Kitlesel Açık Çevrimiçi Ders Ortamlarında öğrenci katılımı nasıl geliştirilebilir?

Year 2022, Volume: 3 Issue: 2, 176 - 206, 31.12.2022

Ahmet Uçar , Mustafa Sarıtepeci

https://doi.org/10.52911/itall.1194260

Cited By: 3

Abstract

Günümüzde artan nüfus, günlük, sosyal, eğitim ve iş yaşamındaki beklenen yeterliklerin değişmesiyle birlikte sürekli eğitim ihtiyacı ve bunun bir sonucu olarak hayat boyu öğrenmenin önemin artması gibi faktörler eğitim ortamlarının çeşitlenmesini beraberinde getirmiştir. Bu artan ihtiyacı karşılamaya dönük özellikle zaman ve mekan konusunda sınırlılıkları bireyler için kitlesel açık çevrimiçi dersler ve uzaktan eğitim ortamları büyük kolaylık sağlamaktadır. Ancak literatürde kitlesel açık çevrimiçi ortamlarda sıklıkla kursu tamamlayamama ve düşük katılım gibi olumsuz durumlar belirtilmiştir. Kitlesel açık çevrimiçi derslerde öğrenci katılımı ile ilgili çok sayıda çalışma vardır. Bu konuyla ilgili sistematik çalışmaların odak noktası bu gibi ortamlarda öğrenci katılımı önündeki engeller ve karşılaşılan zorluklardır. Bu çalışmada ise odak noktamız öğrenci katılımını etkileyen faktörleri (içsel, dışsal) sistematik bir bakış açısı ile almaktır. Buradan yola çıkarak Web of Science veri tabanında yer alan kitlesel açık çevrimiçi dersler ve öğrenci katılımı başlıklarını içeren 100 çalışma incelenmiştir. Kitlesel açık çevrimiçi ortamlarda öğrenci katılımını etkileyen içsel faktörlerde öne çıkan faktörler motivasyon, öz yeterlik, işbirliği ve sadakattir. Öne çıkan dışsal faktörler ise etkileşim, oyunlaştırma, geribildirim, kurs yapısı ve tasarımıdır.

Keywords

kitlesel açık çevrimiçi ders, öğrenci katılımı, Katılım, KAÇD

How can student engagement be improved in Massive Open Online Courses?

Abstract

Today, factors such as the increasing population, the change in expected competencies in daily, social, education, and business life, the need for continuous education, and the increase in the importance of lifelong learning have brought about the diversification of educational environments. Massive open online courses and distance education environments provide great convenience, especially for individuals with limited time and space to meet this increasing need. However, in the literature, negative situations such as the inability to complete the course and low attendance are frequently reported in massive open online settings. There are numerous studies of student engagement in massive open online courses. The focus of systematic studies on this topic is the barriers and challenges to student engagement in such settings. In this study, we focus on the factors (internal and external) affecting student engagement from a systematic perspective. Starting from this, we reviewed 100 studies concentrated on massive open online courses and student engagement in the Web of Science database. The prominent internal factors affecting student engagement in massive open online environments are motivation, self-efficacy, cooperation, and loyalty. The principal external factors are interaction, gamification, feedback, course structure, and design.

Keywords

Engagement, Student Engagement, MOOCs, Massive Open Online Courses

References

• Adeyemo, D. A. (2007). Moderating influence of emotional intelligence on the link between academic self-efficacy and achievement of university students. Psychology and developing societies, 19(2), 199-213.
• Alamri, M. M. (2022). Investigating Students’ Adoption of MOOCs during COVID-19 Pandemic: Students’ Academic Self-Efficacy, Learning Engagement, and Learning Persistence. Sustainability, 14(2), 714.
• Alemayehu, L., & Chen, H.-L. (2021). Learner and instructor-related challenges for learners’ engagement in MOOCs: A review of 2014–2020 publications in selected SSCI indexed journals. Interactive Learning Environments, 1-23.
• Alexandron, G., Wiltrout, M. E., Berg, A., Gershon, S. a. K., & Ruipérez‐Valiente, J. A. (2022). The effects of assessment design on academic dishonesty, learner engagement, and certification rates in MOOCs. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning.
• Alharbi, K., Alrajhi, L., Cristea, A.I., Bittencourt, I.I., Isotani, S., James, A. (2020). Data-Driven Analysis of Engagement in Gamified Learning Environments: A Methodology for Real-Time Measurement of MOOCs. In: Kumar, V., Troussas, C. (eds) Intelligent Tutoring Systems. ITS 2020. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 12149. Springer, Cham.
• Amado-Salvatierra, H.R., Rizzardini, R.H. (2018). An Experience Using Educational Data Mining and Machine Learning Towards a Full Engagement Educational Framework. In: Uden, L., Liberona, D., Ristvej, J. (eds) Learning Technology for Education Challenges. LTEC 2018. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 870. Springer, Cham.
• Anderson, A., Huttenlocher, D., Kleinberg, J., & Leskovec, J. (2014). Engaging with massive online courses. Proceedings of the 23rd international conference on World wide web. Seoul, Korea.
• Antonaci, A., Klemke, R., Lataster, J., Kreijns, K., Specht, M. (2019). Gamification of MOOCs Adopting Social Presence and Sense of Community to Increase User’s Engagement: An Experimental Study. In: Scheffel, M., Broisin, J., Pammer-Schindler, V., Ioannou, A., Schneider, J. (eds) Transforming Learning with Meaningful Technologies. EC-TEL 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11722. Springer, Cham.
• Anutariya, C., & Thongsuntia, W. (2019). MOOC design and learners engagement analysis: a learning analytics approach. 2019 International Conference on Sustainable Information Engineering and Technology (SIET). Lombok, Endonesia.
• Baek, J., & Shore, J. (2016). Promoting student engagement in MOOCs. L@S 2016: Third (2016) ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale. Edinburgh Scotland, UK.
• 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, 8, 13-25.
• Bote Lorenzo, M. L., & Gómez Sánchez, E. (2018). An approach to build in situ models for the prediction of the decrease of academic engagement indicators in Massive Open Online Courses.
• Buchem, I., Carlino, C., Amenduni, F., & Poce, A. (2020). Meaningful gamification in MOOCs. Designing and examining learner engagement in the Open Virtual Mobility Learning Hub. Proceedings of the 14th International Technology, Education and Development Conference. Valencia, Spain.
• Calik, M., & Sözbilir, M. (2014). Parameters of content analysis. Egitim Ve Bilim-Education and Science, 39(174).
• Casson, F., Salter, M., & Hejmadi, M. (2017). What factors influence learner engagement with futurelearn moocs? A case study from bath. 9th International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies. Barcelona, Spain.
• Cheng, Y.-M. (2022). Which quality determinants cause MOOCs continuance intention? A hybrid extending the expectation-confirmation model with learning engagement and information systems success. Library Hi Tech(ahead-of-print).
• Crosslin, M., Dellinger, J. T., Joksimovic, S., Kovanovic, V., & Gaševic, D. (2018). Customizable Modalities for Individualized Learning: Examining Patterns of Engagement in Dual-Layer MOOCs. Online Learning, 22(1), 19-38.
• Choi, N. (2005). Self‐efficacy and self‐concept as predictors of college students' academic performance. Psychology in the Schools, 42(2), 197-205.
• Crues, R. W., Bosch, N., Perry, M., Angrave, L., Shaik, N., & Bhat, S. (2018). Refocusing the lens on engagement in MOOCs. L@S '18: Proceedings of the Fifth Annual ACM Conference on Learning at Scale. London, United Kingdom.
• Dellinger, J. T., Joksimovic, S., Kovanovic, V., & Gaševic, D. (2018). Customizable Modalities for Individualized Learning: Examining Patterns of Engagement in Dual-Layer MOOCs. Online Learning, 22(1), 19-38.
• De Freitas, S. I., Morgan, J., & Gibson, D. (2015). Will MOOCs transform learning and teaching in higher education? Engagement and course retention in online learning provision. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(3), 455-471.
• Deng, R., Benckendorff, P., & Gannaway, D. (2020). Learner engagement in MOOCs: Scale development and validation. British Journal of Educational Technology, 51(1), 245-262.
• Dubbaka, A., & Gopalan, A. (2020). Detecting learner engagement in MOOCs using automatic facial expression recognition. 2020 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON). Porto, Portugal.
• Dinçer, S. (2018). Content analysis in scientific research: Meta-analysis, meta-synthesis, and descriptive content analysis. Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 7(1), 176-190.
• Dubbaka, A., & Gopalan, A. (2020). Detecting learner engagement in MOOCs using automatic facial expression recognition. 2020 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON). Porto, Portugal.
• Estrada-Molina, O., & Fuentes-Cancell, D.-R. (2022). Engagement and Desertion in MOOCs: Systematic Review. Comunicar: Media Education Research Journal, 30(70), 107-119.
• Floratos, N., Guasch, T., & Espasa, A. (2015). Recommendations on Formative Assessment and Feedback Practices for stronger engagement in MOOCs. Open Praxis, 7(2), 141-152.
• Floratos, N., Guasch, T., & Espasa, A. (2016). Is student engagement higher in MOOCS with appropriate formative assessment and feedback practices? 9th Annual International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation. Valencia, Spain.
• Floratos, N., Guasch, T., & Espasa, A. (2017). STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN MOOCS WITH APPROPRIATE FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT AND FEEDBACK PRACTICES. 9th International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies. Barcelona, Spain.
• Formanek, M., Buxner, S., Impey, C., & Wenger, M. (2019). Relationship between learners’ motivation and course engagement in an astronomy massive open online course. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 15(2), 020140.
• Fredricks, J. A., Filsecker, M., & Lawson, M. A. (2016). Student engagement, context, and adjustment: Addressing definitional, measurement, and methodological issues. Learning and instruction, 43, 1-4.
• Goldberg, L. R., Bell, E., King, C., O’Mara, C., McInerney, F., Robinson, A., & Vickers, J. (2015). Relationship between participants’ level of education and engagement in their completion of the Understanding Dementia Massive Open Online Course. BMC medical education, 15(1), 1-7.
• Hagedorn, C., Betz, E.-S., & Meinel, C. (2022). Storified Programming MOOCs: A Case Study on Learner Engagement and Perception. 2022 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON). Tunis, Tunisia.
• Handelsman, M. M., Briggs, W. L., Sullivan, N., & Towler, A. (2005). A measure of college student course engagement. The Journal of Educational Research, 98(3), 184-192.
• Hakami, N., White, S., & Chakaveh, S. (2017). Motivational factors that influence the use of MOOCs: learners’ perspectives-a systematic literature review. 9th International Conference on Computer Supported Education. Porto, Portugal.
• Hayati, H., Tahiri, J. S., Idrissi, M. K., & Bennani, S. (2016). Classification system of learners engagement within Massive Open Online Courses. 2016 4th IEEE International Colloquium on Information Science and Technology (CiSt)
• Hernández, R., Amado-Salvatierra, H.R. (2018). An Adaptive Learning Approach Using a Full Engagement Educational Framework. In: Xhafa, F., Caballé, S., Barolli, L. (eds) Advances on P2P, Parallel, Grid, Cloud and Internet Computing. 3PGCIC 2017. Lecture Notes on Data Engineering and Communications Technologies, vol 13. Springer, Cham.
• Hernández Rizzardini, R., Amado-Salvatierra, H.R. (2018). Exploring New Ways to Increase Engagement in Full-Path MOOC Programs. In: Zaphiris, P., Ioannou, A. (eds) Learning and Collaboration Technologies. Learning and Teaching. LCT 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10925. Springer, Cham.
• Hew, K. F. (2016). Promoting engagement in online courses: What strategies can we learn from three highly rated MOOCS. British Journal of Educational Technology, 47(2), 320-341.
• Hew, K. F., Qiao, C., & Tang, Y. (2018). Understanding student engagement in large-scale open online courses: A machine learning facilitated analysis of student’s reflections in 18 highly rated MOOCs. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 19(3).
• Hewawalpita, S., Herath, S., Perera, I., & Meedeniya, D. (2018). Effective Learning Content Offering in MOOCs with Virtual Reality-An Exploratory Study on Learner Experience. Journal of Universal Computer Science, vol. 24, no. 2 (2018), 24(2), 129-148.
• Honicke, T., & Broadbent, J. (2016). The influence of academic self-efficacy on academic performance: A systematic review. Educational Research Review, 17, 63-84.
• Houston, S. L., Brady, K., Narasimham, G., & Fisher, D. (2017). Pass the idea please: The relationship between network position, direct engagement, and course performance in MOOCs. L@S '17: Proceedings of the Fourth (2017) ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale. Massachussetts, USA.
• Jung, Y., & Lee, J. (2018). Learning engagement and persistence in massive open online courses (MOOCS). Computers & Education, 122, 9-22.
• İzci, K. (2018). Secondary science teachers’ assessment literacies in Turkey: A descriptive content analysis. Journal of Education and Humanities: Theory and Practice, 9(17), 23-54.
• Kala, D., & Chaubey, D. S. (2022). Examination of relationships among technology acceptance, student engagement, and perceived learning on tourism-related MOOCs. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, 1-18.
• Kaveri, A., Gunasekar, S., Gupta, D., & Pratap, M. (2016). Decoding engagement in MOOCs: an indian learner perspective. 2016 IEEE Eighth International Conference on Technology for Education (T4E). Mumbai, India.
• Khalil, M., & Ebner, M. (2017). Clustering patterns of engagement in Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs): the use of learning analytics to reveal student categories. Journal of computing in higher education, 29(1), 114-132.
• Koukis, N., & Jimoyiannis, A. (2017). Designing MOOCs for teacher professional development: Analysis of participants’ engagement and perceptions. 16th European Conference on e-Learning, ECEL 2017. Porto, Portugal.
• Kuo, T. M., Tsai, C.-C., & Wang, J.-C. (2021). Linking web-based learning self-efficacy and learning engagement in MOOCs: The role of online academic hardiness. The Internet and Higher Education, 51, 100819.
• Kuo, T. M. L., Tsai, C. C., & Wang, J. C. (2017). Why learners fail in MOOCs? Investigating the interplay of online academic hardiness and learning engagement among MOOCs learners. 25th International Conference on Computers in Education, ICCE 2017. Christchurch, New Zealand.
• Lan, M., & Hew, K. F. (2020). Examining learning engagement in MOOCs: A self-determination theoretical perspective using mixed method. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17(1), 1-24.
• Liu, M.-C., Yu, C.-H., Wu, J., Liu, A.-C., & Chen, H.-M. (2018). Applying learning analytics to deconstruct user engagement by using log data of MOOCs. Journal of Information Science & Engineering, 34(5).
• Liu, Y., Zhang, M., Qi, D., & Zhang, Y. (2022). Understanding the role of learner engagement in determining MOOCs satisfaction: A self-determination theory perspective. Interactive Learning Environments, 1-15.
• Lu, O. H., Huang, J. C., Huang, A. Y., & Yang, S. J. (2017). Applying learning analytics for improving students engagement and learning outcomes in an MOOCs enabled collaborative programming course. Interactive Learning Environments, 25(2), 220-234.
• Montgomery, A. P., Hayward, D. V., Dunn, W., Carbonaro, M., & Amrhein, C. G. (2015). Blending for student engagement: Lessons learned for MOOCs and beyond. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 31(6).
• Moore, R. L., & Blackmon, S. J. (2022). From the Learner's perspective: A systematic review of MOOC learner experiences (2008–2021). Computers & Education, 104596.
• Morales, M., Amado-Salvatierra, H. R., Hernández, R., Pirker, J., & Gütl, C. (2016). A practical experience on the use of gamification in MOOC courses as a strategy to increase motivation. International Workshop on Learning Technology for Education Challenges,
• Ortega-Arranz, A., Kalz, M., & Martínez-Monés, A. (2018). Creating engaging experiences in MOOCs through in-course redeemable rewards. 2018 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON). Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Spain.
• Padilla Rodriguez, B. C., Armellini, A., & Rodriguez Nieto, M. C. (2020). Learner engagement, retention and success: why size matters in massive open online courses (MOOCs). Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 35(1), 46-62.
• Pérez-Álvarez, R. A., Maldonado-Mahauad, J., Sharma, K., Sapunar-Opazo, D., & Pérez-Sanagustín, M. (2020). Characterizing learners’ engagement in MOOCs: an observational case study using the NoteMyProgress tool for supporting self-regulation. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 13(4), 676-688.
• Qiu, J., Tang, J., Liu, T. X., Gong, J., Zhang, C., Zhang, Q., & Xue, Y. (2016). Modeling and predicting learning behavior in MOOCs. Proceedings of the ninth ACM international conference on web search and data mining. California, USA.
• Ramesh, A., Goldwasser, D., Huang, B., Daume, H., & Getoor, L. (2018). Interpretable engagement models for MOOCs using Hinge-loss markov random fields. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 13(1), 107-122.
• Rincón-Flores, E. G., Mena, J., & Montoya, M. S. R. (2020). Gamification: a new key for enhancing engagement in MOOCs on energy? International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM), 14(4), 1379-1393.
• Ripiye, P.-R. (2016). Examining the impacts of social media engagement on learners motivation in MOOCs. ECEL 2016 - 15th European Conference on e- Learning. Prague, Czech Republic.
• Rizzardini, R. H., & Amado-Salvatierra, H. R. (2018). Towards full engagement for open online education. A practical experience from MicroMasters at edX. In Software Data Engineering for Network eLearning Environments (pp. 161-177). Springer.
• Rodrigues, R. L., Ramos, J. L. C., Silva, J. C. S., & Gomes, A. S. (2016). Discovery engagement patterns MOOCs through cluster analysis. IEEE Latin America Transactions, 14(9), 4129-4135.
• Romero-Rodriguez, L. M., Ramirez-Montoya, M. S., & González, J. R. V. (2019). Gamification in MOOCs: Engagement application test in energy sustainability courses. IEEE Access, vol. 7, 7, 32093-32101.
• Samoilova, E., Keusch, F., & Kreuter, F. (2018). Integrating survey and learning analytics data for a better understanding of engagement in MOOCs. Data analytics and psychometrics: informing assessment practices. Information Age Publishing, Charlotte, 247-261.
• Sanz-Martinez, L., Er, E., Martínez-Monés, A., Dimitriadis, Y., & Bote-Lorenzo, M. L. (2019). Creating collaborative groups in a MOOC: a homogeneous engagement grouping approach. Behaviour & Information Technology, 38(11), 1107-1121.
• Sarıtepeci, M., & Çakır, H. (2015). The effect of blended learning environments on student's academic achievement and student engagement: a study on social studies course. Egitim Ve Bilim-Education and Science, 40(177).
• Saritepeci, M., & Çakır, H. (2019). The effect of digital storytelling activities used in a social studies course on student engagement and motivation. In Educational technology and the new world of persistent learning (pp. 24-55). IGI Global.
• Selçuk, Z., Palanci, M., Kandemir, M., & Dündar, H. (2014). Tendencies of the researches published in education and science journal: Content analysis. Egitim ve Bilim-Education and Science, 39(173).
• Shao, Z., & Chen, K. (2020). Understanding individuals' engagement and continuance intention of MOOCs: the effect of interactivity and the role of gender. Internet Research.
• Sharif, M., & Guilland, A. (2015). Massive Open Online Courses-Promoting Engagement Through Means of Gamification. Proceedings of EDULEARN15 Conference. Barcelona, Spain.
• Sharma, K., Caballero, D., Verma, H., Jermann, P., & Dillenbourg, P. (2015). Shaping learners’ attention in massive open online courses. Revue internationale des technologies en pédagogie universitaire/International Journal of Technologies in Higher Education, 12(1-2), 52-61.
• Shi, L., & Cristea, A. I. (2018). In-depth Exploration of Engagement Patterns in MOOCs. In H. Hacid, W. Cellary, H. Wang, H.-Y. Paik, & R. Zhou, Web Information Systems Engineering – WISE 2018 Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11234. Springer, Cham, Cham.
• Sinclair, J., & Kalvala, S. (2015). Engagement measures in massive open online courses. International Workshop on Learning Technology for Education in Cloud,
• Skinner, E. A., & Belmont, M. J. (1993). Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal effects of teacher behavior and student engagement across the school year. Journal of educational psychology, 85(4), 571.
• Sun, G., & Bin, S. (2018). Construction of learning behavioral engagement model for MOOCs platform based on data analysis. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 18(5).
• Sun, Y., Guo, Y., & Zhao, Y. (2020). Understanding the determinants of learner engagement in MOOCs: An adaptive structuration perspective. Computers & Education, 157, 103963.
• Sun, Y., Ni, L., Zhao, Y., Shen, X. L., & Wang, N. (2019). Understanding students’ engagement in MOOCs: An integration of self‐determination theory and theory of relationship quality. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(6), 3156-3174.
• Suresh Kumar, S., & Mallikarjuna Shastry, P. (2019). Analysis of student engagement and course completion in massive open online courses. In Integrated Intelligent Computing, Communication and Security (pp. 447-458). Springer.
• Tang, C. M., & Chaw, L. (2019). Driving high inclination to complete massive open online courses (MOOCs): motivation and engagement factors for learners. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 17, 118-130.
• Vaibhav, A., & Gupta, P. (2014). Gamification of MOOCs for increasing user engagement. 2014 IEEE International Conference on MOOC, Innovation and Technology in Education (MITE). Patiala, India.
• Ventura, P., Bárcena, E., & Martín-Monje, E. (2014). Analysis of the impact of social feedback on written production and student engagement in Language MOOCs. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 141, 512-517.
• Wei, X., Saab, N., & Admiraal, W. (2023). Do learners share the same perceived learning outcomes in MOOCs? Identifying the role of motivation, perceived learning support, learning engagement, and self-regulated learning strategies. The Internet and Higher Education, 56, 100880.
• Wolfrom, K. J. (2010). Reel Principals: A Descriptive Content Analysis of the Images of School Principals Depicted in Movies from 1997-2009. ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway, PO Box 1346, Ann Arbor, MI 48106.
• Wu, B., & Zhang, C. (2016). Behavior and Intention in MOOCs Research. 2016 2nd International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Industrial Engineering (AIIE 2016). Beijing, China.
• Yeomans, M., Stewart, B. M., Mavon, K., Kindel, A., Tingley, D., & Reich, J. (2018). The civic mission of MOOCs: Engagement across political differences in online forums. International journal of artificial intelligence in education, 28(4), 553-589. Yu, Z. (2021). A literature review on MOOCs integrated with learning analytics. Journal of Information Technology Research (JITR), 14(2), 67-84.
• Yuan, Z., & Xiang, H. (2017). Students' Engagement and Learning Process in Non-Language Focused MOOCs for EFL Purpose. 2017 International Conference on Education, Economics and Management Research (ICEEMR 2017). Singapore. Zankadi, H., Hilal, I., Daoudi, N., & Idrissi, A. (2018). Facebook and moocs: a comparative analysis for a collaborative learning. 2018 6th International Conference on Multimedia Computing and Systems (ICMCS). Rabat, Morocco.