Abstracts
Abstract
This paper investigates the degree to which different variables affect the completion of a Massive Open Online Course (MOOC). Data on those variables, such as age, gender, English proficiency, education level, and motivation for course enrollment were first collected through a pre-course survey. Next, course completion records were collected via the Coursera database. Finally, multiple binomial logistic regression models were used to identify factors related to MOOC completion. Although students were grouped according to their preferences, working in groups did not affect students’ likelihood for MOOC completion. Also, other variables such as age, the institution hosting the MOOC, academic program alignment with students’ needs, and students’ intention to complete the course all affected their probability of MOOC completion. This study contributes to the literature by indicating the factors that influence the probability of MOOC completion. Results show that older participants (age > 50 years old) have higher probability of completing the MOOC. Students’ MOOC completion also increases when the MOOC provides experiences that add to students’ current academic backgrounds and when they are hosted by institutions with a strong academic reputation. Based on these factors, this study contributes to research methods in MOOCs by proposing a model that is aligned with the most important factors predicting completion as recommended by the current MOOC literature. For the next phase of assigning learners to work in groups, findings from this study also suggest that MOOC instructors should provide assistance for group work and monitor students’ collaborative processes.
Keywords:
- MOOC completion,
- demographics,
- motivation,
- intention of completion,
- groups in MOOCs
Appendices
Bibliography
- Akaike, H. (1973). Information theory and an extension of the maximum likelihood principle. In B. N. Petrov & F. Caski (Eds.), Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on Information Theory (pp. 267-281). Budapest: Akademiai Kiado.
- Arendale, D. R., & Hane, A. R. (2014). Holistic growth of college peer study group participants: Prompting academic and personal development. Research & Teaching in Developmental Education, 31(1), 7-29. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1658878111?accountid=13158
- Bayeck, R. Y., Hristova, A., Jablokow, K., & Bonafini, F. C. (2018). Exploring the relevance of single-gender group formation: What we learn from a massive open online course (MOOC). British Journal of Educational Technology, 49(1), 88-100. doi: 10.1111/bjet.12528
- Belanger, Y., & Thornton, J. (2013). Bioelectricity: A quantitative approach: Duke university’s first MOOC. Duke University. Retrieved from http://dukespace.lib.duke.edu/dspace/bitstream/handle/10161/6216/Duke_Bioelectricity_MOOC_Fall2012.pdf
- Berger, D., & Wild, C. (2016). Turned on, tuned in, but not dropped out: Enhancing the student experience with popular social media platforms. European Journal of Law and Technology, 7(1). Retrieved from http://ejlt.org/article/view/503/639
- Bonafini, F. (2017). The effects of participants’ engagement with videos and forums in a MOOC for teachers’ professional development. Open Praxis, 9(4), 433-447. doi: 10.5944/openpraxis.9.4.637
- Bonafini, F. C., Chae, C., Park, E., & Jablokow, K. W. (2017). How much does student engagement with videos and forums in a MOOC affect their achievement? Online Learning, 21(4), 223-240. doi: 10.24059/olj.v21i4.1270
- 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(1), 13-25. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1062850.pdf
- Brown, R., Lynch, C., Wang, Y., Eagle, M., Albert, J., Barnes, T.,... & McNamara, D. S. (2015, June). Communities of performance & communities of preference. In Proceedings of EDM Workshops (pp. 12-19). Madrid, Spain. Retrieved from http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1446/edm2015ws_proc.pdf
- Christensen, G., Steinmetz, A., Alcorn, B., Bennett, A., Woods, D., & Emanuel, E. J. (2013). The MOOC phenomenon: Who takes massive open online courses and why? Social Science Research Network Journal. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.2350964
- Cisel, M. (2014). Analyzing completion rates in the first French xMOOC. In Proceedings of the European MOOC Stakeholder Summit 2014, 26. Retrieved from https://www.openeducationeuropa.eu/sites/default/files/legacy_files/asset/From-field_37_6.pdf
- Cross, S. (2013). Evaluation of the OLDS MOOC curriculum design course: Participant perspectives and experiences. OLDS MOOC Project, Milton Keynes. Retrieved from http://oro.open.ac.uk/37836/1/EvaluationReport_OLDSMOOC_v1.0.pdf
- Davis, H. C., Dickens, K., Leon Urrutia, M., Vera, S., del Mar, M., & White, S. (2014). MOOCs for universities and learners: An analysis of motivating factors. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Computer Supported Education CSEDU (pp. 105-116). Spain: Springer. Retrieved from https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/363714/1/DavisEtAl2014MOOCsCSEDUFinal.pdf
- Despujol, I. M., Turró, C., Busquéis, J., & Cañero, A. (2014, October). Analysis of demographics and results of student's opinion survey of a large scale MOOC deployment for the Spanish speaking community. In Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), 2014 IEEE (pp. 1-8). Madrid, Spain: IEEE.
- Dillahunt, T., Wang, B., & Teasley, S. (2014). Democratizing higher education: Exploring MOOC use among those who cannot afford a formal education. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(5). doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v15i5.1841
- Engle, D., Mankoff, C., & Carbrey, J. (2015). Coursera’s introductory human physiology course: Factors that characterize successful completion of a MOOC. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(2). doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v16i2.2010
- Gil-Jaurena, I., Callejo-Gallego, J., & Agudo, Y. (2017). Evaluation of the UNED MOOCs implementation: Demographics, learners' opinions and completion rates. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(7). doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v18i7.3155
- Guàrdia, L., Maina, M., & Sangrà, A. (2013). MOOC design principles: A pedagogical approach from the learner's perspective. eLearning Papers, 33, 1-6. Retrieved from http://r-libre.teluq.ca/596/1/In-depth_33_4.pdf
- Guo, P. J., & Reinecke, K. (2014, March 4-5). Demographic differences in how students navigate through MOOCs. In Proceedings of the First ACM Conference on Learning@Scale Conference (pp. 21-30). Atlanta, Georgia. Retrieved from https://cs.rochester.edu/hci/pubs/pdfs/edX-MOOC-demographics-and-navigation_LAS-2014.pdf
- Gütl, C., Rizzardini, R. H., Chang, V., & Morales, M. (2014). Attrition in MOOC: Lessons Learned from Drop-Out Students. In L. Uden, J. Sinclair, YH. Tao, D. Liberona (Eds.), Learning technology for education in cloud. MOOC and big data (pp. 37-48). Springer, Cham.
- 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. doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2014.05.001
- Hiltz, S. R. (1998). Collaborative learning in asynchronous learning networks: Building learning communities. Invited address at the WEB98 Conference, Orlando, Florida. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED427705.pdf
- Ho, A. D., Reich, J., Nesterko, S., Seaton, D. T., Mullaney, T., Waldo, J., & Chuang, I. (2014). HarvardX and MITx: The first year of open online courses (HarvardX and MITx Working Paper No. 1). Retrieved from https://dash.harvard.edu/handle/1/11987422
- 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, Indianapolis, IN. Retrieved from http://www.asee.org/public/conferences/32/papers/9669/view
- Jansen, D., & Schuwer, R. (2015). Institutional MOOC strategies in Europe. Status report based on a mapping survey conducted in October - December 2014. The European Association of Distance Teaching Universities. Retrieved from http://www.eadtu.eu/documents/Publications/OEenM/Institutional_MOOC_strategies_in_Europe.pdf
- Jones, B. M. (1997, March). Study groups: Collaboration and conflagration. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED408362.pdf
- Kellogg, S., Booth, S., & Oliver, K. (2014). A social network perspective on peer supported learning in MOOCs for educators. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(5). doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v15i5.1852
- Kizilcec, R. F., & Schneider, E. (2015). Motivation as a lens to understand online learners: Toward data-driven design with the OLEI scale. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), 22(2), 6. doi: 10.1145/2699735
- Koller, D., Ng, A., Do, C., & Chen, Z. (2013). Retention and intention in massive open online courses: In depth. Educause Review, 48(3), 62-63. Retrieved from https://er.educause.edu/articles/2013/6/retention-and-intention-in-massive-open-online-courses-in-depth
- Konstan, J. A., Walker, J. D., Brooks, D. C., Brown, K., & Ekstrand, M. D. (2015). Teaching recommender systems at large scale: Evaluation and lessons learned from a hybrid MOOC. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), 22(2), 10. doi: 10.1145/2728171
- Kulkarni, C., Cambre, J., Kotturi, Y., Bernstein, M. S., & Klemmer, S. R. (2015, February). Talkabout: Making distance matter with small groups in massive classes. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 1116-1128. Retrieved from http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~chinmayk/assets/pdfs/talkabout-cscw.pdf
- Lim, S., Coetzee, D., Hartmann, B., Fox, A., & Hearst, M. A. (2014, March). Initial experiences with small group discussions in MOOCs. In Proceedings of the First ACM Conference on Learning@ Scale Conference, Atlanta, Georgia, USA, 151-152. Retrieved from https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2567854
- Liyanagunawardena, T., Adams, A., & Williams, S. (2013). MOOCs: A systematic study of the published literature 2008-2012. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 14(3), 202-227. doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v14i3.1455
- Locke, E. A. (1982). Relation of goal level to performance with a short work period and multiple goal levels. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67(4), 512-514. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.67.4.512
- Macleod, H., Haywood, J., Woodgate, A., & Alkhatnai, M. (2014). Emerging patterns in MOOCs: Learners, course designs, and directions. TechTrends, 59(1), 56-63. doi: 10.1007/s11528-014-0821-y
- Malan, D. J. (2013). Implementing a massive open online course (MOOC). Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 28(6), 136-137. Retrieved from https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2460182
- Morris, N. P., Hotchkiss, S., & Swinnerton, B. (2015). Can demographic information predict MOOC learner outcomes? In Proceedings of the EMOOC Stakeholder Summit, Belgium. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/278392770_Can_demographic_information_predict_MOOC_learner_outcomes
- Onah, D. F., Sinclair, J., & Boyatt, R. (2014). Dropout rates of massive open online courses: Behavioural patterns. In EDULEARN14 Proceedings (pp. 5825-5834). Barcelona: IATED Academy. Retrieved from http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/65543/
- Pursel, B. K., Zhang, L., Jablokow, K. W., Choi, G. W., & Velegol, D. (2016). Understanding MOOC students: Motivations and behaviours indicative of MOOC completion. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32, 202-217. doi: 10.1111/jcal.12131
- Radford, A. W., Coningham, B., & Horn, L. (2015). MOOCs: Not just for college students—How organizations can use MOOCs for professional development. Employment Relations Today, 41(4), 1-15. doi: 10.1002/ert.21469
- Schulze, A. S. (2014). Massive open online courses (MOOCs) and completion rates: Are self-directed adult learners the most successful at MOOCs? (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Pepperdine University, California, United States. Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (1549976283)
- Sinha, T. (2014, February). Together we stand, together we fall, together we win: Dynamic team formation in massive open online courses. In The Fifth International Conference on the Applications of Digital Information and Web Technologies (ICADIWT 2014), Bangalore, India, 107-112. doi: 10.1109/ICADIWT.2014.6814694.
- Wen, M. (2016). Investigating virtual teams in massive open online courses: Deliberation-based virtual team formation, discussion mining and support (Doctoral dissertation, Carnegie Mellon University). Retrieved from https://www.lti.cs.cmu.edu/sites/default/files/wen,%20miaomiao%20-%20CMU-LTI-16-015%20-%202016.pdf
- Williams, E. A., Duray, R., & Reddy, V. (2006). Teamwork orientation, group cohesiveness, and student learning: A study of the use of teams in online distance education. Journal of Management Education, 30(4), 592-616. doi: 10.1177/1052562905276740
- Xiong, Y., Li, H., Kornhaber, M. L., Suen, H. K., Pursel, B., & Goins, D. D. (2015). Examining the relations among student motivation, engagement, and retention in a MOOC: A structural equation modeling approach. Global Education Review, 2(3). Retrieved from https://ger.mercy.edu/index.php/ger/article/view/124
- Yuan, L., & Powell, S. (2013). MOOCs and open education: Implications for higher education [White Paper]. Retrieved from http://www.smarthighered.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/MOOCs-and-Open-Education.pdf
- Zhang, Q., Peck, K. L., Hristova, A., Jablokow, K. W., Hoffman, V., Park, E., & Bayeck, R. Y. (2016). Exploring the communication preferences of MOOC learners and the value of preference-based groups: Is grouping enough? Educational Technology Research and Development, 64(4), 809-837. doi: 10.1007/s11423-016-9439-4
- Zheng, S., Rosson, M. B., Shih, P. C., & Carroll, J. M. (2015). Understanding student motivation, behaviors, and perceptions in MOOCs. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing - CSCW ’15, (pp. 1882-1895). Vancouver: ACM. doi: 10.1145/2675133.2675217
- Zheng, Z., Vogelsang, T., & Pinkwart, N. (2015). The impact of small learning group composition on student engagement and success in a MOOC. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference of Educational Data Mining (pp. 500-503).
- Zhong, S.-H., Zhang, Q.-B., Li, Z.-P., & Liu, Y. (2016). Motivations and challenges in MOOCs with eastern insights. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 6(12), 954-960. doi: 10.7763/ijiet.2016.v6.824