Impact of an Instructor's Personalized Email Intervention on Completion Rates in a Massive Open Online Course (MOOC)
Open accessAbstract
Although Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) are increasing in popularity, they have been subject to criticism due to the high dropout rate. This study examined the impact of an instructor's personalized email intervention on the rate of completion of a nine week course, which included seven weekly quizzes, and the rate of completion of the final exam. The participants, who took an Israeli noncredit academic MOOC on negotiation management, were randomly assigned to two groups. Treatment group participants (N = 576) who did not complete the weekly quiz received a tailored reminder by email from their instructor encouraging them to complete the quiz and offering them assistance in order to deal with the past week’s contents. The control group (N = 608) that did not complete the weekly quiz did not get any emails from the instructor. The impact of the intervention was measured in three different ways: the immediate-impact, the delayed-impact and a cumulative impact. The increase in quiz completion within a week after the instructor's email was defined as an immediate-impact. The increase in the completion of the next quiz was defined as a delayed impact. The increase in the final exam completion rates was defined as a cumulative impact. The results show that the weekly intervention had an immediate impact as well as a cumulative impact on the final exam completion rate. The results suggest that an instructor's acknowledgement and interest might increase learners' commitment to learning in a MOOC. This study aimed to gain insight into learners' propensity to stay active in a MOOC and to increase completion rates. Findings of this study can be useful to MOOC designers and instructors to design and facilitate more effective MOOCs for learners by using email interventions to prevent students from dropping out of courses.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so the self-check wasn’t run.
Cites
Critical Inquiry in a Text-Based Environment: Computer Conferencing in Higher Education
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (1999) · The Internet and Higher Education · doi:10.1016/s1096-7516(00)00016-6 · Cited by 6,619 · see citing works
Winnicott, D. W. (2012) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203441022 · Cited by 5,707 · cited 1× · see citing works
“We would like to suggest that the instructor’s seemingly minor intervention, namely noticing that a student did not participate in a course activity, and gently offering support, might have created what the psychoanalyst Winnicott (1982) referred to as a “holding environment”.”
BackgroundHow video production affects student engagement: an empirical study of MOOC videos
Guo, P. J., Kim, J., & Rubin, R. (2014) · Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning @ scale conference · doi:10.1145/2556325.2566239 · Cited by 1,850 · see citing works
Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness
Hoyt, G. M. (2009) · International Review of Economics Education · doi:10.1016/s1477-3880(15)30073-6 · Cited by 1,164 · see citing works
Debate: To Nudge or Not to Nudge*
Hausman, D. M., & Welch, B. F. (2009) · Journal of Political Philosophy · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9760.2009.00351.x · Cited by 818 · cited 1× · see citing works
“We can consider this influence as a nudge, as it does not limit the choice set or make other alternatives appreciably more costly (Hausman and Welch, 2010).”
BackgroundA review of online course dropout research: implications for practice and future research
Lee, Y., & Choi, J. (2011) · Educational Technology Research and Development · doi:10.1007/s11423-010-9177-y · Cited by 747 · see citing works
Exploring the factors affecting MOOC retention: A survey study
HONE, K. S., & Said, G. R. E. (2016) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2016.03.016 · Cited by 720 · cited 2× · see citing works
“In a survey study exploring factors that influence retention in a MOOC, Hone and Said (2016), found that the course content was a significant predictor of MOOC retention.”
BackgroundE-Learning in the 21st Century
Garrison, D. R. (2011) · doi:10.4324/9780203838761 · Cited by 549 · see citing works
Massive open online course completion rates revisited: Assessment, length and attrition
Jordan, K. (2015) · The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning · doi:10.19173/irrodl.v16i3.2112 · Cited by 510 · cited 1× · see citing works
“In another study, the completion rates of 221 MOOCs varied from 0.7% to 52.1%, with a median value of 12.6% (Jordan, 2015).”
BackgroundInfluentialReich, J., & Ruipérez‐Valiente, J. A. (2019) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aav7958 · Cited by 491 · cited 2× · see citing works
“It seems that MOOCs are gradually becoming an integral part of the learning process, especially in higher education settings (Schuwer et al., 2015; Soffer and Cohen, 2015).”
BackgroundBarak, M., Watted, A., & Haick, H. (2015) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2015.11.010 · Cited by 462 · see citing works
Cognition, Education, and Multimedia: Exploring Ideas in High Technology
Nix, D. H., & Spiro, R. J. (1990) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 453 · see citing works
MOOC dropout prediction using machine learning techniques: Review and research challenges
Dalipi, F., Imran, A. S., & Kastrati, Z. (2018) · IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON) · doi:10.1109/educon.2018.8363340 · Cited by 221 · cited 2× · see citing works
“, engineering and sophisticated quantitative materials (Dalipi et al., 2018; Rabin et al., 2020; Schuwer et al., 2015).”
BackgroundKahn, W. A. (2001) · The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science · doi:10.1177/0021886301373001 · Cited by 216 · see citing works
A usability evaluation of a blended MOOC environment: An experimental case study
Yousef, A. M. F., Chatti, M. A., Schroeder, U., et al. (2015) · The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning · doi:10.19173/irrodl.v16i2.2032 · Cited by 140 · cited 1× · see citing works
“The reasons related to the MOOC drop outs often involve the way the MOOC was designed, lack of interaction, and other hidden costs (Dalipi, Imran and Kastrati, 2018; Hone and El Said, 2016; Lee and Martin, 2017; Padilla Rodriguez and Armellini, 2015).”
BackgroundUnderstanding Learners’ Motivation and Learning Strategies in MOOCs
Alario‐Hoyos, C., Ayres, I. E., Pérez‐Sanagustín, M., Kloos, C. D., & Fernández-Panadero, C. (2017) · The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning · doi:10.19173/irrodl.v18i3.2996 · Cited by 139 · cited 2× · see citing works
“Learner-related reasons are most often a lack of motivation, lack of www.ejel.org 326 ©The Authors time, and lack of ability or background (Alario-Hoyos et al., 2017; Chaw and Tang, 2019; Cisel, 2018; Lee and Choi, 2011; Rabin et al., 2020).”
BackgroundInvestigating Students’ Perceptions of Motivating Factors of Online Class Discussions
Lee, J., & Martin, L. A. (2017) · The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning · doi:10.19173/irrodl.v18i5.2883 · Cited by 135 · see citing works
Persistence Patterns in Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs)
Evans, B. J., Baker, R. B., & Dee, T. S. (2016) · The Journal of Higher Education · doi:10.1353/jhe.2016.0006 · Cited by 124 · see citing works
Opportunities and Threats of the MOOC Movement for Higher Education: The European Perspective
Schuwer, R., Gil‐Jaurena, I., Aydın, C. H., et al. (2015) · The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning · doi:10.19173/irrodl.v16i6.2153 · Cited by 89 · cited 1× · see citing works
“It seems that MOOCs are gradually becoming an integral part of the learning process, especially in higher education settings (Schuwer et al., 2015; Soffer and Cohen, 2015).”
BackgroundVideos in higher education: Making the most of a good thing
Fyfield, M., Henderson, M., Heinrich, E., & Redmond, P. (2019) · Australasian Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.14742/ajet.5930 · Cited by 82 · see citing works
Rabin, E., Henderikx, M., Kalman, Y. M., & Kalz, M. (2020) · Australasian Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.14742/ajet.5919 · Cited by 74 · cited 2× · see citing works
“…such as a large number of dropouts, inability to validate the learner's identity, barriers to learners’ satisfaction, and difficulties in studying complicated subject matters, e.g., engineering and sophisticated quantitative materials (Dalipi et al., 2018; Rabin et al., 2020; Schuwer et al., 2015).”
BackgroundRoles and student identities in online large course forums: Implications for practice
Baxter, J. A., & Haycock, J. (2014) · The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning · doi:10.19173/irrodl.v15i1.1593 · Cited by 67 · cited 1× · see citing works
“One of the primary means of interaction in MOOCs relies on discussion forums (Baxter and Haycock, 2014; Chen et al., 2019), and there have been different attempts to increase participation and involvement in forums (Kizilcec et al., 2014).”
BackgroundKizilcec, R. F., Schneider, E., Cohen, G. L., & McFarland, D. A. (2014) · E-learning papers · Cited by 53 · see citing works
Developmental networks at work: holding environments for leader development
Ghosh, R., Haynes, R. K., & Kram, K. E. (2013) · Career Development International · doi:10.1108/cdi-09-2012-0084 · Cited by 52 · see citing works
Facilitating Students’ Interaction in MOOCs through Timeline-Anchored Discussion
Chen, Y., Gao, Q., Yuan, Q., & Tang, Y. (2019) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2019.1574056 · Cited by 48 · cited 2× · see citing works
“One of the primary means of interaction in MOOCs relies on discussion forums (Baxter and Haycock, 2014; Chen et al., 2019), and there have been different attempts to increase participation and involvement in forums (Kizilcec et al.”
BackgroundChaw, L. Y., & Tang, C. M. (2019) · The Electronic Journal of e-Learning · doi:10.34190/jel.17.2.05 · Cited by 44 · see citing works
Towards a Model of Engaging Online Students: Lessons from MOOCs and Four Policy Documents
Hew, K. F. (2014) · International Journal of Information and Education Technology · doi:10.7763/ijiet.2015.v5.543 · Cited by 38 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Interactions, particularly between the instructors and students, were found to be a significant factor determining student engagement and thereby the completion rate (Hew, 2015).”
BackgroundOrganizational Cultures as Holding Environments: A Psychodynamic Look at Organizational Symbolism
Buskirk, W. V., & McGrath, D. (1999) · Human Relations · doi:10.1177/001872679905200606 · Cited by 38 · cited 1× · see citing works
“…they will dare to take risks and inquire about new territories: “The quality of such holding (i.e., the sense in which it engenders basic trust in one’s surrounding) determines the extent to which the person can become a genuine, creative individual” (Van Buskirk and McGrath, 1999, p. 808).”
BackgroundBorrella, I., Caballero-Caballero, S., & Ponce-Cueto, E. (2019) · ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale (L@S) · doi:10.1145/3330430.3333634 · Cited by 38 · see citing works
Implementation of Tel Aviv University MOOCs in academic curriculum: A pilot study
Soffer, T., & Cohen, A. (2015) · The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning · doi:10.19173/irrodl.v16i1.2031 · Cited by 34 · cited 1× · see citing works
“It seems that MOOCs are gradually becoming an integral part of the learning process, especially in higher education settings (Schuwer et al., 2015; Soffer and Cohen, 2015).”
BackgroundCho, M., & Byun, M.-K. (2017) · The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning · doi:10.19173/irrodl.v18i5.2892 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
Evans, T., Kensington-Miller, B., & Novak, J. (2020) · Australasian Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.14742/ajet.6258 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
Effects of automated interventions in programming assignments
Teusner, R., Hille, T., & Staubitz, T. (2018) · ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale (L@S) · doi:10.1145/3231644.3231650 · Cited by 23 · cited 1× · see citing works
“The results showed that the intervention increased the callouts for help by up to 66% and lowered the dwelling time until initiating action (Teusner et al., 2018).”
BackgroundExpanding the interaction equivalency theorem
Rodríguez, B. C. P., & Armellini, A. (2015) · The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning · doi:10.19173/irrodl.v16i3.2085 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
Interactions in MOOCs: The Hidden Part of the Iceberg
Cisel, M. (2018) · The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning · doi:10.19173/irrodl.v19i5.3459 · Cited by 14 · cited 2× · see citing works
“Learner-related reasons are most often a lack of motivation, lack of www.ejel.org 326 ©The Authors time, and lack of ability or background (Alario-Hoyos et al., 2017; Chaw and Tang, 2019; Cisel, 2018; Lee and Choi, 2011; Rabin et al., 2020).”
BackgroundLan, M., & Lu, J. (2017) · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Kopolovich, O. (2020) · Online Journal of Applied Knowledge Management · doi:10.36965/ojakm.2020.8(2)91-106 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Self-citationLatta, R. M. (1978) · Journal of Nonverbal Behavior · doi:10.1007/bf01173772 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Teaching UI Design at Global Scales
Cheng, H.-F., Yu, B., Fu, S., et al. (2019) · ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale (L@S) · doi:10.1145/3330430.3333635 · Cited by 3 · cited 2× · see citing works
“However, several participants reported that they experienced a high degree of stress caused by constant communication with the teams (Cheng et al., 2019).”
Background
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- Dhawal, S. 2020. The Second Year of the MOOC: A Review of MOOC stats and Trends in 2020, [online]. Available from https://www.classcentral.com/report/the-second-year-of-the-mooc/ [Accessed 10 August 2021].
- Edinburgh Group. 2013. A Report Summarising the Experience of the University of Edinburgh of Offering Our First 6 Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) in Partnership with Coursera. Available from http://hdl.handle.net/1842/6683 [Accessed 10 August 2021]
- Kilgore, W. and Lowenthal, P. R. 2015. The human element MOOC: an experiment in social presence. In: Wright, R. D. (Ed.), Establishing an Equitable and Fair Admissions System for an Online Doctoral Program, IGI Global, pp. 389–407.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
An early warning system to identify and intervene online dropout learners
Bañeres, D., Rodríguez, M. E., Guerrero‐Roldán, A., & Cortadas, P. (2023) · International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education · doi:10.1186/s41239-022-00371-5 · Cited by 124 · see citing works
“Authors in (Kurtz et al., 2022) proposed a nudging intervention system when a learner did not submit a quiz for helping to improve self-regulation and self-efficacy, and just-in-time interventions were proposed in (Teusner et al., 2018) focusing on motivating learners.”
BackgroundMethodDhiman, N., Gupta, A., Arora, N., & GEORGE, B. P. (2022) · FIIB Business Review · doi:10.1177/23197145221130666 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Shi, Y., Haller, A., Reeson, A., Li, X., & Li, C.-J. (2024) · Behavior and Information Technology · doi:10.1080/0144929x.2024.2316287 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Novella, R., Rosas-Shady, D., & Freund, R. (2024) · Journal of Development Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jdeveco.2024.103285 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Using Deep Transfer Learning to Predict Student Engagement in Online Courses
Ahmad, N., Gupta, A., & Singh, D. (2022) · Communications in computer and information science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-24367-7_3 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Foerster, S., Brosinsky, A., Koch, K., et al. (2024) · International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation · doi:10.1016/j.jag.2024.103983 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Kennedy, B. M., Engel, K., Davidson, J., et al. (2025) · Geoscience Communication · doi:10.5194/gc-8-107-2025 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
“…classrooms have challenges: MOOCs have low completion rates and frequently lack meaningful peer and instructor interaction (Khalil and Ebner, 2014; Kurtz et al., 2022), whereas flipped classrooms frequently require very high levels of “buy-in” from both in-structors and students (Collopy and…”
Alonso, R. R., Gárate, J. V., & Vera, J. J. A. (2022) · RIED Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distancia · doi:10.5944/ried.26.1.33982 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Digitale Kulturen der Lehre entwickeln
Mrohs, L. C., Franz, J., Herrmann, D., Lindner, K., & Staake, T. (2023) · Perspektiven der Hochschuldidaktik · doi:10.1007/978-3-658-43379-6 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Zhao, F., & Gaschler, R. (2024) · Open Learning The Journal of Open Distance and e-Learning · doi:10.1080/02680513.2024.2326002 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
“For instance, Kurtz et al. (2022) randomly assigned weekly quizzes and a final exam to course registrants (around 1,200 participants) in a personalised email group vs. no-email group in a MOOC.”
InfluentialImpact of Embedded Learning Strategy Activities: Student Engagement and Performance
Fleck, A. D. S., & Zhu, T. (2024) · Technology Knowledge and Learning · doi:10.1007/s10758-023-09715-0 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
“Kurtz et al. (2022) found that the weekly intervention had an immediate impact on the quiz completion rate and a cumulative impact on final exam completion rate.”
Studie zum Nutzen persönlicher E-Mails in der Online- und Präsenzlehre
Mühlhauser, M., & Herrmann, D. (2023) · Perspektiven der Hochschuldidaktik · doi:10.1007/978-3-658-43379-6_5 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Building MOOC design on learners: an action research study
Perdue, M. (2023) · doi:10.17760/d20483511
Davidson, J. (2024) · doi:10.5194/egusphere-2024-2512-ac1
Davidson, J. (2024) · doi:10.5194/egusphere-2024-2512-ac2
The TOY Project and Development of Intergenerational Learning Training in Europe
Fitzpatrick, A., Gallagher, C., Kernan, M., et al. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780197750889.013.19
Korpela, P., & Malmi, L. (2026) · Computers and Education Open · doi:10.1016/j.caeo.2026.100386
- Authors
- Kurtz, G., Kopolovich, O., Segev, E., Sahar-Inbar, L., Gal, L., & HAmmer, R.
- Affiliations
- Holon Institute of Technology (IL)
- Venue
- Electronic Journal of e-Learning
- Published
- 2022-03-31
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- pp325-335
- ISSN
- 1479-4403 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4221081670
- Semantic Scholar
- 449d4f48e389d38ca1c28233a54c01c9020f149b
- Cited by
- 17
- References
- 37
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3
- FWCI
- 3.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- The Electronic Journal of e-Learning (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Online Learning and Analytics
- Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Teaching and Learning Programming
- Keywords
- massive open online courses, MOOC completion rates, school dropout, instructor communication, email reminders, weekly quizzes, student engagement, negotiation management
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-12.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
