A usability evaluation of a blended MOOC environment: An experimental case study

Abstract

In the past few years, there has been an increasing interest in Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) as a new form of Technology-Enhanced Learning (TEL), in higher education and beyond. Recognizing the limitations of standalone MOOCs, blended MOOCs (bMOOCs) that aim at bringing in-class (i.e. face-to-face) interactions and online learning components together have emerged as an alternative MOOC model of teaching and learning in a higher education context. In this paper, we present the design, implementation, and evaluation details of a bMOOC course on "Teaching Methodologies" at Fayoum University, Egypt in cooperation with RWTH Aachen University, Germany, provided using the bMOOC platform L 2 P-bMOOC. In order to gauge the usability and effectiveness of the course, we employed an evaluation approach based on Conole's 12 dimensions rubrics, ISONORM 9241/110-S as a general usability evaluation, and a custom effectiveness questionnaire reflecting the different MOOC stakeholder perspectives.

Integrating MOOCs in traditionally taught courses: achieving learning outcomes with blended learning

“…A pilot was conducted at San José State University (SJSU) with an edX course where a flipped classroom model included projects and quizzes. The program achieved "a high success rate with 90% of the students passing the final exam, as compared with 55% in the traditional class of the previous year" (Ghadiri et al, 2013) in (Yousef, Chatti, Schroeder, & Wosnitza, 2015). Another model was piloted at Vanderbilt University where a Coursera MOOC "Machine learning" was incorporated in a graduate level course on machine learning.…”

The Changes in Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) Studies between 2012 and 2017- A Review of Literature

“…Some scholars measured students' and instructors' views of MOOCs to identify their experience using MOOCs with different settings (Bruff et al, 2013;Asiri, 2014;Saadatmand & Kumpulainen, 2014;Waite et al, 2013;Patil et al, 2016;Leito et al, 2015;Leito et al, 2015;Eriksson et al, 2017;Salvador & Rodriguez-Hoyos, 2016), perception (Abeera & Miri, 2014;El Turk, 2015;Loizzo, 2015;Saadatmand & Kumpulainen, 2014;Dal Magro et al, 2017;Firmansyah & Timmis, 2016;Mamgain et al, 2014), motivation (Wen et al, 2014;Pickering & Swinnerton, 2017;Atrey et al, 2016;Sooryanarayan & Gupta, 2015), performance (Masanet et al, 2014;Nkuyubwatsi, 2013;Yousef, et al, 2015;Gamage et al, 2015), engagement (Milligan et al, 2013;Pickering & Swinnerton, 2017;Mulumba, 2016), preference (Abeera & Miri, 2014;Mamgain et al, 2014;Atrey et al, 2016), satisfaction (Fidalgo-Blanco et al, 2016;Khalil & Ebner, 2013), interaction (Khalil & Ebner, 2013), behavior (Campbell et al, 2014;Leach & Hadi, 2017), awareness (Bucovetchi et al, 2015), and intent (Campbell et al, 2014). This variation can help the researchers evaluate the MOOC and know more about how MOOCs could become an official method of education in the world.…”

“…Since MOOCs have a distinctive feature of using effective technology, Yousef et al (2015) were interested in studying the challenges of the development of MOOCs. They examined the reasons behind the high dropout rate percentage of students from these courses.…”

To ΜOOC or not to MOOC? Tαξιδεύοντας καινοτόμα στη γνώση με ένα ΜOOC του Mathesis

“…Yuan & Powell, 2013 . Yousef et al, 2015 . Πάντικ, 2017  η Ανοικτότητα (Open), ως προς την προσβασιμότητα στη γνώση, αλλά και τη δυνατότητα επικοινωνίας και αλληλεπίδρασης όλων με όλους (εκπαιδευτικού -εκπαιδευομένου-εκπαιδευτικού υλικού)  το ότι είναι Διαδικτυακό (Οnline), αφού η παροχή του μέσω Internet διευκολύνει την άμεση άντληση πληροφοριών, αλλά και επαφών  το ότι συνιστά Μάθημα (Course) με συγκεκριμένη ύλη, δομή, χρονοδιάγραμμα, αξιολόγηση ενδεχομένως και πιστοποίηση.…”