Toward a Typology of MOOC Activity Patterns

Learners Who Never Rest?
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10254)


This paper aims at understanding MOOC learners’ activity patterns, taking into account factors like personal schedule, traditional working hours, domestic time, nighttime and their relation with MOOC course opening hours, live sessions, essay submission deadlines… Are MOOC learners adopting nonstandard learning schedules? Does the MOOC schedule determine the connection patterns of the learners? Four search topics and findings emerge from our research A/Observations related to the density of learning activity B/A weekly typology of learning days, C/Attraction for a “live” contact point, D/The “21:00 effect”. Finally, we suggest a series of best practices for MOOC design.


MOOC Platform connection patterns Live Q&A Learning schedule 


  1. 1.
    Milligan, C., Littlejohn, A.: Supporting professional learning in a massive open online course. Int. Rev. Res. Open Distrib. Learn. 15(5) (2014)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Santandreu Calonge, D., Shah, M.: MOOCs, graduate skills gaps, and employability: a qualitative systematic review of the literature. Int. Rev. Res. Open Distance Learn. 17(5), 67–90 (2016)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Radford, A.W., Robles, J., Cataylo, S., Horn, L., Thornton, J., Whitfield, K.E.: The employer potential of MOOCs: a mixed-methods study of human resource professionals’ thinking on MOOCs. Int. Rev. Res. Open Distrib. Learn. 15(5) (2014)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Boltanski, L., Chiapello, E.: Le nouvel esprit du capitalisme. Gallimard, Paris (1999)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Romero, M., Barberà, E.: Quality of e-learners’ time and learning performance beyond quantitative time-on-task. Int. Rev. Res. Open Distrib. Learn. 12(5), 125–137 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Diaz, D.P.: Online drop rates revisited. The Technology Source, pp. 93–106, May/June 2002Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Palloff, R., Pratt, K.: The Virtual Student: A Profile and Guide to Working with Online Learners. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco (2003)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kasprzak, J., Nixon, M.: Cheating in cyberspace: maintaining quality in online education. Am. Assoc. Comput. Educ. J. 12(1), 85–99 (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bachelet, R., Cisel, M.: Evaluation par les pairs au sein du MOOC ABC de la Gestion des projets: une étude préliminaire. Atelier MOOC, EIAH, Toulouse (2013).
  10. 10.
    Bachelet, R., Zongo D., Bourelle A.: Does peer grading work? How to implement and improve it? Comparing instructor and peer assessment in MOOC GdP. In: Third European MOOCs Stakeholders Summit, 18–20 May 2015, Université catholique de Louvain (2015).
  11. 11.
    Lorenzetti, J.P.: How e-learning is changing higher education: a new look. Distance Education Report, pp. 4–7, 1 August 2005Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centrale LilleVilleneuve d’Ascq CedexFrance
  2. 2.Université Lumière Lyon 2, ISPEF, ECPLyon Cedex 07France

Personalised recommendations