Assessment of interaction in MOOC: an integrated analysis of the causes of student dropout
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5753/rbie.2021.29.0.846Keywords:
Massive Open Online Courses, dropping out, retention, Cognitive Walkthrough, Semiotic Inspection MethodAbstract
Massive Open Online Courses (MOOC) emerged as an innovative educational approach by providing online courses without a predefined number of students. However, MOOC courses have suffered from a high dropout rate from their students. Among the various causes of abandonment indicated in the literature are the platform's language and the insufficiency of the user's ability to use MOOC platforms. This article presents the correlation of the evaluation results of the quality of the interaction of a MOOC platform with the general causes of abandonment identified in the literature. The evaluation was performed based on the Cognitive Pathway (CP) results and the Semiotic Inspection Method (SIM) methods. The results show that the interaction quality can influence (directly or indirectly) the occurrence of some general causes of student dropout. It is recommended to use other methods of assessment for further analysis from the student's perspective.
Downloads
References
Alario-Hoyos, C.; Pérez-Sanagustín, M.; Delgado-Kloos, C.; Parada, H. A.; Muñoz-Organero, G. M.; & Rodríguez-de-las-Heras, A. (2013). Analysing the impact of built-in and external social tools in a mooc on educational technologies. In European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning - Springer. p. 5–18. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-40814-4_2 [GS Search]
Almeida, O. C. d. S.; Abbad, G.; Meneses, P. P. M.; & Zerbini, T. (2013). Evasão em cursos a distância: fatores influenciadores. Revista Brasileira de Orientação Profissional, 14(1), p. 19-33. [GS Search]
Armstrong, L. (2013). The year of ups and downs for the MOOCs. Changing Higher Education. Disponível em: http://goo.gl/SqwGWn. Acesso em: 25/11/2020.
Barbosa, S. D. J.; Silva, B. S. d. (2010). Interação humano-computador. Elsevier Brasil. [GS Search]
Baloi, J. A. (2009). A concepção da educação democrática na obra “Democracia e Educação” de Jonh Dewey. Monografia-Faculdade de Filosofia e Ciências Humanas da Universidade São Tomás de Moçambique, Maputo.
Bartolomé, A. (2015). Are MOOCs Promising Learning Environments?/¿ Son los MOOC una alternativa de aprendizaje?. Comunicar (English edition), 22(44), p. 91-99. doi: 10.3916/C44-2015-10 [GS Search]
Baturay, M. H. (2015). An overview of the world of MOOCs. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, p. 427-433. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.685 [GS Search]
Belanger, Y.; Thornton, J.; & Barr, R. C. Bioelectricity. (2013). A quantitative approach--Duke University's first MOOC. EducationXPress, 2013(2), p. 1-21. [GS Search]
Bittencourt, G. P. (2011). Evasão na educação a distância do ensino superior: estudo de caso no 1° curso de administração EAD da UFRGS. Trabalho de Conclusão de Curso. Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul. [GS Search]
Burd, E. L.; Smith, S. P.; & Reisman, S. (2015). Exploring business models for MOOCs in higher education. Innovative Higher Education, 40(1), p. 37-49. doi: 10.1007/s10755-014-9297-0 [GS Search]
Burge, J. (2015). Insights into teaching and learning: Reflections on mooc experiences. Proceedings of the 46th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. p. 600-603. doi: 10.1145/2676723.2677243 [GS Search]
Carmo, T. M. (2017). Como se aprende num MOOC? Revista da UIIPS, Instituto Pilitécnico de Santarem, 5(2), p. 198-210. doi: 10400.15/2330 [GS Search]
Clow, D. (2013). Moocs and the funnel of participation. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge, ACM. p 185–189. doi: 10.1145/2460296.2460332 [GS Search]
De Souza, C. S.; & Leitão, C. F. (2009). Semiotic engineering methods for scientific research in HCI. Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics, 2(1), p. 1-122. doi: 10.2200/S00173ED1V01Y200901HCI002 [GS Search]
Do Rêgo, B. B.; Garrido, F.; & Matos, E. (2017a). Identifying influences of the quality of interaction on dropout rates of MOOC: preliminary results. In Proceedings of the XXVIII Brazilian Symposium on Computers in Education (Simpósio Brasileiro de Informática na Educação-SBIE), p. 1766-1768. doi: 10.5753/cbie.sbie.2017.1766 [GS Search]
Do Rêgo, B. B; Monteiro, I. T; Sampaio, A. L. (2017b). Communicability evaluation of privacy settings on Facebook for Android. In International Conference on Human Aspects of Information Security, Privacy, and Trust. Springer, Cham. p. 623-639. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-58460-7_43 [GS Search]
Do Rêgo, B. B.; Garrido, F.; Rosa, J.; & Matos, E. (2019). Communicability problems on MOOCs: a study around metacommunication. In Proceedings of the XXX Brazilian Symposium on Computers in Education (Simpósio Brasileiro de Informática na Educação-SBIE), p. 1261-1270. doi: 10.5753/cbie.sbie.2019.1261 [GS Search]
Downes, S. (2012). Connectivism and connective knowledge: Essays on meaning and learning networks. Stephen Downes Web.
Dinniz, D. D. (2007). A Interação no Ensino à Distância sob a Ótica dos Estilos de Aprendizagem. Tese de Doutorado. Universidade de São Paulo. [GS Search]
Fini, A. (2009). The technological dimension of a massive open online course: The case of the CCK08 course tools. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 10(5), p. 1- 27. doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v10i5.643 [GS Search]
Gomez-Zermeno, M. G.; & De La Garza, L. A. (2016). Research analysis on mooc course dropout and retention rates. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, pages 3-14. doi: 10.17718/tojde.23429 [GS Search]
Grainger, B. (2013). Introduction to MOOCs: avalanche, illusion or augmentation. Policy Brief - UNESCO (july). Institute for Information Technologies in Education. [Link]. [GS Search]
He, J.; Bailey, J.; Rubinstein, B. I.; & Zhang, R. (2015). Identifying at-risk students in massive open online courses. In AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, p. 1749–1755. doi: 10.5555/2886521.2886563 [GS Search]
Nawrot, I.; & Doucet, A. (2014). Building engagement for MOOC students: introducing support for time management on online learning platforms. In: Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on world wide web. p. 1077-1082. doi: 10.1145/2567948.2580054 [GS Search]
Onah, D. F. O.; Sinclair, J.; & Boyatt, R. (2014). Dropout rates of massive open online courses: behavioural patterns. In Proceedings EDULEARN14, p. 5825–5834. doi: 10.13140/RG.2.1.2402.0009 [GS Search]
Pappano, L. (2012). The Year of the MOOC. The New York Times, v. 2, n. 12, p. 2012. [GS Search]
Salgado, L. C. d. C.; & De Souza, C. S. (2007). CommEST-Uma ferramenta de apoio ao método de Avaliação de Comunicabilidade. In: III Conferência Latino-Americana de Interação Humano-Computador. [GS Search]
Salgado, L. C. d. C.; Bim, S. A.; & De Souza, C. S. (2006). Comparação entre os métodos de avaliação de base cognitiva e semiótica. In: Proceedings of VII Brazilian symposium on Human factors in computing systems. ACM. p. 158-167. doi: 10.1145/1298023.1298045 [GS Search]
Silveira, M. S.; de Souza, C. S.; & Barbosa, S. D. (2003). Um método da engenharia semiótica para a construção de sistemas de ajuda online. In Latin American Conference On Human-computer Interaction. Rio de Janeiro. V. 17, p. 167-177. [GS Search]
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. p. S/N. doi: 10.1145/2675133.2675217 [GS Search]
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Beatriz B. do Rêgo, Filipe A. Garrido, Jean C. S. Rosa, Ecivaldo de Souza Matos
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
