Adoption of massive open online courses (MOOCs) for blended learning: the Indian educators’ perspective

References

• Ajjan, H., & Hartshorne, R. (2008). Investigating faculty decisions to adopt Web 2.0 technologies: Theory and empirical tests. The Internet and Higher Education, 11(2), 71–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2008.05.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behaviour. Prentice-Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Al-Atabi, M., & DeBoer, J. (2014). Teaching entrepreneurship using massive open online course (MOOC). Technovation, 34(4), 261–264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2014.01.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Al-Shami, S. A., Sedik, S., Rashid, N., & Hussin, H. (2018). An empirical analysis of MOOC adoption from the perspective of institutional theory. Journal of Advanced Research in Dynamical and Control Systems, 10(6), 332–343.
   Google Scholar
• Andersen, R., & Ponti, M. (2014). Participatory pedagogy in an open educational course: Challenges and opportunities. Distance Education, 35(2), 234–249. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2014.917703
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411–423. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arima, S., Miyakita, G., Yasui, M., & Okawa, K. (2019, October 23–25). Enhancing educators’ social presence in MOOCs: Design of daily video blog. IEEE learning With MOOCS (LWMOOCS), Milwaukee, WI, USA, pp. 36–41.
   Google Scholar
• Arora, N., & Saini, J. R. (2013). A fuzzy probabilistic neural network for student’s Academic performance prediction. International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology, 2(9), 4425–4432.
   Google Scholar
• Bhuasiri, W., Xaymoungkhoun, O., Zo, H., Rho, J. J., & Ciganek, A. P. (2012). Critical success factors for e-learning in developing countries: A comparative analysis between ICT experts and faculty. Computers and Education, 58(2), 843–855. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.10.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bruff, D. O., Fisher, D. H., McEwen, K. E., & Smith, B. E. (2013). Wrapping a MOOC: Student perceptions of an experiment in blended learning. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 9(2), 187–199.
   Google Scholar
• Cangur, S., & Ercan, I. (2015). Comparison of model fit indices used in structural equation modeling under multivariate normality. Journal of Modern Applied Statistical Methods, 14(1), 152–167. https://doi.org/10.22237/jmasm/1430453580
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cha, S. B., & Park, S. Y. (2017). An analysis of structural relationships among university students’ behavioral intention to use MOOC, major relevance, perceived usefulness, and acceptance attitude in agricultural science fields. Journal of Agricultural Education and Human Resource Development, 49(3), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.23840/agehrd.2017.49.3.1
   Google Scholar
• Chakravarty, R., & Kaur, J. (2016). MOOCs in India: Yet to Shine. International Journal of Information Studies and Libraries, 14–21.
   Google Scholar
• Chan, M. M., Plata, R. B., Medina, J. A., Alario-Hoyos, C., Rizzardini, R. H., & De la Roca, M. (2018). Analysis of behavioral intention to Use cloud-based tools in a MOOC: A technology acceptance model approach. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 24(8), 1072–1089.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chauhan, J. (2017). An overview of MOOC in India. International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology, 49(2), 111–120. https://doi.org/10.14445/22312803/IJCTT-V49P117
   Google Scholar
• Chomal, V. S., & Saini, J. R. (2013). A study and analysis of Paradigm Shifts in education triggered by technology. International Journal of Research in Economics and Social Sciences, 3(1), 14–28.
   Google Scholar
• Davis, F. D. (1986). A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: Theory and results [Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology]. Sloan School of Management. https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/15192
   Google Scholar
• Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Jong, P. G., Pickering, J. D., Hendriks, R. A., Swinnerton, B. J., Goshtasbpour, F., & Reinders, M. E. (2020). Twelve tips for integrating massive open online course content into classroom teaching. Medical Teacher, 42(4), 393–397. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2019.1571569
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Devgun, P. (2013). Prospects for success of MOOC in higher education in India. International Journal of Information and Computation Technology, 3(7), 641–646.
   Google Scholar
• Evans, S., & Myrick, J. G. (2015). How MOOC instructors view the pedagogy and purposes of massive open online courses. Distance Education, 36(3), 295–311. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2015.1081736
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Firmin, R., Schiorring, E., Whitmer, J., Willett, T., Collins, E. D., & Sujitparapitaya, S. (2014). Case study: Using MOOCs for conventional college coursework. Distance Education, 35(2), 178–201. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2014.917707
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 95–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.02.001
   Google Scholar
• Ghadiri, K., Qayoumi, M. H., Junn, E., Hsu, P., & Sujitparapitaya, S. (2013). The transformative potential of blended learning using MIT edX’s 6.002 x online MOOC content combined with student team-based learning in class’. Environment, 8(14), 14–29.
   Google Scholar
• Gilbert, J. A., & Flores-Zambada, R. (2011). Development and implementation of a blended teaching course environment. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 7(2), 244–260.
   Google Scholar
• Griffiths, R., Chingos, M., Mulhern, C., & Spies, Richard R. (2014). Interactive online learning on campus: Testing MOOCs and other hybrid formats in the University system of Maryland. Ithaka S+R.
   Google Scholar
• Halan, D. (2005). Blended learning. Journal of Educational Technology, 2(1), 20–24.
   Google Scholar
• Holotescu, C., Grosseck, G., Cretu, V., & Naaji, A. (2014, April 30–May 1). Integrating MOOCs in blended courses. 10th International Scientific Conference eLearning and software for education, Bucharest, Romania, pp. 243–250.
   Google Scholar
• Hong, J. Y., Suh, E. H., & Kim, S. J. (2009). Context-aware systems: A literature review and classification. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(4), 8509–8522. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2008.10.071
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hossain, L., & de Silva, A. (2009). Exploring user acceptance of technology using social networks. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 20(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hitech.2009.02.005
   Google Scholar
• Hsu, J. Y., Chen, C. C., & Ting, P. F. (2018). Understanding MOOC continuance: An empirical examination of social support theory. Interactive Learning Environments, 26(8), 1100–1118. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1446990
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joseph, A. M., & Nath, B. A. (2013, July 22–25). Integration of massive open online education (MOOC) system with in-classroom interaction and assessment and accreditation: An extensive report from a pilot study. Proceedings of the international conference on e-learning, e-business, enterprise information systems, and e-government (EEE), The Steering Committee of The world Congress in computer Science, computer engineering and applied computing (WorldComp), pp. 105.
   Google Scholar
• Kasat, K., Shaikh, N., Chandrachud, M., & Saini, J. R. (2019, November 12–13 ). Impact of flipped classroom on engagement of Post-graduate students under the faculty of social Sciences. Proceedings of 12th Annual International Conference of education, research and innovation (ICERI-2019), Seville, Spain, pp. 7582–7590.
   Google Scholar
• Kim, T., Suh, Y. K., Lee, G., & Choi, B. G. (2010). Modelling roles of task-technology fit and self-efficacy in hotel employees usage behaviours of hotel information systems. International Journal of Tourism Research, 12(6), 709–725. https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.787
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koukis, N., & Jimoyiannis, A. (2019). MOOCS for teacher professional development: Exploring teachers’ perceptions and achievements. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 16(2), 74–91. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-10-2018-0081
   Google Scholar
• Kujur, S., Vinayagam, S. S., Awasthi, H. K., & Murthy, G. R. R. (2019). Study of factors influencing adoption of educational technology in teaching-learning process in agricultural universities in India. International Journal of Education and Management Studies, 9(3), 164–168.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, C. S., Osop, H., Goh, D. H. L., & Kelni, G. (2017). Making sense of comments on YouTube educational videos: A self-directed learning perspective. Online Information Review, 41(5), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-09-2016-0274.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, M. H., & Tsai, C. C. (2010). Exploring teachers’ perceived self-efficacy and technological pedagogical content knowledge with respect to educational use of the world wide web. Instructional Science, 38(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-008-9075-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, Y., Duan, Y., Fu, Z., & Alford, P. (2012). An empirical study on behavioral intention to reuse e-learning systems in rural China. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(6), 933–948. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01261.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, C. K., & Wong, T. M. (2019). Advancing teaching with massive open online courses: A review of case studies. International Journal of Innovation and Learning, 25(2), 141–155. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJIL.2019.097660
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liyanagunawardena, T. R., Adams, A. A., & Williams, S. A. (2013). OOCs: A systematic study of the published literature 2008–2012. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 14(3), 202–227. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v14i3.1455
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mabuan, R. A. (2018). Using blogs in teaching tertiary ESL writing. English Review: Journal of English Education, 6(2), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.25134/erjee.v6i2.1238
   Google Scholar
• Molla, A., & Licker, P. (2001). E-commerce systems success: An attempt to extend and respecify the DeLone and McLean model of IS success. Journal of Electronic Commerce Success, 2(4), 131–141.
   Google Scholar
• Morris, N. P. (2014). In M. Baptista Nunes, M. McPherson, M. Baptista Nunes, & M. McPherson (Eds.), How digital technologies, blended learning and MOOCs will impact the future of higher education. IADIS Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nikou, S. A., & Economides, A. A. (2019). Factors that influence behavioral intention to use mobile-based assessment: A STEM teachers’ perspective. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(2), 587–600. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12609
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ospina-Delgado, J., García-Benau, M. A., & Zorio-Grima, A. (2016). Massive open online courses for IFRS education: A point of view of Spanish Accounting Educators. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 228, 356–361. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.07.053
   Google Scholar
• Phatak, D. B. (2015, January 5–8). Adopting MOOCs for quality engineering education in India. Proceedings of the International Conference on Transformations in engineering education, Springer, New Delhi, pp. 11–23.
   Google Scholar
• Pujar, S. M., & Tadasad, P. G. (2016). MOOCs–an opportunity for international collaboration in LIS education. New Library World, 117(5/6), 360–373. https://doi.org/10.1108/NLW-07-2015-0048
   Google Scholar
• Pynoo, B., Devolder, P., Tondeur, J., Van Braak, J., Duyck, W., & Duyck, P. (2011). Predicting secondary school teachers’ acceptance and use of a digital learning environment: A cross-sectional study. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(1), 568–575. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.10.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rao, P. N., Komaraiah, M., & Reddy, P. N. (2015). A case for MOOCs in Indian higher education system. Journal of Engineering Education Transformations, 29(1), 15–25. https://doi.org/10.16920/jeet/2015/v29i1/77104
   Google Scholar
• Ray, A., Bala, P. K., & Dasgupta, S. A. (2019). Role of authenticity and perceived benefits of online courses on technology based career choice in India: A modified technology adoption model based on career theory. International Journal of Information Management, 47, 140–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.01.015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richter, S. L., & Krishnamurthi, M. (2014). Preparing faculty for teaching a MOOC: Recommendations from research and experience. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 4(5), 411–415. https://doi.org/10.7763/IJIET.2014.V4.440
   Google Scholar
• Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations. Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rubaai, N., & Hashim, H. (2019). Polytechnic ESL lecturers’ acceptance of using massive open online course(MOOC) for teaching English as a second language (ESL). International Journal of Innovative Technology and Exploring Engineering, 8(9), 114–121. https://doi.org/10.35940/ijitee.I7530.078919
   Google Scholar
• Ryan, L. (2013). MOOCs – Massive Open Online Courses. Retrieved March 20, 2020, from https://www.efmd.org/blog/view/250- white-paper-moocs-massive-open-online-courses.
   Google Scholar
• Saeed, K. A., Hwang, Y., & Yi, M. Y. (2003). Toward an integrative framework for online Consumer behavior research: A meta-analysis approach. Journal of End User Computing, 15(4), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.4018/joeuc.2003100101
   Google Scholar
• Shah, R., & Goldstein, S. (2006). Use of structural equation modeling in operations management research: Looking back and forward. Journal of Operations Management, 24(5), 148–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2005.05.001
   Google Scholar
• Shao, Z. (2018). Examining the impact mechanism of social psychological motivations on individuals’ continuance intention of MOOCs: The moderating effect of gender. Internet Research, 28(1), 232–250. https://doi.org/10.1108/IntR-11-2016-0335
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharpe, R., Benfield, G., Roberts, G. and Francis, R. (2006). The undergraduate experience of blended e-learning: A review of UK literature and practice. The Higher Education Academy. Retrieved March 19, 2020, from https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/system/files/sharpe_benfield_roberts_francis_0.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Siemens, G. (2013, October 21). What are MOOCs doing to open education? Presented at Open Access Week. Retrieved July 7, 2015, from http://openaccess.athabascau.ca/events.php
   Google Scholar
• Teo, T., Lee, C. B., & Chai, C. S. (2008). Understanding pre-service teachers’ computer attitudes: Applying and extending the technology acceptance model. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(2), 128–143. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2007.00247.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teo, T., Sang, G., Mei, B., & Hoi, C. K. W. (2019). Investigating pre-service teachers’ acceptance of Web 2.0 technologies in their future teaching: A Chinese perspective. Interactive Learning Environments, 27(4), 530–546. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1489290
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teo, T., & Zhou, M. (2014). Explaining the intention to use technology among university students: A structural equation modeling approach. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 26(2), 124–142. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-014-9080-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tseng, T. H., Lin, S., Wang, Y. S., & Liu, H. X. (2019). Investigating teachers’ adoption of MOOCs: The perspective of UTAUT2. Interactive Learning Environments, 27(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1674888
   Google Scholar
• UNDP India. (2016). Human development report. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wikipedia (2020). Massive Open Online Courses. Retrieved February 19, 2020, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massive_open_online_course,2020
   Google Scholar
• Wright, R. (2014). The Death of MOOCs has been greatly exaggerate. Retrieved February 18, 2020, from http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2014/04/mooc_completion_rates_don_t_matter.Html.
   Google Scholar
• Wu, B., & Chen, X. (2017). Continuance intention to use MOOCs: Integrating the technology acceptance model (TAM) and task technology fit (TTF) model. Computers in Human Behavior, 67, 221–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.10.028
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu, B., & Zhang, C. Y. (2014). Empirical study on continuance intentions towards ELearning 2.0 systems. Behaviour & Information Technology, 33(10), 1027–1038. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2014.934291
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang, M., Shao, Z., Liu, Q., & Liu, C. (2017). Understanding the quality factors that influence the continuance intention of students toward participation in MOOCs. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65(5), 1195–1214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-017-9513-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang, H. H., & Su, C. H. (2017). Learner behaviour in a MOOC practice-oriented course: In empirical study integrating TAM and TPB. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(5), 35–63. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v18i5.2991
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yuan, L. and Powell, S.J. (2013). MOOCs and open education: Implications for higher education. A white paper. JISC CETIS. Retrieved February 18, 2020, from http://publications.cetis.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/MOOCs-and-Open-Education.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Zawacki-Richter, O., & Naidu, S. (2016). Mapping research trends from 35 years of publications in distance education. Distance Education, 37(3), 245–269. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2016.1185079
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, M., Yin, S., Luo, M., & Yan, W. (2017). Learner control, user characteristics, platform difference, and their role in adoption intention for MOOC learning in China. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 33(1), 114–133. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.2722
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou, M. (2016). Chinese university students’ acceptance of MOOCs: A self-determination perspective. Computers and Education, 92-93, 194–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.10.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar