Research Article

Investigating EFL students’ perceived values of online cooperative learning in MOOCs

Cao Tuong Dinh 1 *
More Detail
1 FPT University, Can Tho, VIETNAM* Corresponding Author
Contemporary Educational Technology, 17(1), January 2025, ep552, https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/15718
Published Online: 12 December 2024, Published: 01 January 2025
OPEN ACCESS   216 Views   147 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

In the rapidly evolving landscape of online education, understanding what drives student satisfaction is crucial for designing effective learning experiences. The study examines the factors influencing English as a foreign language (EFL) students’ satisfaction with online cooperative learning (CL) in massive open online courses (MOOCs). Employing a mixed-methods approach, the research investigates how different aspects of CL contribute to student satisfaction and identifies challenges students face in such environments. Quantitative data were gathered from 374 students through a structured survey, while qualitative insights were derived from semi-structured interviews with 16 participants. The findings suggest that CL enhances academic performance, engagement, and social interaction among students. However, challenges such as language barriers, unequal participation, and technological issues were also highlighted. The study emphasizes the importance of clear task assignments, effective leadership, and structured collaboration to mitigate these challenges. The research underscores the need for further exploration into the nuanced experiences of EFL students in MOOCs, particularly concerning cultural and linguistic factors that may influence their learning outcomes. These insights contribute to the broader understanding of how CL can be optimized in online education settings to enhance student satisfaction.
Keywords: online cooperative learning, MOOCs, constructivism theory, higher education

CITATION (APA)

Dinh, C. T. (2025). Investigating EFL students’ perceived values of online cooperative learning in MOOCs. Contemporary Educational Technology, 17(1), ep552. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/15718

REFERENCES

  1. Adl-Amini, K., Völlinger, V. A., & Eckart, A. (2023). Implementation quality of cooperative learning and teacher beliefs–A mixed methods study. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 39, 2267–2281. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-023-00769-3
  2. Al Fadda, H. A., Haliem, R. O. A., Mahdi, H. S., & Alkhammash, R. (2023). Undergraduates vs. postgraduates attitudes toward cooperative learning in online classes in different settings. PSU Research Review, 8(3), 577–591. https://doi.org/10.1108/PRR-05-2022-0052
  3. Alansari, M., & Rubie-Davies, C. M. (2021). Enablers and barriers to successful implementation of cooperative learning through professional development. Education Sciences, 11(7), Article 312. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11070312
  4. Almaiah, M. A., Al-Khasawneh, A., & Althunibat, A. (2020). Exploring the critical challenges and factors influencing the e-learning system usage during COVID-19 pandemic. Studies in Computational Intelligence, 25, 5261–5280. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-99000-8_16
  5. Alyoussef, I. Y. (2023). The impact of massive open online courses (MOOCs) on knowledge management using integrated innovation diffusion theory and the technology acceptance model. Education Sciences, 13(6), Article 531. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13060531
  6. Bhat, R. A. (2023). The impact of technology integration on student learning outcomes: A comparative study. International Journal of Social Science, Educational, Economics, Agriculture Research and Technology, 2, 592–596. https://doi.org/10.54443/ijset.v2i9.218
  7. Birt, L., Scott, S., Cavers, D., Campbell, C., & Walter, F. (2016). Member checking: A tool to enhance trustworthiness or merely a nod to validation? Qualitative Health Research, 26(13), 1802–1811. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732316654870
  8. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
  9. Bruner, J. S. (1960). The process of education. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674028999
  10. Bui, T. X. T., Ha, Y. N., Nguyen, T. B. U., Nguyen, V. U. T., & Ngo, T. C. T. (2021). A study on collaborative online learning among EFL students in Van Lang University (VLU). AsiaCALL Online Journal, 12(3), 9–21.
  11. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education (8th ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315456539
  12. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE.
  13. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE.
  14. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. Simon and Schuster.
  15. Doo, M. Y., Bonk, C., & Heo, H. (2020). A meta-analysis of scaffolding effects in online learning in higher education. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 21(3), 60–80. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v21i3.4638
  16. Du, B. (2023). Research on the factors influencing the learner satisfaction of MOOCs. Education and Information Technologies, 28(2), 1935–1955. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11269-0
  17. ElSayad, G. (2023). Higher education students’ learning perception in the blended learning community of inquiry. Journal of Computers in Education, 11, 1061–1088. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-023-00290-y
  18. Faja, S. (2013). Collaborative learning in online courses: Exploring students’ perceptions. Information Systems Education Journal, 11(3), 42–51.
  19. Fehrman, S., & Watson, S. L. (2021). A systematic review of asynchronous online discussions in online higher education. American Journal of Distance Education, 35(3), 200–213. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2020.1858705
  20. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (1999). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. Internet and Higher Education, 2(2–3), 87–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6
  21. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education. International Journal of Phytoremediation, 21(1), 7–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923640109527071
  22. Gillies, R. M. (2016). Cooperative learning: Review of research and practice. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 41(3), 39–54. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2016v41n3.3
  23. Gillies, R. M. (2023). Using cooperative learning to enhance students’ learning and engagement during inquiry-based science. Education Sciences, 13(12), Article 1242. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13121242
  24. Gillies, R. M., & Ashman, A. F. (1996). Teaching collaborative skills to primary school children in classroom-based work groups. Learning and Instruction, 6(3), 187–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-4752(96)00002-3
  25. Goretzko, D., Pham, T. T. H., & Bühner, M. (2021). Exploratory factor analysis: Current use, methodological developments and recommendations for good practice. Current Psychology, 40(7), 3510–3521. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-019-00300-2
  26. Hair Jr, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis. Cengage.
  27. Hair Jr, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., Danks, N. P., & Ray, S. (2021). Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) using R: A workbook. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80519-7
  28. Hajjar, S. T. EL. (2018). Statistical analysis: Internal-consistency reliability and construct validity. International Journal of Quantitative and Qualitative Research Methods, 6(1), 27–38.
  29. Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
  30. Hijazi, D., & Alnatour, A. (2021). Online learning challenges affecting students of English in an EFL context during COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Education and Practice, 9(2), 379–395. https://doi.org/10.18488/journal.61.2021.92.379.395
  31. Hoang, N. H. (2024). EFL student’ views on MOOCs’ usability in the North of Vietnam: A qualitative study. Vietnam Journal of Education Sciences, 20(2), 41–53.
  32. Hrastinski, S. (2009). A theory of online learning as online participation. Computers and Education, 52(1), 78–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.06.009
  33. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2018). Cooperative learning: The foundation for active learning. In S. M. Brito (Ed.), Active learning–Beyond the future (pp. 59–71). IntechOpen. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.81086
  34. Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39(1), 31–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02291575
  35. Kent, M., & Bennett, R. (Eds.). (2017). Massive open online courses and higher education: What went right, what went wrong and where to next? Taylor & Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315594248
  36. Keramati, M. R., & Gillies, R. M. (2022). Advantages and challenges of cooperative learning in two different cultures. Education Sciences, 12(1), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12010003
  37. Kock, N. (2015). Common method bias in PLS-SEM: A full collinearity assessment approach. International Journal of E-Collaboration, 11(4), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijec.2015100101
  38. Kolb, D. A. (2015). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development (2nd ed.). Pearson.
  39. Liebech-Lien, B. (2020). The bumpy road to implementing cooperative learning: Towards sustained practice through collaborative action. Cogent Education, 7(1), Article 1780056. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2020.1780056
  40. Lorente, S., Arnal-Palacián, M., & Paredes-Velasco, M. (2024). Effectiveness of cooperative, collaborative, and interdisciplinary learning guided by software development in Spanish universities. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 39, 4467–4491. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-024-00881-y
  41. Malan, M. (2021). The effectiveness of cooperative learning in an online learning environment through a comparison of group and individual marks. Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 19(6), 588–600. https://doi.org/10.34190/EJEL.19.6.2238
  42. Mendo-Lázaro, S., León-del-Barco, B., Polo-del-Río, M. I., & López-Ramos, V. M. (2022). The impact of cooperative learning on university students’ academic goals. Frontiers in Psychology, 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.787210
  43. Mohammadjani, F., & Tonkaboni, F. (2015). A Comparison between the Effect of cooperative learning teaching method and lecture teaching method on students’ learning and satisfaction level. International Education Studies, 8(9), 107–112. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v8n9p107
  44. Moore, M. G. (1989). Editorial: Three types of interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1–7.
  45. Mudra, H. (2023). Digital literacy among young learners: How do EFL teachers and learners view its benefits and barriers? Teaching English with Technology, 20(3), 3–24.
  46. Nguyen, T., Netto, C. L. M., Wilkins, J. F., Bröker, P., Vargas, E. E., Sealfon, C. D., Puthipiroj, P., Li, K. S., Bowler, J. E., Hinson, H. R., Pujar, M., & Stein, G. M. (2021). Insights into students’ experiences and perceptions of remote learning methods: From the COVID-19 pandemic to best practice for the future. Frontiers in Education, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.647986
  47. O’Brien, R. M. (2007). A caution regarding rules of thumb for variance inflation factors. Quality and Quantity, 41(5), 673–690. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-006-9018-6
  48. Oyarzun, B., & Martin, F. (2023). A systematic review of research on online learner collaboration from 2012–21: Collaboration technologies, design, facilitation, and outcomes. Online Learning Journal, 27(1), 71–106. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v27i1.3407
  49. Phungsuk, R., Viriyavejakul, C., & Ratanaolarn, T. (2017). Development of a problem-based learning model via a virtual learning environment. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences, 38(3), 297–306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.kjss.2017.01.001
  50. Piaget, J. (1977). The development of thought: Equilibration of cognitive structures. Viking.
  51. Rahimi, A. R. (2024). A tri-phenomenon perspective to mitigate MOOCs’ high dropout rates: The role of technical, pedagogical, and contextual factors on language learners’ L2 motivational selves, and learning approaches to MOOC. Smart Learning Environments, 11, Article 11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-024-00297-7
  52. Rahimi, A. R., & Cheraghi, Z. (2024). Unifying EFL learners’ online self-regulation and online motivational self-system in MOOCs: A structural equation modeling approach. Journal of Computers in Education, 11, 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-022-00245-9
  53. Rajabalee, Y. B., & Santally, M. I. (2021). Learner satisfaction, engagement and performances in an online module: Implications for institutional e-learning policy. Education and Information Technologies, 26(3), 2623–2656. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10375-1
  54. Reinhard, B. (2021). The impact of cooperative learning [Master’s thesis, Northwestern College].
  55. Saldaña, J. (2013). Coding manual for qualitative researchers (2nd ed.). SAGE.
  56. Slavin, R. E. (1980). Cooperative Learning. Review of Educational Research, 50(2), 315–342. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543050002315
  57. Sugino, C. (2021). Student perceptions of a synchronous online cooperative learning course in a Japanese women’s university during the COVID-19 pandemic. Education Sciences, 11(5), Article 231. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11050231
  58. Talmo, T., Sapountzi, M., Dafoulas, G., & Valenti, A. (2022). Collaborative learning using technological tools - A framework for the future. In P. Zaphiris, & A. Ioannou (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (pp. 478–496). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-05657-4_34
  59. Thanh, L. P., Trang, T. N. Q., Minh, N. N., & Van Hai, H. (2024). Key determinants of student satisfaction in online learning during COVID-19: Evidence from Vietnamese students. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies, 2024(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/5560967
  60. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
  61. Wang, Y. P., & Wu, T. J. (2022). Effects of online cooperative learning on students’ problem-solving ability and learning satisfaction. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.817968
  62. Yu, Q. (2022). Factors influencing online learning satisfaction. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.852360
  63. Zaremohzzabieh, Z., Roslan, S., Mohamad, Z., Ismail, I. A., Jalil, H. A., & Ahrari, S. (2022). Influencing factors in MOOCs adoption in higher education: A meta-analytic path analysis. Sustainability, 14(14), Article 8268. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14148268