The Grounds for Higher Education Teachers to Engage in MOOC Development Projects

Ulf Olsson 1
  • 1 Stockholm University, , 106 91, Stockholm, Sweden


The conditions for higher education teachers operating in a technology-enhanced education setting and an open educational context – such as Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) – are different when compared to traditional teaching methods (e.g. in a lecture hall). This study investigates the grounds for 20 teachers at Swedish Higher education institutions to be involved in MOOC development projects. Six categories are found and described; including curiosity, merits, teaching development, flexibility, as well as the possibility to disseminate their research and expand their professional networks. Interviewees believed that the work was a viable way to strengthen their research portfolio, while also making a limited effort for teaching, enhancing the dissemination possibilities and strengthening their research networks.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • 1. Acker, F. van, Buuren, H. van, & Kreijns, K. (2013). Resources : A Social Exchange Perspective Sharing OER as a Social Exchange Process. In R. McGreal, W. Kinuthia, & S. Marshall (Eds.), Open Educational Resources: Innovation, Research and Practice (pp. 177-192). Commonwealth of Learning, Athabasca University. Retrieved from

  • 2. Arcos, B. de los, Faems, B., Comas-Quinn, A., & Pulker, H. (2017). Teachers’ Use and Acceptance of Gamification and Social Networking Features of an Open Repository. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 20(1).

  • 3. Bachy, S., & Louvain, U. de. (2014). TPDK, a new definition of the TPACK model for a University. European Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 17(2), 15–39.

  • 4. Belikov, O. M., & Bodily, R. (2016). Incentives and barriers to OER adoption: A qualitative analysis of faculty perceptions. Open Praxis, 8(3), 235–246.

  • 5. Bozkurt, A., Akgün-Özbek, E., & Zawacki-Richter, O. (2017). Trends and Patterns in Massive Open Online Courses: Review and Content Analysis of Research on MOOCs (2008-2015). The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(5).

  • 6. Brown, M. G. (2016). Blended instructional practice: A review of the empirical literature on instructors’ adoption and use of online tools in face-to-face teaching. Internet and Higher Education, 31, 1–10.

  • 7. Çakıroğlu, Ü., Gökoğlu, S., & Öztürk, M. (2017). Pre-service Computer Teachers’ Tendencies towards the Use of Mobile Technologies: A Technology Acceptance Model Perspective. European Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 20(1), 176–191.

  • 8. Cox, G. (2016). Explaining the relations between culture, structure and agency in lecturers’ contribution and non-contribution to Open Educational Resources in a Higher Education Institution. Thesis submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy to the School of Edu. University of Cape Town.

  • 9. Cronin, C. (2017). Openness and Praxis: Exploring the Use of Open Educational Practices in Higher Education. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(5), 15–34.

  • 10. Cronin, C. I. (2018). Openness and Praxis: A Situated Study of Academic Staff Meaning-making and Decision-making with Respect to Openness and Use of Open Educational Practices in Higher Education. Retrieved from

  • 11. Evans, S., & Gall, J. (2015). How MOOC instructors view the pedagogy and purposes of massive open online courses. Distance Education, 36(3), 295–311.

  • 12. Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2014). Students’ and instructors’ use of massive open online courses (MOOCs): Motivations and challenges. Educational Research Review, 12, 45–58.

  • 13. Goodfellow, R., & Lea, M. R. (2007). Challenging e-learning in the university : a literacies perspective. McGraw Hill Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.

  • 14. Hammersley, M. (2011). Methodology : who needs it? Los Angeles: SAGE.

  • 15. Karunanayaka, S. P., Naidu, S., Rajendra, J. C. N., & Ariadurai, S. A. (2018). Designing Continuing Professional Development MOOCs to promote the adoption of OER and OEP. Open Praxis, 10(2), 179.

  • 16. Kilis, S., Gülbahar, Y., & Rapp, C. (2016). Exploration of Teaching Preferences of Instructors’ use of Social Media. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 19(1), 1-18.

  • 17. Kolowich, S. (2013, March 18). The Professors behind the MOOC. The Chronicle of Higher Education [Blog post]. Retrieved from

  • 18. Kreber, C. (2010). Academics’ teacher identities, authenticity and pedagogy. Studies in Higher Education, 35(2), 171–194.

  • 19. Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2014). Den kvalitativa forskningsintervjun. Lund: Studentlitteratur.

  • 20. Liyanagunawardena, T. R., Lundqvist, K., Mitchell, R., Warburton, S., & Williams, S. A. (2019). A MOOC Taxonomy Based on Classification Schemes of MOOCs. European Journal of Open Distance and E-Learning, 22(1), 85-103.

  • 21. McNaughton, S. M., & Billot, J. (2016). Negotiating academic teacher identity shifts during higher education contextual change. Teaching in Higher Education, 21(6), 644–658.

  • 22. Nascimbeni, F., & Burgos, D. (2016). In search for the open educator: Proposal of a definition and a framework to increase openness adoption among university educators. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 17(6), 1–17.

  • 23. Olsson, U. (2017). Higher Education Lecturers Lived Experience of Going Public in MOOCs. Open Praxis, 9(3), 287–297.

  • 24. Price, D. (2015, April 16). What Will Education Look Like in a More Open Future? | MindShift | KQED News [Blog post]. Retrieved February 21, 2019, from

  • 25. Pundak, D., & Dvir, Y. (2014). Engineering College Lecturers Reluctance to Adopt Online Courses. Retrieved September. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 17(1), 210–226.

  • 26. Rolfe, V. (2012). Open educational resources: Staff attitudes and awareness. Research in Learning Technology, 20(1), 1–13.

  • 27. Ross, J., Sinclair, C., Knox, J., Bayne, S., & Macleod, H. (2014). Teacher Experiences and Academic Identity: The Missing Components of MOOC Pedagogy. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 10(1), 57–69.

  • 28. Roth, M. (2013). My Modern Experience Teaching a MOOC. Chronicle of Higher Education, 59(34), B18–B21. Retrieved from

  • 29. Salmon, G. (2014). Learning Innovation: A Framework for Transformation. European Journal of Open Distance and E-Learning, 17(2), 219–235.

  • 30. Schneckenberg, D. (2009). Understanding the real barriers to technology-enhanced innovation in higher education. Educational Research, 51(4), 411–424.

  • 31. Siemens, G. (2008). Learning and Knowing in Networks: Changing roles for Educators and Designers.

  • 32. Stöhr, C., Stathakarou, N., Mueller, F., Nifakos, S., & McGrath, C. (2019). Videos as learning objects in MOOCs: A study of specialist and non-specialist participants’ video activity in MOOCs. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(1), 166–176.

  • 33. Wannemacher, K., & Jungermann, I. (2015). MOOCs from the Instructors’ Perspective Klaus. Proceedings of the European MOOC Stakeholder Summit 2015, 81–85.

  • 34. Weller, M., & Anderson, T. (2013). Digital resilience in higher education. European Journal of Distance and E-learning, 2013(I). Retrieved from

  • 35. Zheng, S., Wisniewski, P., Rosson, M. B., & Carroll, J. M. (2016). Ask the Instructors: Motivations and Challenges of Teaching Massive Open Online Courses. Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing – CSCW’ 16, 205–220.


Journal + Issues