research-article

Are Learners Satisfied with Their MOOC Experiences? Assessing and Improving Online Learners’ Interactions

Authors:

Frank RitterAuthors Info & Claims

Asian CHI '21: Proceedings of the Asian CHI Symposium 2021

Pages 215 - 220

https://doi.org/10.1145/3429360.3468223

Published: 07 September 2021 Publication History

Abstract

With the prevalence of the COVID-19 pandemic, most students study remotely online, which can unleash the benefits of massive open online course (MOOC) platforms. MOOC platforms offer various advantages over traditional education. Still, it is inevitable that there still remain significant challenges that hamper the development and popularity of MOOCs. Interactions and collaborated learning remain as vital weaknesses. In this paper, we are interested in improving MOOC interactions by investigating learners’ experience with current popular MOOC platforms starting with a survey. We also conducted a task analysis on three popular MOOC platforms, Coursera, LinkedIn Learning, and Canvas, to analyze whether and how they include key interaction functions. We found that learner-instructor and teamwork interaction affect users’ experience most. Based on our findings, we propose a set of comprehensive guidelines, called IN-MOOC, to facilitate interpersonal interactions on MOOC platforms. In summary, IN-MOOC provides comprehensive and hierarchical guidelines to improve users’ experience via enhancing interpersonal interaction on MOOC platforms.

References

[1]

John R Anderson, Michael Matessa, and Christian Lebiere. 1997. ACT-R: A theory of higher level cognition and its relation to visual attention. Human–Computer Interaction 12, 4 (1997), 439–462.

Digital Library

[2]

Annette Backs. 2017. Promoting online learner self-efficacy through instructional strategies and course supports. Ph.D. Dissertation. Capella University.

[3]

John M Carroll, Hao Jiang, and Marcela Borge. 2015. Distributed collaborative homework activities in a problem-based usability engineering course. Education and Information Technologies 20, 3 (2015), 589–617.

Digital Library

[4]

Gráinne Gráinne Conole. 2013. MOOCs as disruptive technologies: Strategies for enhancing the learner experience and quality of MOOCs. Revista de Educación a Distancia (RED)39 (2013).

[5]

Ariana Eichelberger, Ellen Hoffman, and Michael Menchaca. 2008. Overcoming preconceptions: Does distance learning get easier. In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), 354–359.

[6]

Michael Foley. 2007. The global development learning network: a World Bank initiative in distance learning for development. (2007), 829.

[7]

Dilrukshi Gamage, Shantha Fernando, and Indika Perera. 2015. Factors leading to an effective MOOC from participiants perspective. In 2015 8th International Conference on Ubi-Media Computing (UMEDIA). IEEE, 230–235.

[8]

Dilrukshi Gamage, Indika Perera, and Shantha Fernando. 2020. MOOCs lack interactivity and collaborativeness: Evaluating MOOC platforms.iJEP 10, 2 (2020), 94–111.

[9]

Chere Campbell Gibson. 1998. Distance learners in higher education: institutional responses for quality outcomes.ERIC.

[10]

Francisco Javier Palacios Hidalgo, Cristina A Huertas Abril, 2020. MOOCs: Origins, concept and didactic applications: a systematic review of the literature (2012–2019). Technology, Knowledge and Learning(2020), 1–27.

[11]

Andreas M Kaplan and Michael Haenlein. 2016. Higher education and the digital revolution: About MOOCs, SPOCs, social media, and the Cookie Monster. Business Horizons 59, 4 (2016), 441–450.

[12]

Taesung Kim, Steven Welch, and Seungwan Nam. 2016. Examining graduate students’ perceptions of and preferences for online courses. International Journal on E-Learning 15, 2 (2016), 179–194.

[13]

Philippos Koutsakas, Eleni Syritzidou, Angeliki Karamatsouki, and Charalampos Karagiannidis. 2018. Exploring the Role of Facebook as Collaboration Platform in a K-12 MOOC. In International Conference on Technology and Innovation in Learning, Teaching and Education. Springer, 31–48.

[14]

Jingjing Lin and Lorenzo Cantoni. 2018. Decision, implementation, and confirmation: Experiences of instructors behind tourism and hospitality MOOCs. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning 19, 1(2018).

[15]

Ronald B Marks, Stanley D Sibley, and John Benard Arbaugh. 2005. A structural equation model of predictors for effective online learning. Journal of management education 29, 4 (2005), 531–563.

[16]

Elizabeth Murphy and María A Rodríguez-Manzanares. 2018. The activity system of higher education students using technology. In Online Course Management: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications. IGI Global, 1826–1851.

[17]

Matti Nelimarkka and Arto Hellas. 2018. Social help-seeking strategies in a programming MOOC. In Proceedings of the 49th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. 116–121.

Digital Library

[18]

Justin Reich and José A Ruipérez-Valiente. 2019. The MOOC pivot. Science 363, 6423 (2019), 130–131.

[19]

Frank E Ritter, Gordon D Baxter, and Elizabeth F Churchill. 2014. Foundations for designing user-centered systems. Springer-Verlag London, DOI, 10(2014), 978–1.

[20]

Jennifer Seaton, Joanne Traves, Gordon McCalla, and Richard Schwier. 2013. Designing an incentive-based online education system to encourage student collaboration. In EdMedia+ Innovate Learning. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), 1364–1371.

[21]

Hyungyu Shin, Eun-Young Ko, Joseph Jay Williams, and Juho Kim. 2018. Understanding the effect of in-video prompting on learners and instructors. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 1–12.

Digital Library

[22]

Andria Young and Chari Norgard. 2006. Assessing the quality of online courses from the students’ perspective. The Internet and Higher Education 9, 2 (2006), 107–115.

[23]

Wei-yuan Zhang and Kirk Perris. 2004. Researching the efficacy of online learning: A collaborative effort amongst scholars in Asian open universities. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning 19, 3(2004), 247–264.

[24]

Saijing Zheng, Kyungsik Han, Mary Beth Rosson, and John M Carroll. 2016. The role of social media in MOOCs: How to use social media to enhance student retention. In Proceedings of the Third (2016) ACM Conference on Learning@ Scale. 419–428.

Digital Library

[25]

Saijing Zheng, Mary Beth Rosson, Patrick C Shih, and John M Carroll. 2015. Understanding student motivation, behaviors and perceptions in MOOCs. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing. 1882–1895.

Digital Library

[26]

Saijing Zheng, Pamela Wisniewski, Mary Beth Rosson, and John M Carroll. 2016. Ask the instructors: Motivations and challenges of teaching massive open online courses. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing. 206–221.

Digital Library

[27]

Tekeisha Denise Zimmerman and Kim Nimon. 2017. The online student connectedness survey: Evidence of initial construct validity. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning 18, 3(2017).

Cited By

Wei XChen YShen JZhou L(2024)Fail or pass? Investigating learning experiences and interactive roles in MOOC discussion boardComputers & Education10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105073217:COnline publication date: 18-Jul-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105073
Ritter FStager S(2024)Semester Projects on Human-Computer Interaction as Service and Outreach: Undergraduate and GraduateInnovative Practices in Teaching Information Sciences and Technology10.1007/978-3-031-61290-9_13(169-181)Online publication date: 14-Aug-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-61290-9_13

Recommendations

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. ...
Supporting learners' self-regulated learning in Massive Open Online Courses
Abstract
In MOOCs, learners are typically presented with great autonomy over their learning process. Therefore, learners should engage in self-regulated learning (SRL) in order to successfully study in a MOOC. Learners however often struggle to self-...
Highlights
- Learners struggle to regulate their learning in massive open online courses (MOOCs).
- A self-regulated learning (SRL) intervention was implemented in three MOOCs.
- Learners' SRL was measured with trace data variables.
- ...
Self-Regulation for High School Learners in a MOOC Computer Science Course
SIGCSE '20: Proceedings of the 51st ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education

Courses designed for Massive Open Online Courseware (MOOC)platforms provide learners worldwide with extensive learning opportunities. Previous research has explored learner motivation in MOOC courses using self-regulated learning (SRL) theory. How-ever; ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

Asian CHI '21: Proceedings of the Asian CHI Symposium 2021

May 2021

228 pages

ISBN:9781450382038

DOI:10.1145/3429360

Copyright © 2021 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 07 September 2021

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article
Research
Refereed limited

Conference

CHI '21

Sponsor:

CHI '21: CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

May 8 - 13, 2021

Yokohama, Japan

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

1
Total Citations
View Citations
232
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)37
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)5

Reflects downloads up to 25 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Wei XChen YShen JZhou L(2024)Fail or pass? Investigating learning experiences and interactive roles in MOOC discussion boardComputers & Education10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105073217:COnline publication date: 18-Jul-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105073
Ritter FStager S(2024)Semester Projects on Human-Computer Interaction as Service and Outreach: Undergraduate and GraduateInnovative Practices in Teaching Information Sciences and Technology10.1007/978-3-031-61290-9_13(169-181)Online publication date: 14-Aug-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-61290-9_13

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

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

Figures

Tables

Media

View Table of Conten