reviewed publications. This paper presents a systematic review of the published MOOC literature (2008-2012): Forty-five peer reviewed papers are identified through journals, database searches, searching the Web, and chaining from known sources to form the base for this review. We believe this is the first effort to systematically review literature relating to MOOCs, a fairly recent but massively popular phenomenon with a global reach. The review categorises the literature into eight different areas of interest, introductory, concept, case studies, educational theory, technology, participant focussed, provider focussed, and other, while also providing quantitative analysis of publications according to publication type, year of publication, and contributors. Future research directions guided by gaps in the literature are explored.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Aberdeen, T. (2013) · The Canadian Journal of Action Research · doi:10.33524/cjar.v14i1.73 · Cited by 3,250
“But the data is already public”: on the ethics of research in Facebook
Zimmer, M. (2010) · Ethics and Information Technology · doi:10.1007/s10676-010-9227-5 · Cited by 900
Will massive open online courses change how we teach?
Martin, F. G. (2012) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/2240236.2240246 · Cited by 324
Cited by
Supporting Self-Regulated Learning in Online Learning Environments and MOOCs: A Systematic Review
Wong, J., Baars, M., Davis, D., Van Der Zee, T., Houben, G.-J., & Paas, F. (2019) · International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2018.1543084 · Cited by 631
A systematic review of research on online teaching and learning from 2009 to 2018
Martin, F., Sun, T., & Westine, C. D. (2020) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104009 · Cited by 616
An Overview of the World of MOOCs
Baturay, M. H. (2015) · Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.685 · Cited by 310
Progress and new directions for teaching and learning in MOOCs
Deng, R., Benckendorff, P., & Gannaway, D. (2019) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2018.10.019 · Cited by 273
Zhu, M., Bonk, C. J., & Doo, M. Y. (2020) · Educational Technology Research and Development · doi:10.1007/s11423-020-09747-8 · Cited by 224
Metadata
- Authors
- Liyanagunawardena, T. R., Adams, A. A., & Williams, S. A.
- Venue
- The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning
- Publisher
- Athabasca University Press
- Published
- 2013-07-05
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 202
- ISSN
- 1492-3831 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2161072671
- Cited by
- 1,092
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 176.24
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: MOOCs: A systematic study of the published literature 2008-2012. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.19173/irrodl.v14i3.1455
- The paper
- Liyanagunawardena, T. R., Adams, A. A., & Williams, S. A. (2013). MOOCs: A systematic study of the published literature 2008-2012. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v14i3.1455
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.