Analyzing instructional design quality and students' reviews of 18 courses out of the Class Central Top 20 MOOCs through systematic and sentiment analyses

IF 6.4 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Xue Wang , Youngjin Lee , Lin Lin , Ying Mi , Tiantian Yang
{"title":"Analyzing instructional design quality and students' reviews of 18 courses out of the Class Central Top 20 MOOCs through systematic and sentiment analyses","authors":"Xue Wang ,&nbsp;Youngjin Lee ,&nbsp;Lin Lin ,&nbsp;Ying Mi ,&nbsp;Tiantian Yang","doi":"10.1016/j.iheduc.2021.100810","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This study integrated a systematic analysis of instructional design and a sentiment analysis of student reviews of 18 courses from the Class Central Top 20 MOOCs to analyze the potential connections between instructional design quality and student reviews. The analysis of instructional design quality was based on the ten-principle framework. The results indicated that: 1) the instructional design quality of the highly-rated courses was in the medium-to-upper range; 2) there was a positive correlation between the instructional design quality and MOOCs ranking; 3) student sentiment was much more positive for Humanities courses compared to other subjects; 4) the student sentiment and MOOCs ranking had no significant correlation, but there was a positive correlation between student sentiment and the instructional design quality; and 5) the design of learning activities related to “Collaboration”, “Differentiation” and “Collective knowledge” needed to be improved. The implications for practice and ideas for future research are outlined.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48186,"journal":{"name":"Internet and Higher Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.iheduc.2021.100810","citationCount":"15","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Internet and Higher Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1096751621000191","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 15

Abstract

This study integrated a systematic analysis of instructional design and a sentiment analysis of student reviews of 18 courses from the Class Central Top 20 MOOCs to analyze the potential connections between instructional design quality and student reviews. The analysis of instructional design quality was based on the ten-principle framework. The results indicated that: 1) the instructional design quality of the highly-rated courses was in the medium-to-upper range; 2) there was a positive correlation between the instructional design quality and MOOCs ranking; 3) student sentiment was much more positive for Humanities courses compared to other subjects; 4) the student sentiment and MOOCs ranking had no significant correlation, but there was a positive correlation between student sentiment and the instructional design quality; and 5) the design of learning activities related to “Collaboration”, “Differentiation” and “Collective knowledge” needed to be improved. The implications for practice and ideas for future research are outlined.

Abstract Image

通过系统分析和情感分析,分析班中20强mooc中18门课程的教学设计质量和学生评价
本研究通过对教学设计的系统分析和对班级中央20强mooc课程中18门课程的学生评论的情感分析,来分析教学设计质量与学生评论之间的潜在联系。教学设计质量的分析基于十原则框架。结果表明:1)高评价课程的教学设计质量处于中上水平;2)教学设计质量与mooc排名呈正相关;3)人文学科的学生情绪比其他学科要积极得多;4)学生情绪与mooc排名无显著相关,但学生情绪与教学设计质量正相关;5)“协作”、“差异化”和“集体知识”的学习活动设计有待改进。概述了实践的意义和未来研究的思路。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Internet and Higher Education
Internet and Higher Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
19.30
自引率
4.70%
发文量
30
审稿时长
40 days
期刊介绍: The Internet and Higher Education is a quarterly peer-reviewed journal focused on contemporary issues and future trends in online learning, teaching, and administration within post-secondary education. It welcomes contributions from diverse academic disciplines worldwide and provides a platform for theory papers, research studies, critical essays, editorials, reviews, case studies, and social commentary.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信