Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Value Dimensions in the Reviews of the MOOCs Students

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Digital Transformation and Global Society (DTGS 2020)

Part of the book series: Communications in Computer and Information Science ((CCIS,volume 1242))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) are a popular educational format. However, it is not clear how to assess students’ experience in MOOCs. This pilot study aims to determine how the discussion of essential aspects of online education differs for students taking online courses from four different categories of education. Moreover, this study is an attempt to explore the value dimensions of the students of MOOCs – the attributes of online education experience that online learners deem most important. Using texts of student feedback it is possible to identify underlying aspects of courses students value and the difference of features and their frequency of mentioned across four fields of education.

We collected 8558 sets of feedback from students taking 37 courses on Coursera. Text mining methods – frequency analysis, keyword extraction, and dictionary construction – were used to identify the MOOCs features to which students pay the most attention.

This study identifies the dimension values of MOOCs students and distinct trends in the discussion of online learning experiences that are strictly specific to different areas.

Conducting a value analysis of MOOCs using feedback allows us to look at the features of the courses that are important for students.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Annaraud, K., Singh, D.: Perceptions of hospitality faculty and students of massive open online courses (MOOCs). J. Hosp. Tour. Educ. 29, 82–90 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1080/10963758.2017.1297714

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. May, L., Acquaviva, K.D., Dorfman, A., Posey, L.: Medical student perceptions of self-paced, web-based electives: a descriptive study. Am. J. Distance Educ. 23, 212–223 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1080/08923640903332120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Okech, D., Barner, J., Segoshi, M., Carney, M.: MSW student experiences in online vs. face-to-face teaching formats? Soc. Work. Educ. 33, 121–134 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1080/02615479.2012.738661

  4. Guo, Y., Barnes, S.J., Jia, Q.: Mining meaning from online ratings and reviews: tourist satisfaction analysis using latent dirichlet allocation. Tour. Manag. 59, 467–483 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2016.09.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Harasim, L.: Shift happens: online education as a new paradigm in learning. Internet High. Educ. 3, 41–61 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00032-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Williams, J.: Student feedback on the experience of higher education. In: Menon, M.E., Terkla, D.G., Gibbs, P. (eds.) Using Data to Improve Higher Education: Research, Policy and Practice, pp. 67–80. SensePublishers, Rotterdam (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-794-0_5

  7. Kember, D., Leung, D.Y.P., Kwan, K.P.: Does the use of student feedback questionnaires improve the overall quality of teaching? Assess. Eval. High. Educ. 27, 411–425 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1080/0260293022000009294

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Brinko, K.T.: The practice of giving feedback to improve teaching. J. High. Educ. 64, 574–593 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.1993.11778449

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Harvey, L.: Student Feedback [1]. Qual. High. Educ. 9, 3–20 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1080/13538320308164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Spooren, P., Brockx, B., Mortelmans, D.: On the validity of student evaluation of teaching: the state of the art. Rev. Educ. Res. 83, 598–642 (2013). https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654313496870

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Grebennikov, L., Shah, M.: Commencing student experience: new insights and implications for action. Eur. J. High. Educ. 2, 267–289 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1080/21568235.2012.683663

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Smithson, J., Birks, M., Harrison, G., et al.: Benchmarking for the effective use of student evaluation data. Qual. Assur. Educ. 23, 20–29 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1108/QAE-12-2013-0049

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ferguson, J.M., DeFelice, A.E.: Length of online course and student satisfaction, perceived learning, and academic performance. IRRODL 11, 73–84 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Gaebel, M.: MOOCs: Massive Open Online Courses. An Update of EUA’s First Paper (January 2013). EUA Occasional Papers (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Sanford, D., Ross, D., Rosenbloom, A., Singer, D.: Course convenience, perceived learning, and course satisfaction across course formats. e-JBEST 11, 69–84 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Steyn, C., Davies, C., Sambo, A.: Eliciting student feedback for course development: the application of a qualitative course evaluation tool among business research students. Assess. Eval. High. Educ. 44, 11–24 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1466266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Grebennikov, L., Shah, M.: Student voice: using qualitative feedback from students to enhance their university experience. Teach. High. Educ. 18, 606–618 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2013.774353

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Brockx, B., Van Roy, K., Mortelmans, D.: The student as a commentator: students’ comments in student evaluations of teaching. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 69, 1122–1133 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.12.042

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Huxham, M., Laybourn, P., Cairncross, S., et al.: Collecting student feedback: a comparison of questionnaire and other methods. Assess. Eval. High. Educ. 33, 675–686 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930701773000

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Richardson, J.T.E.: Instruments for obtaining student feedback: a review of the literature. Assess. Eval. High. Educ. 30, 387–415 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930500099193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Unankard, S., Nadee, W.: Topic detection for online course feedback using LDA. In: Popescu, E., Hao, T., Hsu, T.-C., Xie, H., Temperini, M., Chen, W. (eds.) SETE 2019. LNCS, vol. 11984, pp. 133–142. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-38778-5_16

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  22. Luo, W., Liu, F., Liu, Z., Litman, D.: Automatic summarization of student course feedback. In: Proceedings of the 2016 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, pp. 80–85. Association for Computational Linguistics, San Diego (2016). http://dx.doi.org/10.18653/v1/N16-1010

  23. Welch, C., Mihalcea, R.: Targeted sentiment to understand student comments. In: Proceedings of COLING 2016, the 26th International Conference on Computational Linguistics: Technical Papers, pp. 2471–2481. The COLING 2016 Organizing Committee, Osaka (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Korableva, O., Durand, T., Kalimullina, O., Stepanova, I.: Studying user satisfaction with the MOOC platform interfaces using the example of coursera and open education platforms. In: Proceedings of the 2019 International Conference on Big Data and Education, pp. 26–30. Association for Computing Machinery, London (2019). https://doi.org/10.1145/3322134.3322139

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Research University Higher School of Economics, 190008, Saint-Petersburg, Russia

    Milena Oleshko, Anna Kostrova & Roman Lisyukov

Authors
  1. Milena Oleshko
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anna Kostrova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Roman Lisyukov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Roman Lisyukov .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. National Research University Higher School of Economics, St. Petersburg, Russia

    Daniel A. Alexandrov

  2. ITMO University, St. Petersburg, Russia

    Alexander V. Boukhanovsky

  3. ITMO University, St. Petersburg, Russia

    Andrei V. Chugunov

  4. National Research University Higher School of Economics, St. Petersburg, Russia

    Yury Kabanov

  5. National Research University Higher School of Economics, St. Petersburg, Russia

    Olessia Koltsova

  6. National Research University Higher School of Economics, St. Petersburg, Russia

    Ilya Musabirov

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Oleshko, M., Kostrova, A., Lisyukov, R. (2020). Value Dimensions in the Reviews of the MOOCs Students. In: Alexandrov, D.A., Boukhanovsky, A.V., Chugunov, A.V., Kabanov, Y., Koltsova, O., Musabirov, I. (eds) Digital Transformation and Global Society. DTGS 2020. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 1242. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-65218-0_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-65218-0_10

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-65217-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-65218-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation