A QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE FACTORS INFLUENCING THE ADOPTION OF MOOC IN HIGHER EDUCATION

Year 2023, Volume: 24 Issue: 2, 217 - 231, 01.04.2023

Nour Awni Albelbısı Ahmad Samed Al-adwan Akhmad Habıbı

https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.973956

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to highlight the factors influencing the adoption of MOOCs in the Malaysian context. This qualitative study was designed using focus group discussions (FGs) with fifty postgraduate students from two Malaysian Universities. The thematic analysis revealed two major themes, opportunities, and challenges. The findings revealed 12 sub-factors influencing the adoption of MOOCs, seven subfactors for the opportunities for using MOOC, namely, improve the higher education system, support lifelong learning, the accessibility, interactivity, flexibility, individualized instructions, and the positive attitude toward using MOOC. The challenges included 5 sub-factors, namely, lack of openness feature, lack of knowledge and skills, poor technology infrastructure, low self-regulated learning skills, and lack of instructor’ support. Such findings are important for improving the implementation of MOOCs in the Malaysian higher education system for MOOC learners and related stakeholders.

Keywords

Focus group discussion, Higher Education, MOOCs, Thematic Analysis.

References

• Ab Jalil, H., Ismail, A., Bakar, N., Azizan, N. A., & Nasir, K. (2016). Evaluation of Malaysia Pilot MOOC (Final Report). Serdang, Malaysia: CADe UPM
• Abdel-Maksoud, N. F. (2019). Factors Affecting MOOCs' Adoption in the Arab World: Exploring Learners' Perceptions on MOOCs' Drivers and Barriers. Higher Education Studies, 12(11), 164-177.
• Abeer, W., & B. Miri, B. (2014). Students’ preferences and views about learning in a MOOC. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 152, pp. 318-323, 2014.
• Abu-Shanab, E., & Musleh, S. (2018). The adoption of massive open online courses: Challenges and benefits. International Journal of Web-Based Learning and Teaching Technologies, 13(4), 62–76. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJWLTT.2018100104.
• Al-Adwan, A. S. (2020). Investigating the drivers and barriers to MOOCs adoption: The perspective of TAM. Education and Information Technologies, 25, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10250-z.
• Al-Adwan, A. S., Albelbisi, N. A., Aladwan, S. H., Horani, O., Al-Madadha, A., & Al Khasawneh, M. H. (2020). Investigating the Impact of Social Media Use on Student’s Perception of Academic Performance in Higher Education: Evidence from Jordan. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 19, 953-975.
• Al-Rahmi, W., Yahaya, N., Alamri, M., Alyoussef, I., Al-Rahmi, A., & Kamin, Y. (2019). Integrating innovation diffusion theory with technology acceptance model: Supporting students’ attitude towards using a massive open online courses (MOOCs) systems. Interactive Learning Environments, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1629599.
• Alraimi, K. M., Zo, H., & Ciganek, A. P. (2015). Understanding the MOOCs continuance: The role of openness and reputation. Computers & Education, 80, 28-38.
• Authors (2018). Mapping the Factors Influencing Success of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOC) in Higher Education. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(7), 2995-3012.
• Authors (2019). Factors influencing Learners' self-regulated learning skills in a massive open online course (MOOC) environment. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 20(3), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.598191.
• Authors (2020). Systematic review of a Nationwide Mooc initiative in Malaysian higher education system. The Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 18(4), 288–299. https://doi.org/10.34190/ EJEL.20.18.4.002
• Authors (2021). Impact Of Quality Antecedents on Satisfaction toward MOOC. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education , 22 (2) , 164-175 . DOI: 10.17718/tojde.906843
• Ayub, E., & Leong, L. C. (2017). Developing a Pedagogy Framework for Institution-Wide Implementation of MOOC: A Case Study from a Malaysian Private University. Advanced Science Letters, 23(2), 809-813.
• Azevedo, J., & Marques, M. M. (2017). MOOC success factors: Proposal of an analysis framework. Journal of Information Technology Education: Innovations in Practice, 16, 233–251. https://doi.org/10.28945/ 3861.
• Boyatzis, R. E. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development. sage. Bryman, A., & Hardy, M. A. (Eds.). (2009). Handbook of data analysis. Sage.
• Chen, J. C. (2013, August). Opportunities and challenges of MOOCs: perspectives from Asia. Paper presented at the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions. World Library and Information Congress.Retrieved from http://library.ifla.org/157
• Creswell, J. W. (2014). A concise introduction to mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication.
• Davis, H. C., Dickens, K., Leon Urrutia, M., Sánchez-Vera, M. M., & White, S. (2014). MOOCs for Universities and learners: an analysis of motivating factors. University of Southampton. Retrieved from https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/363714/
• Gameel, B. G. (2017). Learner satisfaction with massive open online courses. American Journal of Distance Education, 31(2), 98–111. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2017.1300462
• Gao, S., & Yang, Y. (2015, June 19). Exploring Users' Adoption of MOOCs from the Perspective of the Institutional theory. Paper presented at the Wuhan International Conference on EBusiness, Wuhan, China.
• Ghazali, N., & Nordin, M. S. (2016). The perception of university lecturers of teaching and learning in massive open online courses (MOOCs). Journal of Personalized Learning, 2(1), 51-56.
• Goh, W. W., Wong, S. Y., & Ayub, E. (2018). The effectiveness of MOOC among learners based on Kirkpatrick’s model. In Redesigning learning for greater social impact (pp. 313-323). Singapore: Springer.
• Haavind, S., & Sistek-Chandler, C. (2015). The Emergent role of the MOOC instructor: A qualitative study of trends toward improving future practice. International Journal on E-Learning, 14(3), 331-350.
• Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2014). Students’ and instructors’ use of massive open online courses (MOOCs): Motivations and challenges. Educational research review, 12, 45-58.
• Holloway, I., & Todres, L. (2003). The status of method: flexibility, consistency and coherence. Qualitative research, 3(3), 345-357. Hruschka, D. J., Schwartz, D., St. John, D. C., Picone-Decaro, E., Jenkins, R. A., & Carey, J. W. (2004). Reliability in coding open-ended data: Lessons learned from HIV behavioral research. Field methods, 16(3), 307-331.
• Khalil, H., & Ebner, M. (2014). MOOCs completion rates and possible methods to improve retention-A literature review. In EdMedia: World Conference on Educational Media and Technology (pp. 1305-1313). Tampere, Finland. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
• Kizilcec, R. F., Pérez-Sanagustín, M., & Maldonado, J. J. (2016, April). Recommending self-regulated learning strategies does not improve performance in a MOOC. Paper presented at Learning @Scale 2016 (pp. 101-104). Edinburgh. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2876034.2893378
• Kolås, L., Nordseth, H., & Hoem, J. (2016). Interactive modules in a MOOC. In Information Technology Based Higher Education and Training (ITHET), 2016 15th International Conference on (pp. 1–8). IEEE. Abgerufen von http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/7760707/
• Ma, L., & and Lee, C. (2018). Investigating the adoption of MOOC s: A technology–user–environment perspective. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 35(1), 89–98. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12314.
• Ma, L., & Lee, C. S. (2019). Understanding the barriers to the use of MOOCs in a developing country: An innovation resistance perspective. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 57(3), 571-590.
• Mansor, F., Latifah, A. L., & Amina, M. (2015). MOOCs in Malaysia: a preliminary case study. Paper presented at E-ASEM Forum: Renewing the Lifelong Learning Agenda for The Future. Bali, Indonesia.
• MCMC (2013). Statistical Brief Number Fifteen: Internet Users Survey 2012. Cyberjaya: MCMC.
• Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2018). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
• Ministry of Education Malaysia (2015). Executive summary: Malaysia Education Blueprint 2015-2025 (Higher Education). Retrieved from https://www.mohe.gov.my.
• Nisha, F., & Senthil, V. (2015). MOOCs: Changing trend towards open distance learning with special reference to India. DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology, 35(2), 82-89.
• Nordin, N., Embi, M. A., & Norman, H. (2016). Towards envisioning the future of learning in Malaysia: Development of a Malaysia MOOC based on the iterative ADDIE instructional design framework. In Envisioning the Future of Online Learning (pp. 269-279). Singapore: Springer.
• OpenLearning (2017). Malaysia Massive Open Online Courses (MOOC). Retrieved from https://www.openlearning.com/malaysiamoocs
• Shah, D. (2016). By the Numbers: MOOCs in 2015. Retrieved from https://www.class-central.com/report/MOOCs-2015-stats/
• The Star. (2014). 70,000 PTPTN Recipients Yet to Repay Their Loans. Retrieved from http://www.thestar.com.my/News/Nation/2014/11/04/70000PTPTN-recipients-yet-to-repay-their-loans/
• Zhao, H. (2016). Factors Influencing Self-Regulation in E-Learning 2.0: Confirmatory Factor Model. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 42, 2-22.