Understanding affordances and limitations in a language MOOC from an activity theory perspective

Abstract

In the last decade, Language MOOCs have attracted a lot of interest for their potential to enhance language learning. However, how learners engage with MOOC environments and realise their benefits, remains unclear. The current study adopts activity theory (Engeström in J Educ Work 14:133–156, 2001) as a lens to comprehend the affordances and limitations in an LMOOC dealing with English presentation skills called Presentation@work. Data were collected via semi-structured interviews with 22 participants. The data were then analysed using thematic content analysis and triangulated with the participants’ profiles using learning analytical procedures. The results showed that peer learning, personalisation, and social interaction opportunities were perceived as affordances by the participants, while lack of proficiency, lack of affinity, course content, and lack of teacher presence were seen as limitations. Relationships between the perceived affordances and limitations and different types of participants were also found. The findings demonstrate that the LMOOC activity system is dynamic and complex and that the learners play a central role in interacting with different aspects of the system. We conclude with a number of suggestions and implications for future LMOOC design, implementation and research.

An Observation Protocol for Scaffolding Community of Inquiry and Its Exemplary Practices in Language MOOCs

“…In the dimension of social presence, although the authors have provided some exemplary practices, it is noteworthy that raters still expressed relatively moderate to low levels of social presence in the observed courses, which is consistent with previous findings that interaction was perceived as hard to achieve through LMOOCs (Barcena et al, 2015;Chong et al, 2022;Jitpaisarnwattana et al, 2021a;Jitpaisarnwattana et al, 2022c;Wright & Furneaux, 2021). This points to a need to create more innovative, or even intelligent communicative tools to aid class interaction and increase the sense of familiarity among learners (Lebedeva, 2021).…”

“…As for course design and teaching, major challenges include: (a) Course design and instruction both need to be more structured and professional (Friðriksdóttir, 2021a;Jitpaisarnwattana et al, 2022c;Nie & Hu, 2018;Zhao, 2015), (b)The current LMOOCs need to integrate rich, innovative, and engaging activities, such as online games, vocabulary contests, and/or live chat rooms (Friðriksdóttir, 2021a;Hsu, 2021b;Yaşar, 2020;Zhao, 2015), (c) The teaching materials need to be more closely connected to students, and allow individualized pathways to learning (Chong et al, 2022;Hsu, 2021a;Jitpaisarnwattana et al, 2021b;Jitpaisarnwattana et al, 2022b;Mac Lochlainn et al, 2021;Martín-Monje et al, 2018;Nie & Hu, 2018), and (d) A lack of teaching presence (Jitpaisarnwattana et al, 2022c).…”

“…It is consistent with the finding of Sadaf et al (2021) from a systematic review of cognitive presence in online learning that resolution is relatively hard to achieve. This shows that more needs to be done in terms of encouraging students to walk out of their comfort zones and relate the ideas learned in the course to real-world situations (Garrison & Arbaugh, 2007;Jitpaisarnwattana et al, 2022c). Mat Daud et al (2018) has proposed the adoption of problem-based learning and task-based learning in LMOOCs to encourage students to apply knowledge learned in the course to solve realworld problems.…”

Instructors’ perspectives in design and L-MOOCs: A qualitative look

“…It is believed that a well-designed L-MOOC with a variety of interesting materials and assignments to encourage more interactive learning that are sensitive to the particular learner demands in various contexts could well improve learner involvement. In a study of Jitpaisarnwattana et al (2022), peer learning, personalization, social contact, course design, and learning assistance were seen as L-MOOC affordances by MOOC learners, whereas lack of proficiency, lack of affinity, low quality course design, and lack of teacher presence were perceived as learning limits. The results of that study show how L-MOOC activity system is dynamic and complex and can simultaneously entail aspects of personalized learning and peer-based or group-related learning (Jitpaisarnwattana et al, 2022).…”

“…In a study of Jitpaisarnwattana et al (2022), peer learning, personalization, social contact, course design, and learning assistance were seen as L-MOOC affordances by MOOC learners, whereas lack of proficiency, lack of affinity, low quality course design, and lack of teacher presence were perceived as learning limits. The results of that study show how L-MOOC activity system is dynamic and complex and can simultaneously entail aspects of personalized learning and peer-based or group-related learning (Jitpaisarnwattana et al, 2022). Importantly, that particular study shed light on how learners engage with peers and with various system components in an L-MOOC to learn a language.…”