Technology Tools and Instructional Strategies for Designing and Delivering MOOCs to Facilitate Self-monitoring of Learners

Authors

  • Meina Zhu Wayne State University
  • Curtis J. Bonk Indiana University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.56059/jl4d.v7i1.380

Keywords:

massive open online courses (MOOCs), self-monitoring, self-directed learning, instructional design, MOOC instructors

Abstract

This mixed-methods study examines the design and delivery of MOOCs to facilitate student self-monitoring for self-directed learning (SDL). The data collection methods included an online survey (n = 198), semi-structured interviews of MOOC instructors (n = 22), and document analysis of MOOCs (n = 22). This study found that MOOC instructors viewed self-monitoring skills vital for SDL. MOOC instructors reported that they facilitated students’ self-monitoring with both internal and external feedback. Students’ internal feedback is related to cognitive and metacognitive processes. Among the methods used to facilitate cognitive processes were quizzes, tutorials, learning strategies, learning aids, and progress bars. To foster metacognition, MOOC instructors provided reflection questions and attempted to create learning communities. In addition, MOOC instructors, teaching assistants, and peers provided external feedback for students’ self-monitoring. In addition, synchronous communication technologies, asynchronous communication technologies, and feedback were used with diverse purposes in supporting student’s self-monitoring. 

Author Biographies

Meina Zhu, Wayne State University

Meina Zhu is Assistant Professor in the Learning Design and Technology program in the College of Education at Wayne State University. Her research interests include online education, MOOCs, self-directed learning, STEM education, and active learning.

Curtis J. Bonk, Indiana University

Curtis J. Bonk (cjbonk@indiana.edu) is Professor of Instructional Systems Technology at Indiana University and author/editor of a dozen books in the field of educational technology and e-learning. He is a passionate and energetic speaker, writer, educational psychologist, instructional technologist, and entrepreneur as well as a former CPA/corporate controller (homepage: http://curtbonk.com/).

References

Authors, (2009)

Authors, (2015)

Authors, (2018)

Authors, (2019)

Authors, (2020)

Barak, M., & Rafaeli, S. (2004). On-line question-posing and peer-assessment as means for web-based knowledge sharing in learning. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 61(1), 84-103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2003.12.005

Beaven, T., Codreanu, T., & Creuzé, A. (2014). Motivation in a language MOOC: Issues for course designers. Retrieved from https://www.degruyter.com/downloadpdf/books/9783110422504/9783110422504.4/9783110422504.4.pdf

Blaschke, L. M. (2012). Heutagogy and lifelong learning: A review of heutagogical practice and self-determined learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 13(1), 56-71. doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v13i1.1076

Boud, D., Keogh, R., & Walker, D. (2013). Reflection: Turning experience into learning. New York, NY: Routledge.

Brockett, R. G., & Hiemstra, R. (1991). Self-direction in adult learning: Perspectives on theory, research, and practice (Vol. 20). London: Routledge.

Candy, P. C. (1991). Self-direction for lifelong learning. A comprehensive guide to theory and practice. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.

Chang, M. M. (2007). Enhancing web-based language learning through self-monitoring. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23(3), 187-196. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2006.00203.x

Cho, H., & LaRose, R. (1999). Privacy issues in Internet surveys. Social Science Computer Review, 17(4), 421-434. https://doi.org/10.1177/089443939901700402

Coleman M. C. & Webber J. (2002). Emotional and behavioral disorders. Boston, MA: Pearson Education Company.

Creswell, J. W., & Plano-Clark, V. L. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (Third Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Delclos, V. R., & Harrington, C. (1991). Effects of strategy monitoring and proactive instruction on children's problem-solving performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(1), 35. Retrieved from https://psycnet.apa.org/buy/1991-19728-001

Dochy, F. J. R. C., Segers, M., & Sluijsmans, D. (1999). The use of self-, peer and co-assessment in higher education: A review. Studies in Higher Education, 24(3), 331-350. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079912331379935

The Economist (2019, June 8). The second half of humanity is joining the Internet: They will change it, and it will change them. The Economist. Retrieved from https://www.economist.com/leaders/2019/06/08/the-second-half-of-humanity-is-joining-the-internet

Fisher, M. J., & King, J. (2010). The self-directed learning readiness scale for nursing education revisited: A confirmatory factor analysis. Nurse Education Today, 30(1), 44-48. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2009.05.020

Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2009). The nature of qualitative research. How to design and evaluate research in education (7th ed). Boston: McGraw-Hill, 420.

Garrison, D. R. (1997). Self-directed learning: Toward a comprehensive model. Adult Education Quarterly, 48(1), 18-33. Retrieved from http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/074171369704800103

Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59-82. doi: 10.1177/1525822X05279903

Hewitt-Taylor, J. (2001). Self-directed learning: Views of teachers and students. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 36(4), 496-504. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.2001.02001.x

Junco, R., Heiberger, G., & Loken, E. (2011). The effect of Twitter on college student engagement and grades. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27(2), 119-132. doi: 10.1111/j.13652729.2010.00387.x

Kell, C., & Deursen, R. V. (2002). Student learning preferences reflect curricular change. Medical Teacher, 24(1), 32-40. doi: 10.1080/00034980120103450

Kop, R., & Fournier, H. (2011). New dimensions to self-directed learning in an open networked learning environment. International Journal for Self-Directed Learning, 7(2), 1-19. Retrieved from https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/dfdeaf_b1740fab6ad144a980da1703639aeeb4.pdf

Kulkarni, C., Wei, K. P., Le, H., Chia, D., Papadopoulos, K., Cheng, J.,… & Klemmer, S. R. (2013). Peer and self-assessment in massive online classes. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), 20(6), 33. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2505057

Lan, W. Y. (1996). The effects of self-monitoring on students' course performance, use of learning strategies, attitude, self-judgment ability, and knowledge representation. The Journal of Experimental Education, 64(2), 101-115. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/20152478

Leech, N. L., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2007). An array of qualitative data analysis tools: A call for data analysis triangulation. School Psychology Quarterly, 22(4), 557. doi: 10.1037/1045-3830.22.4.557

Loizzo, J., Ertmer, P. A., Watson, W. R., & Watson, S. L. (2017). Adult MOOC learners as self-directed: Perceptions of motivation, success, and completion. Online Learning, 21(2). doi: 10.24059/olj.v21i2.889

Lunyk-Child, O. I., Crooks, D., Ellis, P. J., Ofosu, C., & Rideout, E. (2001). Self-directed learning: Faculty and student perceptions. Journal of Nursing Education, 40(3), 116-123. doi: 10.3928/0148-4834-20010301-06

Maag, J. W., Rutherford Jr, R. B., & Digangi, S. A. (1992). Effects of self-monitoring and contingent reinforcement on on-task behavior and academic productivity of learning disabled students: A social validation study. Psychology in the Schools, 29(2), 157-172. https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6807(199204)29:2<157::AID-PITS2310290211>3.0.CO;2-F

Malone, L. D., & Mastropieri, M. A. (1991). Reading comprehension instruction: Summarization and self-monitoring training for students with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 58(3), 270-279. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440299105800309

Margaryan, A., Bianco, M., & Littlejohn, A. (2015). Instructional quality of massive open online courses (MOOCs). Computers & Education, 80, 77-83. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.08.005

Merriam, S. B. (1988). Case study research in education: A qualitative approach. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Merriam, S. B. (2001). Andragogy and self-directed learning: Pillars of adult learning theory. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2001(89), 3-14. doi: 10.1002/ace.3

Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Parker, D. L., Webb, J., & D'Souza, B. (1995). The value of critical incident analysis as an educational tool and its relationship to experiential learning. Nurse Education Today, 15(2), 111-116. doi: 10.1016/S0260-6917(95)80029-8

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Two decades of developments in qualitative inquiry: A personal, experiential perspective. Qualitative Social Work, 1(3), 261-283. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473325002001003636

Prociuk, J. L. (1990). Self-directed learning and nursing orientation programs: Are they compatible? The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 21(6), 252-256. doi:10.3928/0022-0124-19901101-07

Ross, J., Sinclair, C., Knox, J., & Macleod, H. (2014). Teacher experiences and academic identity: The missing components of MOOC pedagogy. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 10(1), 57. Retrieved from http://jolt.merlot.org/vol10no1/ross_0314.pdf

Schraw, G. (1998). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. Instructional Science, 26(1-2), 113-125. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1003044231033

Schunk, D. H. (1982). Progress self-monitoring: Effects on children’s self-efficacy and achievement. The Journal of Experimental Education, 51(2), 89-93. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.1982.11011845

Shah, D. (2017). MOOCs find their audience: Professional learners and universities. Class Central. Retrieved from https://www.classcentral.com/report/moocs-find-audience-professional-learners-universities/

Shah, D. (2019). Year of MOOC-based degrees: A review of MOOC stats and trends in 2018. Class Central. Retrieved from https://www.class-central.com/report/moocs-stats-and-trends-2018/

Terras, M. M., & Ramsay, J. (2015). Massive open online courses (MOOCs): Insights and challenges from a psychological perspective. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(3), 472-487. doi: 10.1111/bjet.12274

Watson, S. L., Loizzo, J., Watson, W. R., Mueller, C., Lim, J., & Ertmer, P. A. (2016). Instructional design, facilitation, and perceived learning outcomes: An exploratory case study of a human trafficking MOOC for attitudinal change. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64(6), 1273-1300. doi:10.1007/s11423-016-9457-2

Williamson, S. N., (2007). Development of a self-rating scale of self-directed learning. Nurse Researcher, 14(2), 66–83. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/openview/c7980aea8ee20b570c57e9102cf5b9ea/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=33100

Zimmerman B. J. (1995). Self-efficacy and educational development. In Self-efficacy in changing societies (ed. A. Bandura), pp. 202–231. Cambridge University Press, New York.

Zimmerman, B. J., & Paulsen, A. S. (1995). Self-monitoring during collegiate studying: An invaluable tool for academic self-regulation. New directions for teaching and learning, 1995(63), 13–27. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.37219956305

Downloads

Published

2020-03-20

How to Cite

Zhu, M., & Bonk, C. J. (2020). Technology Tools and Instructional Strategies for Designing and Delivering MOOCs to Facilitate Self-monitoring of Learners. Journal of Learning for Development, 7(1), 31–45. https://doi.org/10.56059/jl4d.v7i1.380

Issue

Vol. 7 No. 1 (2020): ISSUE 1

Section

Research Articles

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

    1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

 

    1. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

 

  1. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
Received 2019-12-06
Accepted 2020-02-04
Published 2020-03-20