Journal of Engineering Education Transformations

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

A Pragmatic Analysis of Mobile and MOOCs Based Learning Methods


Affiliations
1 Inderprastha Engineering College, Ghaziabad, India
2 ABES Engineering College, Ghaziabad, India
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


With the increasing use of the Internet, education availability to large masses through online mode has become easy. The platforms for Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) like Udemy, Udacity, Edx, Coursera etc. and mobile learning technologies like mobile live video streaming system have evolved all over the world. Through these platforms it has become quite easier for the academicians to provide education. In several remote areas, the learners are not able to attend classroom teaching. But, with the help of emerging technologies like Electronic Learning (MOOCs) and Mobile Learning, many people can now learn things at any time from anywhere at free or very less cost. It also allows academicians to make their content and teaching skills reach everywhere. These technologies help both academicians as well as students. Various multimedia tools are also used for making out the content look attractive and interactive. Students join these courses to compete among themselves, gain knowledge and earn certificates. Almost every type of course is offered ranging from basic to specialization courses. These technologies are a boon to our learning culture. This paper makes an analysis of advantages and limitations of MOOCs based and mobile learning modes. This paper also maps the findings with a survey on 770 students of Delhi NCR region (India). As in this era of technology we all see the future of education in MOOCs and Mobile based learning, hence the major findings of this work is to identify the gap in these modes based learning methodology. It will help the practitioners to improve the utilities from these modes of learning.

Keywords

Education, MOOCs, Mobile Learning, M-Learning Applications.
Subscription Login to verify subscription
User
Notifications
Font Size


  • Lai, Chin-Feng & Chen, Shih-Yeh & Huang, Yueh-Min. (2014). A M-Learning Content Recommendation Service by Exploiting Mobile Social Interactions. Learning Technologies, IEEE Transactions on. 7, pp no.221-230. doi: 10.1109/TLT.2014.2323053.

  • Jonathan H. Tomkin & Donna Charlevoix. (2014). Do professors matter? using an a/b test to evaluate the impact of instructor involvement on MOOC student outcomes. In Proceedings of the first ACM conference o n the Learning @ scale conference. Association for Computing Machinery, USA, pp no.71–78. doi: https://doi.org/10.1145/2556325.2566245.

  • Philip J. Guo and Katharina Reinecke(2014). Demographic differences in how students navigate through MOOCs. In Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning @ scale conference. Association for Computing Machinery, USA, pp no. 21–30. doi:https://doi.org/10.1145/2556325.2566247.

  • Eleanor O’Rourke, Christy Ballweber, and Zoran Popovií(2014). Hint systems may negatively impact performance in educational games. In Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning@ scale conference, pages 51–60.

  • Jonathan Huang, Anirban Dasgupta, Arpita Ghosh, Jane Manning, and Marc Sanders(2014). Superposter behavior in MOOC forums. In Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning @ scale conference. Association for Computing Machinery, USA, pp no.117–126. doi:https://doi.org/10.1145/2556325.2566249.

  • Derrick Coetzee, Armando Fox, Marti A. Hearst, and Bjoern Hartmann (2014). Chatrooms in MOOCs: all talk and no action. In Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning @ scale conference. Association for Computing Machinery, USA, pp no. 127–136. doi:https://doi.org/10.1145/2556325.2566242.

  • Chinmay E. Kulkarni, Richard Socher, Michael S. Bernstein, and Scott R. Klemmer.(2014). Scaling short-answer grading by combining peer assessment with algorithmic scoring. In Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning @ scale conference . Association for Computing Machinery, USA, pp no. 99–108. doi:https://doi.org/10.1145/2556325.2566238.

  • Julia Wilkowski, Daniel M. Russell, and Amit Deutsch (2014). Self-evaluation in advanced power searching and mapping with google MOOCs. In Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning @ scale conference. Association for Computing Machinery, USA, pp no. 109–116. doi:https://doi.org/10.1145/2556325.2566241.

  • Michael Brooks, Sumit Basu, Charles Jacobs, and Lucy Vanderwende(2014). Divide and correct: using clusters to grade short answers at scale. In Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning @ scale conference. Association for Computing Machinery, USA, pp no. 89–98. doi:https://doi.org/10.1145/2556325.2566243.

  • Juho Kim, Philip J. Guo, Daniel T. Seaton, Piotr Mitros, Krzysztof Z. Gajos, and Robert C. Miller(2014). Understanding in-video dropouts and interaction peaks in online lecture videos. In Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning @ scale conference. ACM, USA, pp no. 31-40.

  • Philip J. Guo, Juho Kim, and Rob Rubin( 2014). How video production affects student engagement: an empirical study of MOOC videos. In Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning @ scale conference. Association for Computing Machinery, USA, pp no. 41–50. doi :https://doi.org/10.1145/2556325.2566239.

  • Chatterjee, S., Majumdar, D., Misra, S. et al (2020). Adoption of mobile applications for teaching-learning process in rural girls’ schools in India: an empirical study. Educ Inf Technol 25, pp no. 4057–4076.doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10168-6.

  • Kam M., Agarwal A., Kumar A., Lal S., Mathur A., Tewari A. & Canny J.(2008). Designing e-learning games for rural children in India: a format for balancing learning with fun. In Proceedings of the 7th ACM conference on Designing interactive systems. Association for Computing Machinery, USA, pp no. 58–67. doi:https://doi.org/10.1145/1394445.1394452.

  • Matthew Kam, Divya Ramachandran, Varun Devanathan,Anuj Tewari, and John Canny. (2007). Localized iterative design for language learning in underdeveloped regions: the PACE framework. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Association for Computing Machinery, USA, pp no. 1097–1106. doi :https://doi.org/10.1145/1240624.1240791.

  • C. G. Brinton, M. Chiang, S. Jain, H. Lam, Z. Liu and F. M. F. Wong (2014). Learning about Social Learning in MOOCs: From Statistical Analysis to Generative Mo d e l. I E EE Transactions on Learning Technologies, vol. no. 7, iss no. 4, pp no. 346-359. doi: 10.1109/TLT.2014.2337900.

  • C. Ullrich, R. Shen, R. Tong and X. Tan(2010). A Mobile Live Video Learning System for Large-Scale Learning—System Design and Evaluation. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, vol. no. 3, iss no. 1, pp no. 6-17. doi: 10.1109/TLT.2009.54.

  • V. Garaj (2010) .m-Learning in the Education of Multimedia Technologists and Designers at the University Level: A User Requirements Study. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, vol. no. 3, iss no. 1, pp no. 2 4 - 3 2 . d o i : 10.1109/TLT.2009.38.

  • Hone, Kate & El Said, Ghada. (2016). Exploring the factors affecting MOOC retention: A survey study. Computers & Education. vol no. 98, pp no. 157-168, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. compedu.2016.03.016.

  • Julia Wilkowski, Amit Deutsch, and Daniel M. Russell. 2014. Student skill and goal achievement in the mapping with google MOOC. In Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning @ scale conference. Association for Computing Machinery, USA, pp no. 3–10. doi :https://doi.org/10. 1145/2556325.2566240

  • Kristin Stephens-Martinez, Marti A. Hearst, and Armando Fox (2014). Monitoring MOOCs: which information sources do instructors value? In Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning @ scale conference. Association for Computing Machinery, USA, pp no. 79–88. doi : https://doi.org/10.1145/2556325.2566246.

  • Alario-Hoyos, Carlos & Delgado-Kloos, Carlos & G., H.A. & Organero, Mario. (2014). Delving into Participants’ Profiles and Use of Social Tools in MOOCs. Learning Technologies, IEEE Transactions on. 7. pp no. 260-266. doi: 10.1109/TLT.2014.2311807.

  • Sharples, M., Delgado Kloos, C., Dimitriadis, Y., Garlatti, S., & Specht, M. (2015). Mobile and Accessible Learning for MOOCs. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, vol no. 4, iss no. 1, pp no. 1-8. doi: http://doi.org/10.5334/jime.ai.

  • Konstan, Joseph & Walker, Jd & Brooks, D. & Brown, Keith & Ekstrand, Michael. (2014). Teaching Recommender Systems at Large Scale: Evaluation and Lessons Learned from a Hybrid MOOC. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction. vol no. 22, pp no. 61-70. doi: 10.1145/2556325.2566244.

  • Zhou, M. (2016). Chinese university students' acceptance of MOOCs: A self-determination perspective. Computers & Education, vol 92-93, ppno. 194-203. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.10.012.

  • Rohloff, T., Bothe, M., Renz, J., & Meinel, C. (2018). Towards a Better Understanding of Mobile Learning in MOOCs. In 2018 Learning With MOOCS (LWMOOCS), pp. no. 1-4. Online Available: https://s3.xopic.de/openhpi-public/pages/research/7nU7zOWCJZcXfDjSe8 hvbB/2018_Towards_a_Better_Understanding_of_Mobile_Learning_in_MOOCs.pdf.

  • Hone, K. S., & El Said, G. R. (2016). Exploring the factors affecting MOOC retention: A survey study. Computers & Education, vol no. 98, pp no. 157-168. doi:10.1016/j.compedu. 2016.03.016.

  • Sun, Geng & Shen, Jun. (2014). Facilitating Social Collaboration in Mobile Cloud-Based Learning: A Teamwork as a Service (TaaS) Approach. Learning Technologies, IEEE Transactions on. 7. pp no. 207-220. doi: 10.1109/TLT.2014.2340402.

  • J. Park, D. Parsons and H. Ryu. (2010).To Flow and Not to Freeze: Applying Flow Experience to Mobile Learning. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 56-67. doi: 10.1109/TLT.2010.1.

  • Alraimi, K.M., Zo, H., & Ciganek, A. (2015). Understanding the MOOCs continuance: The role of openness and reputation. Comput. Educ., vol. no. 80, pp. no. 28-38. d o i : https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.08.006 .

  • Seppala, P., & Alamäki, H. (2003). Mobile learning in teacher training. Journal of computer assisted learning, vol. no. 19, iss no. 3, pp. no. 330-335. doi: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0266-4909.2003.00034.x

  • Ahmed Al-Hmouz, Jun Shen, Rami Al-Hmouz, and Jun Yan. (2012). Modeling and Simulation of an Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy Inference System (ANFIS) for Mobile Learning. In IEEE Trans. Learn. Technol. Vol. no. 5, iss. no. 3, pp. no. 226–237. doi : https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2011.36

  • P. Zervas and D. G. Sampson. (2014). Facilitating Teachers' Reuse of Mobile Assisted Language Learning Resources Using Educational Metadata. In IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, vol. no. 7, iss no. 1, pp. 6-16, Jan.-March 2014, doi:10.1109/TLT.2013.39.

  • G. Rubner. (2012). mbclick - An Electronic Voting System that Returns Individual Feedback. In IEEE Seventh International Conference on Wireless, Mobile and Ubiquitous Technology in Education, pp. no. 221-222, doi: 10.1109/WMUTE.2012.53.

  • M. A. Ayu, K. Taylor and T. Mantoro. (2009). Active learning: Engaging students in the classroom using mobile phones. In IEEE Symposium on Industrial Electronics & Applications, pp. no. 711-715, doi:10.1109/ISIEA.2009.5356379.

  • S. Bakrania. (2012). A study on the influence of rich versus traditional classroom response system (CRS) questions on concept retention. In Frontiers in Education Conference Proceedings, pp. no. 1-6, doi: 10.1109/FIE.2012.6462251.

  • D. Adam, D. Kioutsiouki, A. Karakostas and S. N. Demetriadis. (2014). Do Your Students Get It? Quiz It! The Android Classroom Response System. IEEE 14th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies, pp. no. 168-170. doi:10.1109/ICALT.2014.57.

  • Schmidt, B. (2014). Improving Motivation and Learning Outcome in a Flipped Classroom Environment. In Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning, pp no. 689-690. doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICL.2014.7017854.

  • Alrasheedi, M., & Capretz, L. F. (2018). Determination of critical success factors affecting mobile learning: a meta-analysis approach. arXiv preprint arXiv:1801.04288.

  • Crompton, H. & Burke, D. (2018). The use of mobile learning in higher education: A systematic review. Computers & Education, vol no. 123, iss no. 1, pp no. 53-64. Online Available: https://www.learntechlib.org/p/201270/.

  • Chang, C.Y., Lai, C.L. & Hwang, G.J. (2018). Trends and research issues of mobile learning studies in nursing education: A review of academic publications from 1971 to 2016. Computers & Education, vol no. 116, iss no. 1, pp no. 28-48. Online Available: https://www.learntechlib.org/p/200739/.

  • Pimmer, Christoph & Brühlmann, Florian & Odetola, Titilayo & Oluwasola, Deborah & Dipeolu, Isaac & Ajuwon, Ademola. (2019). Facilitating professional mobile learning communities with instant messaging. Computers & Education. vol no. 128. pp no. 102–112. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2018.09.005.

  • Wright, Forrest. (2013). What do Librarians Need to Know About MOOCs?. D-Lib Magazine. 19. 10.1045/march 2013-wright., Online Available at SSRN : https://ssrn.com/abstract=3414955.

  • John, G. Chaka, Irene Govender (2020). Implementation of mobile learning using a social network platform: Facebook. Problems of education in the 21st century. vol. 78, no. 1, pp no. 24-47. Available online: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1265829.pdf.


Abstract Views: 364

PDF Views: 1




  • A Pragmatic Analysis of Mobile and MOOCs Based Learning Methods

Abstract Views: 364  |  PDF Views: 1

Authors

Kirti Jain
Inderprastha Engineering College, Ghaziabad, India
Shelly Gupta
ABES Engineering College, Ghaziabad, India

Abstract


With the increasing use of the Internet, education availability to large masses through online mode has become easy. The platforms for Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) like Udemy, Udacity, Edx, Coursera etc. and mobile learning technologies like mobile live video streaming system have evolved all over the world. Through these platforms it has become quite easier for the academicians to provide education. In several remote areas, the learners are not able to attend classroom teaching. But, with the help of emerging technologies like Electronic Learning (MOOCs) and Mobile Learning, many people can now learn things at any time from anywhere at free or very less cost. It also allows academicians to make their content and teaching skills reach everywhere. These technologies help both academicians as well as students. Various multimedia tools are also used for making out the content look attractive and interactive. Students join these courses to compete among themselves, gain knowledge and earn certificates. Almost every type of course is offered ranging from basic to specialization courses. These technologies are a boon to our learning culture. This paper makes an analysis of advantages and limitations of MOOCs based and mobile learning modes. This paper also maps the findings with a survey on 770 students of Delhi NCR region (India). As in this era of technology we all see the future of education in MOOCs and Mobile based learning, hence the major findings of this work is to identify the gap in these modes based learning methodology. It will help the practitioners to improve the utilities from these modes of learning.

Keywords


Education, MOOCs, Mobile Learning, M-Learning Applications.

References





DOI: https://doi.org/10.16920/jeet%2F2022%2Fv35i4%2F22100