Research Article

Teachers’ Perception About MOOCs and ICT During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Ricardo-Adán Salas-Rueda 1 * , Ricardo Castañeda-Martínez 1 , Ana-Libia Eslava-Cervantes 1 , Clara Alvarado-Zamorano 1
More Detail
1 Institute of Applied Sciences and Technology, National Autonomous University of Mexico, Mexico* Corresponding Author
Contemporary Educational Technology, 14(1), January 2022, ep343, https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/11479
Published: 03 January 2022
OPEN ACCESS   3060 Views   1875 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

Technological advances such as Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) and Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) allow the construction of new spaces where students consult the information at any time, take the online exams and communicate with the participants of the educational process from anywhere. This quantitative research analyzes the perception of the teachers about the organization of the school activities in MOOCs and use of ICT considering machine learning and decision tree techniques (data science). The participants are 122 teachers (58 men and 64 women) from the National Autonomous University of Mexico who took the “Innovation in University Teaching 2020” Diploma. The academic degree of these educators is Bachelor (n = 35, 28.69%), Specialty (n = 4, 3.28%), Master (n = 58, 47.54%) and Doctorate (n = 25, 20.49%). The results of machine learning (linear regressions) indicate that the organization of the school activities in MOOCs positively influences the motivation, participation and learning of the students. Data science identifies 3 predictive models about MOOCs and ICT through the decision tree technique. According to the teachers of the National Autonomous University of Mexico, the organization of the school activities in MOOCs and use of ICT play a fundamental role during the COVID-19 pandemic. The implications of this research promotes that educators use MOOCs and ICT to improve the educational conditions, create new remote school activities and build new virtual learning spaces. In conclusion, universities with the support of technological tools can improve the teaching-learning process and update the course during the COVID-19 pandemic. In particular, MOOCs represent a technological alternative to transform the school activities in the 21st century.
Keywords: MOOCs, teaching, data science, machine learning, ICT, COVID-19

CITATION (APA)

Salas-Rueda, R.-A., Castañeda-Martínez, R., Eslava-Cervantes, A.-L., & Alvarado-Zamorano, C. (2022). Teachers’ Perception About MOOCs and ICT During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Contemporary Educational Technology, 14(1), ep343. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/11479

REFERENCES

  1. Acher, M., López-Herrejón, R. E., & Rabiser, R. (2017). Teaching software product lines: A snapshot of current practices and challenges. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 18(1), 1-31. https://doi.org/10.1145/3088440
  2. Adam, T. (2020). Open educational practices of MOOC designers: Embodiment and epistemic location. Distance Education, 41(2), 171-185. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2020.1757405
  3. Albelbisi, N. A., Al-Adwan, A. S., & Habibi, A. (2021). Impact of quality antecedents on satisfaction toward MOOC. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 22(2), 164-175. https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.906843
  4. Albelbisi, N., & Yusop, F. (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
  5. Almatrafi, O., Johri, A., & Rangwala, H. (2018). Needle in a haystack: Identifying learner posts that require urgent response in MOOC discussion forums. Computers & Education, 118, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.11.002
  6. Almeida, A. N., & Hilleshein-de-Souza, M. L. (2020). Evaluation of the Pronatec courses: Benchmarking with long-term technical courses. Meta: Avaliação, 12(34), 88-117. https://doi.org/10.22347/2175-2753v12i34.2352
  7. Arnavut, A., Bicen, H., & Tugun, V. (2020). An evaluation of classroom teachers’ opinions on online material preparation training through MOOC and blended education model. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 21, 4-11. https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.770887
  8. Atencio, P., Sánchez-Torres, G., Iral-Palomino, R., Branch-Bedoya, J. W., & Burgos, D. (2021). Conceptual architecture of the epidemiological surveillance technology platform for COVID-19. Campus Virtuales, 10(1), 21-34.
  9. Bozkurt, A., Kilgore, W., & Crosslin, M. (2018). Bot-teachers in hybrid massive open online courses (MOOCs): A post-humanist experience. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 34(3), 39-59. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3278
  10. Broeck, L. V., Laet, T. D., Lacante, M., Pinxten, M., Soom. C. V., & Langie, G. (2020). The effectiveness of a MOOC in basic mathematics and time management training for transfer students in engineering. European Journal of Engineering Education, 45(4), 534-549. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2019.1641692
  11. Brooker, A., Corrin, L., De Barba, P., Lodge, J., & Kennedy, G. (2018). A tale of two MOOCs: How student motivation and participation predict learning outcomes in different MOOCs. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 34(1), 73-87. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3237
  12. Carmo-Silva, M. D., Soares-de-Mello, J. S., Simoes-Gomes, C. F., & Couto-Carlos, I. (2020). Efficiency analysis of scientific laboratories. Meta: Avaliação, 12(36), 625-645. https://doi.org/10.22347/2175-2753v12i36.2471
  13. Chen, C., Sonnert, G., Sadler, P. M., Sasselov, D. D., Fredericks, C., & Malan, D. J. (2020). Going over the cliff: MOOC dropout behavior at chapter transition. Distance Education, 41(1), 6-25. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2020.1724772
  14. Chiu, T. K. F., & Hew, T. K. F. (2018). Factors influencing peer learning and performance in MOOC asynchronous online discussion forums. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 34(4), 16-28. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3240
  15. Cisel, M. (2019). The structure of the MOOC ecosystem as revealed by course aggregators. American Journal of Distance Education, 33(3), 212-227. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2019.1610285
  16. Crues, R. W., Henricks, G. M., Perry, M. Bhat, S. P., Anderson, C. J., Shaik, N., & Angrave, L. (2018). How do gender, learning goals, and forum participation predict persistence in a computer science MOOC? ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 18(4), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1145/3152892
  17. Del-Castillo-Olivares, J. M. & Del-Castillo-Olivares, A. (2021). The impact of COVID-19 on higher education teachers and its conceptions on assessment. Campus Virtuales, 10(1), 89-101.
  18. Doo, M. Y., Tang, Y., Bonk, C. J., & Zhu, M. (2020). MOOC instructor motivation and career development. Distance Education, 41(1), 26-47. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2020.1724770
  19. Fernandez-Díaz, E., Rodríguez-Hoyos, C., Belver-Dominguez, J., & Calvo-Salvador, A. (2020). Who takes a MOOC? Profile of students in the framework of a European project. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 21(2), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.727968
  20. Gamage, D., Perera, I., & Fernando, S. (2020). Exploring MOOC user behaviors beyond platforms. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 15(16), 161-179. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v15i08.12493
  21. Grande-de-Prado, M., García-Peñalvo, F. J., Corell Almuzara, A., & Abella-García, V. (2021). Higher education assessment during COVID-19 pandemic. Campus Virtuales, 10(1), 49-58.
  22. Gregori, E. B., Zhang, J., Galván-Fernández, C., & Fernández-Navarro, F. A. (2018). Learner support in MOOCs: Identifying variables linked to completion. Computers & Education, 122, 153-168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.03.014
  23. Hsu, J. Y., Chen, C. C., & Ting, P. F. (2018). Understanding MOOC continuance: An empirical examination of social support theory. Interactive Learning Environments, 26(8), 1100-1118. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1446990
  24. Isomottonen, V., & Tirronen, V. (2017). Flipping and blending - An action research project on improving a functional programming course. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 17(1), 1-35. https://doi.org/10.1145/2934697
  25. Jafari, E., Vajargah, K., Arefi, M., & Rezaeizadeh, M. (2018). MOOC-based curriculum model validation in higher education in Iran. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 19(3), 112-127. https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.445112
  26. Ji, Z. (2016). Application and empirical investigation of new MOOC teaching system in computer application course. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 11(5), 62-67. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v11i05.5696
  27. Johnson, P. M. (2019). Design and evaluation of an “athletic” approach to software engineering education. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 19(4), 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1145/3344273
  28. Joo, Y. J., So, H. J., & Kim, N. H. (2018). Examination of relationships among students’ self-determination, technology acceptance, satisfaction, and continuance intention to use K-MOOCs. Computers & Education, 122, 260-272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.01.003
  29. Jung, Y., & Lee, J. (2018). Learning engagement and persistence in Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCS). Computers & Education, 122, 9-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.02.013
  30. Kang, I. G. (2020). Heterogeneity of learners’ behavioral patterns of watching videos and completing assessments in Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs): A latent class analysis. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 21(4), 222-237. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v21i4.4645
  31. Kara, N. (2021). A systematic review of the use of serious games in science education. Contemporary Educational Technology, 13(2), ep295. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/9608
  32. Khalid, A., Lundqvist, K., & Yates, A. (2020). Recommender systems for MOOCs: A systematic literature survey (January 1, 2012 – July 12, 2019). The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 21(4), 255-291. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v21i4.4643
  33. Kim, S., Bindoff, A., Farrow, M., McInerney, F., Borchard, J., & Doherty, K. (2021). Is the understanding dementia Massive Open Online Course accessible and effective for everyone? Native versus non-native English speakers. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 22(3), 19-33. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v22i3.5380
  34. Kurhila, J., & Vihavainen, A. (2015). A purposeful MOOC to alleviate insufficient CS education in Finnish schools. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 15(2), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1145/2716314
  35. Lee, S., & Chung, J. Y. (2019). Lessons learned from two years of K-MOOC experience. Educational Media International, 56(2), 134-148. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2019.1614245
  36. Li, H., Kim, M. K., & Xiong, Y. (2020). Individual learning vs. interactive learning: A cognitive diagnostic analysis of MOOC students’ learning behaviors. American Journal of Distance Education, 34(2), 121-136. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2019.1697027
  37. Li, J. (2017). Construction of modern educational technology MOOC platform based on courseware resource storage system. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 15(16), 105-116. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v12.i09.7491
  38. Liu, L., Zhang, L., Ye, P., & Liu, Q. (2018). Influence factors of satisfaction with mobile learning APP: An empirical analysis of China. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 13(3), 87-99. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v13i03.8381
  39. Llorens-Largo, F., Villagrá-Arnedo, C., Gallego-Durán, F., & Molina-Carmona, R. (2021). COVID-proof: how project-based learning has supported lockdown. Campus Virtuales, 10(1), 73-88.
  40. Lorente-Ruiz, A., Despujol, I., & Castañeda, L. (2021). MOOC as a leveling strategy in higher education: The case of the Polytechnic University of Valencia. Campus Virtuales, 10(2), 9-25.
  41. Luik, P., & Lepp, M. (2021). Are highly motivated learners more likely to complete a computer programming MOOC? International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 22(1), 41-58. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v22i1.4978
  42. Mailizar, M., Almanthari, A., & Maulina, S. (2021). Examining teachers’ behavioral intention to use e-learning in teaching of mathematics: An extended TAM model. Contemporary Educational Technology, 13(2), ep298. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/9709
  43. Martin, N. I., Kelly, N., & Terry, P. C. (2018). A framework for self-determination in massive open online courses: Design for autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 34(2), 35-55. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3722
  44. Medina-Labrador, M., Gómez-Zermeno, M., & Garza, L. D. (2020). Efficiency of biometric recognition technology based on typing dynamics in Mooc. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 21, 79-87. https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.770922
  45. Njiku, J., Mutarutinya, V., & Maniraho, J. F. (2021). Building mathematics teachers’ TPACK through collaborative lesson design activities. Contemporary Educational Technology, 13(2), ep297. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/9686
  46. Oliveira, J. P. (2019). ICT and children’s literature: challenges of pedagogical practice in the digital age. Texto Livre, 12(2), 116-134. https://doi.org/10.17851/1983-3652.12.2.116-134
  47. Otto, D., Bollmann, A., Becker, S., & Sander, K. (2018). It’s the learning, stupid! Discussing the role of learning outcomes in MOOCs. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 33(3), 203-220. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2018.1486183
  48. Oudeweetering, K. V., & Agirdag, O. (2018). Demographic data of MOOC learners: Can alternative survey deliveries improve current understandings? Computers & Education, 122, 169-178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.03.017
  49. Padilla-Rodriguez, B. C., Armellini, A., & Rodriguez-Nieto, M. C. (2020). Learner engagement, retention and success: why size matters in massive open online courses (MOOCs). Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 35(1), 46-62. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2019.1665503
  50. Papadakis, S., Kalogiannakis, M., Sifaki, E., & Vidakis, N. (2017). Access Moodle using smart mobile phones. A case study in a Greek University. In A. Brooks, E. Brooks, & N. Vidakis (Eds.), Interactivity, game creation, design, learning, and innovation (pp. 376-385). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76908-0_36
  51. Papadakis, S., Kalogiannakis, M., Sifaki, E., & Vidakis, N. (2018). Evaluating Moodle use via smart mobile phones. A case study in a Greek University. EAI, 5(16), e1. https://doi.org/10.4108/eai.10-4-2018.156382
  52. Paton, R. M., Fluck, A. E., & Scanlan, J. D. (2018). Engagement and retention in VET MOOCs and online courses: A systematic review of literature from 2013 to 2017. Computers & Education, 125, 191-201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.06.013
  53. Persson, V., & Nouri, J. (2018). A systematic review of second language learning with mobile technologies. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 13(2), 188-210. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v13i02.8094
  54. Pilli, O., & Admiraal, W. (2016). A taxonomy of massive open online courses. Contemporary Educational Technology, 7(3), 223-240. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/6174
  55. Poultsakis, S., Papadakis, S., Kalogiannakis, M., & Psycharis, S. (2021). The management of digital learning objects of natural sciences and digital experiment simulation tools by teachers. Advances in Mobile Learning Educational Research, 1(2), 58-71. https://doi.org/10.25082/AMLER.2021.02.002
  56. Salas-Rueda, R. A., Eslava-Cervantes, A. L., & Prieto-Larios, E. (2020). Teachers’ perceptions about the impact of Moodle in the educational field considering data science. Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 10(4), e202023. https://doi.org/10.30935/ojcmt/8498
  57. Santoso, H. D., Desprianto, D. A., Nurrohmah, I., Nursalamah, R. K., & Putra, H. D. (2019). Customer journey construction of the Indonesian OpenEducation resources platform. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 14(24), 18-30. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v14i24.12045
  58. Shen, C. (2018). MOOC teaching mode of news transmission based on network audio data decoding technology. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 15(16), 43-55. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v13i06.8582
  59. Shukor, N. A., & Abdullah, Z. (2019). Using learning analytics to improve MOOC instructional design. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 15(16), 6-17. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v14i24.12185
  60. Thomas, D. A., & Nedeva, M. (2018). Broad online learning EdTech and USA universities: symbiotic relationships in a post-MOOC world. Studies in Higher Education, 43(10), 1730-1749. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2018.1520415
  61. Tsai, Y. H., Lin, C. H., Hong, J. C., & Tai, K. H. (2018). The effects of metacognition on online learning interest and continuance to learn with MOOCs. Computers & Education, 121, 18-29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.02.011
  62. Vaz-de-Oliveira, U. T. (2017). Language learning in blended and tandem with Brazilian partners: Flexible learning models. Texto Livre, 10(2), 123-144. https://doi.org/10.17851/1983-3652.10.2.123-144
  63. Wahid, R., Ahmi, A., & Alam, A. F. (2020). Growth and collaboration in massive open online courses: A bibliometric analysis. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 21(4), 292-322. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v21i4.4693
  64. Watson, W. R., Yu, J. H., & Watson, S. L. (2018). Perceived attitudinal learning in a self-paced versus fixed-schedule MOOC. Educational Media International, 55(2), 170-181. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2018.1484044
  65. Wise, A. F., & Cui, Y. (2018). Learning communities in the crowd: Characteristics of content related interactions and social relationships in MOOC discussion forums. Computers & Education, 122, 221-242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.03.021
  66. Xing, W. (2019). Exploring the influences of MOOC design features on student performance and persistence. Distance Education, 40(1), 98-113. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2018.1553560
  67. You, H. W. (2019). Students’ perception about learning using MOOC. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 14(18), 203-208. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v14i18.10802
  68. Zhang, M., Yin, S., Luo, M., & Yan, W. (2017). Learner control, user characteristics, platform difference, and their role in adoption intention for MOOC learning in China. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 33(1), 114-133. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.2722
  69. Zhang, Y. & Zuo, L. (2019). College English teaching status and individualized teaching design in the context of mobile learning. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 14(12), 85-96. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v14i12.10704
  70. Zhang, Y., Chen, J., Miao, D., & Zhang, C. (2018). Design and Analysis of an Interactive MOOC Teaching System Based on Virtual Reality. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 13(7), 111-123. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v13i07.8790
  71. Zhou, J. (2017). Exploring the factors affecting learners’ continuance intention of MOOCs for online collaborative learning: An extended ECM perspective. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 33(5), 123-135. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.2914
  72. Zhu, M., Sabir, N., Bonk, C. J., Sari, A., Xu, S., & Kim, M. (2021). Addressing learner cultural diversity in MOOC design and delivery: Strategies and practices of experts. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 22(2), 1-25. https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.906468