General issues of artificial general intelligence

Online education industry has been growing strongly in recent years. The market for educational platforms that provides access to online learning is growing every year. With the increasing growth of online course enrollment, the interest of researchers to study the effectiveness of online learning is increasing. This paper summarizes the results of a study of online courses on the Stepik educational platform. The courses selected for analysis were divided into three groups according to the parameter of learners’ “reachability” to the end of training. The process of course completion by 36226 online course participants was analyzed. The main purpose of the study was to identify the factors affecting the yield parameter. The data obtained in the study suggest that the design of online courses does not affect the learning effectiveness and the yield parameter. We attribute such results to the fact that “instructional presence” and “social presence” are almost completely absent in the online learning process, as interaction with the instructor and other learners is minimized. “Cognitive presence” formed through interaction with the educational material is insufficient to form the level of engagement necessary to complete the learning. The study also identified the main points of “falling out” of learners from the educational process and formulated the strategies that learners resort to. The obtained data indicate that the parameter of profitability and effectiveness of online learning is most influenced by the qualitative (psychological) criteria of learners. The conclusion of this article suggests the main directions for further research, which can contribute to obtaining more complete data on the factors affecting the effectiveness of online learning.

1. Valeeva N. G., Rudneva M. A. Massive open online courses in teaching students of the environmental faculty English for professional communication // Bulletin of Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia. Series: Ecology and life safety. 2016. № 3.

2. Veledinskaya S. B., Dorofeeva M. Yu. B. B., Dorofeeva M. Yu. Blended learning: secrets of effectiveness // Educational Technologies. - 2015. - №. 3. - С. 8-13.

3. Geyzhan N. F., Simakova T. A. Distance learning in the aspect of labor psychology of teachers and students // Vestnik of St. Petersburg University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia. - 2020. - №. 3 (87).

4. Gordeeva T. O., Sychev O. A., Osin E. N. Internal and external educational motivation of students: their sources and influence on psychological well-being // Voprosy psychologii. N. Internal and external educational motivation of students: their sources and influence on psychological well-being // Voprosy Psychologii. 2013. № 1. С. 35-45.

5. Ershova R. V. Quantitative and quality criteria of effectiveness of online learning // Digital Society as a Cultural and Historical Context of Human Development. - 2022. - С. 107112.

6. Klimenskikh M. V., Lebedeva Y. V., Maltsev A. V., Saveliev V. В.. Psychological factors of effective online learning of students //Perspectives of Science and Education. - 2019. - №. 6(42).

7. Kuzmina K. Е. Psychological features of self-organization and goal-setting activity in the conditions of online learning // Development of scientific and technical creativity of children and youth. - 2020. - С. 195-199.

8. Levadnaya M. O., Stankevich E. M. To the problem of psychological features of online adult education //Fundamental and Applied Science: state and trends of development. - 2020. - С. 61-68.

9. Matsuta V. V. et al. Exploring the potential of social networks to identify gifted high school students //Psychology and Psychotechniques. - 2017. - №. 4. - С. 104-121.

10. Nai D. V. K., Oryol E. A., Kochergina E.. V. Factors” Big Five” as psychological predictors of academic performance of university students //Psychological Studies: electronic scientific journal. - 2013. - Т. 6. - №. 27. - С. 4.

11. Pekker P. L. Measuring the effectiveness of mass open online courses: quantitative and qualitative criteria // Higher Education Today. - 2018. - №. 8.

12. Arens A. K., Marsh H. W., Pekrun R., Lichtenfeld S., Murayama K., vom Hofe R.. Math self-concept, grades, and achievement test scores: long-term reciprocal effects across five waves and three achievement tracks // Journal of Educational Psychology. 2016. Vol. 109. No. 5. P. 621-634.

13. Broadbent J. Academic success is about self-efficacy rather than frequency of use of the learning management system // Australasian Journal of Educational Technology. 2016. Vol. 32(4). P. 38-49.

14. Brown B. W., Liedholm C. E. Can web courses replace the classroom in principles of microeconomics? //American Economic Review. - 2002. - Т. 92. - №. 2. - С. 444-448.

15. Carr N. The shallows: What the Internet is doing to our brains. - WW Norton & Company, 2011.

16. Cheng H. C., Lehman J., Armstrong P.. Comparison of performance and attitude in traditional and computer conferencing classes //American Journal of Distance Education. - 1991. - Т. 5. - №. 3. - С. 51-64.

17. Chirikov I. et al. Online education platforms scale college STEM instruction with equivalent learning outcomes at lower cost //Science advances. - 2020. - Т. 6. - №. 15. - P. eaay5324.

18. Chou T. L., Wu J. J., Tsai C. C. Research trends and features of critical thinking studies in e-learning environments: A review //Journal of educational computing research. - 2019. - Т. 57. - №. 4. - С. 1038-1077.

19. Clark D. MOOCs: Course Completion is the Wrong Measure of Course Success-Class Central. Retrieved May 28, 2018. - 2016.

20. Clark R. E. Reconsidering research on learning from media //Review of educational research. - 1983. - Т. 53. - №. 4. - С. 445-459.

21. Coppola N. W., Hiltz S. R., Rotter N. G. Becoming a virtual professor: Pedagogical roles and asynchronous learning networks // Journal of management information systems. - 2002. - Т. 18. - №. 4. - С. 169-189.

22. Eom S. B., Ashill N. J. A system’s view of e-learning success model //Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education. - 2018. - Т. 16. - №. 1. - С. 42-76.

23. Eshet-Alkalai, Yoram. (2004). Digital Literacy: A Conceptual Framework for Survival Skills in the Digital Era. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia. 13.

24. Fallah M. H., Ubell R. Blind scores in a graduate test: Conventional compared with web-based outcomes //ALN magazine. - 2000. - Т. 4. - №. 2. - С. 1-5.

25. Fischer C. et al. Mining big data in education: Affordances and challenges //Review of Research in Education. - 2020. - Т. 44. - №. 1. - С. 130-160.

26. Fredericksen E. et al. Student satisfaction and perceived learning with online courses-principles and examples from the SUNY learning network. - 1999.

27. Freeman M. A., Capper J. M. Exploiting the web for education: An anonymous asynchronous role simulation //Australasian Journal of Educational Technology. - 1999. - Т. 15. - №. 1.

28. Garrison D. R., Anderson T., Archer W. Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education //American Journal of distance education. - 2001. - Т. 15. - №. 1. - С. 7-23.

29. Hiltz S. R. et al. Measuring the importance of collaborative learning for the effectiveness of ALN: A multi-measure, multi-method approach // Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks. - 2000. - Т. 4. - №. 2. - С. 103-125.

30. Kennedy D. M., Fox B. ‘Digital natives’: an Asian perspective for using learning technologies //International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology. - 2013. - Т. 9. - №. 1. - С. 64.

31. Khare K., Lam H., Khare, A. Educational data mining (EDM): Researching impact on online business education // On the line: Business education in the digital age. - 2017. - Р. 3753. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-62776-2_3.

32. Kirkpatrick D., Kirkpatrick J. Evaluating training programs: The four levels. - Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2006.

33. Kozma R. B. Robert Kozma’s counterpoint theory of “learning with media.” //Learning from media: Arguments, analysis and evidence. - 2001. - С. 137-178.

34. Molnár G., Sik D., Szűts Z. Use of big data in educational efficiency analysis //Re-Imaging Learning Environments: Proceedings of the European Distance and E-Learning Network 2016 Annual Conference. - 2016. - С. 440-447.

35. Ophir E., Nass C., Wagner A. D. Cognitive control in media multitaskers //Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. - 2009. - Т. 106. - №. 37. - С. 15583-15587.

36. Parker D., Gemino A. Moving a University Toward On-line Learning: Opportunities, Challenges, and Technologies //Educational Innovation in Economics and Business. - Springer, Dordrecht, 2004. - С. 61-76.

37. Peechapol C. et al. An Exploration of Factors Influencing Self-Efficacy in Online Learning: A Systematic Review //International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning. - 2018. - Т. 13. - №. 9.

38. Picciano A. G. et al. Beyond student perceptions: Issues of interaction, presence, and performance in an online course //Journal of Asynchronous learning networks. - 2002. - Т. 6. - №. 1. - С. 21-40.

39. Prensky M. Digital natives, digital immigrants part 1 //On the horizon. - 2001. - Т. 9. - №. 5. - С. 1-6.

40. Salomon G. Interaction of media, cognition, and learning: An exploration of how symbolic forms cultivate mental skills and affect knowledge acquisition. - Routledge, 2012.

41. Sellar S., Hogan A. Pearson 2025: Transforming teaching and privatizing educational data. - 2019.

42. Shea P. J., Pickett A. M., Pelz W. E. A follow-up investigation of “teaching presence” in the SUNY Learning Network // Journal of asynchronous learning networks. - 2003. - Т. 7. - №. 2. - С. 61-80.

43. Garrison D. R. E-learning in the 21st century: A framework for research and practice. - Routledge, 2011.

44. Swan K. et al. Building knowledge building communities: Consistency, contact and communication in the virtual classroom //Journal of Educational Computing Research. - 2000. - Т. 23. - №. 4. - С. 359-383.

45. Swan K. Learning effectiveness online: What the research tells us //Elements of quality online education, practice and direction. - 2003. - Т. 4. - №. 1. - С. 13-47

46. Terras M. M., Ramsay J. Massive open online courses (MOOCs): Insights and challenges from a psychological perspective //British Journal of Educational Technology. - 2015. - Т. 46. - №. 3. - С. 472-487.

47. Twigg C. A. Models for online learning //Educause review. - 2003. - Т. 38. - С. 28-38.

48. Uribe S. N., Vaughan M. Facilitating student learning in distance education: a case study on the development and implementation of a multifaceted feedback system // Distance Education. 2017. Т. 38. № 3. С. 288-301.

49. Verezub E., Wang H. The role of metacognitive reading strategies instructions and various types of links in comprehending hypertext. - 2010.

50. Vikulova E. A., Chiglintseva E. S. That multifaceted english like: How do you like it? // XLinguae. 2017. Vol. 10(3). P. 348-356.

51. Wang S. K. et al. An investigation of middle school science teachers and students use of technology inside and outside of classrooms: considering whether digital natives are more technology savvy than their teachers //Educational Technology Research and Development. - 2014. - Т. 62. - №. 6. - С. 637-662.

52. Watson W. R., Watson S. L., Reigeluth C. M. Education 3.0: Breaking the mold with technology // Interactive Learning Environments. 2015. Т. 23. № 3. С. 332-343. URL: https:// doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2013.764322

53. Wolf M., Barzillai M., Dunne J. The importance of deep reading //Challenging the whole child: reflections on best practices in learning, teaching, and leadership. - 2009. - Т. 130. - С. 21.