Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Table of Contents
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LEARNERS ATTENTION AND COMPLETION
RATE IN MOOCS 1
INTRODUCTION 3
PROBLEM STATEMENT 4
PURPOSE OF RESEARCH 7
RESEARCH QUESTIONS 7
SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY 7
LIMITATIONS 8
DEFINITION OF KEY TERMS 8
COMPLETION RATE IN MOOCS 8
ARCS MOTIVATIONAL MODEL AND MOOCS COMPLETION RATE 10
KELLERS MOTIVATION THEORY 12
METHOD 14
DESIGN OF THE STUDY 14
ETHICAL PRINCIPLES/ HUMAN SUBJECT COMPLIANCE 14
SETTING 15
PARTICIPANTS AND SAMPLING PROCEDURE 15
RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES 15
VARIABLES 15
INSTRUMENTATION 15
VALIDITY 16
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS PROCEDURES 16
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 17
REFERENCES 18
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LEARNS MOTIVATION AND COMPLETION RATE IN
MOOCS
Introduction
Massive open online courses (MOOCs) are attractive to many researchers due to their
modernity and proliferation (St. Clair, Winer, Finkelstein, Fuentes-Steeves & Wald, 2015).
MOOCs are online courses that are free for everyone to enroll in and usually have a large
number of registered students (Li, 2015, p. 28; Masters, 2011). Comparing MOOCs to the
traditional learning environments, massive indicates the huge number of students who can
enroll in the online courses. Open refers to online courses that are not confined to certain
students or organizations. Online involves all web courses that are provided through the
Internet, and courses consist of content and activities that are provided by institutions and
shared between the instructors and students (Li, 2015). In addition, MOOCs are divided into
cMOOCs and xMOOCs. The c in cMOOCs refers to the connectivism theory. Specifically, the
cMOOCs concept is known as a huge network of connected people and resources, within which
each learner can plot their own course where learning is concerned (Clar & Barber, 2014, p.
189). Alternatively, the x in xMOOCs refers to the term extended. xMOOCs are more
traditional, content based, and more closely resemble traditional educational models (El-
Hmoudova, 2014, p. 30). Because xMOOCs can accommodate more learning experiences and
are more organized than cMOOCs (OToole, 2013), with components like auto-graded
assignments with deadlines and programming exams, xMOOCs are growing quickly and are
provided by many institutions such as Coursera, Edx, and Udacity (Li, 2015). Recent research
that has focused on xMOOCs includes contributions from: (Adamopoulos, 2013; Brahimi &
Sarirete, 2015; Jordan, 2014; Mackness, Waite, Roberts, & Lovegrove, 2013; Najafi, Evans, &
Federico, 2014; Perna, Ruby, Boruch, Wang, Scull, Ahmad, & Evans, 2014; Zutshi, OHare, &
Rodafinos, 2013). This proposed study seeks to add to the discourse of these scholars.
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LEARNS MOTIVATION AND COMPLETION RATE IN
MOOCS
Problem Statement
Regardless of the reasons that make learners enroll in MOOCS, such as being interesting
or entertaining, MOOCs have been hampered by very high dropout rates (Adamopoulos, 2013),
especially when compared to traditional classes (Li, 2015). Thus, although there are a huge
number of registrants in MOOCs, their course completion rates are very low. Moreover, these
completion rates range between 5% and 12% of registrants, regardless of when the students were
considered as having completed a course, such as if they attended 50% or 100% of a MOOC
(Haber, 2014; Ho, Reich, Nesterko, Seaton, Mullaney, Waldo, &Chuang, 2014; Koller, Ng,
Chuong, & Chen, 2013; Perna, Ruby, Boruch, Wang, Scull, Ahmad, & Evans, 2014).
(Cheng & Yeh, 2009; Keller, 1984, 2000; Malik, 2014), lack of motivation is one of the major
factors that cause the decreasing completion rates of MOOCs (Huang & Hew, 2010; Perna et al.,
2014). Also, Adamopoulos (2013), Jordan (2014), and Perna et al. (2014) asserted that the lack of
motivation eventually led students to drop out of their MOOCs. Thus, further research that
motivation and completion rate may aid the development of future MOOC designs, and
Due to the aforementioned problems, this proposed research study wishes to assess the
relationship between learners attention and completion of MOOCs, thus, address the dilemma of
low MOOC completion rates, as well as help strengthen MOOC design to engage students and
enhance their motivation to complete MOOCs. The ARCS motivation model will be used as a
framework in this study. Additionally, it is hoped that the study enriches the scholarly literature
In this paper, the ARCS motivation model will be used to assess the relationship between
learner attention and completion of MOOCs, and thus provide guidance for future MOOC
designs. Kellers ARCS model is a motivational approach, which emphasizes taking learner
motivation into account when creating instructional design (Keller, 2000). The ARCS acronym
refers to four characteristics: (A) attention, (R) relevance, (C) confidence, and (S) satisfaction.
Integration of all four can lead to full motivation for a person or group (Cheng & Yeh, 2009;
Keller, 1984, 2000; Malik, 2014). The proposed studys findings will hopefully contribute
towards ameliorating MOOC design to aid MOOC learners persistence and reduce the high
dropout rates. Also there is presently a lack of literature about this subject in Saudi Arabia, and
this proposed study wishes to make a contribution to remedying this knowledge gap
Purpose of Research
The proposed research attempts to assess the relationship between the learners attention
and completion of MOOCs by using the ARCS motivation model as a framework. It an attempt
forward developing MOOCs design in order to improve the learners motivation, thus increasing
the completion rate in MOOCs. In addition, it aims to provide recommendations for MOOCs
Research Questions
Based on an examination of the literature, this researcher has come up with the following
questions:
1) What is the extent of the relationship between learners motivation and completion of MOOCs?
A) What is the extent of the relationship between learners attention and completion of MOOCs?
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LEARNS MOTIVATION AND COMPLETION RATE IN
MOOCS
Significance of Study
The proposed study will assess the relationship between learners attention and
completion of MOOCs. Although studies exist about the possible correlation between
learners attention and completion rates in MOOCs, still there is potential dearth of literature
about MOOCs.
completion of MOOCs. The more motivated learners are, the more they complete MOOCs
(Huang & Hew, 2010; Malik, 2014). This indicates that motivation plays an important role in
MOOCs completion. The proposed study seeks to apply a survey instrument to Saudi MOOCs
learners. The research hopes to assess the dilemma of low completion rates in MOOCs and to the
design of MOOCs to further engage students and enhance their motivation to complete
MOOCs. Additionally, this proposed study will use a motivation survey (IMMS) to measure the
learners motivation, and assess its relationship to the completion of MOOCs based on the four
categories of Kellers ARCS motivation model. The following section will introduce the
theoretical framework for the proposed study and its factors in detail
& Lovegrove, 2013; Najafi, Evans, & Federico, 2014; Perna, Ruby, Boruch, Wang, Scull,
Ahmad, & Evans, 2014; Zutshi, OHare, & Rodafinos, 2013) have investigated completion rates
in MOOCs. Findings show that despite the large number of registrants in MOOCs, these courses
are influenced by a high dropout rate, especially when considering that this rate represents
between 5% and 12% of enrolled learners (Koller, Ng, Chuong, & Chen, 2013; Ho, Reich,
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LEARNS MOTIVATION AND COMPLETION RATE IN
MOOCS
Nesterko, Seaton, Mullaney, Waldo, &Chuang, 2014; Perna, Ruby, Boruch, Wang, Scull, Ahmad,
Scholars (Mackness et al., 2013; Jordan, 2014; Perna et al., 2014) have examined a real
problem with MOOCs completion. Although they have attributed the decline in the rate of
MOOCs completion to various causes, all found that there is a high dropout rate in MOOCs.
Perna et al. (2014) used descriptive analysis in their quantitative study to investigate MOOCs
completion. The researchers collected data from 16 Coursera courses provided by the University
of Pennsylvania. They found that the number of students who completed courses was low. Jordan
(2014) concurred. In a quantitative research study, Jordan attempted to illustrate some factors
that may have affected the completion rate in MOOCs by collecting data from the Internet,
including MOOC student blogs, university reports, news stories, and conference presentations.
Linear regression was used along with Minitab statistical software to analyze the data because
the goal of this study was to explore and identify potential trends in MOOCs. The findings
showed the completion rate in a MOOC is low when comparing the enrolled students percentage
with the percentage of students who actually completed the course. The resulting averages
illustrated that only 6.5% of students completed MOOCs from the 34,000 enrolled. The
researchers defined completion rate as the percentage of students who satisfactorily completed
examining reasons for completing MOOCs while also taking into consideration more students
voice. Moreover, Mackness et al. (2013) recognized there is a low completion rate in MOOCs
while focusing on one MOOC Oxford Brookes Universitys First Steps in Learning and
Teaching in Higher Education MOOC (FSLT12). Additional challenges were looked at such as
the acceptance of open academic practice and academic identity in a virtual context.
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LEARNS MOTIVATION AND COMPLETION RATE IN
MOOCS
The above findings confirmed the existence of a high dropout rate in MOOCs, and
asserted that MOOCs clearly are negatively affected. Mackness et al. (2013), Jordan (2014), and
Perna et al. (2014) have further explored and sought out factors that cause the low completion
rate in MOOCs. Mackness et al. (2013) stated that lack of autonomy and learner involvement are
reasons that made learners stop completing their MOOCs. In addition, Perna et al. (2014)
suggested that course length as well as assessment type negatively affected student MOOCs
completion. However, these findings also indicate a sharp decline in motivation and interest to
complete MOOCs. Thus, any potential relationship between learners motivation and completion
discussed in the results of studies such as Cheng and Yeh (2009), Huang and Hew (2016),
and Malik (2014). Malik (2014) reported that the ARCS model of motivational design can be
successfully, thus decreasing the dropout rate in MOOCs. In a quantitative study, Huang
and Hews (2010) sample target was 27 learners in a MOOC over a four-week period. They used
a motivation survey (IMMS) to measure learners motivation based on the four categories of
Kellers theory, which are attention, relevance, confidence, and satisfaction (ARCS). The results
illustrated that the group who completed the course was more motivated than the group who did
not. Through the instrument, the group who did not complete the course indicated that they
lacked attention during it, which confirms that learners need to refresh their attention by
frequently encountering varying learning strategies (Cheng & Yeh, 2009; Keller, 1984,
2000; Malik, 2014). Thus, the researchers suggested that future studies should investigate the
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LEARNS MOTIVATION AND COMPLETION RATE IN
MOOCS
motivational needs of the group who did not complete the course to improve their attention
The previous findings show an agreement with Xiong, Li, Kornhaber, Suen, Pursel, and
Goins (2015) whose study set two hypotheses: (a) motivation predicts MOOC students course
engagement; and (b) students engagement predicts their retention in the course (p. 24). Their
intent was to examine the relationship among MOOC learners motivation, engagement, and
retention and the high dropout rate. The impetus for the study was the researchers conviction
that the high dropout rate in MOOCs correlates to learners need for motivation. Data were
collected from a Penn State University MOOC and analyzed by using structural equation
modeling (SEM). Xiong et al. (2015) focused on three types of learner motivation; intrinsic,
extrinsic, and social. The researchers concluded that motivation plays an important role in keep
learners engaged in MOOCs and preventing attrition. They found that intrinsic and extrinsic
motivation lead to student engagement, and this in turn causes more retention in MOOCs. With
regard to social motivation, they found this did not strongly engage MOOCs learners.
These findings hopefully will promote other scholarly examinations of the possible
relationship between learners motivation and MOOCs completion rates. The Xiong et al. (2015)
study asserts that extrinsic motivation is a determinant of MOOCs completion and uses ARCS
motivation model as its framework. Thus, since attention, relevance, confidence, and satisfaction
Kellers motivation model began its emergence in 1979 through 1983. John Keller
created this model, whose significance lies in the important role it plays in learner motivation. As
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LEARNS MOTIVATION AND COMPLETION RATE IN
MOOCS
mentioned previously, Kellers Motivation Theory, or ARCS model, emanated from Tolman and
approach which emphasizes integrating learner motivation into instructional design (Keller,
2000). The ARCS acronym denotes four characteristics: (A) attention, (R) relevance, (C)
confidence, and (S) satisfaction. Integration of all four components can lead to full motivation
for a person or group (Cheng & Yeh, 2009; Keller, 1984, 2000; Malik, 2014).
ARCS, for example, aims to engage learners attentiveness by using strategies such as
increasing their natural curiosity to explore unexpected things. Also, learners need to refresh
their attention by encountering varying learning strategies frequently (Cheng & Yeh,
2009; Keller, 1984, 2000; Malik, 2014). The attention component is divided into three main
categories: perceptual arousal, inquiry arousal, and variability. Perceptual arousal exists through
providing a specific subject and example, showing the interests and the opposite views, and
integrating facetiousness. Inquiry arousal is created by raising questions that lead to critical
thinking. Variability means using more than one method to teach learners (Poulsen, Lam,
Method
Setting
The study will be focus on Saudi students who have taken MOOCs. The survey will be
The sample study is all Saudi MOOCs learners. They are about 33 students. They vary in
terms of their gender, educational background, and type of class. They all will receive the survey
Based on an examination of the literature, this researcher has come up with the following
questions:
1) What is the extent of the relationship between learners motivation and completion of MOOCs?
B) What is the extent of the relationship between learners attention and completion of MOOCs?
Variables
Instrumentation
The IMMS survey was designed to evaluate whether the instructional material is in line
with the aforementioned principles and examine what students motivation levels are. The IMMS
instrument has been applied and proved to have good internal consistency and validity in
measuring learners motivational features in e-learning setting (Huang & Hew, 2010, p. 760).
The IMMS survey measures the learners motivation level by using a 5-point symmetrical
Likert scale, which contains items and subscales. The four subscales are attention (12 items),
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LEARNS MOTIVATION AND COMPLETION RATE IN
MOOCS
relevance (9 items), confidence (9 items), and satisfaction (6 items). This study focus on the
attention factor and ignore the rest factors on ARCS. In addition, some questions will be added to
the questionnaire. Some general demographic questions will be located in the front of the survey.
This study aims to employee logistic regression method to analyze the data. The results
will show whether there is a significant relationship in terms of learners attention and
completion of MOOCs. In addition, the SPSS application will be used to conduct the statistical
processes.
Hopefully, the findings will develop MOOCs design in order to improve the learners
motivation, thus increasing the completion rate in MOOCs. In addition, it aims to provide
recommendations for MOOCs providers such as Coursera, Edx, Udacity, and King Khalid
University MOOCs.
Result
The researchers have done Hot Deck imputation after missing values founded. The
missing values was 27.3% which is more than 5% (see table 1 &2). In SPSS, logistic regression
predicts the odds of the DV=1 (See table 3). Because 1 = No this means were predicting
learners to choose no. They did not complete their MOOCs. In the data, 26 learners did complete
their MOOCs and 7 learners did not complete theirs (see table 4).
The result from this study showed that the model with the predictor fit significantly as
well as the intercept-only model which means they both have p < 0.05 (see table 4 &7). In
addition, Hosmer and Lemeshow test shows that the model fits the data because p = .600 which
is bigger than .05, thus H0: model fits the data (see table 8). These findings demonstrate that
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LEARNS MOTIVATION AND COMPLETION RATE IN
MOOCS
Attention (p = 0.03) significantly does predict whether learners will not complete their MOOCs
(see table 9). In addition as shown in figure 2, most Y on the left side whilst most N on the right
side. The predicted probability for student #1 to not complete MOOCs is 0.807. which means the
probability is 80% for this learner. In addition, there is no standardized residuals greater than or
less than -3. Thus regression residuals are not extreme (see figure 1).
Those learners who did complete their MOOCs were classified more accurately (96.2%)
than those who did not (28.6%). Therefore, 81.8% of cases were classified correctly (see table
10). Each unit increases in attention decreases the odds of not completion MOOCs by 0.231
times (OR = 0.231) which is 23.1%. Also, the odds are significantly different from 1 for the
predictor. In another word, each unit increases in attention increases the odds of completion
MOOCs by 23.1%.
CaseProcessingSummary
UnweightedCasesa N Percent
SelectedCases IncludedinAnalysis 33 100.0
MissingCases 0 .0
Total 33 100.0
UnselectedCases 0 .0
Total 33 100.0
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LEARNS MOTIVATION AND COMPLETION RATE IN
MOOCS
Table3
DependentVariableEncoding
OriginalValue InternalValue
Yes 0
No 1
Table4
Observed Predicted
Basedonthemostcurrent Percentage
massiveopenonlinecourse Correct
(MOOC)youhavetaken,did
youcompleteit?
Yes No
Step0 Basedonthemostcurrent Yes 26 0 100.0
massiveopenonline
No 7 0 .0
course(MOOC)youhave
taken,didyoucomplete
it?
OverallPercentage 78.8
VariablesintheEquation
VariablesnotintheEquation
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LEARNS MOTIVATION AND COMPLETION RATE IN
MOOCS
Score df Sig.
Step0 Variables attention 6.342 1 .012
OverallStatistics 6.342 1 .012
Table 7
Model Summary
Step -2 Log Cox & Snell R Nagelkerke R
likelihood Square Square
1 28.107a .166 .258
Table 9
VariablesintheEquation
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LEARNS MOTIVATION AND COMPLETION RATE IN
MOOCS
figure 1
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LEARNS MOTIVATION AND COMPLETION RATE IN
MOOCS
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LEARNS MOTIVATION AND COMPLETION RATE IN
MOOCS
figure 2
Table 10
Classification Tablea
Observed Predicted
Based on the most current Percentage
massive open online Correct
course (MOOC) you have
taken, did you complete
it?
Yes No
Table 11
VariablesintheEquation
Discussion
In regard to the results of this study, the researcher found that there is
attention in MOOCs helps to eliminate their high dropout rate. The findings
motivational theory consists of four factors, and the first one is Attention.
The current findings reflect what the researchers have found in the literature
review such as Cheng and Yeh (2009), Huang and Hew (2016), and Malik
(2014). Huang and Hews (2010) found that learners who are motivated are
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LEARNS MOTIVATION AND COMPLETION RATE IN
MOOCS
able to complete their courses more than the others. Thus, learners need to
(Cheng & Yeh, 2009; Keller, 1984, 2000; Malik, 2014). Using ARCS motivation
model in MOOCs designing may help to keep learners more motivated and
thus complete their MOOCs. MOOCs providers and designers should build
increasing their attention, and thus pushing them to complete their MOOCs.
References
Brahimi, T., & Sarirete, A. (2015). Learning outside the classroom through MOOCs. Computers
Cheng, Y. C., & Yeh, H. T. (2009). From concepts of motivation to its application in instructional
Clar, M., & Barber, E. (2014). Three problems with the connectivist conception of
Haber, J. (2014). MOOCs. US: The MIT Press Essential Knowledge series.
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LEARNS MOTIVATION AND COMPLETION RATE IN
MOOCS
Ho, A. D., Reich, J., Nesterko, S. O., Seaton, D. T., Mullaney, T., Waldo, J., & Chuang, I. (2014).
HarvardX and MITx: The First Year of Open Online Courses, Fall 2012-Summer2013.
SSRN Journal.
Huang, B., & Hew, K. F. (2016). Measuring learners motivation level in massive open online
759-764.
Jordan, K. (2014). Initial trends in enrolment and completion of massive open online
courses. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(1),
133-160.
Keller, J. M. (1984). The use of the ARCS model of motivation in teacher training. Aspects of
Keller, J. M. (1987). Development and use of the ARCS model of instructional design. Journal
Keller, J. M. (2000). How to integrate learner motivation planning into lesson planning: The
Koller, D., Ng, A., Do, C., & Chen, Z. (2013). Retention and intention in massive open online
Li, K. (2015). Motivating learners in massive open online courses: A design-based research
Mackness, J., Waite, M., Roberts, G., & Lovegrove, E. (2013). Learning in a small, task
Masters, K. (2011). A brief guide to understanding MOOCs. The Internet Journal of Medical
OToole, R. (2013). Pedagogical Strategies and Technologies for Peer Assessment in Massively
Perna, L. W., Ruby, A., Boruch, R. F., Wang, N., Scull, J., Ahmad, S., & Evans, C. (2014).
Moving through MOOCs: Understanding the progression of users in massive open online
Poulsen, A., Lam, K., Cisneros, S., & Trust, T. (2008). ARCS Model of Motivational
St. Clair, R., Winer, L., Finkelstein, A., Fuentes-Steeves, A., & Wald, S. (2015). Big hat and no
cattle? The implications of MOOCS for the adult learning landscape. The Canadian
Xiong, Y., Li, H., Kornhaber, M. L., Suen, H. K., Pursel, B., & Goins, D. D. (2015). Examining
Zutshi, S., O'Hare, S., & Rodafinos, A. (2013). Experiences in MOOCs: The perspective of