Massive Open Online Courses in Healthcare Field: History
View Latest Version
Please note this is an old version of this entry, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Contributor:
Giovanni Schettino
,
Vincenza Capone

In the healthcare field, the need to ensure effective and economically sustainable training has led to a focus on technology-enhanced learning (TEL) and, specifically, to massive open online courses (MOOCs). These courses can be regarded as a significant step forward in the educational field due to the ease of access and convenient content delivery they offer. Specifically, MOOCs are courses potentially aimed at an unlimited number of students (massive). They can register free of charge (open) and enjoy, via the internet (online), learning-oriented content characterized by a structured learning plan (course).

  • massive open online course
  • physicians
  • medical education
  • continuing education
  • doctors
  • mooc

1. Introduction

The literature has demonstrated that the adoption of human resource development interventions can be helpful in increasing healthcare workers’ (HCWs) knowledge, skills, resilience, and quality of care [1], which is consistent with the human capital theory [2].
In the healthcare field, the need to ensure effective and economically sustainable training has led to a focus on technology-enhanced learning (TEL) and, specifically, to massive open online courses or MOOCs [3][4]. These courses can be regarded as a significant step forward in the educational field due to the ease of access and convenient content delivery they offer. More in detail, MOOCs are courses potentially aimed at an unlimited number of students (massive) who can attend them whenever and wherever they want. Moreover, they can register free of charge (open) and enjoy learning-oriented content accessible via the internet (online). Finally, the courses are characterized by a structured learning plan (course) developed by some of the world’s most prestigious scholars and universities [5].
The success of MOOCs is highlighted by the impressive number of individuals who have adopted them. These courses have reached over 220 million learners (40 million new learners in 2021 alone), with over 19.400 courses available and 1.416 covering the field of health and medicine [6]. The wide appeal of MOOCs in medical education can be explained by considering their potential both for HCWs and their organizations [7][8]. They represent an accessible and affordable choice by providing online learning in a more effective and timely manner compared with traditional education [9] since online learning has fewer time and space constraints [10]. Indeed, the quick implementation of this teaching mode has been proven to be particularly suitable for dealing with challenges concerning health emergencies by providing effective training for healthcare professionals [11][12]
Despite their great success, scholars and developers of online courses have expressed skepticism about their ability to offer relevant education which advances people in careers and socio-economic activities [13]. These reservations are supported by the higher dropout levels in MOOCs than in offline courses [14]. It is widely acknowledged that the number of trainees drops by the end of courses, rarely reaching more than 7–9% of the initial students [15][16]. With this in mind, researchers have argued that the ability of MOOCs structure to “tune” to participants’ needs is crucial to limit this phenomenon and, in turn, realize their learning objectives [17][18][19][20]. Nevertheless, there is a scant amount of agreement about the definition of characteristics of a MOOC and its pedagogical foundations [4]. The reasons for this issue are twofold and are linked to the multifarious nature of this teaching mode [21]. The latter manifests itself in the extensive variations of the teaching model according to courses content, their aims, learners’ characteristics, and the innovations in TEL. Concerning the adoption of such a model in physicians’ training, few recent review studies [22][23] have systematically analyzed their effectiveness in this population, however, neglecting to investigate the factors that might explain these outcomes.

2. The MOOC Model in the Healthcare Field

Although medicine is traditionally slow in adapting to new trends [23], the MOOC revolution has strongly impacted this field. It must be noted that the widespread use of such a teaching method has been established in a relatively short time [24]. The first generation of MOOCs, or cMOOCS, are inspired by connectivism [25] due to their emphasis on social learning, cooperation, creativity, and knowledge sharing. The second generation of MOOCs, or xMOOCs, are based on a more traditional classroom structure centered around the teacher rather than a community of students and, thus, they provide limited communication space between participants [26]. Even though xMOOCs have been criticized for not providing adequate learner support and engagement, this teaching model has shown a high degree of flexibility and scalability [13]. These features have made it the primary teaching mode in online learning, contributing, in this way, to the broad adoption of MOOCs in various fields (e.g., engineering, math, law, social and healthcare sciences) and at different educational levels (e.g., primary, middle and high schools, undergraduate, postgraduate, and continuing education courses) [27]. More specifically, these online courses are capable of meeting organizations’ demands for properly trained employees since, as the Human Capital Theory [28][29][30] states, investing in employees’ training positively affects their performance. Valuable education and skills training contribute, indeed, to an increase in both employees’ and organizations’ performances, evaluated in terms of outcomes such as job satisfaction, motivation, mental health, better standing, the development of new services, increased market share, and improved quality of services [31][32][33][34]. The latter is a critical success factor for field service organizations, since it depends mainly on customer satisfaction and the perceived value of the services rendered, as shown by Parasuraman et al. [35]. In this vein, employees’ training can manifest itself in the form of continuing education, which may be defined as the process of engaging in educational activities in order to update one’s professional knowledge and skills [36]. This is the main dimension of human resources management practices due to its potential to capitalize the intangible assets of knowledge, skills, and abilities possessed by organizational actors, which, in turn, can translate into a competitive advantage in the market [37] and the achievement of organizations’ aims [38].
Regarding the teaching methods required to implement such a strategy, it is important to note that healthcare has been marked by the rise in TEL [39] fostered by steadily growing internet access and the wide adoption of web-based platforms in individual lives [40]. More precisely, massive open online courses or MOOCs have been the main subject of this interest.
As mentioned above, MOOCs provide effective, flexible, and economically sustainable training [41], responding to the need to improve the quality of care and, at the same time, improve cost efficiency [42]. As Mangalji and Karthikeyan [43] argue, the integration of MOOCs into medical training could contribute to improving students’ preparation, specifically through case-based learning, since it can lead them to focus on interactive aspects (e.g., problem-solving, team-based skills, and knowledge application). On that note, MOOCs that include active learning modules, feedback to learners, and the possibility to choose between different activities can foster students’ engagement and retention of information [43][44]. Moreover, MOOCs reported equal or better performance compared to traditional teaching [22][23]. The above-mentioned advantages, mainly related to the high flexibility of MOOCs, blend well with continuing education in the healthcare field since physicians require regular updates of the knowledge needed to be effective in the medical profession and deal adequately with health emergencies [11][12]. Hence, the adoption of the MOOC model represents a good way to provide continuing professional development [45] by combining physicians’ demand for high-quality training—in line with their time and resources—and the organizations’ efforts to achieve their goals.
In spite of their multiple benefits, MOOCs have several weaknesses, which translate into high dropout rates [46][47]. The latter can be explained by considering factors such as the easy registering process, high passiveness, low student motivation, and demands (including time) that are incompatible with participants’ private and professional duties, as well as the lack of necessary knowledge and skills to attend courses [16][48][49].
Following this reasoning, a MOOC should be built through the accurate selection of the most suitable parameters according to learners’ characteristics, although it is not easy in the presence of a considerable number of participants, which is typical of this teaching model. Thus, to develop an effective MOOC for physicians, it is necessary to gain adequate knowledge about the factors that contribute to the success of this teaching model among the medical population. In this regard, Milligan [50] (p. 1882) stated that “understanding the nature of learners and their engagement is critical to the success of any online education provision, especially those MOOCs where there is an expectation that the learners should self-motivate and self-direct their learning”.
In recent years, a large number of reviews have been conducted by considering studies on MOOCs related to healthcare workers in general [51][52][53], whereas few studies have focused on physicians by paying attention solely to the outcomes of such courses. More precisely, Zhao et al. [23] performed a meta-analysis based on the examination of four articles reporting no significant differences between the efficacy of the MOOC teaching model and that of the traditional one. A subsequent meta-analysis study by Gao et al. [22], considering the same topic, reported that students enrolled in a MOOC performed better than those who attended traditional courses. However, it is important to note that this research included only studies at colleges or universities in China.
In light of this evidence, the need to better understand the strategies and methods underlying the effectiveness of these courses is clear. Such recognition is fundamental for the passage from a theoretical to a practical level, offering, in this way, valuable help to developers in designing MOOCs for physicians that are capable of achieving their specific learning goals.

This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/ijerph192114247

References

  1. Barello, S.; Graffigna, G. Engagement-Sensitive Decision Making: Training Doctors to Sustain Patient Engagement in Medical Consultations. In Engagement-sensitive Decision Making: Training Doctors to Sustain Patient Engagement in Medical Consultations; De Gruyter Open Poland: Warsaw, Poland, 2015; pp. 78–93.
  2. Becker, G.S. Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis with Special Reference to Education, 1st ed.; National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1964.
  3. Longhini, J.; Rossettini, G.; Palese, A. Massive Open Online Courses for Nurses’ and Healthcare Professionals’ Continuous Education: A Scoping Review. Int. Nurs. Rev. 2021, 68, 108–121.
  4. Glance, D.G.; Forsey, M.; Riley, M. The Pedagogical Foundations of Massive Open Online Courses. First Monday 2013, 18, 12.
  5. McAuley, A.; Stewart, B.; Siemens, G.; Cormier, D. The MOOC Model for Digital Practice. Available online: https://www.oerknowledgecloud.org/archive/MOOC_Final.pdf (accessed on 1 January 2021).
  6. Shah, D. By The Numbers: MOOCs in 2021. Available online: https://www.classcentral.com/report/mooc-stats-2021/ (accessed on 2 October 2022).
  7. Aiken, L.H.; Clarke, S.P.; Cheung, R.B.; Sloane, D.M.; Silber, J.H. Educational Levels of Hospital Nurses and Surgical Patient Mortality. JAMA 2003, 290, 1617–1623.
  8. Goldberg, L.R.; Bell, E.; King, C.; O’Mara, C.; McInerney, F.; Robinson, A.; Vickers, J. Relationship between Participants’ Level of Education and Engagement in Their Completion of the Understanding Dementia Massive Open Online Course. BMC Med. Educ. 2015, 15, 60.
  9. Gitlin, L.; Hodgson, N. Online Training-Can It Prepare an Eldercare Workforce? Generations 2016, 40, 71–81.
  10. Liu, C.; Zou, D.; Chen, X.; Xie, H.; Chan, W.H. A Bibliometric Review on Latent Topics and Trends of the Empirical MOOC Literature (2008–2019). Asia Pac. Educ. Rev. 2021, 22, 515–534.
  11. Chabriere, E.; Parola, P. Malaria: Massive Open Online Courses MOOC. Travel Med. Infect. Dis. 2016, 14, 636.
  12. Bhattacharya, S.; Singh, A.; Hossain, M.M. Health System Strengthening through Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) during the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Analysis from the Available Evidence. J. Educ. Health Promot. 2020, 9, 195.
  13. Yousef, A.M.F.; Sumner, T. Reflections on the Last Decade of MOOC Research. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ. 2021, 29, 648–665.
  14. Rothkrantz, L. Dropout Rates of Regular Courses and MOOCs. In Proceedings of the Computers Supported Education; Costagliola, G., Uhomoibhi, J., Zvacek, S., McLaren, B.M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Germany, 2017; pp. 25–46.
  15. Ma, Y. Exploration of the Application of MOOC to College Education; Atlantis Press: Paris, France, 2014; pp. 85–87.
  16. MOOCs on the Move: How Coursera Is Disrupting the Traditional Classroom. Available online: https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/moocs-on-the-move-how-coursera-is-disrupting-the-traditional-classroom/ (accessed on 2 October 2022).
  17. Giusino, D.; De Angelis, M.; Mazzetti, G.; Faiulo, I.R.; Innstrand, S.T.; Christensen, M.; Nielsen, K. Mentally Healthy Healthcare: Main Findings and Lessons Learned From a Needs Assessment Exercise at Multiple Workplace Levels. In Mental Health and Wellness in Healthcare Workers: Identifying Risks, Prevention, and Treatment; Bowers, C.A., Beidel, D.C., Marks, M.R., Horan, K., Cannon-Bowers, J., Eds.; IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA, 2022; pp. 143–171. ISBN 978-1-79988-813-0.
  18. Pickering, J.D.; Henningsohn, L.; DeRuiter, M.C.; de Jong, P.G.M.; Reinders, M.E.J. Twelve Tips for Developing and Delivering a Massive Open Online Course in Medical Education. Med. Teach. 2017, 39, 691–696.
  19. A.Qaffas, A.; Kaabi, K.; Shadiev, R.; Essalmi, F. Towards an Optimal Personalization Strategy in MOOCs. Smart Learn. Env. 2020, 7, 14.
  20. Waqanimaravu, M.; Arasanmi, C.N. Employee Training and Service Quality in the Hospitality Industry. J. Foodserv. Bus. Res. 2020, 23, 216–227.
  21. Moore, R.L.; Blackmon, S.J. From the Learner’s Perspective: A Systematic Review of MOOC Learner Experiences (2008–2021). Comput. Educ. 2022, 190, 104596.
  22. Gao, J.; Yang, L.; Zou, J.; Fan, X. Comparison of the Influence of Massive Open Online Courses and Traditional Teaching Methods in Medical Education in China: A Meta-Analysis. Biochem. Mol. Biol. Educ. 2021, 49, 639–651.
  23. Zhao, F.; Fu, Y.; Zhang, Q.-J.; Zhou, Y.; Ge, P.-F.; Huang, H.-X.; He, Y. The Comparison of Teaching Efficiency between Massive Open Online Courses and Traditional Courses in Medicine Education: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Ann. Transl. Med. 2018, 6, 458.
  24. De Freitas, S.I.; Morgan, J.; Gibson, D. Will MOOCs Transform Learning and Teaching in Higher Education? Engagement and Course Retention in Online Learning Provision. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 2015, 46, 455–471.
  25. Siemens, G. Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age. Int. J. Instr. Technol. Distance Learn 2005. Available online: https://www.itdl.org/Journal/Jan_05/article01.htm (accessed on 10 September 2021).
  26. Gaebel, M. MOOCs: Massive Open Online Courses. EUA Occasional Papers. Available online: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED571272 (accessed on 2 October 2022).
  27. Great Britain. Department for Business, I. and S. The Maturing of the MOOC: Literature Review of Massive Open Online Courses and Other Forms of Online Distance Learning. Available online: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/240193/13-1173-maturing-of-the-mooc.pdf (accessed on 6 May 2021).
  28. Mincer, J. Schooling, Experience, and Earnings. Human Behavior & Social Institutions No. 2; NBER: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1974; ISBN 0-87014-265-8.
  29. Schultz, T.W. Investment in Human Capital. Am. Econ. Rev. 1961, 51, 1–17.
  30. Becker, G.S. Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis, with Special Reference to Education; University of Chicago Press: Chicago, IL, USA, 2009.
  31. Shaheen, A.; Naqvi, S.M.H.; Khan, M.A. Employees Training and Organizational Performance: Mediation by Employees Performance. IJCRB 2013, 5, 490–503.
  32. Capone, V.; Borrelli, R.; Marino, L.; Schettino, G. Mental Well-Being and Job Satisfaction of Hospital Physicians during COVID-19: Relationships with Efficacy Beliefs, Organizational Support, and Organizational Non-Technical Skills. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public. Health 2022, 19, 3734.
  33. Morando, M.; Platania, S. Building a Social Sustainable Society: Influence of Interventions and Training Programs on Organisational Climate. Merits 2022, 2, 21–25.
  34. Salas, E.; Wilson, K.A.; Priest, H.A.; Guthrie, J.W. Design, Delivery, and Evaluation of Training Systems. In Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2006; pp. 472–512. ISBN 978-0-470-04820-7.
  35. Parasuraman, A.P.; Berry, L.; Zeithaml, V. Understanding Customer Expectations of Service. Sloan Manag. Rev. 1991, 32, 39–48.
  36. Weingand, D.E. Describing the Elephant: What Is Continuing Professional Education? IFLA J. 2000, 26, 198–202.
  37. Gemmano, C.G.; Manuti, A.; Giancaspro, M.L. “It’s Just a Matter of Culture”: An Explorative Study on the Relationship between Training Transfer and Work Performance. J. Workplace Learn. 2022, 34, 532–548.
  38. Bierema, L.L.; Eraut, M. Workplace-Focused Learning: Perspective on Continuing Professional Education and Human Resource Development. Adv. Dev. Hum. Resour. 2004, 6, 52–68.
  39. Schettino, G.; Marino, L.; Capone, V. The Impact of University-Related Variables on Students’ Perceived Employability and Mental Well-Being: An Italian Longitudinal Study. Sustainability 2022, 14, 2671.
  40. Schettino, G.; Fabbricatore, R.; Caso, D. “To Be Yourself or Your Selfies, That Is the Question”: The Moderation Role of Gender, Nationality, and Privacy Settings in the Relationship between Selfie-Engagement and Body Shame. Psychol. Pop. Media 2022.
  41. Hollands, F.M.; Tirthali, D. Resource Requirements and Costs of Developing and Delivering MOOCs. Int. Rev. Res. Open Distrib. Learn. 2014, 15, 113–133.
  42. Porter, M.E. Value-Based Health Care Delivery. Ann. Surg. 2008, 248, 503–509.
  43. Mangalji, A.; Karthikeyan, V. Considering the Use of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) in Medical Education. UBC Med. J. 2018, 10, 25–26.
  44. Hew, K.F. Promoting Engagement in Online Courses: What Strategies Can We Learn from Three Highly Rated MOOCS. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 2016, 47, 320–341.
  45. Setia, S.; Tay, J.C.; Chia, Y.C.; Subramaniam, K. Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) for Continuing Medical Education—Why and How? Adv. Med. Educ. Pract. 2019, 10, 805–812.
  46. Halawa, S.; Greene, D.; Mitchell, J. Dropout Prediction in MOOCs Using Learner Activity Features. Proc. Second Eur. MOOC Stakehold. Summit 2014, 37, 7–16.
  47. Khalil, H.; Ebner, M. “How Satisfied Are You with Your MOOC?”—A Research Study on Interaction in Huge Online Courses. In Proceedings of the Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Victoria, BC, Canada, 24 June 2013; pp. 830–839.
  48. Onah, D.; Sinclair, J.; Boyatt, R.; Foss, J. Massive Open Online Courses: Learners Participation. In Proceeding of the 7th International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation, Seville, Spain, 17–19 November 2014.
  49. Tseng, S.-F.; Tsao, Y.-W.; Yu, L.-C.; Chan, C.-L.; Lai, K. Who Will Pass? Analyzing Learner Behaviors in MOOCs. Res. Pract. Technol. Enhanc. Learn. 2016, 11, 8.
  50. Milligan, C.; Littlejohn, A. Why Study on a MOOC? The Motives of Students and Professionals. Int. Rev. Res. Open Distrib. Learn. 2017, 18, 92–102.
  51. Ionescu, A.; de Jong, P.G.M.; Drop, S.L.S.; van Kampen, S.C. A Scoping Review of the Use of E-Learning and e-Consultation for Healthcare Workers in Low- and Middle-Income Countries and Their Potential Complementarity. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2022, 29, 713–722.
  52. Nieder, J.; Nayna Schwerdtle, P.; Sauerborn, R.; Barteit, S. Massive Open Online Courses for Health Worker Education in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Scoping Review. Front. Public Health 2022, 10.
  53. Berndt, A.; Murray, C.M.; Kennedy, K.; Stanley, M.J.; Gilbert-Hunt, S. Effectiveness of Distance Learning Strategies for Continuing Professional Development (CPD) for Rural Allied Health Practitioners: A Systematic Review. BMC Med. Educ. 2017, 17, 117.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
This entry is offline, you can click here to edit this entry!
ScholarVision Creations
Feedback