Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T17:52:18.759Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of content-related and external factors on student retention in LMOOCs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 March 2021

Kolbrún Friðriksdóttir Open the ORCID record for Kolbrún Friðriksdóttir [Opens in a new window]
Kolbrún Friðriksdóttir*
Affiliation:
University of Iceland, Reykjavík, Iceland ([email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Commonly, low completion rates in massive open online courses have called into question the quality of their learning materials and instruction. This paper attempts to identify crucial factors of engagement and retention in language massive open online courses (LMOOCs) in the context of the open online program of Icelandic Online, a self-guided course for second language learners of Icelandic. The study seeks to explore the impact of factors associated with the course’s instructional design on engagement and retention and reveal crucial determinants of attrition. The study depends on survey and tracking data from 400 learners and qualitative data from 62 informants in one course. It builds on previous studies on student engagement and retention in LMOOCs (Friðriksdóttir, 2018, 2019). The present study identified six content-specific factors that the majority of participants considered to be important for their motivation. Some factors, such as gradual and scaffolded presentation of input, had a positive impact on retention. Furthermore, statements from learners in the study who disengaged before completing show that non-course-related factors, such as time constraints, affect LMOOC retention. The study provides a new framework for how to promote student engagement and suggests specific strategies for other LMOOC developers.

Keywords

LMOOC retentionlearning analyticscontent-specific factorsreason for non-completionIcelandic Online
Type
Research Article
Information
ReCALL , Volume 33 , Issue 2 , May 2021 , pp. 128 - 142
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of European Association for Computer Assisted Language Learning

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aebersold, J. A. & Field, M. L. (1997) From reader to reading teacher: Issues and strategies for second language classrooms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Arnbjörnsdóttir, B. (2004) Teaching morphologically complex languages online: Theoretical questions and practical answers. In Henrichsen, P. J. (ed.), CALL for the Nordic languages: Tools and methods for computer assisted language learning. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur, 79–94.Google Scholar
Arnbjörnsdóttir, B. (2007) Kenningar um tileinkun og nám annars máls og erlendra mála [Theories on second-language acquisition and learning]. In Hauksdóttir, A. & Arnbjörnsdóttir, B. (eds.), Mál málanna. Um nám og kennslu erlendra mála. Reykjavík: Vigdís Finnbogadóttir Institute of Foreign Languages, 13–47.Google Scholar
Arnbjörnsdóttir, B. (2008) Kennsla tungumála á netinu: Hugmyndafræði og þróun Icelandic Online [Teaching languages online: The methodology and development of IOL]. In Þráinsdóttir, A. S. & Sigurðsson, B. (eds.), Hrafnaþing 5. Reykjavík: University of Iceland, 33–53.Google Scholar
Bárcena, E. & Martín-Monje, E. (2014) Introduction: Language MOOCs: An emerging field. In Martín-Monje, E. & Bárcena, E. (eds.), Language MOOCs: Providing learning, transcending boundaries. Warsaw: De Gruyter Open, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.2478/9783110420067.1 Google Scholar
Bruner, J. S. (1974) Beyond the information given: Studies in the psychology of knowing. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
Chapelle, C. (1998) Multimedia CALL: Lessons to be learned from research on instructed SLA. Language Learning & Technology, 2(1): 21–36.Google Scholar
Chapelle, C. A. (2003) English language learning and technology: Lectures on applied linguistics in the age of information and communication technology. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chun, D. M. (2012) Replication studies in CALL research. CALICO Journal, 29(4): 591–600. https://doi.org/10.11139/cj.29.4.591-600 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chun, D. M. (2016) The role of technology in SLA research. Language Learning & Technology, 20(2): 98–115. https://doi.org/10125/44463 Google Scholar
Colpaert, J. (2010) Elicitation of language learners’ personal goals as design concepts. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 4(3): 259–274. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2010.513447 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colpaert, J. (2014) Conclusion. Reflections on present and future: Towards an ontological approach to LMOOCs. In Martín-Monje, E. & Bárcena, E. (eds.), Language MOOCs: Providing learning, transcending boundaries. Warsaw: De Gruyter Open, 161–172. https://doi.org/10.2478/9783110420067.10 Google Scholar
Colpaert, J. (2018) Transdisciplinarity revisited. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31(5–6): 483–489. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2018.1437111 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Council of Europe (2018) Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment: Companion volume with new descriptors. Strasbourg: Language Policy Unit.Google Scholar
Creswell, J. W. (2013) Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE.Google Scholar
de Barba, P. G., Kennedy, G. E. & Ainley, M. D. (2016) The role of students’ motivation and participation in predicting performance in a MOOC. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32(3): 218–231. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12130 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Freitas, S. I., Morgan, J. & Gibson, D. (2015) Will MOOCs transform learning and teaching in higher education? Engagement and course retention in online learning provision. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(3): 455–471. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12268 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Larreta-Azelain, M. D. C. (2014) Language teaching in MOOCs: The integral role of the instructor. In Martín-Monje, E. & Bárcena, E. (eds.), Language MOOCs: Providing learning, transcending boundaries. Warsaw: De Gruyter Open, 67–90. https://doi.org/10.2478/9783110420067.5 Google Scholar
Doiz, A., Lasagabaster, D. & Sierra, J. M. (2014) Giving voice to the students: What (de)motivates them in CLIL classes? In Lasagabaster, D., Doiz, A. & Sierra, J. M. (eds.), Motivation and foreign language learning: From theory to practice. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 117–138.Google Scholar
Dörnyei, Z., Muir, C. & Ibrahim, S. (2014) Directed motivational currents: Energising language learning by creating intense motivational pathways. In Lasagabaster, D., Doiz, A. & Sierra, J. M. (eds.), Motivation and foreign language learning: From theory to practice. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 9–29.Google Scholar
Doughty, C. & Williams, J. (eds.) (1998) Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
El Said, G. R. (2017) Understanding how learners use massive open online courses and why they drop out: Thematic analysis of an interview study in a developing country. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 55(5): 724–752. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633116681302 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friðriksdóttir, K. (2015) Styðjandi námsumhverfi Icelandic Online [Icelandic Online – enhancing vocabulary L2 learning and reading comprehension]. In Sigurðardóttir, T. & Garðarsdóttir, M. (eds.), Frændafundur 8. Tórshavn: University of the Faroe Islands, 45–74.Google Scholar
Friðriksdóttir, K. (2018) The impact of different modalities on student retention and overall engagement patterns in open online courses. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31(1–2): 53–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2017.1381129 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friðriksdóttir, K. (2019) The effect of tutor-specific and other motivational factors on student retention on Icelandic Online. Computer Assisted Language Learning. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2019.1633357 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henderikx, M., Kreijns, K. & Kalz, M. (2018) A classification of barriers that influence intention achievement in MOOCs. In Pammer-Schindler, V., Pérez-Sanagustín, M., Drachsler, H., Elferink, R. & Scheffel, M. (eds.), Lifelong technology-enhanced learning. EC-TEL 2018: Lecture notes in computer science, Vol. 11082. Cham: Springer, 3–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98572-5_1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hew, K. F. (2016) Promoting engagement in online courses: What strategies can we learn from the three highly rated MOOCS. British Journal of Educational Technology, 47(2): 320–341. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12235 Google Scholar
Hone, K. S. & El Said, G. R. (2016) Exploring the factors affecting MOOC retention: A survey study. Computers & Education, 98: 157–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.03.016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hsieh, H.-F. & Shannon, S. E. (2005) Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9): 1277–1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hubbard, P. (2013) Digital content curation for CALL. Glasgow World CALL 2013: Global perspectives on computer-assisted language learning. Glasgow, 10–13 July.Google Scholar
Jeong, H. J. & Lee, W. C. (2016) The level of collapse we are allowed: Comparison of different response scales in safety attitudes questionnaire. Biometrics & Biostatistics International Journal, 4(4): 128–134. https://doi.org/10.15406/bbij.2016.04.00100 Google Scholar
Jordan, K. (2015) Massive open online course completion rates revisited: Assessment, length and attrition. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(3): 341–358. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v16i3.2112 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koller, D., Ng, A. & Chen, Z. (2013) Retention and intention in massive open online courses: In depth. EDUCAUSE Review. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2013/6/retention-and-intention-in-massive-open-online-courses-in-depth Google Scholar
Lantolf, J. P. (ed.) (2000) Sociocultural theory and second language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Martín-Monje, E., Castrillo, M. D. & Mañana-Rodríguez, J. (2018) Understanding online interaction in language MOOCs through learning analytics. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31(3): 251–272. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2017.1378237 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reich, J. (2014) MOOC completion and retention in the context of student intent. EDUCAUSE Review. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2014/12/mooc-completion-and-retention-in-the-context-of-student-intent Google Scholar
Schmidt, R. (1992) Awareness and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 13: 206–226. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190500002476 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapiro, H. B., Lee, C. H., Wyman Roth, N. E., Li, K., Çetinkaya-Rundel, M. & Canelas, D. A. (2017) Understanding the massive open online course (MOOC) student experience: An examination of attitudes, motivations, and barriers. Computers & Education, 110: 35–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.03.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sokolik, M. (2014) What constitutes an effective language MOOC? In Martín-Monje, E. & Bárcena, E. (eds.), Language MOOCs: Providing learning, transcending boundaries. Warsaw: De Gruyter Open, 16–32. https://doi.org/10.2478/9783110420067.2 Google Scholar
Taylor, S. J. & Bogdan, R. (1998) Introduction to qualitative research methods: A guidebook and resource (3rd ed.). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Teixeira, A. M. & Mota, J. (2014) A proposal for the methodological design of collaborative language MOOCs. In Martín-Monje, E. & Bárcena, E. (eds.), Language MOOCs. Providing learning, transcending boundaries. Warsaw: De Gruyter Open, 33–47. https://doi.org/10.2478/9783110420067.3 Google Scholar
Thomas, M. & Gelan, A. (2018) Special edition on language learning and learning analytics. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31(3): 181–184. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2018.1447723 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Friðriksdóttir supplementary material

Friðriksdóttir supplementary material 1

Download Friðriksdóttir supplementary material(File)
File 55.9 KB
Supplementary material: File

Friðriksdóttir supplementary material

Friðriksdóttir supplementary material 2

Download Friðriksdóttir supplementary material(File)
File 490 Bytes