This article by Villalonga Pons, Besalú, Samà Camí, and Sancho-Vinuesa offers a highly concrete yet revealing glimpse into the academic lives of engineering students studying mathematics online as adults. Rather than resting on abstract claims about “autonomous learning,” it dives into data from 340 students enrolled in a preparatory mathematics course at the UOC, examining what they actually do on the virtual campus, what activities they complete, which ones they ignore, how often they participate in forums, and how all of this relates to their academic performance.
The focus on non-assessed activities (practice quizzes and “Challenges” in the forum) is particularly interesting because it exposes the often unseen territory of learning: what students do when they are not required to… or choose not to.
Through a K-means cluster analysis combined with dimensionality reduction via principal components, the authors identify three student profiles: efficient, dedicated, and passive. The efficient students, who make up nearly two-thirds of the group, earn good grades and make frequent use of practice quizzes but participate very little in forums or Challenges, they optimize their effort toward what “counts” for the grade.
The dedicated students are a small but highly active minority: they complete practice activities, participate in forums, engage in Challenges, and also achieve good academic results. The passive students, by contrast, connect infrequently, barely complete practice work or interact, and end up with low performance. These patterns align closely with findings from MOOC research: a majority of “lurkers” who follow the course but rarely interact, a small minority of highly committed participants, and a group that either partially engages or disengages entirely.
The core message is uncomfortable but instructive for course design: evaluation systems and time management have a greater influence on student behavior than our pedagogical intentions. Non-assessed activities tend to be used primarily by those already on track (the “dedicated” students), while those who most need support—the “passive” students—are the least likely to use them.
Beyond rigorously describing the profiles and the variables that define them, the article issues a clear call: if we want practice activities and forums to be more than “extras for the motivated,” we need to rethink design, timing, and guidance, with special attention to that silent group most at risk of being left behind.
---
How to Cite: Villalonga Pons, J., Besalú, M., Samà Camí, A., & Sancho-Vinuesa, T. (2023). Online Engineering Students’ Learning Strategies. RIED-Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distancia, 26(2), 237–256. https://doi.org/10.5944/ried.26.2.36257
