The International Comparison and Trend Analysis of the Development of MOOCs in Higher Education

  • Qinhua ZhengEmail author
  • Li Chen
  • Daniel Burgos
Part of the Lecture Notes in Educational Technology book series (LNET)


This chapter explores the potential impact of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) on the international aspects of university development, claiming that the development and offering of MOOCs can affect not only universities’ educational offerings but also the way they plan their development within an increasingly globalized context. This chapter argues that MOOCs can contribute to enhancing universities’ international cooperation and propose six patterns of international cooperation among universities empowered by MOOCs.



This chapter has been authored by Daniel Burgos (Universidad Internacional de La Rioja – UNIR–), Fabio Nascimbeni (Universidad Internacional de La Rioja – UNIR–), and Edison Spina (Universidad de Sao Paulo – USP–). This book chapter is based on the results of the eMundus project, an action conducted during the period 2013-2015 with the support of the Erasmus Mundus programme of the European Commission. The project involved an international consortium composed by SOPHIA R&I (Italy), the Open University of the Netherlands (NL), the Universidad Internacional de la Rioja (UNIR, Spain), the University of Sao Paulo (Brazil), the Universidad Autonoma Metropolitana (Mexico), the Moscow State University of Economics, Statistics, and Informatics (Russia), the OER Foundation (New Zealand), Athabasca University (Canada) and the Universitas Siswa Bangsa Internasional (Indonesia).

Furthermore, this research is partially funded by Universidad Internacional de la Rioja (UNIR) (, through the Research Institute for Innovation & Technology in Education (UNIR iTED,, UNESCO Chair on eLearning, ICDE Chair in Open Educational Resources (, and the Telefónica-UNIR Chair in Digital Society and Education.


  1. Ardis, M. A., & Henderson, P. B. (2012). Software engineering education (SEEd): Is software engineering ready for MOOCs? ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, 37(5), 14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Becker, S., Cummins, M., Davis, A., Freeman, A., Hall Giesinger, C., & Ananthanarayanan, V. (2017). NMC horizon report: 2017 higher education edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.Google Scholar
  3. Bijnens, H., et al. (2006). European cooperation in education through Virtual Mobility—A best practices manual. Leuven: EUROPACE.Google Scholar
  4. Billingsley, W., & Steel, J. R. (2014). Towards a supercollaborative software engineering MOOC. In Companion Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Software Engineering (pp. 283–286). ACM.Google Scholar
  5. Burgos, D. (2015a). OER y currículo. Colaboración sin servilismo. Retrieved September 18 2015 from
  6. Burgos, D. (2015b). MOOCs y currículo. ¿Un equilibrio posible?. Retrieved September 18 2015 from
  7. Class-Central. (2017). By the numbers: MOOCs in 2016. Retrieved May 31st 2017 from
  8. Commission, European. (2013). Communication on ‘Opening up Education: Innovative teaching and learning for all through new Technologies and Open Educational Resources. Luxembourg: European Commission.Google Scholar
  9. Commission, European. (2017). Communication on a renewed EU agenda for higher education. Luxembourg: European Commission.Google Scholar
  10. Fischer, L. (2014). Marketing of education. The Pie Review, 2013(3).Google Scholar
  11. Garcia, F., Diaz, G., Tawfik, M., Martin, S., Sancristobal, E., & Castro, M. (2014). A practice-based MOOC for learning electronics. In Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), 2014 IEEE (pp. 969–974). IEEE.Google Scholar
  12. Grove, J. (2016). MOOCs: International credit transfer system edges closer. Times Higher Education, Accessed April 24 2016.
  13. Johnson, D. H. (2013). Teaching a “MOOC:” Experiences from the front line. In Digital Signal Processing and Signal Processing Education Meeting (DSP/SPE), 2013 IEEE (pp. 268–272). IEEE.Google Scholar
  14. Knight, J. (2008). Higher education in turmoil: The changing world of internationalization. The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  15. Knox, J. (2013, January–March). The limitations of access alone: Moving towards open processes in education technology. Open Praxis, 5(1), 21–29.Google Scholar
  16. Lazetic, P, Souto-Otero, M., & Shields, R. (2015). OpenCases: Catalogue of mini cases on open education in Europe. Publications Office of the European Union.Google Scholar
  17. Mackintosh, W., McGreal, R., & Taylor, J. (2011). Open Educational Resources (OER) for assessment and credit for students’ projects: Towards a logic model and plan for action. Retrieved from
  18. McGreal, R., Conrad, D., Murphy, A., Witthaus, G., & Mackintosh, W. (2014). Formalising informal learning: Assessment and accreditation challenges within disaggregated systems. Open Praxis, 6(2), 125–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mulder, F., & Jansen, D. (2015). MOOCs for opening up education and the OpenupEd initiative. In C. J. Bonk, M. M. Lee, T. C. Reeves, & T. H. Reynolds (Eds.), The MOOCs and open education around the world. New York: Routledge Tayler & Francis Group.Google Scholar
  20. Nascimbeni, F. (2014). The increased complexity of Higher Education collaboration in times of Open Education. Campus virtuales, 3(1), 102–108.Google Scholar
  21. Pawlowski, J. M., et al. (2013). Open educational ideas: Early stage sharing of educational artefacts. EIF 2013. Barcelona, Spain.Google Scholar
  22. Quiang, Z. (2003). Internationalization of higher education: Towards a conceptual framework. Policy Futures in Education, 1(2).Google Scholar
  23. Richter, T. (2011). Adaptability as a special demand on open educational resources: The cultural context of e-Learning. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 2.Google Scholar
  24. Sutton, S. B. (2010, January–February). Transforming internationalization through partnerships. International Educator. Google Scholar
  25. The Economist. (2017). Learning and earning: The return of the MOOC. Established education providers v new contenders. Retrieved June 2, 2017 from
  26. UNESCO. (2015). Qingdao declaration. In: International Conference on Ict and Post-2015 Education, May 23–25, 2015. Qingdao, The People’s Republic of China.Google Scholar
  27. Weller, M. (2014). The battle for open. London: Ubiquity Press.Google Scholar
  28. Westera, W., van den Herik, Jap, & van de Vrie, E. (2004). Strategic alliances in education: The knowledge engineering web. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 41(3), 317–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Yuan, L., & Powell, S. (2013). MOOCs and open education: Implications for higher education. JISC CETIS.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Beijing Normal UniversityBeijingChina
  2. 2.Universidad Internacional de La Rioja (UNIR)LogroñoSpain

Personalised recommendations