为成功设计mooc:一个以学生动机为导向的框架

Jonathan M. Kevan, Michael P. Menchaca, Ellen S. Hoffman
{"title":"为成功设计mooc:一个以学生动机为导向的框架","authors":"Jonathan M. Kevan, Michael P. Menchaca, Ellen S. Hoffman","doi":"10.1145/2883851.2883941","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Considerable literature exists regarding MOOCs. Evaluations of MOOCs range from ringing endorsements to its vilification as a delivery model. Much evaluation focuses on completion rates and/or participant satisfaction. Overall, MOOCs are ill-defined and researchers struggle with appropriate evaluation criteria beyond attrition rates. In this paper, we provide a brief history of MOOCs, a summary of some evaluation research, and we propose a new model for evaluation with an example from a previously-delivered MOOC. Measurement of the MOOC success framework through four student satisfaction types is proposed in this paper with a model for informal learning satisfaction, one of the proposed types, theorized and tested. Results indicated theoretical underpinnings, while intended to improve instruction, might not have influenced the same satisfaction construct. Therefore, future research into alternative satisfaction factor models is needed.","PeriodicalId":343844,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Learning Analytics & Knowledge","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Designing MOOCs for success: a student motivation-oriented framework\",\"authors\":\"Jonathan M. Kevan, Michael P. Menchaca, Ellen S. Hoffman\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/2883851.2883941\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Considerable literature exists regarding MOOCs. Evaluations of MOOCs range from ringing endorsements to its vilification as a delivery model. Much evaluation focuses on completion rates and/or participant satisfaction. Overall, MOOCs are ill-defined and researchers struggle with appropriate evaluation criteria beyond attrition rates. In this paper, we provide a brief history of MOOCs, a summary of some evaluation research, and we propose a new model for evaluation with an example from a previously-delivered MOOC. Measurement of the MOOC success framework through four student satisfaction types is proposed in this paper with a model for informal learning satisfaction, one of the proposed types, theorized and tested. Results indicated theoretical underpinnings, while intended to improve instruction, might not have influenced the same satisfaction construct. Therefore, future research into alternative satisfaction factor models is needed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":343844,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Learning Analytics & Knowledge\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-04-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Learning Analytics & Knowledge\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/2883851.2883941\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Learning Analytics & Knowledge","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/2883851.2883941","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

关于mooc的文献相当多。对mooc的评价褒贬不一,有的推崇有加,有的把它贬为一种教学模式。许多评估侧重于完成率和/或参与者满意度。总体而言,mooc的定义不明确,除了流失率之外,研究人员还在努力寻找合适的评估标准。本文简要介绍了MOOC的发展历史,总结了一些评价研究,并以已有的MOOC为例,提出了一种新的评价模型。本文提出了通过四种学生满意度类型来测量MOOC成功框架的方法,并提出了非正式学习满意度模型,这是所提出的类型之一,并进行了理论和测试。结果表明,理论基础虽然旨在改善教学,但可能不会影响相同的满意度结构。因此,未来需要对替代满意度因子模型进行研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Designing MOOCs for success: a student motivation-oriented framework
Considerable literature exists regarding MOOCs. Evaluations of MOOCs range from ringing endorsements to its vilification as a delivery model. Much evaluation focuses on completion rates and/or participant satisfaction. Overall, MOOCs are ill-defined and researchers struggle with appropriate evaluation criteria beyond attrition rates. In this paper, we provide a brief history of MOOCs, a summary of some evaluation research, and we propose a new model for evaluation with an example from a previously-delivered MOOC. Measurement of the MOOC success framework through four student satisfaction types is proposed in this paper with a model for informal learning satisfaction, one of the proposed types, theorized and tested. Results indicated theoretical underpinnings, while intended to improve instruction, might not have influenced the same satisfaction construct. Therefore, future research into alternative satisfaction factor models is needed.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信