Claims

MOOCs failed to deliver on their proponents' promises of transforming higher education

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · theoretical r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2017 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q2 i? The article concludes that research and data show MOOCs failed to deliver on proponents' promises and remain just a different kind of online course. → Popenici 2017

Evidence

Popenici 2017

Popenici, S. A. D., & Kerr, S. (2017). Exploring the impact of artificial intelligence on teaching and learning in higher education. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 12:22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-017-0062-8

q2 · i? · theoretical · r2

The paper's lesson-of-MOOCs analysis states that by 2016 it became clear MOOCs "remain just a different kind of online course, interesting and useful, but not really aimed at or capable of changing the structure and function of universities". It cites the authors' own prior work and a 2015 book chapter.

"Research and data on this topic reflect the failure of MOOCs to deliver on their proponents' promises."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
type claim
id moocs-failed-to-deliver-on-promises
title MOOCs failed to deliver on their proponents' promises of transforming higher education
description MOOCs failed to deliver on their proponents' promises of transforming higher education
status review
evidence_strength weak
newest_evidence 2017
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-15
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
sources 1 — popenici-2017

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.