Self-motivation challenges for student involvement in the Open Educational Movement with MOOC

Brenda Jeanett García Espinosa, Gloria Concepción Tenorio Sepúlveda, María Soledad Ramírez Montoya


This article attempts to answer the questions: What are the challenges, problems and obstacles of involving less self-motivated students in MOOCs and how do they relate to their learning connectivism? The correlations between connectivism and contextualized learning through a formative experience of the Open Educational Movement was analyzed in order to propose strategies that result in greater perseverance, active participation and retention of less self-motivated students in MOOCs. A mixed method approach was used to survey students, interview students and coordinators, and analyze relevant documents. The findings were classified as (1) Challenges: self-motivation, self-regulation abilities, extra time invested, release requirements, goals and inductive activities before the course opening, unsatisfactory identification of students, difficult activities, feedback monitoring and a platform incompatible with balancing its use with that of social networks; (2) Problems: limited information and communication technology skills, difficult feedback research in forums, uncertain peer feedback when not theory-based or scaffolded by teachers, scarce theoretical support in evidence portfolios and a lack of means to help low self-motivated or self-regulated students; (3) Main contextual obstacles: some students cannot count on their employers’ support or continuous technology access, some students basic wellbeing needs are not met, and inability to contextualize learning; (4) Connectivism: students’ motivation in the MOOC content and their expanding knowledge networks. Based on these findings, a MOOC design requirement template aimed at supporting students’ self-motivation and self-regulation through connectivism is provided.


self-motivation, open education movement, MOOCs, e-learning, connectivism, contextualized learning


Aiken, L. (2003). Tests psicológicos y evaluación. 11a ed. México, D. F.: Pearson Educación.

Carr, D. (2013). Udacity CEO says MOOC ‘magic formula’ emerging. Informationweek-Online. Retrieved from

Collins, K. (2003). Advanced sampling designs in mixed research: current practices an emerging trends in the social and behavioral sciences. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research (pp. 353-377). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Contreras, Y., & Lozano, A. (2012). Aprendizaje auto-regulado como competencia para el aprovechamiento de los estilos de aprendizaje en alumnos de educación superior. Revista de Estilos de Aprendizaje, 10(10), 114-147. Retrieved from

Creswell, J., & Plano, V. (2011). Designing and conducting Mixed Method Research. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Coughlan, T., & Perryman, L. A. (2013). Beyond the Ivory Tower: A Model for Nurturing Informal Learning and Development Communities through Open Educational Practices. RUSC. Universities and Knowledge Society Journal, 10(1), 135-150. Retrieved from doi: 10.7238/rusc.v10i1.1586

Downes, S. (2012). Connectivism and Connective Knowledge: essays on meaning and learning networks. Ottawa: National Research Council Canada. Retrieved from

Evans, E., Burritt, R., & Guthrie, J. (2013). The Virtual University: Impact on Australian Accounting and Business Education. Sydney, Australia: Institute of Chartered Accountants Australia. Retrieved from

Farías, G., & Ramírez, M. (2010). Desarrollo de cualidades reflexivas de profesores en formación inicial a través de portafolios electrónicos. Revista Mexicana de Investigación Educativa, 25(44), 141-162. Retrieved from

Fisher, M., & Baird, D. (2005). Online learning design that fosters student support, self-regulation, and retention. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 22(2), 88-107. doi: 10.1108/10650740510587100

Giroux, S., & Tremblay, G. (2009). Metodología de las ciencias humanas. México D. F.: Fondo de Cultura Económica.

Martin, N. (2012). MOOCs are massive. Training & Development, 39(5), 32-33.

Molina, J., & Rodrigo, M. (2009). Estadística descriptiva en Psicología. Valencia, Spain: University of Valencia. Retrieved from

Mupinga, D., Nora, R., & Yaw, D. (2006). The learning styles, expectations, and needs of online students. College Teaching, 54(1), 185-189. doi: 10.3200/ctch.54.1.185-189

Niemiec, C., & Ryan, R. (2009). Autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the classroom: Applying self-determination theory to educational practice. Theory and Research in Education, 7(2), 133-144. doi: 10.1177/1477878509104318

Olcott, Jr. D. (2013). New Pathways to Learning: Leveraging the Use of OERs to Support Non-formal Education. RUSC. Universities and Knowledge Society Journal, 10(1), 151-169. Retrieved from doi: 10.7238/rusc.v10i1.1562

Onwuegbuzie, J., Burke, R., & Collins, K. (2011). Assessing legitimation in mixed research: a new Framework. Quality & Quantity, 45(6), 1253-1271. doi: 10.1007/s11135-009-9289-9

Ormrod, J. (2005). Aprendizaje humano. 4a. ed. Madrid, Spain: Pearson Educación.

Ramírez, M. (2013). Competencias Docentes y Prácticas Educativas Abiertas en la Educación a Distancia. Monterrey, Mexico: LULU. Retrieved from

Ramírez, M., & Burgos, J. (2013a). Innovación educativa con recursos abiertos. Retrieved from

Ramírez, M., & Burgos, J. (2013b). Sesión 2 de participantes del curso Innovación Educativa con Recursos Abiertos-Tema de la sesión: Movilizando prácticas educativas abiertas: acciones [video]. 9-26-13 Hangout session. Retrieved from

Ramírez, M., & Burgos, J. (2013c). Innovación educativa con recursos abiertos. Unpublished resource from MOOC: Innovación educativa con recursos abiertos.

Ransdell, M. (2009). Designscholar: Examining creative thinking in an online learning community for interior design graduate students [Doctoral dissertation], University of Florida. Retrieved from

Sangrá, A., & Wheeler, S. (2013). New Informal Ways of Learning: Or Are We Formalizing the Informal? RUSC. Universities and Knowledge Society Journal, 10(1), 107-115. Retrieved from doi: 10.7238/rusc.v10i1.1689

Shroff, R., Vogel, D., & Coombes, J. (2008). Assessing Individual-level Factors Supporting Student Intrinsic Motivation in Online Discussions: A Qualitative Study. Journal of Information Systems Education, 19(1), 111-126.

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

Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2003). Overview of Contemporary Issues in Mixed Methods Research. In: A. Tashakkori and C. Teddlie (eds.), Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research (pp. 353-377). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Valenzuela, J. (2006). Evaluación de las instituciones educativas. México D. F.: Trillas.

Valenzuela, J., & Flores, M. (2012). Fundamentos de investigación educativa. Vols. 2 & 3, [eBook]. Monterrey, Mexico: Editorial Digital Tecnológico de Monterrey.

Wolters, Ch. (2010). Self-regulated learning and the 21st-century competencies. University of Houston, Department of Educational Psychology. Retrieved from

Wolters, Ch., Pintrich, P., & Karabenick, S. (2003). Assessing Academic Self-regulated Learning. Conference on Indicators of Positive Development: Definitions, Measures, and Prospective Validity. Retrieved from



  • There are currently no refbacks.

 Universitat Oberta de Catalunya. eLearn Center

RUSC. Universities and Knowledge Society Journal is an e-journal edited by the Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (Barcelona).

Creative Commons
The texts published in this journal are – unless indicated otherwise – covered by the Creative Commons Spain Attribution 3.0 licence. You may copy, distribute, transmit and adapt the work, provided you attribute it (authorship, journal name, publisher) in the manner specified by the author(s) or licensor(s). The full text of the licence can be consulted here: