nach oben

Education and Information Technologies

Erschienen in:

07.01.2021

Self-regulated learning and satisfaction: A key determinants of MOOC success

verfasst von: Nour Awni Albelbisi, Ahmad Samed Al-Adwan, Akhmad Habibi

Erschienen in: Education and Information Technologies | Ausgabe 3/2021

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

MOOC is an innovative method in modern education, particularly important for sharing of excellent educational resources worldwide. To realize the full potential of MOOC, we need to understand the factors influencing MOOC success. In this study a theoretical framework has been proposed by integrating a self-regulated learning theory and DeLone and McLean success model to investigate the determinants of successful MOOC. This study aimed to (1) examine the relationships between quality factors and satisfaction; self-regulated learning and (2) understand the role of satisfaction as a mediator of the quality factors /self-regulated learning relationships. Six hundred twenty-two structured questionnaires collected from undergraduate students in Malaysia. The subsequent analysis employing Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) revealed three main results: first, system quality has a positive impact on satisfaction; second, satisfaction and service quality have a positive impact on self-regulated learning; finally, system quality has an indirect effect on SRL via satisfaction. The findings provide by the study will guide MOOC designer and developer to formulate methods and strategies that could further improve the adoption of MOOC successfully.

Vorheriger Artikel Digital storytelling: a tool for life design career intervention

Nächster Artikel Influence of MOOC learners discussion forum social interactions on online reviews of MOOC

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

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.CrossRef

Albelbisi, N. A. (2019). The role of quality factors in supporting self-regulated learning (SRL) skills in MOOC environment. Education and Information Technologies, 24(2), 1681–1698. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-09855-2.CrossRef

Albelbisi, N. A. (2020). Development and validation of the MOOC success scale (MOOC-SS). Education and Information Technologies, 25(5), 4535–4555. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10186-4.CrossRef

Albelbisi, N. A., & Yusop, F. D. (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.CrossRef

Albelbisi, N. A., & Yusop, F. D. (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.CrossRef

Albelbisi, N., Yusop, F. D., & Salleh, U. K. M. (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. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/91486.CrossRef

Alraimi, K. M., Zo, H., & Ciganek, A. P. (2015). Understanding the MOOCs continuance: The role of openness and reputation. Computers & Education, 80, 28–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.08.006.CrossRef

Aparicio, M., Oliveira, T., Bacao, F., & Painho, M. (2019). Gamification: A key determinant of massive open online course (MOOC) success. Information & Management, 56(1), 39–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2018.06.003.CrossRef

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.CrossRef

Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.51.6.1173.CrossRef

Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14(3), 464–504. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701301834.MathSciNetCrossRef

Cheng, S. I., Chen, S. C., & Yen, D. C. (2015). Continuance intention of E-portfolio system: A confirmatory and multigroup invariance analysis of technology acceptance model. Computer Standards & Interfaces, 42, 17–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csi.2015.03.002.CrossRef

Chin, W. W., Marcolin, B., & Newsted, P. (2003). A partial least squares latent variable modeling approach for measuring interaction effects: Results from a Monte Carlo simulation study and an electronic-mail emotion/adoption study. Information Systems Research, 14(2), 189–217. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.14.2.189.16018.CrossRef

Cohen, A., & Baruth, O. (2017). Personality, learning, and satisfaction in fully online academic courses. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.030.CrossRef

DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (2003). The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: A ten-year update. Journal of Management Information Systems, 19(4), 9–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2003.11045748.CrossRef

Dong, T.-P., Cheng, N.-C., & Wu, Y.-C. J. (2014). A study of the social networking website service in digital content industries: The Facebook case in Taiwan. Computers in Human Behavior, 30, 708–714. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.07.037.CrossRef

Drake, J. R., O'Hara, M., & Seeman, E. (2015). Five principles for MOOC design: With a case study. Journal of Information Technology Education: Innovations in Practice, 14(14), 125–143. https://doi.org/10.28945/2250.CrossRef

Fianu, E., Blewett, C., Ampong, G. O. A., & Ofori, K. S. (2018). Factors affecting MOOC usage by students in selected Ghanaian universities. Education Sciences, 8(2), 70. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci8020070.CrossRef

Gamage, D., Fernando, S., & Perera, I. (2015, August). Quality of MOOCs: A review of literature on effectiveness and quality aspects. In Ubi-Media Computing (UMEDIA), 2015 8th International Conference on (pp. 224-229). https://doi.org/10.1109/UMEDIA.2015.7297459.

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.MathSciNetCrossRef

Gillani, N., & Eynon, R. (2014). Communication patterns in massively open online courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 23, 18–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2014.05.004.CrossRef

Gold, A. H., Malhotra, A., & Segars, A. H. (2001). Knowledge management: An organizational capabilities perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(1), 185–214. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2001.11045669.CrossRef

Gutiérrez-Santiuste, E., Gámiz-Sánchez, V. M., & Gutiérrez-Pérez, J. (2015). MOOC & B-learning: Students' barriers and satisfaction in formal and non-formal learning environments. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 13(3), 88–111 Retrieved April 9, 2020 from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/161518/.

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B., Anderson, R. E., & Ronald, L. T. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (5th ed.). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2014). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Thousand Oaks: SAGE.MATH

Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) (2nd ed.). London: Thousand Oaks: SAGE.

Hayes, A. F. (2009). Beyond Baron and Kenny: Statistical mediation analysis in the new millennium. Communication Monographs, 76(4), 408–420. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637750903310360.MathSciNetCrossRef

Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sinkovics, R. R. (2009). The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. Advances in International Marketing, 20, 277–319. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1474-7979(2009)0000020014.CrossRef

Isaac, O., Abdullah, Z., Ramayah, T., & Mutahar, A. M. (2017). Examining the relationship between overall quality, user satisfaction and internet usage: An integrated individual, technological, organizational and social perspective. Asian Journal of Information Technology, 16(1), 100–124. https://doi.org/10.3923/ajit.2017.100.124.CrossRef

Kevan, J. M., Menchaca, M. P., & Hoffman, E. S. (2016, April). Designing MOOCs for success: A student motivation-oriented framework. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Learning Analytics & Knowledge (pp. 274-278). https://doi.org/10.1145/2883851.2883941.

Khalil, H., & Ebner, M. (2015). “How satisfied are you with your MOOC?”—A research study about interaction in huge online courses. Journalism and mass communication, 5(12), 629–639. https://doi.org/10.17265/2160-6579/2015.12.003.CrossRef

Kizilcec, R. F., Pérez-Sanagustín, M., & Maldonado, J. J. (2016, April). Recommending self-regulated learning strategies does not improve performance in a MOOC. In Proceedings of the Third (2016) ACM Conference on Learning@ Scale (pp. 101-104). Edinburgh, Scotland, UK. https://doi.org/10.1145/2876034.2893378.

Kline, R. B. (2010). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.MATH

Kovanović, V., Joksimović, S., Gašević, D., Siemens, G., & Hatala, M. (2015). What public media reveals about MOOCs: A systematic analysis of news reports. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(3), 510–527. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12277.CrossRef

Liyanagunawardena, T. R., Lundqvist, K., Mitchell, R., Warburton, S., & Williams, S. A. (2019). A MOOC taxonomy based on classification schemes of MOOCs. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-learning, 22(1). https://doi.org/10.2478/eurodl-2019-0006.

MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, P. M. (2012). Common method bias in marketing: Causes, mechanisms, and procedural remedies. Journal of Retailing, 88, 542–555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2012.08.001.CrossRef

Magen-Nagar, N., & Cohen, L. (2016). Learning strategies as a mediator for motivation and a sense of achievement among students who study in MOOCs. Education and Information Technologies, 22, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-016-9492-y.CrossRef

Margaryan, A., Bianco, M., & Littlejohn, A. (2015). Instructional quality of massive open online courses (MOOCs). Computers & Education, 80, 77–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.08.005.CrossRef

Mohammadi, H. (2015). Investigating users’ perspectives on e-learning: An integration of TAM and IS success model. Computers in Human Behavior, 45, 359–374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.07.044.CrossRef

Onah, D. F. O., & Sinclair, J. E. (2017). Assessing self-regulation of learning dimensions in a stand-alone MOOC platform. International Journal of Engineering Pedagogy (iJEP), 7(2), 4–21. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijep.v7i2.6511.CrossRef

Pallant, J. (2010). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS. Open University Press.

Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879–891. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.3.879.CrossRef

Roll, I., Aleven, V., McLaren, B. M., & Koedinger, K. R. (2011). Improving students’ help-seeking skills using metacognitive feedback in an intelligent tutoring system. Learning and Instruction, 21(2), 267–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2010.07.004.CrossRef

Soffer, T., & Cohen, A. (2015). Implementation of Tel Aviv University MOOCs in academic curriculum: A pilot study. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v16i1.2031.

Sun, P., Tasi, R. J., Finger, G., & Chen, Y. (2008). What drives a successful e- learning? An empirical investigation of the critical factors influencing learner satisfaction. Computers & Education, 50(4), 1183–1202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.11.007.CrossRef

Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics., 6th edition. Pearson Education: Boston.

Terras, M. M., & Ramsay, J. (2015). Massive open online courses (MOOCs): Insights and challenges from a psychological perspective. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(3), 472–487. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12274.CrossRef

Yakubu, M. N., & Dasuki, S. (2018). Assessing eLearning systems success in Nigeria: An application of the DeLone and McLean information systems success model. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 17, 183–203. https://doi.org/10.28945/4077.CrossRef

Yamane, T. (1967). Problems to accompany statistics: An introduction analysis. New York: Harper & Row.

Yang, M., Shao, Z., Liu, Q., & Liu, C. (2017). Understanding the quality factors that influence the continuance intention of students toward participation in MOOCs. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65(5), 1195–1214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-017-9513-6.CrossRef

Zhao, H. (2016). Factors influencing self-regulation in e-learning 2.0: Confirmatory factor model. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 42(2), 2–22. https://doi.org/10.21432/T2C33K.CrossRef

Zimmerman, B. J. (1989). Models of self-regulated learning and academic achievement. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement. New York, NY: Springer Series in Cognitive Development. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-3618-4_1.CrossRef

Zimmerman, B. J., & Moylan, A. R. (2009). Self-regulation: Where metacognition and motivation intersect. In Handbook of metacognition in education (pp. 311–328). New York: Routledge. Retrieved October 11, 2019 from https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9780203876428.ch16

Titel: Self-regulated learning and satisfaction: A key determinants of MOOC success
verfasst von: Nour Awni Albelbisi
Ahmad Samed Al-Adwan
Akhmad Habibi
Publikationsdatum: 07.01.2021
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Education and Information Technologies / Ausgabe 3/2021
Print ISSN: 1360-2357
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-7608
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10404-z

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2021

Finding satisfaction: intrinsic motivation for synchronous and asynchronous communication in the online language learning context

A systematic review of the use of gamification in flipped learning

Are teachers techno-optimists or techno-pessimists? A pilot comparative among teachers in Bolivia, Brazil, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Finland, Poland, Turkey, and Uruguay

Implementing dynamicity in research designs for collaborative digital writing

The effectiveness of the GeoGebra Programme in the development of academic achievement and survival of the learning impact of the mathematics among secondary stage students

Factors affecting the usage of learning management systems in higher education

Premium Partner