1
To appear in The American Journal of Distance Education. 28(3).
Understanding MOOCs as an Emerging Online Learning Tool:
Perspectives From the Students
Min Liu, Jina Kang, Mengwen Cao, Mihyun Lim, Yujung Ko, and Ryan Myers
The University of Texas at Austin
Amy Schmitz Weiss
San Diego State University
Abstract: This study examined participants’ learning experiences in the context
of a six-week massive open online course (MOOC) in journalism with 5,000
students from 137 countries. Three research questions were asked: (1) Who are
the students and why are they enrolled in this MOOC? (2) How much time have
the students spent in taking this MOOC and have they completed all the
assignments? and (3) What have they learned and what aspects of this MOOC
do the students find most helpful? Four hundred nine students responded to a
survey and 44 responded to interview questions. The main findings showed
84% of the participants were working professionals and only 28.9% were from
a journalism background. Of those who did not complete the course, lack of time
was the top reason. Most participants reported a positive learning experience,
but lack of feedback and/or poor quality were reported as negative experiences.
The discussion forum was the least liked aspect of the course.
2
The emergent, fragmented, confusing at times, and self-defined nature of massive open
online courses (MOOCs) (McAuley, Stewart, Siemens, and Cormier 2010) presents
challenges to learners, instructors, and educational institutions. The current rush to offer
MOOCs has raised questions “about the future of teaching, the value of a degree, and the
effect technology will have on how colleges operate” (The Chronicle of Higher Education
2013). Evidence-based research is beginning to surface, helping instructors and
institutions understand MOOC advantages and constraints as a teaching and learning tool
(Liyanagunawardena, Adams, and Williams 2013; Siemens, Irvine, and Code 2013). A key
factor to ensure MOOC effectiveness is to understand the perspectives of students enrolled
in these courses (Milligan, Littlejohn, and Margaryan 2013).
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
This study aims to examine students’ experience in taking a MOOC in journalism and
aspects of this MOOC that students find beneficial to their learning. We ask these research
questions:
1. Who are the students and why are they enrolled in this MOOC?
2. How much time have the participating students spent in taking this MOOC and have
they completed all the assignments? If not, why?
3. What have the participating students learned from taking this MOOC and what
aspects of this MOOC do the students find most helpful to their learning?
METHOD
3
Participants and Structure of the MOOC
The participants were approximately 5,000 students from 137 countries. The students had
registered for the MOOC Introduction to Infographics and Data Visualization1, which was
delivered by The Knight Center for Journalism in the Americas in the College of
Communications at The University of Texas at Austin. This course was designed for
practicing journalists, journalism students, media practitioners, and anyone else interested
in learning about how data can be used in a journalistic context and various ways of
working with graphics to communicate and analyze data. The MOOC was offered during the
weeks of Jan. 12 to Feb. 23, 2013 for a total of six weeks through Moodle, a free coursemanagement system (CMS).
The course content consisted of reading materials, video lectures, and tutorials for
learning technical tools. During the course, two quizzes, three infographic exercises, and
five mandatory discussions were used to evaluate participants’ performance. Each of the
five mandatory discussions focused on a different topic. For each discussion topic, ten
groups were formed, one group for each forum. A total of 165 forums were provided. In
addition, there were weekly Q&A forums, student lounge forums, and weekly help forums.
A certificate of completion was provided if a student met all of the following requirements:
completion of two quizzes with an 80% score, completion of three exercises, and
1
The researchers were not the participants nor instructors of the MOOC. One of the co-authors manages the Moodle
LMS for the Knight Center. This research was approved by the university’s institutional review board (IRB).
4
submission of posts to all five discussions. Given the current understanding of MOOC types,
this course is an xMOOC.
Data Sources, Procedure, and Analysis
To answer the research questions, three data sources (both quantitative and
qualitative) were employed for the purpose of triangulation (Creswell 2014).
Survey. A 24-question survey was created. The survey included questions on
demographic information and the experience and perceptions of students while they were
participating in the MOOC. Construction of the survey was based upon the literature on
MOOCs and reviewed by the journalism faculty for face and content validity. Both Likert
scale questions and open-ended questions were used. Sample questions include:

Why are you taking this MOOC?

How do you compare learning in this MOOC with other face-to-face or online
courses?

Do you feel you have learned a lot from this MOOC?

Of all the materials provided in the MOOC, which one is the most helpful?

What do you like the most/least about the course?
Interviews. All participants were asked if they were willing to be interviewed. Given
the nature of a MOOC with its participants from all over the world, the interview was
5
conducted via e-mail (Creswell 2007, 130). Those who indicated their willingness were
sent interview questions. Sample interview questions include:

Please describe one SPECIFIC good/bad example of learning via this MOOC.

Please describe what motivated you to spend time in doing all the different activities
for this MOOC.

Please specify any challenges you have encountered in taking this MOOC.
Course activity data. Data on the usage of course activities were also collected,
including the number of logins, participation rate in weekly discussions, both viewings and
postings, and quiz completion rates.
Procedure. The survey was distributed during the last week of the MOOC. The
participants were informed that their participation was entirely voluntary and anonymous.
A total of 409 participants responded, representing a response rate of 8%. Forty-four
participants also responded to seven guiding interview questions about their learning
experience.
Analysis. Responses to the Likert scale questions in the survey were analyzed
descriptively. Open-ended responses and interviews were analyzed using a systematic and
iterative examination of the data, line by line. As we analyzed the qualitative data, we
focused on the main idea in each response from the participants through "focused coding"
(Charmaz 2006). The themes that emerged from the data were compared with each other
6
and with our research questions until an “emergence of regularities” (Lincoln and Guba
1985) was reached and we felt we had uncovered the primary themes from the responses.
In reporting the findings below, sample participants’ comments were reported as unedited.
Six researchers were involved in the process of analyzing the open-ended responses and
interview data as well as checking and verifying the descriptive data using the Likert scale
questions until 100% interrater reliability was reached. Course activity data were also
tallied and reported. The research team met weekly to discuss data and resolve any
disagreement in qualitative data interpretation.
FINDINGS
Participants’ Demographic Information and Reasons for Enrolling in This MOOC
Of the 409 participants who responded to the survey, 58.4% (n = 239) were female and
41.6% (n = 170) were male. Figure 1 provides information about the countries the
participants were from, their occupations, the fields they were in, and the number of
MOOCs they have taken previously. The participants were asked the reasons they took this
MOOC, and the top three reasons were (1) learning more about the topic for their current
job, (2) personal interest, and (3) career development (see Table 1).
<insert figure 1 about here.>
7
<insert table 1 about here.>
More than 80% of the participants indicated they were excited to take this MOOC,
while only 2.2% were reluctant. The three main reasons for their excitement were related
to the course topic (68%), the MOOC format (22%), and personal/professional
development (10%). Specific reasons relating to enthusiasm for the course topic included
interest in the topic, relevance to job, positive reputation of the instructor or university,
and the course’s function as an alternative to an equivalent course offering. Specific reasons
relating to enthusiasm for the MOOC format were free of charge, flexibility of schedule, and
interaction with others worldwide. Specific reasons related to personal/professional
development were the opportunity to learn new concepts and career preparation.
The participants were also asked how well prepared they were to take this MOOC.
Some 36.7% (n = 150) of the participants indicated they were well prepared, followed by
56.9% (n = 233) who stated they were somewhat or slightly prepared. Approximately 50%
of the participants felt competent enough to complete the course, while around 10% did
not feel competent.
Time Spent and Completion of Assignments
The students were assigned various activities, such as exercises and discussions, during the
course in addition to watching video lectures and video tutorials. Approximately 42% of
the participants indicated they spent more than four hours each week participating in
different activities, 36% spent between two to four hours, 14% spent one or two hours, and
8
6.8% spent less than one hour. Additionally, the participants were asked how many
exercises and assignments they had done at the point when the survey was given. Slightly
more than 62% of the participants had completed all or most of the activities, 28.2% had
completed a few, and only 8.6% of the participants had not completed any of the activities.
Regarding noncompletion of course activities, the participants cited two main
reasons: lack of time and too much work (see Table 2). Other reasons included language
barrier, technical problems, and noninterest in the topic. Other reasons for not completing
assignments were that participants did not like the discussion forums, they simply wanted
information, or they were ill. The interview questions asked the students to discuss what
motivated them to complete all the assignments and challenges in taking the MOOC. The
responses revealed that students completed exercises/assignments because they were
“well-chosen and aligned with learning about the course topic,” “engaging,” and “typical of
real-life professional projects,” and that the students were “learning by doing.” The primary
challenge for not completing exercises/assignments was, as one student succinctly
summarized in the response, “Time!”
<insert table 2 about here.>
Figure 2 provides the weekly activity data for discussion forums with a total of
16,810 posts and 36,769 views.
At the end of the course, 33% of the participants (n = 1,630) had completed the first
quiz, 26% (n = 1,277) had completed the second quiz, and 25% (n = 1,272) had completed
both quizzes. In total, 44% of the participants (n = 2,214) interacted in the forums of the
9
course. At the end of the MOOC, 5.6% (n = 281) had met all of the requirements and paid
$30 to receive the certificate.
<insert figure 2 about here.>
Students’ Learning and Aspects of MOOC that Students Found Most Helpful
The participants were asked if they felt they had learned from this MOOC. Eighty-six
percent (n = 353) indicated they did, while only 13.7% (n = 56) indicated they did not. The
reasons for limited learning included lack of time, lack of participation/poor feedback, not
new topic, lack of organization, and too much work. The participants were asked to name
three things they had learned. Learning how to visualize data and critique infographics
(46%, n = 303)2, learning visualization concepts (32%, n = 211), and learning tool use (9%,
n = 59) were the top responses. Other responses included new way of learning (2.4%, n =
16) and helpful peer feedback (2%, n = 11). The top two reasons for not learning were that
the students did not have enough time (39%, n = 19) and they did not feel they received
new knowledge from the course (24%, n = 12). Other reasons (37%, n = 18) included lack
of feedback, disorganized content, and too much work.
The participants were also asked specifically about their learning experience
through feedback or critiques from peers. Some 84% of the participants (n = 342) indicated
2
% is out of a total of 660 coding units as each response can have more than 1 coding units.
10
that peers’ feedback was useful, while 16% (n = 66) felt no value in peer feedback. Of the
negative responses, the most cited reason was that feedback from peers was not
useful/thoughtful/meaningful or the peers lacked expertise. One participant commented, “I
haven't had any useful feedback,” and another said, “Many of the comments repeat the
same things. Few are especially insightful, and those get buried. Most don't address
particular questions/comments made by others.” Other reasons included “too many
students” and “the forum was not set up for it—impossible to keep track of who is
responding to what easily and there are too many messages.” Language can be a barrier as
one participant stated: “Most class participants do not post meaningful content in the
forums, but rather write a few sentences just to say they posted something. Also, since the
students come from all over the world, there is a definite language barrier in interpreting
what some students are trying to say through broken English.”
The participants were asked the question “How do you compare learning in this
MOOC with face-to-face courses or other online courses?” Most participants (75.31%, n =
186) indicated their MOOC experience was better than face-to-face instruction, about
6.48% (n = 16) indicated no difference, and 18.21% (n = 45) felt face-to-face instruction
was better than their MOOC experience. The positive features the students indicated
included
self-pace
and
flexibility,
diversity
of
worldwide
participants,
peer
learning/monitoring, usefulness and quality of course materials (readings, videos,
assignments), expertise of the instructor, and other aspects of the MOOC—free and
convenient, hands-on, and engaging. The negative aspects included lack of feedback or
feedback that was not useful, lack of peer instruction, unorganized course structure, and
too many people.
11
The following are a few sample quotes from the students:
Can learn by oneself any time, anywhere as long as internet is available, very flexible
which conventional way of face-to-face can't provide. (Positive: Flexibility)
The fact that we have 5000 colleagues it is a huge brainstorming and a great way of
sharing ideas and connections. (Positive: Peer learning)
This MOOC's assignments keep students moving forward, continuously, towards a
defined goal promotes a more effective learning experience (Positive: Engaging
experience)
Lack of one-to-one interactions with professor/other students is lacking compared
to face to face, but comparable to other MOOCs. (Negative: Lack of interaction)
The structure online is kind of confusing with so many forums and everything.
(Negative: Course structure)
In this MOOC, various types of learning materials were provided including readings,
video lectures, tutorials, and external resources. The participants considered readings as
the most helpful (49.1%, n = 201) among all of the materials, followed by videos (39.4%, n
= 161), discussion forums (5.9%, n = 24), others (3.9%, n = 16), and quizzes (1.5%, n = 6).
The analysis of the qualitative data from the open-ended responses for explaining the
12
reasons corroborated the findings from the descriptive statistics in that the participants
commented on the comprehensiveness and variety of the reading materials provided, the
engaging video lectures delivered by the instructor energetically, and the usefulness of the
hands-on activities to illustrate the content. The participants, however, found the
discussion forum less helpful. As one participant stated, “Because it is impossible to read all
forums, the information on the site are not very good structured.”
The participants’ responses indicated eight aspects they liked most: (1) content
related (various types, different materials, high quality, good selection, challenging,
information/helpful), 29.2% (n = 151) 3 ; (2) instructor related (expertise, engaging,
enthusiastic, responsive), 16.6% (n = 86); (3) topic (interesting, relevant, focused), 11.4%
(n = 59); (4) activities (challenging, practical), 11.0% (n = 57); (5) organization (wellstructured, coherent, practical approach, combination of different activities, 7.9% (n = 41);
(6) peer learning (different views, interaction with others), 7.9% (n = 41); (7) flexibility,
6.6% (n = 34); (8) free, 3.5% (n = 18) and other (e.g. getting a certificate). Their responses
also indicated ten aspects they liked the least: (1) discussion forum (too many/fewer
forums for overwhelming number of participants, unstructured), 22.6% (n = 71); (2)
course platform (not easy to navigate, usability issues), 10.2% (n = 32); (3) instructor
related (lack of feedback and guidance), 8.9% (n = 28); (4) high course load, 7.3% (n = 23);
(5) peer feedback (not helpful, misjudgment, low quality), 8.0% (n = 25); (6) materials (too
basic, too much, repetitive), 6.1% (n = 19); (7) interaction (impossible interaction among
peers, lack of interaction), 4.5% (n = 14); (8) course duration (too short), 4.1% (n = 13);
3
% out of 314 coding units as each response can have more than 1 coding units.
13
(9) quizzes, 3.5% (n = 11); (10) technical issues, 2.9% (n = 9) and other (e.g., language
barrier, too many e-mails). Interview data provided more evidence to support what the
students liked and did not like about the course as discussed above. A few sample
responses:
I think the most effective part of the course was the overall structure of readings,
video lectures and hands-on projects. The lectures and readings gave me the
confidence to attempt the projects, and the projects then in turn reinforced the
learning from the lectures and readings. (Positive, course organization)
[Instructor] used practical, easy-to-understand examples in his lectures. (Positive,
instructor, practical examples)
I very much enjoyed the interactions with the other students in the class. There are
some really talented people enrolled. And their work inspired me to work harder.
(Positive, peer learning)
It's obviously inherent in the format, but having to do everything online is really
hampered by a bad Internet connection. (Negative, technical issue)
The reliance of students (often uninformed) to provide this feedback was a real flaw
in the model. While the act of reviewing the work of others has benefits, these
14
benefits were thwarted by bad advice. Too often praise was given when
condemnation was warranted. (Negative, feedback quality)
The large number of people enrolled on the MOOC meant that assignments which I
spent a long time working on often only received one comment, which is not that
helpful in terms of future development. (Negative, MOOC format)
DISCUSSION
Participants’ Reasons and Readiness in Taking this MOOC and Completion Rate
More than 80% of the participants were excited to take this xMOOC because they were
interested in the topic for their jobs or professional/personal development, and/or because
they were interested in the MOOC format. Only a few showed reluctance (2.2%). This
finding is aligned with the current MOOC phenomenon in that there is much enthusiasm by
institutions, instructors, and students who are eager to explore this format as a new way of
learning (Davidson 2012; Ruth 2012). While it was shown in a recent report on the first
year of course offerings from edX (Ho et al. 2014) that the most typical course registrant
was a male student, 58% of the registrants for this MOOC were females and 84% were
working professionals, whose primary purpose for enrolling was job related,
personal/lifelong learning, or interest in the MOOC format.
A characteristic of a MOOC is its open access to anyone around the world. Although
this MOOC was designed primarily for people in journalism, only 28.9% were journalism
15
professionals, while 71.1% were from other fields including education, social science,
science and technology, business, and health. The finding that people from a variety of
fields enrolled because of their interest in the topic on data visualization and in accessing
free content supports the important advantages of MOOCs as a learning tool to offer free
resources to anyone interested in learning about a topic regardless of time, geographic
location, and formal prerequisite constraints (McAuley et al. 2010; Stewart 2013). In
addition, the fact that the topic of this course, data visualization, is new and applicable to
many professions explains the interest by a large number of people from other fields.
The students, overall, had adequate computer and Internet experiences to
participate online. The main technical problem they experienced were slow Internet
connections at times.
It is generally agreed that, compared to attending face-to-face courses, students
need more discipline to succeed in an online course (Allen and Seaman 2014). Research
looking into learner participation in MOOCs has indicated that for MOOC students, it is
critical to have self-directed learning, time management, and critical-analysis skills to
benefit from MOOC instruction (Kop and Fournier 2010; Waite et al. 2013), especially
because many MOOCs at this current stage are still evolving, fragmented, and confusing at
times (McAuley et al. 2010). As shown in this study with multiple data sources, lack of time
is not only the main challenge, but also the top reason for students withdrawing despite
their interest in the topic. As shown in recent reports, while hundreds and thousands might
register for a MOOC, the completion rate is often low (Parr 2013). In this six-week MOOC,
only 5.6% of the students completed all the requirements and paid to receive their
certificate, although during the course’s final week more than 50% of those surveyed stated
16
they were competent to be able to complete the course. This finding raised the question:
Did those who completed all the requirements proceed to get certificates? As illustrated in
Table 1, earning a certificate was not the primary goal for participants of this MOOC, which
is consistent with the finding by the University of Edinburgh (MOOCs@Edinburgh 2013)
Rather, the participants were interested in learning about the topic out of personal interest
and for career development. One student stated, “[MOOC] an educational format that works
well with my time and circumstances. I'm scheduled to start another MOOC at the end of
March. I do think that this is an exciting opportunity for people who want to learn, but
don't need the college degree.” Apart from getting a completion certificate as one of many
indicators of success, Koller et al. (2013) suggested that understanding learners’ intent was
important when examining if they received a certificate or not. The open access, free, wide
dissemination characteristics allow MOOCs to provide valuable resources, not readily
available until now, for lifelong learning. This finding is consistent with the result
examining the first year of course offering through edX: “Large numbers of non-certified
registrants access substantial amounts of course content” (Ho et al. 2014). Kizilcec, Piech,
and Schneider (2013) pointed out that learners in MOOCs do not adhere to traditional
expectations that centered around regular assessments. Ho and his colleagues indicated
that “Course certification rates are misleading and counterproductive indicators of the
impact and potential of open online courses.” For many participants, receiving a certificate
of completion does not appear to be as important as getting the knowledge and developing
the skills that they seek, as the finding of this study suggests.
Students’ Learning and Course Activities/Assignments
17
Probably the most important factor to consider is if the students have learned from taking a
MOOC as well as what they have learned, and how to design a MOOC that will offer a good
learning experience. The majority of the students (86.3%) responded that they learned a
lot from this MOOC, similar to the finding by the University of Edinburgh
(MOOCs@Edinburgh 2013). This study also found that of all the different learning
materials offered, the participants considered the reading materials and videos to be the
most helpful resources. The students particularly appreciated the well-chosen reading
materials
and
the
practical
hands-on
aspects
of
the
course
as
shown
in
assignments/exercises. Qualitative data also revealed that students found the video
lectures by the instructor engaging and through these lectures they could connect to him.
One student commented, “[Instructor] makes this look very easy. He's very passionate and
influences positively to the students.” Since a MOOC can involve hundreds and thousands of
students, students are expected to be self-directed and self-disciplined in their studies. Yet
not all students are. Providing engaging materials becomes more important in MOOCs than
in traditional classroom instruction. Interesting, useful, and multimedia-based materials
can keep students engaged and motivated to stay enrolled in a MOOC (Kop and Fournier
2010).
Similar to other research on MOOCs (Zutshi, O’Hare, and Rodafinos 2013), these
findings also revealed mixed results. For example, some students found this MOOC to be
well organized while others did not. Some found peer feedback useful while others did not,
and some found materials helpful while some did not. While the overall results were
positive, both quantitative and qualitative results showed that using discussion forums was
18
the least liked and useful aspect of the course because of lack of feedback and interaction.
The number of postings in the discussion forums dropped from 4,153 posts in the first
week to 1,918 posts in the final week. Although the students in this MOOC found peer
assessment helpful, they also indicated that the large number of students was
overwhelming and interaction was not optimal. Students related difficulty keeping up with
the conversation. One student commented,
This is the first MOOC I've taken and I enjoyed and appreciated the experience.
However, speaking as a teacher, I find that the strengths of the MOOC format are its
openness—to large numbers of students in multiple time zones. Its main weakness
is the lack of connection and interactivity between all the class members, students
and instructor. My biggest complaint was the forums. I feel that they are clumsy to
navigate and use.
This MOOC relied on two main forms of communication: discussion forums and email communication with the instructor. Students’ responses also indicated difficulty in
navigating the Moodle system and clumsiness in interacting with peers using Moodle.
Delivery of a MOOC typically relies on a technology system, such as a CMS or a learningmanagement system (LMS). A CMS/LMS not only serves as a delivery platform, but also
supports scaffolding specific learning experiences. The features provided by these systems
and how they are used can affect the ease and effectiveness of the learning experience
(Daniel 2012). Some CMS/LMS setups, such as Moodle, existed prior to the emergence of
MOOCs, and having these systems updated and adapted for this new format of online
19
instruction to facilitate interaction becomes critical. Institutions and instructors choosing
those systems for MOOC delivery need to be aware of their constraints. CMS/LMS
providers need to adjust and adapt their systems to keep up with the evolving needs of
modern technologies in order to meet learners’ expectations.
Limitations
This study used self-reported data from volunteered participants who represented a
percentage of all course registrants to provide a glimpse of participants’ learning
experiences. It is possible these participants may have strong positive or negative views
about their learning experiences. Due to the way the discussion forums were structured in
this MOOC via Moodle, it was not possible to get accurate information in terms of those
who completed all activities and yet did not proceed to apply for the certificate.
Implications and Conclusion
This study showed that the majority of this MOOC’s participants had a positive experience
and learned new knowledge and skills about a topic they were interested in. While the
findings have provided empirical evidence to support the suggested advantages of MOOCs,
a number of challenges for course designers, instructors, and providers are highlighted.
Emerging research on the topic begins to show learning in a MOOC environment requires
learners to be more self-directed, self-disciplined, and intrinsically motivated than in a
typical face-to-face course. However, not all participants have those skills. Since anyone can
20
participate in a MOOC for any learning purpose, including professional development,
lifelong learning, or for course credit, course designers and instructors are challenged to
meet learners’ diverse needs. Making the goals and expectations of a MOOC clear and
explicit can help potential students decide if they are suited for taking a MOOC.
Large student enrollments and the expected learner autonomy warrant a more
innovative use of instructional materials and strategies that need to go beyond the current
common practice of using videos, readings, and discussion forums. MOOCs typically rely on
peer interaction and peer assessment as their critical elements. As this study has shown,
designing effective peer assessment and encouraging peer interaction are important issues.
The large-scale nature of MOOCs is pushing the envelope of using discussion forums, emails, and social networking tools as means for communicating differently and
innovatively.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We thank Professor Rosental Calmon Alves,
director of Knight Center for
Journalism in the Americas at The University of Texas at Austin for his encouragement and
support for this research.
REFERENCES
Allen, I. E., and J. Seaman. 2014. Grade change: Tracking online education in the United
States. Wellesley, MA: Babson College/Sloan Foundation.
21
Charmaz, K. 2006. Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative
analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Creswell, J. W. 2007. Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five
approaches, 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
———. 2014. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches, 4th
ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Daniel, J. 2012. Making sense of MOOCs: Musings in a maze of myth, paradox and possibility.
Seoul:
Korean
National
Open
University.
Available
online
at
http://www.tonybates.ca/wp-content/uploads/Making-Sense-of-MOOCs.pdf
Davidson, C. 2012. What can MOOCs teach us about learning? October 1. Available online at
http://www.hastac.org/blogs/cathy-davidson/2012/10/01/what-can-moocsteach-us-about-learning
Ho, A. D., J. Reich, S. Nesterko, D. T. Seaton, T. Mullaney, J. Waldo, and I. Chuang. 2014.
HarvardX and MITx: The first year of open online courses (HarvardX and MITx
Working Paper No. 1). Available online at http://ssrn.com/abstract=2381263 or
http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2381263
Kizilcec, R. F., C. Piech, and E. Schneider. 2013. Deconstructing disengagement: Analyzing
learner subpopulations in massive open online courses. In Proceedings of the Third
International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge, 170–179, April. New
York.
Koller, D., A. Ng, C. Do, and Z. Chen. 2013. Retention and intention in massive open online
courses: In depth. EDUCAUSE Review Online, June 3. Available online at
22
http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/retention-and-intention-massive-openonline-courses-depth-0
Kop, R., and H. Fournier. 2010. New dimensions to self-directed learning in an open
networked learning environment. International Journal of Self-Directed Learning 7
(2):
1–19.
Available
online
at
http://selfdirectedlearning.com/documents/Kop&Fournier2010.pdf
Lincoln, Y. S., and E. G. Guba, E. G. 1985. Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Liyanagunawardena, T. R., A. A. Adams, and S. A. Williams. 2013. MOOCs: A systematic
study of the published literature 2008–2012. The International Review of Research in
Open
and
Distance
Learning
14
(3):
202–227.
Available
online
at
http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/1455/2531
McAuley, A., B. Stewart, G. Siemens, and D. Cormier. 2010. The MOOC model for digital
practice. Available online at http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/MOOC_Final.pdf
Milligan, C., A. Littlejohn, and A. Margaryan. 2013. Patterns of engagement in connectivist
MOOCs. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching 9 (2): 149–159. Available
online at http://jolt.merlot.org/vol9no2/milligan_0613.pdf
MOOCs@Edinburgh Group. 2013. MOOCs @ Edinburgh 2013: Report #1. May 10. Available
online at http://hdl.handle.net/1842/6683
Parr, C. 2013. Not staying the course. Inside Higher Ed, May 10. Available online at
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/05/10/new-study-low-mooccompletion-rates
Ruth, S. 2012. Can MOOCs and existing e-learning paradigms help reduce college costs?
International Journal of Technology in Teaching and Learning 8 (1): 21–32.
23
Siemens, G., V. Irvine, and J. Code. 2013. An academic perspective on an emerging
technological and social trend. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching 9
(2):
3–10.
Available
online
at
http://jolt.merlot.org/vol9no2/siemens_editorial_0613.pdf
Stewart, B. 2013. Massiveness + openness = New literacies of participation? MERLOT
Journal of Online Learning and Teaching 9 (2): 228–238. Available online at
http://jolt.merlot.org/vol9no2/stewart_bonnie_0613.pdf
The Chronicle of Higher Education. 2013. What you need to know about MOOCs. The
Chronicle
of
Higher
Education,
May
6.
Available
online
at
http://chronicle.com/article/What-You-Need-to-Know-About/133475/
Waite, M., J. Mackness, G. Roberts, and E. Lovegrove. 2013. Liminal participants and skilled
orienteers: Learner participation in a MOOC for new lecturers. MERLOT Journal of
Online Learning and Teaching 9 (2): 200–215.
Zutshi, S., S. O’Hare, and A. Rodafinos. 2013. Experiences in MOOCs: The perspective of
students. The American Journal of Distance Education 27 (4): 218–227.
24
TABLE 1
Reasons for Taking This MOOC
Purpose for taking this MOOC
To learn more about the topic for my current job
%*
70.9 (n = 290)
To learn more about the topic because of personal interest 66.7 (n = 273)
To learn more about possible future career
39.4 (n = 161)
Curious to find out what MOOC is like
24.2 (n = 99)
To get the credit for certification or degree
14.2 (n = 58)
Curious to find out what this topic is
14.2 (n = 58)
Other
3.7 (n = 15)
*Note: This is a multiple answer question. Participants were asked to select all that applied. % = n/total
number of participants.
25
TABLE 2
Reasons for Not Completing All Exercises and Assignments
Reasons for not completing all exercises and assignments
%*
Lack of time
54 (n = 221)
Too much work
24 (n = 98)
Language barrier
4.6 (n = 19)
Technical problems related to this MOOC
3.4 (n = 14)
Not interesting topic
2 (n = 8)
Other
9 (n = 37)
*Note: This is a multiple answer question. Participants were asked to select all that applied. % = n/total
number of participants.
26
Countries of participants
Fields of participants
Occupations of participants
Number of MOOCs taken prior to this MOOC
FIGURE 1 Participants’ Demographic Information
27
FIGURE 2 Number of Posts vs. Views in the Discussion Forums (Week 3 did not have formal
discussions)