Volume 7, Issue 1 (3-2022)
IJREE 2022, 7(1): 86-98 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Shrestha S, Gnawali L, Laudari S. Issues of Participant Retention in an Online Course for English as a Foreign Language Teachers. IJREE 2022; 7 (1)
URL: http://ijreeonline.com/article-1-645-en.html
URL: http://ijreeonline.com/article-1-645-en.html
School of Applied Language and Intercultural Studies (SALIS), Dublin City University
Abstract: (3635 Views)
Online courses are popular around the world these days as people can access learning being in different times and spaces. At the same time, the retention of participants in any online course is always challenging. This qualitative case study investigated the issues related to participant retention in an online course and explored the effective ways to retain the participants in such courses. The data were collected through the interviews conducted with 12 teachers who partly or wholly participated in a year-long online course. Teacher participants’ online communication exchanges on Edmodo and Viber platforms during the course period also served as data for this study. The Edmodo and Viber extracts were originally in English while the interviews were conducted in Nepali; therefore, in the process of analysis, some key extracts were translated, especially focusing on the message they communicated. The findings based on thematic analysis reveal that the issues related to retention include facilitators’ delayed response, poor activity design and inappropriate selection of web tools, and need for additional time among others. This study is expected to assist course designers, institutions, and organizations that run online courses as well as teachers who plan to run and join online courses as they can be informed of the issues that play a role in the retention of participants in online courses.
References
1. Bainbridge, S. (2013). A pedagogical model for an open university in Nepal [Doctoral dissertation, Athabasca University]. https://dt.athabascau.ca/jspui/bitstream/10791/33/4/SusanBainbridgeFinal.pdf
2. Bastola, P., & Ameen, A. (2017). Toward harnessing web-based technology in developing distance education in Nepal: Reviewing the barriers and opportunities. In 18th International Conference on IT Applications and Management (ITAM18) (p. 32).
3. Bawa, P. (2016). Retention in online courses: Exploring issues and solutions - A literature review. SAGE Open, 6(1), [DOI:10.1177/2158244015621777]
4. Bornschlegl, M., & Cashman, D. (2019). Considering the role of the distance student experience in student satisfaction and retention. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 34(2), 139-155. [DOI:10.1080/02680513.2018.1509695]
5. Burns, M. (2013). Staying or leaving? Designing for persistence in an online educator training programme in Indonesia. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 28(2), 141-152. [DOI:10.1080/02680513.2013.851023]
6. Datt, G., & Singh, G. (2021). Learners' satisfaction with the website performance of an open and distance learning institution: A case study. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 22(1), 1-20. [DOI:10.19173/irrodl.v22i1.5097]
7. Flyvbjerg, B. (2011). Case study. In N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (pp. 301-316). Sage.
8. Friðriksdóttir, K. (2019). The effect of tutor-specific and other motivational factors on student retention on Icelandic Online. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 34(5-6), 1-22. [DOI:10.1080/09588221.2019.1633357]
9. Hone, K. S., & El Said, G. R. (2016). Exploring the factors affecting MOOC retention: A survey study. Computers & Education, 98, 157-168. [DOI:10.1016/j.compedu.2016.03.016]
10. Jordan, K. (2015). Massive open online course completion rates revisited: Assessment, length and attrition. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(3), 341-358. [DOI:10.19173/irrodl.v16i3.2112]
11. Khalid, A., Lundqvist, K., & Yates, A. (2020). Recommender systems for MOOCs: A systematic literature survey (January 1, 2012-July 12, 2019). The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 21(4), 255-291. [DOI:10.19173/irrodl.v21i4.4643]
12. Khan, R. (2020). Emergency remote teaching at higher education in Bangladesh: Overcoming barriers and the way forward. Paper presented at the Nepal English Language Teachers' Association (NELTA) International Virtual Think-in 2020, Nepal
13. Liyanagunawardena, T. R., Williams, S., & Adams, A. A. (2014). The impact and reach of MOOCs: a developing countries' perspective. eLearning Papers, 38-46. http://centaur.reading.ac.uk/32452/
14. Otto, D., Bollmann, A., Becker, S., & Sander, K. (2018). It's the learning, stupid! Discussing the role of learning outcomes in MOOCs. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 33(3), 203-220. [DOI:10.1080/02680513.2018.1486183]
15. Packham, G., Jones, G., Miller, C., & Thomas, B. (2004). E-learning and retention: Key factors influencing student withdrawal. Education & Training, 46(6/7), 335-342. [DOI:10.1108/00400910410555240]
16. Padilla Rodriguez, B. C., Armellini, A., & Rodriguez Nieto, M. C. (2020). Learner engagement, retention and success: why size matters in massive open online courses (MOOCs). Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 35(1), 46-62. [DOI:10.1080/02680513.2019.1665503]
17. Pangeni, S. K. (2016). Open and distance learning: Cultural practices in Nepal. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-learning, 19(2), 32-45. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1138171.pdf [DOI:10.1515/eurodl-2016-0006]
18. Patton, M. Q. (2014). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice [4th ed]. Sage.
19. Petronzi, D., & Hadi, M. (2016). Exploring the factors associated with MOOC engagement, retention and the wider benefits for learners. European Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 19(2), 112-129. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1138117.pdf [DOI:10.1515/eurodl-2016-0011]
20. Pierrakeas, C., Xenos, M., Panagiotakopoulos, C., & Vergidis, D. (2004). A comparative study of dropout rates and causes for two different distance education courses. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 5(2), 1-13. [DOI:10.19173/irrodl.v5i2.183]
21. Saldaña, J. (2015). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage.
22. Salmon, G. (2004). E-tivities: The key to active online learning. Kogan Page. [DOI:10.4324/9780203646380-6]
23. Samuel, A. (2020). Zones of agency: Understanding online faculty experiences of presence. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 21(4), 79-95. [DOI:10.19173/irrodl.v21i4.4905]
24. Shakya, M., Shrestha, S., & Manandhar, R. (2016). Awareness of MOOC among college students: A study of Far Western Region of Nepal. Paper presented at International Conference on IT4D, Kathmandu.
25. Shakya, S., Sharma, G., & Thapa, K. B. (2017). State education system with E-learning in Nepal: Impact and challenges. Journal of the Institute of Engineering, 13(1), 10-19. doi:10.3126/JIE.V13I1.20344 [DOI:10.3126/jie.v13i1.20344]
26. Sharma, R. (2020). Education in India in the post COVID: Challenges and strategies. Paper presented at the Nepal English Language Teachers' Association (NELTA) International Virtual Think-in 2020, Nepal.
27. Shrestha, S., Haque, S., Dawadi, S., & Giri, R. A. (2021). Preparations for and practices of online education during the Covid-19 pandemic: A study of Bangladesh and Nepal. Education and Information Technologies, 27, 243-265. [DOI:10.1007/s10639-021-10659-0]
28. Simons, H. (2009). Case study in research in practice. Sage. [DOI:10.4135/9781446268322]
29. Sunar, A., White, S., Abdullah, N., & Davis, H. (2016). How learners' interactions sustain engagement: A MOOC case study. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 10(4), 475-487. [DOI:10.1109/TLT.2016.2633268]
30. Willging, P. A., & Johnson, S. D. (2004). Factors that influence students' decision to drop out of online courses. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Network, 13(3), 115-127. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ862360.pdf [DOI:10.24059/olj.v13i3.1659]
31. Zou, B. (2020). Challenges and solutions in online English teaching in China. Paper presented at the Nepal English Language Teachers' Association (NELTA) International Virtual Think-in 2020, Nepal.
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
