.png)
.png)
Email this article 
Cognitive modeling as a tool for selecting massive open online courses for independent work of students of general engineering areas of training in physics
https://doi.org/10.20913/2618-7515-2023-2-7
Abstract
Introduction. The article is devoted to the development of an adaptive mechanism for managing the independent work of students of general engineering areas when studying a physics course by using massive open online courses based on cognitive modeling technology. Purpose setting. The problem of choosing the factors that determine the feasibility of choosing massive open online courses for self-study of physics is being studied, and the sensitivity of the educational result to changes in influencing factors has been experimentally assessed. Methodology and methods of the study. The complex and weakly structured task of assessing the feasibility of using massive open online courses in teaching physics to students is formalized by constructing cognitive maps that allow modeling changes in the academic result with an impulsive change in factors and in the formation of scenarios. The research methodology is based on the qualitative principles of graph theory, PEST methodology and SWOT analysis. Results. A cognitive model is presented in the form of a functional graph and a simulation experiment was carried out to test the adequacy of the formed cognitive model. Conclusion. The results obtained should subsequently become the ground for the formation of a scientific basis for managing the quality of education in terms of selecting massive open online courses for independent work of students and increasing its both internal and external efficiency.
About the Author
O. A. ChikovaRussian Federation
Olga A. Chikova – Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Professor of the Department of Physics, Institute of Fundamental Education
19 Mira Str., Yekaterinburg, 620002
References
1. Zawacki-Richter O., Bozkurt A., Alturki U., Aldraiweesh A. What research says about MOOCs – an explorative content analysis. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 2018, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 242 – 259.
2. Zhu M., Bonk C. J., Sari A. R. Instructor experiences designing MOOCs in higher education: pedagogical, resource, and logistical considerations and challenges. Online Learning Journal, 2018, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 203 – 241.
3. Zakharova U. S., Tanasenko K. I. MOOCs in higher education: advantages and pitfalls for instructors. Voprosy obrazovaniya, 2019, no. 3, pp. 176 – 202. (In Russ.).
4. Roshchina Ya. M., Roshchin S. Yu., Rudakov V. N. Demand for massive open online courses (MOOCs): experience of Russian education. Voprosy obrazovaniya, 2018, no. 1, pp. 174 – 199. (In Russ.).
5. Sorokova M. G. E-course as blended learning digital educational resource in university. Psikhologicheskaya nauka i obrazovanie, 2020, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 36 – 50. (In Russ.).
6. Moskalev A. K., Seryukova I. V., Dolgopolova M. V. The use of massive open online courses in teaching physics to bachelors of general engineering. Vestnik Krasnoyarskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta im. V. P. Astaf'eva, 2019, no. 1, pp. 26 – 34. (In Russ.).
7. Semenova T. V., Vilkova K. A. Types of MOOCs integration into universities» educational process. Universitetskoe upravlenie: praktika i analiz, 2017, vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 114 – 126. (In Russ.).
8. Vil'mova S. I., Zamulin I. S. The use of MOOCs in the study of general physics. Psikhologiya, sotsiologiya i pedagogika, 2016, no. 8. URL: https://psychology.snauka.ru/2016/08/7062 (accessed 16.04.2023). (In Russ.).
9. Kaver K. K., Kaver A. K., Glotova A. V. The use of mass open online courses for organizing independent work in teaching physics. Lomonosov – 2022: materialy XXIX Mezhdunar. nauch. konf. studentov, aspirantov i molodykh uchenykh. Sevastopol, 2022, pp. 139 – 140. (In Russ.).
10. Yukhanov Yu. V., Semenikhin A. I., Semenikhina D. V. Methodological support of online courses on teaching physics to students in higher education institutions. Izvestiya Volgogradskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta, 2020, no. 4, pp. 44 – 53. (In Russ.).
11. Timchenko S. L., Semikolenov A. V., Chuev A. S., Zadorozhnyi N. A. Online physics course on the digital education platform of a technical university. Tsifrovye tekhnologii v inzhenernom obrazovanii: novye trendy i opyt vnedreniya: sb. tr. Mezhdunar. foruma, 2020, pp. 118 – 122. (In Russ.).
12. Andreev A. A. Assessment of the quality of online courses. Territoriya nauki, 2015, no. 1, pp. 20 – 26. (In Russ.).
13. Alemán de la Garza L. Y., Sancho-Vinuesa T., Gómez Zermeño M. G. Indicators of pedagogical quality for the design of a Massive Open Online Course for teacher training. RUSC. Universities and Knowledge Society Journal, 2015, vol. 12, no. 1, pp 104 – 118. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7238/rusc.v12i1.2260.
14. Юань Л., Пауэлл С. MOOCs and open education: significance for higher education. Open Education Network. 2013. URL: https://open-education.net/services/mook-i-otkrytoe-obrazovanie-znachenie-dlya-vysshego-obrazovaniya/ (accessed 03.04.2023). (In Russ.).
15. Siemens G. Connectivism: a learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2004, vol. 2, iss. 1, pp. 3 – 10.
16. Poce A., Amenduni F., Re M. R., De Medio C. Establishing a MOOC quality assurance framework – a case study. Open Praxis, 2019, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 451 – 460.
17. Karasik A. A., Larionova V. A., Kuz'mina A. V. Quality assessment system of online courses and virtual academic mobility. Novye informatsionnye tekhnologii v obrazovanii i nauke, 2018, no. 1, pp. 65 – 72. (In Russ.).
18. Gritsova O. A., Tissen E. V. Quality assessment of online learning in regional higher education systems. Ekonomika regiona, 2021, vol. 17, iss. 3, pp. 929 – 943. (In Russ.).
19. Farrow R., Ferguson R., Weller M., Pitt R., Sanzgiri J., Habib M. Assessment and recognition of MOOCs: the state of the art. Journal of Innovation in Polytechnic Education, 2021, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 15 – 26.
20. Luchko O. N., Marenko V. A. The study of aspects of the education quality using the methodology of cognitive modeling. Obrazovatel»nye tekhnologii, 2015, no. 1, pp. 69 – 75. (In Russ.).
21. Makarova E. A., Zakieva E. Sh., Gabdullina E. R. Education quality management on the basis of fuzzy cognitive modeling. Sovremennye naukoemkie tekhnologii, 2018, no. 12 – 2, pp. 303 – 307. (In Russ.).
22. Teploukhov A. V., Chikova O. A., Sartakov I. V. Cognitive modeling of the quality management system of distance learning of pupils in the digital educational environment. Vestnik pedagogicheskikh innovatsii, 2021, no. 3, pp. 64 – 76. (In Russ.).
23. Tyumentseva E. Yu., Abramchenko N. V., Shamis V. A., Mukhametdinova S. Kh. Cognitive modeling the level of university students' perceptions of distance learning in the COVID-19 pandemic. Science for Education Today, 2022, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 74 – 91. (In Russ.).
Supplementary files
For citation: Chikova O.A. Cognitive modeling as a tool for selecting massive open online courses for independent work of students of general engineering areas of training in physics. Professional education in the modern world. 2023;13(2):255-266. https://doi.org/10.20913/2618-7515-2023-2-7
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
