Factors Influence the Readiness of the Libyan Higher Educational Students Toward Using MOOC

International Journal of Business Society, Vol. 3, Issue 6
Ebrahem Ali ElburaseOmar Ismael Al-SanjaryZurida Ishak
Internet DiscussionTechnology AccessMotivationMOOC
PDFRegular IssueDOI: 10.30566/ijo-bs/2019.123
3Volume
6Issue

Abstract

The massive open online course (MOOC) is a specific area of development in distance learning, which consists of world-wide participants who have access to the course via the Internet with no formal accreditation. These courses are massive in the sense that they can attract thousands of participants (Martin, 2012). In this regard, this study tries to fill the gap of the lack of higher education output achievement in Libya by adopting the MOOCs. The important methods of several quantitative studies are the utilization of tools like surveys to gather data and improve on feasible theory to analyze the statistical hypotheses that respond to the questions of research. The total population of this study is the Libyan students in the university of Tripoli city. Identifying the proper sample size for a study is able to give a wide perception toward answering the study question. Several previous studies have paid attention toward determining the optimal sample size for research. The total students at Tripoli University are 74,450 students. According to the current study, it was found that there are significant and positive relationships between Internet Discussion, Technology Access, Motivation, and readiness for MOOC. Stating that correlation values for the variables were (0.273, 0.289, and 0.268).

References

[1]

Achimugu, P., Oluwagbemi, O., & Oluwaranti, A. (2010). An evaluation of the impact of ICT diffusion in Nigeria’s higher educational institutions. Journal of Information Technology Impact, 10(1), 25-34.

[2]

Aker, J. C., & Mbiti, I. M. (2010). Mobile phones and economic development in Africa. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 24(3), 207-232.

[3]

Ale, K., & Chib, A. (2011). Community factors in technology adoption in primary education: Perspectives from rural India. Information Technologies & International Development, 7(4), pp. 53-68.

[4]

Anderson, T., & Dron, J. (2011). Three generations of distance education pedagogy. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 12(3), 80-97.

[5]

Balasubramanian, K., & Clarke-Kah, W. (2009). ICTs for higher education. Background paper from the Commonwealth of Learning UNESCO. Paper presented at the World Conference on Higher Education.

[6]

Boeree, C. G. (1904). Personality theories. BF Skinner.

[7]

Bremer, C. (2012). New format for online courses: the open course future of learning. paper presented at the eLearning Baltics (eLBa 2012), Rostock, pp. 63-90.

[8]

Breslow, L., Pritchard, D. E., DeBoer, J., Stump, G. S., Ho, A. D., & Seaton, D. T. (2013). Studying learning in the worldwide classroom research into edX's first MOOC. Research & Practice in Assessment, 8, 13-25.

[9]

Bruner, J. (1969). Toward s a theory of instruction. Mexico, UTEHA.

[10]

Chauhan, A. (2015). Beyond the Phenomenon: Assessment in Massive Open. Macro-Level Learning through Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs): Strategies and Predictions for the Future: Strategies and Predictions for the Future, 119.

[11]

Chen, Y. (2014). Investigating MOOCs through blog mining. International Review of Study in Open and Distance Learning, 15(2).

[12]

Christensen, G., Steinmetz, A., Alcorn, B., Bennett, A., Woods, D., & Emanuel, E. (2013). The MOOC phenomenon: Who takes massive open online courses and why?

[13]

Clarà, M., & Barberà, E. (2013). Learning online: massive open online courses (MOOCs), connectivism, and cultural psychology. Distance Education, 34(1), 129-136.

[14]

Conole, G. (2013). MOOCs as disruptive technologies: strategies for enhancing the learner experience and quality of MOOCs. Revista de Educación a Distancia, 39, 1-17.

[15]

De Barba, P., Kennedy, G. E., & Ainley, M. (2016). The role of students' motivation and participation in predicting performance in a MOOC. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32(3), 218-231.

[16]

Dodds, T. (2007). Information technology: A contributor to innovation in higher education. New Directions for Higher Education, 2007(137), 85-95.

[17]

Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175-191.

[18]

Follis, C. (2015). VARIABLES PREDICTING THE RETENTION OF COMMUNITY COLLEGE STUDENTS IN ONLINE COURSES - A Dissertation presented to. University of Missouri-Columbia.

[19]

García-Peñalvo, F. J., Fidalgo-Blanco, Á., & Sein-Echaluce, M. L. (2018). An adaptive hybrid MOOC model: Disrupting the MOOC concept in higher education. Telematics and Informatics, 35(4), 1018-1030.

[20]

Goldberg, L.R., Bell, E., King, C., O’Mara, C., McInerney, F., Robinson, A. and Vickers, J. (2015). Relationship between participants’ level of education and engagement in their completion of the understanding dementia massive open online course. BMC Medical Education, 15(1), 60.

[21]

Hertin, R. D., & Al-Sanjary, O. I. (2018). Performance of Hospital Information System in Malaysian Public Hospital: a Review. International Journal of Engineering & Technology, 7(4.11), 24-28.

[22]

Hone, K. S., & El Said, G. R. (2016). Exploring the factors affecting MOOC retention: A survey study. Computers & Education, 98, 157-168.

[23]

Ibarrola López de Davalillo, B. (2006). The education of emotions in Primary Education. Extremadura joint.

[24]

Jasnani, P. (2013). Designing MOOCs: A white paper on instructional design for MOOCs.

[25]

Jordan, K. (2015). Massive online course completion rates revisited: Assessment, length and attrition. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(3).

[26]

Kellogg, S. (2013). Online learning: how to make a MOOC. Nature, 499(7458), 369-371.

[27]

Kizilcec, R. F., Pérez-Sanagustín, M., & Maldonado, J. J. (2016). Recommending self-regulated learning strategies does not improve performance in a MOOC. Proceedings of the Third ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale.

[28]

Kop, R. (2011). The challenges to connectivist learning on open online networks: Learning experiences during a massive open online course.

[29]

Martin, F. G. (2012). Will massive open online courses change how we teach?

[30]

Murray, A. (2013). Running a MOOC? Massive online open courses. Distance Learning, 10(2), 11-18.

[31]

OECD. (2011). PISA 2009 Results: Students Online: Digital Technologies and Performance (Volume VI). Retrieved December 29, 2013, from http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264112995-en.

[32]

Pursel, B. K., Zhang, L., Jablokow, K. W., Choi, G., & Velegol, D. (2016). Understanding MOOC students: motivations and behaviours indicative of MOOC completion. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32(3), 202-217.

[33]

Richter, S.L., & Krishnamurthi, M. (2014). Preparing faculty for teaching a MOOC: recommendations from study and experience. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 4(5), 411-415.

[34]

Rollag, K. (2010). Teaching business cases online through discussion boards: strategies and best practices. Journal of Management Education, 34(4), 499-526.

[35]

Shanmugam, K., Srinivas, K., & Reddy, K. S. (2014). INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY (ICT) IN EDUCATION: ADVANTAGES, DISADVANTAGES, CONVENIENCES AND LIMITATIONS. Paper presented at the NATIONAL SEMINAR.

[36]

Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: Learning as network-creation. ASTD Learning News, 10(1), 1-28.

[37]

Siemens, G., Gašević, D., & Dawson, S. (2015). Preparing for the digital university: a review of the history and current state of distance, blended, and online learning. Athabasca: Athabasca University.

[38]

Smith, N., Caldwell, H., Richards, M., & Bandara, A. (2017). A comparison of MOOC development and delivery approaches. International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, 34(2), 152-164. doi: 10.1108/IJILT-09-2016-0047

[39]

Tapia, J. A. (2005). Motivate at school , motivate the family : keys to learning. Morata editions.

[40]

Tschofen, C., & Mackness, J. (2012). Connectivism and dimensions of individual experience. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 13(1), 124-143.

[41]

Tu, C.-H., Sujo-Montes, L., Yen, C.-J., Chan, J.-Y., & Blocher, M. (2012). The integration of personal learning environments & open network learning environments. TechTrends, 56(3), 13.

[42]

Väljataga, T., & Laanpere, M. (2010). Learner control and personal learning environment: a challenge for instructional design. Interactive Learning Environments, 18(3), 277-291.

[43]

Veletsianos, G. (2010). Emerging technologies in distance education. Athabasca University Press.

[44]

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.

[45]

Zhu, M., Sari, A., & Lee, M. M. (2018). A systematic review of research methods and topics of the empirical MOOC literature (2014 –2016). The Internet and Higher Education, 37, 31-39.

[46]

Zou, M. (2016). Exploration of Application Mode of the MOOC-based Distance Education Mode in Digital Illustration. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 11(9).

Article Information

Article Details
Volume & IssueVol. 3, Iss. 6
Publication DateDec 31, 2019
Authors
Ebrahem Ali Elburase
Omar Ismael Al-Sanjary
Zurida Ishak
DOI
10.30566/ijo-bs/2019.123
PDF Download
Factors Influence the Readiness of the Libyan Higher Educational Students Toward Using MOOC | International Journal of Business Society