Готовы ли мы к модели новой нормальности в электронном бизнес-образовании? Сентимент-анализ мнения обучающихся о МООК

Введение. Новая цифровая экономика и ее постоянно развивающаяся парадигма полностью изменили модель ведения бизнеса и методы обучения. MOOK (массовые открытые онлайн-курсы) и программы микроквалификаций - это образовательные интерфейсы, которые превратились в важный инструмент учебной среды. В высших учебных заведениях дистанционное обучение стало незаменимым альтернативным методом преподавания при обновлении и передаче классических учебных материалов в соответствии с реальными условиями.

Цель данного исследования - определить готовность и отношение общества к концепции МООК и дистанционного обучения, а также подчеркнуть неизбежность их использования в образовательных учреждениях любого уровня, для того чтобы внести фундаментальные изменения в учебные планы, особенно в программы курсов электронного бизнеса - наиболее востребованного направления образовательных курсов на платформах МООК.

Методология и методы исследования. В исследовании анализируется осведомленность общества о концепции MOOK. Восприятие и отношение респондентов к МООК было рассмотрено с помощью сентимент-анализа на платформе Eksi Sozluk (социальная коммуникационно-дискуссионная онлайн-площадка).

Результаты. Согласно результатам сентимент-анализа, 52 % опрошенных оценивают дистанционное обучение и МООК положительно, 29 % - нейтрально и 18 % - отрицательно. В общем, дистанционное образование и МООК воспринимаются респондентами как новая полезная модель образования.

Научная новизна. Авторы впервые провели сентимент-анализ мнений о МООК и дистанционном обучении среди пользователей этих платформ в Турции. Это первое исследование, в котором рассматривается приоритетность растущей осведомленности о МООК и необходимости в дистанционном бизнес-образовании как наиболее предпочтительном типе МООК в условиях пандемии COVID-19.

Практическая значимость. Предполагается, что данное исследование будет способствовать демонстрации заинтересованным участникам того, что МООК и программы микроквалификаций имеют высокий потенциал для осмысления тенденций изменения образования, особенно в условиях модели новой нормальности после пандемии COVID-19. Целостная образовательная модель учреждения образования сопряжена с трудностями в плане соответствия конкурентному характеру и ориентированному на результат подходу экосистемы электронного бизнеса. Рыночная реальность требует, чтобы учебные заведения предлагали более целенаправленные и прикладные образовательные решения для развития данной сферы обучения. Что касается курсов электронного бизнеса (электронная коммерция, цифровой маркетинг), то важность MOOК как решения, ориентированного на то, как, а не что, подробно обсуждается в статье.

1. De Freitas S. I., Morgan J., Gibson D. Will MOOCs transform learning and teaching in higher education? Engagement and course retention in online learning provision. British Journal of Educational Technology. 2015; 46 (3): 455-471.

2. Eriksson T., Adawi T., Stohr C. “Time is the bottleneck”: A qualitative study exploring why learners drop out of MOOCs. Journal of Computing in Higher Education [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2020 Dec 18]; 29 (1): 133-146. Available from: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12528-016-9127-8

3. Palacios Hidalgo F. J., Huertas Abril C. A., Gomez Parra M. E. MOOCs: Origins, concept and didactic applications: A systematic review of the literature (2012-2019). Technology, Knowledge and Learning [Internet]. 2020 [cited 2020 Dec 25]; 25 (4): 853-879. Available from: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10758-019-09433-6

4. Bozkurt A. Kitlesel açık çevrimiçi dersler (Massive Open Online Courses-MOOCs) ve sayısal bilgi çağında yaşamboyu öğrenme fırsatı. Açıköğretim Uygulamaları ve Araştırmaları Dergisi. 2015; 1 (1): 56-81. (In Turkish)

5. Clements K., West R. E., Hunsaker E. Getting started with open badges and open microcredentials. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning. 2020; 21 (1): 154-172.

6. Fong J. (UPCEA)., Janzow P. (Pearson)., Peck K. (Penn S. U. Demographic shifts in educational demand and the rise of alternative credentials [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2020 Dec 28]. Available from: https://upcea.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Demographic-Shifts-in-Educational-Demand-and-the-Rise-of-Alternative-Credentials.pdf

7. Newby T. J., Cheng Z. Instructional digital badges: Effective learning tools. Educational Technology Research and Development [Internet]. 2020 [cited 2020 Dec 26]; 68 (3): 1053-1067. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09719-7

8. Ghasia M., Machumu H., DeSmet E. Micro-credentials in higher education institutions: An exploratory study of its place in Tanzania. International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology. 2019; 15 (1): 233.

9. Oliver B. Making micro-credentials work for learners, employers and providers [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2020 Dec 27]. Available from: http://wordpress-ms.deakin.edu.au/dteach/wp-content/uploads/sites/103/2019/08/Making-micro-credentials-work-Oliver-Deak-in-2019-full-report.pdf?_ga=2.8346290.1216754425.1611174095-108573527.1611174095

10. Pickard L., Shah D., De Simone J. J. Mapping microcredentials across MOOC platforms. In: 2018 Learning With MOOCS (LWMOOCS). IEEE; 2018. 2018 [cited 2020 Dec 7]; p. 17-21. Available from: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8534617/

11. Mallon M. Micro-credentialing. Public Services Quarterly [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2020 Dec 22]; 15 (2): 116-125. Available from: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15228959.20191590290

12. Van der Hijden P. Digitization of credentials: Quality of shorter-term educational experiences [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2020 Dec 18]. Available from: https://files.eric.ed.gov/full-text/ED597931.pdf

13. Liyanagunawardena T. R., Adams A. A., Williams S. A. MOOCs: A systematic study of the published literature 2008-2012. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning. 2013 [cited 2020 Dec 30]; 14 (3): 202. Available from: http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/1455

14. Siemens G. Connectivism: A Learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning. 2005; 2 (1): 3-10.

15. Downes S. New technology supporting informal learning. Journal of Emerging Technologies in Web Intelligence. 2010; 2 (1): 27-33.

16. Ellis L. E., Nunn S. G., Avella J. T. Digital badges and micro-credentials: Historical overview, motivational aspects, issues, and challenges. In: Ifenthaler D., Bellin-Mularski N., Mah D.-K. (eds.). Foundation of digital badges and micro-credentials: Demonstrating and recognizing knowledge and competencies. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2016. p. 3-21.

17. Gamrat C., Zimmerman H. T., Dudek J., Peck K. Personalized workplace learning: An exploratory study on digital badging within a teacher professional development program. British Journal of Educational Technology [Internet]. 2014 [cited 2020 Nov 20]; 45 (6): 11361148. Available from: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/bjet.12200

18. Ruddy C., Ponte F. Preparing students for university studies and beyond: A micro-credential trial that delivers academic integrity awareness. Journal of the Australian Library and Information Association [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2020 Nov 720]; 68 (1): 56-67. Available from: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/24750158.2018.1562520

19. Allen I. E., Seaman J. Grade change: Tracking online education in the United States. Oakland, CA: Babson Survey Research Group and Quahog Research Group LLC; 2014. 45 p.

20. Wilson B. G., Gasell C., Ozyer A., Scrogan L. Adopting digital badges in higher education: Scoping the territory. In: Ifenthaler D., Bellin-Mularski N., Mah D-K., (eds.). Foundation of digital badges and micro-credentials. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2016. p. 163-177.

21. Liyanagunawardena T. R., Adams A. A., Williams S. A. MOOCs: A systematic study of the published literature 2008-2012. Distance Education in China. 2014; 3: 5-16.

22. Ebben M., Murphy J. S. Unpacking MOOC scholarly discourse: A review of nascent MOOC scholarship. Learning, Media and Technology. 2014; 39 (3): 328-345.

23. Chiappe-Laverde A., Hine N., Martinez-Silva J. A. Literature and practice: A critical review of MOOCs. Comunicar. 2015; 22 (44): 9-18.

24. Kovanovic V., Joksimovic S., Gasevic D., Siemens G., Hatala M. What public media reveals about MOOCs: A systematic analysis of news reports. British Journal of Educational Technology [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2020 Nov 30]; 46 (3): 510-527. Available from: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/bjet.12277

25. Rolfe V. A Systematic review of socio-ethical aspects of Massive Online Open Courses. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2020 Dec 1]; 18 (1): 52-71. Available from: http://content.sciendo.com/view/journals/eurodl/18/1/article-p52.xml

26. Sangra A., Gonzalez-Sanmamed M., Anderson T. Metaanalisis de la investigation sobre MOOC en el periodo 2013-2014. Education XXI: revista de la Facultad de Education. 2015; 18 (2): 21-49. (In Spanish)

27. Veletsianos G., Shepherdson P. Who studies MOOCs? Interdisciplinarity in MOOC research and its changes over time. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2020 Dec 23]; 16 (3). Available from: http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/2202

28. Veletsianos G., Shepherdson P. A Systematic analysis and synthesis of the empirical MOOC literature published in 2013-2015. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2020 Nov 11]; 17 (2). Available from: http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/2448

29. Brouns F., Mota J., Morgado L., Jansen D., Fano S., Silva A., et al. A networked learning framework for effective MOOC design: The ECO project approach. In: 8th EDEN Research Workshop Challenges for Research into Open & Distance Learning: Doing Things Better: Doing Better Things. Ed. by Teixeira A. M., Szucs A. Budapest, Hungary: Eden. Oxford, United Kingdom; 2014.

30. Rosewell J., Jansen D. The OpenupEd quality label: Benchmarks for MOOCs. IN-NOQUAL: The International Journal for Innovation and Quality in Learning. 2014; 2 (3): 88-100.

31. Wong J., Baars M., Davis D., Van Der Zee T., Houben G.-J., Paas F. Supporting self-regulated learning in online learning environments and MOOCs: A systematic review. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2020 Nov 19]; 35 (4-5): 356-373. Available from: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10447318.2018.1543084

32. Garaa-Penalvo F. J., Fidalgo-Blanco A., Sein-Echaluce M. L. An adaptive hybrid MOOC model: Disrupting the MOOC concept in higher education. Telematics and Informatics. 2018; 35 (4): 1018-1030.

33. Santos-Hermosa G., Ferran-Ferrer N., Abadal E. Repositories of open educational resources: An assessment of reuse and educational aspects. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2020 Dec 3]; 18 (5). Available from: http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/3063

34. Gil-Jaurena I., Dommguez D. Teachers' roles in light of massive open online courses (MOOCs): Evolution and challenges in higher distance education. International Review of Education [Internet]. 2018 [cited 2020 Dec 28]; 64 (2): 197-219. Available from: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11159-018-9715-0

35. Barbour M. K. The landscape of K-12 online learning: Examining what is known. 3rd ed. In: Handbook of distance education. New York: Routledge; 2013. p. 574-593.

36. Picciano A. G., Seaman J., Shea P., Swan K. Examining the extent and nature of online learning in American K-12 Education: The research initiatives of the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation. The Internet and Higher Education [Internet]. 2012 [cited 2020 Dec 24; 15 (2): 127-135. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1096751611000509

37. Moore J. L., Dickson-Deane C., Galyen K. e-Learning, online learning, and distance learning environments: Are they the same? The Internet and Higher Education [Internet]. 2011 [cited 2020 Nov 29]; 14 (2): 129-135. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1096751610000886

38. Tsai S., Machado P. E-Learning Basics: Essay: E-learning, online learning, webbased learning, or distance learning: unveiling the ambiguity in current terminology. eLearn. 2002; 2002 (7): 3.

39. Shah D. By the numbers: MOOCS in 2016 [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2020 Dec 12]. Available from: https://www.classcentral.com/report/mooc-stats-2016/

40. Clark D. Donald Clark Plan B: MOOCs: Taxonomy of 8 types of MOOC [Internet]. 2013 [cited 2021 Jan 15]. Available from: http://donaldclarkplanb.blogspot.com/2013/04/moocs-taxonomy-of-8-types-of-mooc.html

41. Pérez L., Jordano M., Martin-Cuadrado A. M. Los NOOC para la formacion en competencias digitales del docente universitario. Una experiencia piloto de la Universidad Nacional de Educacion a distancia (UNED). Revista de Education a Distancia (RED) [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2020 Dec 22]; 17 (55). Available from: http://www.um.es/ead/red/55/perez_et_al.pdf (In Spanish)

42. Teclehaimanot B., Marshall H. Faculty members' best practice standards in the design of higher education online courses. In: 39th Annual Proceedings of Selected Research and Development Papers Volume 1; 2016; Las Vegas. Las Vegas; 2016 [cited 2020 Dec 5]; p. 125-135. Available from: https://www.tresystems.com/proceedings/documents/2016_lasvegas_volume1.pdf

43. Demirci N. Kitlesel Açık Çevrimiçi Dersleri (KAÇD) Nedir? Ve Öğrenme İçin Bizlere Neler Vaad Ediyor?: KAÇD’ler Hakkında İnceleme-Değerlendirme Makalesi. Necatibey Eğitim Fakültesi Elektronik Fen ve Matematik Eğitimi Dergisi. Balıkesir Üniversitesi. 2014; (8): 231-256. (In Turkish)

44. Cormier D., Siemens G. The open course: Through the open door--open courses as research, learning, and engagement. EDUCAUSE Review. 2010 [cited 2020 Dec 20]; 45 (4): 30-39. Available from: https://islandscholar.ca/islandora/object/ir%3A20478/datastream/PDF/view

45. Hollands F. M., Tirthali D. MOOCs: Expectations and reality [Internet]. 2014 [cited 2020 Dec 14]. Available from: https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/33728665/MOOCs_Expectations_and_Reality.pdf?1400413525=&response-content-disposition=inline%3B+filename%3D-MOOCs_Expectations_and_Reality_Full_Repo.pdf&Expires=1611176442&Signature=AKt-M928x10RFsDfY-tNlIuTIckytuwdSPFsTk

46. De Notaris D. Reskilling higher education professionals: Skills and workflow in the making of a MOOC. In: Calise M., Kloos C. D., Reich J., Ruiperez-Valiente J. A., Wirsing M. (eds.). Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics). Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2019. p. 145-155.

47. Shah D. The second year of the MOOC: A review of MOOC stats and trends in 2020 [Internet]. 2020 [cited 2020 Dec 20]. Available from: https://www.classcentral.com/report/the-second-year-of-the-mooc/

48. Khan S. What college could be like. Communications of the ACM [Internet]. 2013 [cited 2020 Dec 18]; 56 (1): 41-43. Available from: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2398356.2398370

49. Crotty J. M. Badges lend gravitas to free education revolution. Forbes [Internet]. 2013 [cited 2020 Dec 18]. Available from: https://www.forbes.com/sites/james-marshallcrotty/2013/02/25/new-improved-badges-give-credential-meat-to-mooc-revolution/?sh=378068a7568f

50. Olneck M. R. Insurgent credentials: A challenge to established institutions of higher education? [Internet]. 2012. Available from: https://www.hastac.org/sites/default/files/documents/insurgent_credentials__michael_olneck_2012.pdf

51. Halavais A. Microcredentials on the Open Web. AOIR Selected Papers of Internet Research. 2013; IR14 1-3.

52. The State University of New York. Micro-Credentials at SUNY [Internet]. [cited 2020 Dec 3]. Available from: https://system.suny.edu/academic-affairs/microcredentials

53. Cochran W. G. Sampling Techniques 3rd ed. New York: John Wiey & Sons & Sons; 1977. 448 p.

54. Miles M. B., Huberman A. M. Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. 2nd ed. California: Sage Publications; 1994. 352 p.