Running Head: A STUDY ON MOOC DROPOUT RATES AND

A Study on MOOC Dropout Rates and Multiple Intelligences

L. Roca

University of North Texas

 A STUDY ON MOOC DROPOUT RATES AND MULTIPLE INTELLIGENCES 2

Abstract

Since the inception of massive open online courses (MOOCs), this platform for learning

has been characterized as having high enrollment rates with high dropout rates. Researchers are

studying this phenomenon at length, but there is no unifying consensus about underlying factors

for high dropout rates in MOOCs. This mixed method research study aims to discover whether

the wide variety of reasons found for dropout rates are connected to instructional design as it

pertains to learners with different types of intelligences. This research study will have a

purposive sampling design with a control group and a treatment group of learners to determine

whether a redesigned MOOC with instructional techniques for learners with different types of

intelligences can improve retention rates and reduce dropout rates. Also, the data may provide

the unifying factor for the wide variety of reasons found for high dropout rates in this type of

massive form of online education.

 A STUDY ON MOOC DROPOUT RATES AND MULTIPLE INTELLIGENCES 3

A Study on MOOC Dropout Rates and Multiple Intelligences

MOOCs began in 2008 when professors from the University of Manitoba in Canada

offered the first massive open online 12-week course in which 2,300 students enrolled (Fini,

Wiley & Hilton III, as cited in Gomez-Zermeno & Aleman de la Garza, 2016). Since its

inception, massive open online courses have proliferated worldwide with enrollment in the

hundreds of thousands to millions (Banks & Meinert, 2016; Garcia-Mendoza et al., 2017). For

example, Class Central reports that Coursera, the largest MOOC provider, reached 23 million

registered users followed by edX with 10 million. (Garcia-Mendoza et al., 2017). Even though

MOOC enrollment is very high, studies show that high dropout rates in MOOCs raise concerns

about its effectiveness in education. Balsh (as cited in Khalil & Ebner, 2014, p. 1), affirms that

“although thousands of learners enroll for [MOOCs], a very small proportion finally completes

such courses”.

Many possible reasons for high dropout rates have been identified by researchers,

including structure of the course, lack of tutorials, quality of materials, and limitations on the use

of information technology. (Gomez-Zermeno & de la Garza, 2016, Bayeck, 2016). Other reasons

for high dropout rates have been reported as lack of time, lack of learner motivation, feelings of

isolation, lack of interactivity in MOOCs, and dissatisfaction with inability to interact with

instructors. (Khalil & Ebner, 2014). Although these are valid discoveries, they may not explain

the underlying cause for such reasons for dropout rates. The question is, could most of the

research findings for dropout rates be a symptom of MOOC instructional design as it pertains to

multiple intelligences? Khalil and Ebner (2014, p. 8) argue that “it is widely agreed that it would

be useful to improve the retention rates of MOOCs by finding out why students drop out of

courses and to suggest strategies that can be implemented to increase the retention rate”. A study

on multiple intelligences in relation to MOOC instructional design may uncover a connection for
 A STUDY ON MOOC DROPOUT RATES AND MULTIPLE INTELLIGENCES 4

the wide number of reasons found for high dropout rates as it relates to the types of intelligences

learners possess.

Review of Literature

As previously stated, since its inception in 2008 (Banks & Meinert, 2016), these courses

have been successful in enrollment numbers, but very unsuccessful in retention rates. MOOC

dropout rates are in the range of 90% to 98% (Breslow et al., as cited in Hendrikx et al.; Belanger

and Thornton, as cited in Henderikx et al., 2017; Meyer, as cited in Khalil & Ebner, 2014). For

example, Duke University found MOOC completion rates of only 2% with dropout rates of 98%

(Belanger and Thornton as cited in Henderikx et al., 2017). MIT, Harvard and Stanford found

completion rates of under 10%, with over 90% dropout rates (Zheng et al., as cited in Banks &

Meinert, 2016).

Khalil & Ebner (2014, p. 1) state that learners “construct their own knowledge and

develop their [own] personal learning network from nodes and connections in the digital

environment”. This is one explanation of the individuality in learners’ intelligences that seek for

meaning and that must be taken under account when studying dropout rates in MOOCs. This

individuality may be represented in the work of Dr. Howard Gardner on multiple intelligences

(Eutopia, 2018). The theory of multiple intelligences may give insight and a better understanding

of MOOC dropout rates in relation to course design. Cherry (2017), argues that the conventional

concepts of intelligence are too narrow and restrictive and IQ measurements often miss out on

how people are individually intelligent (Cherry, 2017; Gordon, 2018). Garrison (as cited in

Henerikx, et al., 2017) argues that research on dropout rates in distance education is too focused

on predictions without taking into account the nature of distance education. Therefore, the

current approach to understanding dropout rates in MOOCs may not be sufficient to fully

understand this phenomenon.

 A STUDY ON MOOC DROPOUT RATES AND MULTIPLE INTELLIGENCES 5

The work of Dr. Gardner revolutionized how we view learners. In his book, Frames of

Mind, he outlined his theory of multiple intelligences, and found eight major types of

intelligences, and a ninth intelligence was discovered later in his research (Cherry, 2017;

Gordon, 2018; Madkour et al., 2016). According to Dr. Gardner, humans possess multiple

mental abilities that are a combination of biological and cultural domains (Madkour et al., 2016).

Dr. Gardner’s nine intelligences are: (1) Bodily-Kinesthetic Intelligence – Handle objects

skillfully, use the body to express ideas and feelings, (2) Existential Intelligence – Can

contemplate questions beyond sensory data, can understand questions about life and the

universe; (3) Interpersonal Intelligence – Ability to communicate effectively, can perceive

moods, motivations, emotions; (4) Intrapersonal Intelligence – Self-reflective capacities, deep

understanding of self, ability to modify errors based on self-knowledge; (5) Logical-

Mathematical Intelligence – Can deal with logic, abstractions, reasoning in numbers, can

understand reasoning effectively; (6) Musical-rhythmic Intelligence – Ability and sensitivity to

appreciate, distinguish, compose and perform in musical forms; (7) Naturalistic Intelligence –

Ability to understand and interact with natural surroundings; (8) Verbal-Linguistic Intelligence –

Ability to create and use the spoken or written language; (9) Visual-Spatial Intelligence – Ability

to do activities which require spatial judgment, and ability to see an image and visualize with the

mind’s eye (Madkour et al., 2016). If learners are this diverse in their intelligences, this may

explain the diverse reasons discovered by researchers on dropout rates in MOOCs.

Significance of the Study

There is indication that the current approach to MOOC instructional design may be a

factor that is affecting learners with different types of intelligences. For example, Bayeck (2016,

p. 223) affirms that “MOOCs seem not diverse enough to include students from diverse

backgrounds”. Chang, Hung, and Lin (as cited in Garcia-Mendoza, et al., 2017) revealed that
 A STUDY ON MOOC DROPOUT RATES AND MULTIPLE INTELLIGENCES 6

learners with high reflective learning styles had low probability of enrolling in a MOOC.

Although Chang’s opinion may pertain to styles of learning, this may indicate the possibility that

multiple intelligences are also a factor for MOOC dropout rates. For example, Chang, Hung, and

Lin (as cited in Bayeck, 2016) suggest that creating groups and establishing interactions within

MOOCs can promote an environment where learners can develop their own ideas, express

themselves, establish presence, develop relationships, and thrive in an environment of

collaboration that can motivate them to participate in a MOOC. This finding could correlate

with the need of learners with interpersonal intelligences to connect with others.

This research study is significant in that: (1) It may provide the unifying factor for the

wide number of reasons found for dropout rates, (2) Offer insight on the needs of students with

multiple intelligences as it pertains to MOOC instructional design, and (3) Provide information

that can equip MOOC instructional designers to create enriching learning environments in which

learners with different types of intelligences can thrive, thus potentially improving dropout rates

in MOOCs.

Research Question

Research Questions: (1) Are multiple intelligences, in relation to course design, the

underlying or main factor for MOOC dropout rates? (2) Do redesigned MOOCs with strategies

to reach different types of intelligences lower dropout rates?

Research Setting

This study will take place in an online learning platform such as Coursera. A MOOC will

be selected for the study, and permissions will be obtained to offer the MOOC in two versions:

(1) A MOOC as it is currently offered, and (2) a redesigned MOOC with instructional techniques

for the most predominant types of intelligences among the sample. Some of the techniques

included in the redesigned MOOD may include dual coding, visual cues, completing logic
 A STUDY ON MOOC DROPOUT RATES AND MULTIPLE INTELLIGENCES 7

problems, constructing a model, inventing a game, giving feedback on what participants would

like to learn, and presentations using at least one of the intelligences (Douglas et. al, 2008).

Participants

Participants are students registered in the selected MOOC. The research study will

randomly select 100 to 200 participants. The participants will be male and female, ranging

between the age of 18 and 50. The participants will have a High School diploma up to a

bachelor’s degree. The study may be repeated by extending it to participants with master’s and

post-doctoral degrees.

Data Generation/Collection

Participants will take the McKenzie Multiple Intelligences Inventory Test (Edutopia,

2018) to determine types of intelligences in the sample. Participants will be assigned to a control

group or a treatment group in equivalent percentages according to their types of intelligences and

gender. The Control Group will enroll in the MOOC as it is currently offered, and the treatment

group will enroll in the redesigned MOOC. Each group of participants will answer one of two

types of surveys: (1) A dropout survey, or (2) a course completion survey. A survey will be

supplied to all participants from the control and the treatment group, depending on whether they

dropped out or completed the course. All survey instruments will be designed with a

combination of scales such as Likert rating scales, statements with tick boxes, and open-ended

items (Boynton, Greenhalgh, 2004). The aim is to receive survey responses from all participants.

Data Analysis

Based on responses from the McKenzie Multiple Intelligences Test, and the surveys, data

will be generated on types of intelligences per gender in relation to dropout rates and course

completion rates for each version of the MOOC. Based on survey responses, qualitative and

quantitative data will be generated to establish causal relationships between learners’ types of
 A STUDY ON MOOC DROPOUT RATES AND MULTIPLE INTELLIGENCES 8

intelligences and MOOC instructional design. Data will be further broken down per gender to

determine possible differences between males and females. The results will be presented in

written and visual form. Qualitative and quantitative data will be analyzed to determine a

correlation between dropout and completion rates among participants in the control group versus

the treatment group. Responses will be coded to generate numerical data that will be presented in

charts and graphs to illustrate statistical relationships. Statistical data for each version of the

MOOC will be divided into: (1) dropout rates per type of intelligence, and (2) course completion

rates per type of intelligence. Data will also be broken down per gender to illustrate

relationships between MOOC instructional design and type of intelligence within each gender

and illustrated possible statistical differences between males and females in the control group

versus the treatment group.

Study Report Type

This mixed method research study will have a purposive sampling design in which

participant responses will provide answers to the research questions in relation to their type of

intelligence and dropout rates, and any possible differences between genders.

Rigor and Trustworthiness

Collected data from participants will go through credibility strategies based on Lincoln

and Guba’s evaluative criteria (Korstjens & Moser, 2017). This strategy will be utilized to ensure

validity of the data and it will include: (1) Persistent observation, (2) peer review, (3) number

checks, (4) triangulation, and audit of the data (Korstjens & Moser, 2017). Additionally, to

establish further validity of survey instruments, a panel of experts in the field of multiple

intelligences will rate and review all surveys utilized in the study. A test-Retest method may be

applied to the same group of participants to establish reliability of survey instruments. The

research study may be repeated with a different group of participants, such as students with
 A STUDY ON MOOC DROPOUT RATES AND MULTIPLE INTELLIGENCES 9

master’s and postdoctoral degrees, to establish reliability as a whole.

Anticipated Results

The result of the study will show evidence of better participation, better retention rates,

and lower dropout rates among participants that enrolled in the re-designed MOOC. Research

results will indicate that MOOC instructional design that targets the needs of participants with

different types of intelligences is the underlying or main factor that explains the wide variety of

reasons found for lower dropout rates. The study results will indicate that both genders equally

benefited from the redesigned MOOC.

Conclusion

As Milligan et al. (as cited in Garcia-Mendoza, 2017, p. 2) state, “Understanding the

nature of learners and their adoption of online education is crucial to the success of any MOOC

provision, especially those in which learners are expected to be self-motivated and self-directed

in their learning”. In this new era of online education, it is important for designers of MOOCs to

investigate avenues for improving this form of online instruction. Part of that investigation

should include understanding how learners are intelligent. This study will provide such insights

that can be applied to the development educational strategies according to how learners are

intelligent and potentially produce enriching online learning experiences for students culminating

in increased retention rates.

References

Banks, C, Meinert, E. (2016). The acceptability of MOOC certificates in the workplace.

International Conference e-Learning. 215-218. Eric ED571496. Retrieved from

https://libproxy.library.unt.edu:3086/?q=MOOC+degree+versus+employment&ft=on&id

=ED571496.

Bayeck, R. Y. (2016). Exploratory study of MOOC learners’ demographics and motivation: The
 A STUDY ON MOOC DROPOUT RATES AND MULTIPLE INTELLIGENCES 10

case of students involved in groups. 8(3). 223-233. ERIC: EJ1112529. Retrieved from:

https://libproxy.library.unt.edu:3232/fulltext/EJ1112529.pdf.

Boynton, P. M., Greenhalgh, T. (2004). Selecting, designing, and developing your questionnaire.

BMJ. 328(7451). 1312-1315. Doi: 10.1136/bmj.328.7451.1312. Retrieved from:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC420179/.

Cherry, K. (2017). Howard Gardner biography. VeryWell.com. Retrieved from

https://www.verywell.com/howard-gardner-biography-279511.

Douglas, O., Smith Burton, K, Reese-Durham, N. 2008. The effects of the multiple intelligence

teaching strategy on the academic achievement of eight grad math students. North

Carolina Central University. 3(54). 1-14. Retrieved from:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234613535.

Edutopia. (2018). Multiple Intelligences Self-Assessment. Edutopia.com. Retrieved from:

https://www.edutopia.org/multiple-intelligences-assessment.

Garcia-Mendoza, G.; Jung, I.; & Kobayashi, S. (2017). A review of empirical studies of MOOC

adoption: Applying the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology.

ResearchGate.net. Retrieved from:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/318226133_A_Review_of_Empirical_Studies_

on_MOOC

Adoption_Applying_the_Unified_Theory_of_Acceptance_and_Use_of_Technology.

Gomez-Zermeno, M.G.; Aleman de la Garza, L. (2016). Research analysis on MOOC course

dropout and retention rates. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education-TOJDE.

17(2). 3-14. ERIC Number: EJ1097222. Retrieved from:

https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1097222.

Gordon, L. M. (2018). Howard Gardner. Encyclopaedia Britannica. Retrieved from:

 A STUDY ON MOOC DROPOUT RATES AND MULTIPLE INTELLIGENCES 11

https://www.britannica.com/biography/Howard-Gardner.

Henderikx, M. A, Kreijns, K., & Kalz, M. (2017). Refining success and dropout in massive open

online courses based on the intention-behavior gap. Distance Education. 38(3). 353-368.

https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2017.1369006

Khalil, H., Ebner, M. (2014). MOOCs Completion rates and possible methods to improve

retention – A literature review. ResearchGate.net. Retrieved from:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263348990_MOOCs_Completion_Rates_and_

Possible_Methods_to_Improve_Retention_-_A_Literature_Review.

Korstjens, I., Moser A. (2017). Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 4:

Trustworthiness and publishing. European Journal of General Practice. 24(1). 120-124.

ISSN: 1381-4788. Retrieved from:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/13814788.2017.1375092.

Madkour, M; Rafik, A.A.; & Mohamed M., (2016). Identifying college students’ intelligence to

enhance motivation and language proficiency. English Language Teaching. 9(6). 92-107.

Eric Database EJ1101228. Retrieved from:

https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1101228.pdf.