Keywords
Bibliometric Analysis
Online Education
Thematic Mapping
Co-citation Analysis
How to Cite
Abstract
The past decade has witnessed a revolution in the learning landscape worldwide, driven by the rapid expansion of digital technologies and open-access learning platforms. Among them, Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) have been at the centre stage of learning innovation, promising flexible, low-cost, and borderless learning. This study aims to map the global research landscape of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) using bibliometric techniques to understand the evolution, intellectual structure, and thematic trends of the field. Drawing from a dataset of 10,059 publications indexed in Scopus, the analysis was conducted using Bibliometrix (R package) and VOSviewer to perform co-citation analysis, bibliographic coupling, and thematic mapping. The results reveal that the United States, China, and the United Kingdom are the leading contributors in terms of research output. Key institutions such as MIT and Stanford dominate citation impact, while authors like Yuan L. and Alario-Hoyos S. show high scholarly influence. The analysis reveals a mismatch between research output volume and scholarly influence, particularly in certain regions. Thematic mapping highlights core clusters in pedagogy, learner engagement, and assessment tools, while underexplored areas include inclusivity, multilingual access, and international policy coordination. A key contribution of this study lies in uncovering structures in the MOOC literature which reveal hidden intersections between technical, pedagogical, and policy-related domains. The findings underscore the growing maturity of MOOCs as an interdisciplinary field, while also pointing to fragmentation in research efforts. This study not only charts the growth and diversification of MOOC research but also highlights neglected areas crucial for educational equity and global collaboration. The findings have applied value for educators, platform developers, and policymakers seeking to expand the reach, quality, and impacts of MOOCs in an evolving digital learning environment.
References
[1] L. Pappano, “The year of the MOOC,” The New York Times, Nov. 2, 2012. [Online]. Available: https://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/04/education/edlife/massive-open-online-courses-are-multiplying-at-a-rapid-pace.html (in English)
[2] T. R. Liyanagunawardena, A. A. Adams, and S. A. Williams, “MOOCs: A systematic study of the published literature 2008–2012,” Int. Rev. Res. Open Distrib. Learn., vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 202–227, 2013. (in English)
[3] K. Jordan, “Initial trends in enrolment and completion of massive open online courses,” Int. Rev. Res. Open Distrib. Learn., vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 133–160, 2014. (in English)
[4] J. Reich, Failure to Disrupt: Why Technology Alone Can't Transform Education. Cambridge, MA, USA: Harvard Univ. Press, 2020. (in English)
[5] K. F. Hew and W. S. Cheung, “Students’ and instructors’ use of massive open online courses (MOOCs): Motivations and challenges,” Educ. Res. Rev., vol. 12, pp. 45–58, 2014. (in English)
[6] P. J. Guo, J. Kim, and R. Rubin, “How video production affects student engagement: An empirical study of MOOC videos,” in Proc. 1st ACM Conf. Learn. @ Scale, 2014, pp. 41–50. (in English)
[7] S. Zheng, M. B. Rosson, P. C. Shih, and J. M. Carroll, “Understanding student motivation, behaviors and perceptions in MOOCs,” Comput. Educ., vol. 91, pp. 83–93, 2015. (in English)
[8] M. Aria and C. Cuccurullo, “Bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis,” J. Informetrics, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 959–975, 2017. (in English)
[9] K. M. Alraimi, H. Zo, and A. P. Ciganek, “Understanding the MOOCs continuance: The role of openness and reputation,” Comput. Educ., vol. 80, pp. 28–38, 2015. (in English)
[10] C. Chen and Y. Xiao, “Selecting publication keywords for domain analysis in bibliometrics: A comparison between natural language processing and bibliographic coupling,” J. Informetrics, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 927–940, 2016. (in English)
[11] S. Downes, Connectivism and Connective Knowledge: Essays on Meaning and Learning Networks. Ottawa, Canada: Nat. Res. Council Canada, 2012. (in English)
[12] F. M. Hollands and D. Tirthali, MOOCs: Expectations and Reality. New York, NY, USA: Center for Benefit-Cost Stud. Educ., Teachers College, Columbia Univ., 2014. (in English)
[13] A. M. Kaplan and M. Haenlein, “Higher education and the digital revolution: About MOOCs, SPOCs, social media, and the Cookie Monster,” Bus. Horizons, vol. 59, no. 4, pp. 441–450, 2016. (in English)
[14] R. F. Kizilcec, C. Piech, and E. Schneider, “Deconstructing disengagement: Analyzing learner subpopulations in massive open online courses,” in Proc. 3rd Int. Conf. Learn. Analytics Knowl., 2013, pp. 170–179. (in English)
[15] R. F. Kizilcec, M. Pérez-Sanagustín, and J. J. Maldonado, “Self-regulated learning strategies predict learner behavior and goal attainment in massive open online courses,” Comput. Educ., vol. 104, pp. 18–33, 2017. (in English)
[16] A. Margaryan, M. Bianco, and A. Littlejohn, “Instructional quality of massive open online courses (MOOCs),” Comput. Educ., vol. 80, pp. 77–83, 2015. (in English)
[17] R. Pranckutė, “Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The titans of bibliographic information in today’s academic world,” Publications, vol. 9, no. 1, p. 12, 2021. (in English)
[18] G. Siemens, “Massive open online courses: Innovation in education?,” in Open Educational Resources: Innovation, Research and Practice, R. McGreal, W. Kinuthia, and S. Marshall, Eds. Vancouver, Canada: Commonwealth of Learning and Athabasca Univ., 2013, pp. 5–15. (in English)
[19] A. F. J. Van Raan, “Advances in bibliometric analysis: Research performance assessment and science mapping,” in Measuring Scholarly Impact, Y. Ding, R. Rousseau, and D. Wolfram, Eds. Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2014, pp. 17–33. (in English)
[20] G. Veletsianos and P. Shepherdson, “A systematic analysis and synthesis of the empirical MOOC literature published in 2013–2015,” Int. Rev. Res. Open Distrib. Learn., vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 198–221, 2016. (in English)
[21] O. Zawacki-Richter, A. Bozkurt, U. Alturki, and A. Aldraiweesh, “What research says about MOOCs – An explorative content analysis,” Int. Rev. Res. Open Distrib. Learn., vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 242–259, 2018. (in English)
[22] J. Zhang, K. C. Almeroth, S. Knight, and S. Niemann, “Moodog: Tracking student behaviors in MOOCs,” in Proc. 26th Int. Conf. World Wide Web, 2017, pp. 353–362. (in English)
[23] P. J. Guo, J. Kim, and R. Rubin, “How video production affects student engagement: An empirical study of MOOC videos,” in *Proc. 1st ACM Conf. Learning @ Scale*, New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2014, pp. 41–50. (in English)
[24] K. Jordan, “Initial trends in enrolment and completion of massive open online courses,” *Int. Rev. Res. Open Distrib. Learn.*, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 133–160, 2014. (in English)
[25] A. Margaryan, M. Bianco, and A. Littlejohn, “Instructional quality of massive open online courses (MOOCs),” *Comput. Educ.*, vol. 80, pp. 77–83, 2015. (in English)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2025 Dr. Mohit Kumar, Dr. Pravin Kumar Agrawal, Dr. Supriya Agrawal, Vibha Kushwaha