article

Understanding MOOC students: motivations and behaviours indicative of MOOC completion

Authors:

D. VelegolAuthors Info & Claims

Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, Volume 32, Issue 3

Pages 202 - 217

https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12131

Published: 01 June 2016 Publication History

Abstract

Massive open online courses MOOCs continue to appear across the higher education landscape, originating from many institutions in the USA and around the world. MOOCs typically have low completion rates, at least when compared with traditional courses, as this course delivery model is very different from traditional, fee-based models, such as college courses. This research examined MOOC student demographic data, intended behaviours and course interactions to better understand variables that are indicative of MOOC completion. The results lead to ideas regarding how these variables can be used to support MOOC students through the application of learning analytics tools and systems.

References

[1]

Arnold, K. E., &Pistilli, M. D. 2012. Course signals at Purdue: Using learning analytics to increase student success. In S.Buckingham Shum, D.Gašević, &R.Ferguson Eds., Proceedings of the second international conference on learning analytics and knowledge pp. pp.267-270. New York, NY: Association for Computing Machinery.

Digital Library

[2]

Belanger, Y., &Thornton, J. 2013. Bioelectricity: A quantitative approach to Duke University's first MOOC. Retrieved from "http://hdl.handle.net/10161/6216"

[3]

Breslow, L., Pritchard, D. E., DeBoer, J., Stump, G. S., Ho, A. D., &Seaton, D. T. 2013. Studying learning in the worldwide classroom: Research into edX's first MOOC. Research & Practice in Assessment, Volume 8, pp.13-25.

[4]

Brooks, C., Thompson, C., &Teasley, S. 2015. A time series interaction analysis method for building predictive models of learners using log data. In Proceedings of the fifth international conference on learning analytics and knowledge pp. pp.126-135. New York, NY: Association for Computing Machinery.

Digital Library

[5]

Campbell, J., DeBlois, P. B., &Oblinger, D. 2007. Academic analytics: A new tool for a new era. EDUCAUSE Review, Volume 42, pp.40-57.

[6]

Coetzee, D., Fox, A., Hearst, M. A., &Hartmann, B. 2014. Should your MOOC forum use a reputation system? In Proceedings of the 17th ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work & social computing pp. pp.1176-1187. New York, NY: Association for Computing Machinery.

Digital Library

[7]

Conrad, D. 2002. Deep in the hearts of learners: Insights into the nature of online community. International Journal of E-Learning & Distance Education, Volume 17 Issue 1, pp.1-19.

[8]

Daniel, J. 2012. Making sense of MOOCs: Musings in a maze of myth, paradox and possibility. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, Volume 2012 Issue 3. Retrieved from "http://jime.open.ac.uk"

[9]

DeBoer, J., Ho, A. D., Stump, G. S., &Breslow, L. 2014. Changing 'course': Reconceptualizing educational variables for massive open online courses. Educational Researcher, Volume 43, pp.74-84.

[10]

DeBoer, J., Stump, G., Seaton, D. T., &Breslow, L. 2013, June. Diversity in MOOC students' backgrounds and behaviors in relationship to performance in 6.002x. Cambridge, MA: Paper presented at the Sixth International Conference of MIT's Learning International Networks Consortium. Retrieved from "https://tll.mit.edu/sites/default/files/library/LINC%20%2713.pdf"

[11]

Dixson, M. 2010. Creating effective student engagement in online courses: What do students find engaging? Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, Volume 10 Issue 2, pp.1-13.

[12]

Ekwunife-Orakwue, K. C. V., &Teng, T.-L. 2014. The impact of transactional distance dialogic interactions on student learning outcomes in online and blended environments. Computers & Education, Volume 78, pp.414-427.

[13]

Ezen-Can, A., Boyer, K. E., Kellogg, S., &Booth, S. 2015. Unsupervised modeling for understanding MOOC discussion forums: A learning analytics approach. In Proceedings of the fifth international conference on learning analytics and knowledge pp. pp.146-150. New York, NY: Association for Computing Machinery.

Digital Library

[14]

Hauser, R., Paul, R., &Bradley, J. 2012. Computer self-efficacy, anxiety, and learning in online versus face to face medium. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, Volume 11, pp.141-154.

[15]

Hu, S., &Kuh, G. D. 2001 April. Being disengaged in educationally purposeful activities: The influences of student and institutional characteristics. Seattle, WA: Paper presented at the 2001 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association.

[16]

Jablokow, K., Matson, J. V., &Velegol, D. 2014. A multidisciplinary MOOC on creativity, innovation, and change: Encouraging experimentation and experiential learning on a grand scale. In Proceedings of the 2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition. Retrieved from "http://www.asee.org/public/conferences/32/papers/9669/view"

[17]

Jordan, K. 2014. Initial trends in enrollment and completion of massive open online courses. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, Volume 15 Issue 1, pp.133-160. Retrieved from "http://www.irrodl.org"

[18]

Kizilcec, R. F., Piech, C., &Schneider, E. 2013. Deconstructing disengagement: Analyzing learner subpopulations in massive open online courses. In D.Suthers, K.Verbert, E.Duval, &X.Ochoa Eds., Proceedings of the third international conference on learning analytics and knowledge pp. pp.170-179. New York: Association for Computing Machinery.

Digital Library

[19]

Krause, K.-L., &Coates, H. 2008. Students' engagement in first-year university. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, Volume 33, pp.493-505.

[20]

Krosnick, J. A. 1999. Survey research. Annual Review of Psychology, Volume 50, pp.537-567.

[21]

Kuh, G. D., Kinzie, J., Bridges, B. K., &Hayek, J. C. 2007. Piecing together the student success puzzle: Research, propositions, and recommendations. ASHE Higher Education Report, Volume 32 Issue 5, pp.1-182.

[22]

Lewin, T. 2008, December 3. College may become unaffordable for most in U.S. The New York Times. Retrieved from "http://www.nytimes.com"

[23]

Liyanagunawardena, T. R., Adams, A. A., &Williams, S. A. 2013. MOOCs: A systematic study of the published literature 2008-2012. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, Volume 14, pp.202-227. Retrieved from "http://www.irrodl.org"

[24]

Macfadyen, L. P., &Dawson, S. 2010. Mining LMS data to develop an 'early warning system' for educators: A proof of concept. Computers & Education, Volume 54, pp.588-599.

Digital Library

[25]

McBrien, J. L., Jones, P., &Cheng, R. 2009. Virtual spaces: Employing a synchronous online classroom to facilitate student engagement in online learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, Volume 10 Issue 3. Retrieved from "http://www.irrodl.org"

[26]

McKerlich, R., Riis, M., Anderson, T., &Eastman, B. 2011. Student perceptions of teaching presence, social presence, and cognitive presence in a virtual world. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, Volume 7 pp.324-336.

[27]

Meyer, K. A. 2014. Student engagement in online learning: What works and why. ASHE Higher Education Report, Volume 40 Issue 6, pp.1-114.

[28]

Meyer, K. A., Bruwelheide, J., &Poulin, R. 2009. Why they stayed: Near-perfect retention in an online certification program in library media. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, Volume 13 Issue 3, pp.129-145.

[29]

Milligan, C., Littlejohn, A., &Margaryan, A. 2013. Patterns of engagement in connectivist MOOCs. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, Volume 9 Issue 2, pp.149-159.

[30]

Moore, M. G. 1993. Theory of transactional distance. In D.Keegan Ed., Theoretical principles of distance education. New York, NY: Routledge.

[31]

Muilenburg, L. Y., &Berge, Z. L. 2005. Student barriers to online learning: A factor analytics study. Distance Education, Volume 26, pp.29-48.

[32]

Ngoyi, L., Mpanga, S., &Ngoyi, A. 2014. The relationship between student engagement and social presence in online learning. International Journal of Advances in Computer Science and Technology, Volume 3, pp.242-247.

[33]

Pappano, L. 2012, November 2. The year of the MOOC. The New York Times. Retrieved from "http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/04/education/edlife/massive-open-online-courses-are-multiplying-at-a-rapid-pace.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0"

[34]

Perna, L. W., Ruby, A., Boruch, R. F., Wang, N., Scull, J., Ahmad, S., &Evans, C. 2014. Moving through MOOCs: Understanding the progression of users in massive open online courses. Educational Researcher, Volume 43, pp.421-432.

[35]

Richardson, J. C., &Newby, T. 2006. The role of students' cognitive engagement in online learning. American Journal of Distance Education, Volume 20, pp.23-37.

[36]

Robinson, C. C., &Hullinger, H. 2008. New benchmarks in higher education: Student engagement in online learning. Journal of Education for Business, Volume 84 Issue 2, pp.101-109.

[37]

Robinson, J. 2011. Assessing the value of using an online discussion board for engaging students. The Journal of Hospitality Leisure Sport and Tourism, Volume 10 Issue 1, pp.13-22.

[38]

Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, D. R., &Archer, W. 1999. Assessing social presence in asynchronous text-based computer conferencing. Journal of Distance Education, Volume 14, pp.50-71.

[39]

Shin, N., &Chan, J. K. Y. 2004. Direct and indirect effects of online learning on distance education. British Journal of Educational Technology, Volume 35, pp.275-288.

[40]

Siemens, G. 2010. What are learning analytics? Retrieved from "http://www.elearnspace.org/blog/2010/08/25/what-are-learning-analytics/"

[41]

Siemens, G. 2011. Call for papers for the first international conference on learning analytics and knowledge. Retrieved from "https://tekri.athabascau.ca/analytics/"

[42]

Sun, J. C.-Y., &Rueda, R. 2012. Situational interest, computer self-efficacy and self-regulation: Their impact on student engagement in distance education: Student engagement in distance education. British Journal of Educational Technology, Volume 43 Issue 2, pp.191-204.

[43]

Swan, K. 2001. Virtual interaction: Design factors affecting student satisfaction and perceived learning in asynchronous online courses. Distance Education, Volume 22, pp.306-331.

[44]

Swan, K., Shea, P., Richardson, J., Ice, P., Garrison, D. R., Cleveland-Innes, M., &Arbaugh, J. B. 2008. Validating a measurement tool of presence in online communities of inquiry. E-Mentor, Volume 2 Issue 24, pp.1-12.

[45]

Trowler, V. 2010. Student engagement literature review. The Higher Education Academy, Volume 11, pp.1-70.

[46]

Tu, C.-H., &McIsaac, M. 2002. The relationship of social presence and interaction in online classes. American Journal of Distance Education, Volume 16 Issue 3, pp.131-150.

[47]

Waldrop, M. 2013. Campus 2.0. Nature, Volume 495 Issue 7440, pp.160-163.

[48]

Yukselturk, E., &Bulut, S. 2007. Predictors for student success in an online course. Educational Technology & Society, Volume 10, pp.71-83.

Cited By

Keshavarzi FTeo THeidari EMehrvarz M(2024)Mediating role of academic help-seeking among students’ social networking self-efficacy and social presence in online environmentsEducation and Information Technologies10.1007/s10639-023-12204-729:8(9773-9794)Online publication date: 1-Jun-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10639-023-12204-7
Celik BCagiltay K(2024)Did you act according to your intention? An analysis and exploration of intention–behavior gap in MOOCsEducation and Information Technologies10.1007/s10639-023-11859-629:2(1733-1760)Online publication date: 1-Feb-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10639-023-11859-6
Celik BCagiltay K(2023)The undervalued variable in Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) research: An analysis and conceptualization of readiness for online learning in MOOCsEducation and Information Technologies10.1007/s10639-023-11662-328:9(11569-11588)Online publication date: 22-Feb-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10639-023-11662-3
Show More Cited By

Understanding MOOC students: motivations and behaviours indicative of MOOC completion
1. Applied computing
  1. Education
2. Social and professional topics
  1. Professional topics
    1. Computing education
      1. Computing education programs

Recommendations

The Learning Analytics System that Improves the Teaching-Learning Experience of MOOC Instructors and Students
Learning Technologies and Systems
Abstract
Great learning opportunities are provided through MOOCs. However, MOOCs provide a number of challenges for students. Many students find it difficult to successfully finish MOOCs due to a variety of factors, including feelings of loneliness, a lack ...
Perception of MOOC Pedagogical Tools and Learners' Learning Styles in MOOC Blended Teaching: a Case Study
ICEBT '19: Proceedings of the 2019 3rd International Conference on E-Education, E-Business and E-Technology

Rapid development has been achieved since the emergence of MOOC in 2008, but there are still many defects in the popularization of MOOC. Developing blended teaching by utilizing is considered to be one of effective means to overcome these shortcomings. ...
Learning strategies as a mediator for motivation and a sense of achievement among students who study in MOOCs

The goal of the research was to examine the contribution of learning strategies as a mediator for motivation and a sense of achievement in a Massive Open Online Course (MOOC), among students who participate in a unique program in Israel, called "Academy ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Journal of Computer Assisted Learning

Journal of Computer Assisted Learning Volume 32, Issue 3

June 2016

104 pages

ISSN:0266-4909

EISSN:1365-2729

Issue’s Table of Contents

Publisher

John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

United States

Publication History

Published: 01 June 2016

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Article

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

25
Total Citations
View Citations
0
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)0
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 25 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Keshavarzi FTeo THeidari EMehrvarz M(2024)Mediating role of academic help-seeking among students’ social networking self-efficacy and social presence in online environmentsEducation and Information Technologies10.1007/s10639-023-12204-729:8(9773-9794)Online publication date: 1-Jun-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10639-023-12204-7
Celik BCagiltay K(2024)Did you act according to your intention? An analysis and exploration of intention–behavior gap in MOOCsEducation and Information Technologies10.1007/s10639-023-11859-629:2(1733-1760)Online publication date: 1-Feb-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10639-023-11859-6
Celik BCagiltay K(2023)The undervalued variable in Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) research: An analysis and conceptualization of readiness for online learning in MOOCsEducation and Information Technologies10.1007/s10639-023-11662-328:9(11569-11588)Online publication date: 22-Feb-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10639-023-11662-3
Lu KPang FShadiev R(2023)Understanding college students’ continuous usage intention of asynchronous online courses through extended technology acceptance modelEducation and Information Technologies10.1007/s10639-023-11591-128:8(9747-9765)Online publication date: 17-Jan-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10639-023-11591-1
Suriyapaiboonwattana KHone K(2023)Exploring the Factors Affecting Learning Satisfaction in MOOC: A Case Study of Higher Education in a Developing CountryLearning and Collaboration Technologies10.1007/978-3-031-34550-0_39(551-569)Online publication date: 23-Jul-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-031-34550-0_39
Yu ZZou X(2022)Student Perceptions of Factors Influencing Engagement in Online Courses on Tencent MeetingInternational Journal of Online Pedagogy and Course Design10.4018/IJOPCD.31144212:1(1-17)Online publication date: 14-Oct-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.4018/IJOPCD.311442
Wang QRose CMa NJiang SBao HLi Y(2022)Design and Application of Automatic Feedback Scaffolding in Forums to Promote LearningIEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies10.1109/TLT.2022.315691415:2(150-166)Online publication date: 1-Apr-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1109/TLT.2022.3156914
Yang BTang HHao LRose J(2022)Untangling chaos in discussion forumsComputers & Education10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104402178:COnline publication date: 1-Mar-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104402
Chen XZou DXie H(2022)A decade of learning analytics: Structural topic modeling based bibliometric analysisEducation and Information Technologies10.1007/s10639-022-11046-z27:8(10517-10561)Online publication date: 1-Sep-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10639-022-11046-z
Zuo MHu YLuo HOuyang HZhang Y(2022)K-12 students’ online learning motivation in China: An integrated model based on community of inquiry and technology acceptance theoryEducation and Information Technologies10.1007/s10639-021-10791-x27:4(4599-4620)Online publication date: 1-May-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10639-021-10791-x
Show More Cited By

View Options

View options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Issue’s Table of Contents