Exploring the Influence of Countries’ Economic Conditions on Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) Participation: A Study of 3.5 Million MITx Learners
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v24i2.7123Keywords:
massive open online courses, geographic region, country's income level, distance education, online learningAbstract
It is well known that there are disparities in access to education around the world, with developed countries generally having better educational resources and opportunities compared to developing countries. Massive open online courses (MOOCs) have been proposed as a way to bridge this gap by providing free or low-cost online education to anyone with an Internet connection. This study aimed to better understand the effects of location, both country and region, on the use of MOOCs, using data from 3.5 million learners who registered for MOOCs offered by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). The data set provided a broad picture of how MOOCs are being used around the globe. The results of the study indicated significant differences in the use of MOOCs among students from different countries and their corresponding economic levels. In order to address these differences and improve access to education through MOOCs, the study suggested several actions that could be taken. These include providing better infrastructure and support for MOOC learners in developing countries, increasing awareness of and access to MOOCs in these regions, and working to improve the quality and relevance of MOOC offerings. Overall, the study highlighted the potential of MOOCs to bridge the educational gap between developed and developing countries, but also emphasized the need for continued efforts to remove barriers and improve access to these resources.
References
Aboshady, O. A., Radwan, A. E., Eltaweel, A. R., Azzam, A., Aboelnaga, A. A., Hashem, H. A., Darwish, S. Y., Salah, R., Kotb, O. N., Afifi, A. M., Noaman, A. M., Salem, D. S., & Hassouna, A. (2015). Perception and use of massive open online courses among medical students in a developing country: Multicentre cross-sectional study. BMJ Open, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006804
Arpaci, I., Al-Emran, M., & Al-Sharafi, M. A. (2020). The impact of knowledge management practices on the acceptance of massive open online courses (MOOCs) by engineering students: A cross-cultural comparison. Telematics and Informatics, 54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2020.101468
Cagiltay, N. E., Cagiltay, K., & Celik, B. (2020). An analysis of course characteristics, learner characteristics, and certification rates in MITx MOOCs. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 21(3), 121–136. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v21i3.4698
Campbell, S., Greenwood, M., Prior, S., Shearer, T., Walkem, K., Young, S., Bywaters, D., & Walker, K. (2020). Purposive sampling: complex or simple? Research case examples. Journal of Research in Nursing, 25(8), 652–661. https://doi.org/10.1177/1744987120927206
Castillo, N. M., Lee, J., Zahra, F. T., & Wagner, D. A. (2015). MOOCs for development: trends, challenges, and opportunities. Information Technologies and International Development, 11(2).
Chaker, R., & Bachelet, R. (2020). Internationalizing professional development: Using educational data mining to analyze learners’ performance and dropouts in a French MOOC. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 21(4), 199–221. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v21i4.4787
Christensen, G., Steinmetz, A., Alcorn, B., Bennett, A., Woods, D., & Emanuel, E. (2013). The MOOC phenomenon: Who takes massive open online courses and why? SSRN. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2350964
Daniel, J. (2012). Making sense of MOOCs: Musings in a maze of myth, paradox and possibility. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 3(18). https://doi.org/10.5334/2012-18
Dell’Acqua, S. (2014). Massive open online courses (MOOCs): Is it real democracy? European Journal of Educational Sciences, 1(2). https://doi.org/10.19044/ejes.v1no2a4
Du, Z., Wang, F., Wang, S., & Xiao, X. (2022). Online listening responses and e-learning performance. Information Technology & People. (Early Access). https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-09-2021-0687
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
Emanuel, E. J. (2013). MOOCs taken by educated few. Nature, 503, 342–342. https://doi.org/10.1038/503342a
Essex, C., & Cagiltay, K. (2001). Evaluating an online course: Feedback from “distressed” students. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 2(3), 233–239.
Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Sage Publications.
Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., &Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education (Vol. 7). McGraw-Hill.
Frane, A. V. (2015). Power and type I error control for univariate comparisons in multivariate two-group designs. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 50(2), 233–247. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2014.968836
Gameel, B. G., & Wilkins, K. G. (2019). When it comes to MOOCs, where you are from makes a difference. Computers and Education, 136, 49–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.02.014
Garrido, M., Koepke, L., Anderson, S., & Mena, A. F. (2016). The Advancing MOOCs for Development Initiative: An examination of MOOC usage for professional workforce development outcomes in Colombia, the Philippines, & South Africa (TASCHA Report). Seattle: University of Washington Information School. Retrieved from https://digital.lib.washington.edu/researchworks/bitstream/handle/1773/35647/Advancing_MOOCs_for_Development_Final_Report_2016_Final.pdf
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–Summer 2013. SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2381263
Kizilcec, R. F., Saltarelli, A. J., Reich, J., & Cohen, G. L. (2017). Closing global achievement gaps in MOOCs. Science, 355(6322), 251–252. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aag2063
Lee, J., Hong, A., & Hwang, J. (2018). A review of massive open online courses : MOOC’s approach to bridge the digital divide. 22nd Biennial Conference of the International Telecommunications Society, Seoul, South Korea.
Liyanagunawardena, T. R., Adams, A. A., & Williams, S. (2013). MOOCs: A systematic study of the published literature 2008–2012. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 14(3), 202–227. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v14i3.1455
Ma, L., & Lee, C. S. (2019). Understanding the barriers to the use of MOOCs in a developing country: An innovation resistance perspective. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 57(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633118757732
Olson, C. L. (1979). Practical considerations in choosing a MANOVA test statistic: A rejoinder to Stevens. Psychological Bulletin, 86(5), 1350–1352. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.86.6.1350
Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N., & Hoagwood, K. (2015). Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 42, 533–544. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10488-013-0528-y
Rohs, M., & Ganz, M. (2015). MOOCs and the claim of education for all: A disillusion by empirical data. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(6). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v16i6.2033
Shah, D., Pickard, L., & Ma, R. (2022). Massive list of MOOC platforms around the world in 2023. https://www.classcentral.com/report/mooc-platforms/
Shavelson, R. J., Brophy, M., & Obemeata, J. O. (1985). Evaluation of nonformal education programs: The applicability and utility of the criterion-sampling approach. UNESCO Institute for Education.
Shcherbinin, M., Kruchinin, S. V., & Ivanov, A. G. (2019). MOOC and MOOC degrees: new learning paradigm and its specifics. International Transaction Journal of Engineering, Management, & Applied Sciences & Technologies, 10, 1-14. https://tuengr.com/V10A/10A19K.pdf
Stevens, J. P. (1980). Power of the multivariate analysis of variance tests. Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 728–737. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.728
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using Multivariate Statistics (5th ed.). Pearson Education.
Tahirsylaj, A., Mann, B., & Matson, J. (2018). Teaching creativity at scale: Overcoming language barriers in a MOOC. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 4(2), 1-9.
Tong, T., & Li, H. (2018). Demand for MOOC: An application of big data. China Economic Review, 51, 194–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chieco.2017.05.007
Warusavitarana, P. A., Lokuge Dona, K., Piyathilake, H. C., Epitawela, D. D., & Edirisinghe, M. U. (2014). MOOC: A higher education game changer in developing countries. In B. Hegarty, J. McDonald, & S.-K. Loke (Eds.), Rhetoric and reality: Critical perspectives on educational technology. Proceedings ascilite Dunedin 2014 (pp. 359-366). https://www.ascilite.org/conferences/dunedin2014/files/fullpapers/321-Warusavitarana.pdf
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence. The copyright of all content published in IRRODL is retained by the authors.
This copyright agreement and use license ensures, among other things, that an article will be as widely distributed as possible and that the article can be included in any scientific and/or scholarly archive.
You are free to
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms below:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
