The Influence of Successful MOOC Learners’ Self-Regulated Learning Strategies, Self-Efficacy, and Task Value on Their Perceived Effectiveness of a Massive Open Online Course
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High dropout rates have been an unsolved issue in massive open online courses (MOOCs). As perceived effectiveness predicts learner retention in MOOCs, instructional design factors that affect it have been increasingly examined. However, self-regulated learning, self-efficacy, and task value have been underestimated from the perspective of instructors even though they are important instructional design considerations for MOOCs. This study investigated the influence of self-regulated learning strategies, self-efficacy, and task value on perceived effectiveness of successful MOOC learners. Three hundred fifty-three learners who successfully completed the Mountain 101 MOOC participated in this study by completing a survey through e-mail. The results of stepwise multiple regression analysis showed that perceived effectiveness was significantly predicted by both self-regulated learning strategies and task value. In addition, the results of another stepwise multiple regression analysis showed that meta-cognitive activities after learning, environmental structuring, and time management significantly predicted perceived effectiveness.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".