The Value of MOOC Certificates versus Traditional Credentials and Experience: Data and Analysis Files
Principal Investigator(s): View help for Principal Investigator(s) Mariela Rivas, University of California, Irvine; Rachel Baker, University of California, Irvine; Brent Evans, Vanderbilt University
Version: View help for Version V1
| Name | File Type | Size | Last Modified |
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
text/csv | 159.2 KB | 01/20/2021 02:10:PM |
|
|
text/x-stata-syntax | 30.9 KB | 01/21/2021 08:59:AM |
|
|
text/csv | 178.6 KB | 01/20/2021 02:09:PM |
|
|
text/x-stata-syntax | 25.4 KB | 01/21/2021 09:00:AM |
|
|
application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document | 68.1 KB | 01/20/2021 02:34:PM |
Project Citation:
Rivas, Mariela, Baker, Rachel, and Evans, Brent. The Value of MOOC Certificates versus Traditional Credentials and Experience: Data and Analysis Files. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2021-01-22. https://doi.org/10.3886/E130725V1
Project Description
Summary:
View help for Summary
This deposit contains the data and analysis files necessary to produce the tables in "Do MOOCs Make You More Marketable? An Experimental Analysis of the Value of MOOCs Relative to Traditional Credentials and Experience" published in AERA Open.
The abstract is below:
Massive open online courses (MOOCs) are marketed as opportunities for participants to improve their labor market outcomes, and tens of thousands of students have paid for career-focused MOOC certificate programs. However, there is limited and conflicting research on MOOCs and labor market outcomes. Using two randomized control trials, we test Amazon’s Mechanical Turk respondents’ preferences for hiring hypothetical freelance web developers. In the first experiment, we examine preferences for profiles with MOOCs as compared to profiles with traditional degrees (bachelor’s, associates, and community college certificates). Respondents preferred all traditional degrees over a MOOC; MOOCs do not serve as substitutes for traditional postsecondary credentials. In the second experiment, we examine preferences for MOOCs as compared to no listed credential. Results demonstrate a 61–percentage point preference for MOOC credentials compared to no MOOC credential; the preference does not vary across levels of professional experience.
The abstract is below:
Massive open online courses (MOOCs) are marketed as opportunities for participants to improve their labor market outcomes, and tens of thousands of students have paid for career-focused MOOC certificate programs. However, there is limited and conflicting research on MOOCs and labor market outcomes. Using two randomized control trials, we test Amazon’s Mechanical Turk respondents’ preferences for hiring hypothetical freelance web developers. In the first experiment, we examine preferences for profiles with MOOCs as compared to profiles with traditional degrees (bachelor’s, associates, and community college certificates). Respondents preferred all traditional degrees over a MOOC; MOOCs do not serve as substitutes for traditional postsecondary credentials. In the second experiment, we examine preferences for MOOCs as compared to no listed credential. Results demonstrate a 61–percentage point preference for MOOC credentials compared to no MOOC credential; the preference does not vary across levels of professional experience.
Scope of Project
Geographic Coverage:
View help for Geographic Coverage
United States of America
Time Period(s):
View help for Time Period(s)
2/2018 – 6/2018 (February to June 2018)
Collection Date(s):
View help for Collection Date(s)
2/2018 – 6/2018 (February to June 2018)
Universe:
View help for Universe
Adults in the United States
Data Type(s):
View help for Data Type(s)
experimental data;
survey data
Collection Notes:
View help for Collection Notes
Collected from Amazon Mechanical Turk
Related Publications
Published Versions
Report a Problem
Found a serious problem with the data, such as disclosure risk or copyrighted content? Let us know.
This material is distributed exactly as it arrived from the data depositor. ICPSR has not checked or processed this material. Users should consult the investigator(s) if further information is desired.