|
UPSI Digital Repository (UDRep)
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Abstract : Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris |
| Purpose of the study: This study examined the effectiveness of MOOC in the blended learning of Computer Architecture and Organization course based on the integration of online learning using MOOC and face-to-face learning. Specifically, the aim of the study was to identify factors that could influence student acceptance of MOOC in terms of immersion (IM) and intention to use (BIU) based on the HMSAM. Methodology: Quantitative approach through pre-test/post-test control group design was implemented in this study. Simple random sampling was carried out to recruit the study sample comprising 168 undergraduates from a population of 298 students. Pearson correlation analysis, ANOVA and multiple regression analysis were performed on the survey data collected using online questionnaire. Main Findings: Joy, control, perceived usefulness (PU) and curiosity were significantly correlated with IM while PU, joy and curiosity were significantly correlated with BIU. Control, PU, joy and curiosity were significant predictors of student acceptance in terms of IM and BIU. 33% of IM variances and 22% of BIU variances can be predicted by control, PU, joy and curiosity. Applications of this study: This study is useful in educational technology area where it shows that MOOC is a potent platform for blended learning, but its effectiveness relies on appropriate division of learning between online and face-to-face mode. Therefore the study on teaching and learning strategies, techniques and tools are widely open in order to improve the effectiveness of blended learning in the future. Novelty/Originality of this study: The finding suggests that the proportion of learning based on online and face-to-face mode should be carefully apportioned where the effectiveness of MOOC in the blended learning was significantly lower if it was used up to 71% and the effectiveness will be increased if only 29% of MOOC was used in the non-blended learning |
| References |
[1] Abdul, H.F.H., & Aris, N.S. (2016). Persepsi Pelajar Terhadap Pembelajaran Teradun. Journal of Technical and Vocational Education, 1(2), 53-63. [Done] [2] Allen, I.E., & Seaman, J. (2010). Class Differences: Online Education in the United States. Resource document. Babson Survey Research Group. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED529952.pdf. Accessed15 January 2017. [3] Alraimi, K.M., Zo, H., & Ciganek, A.P. (2015)Understanding the MOOCs continuance: The role of openness an reputation. Computers & Education, 80(), 28-38. [4] Breslow, L., Pritchard, D.E., DeBoer, J., Stump, G.S., Ho, A.D., & Seaton, D.T. (2013). Studying learning in the worldwide classroom: Research into edX’s first MOOC. Research & Practice in Assessment, 8(), 13-25. [5] Chafkin, M. (2013). Udacity’s Sebastian Thrun, Godfather Of Free Online Education, Changes Course. Resource document. https://www.fastcompany.com/3021473/udacity-sebastianthrun-uphill-climb. Accessed 10 December 2016. [6] Chauhan, A. (2014). Massive Open Online Course (MOOCs): Emerging Trends in Assessment and Accreditation. Digital Education Review, 25(), 7-18. [7] Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P., & Warshaw, P.R. (1989).User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models. Management Science, 35(8), 982-1003. [8] Heijden, H.V.D. (2004). User Acceptance of Hedonic Information Systems. MIS Quarterly, 28(4), 695-704. [Done] [9] Hew, K.F., & Cheung, W.S. (2014). Students’ and instructors’ use of massive open online courses (MOOCs): Motivations and challenges. Educational Research Review, 12(), 45-58. [10] Ho, A.D., Reich, J., Nesterko, S., Seaton, D.T., Mullaney, T., Waldo, J., et al. (2014). HarvardX and MITx: The first year of open online courses. HarvardX and MITx Working Paper 1. [11] Jordan. K. (2014). Initial trends in enrolment and completion of massive open online courses. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 15(1), 133-160. [Done] [12] Kolowich, S. (2014). The professors who make the MOOCs. Chronicle of Higher Education, 59(28), A20-A23. [Done] [13] Lowry, P.B., Gaskin, J., Twyman, N., Hammer, B., & Roberts, T.L. (2013). Proposing the hedonic-motivation system adoption model (HMSAM) to increase understanding of adoption of hedonically motivated systems. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 14(11), 617-627. [Done] [14] Marcus, J. (2013). All Hail MOOCs! Just Don’t Ask If They Actually Work. Resource document. http://nation.time.com/2013/09/12/all-hail-moocs-just-dont -ask-if-they-actually-work/. Accessed 9 December 2016. [15] Ministry of Education. (2015). Executive Summary of Malaysia Education Blueprint for Higher Education 2015-2025. Resource document. Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia, Putrajaya. https://www.um.edu.my/docs/default-source/about-um_do cument/media-centre/um-magazine/4-executive-summary- pppm-2015-2025.pdf?sfvrsn=4. Accessed 15 January 2017. [16] Ministry of Higher Education. (2011). National e-Learning Policy (DePAN). Resource document. Kementerian Pengajian Tinggi, Malaysia. https://smart2.ums.edu.my/pluginfile.php/2/course/section/ 2/dasar_e- pembelajaran_negara_depan.pdf. Accessed 20 December 2016. [Done] [17] Mohd, A.S.K. (2016). The effects of blended learning in the teaching of English through short story among secondary school students. Tanjong Malim: Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris. [18] Mohd, K.N.N., & Khalid, F. (2016). Kesesuaian Pembelajaran Teradun Dari Sudut Pandangan Pelajar Pascasiswazah. International Conference on Education for Sustainable Regional Development 2016. Resource document. http://icerd2016.conference.upi.edu/wpcontent/uploads/sites/13/2016/10/93. Accessed 15 February 2017. [19] Staker, H., & Horn, M.B. (2012). Classifying K-12 Blended Learning. Resource document. Innosight Institute, Harvard. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED535180.pdf. Accessed 10 November 2016. |
| This material may be protected under Copyright Act which governs the making of photocopies or reproductions of copyrighted materials. You may use the digitized material for private study, scholarship, or research. |