@article{StaubitzSerthThomasetal.2023,
  author    = {Staubitz, Thomas and Serth, Sebastian and Thomas, Max and Ebner, Martin and Koschutnig-Ebner, Markus and Rampelt, Florian and von Stetten, Alexander and Wittke, Andreas},
  title     = {A metastandard for the international exchange of MOOCs},
  series = {EMOOCs 2023 : Post-Covid Prospects for Massive Open Online Courses - Boost or Backlash?},
  journal   = {EMOOCs 2023 : Post-Covid Prospects for Massive Open Online Courses - Boost or Backlash?},
  editor    = {Meinel, Christoph and Schweiger, Stefanie and Staubitz, Thomas and Conrad, Robert and Alario Hoyos, Carlos and Ebner, Martin and Sancassani, Susanna and Żur, Agnieszka and Friedl, Christian and Halawa, Sherif and Gamage, Dilrukshi and Scott, Jeffrey and Kristine Jonson Carlon, May and Deville, Yves and Gaebel, Michael and Delgado Kloos, Carlos and von Schmieden, Karen},
  publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam},
  address   = {Potsdam},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-62415},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-624154},
  pages     = {147 -- 161},
  year      = {2023},
  abstract  = {The MOOChub is a joined web-based catalog of all relevant German and Austrian MOOC platforms that lists well over 750 Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs). Automatically building such a catalog requires that all partners describe and publicly offer the metadata of their courses in the same way. The paper at hand presents the genesis of the idea to establish a common metadata standard and the story of its subsequent development. The result of this effort is, first, an open-licensed de-facto-standard, which is based on existing commonly used standards and second, a first prototypical platform that is using this standard: the MOOChub, which lists all courses of the involved partners. This catalog is searchable and provides a more comprehensive overview of basically all MOOCs that are offered by German and Austrian MOOC platforms. Finally, the upcoming developments to further optimize the catalog and the metadata standard are reported.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{SerthStaubitzvanEltenetal.2022,
  author    = {Serth, Sebastian and Staubitz, Thomas and van Elten, Martin and Meinel, Christoph},
  title     = {Measuring the effects of course modularizations in online courses for life-long learners},
  series = {Frontiers in Education},
  volume    = {7},
  journal   = {Frontiers in Education},
  editor    = {Gamage, Dilrukshi},
  publisher = {Frontiers},
  address   = {Lausanne, Schweiz},
  issn      = {2504-284X},
  doi       = {10.3389/feduc.2022.1008545},
  pages     = {15},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {Many participants in Massive Open Online Courses are full-time employees seeking greater flexibility in their time commitment and the available learning paths. We recently addressed these requirements by splitting up our 6-week courses into three 2-week modules followed by a separate exam. Modularizing courses offers many advantages: Shorter modules are more sustainable and can be combined, reused, and incorporated into learning paths more easily. Time flexibility for learners is also improved as exams can now be offered multiple times per year, while the learning content is available independently. In this article, we answer the question of which impact this modularization has on key learning metrics, such as course completion rates, learning success, and no-show rates. Furthermore, we investigate the influence of longer breaks between modules on these metrics. According to our analysis, course modules facilitate more selective learning behaviors that encourage learners to focus on topics they are the most interested in. At the same time, participation in overarching exams across all modules seems to be less appealing compared to an integrated exam of a 6-week course. While breaks between the modules increase the distinctive appearance of individual modules, a break before the final exam further reduces initial interest in the exams. We further reveal that participation in self-paced courses as a preparation for the final exam is unlikely to attract new learners to the course offerings, even though learners' performance is comparable to instructor-paced courses. The results of our long-term study on course modularization provide a solid foundation for future research and enable educators to make informed decisions about the design of their courses.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{GamageStaubitzWhiting2021,
  author    = {Gamage, Dilrukshi and Staubitz, Thomas and Whiting, Mark},
  title     = {Peer assessment in MOOCs},
  series = {Distance education},
  volume    = {42},
  journal   = {Distance education},
  number    = {2},
  publisher = {Routledge, Taylor \& Francis Group},
  address   = {Abingdon},
  issn      = {0158-7919},
  doi       = {10.1080/01587919.2021.1911626},
  pages     = {268 -- 289},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {We report on a systematic review of the landscape of peer assessment in massive open online courses (MOOCs) with papers from 2014 to 2020 in 20 leading education technology publication venues across four databases containing education technology-related papers, addressing three research issues: the evolution of peer assessment in MOOCs during the period 2014 to 2020, the methods used in MOOCs to assess peers, and the challenges of and future directions in MOOC peer assessment. We provide summary statistics and a review of methods across the corpus and highlight three directions for improving the use of peer assessment in MOOCs: the need for focusing on scaling learning through peer evaluations, the need for scaling and optimizing team submissions in team peer assessments, and the need for embedding a social process for peer assessment.},
  language  = {en}
}