Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
research-article

FAQ chatbot and inclusive learning in massive open online courses

Published: 01 April 2022 Publication History

Abstract

Recognizing the research gap involving the lack of equity considerations in new technology implementation, this study compares students' learning experiences when using an FAQ chatbot with using an FAQ webpage. We trained a natural language processing–based chatbot utilizing content from an FAQ webpage and deployed it in two journalism massive open online courses (MOOCs) with 46 students and compared their experiences with 74 students' experiences with the FAQ webpage as a baseline. There were equal numbers of male and female students, their ages ranged from 18 to 65+, and they hailed from 45 unique countries. Considering the importance of supporting students with an inclusive Q&A experience before implementing any new technology into real-world operation, this study investigates students' disparate Q&A experiences by measuring their intention to use the interface as well as perceived Q&A service quality, enjoyment, and barriers utilizing a between-subjects online experiment. The results indicate that the students preferred an FAQ webpage over an FAQ chatbot, and the chatbot users experienced a higher magnitude of barriers compared to the webpage users. For the chatbot users, we found that region and native language factors influenced their Q&A experiences significantly. We discussed the meaning of the students’ disparate experiences from multiple perspectives—namely, human-computer interaction, MOOC context, and technologies as social practice aspects. Lastly, we determined how feasible it is to provide an inclusive learning experience for the MOOC population with the FAQ chatbot, based on the contextualized meaning of MOOC inclusiveness in current literature. This study suggests multi-faceted aspects to consider when adopting new technologies in MOOCs to provide an inclusive learning experience, and underscores the need for more active research in chatbot use to serve diverse student needs in MOOCs.

Highlights

Students prefer webpages over chatbots to answer queries about their courses.
Chatbot users experience a higher magnitude of barriers compared to webpage users.
Region and language factors are influential in this disparate experience.
Additional external factors appear to cause students' reluctance toward chatbot use.

References

[1]
R.Y. Bayeck, A. Hristova, K.W. Jablokow, F. Bonafini, Exploring the relevance of single‐gender group formation: What we learn from a massive open online course (MOOC), British Journal of Educational Technology 49 (1) (2018) 88–100,.
[2]
M. Bower, Technology‐mediated learning theory, British Journal of Educational Technology 50 (3) (2019) 1035–1048,.
[3]
T. Boyle, A. Ravenscroft, Context and deep learning design, Computers & Education 59 (4) (2012) 1224–1233,.
[4]
J.K. Burgoon, J.B. Walther, Nonverbal expectancies and the evaluative consequences of violations, Human Communication Research 17 (2) (1990) 232–265,.
[5]
J.N. Cappella, J.O. Greene, A discrepancy-arousal explanation of mutual influence in expressive behavior for adult and infant-adult interaction, Communication Monographs 49 (2) (1982) 89–114,.
[6]
A. Chatterjee, M. Gupta, P. Agrawal, FAQaugmenter: Suggesting questions for enterprise FAQ pages, in: Proceedings of the 13th international conference on web search and data mining, 2020, January, pp. 829–832,.
[7]
T. Coughlan, K. Lister, J. Seale, E. Scanlon, M. Weller, Accessible inclusive learning: Foundations, in: R. Ferguson, A. Jones, E. Scanlon (Eds.), Educational visions: Lessons from 40 years of innovation, Ubiquity Press, London, 2019, pp. 51–73,.
[8]
C. De Saint Laurent, Defence of machine learning: Debunking the myths of artificial intelligence, Europe's Journal of Psychology 14 (4) (2018) 734–747,.
[9]
N.S. De Souza, G.T. Perry, Women's participation in MOOCs in the IT area, Computers & Education 173 (2021),.
[10]
S. Di Gaetano, P. Diliberto, Chatbots and conversational interfaces: Three domains of use, in: Fifth international workshop on cultures of participation in the digital age, 2018, pp. 62–70. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2101/paper8.pdf.
[11]
R. Ferguson, Teaching and learning at scale: Futures, in: R. Ferguson, A. Jones, E. Scanlon (Eds.), Educational visions: Lessons from 40 years of innovation, Ubiquity Press, London, 2019, pp. 33–50,.
[12]
E. Go, S.S. Sundar, Humanizing chatbots: The effects of visual, identity and conversational cues on humanness perceptions, Computers in Human Behavior 97 (2019) 304–316,.
[13]
L.M. Howden, J.A. Meyer, Age and sex composition, 2010, US Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration, US Census Bureau, 2011.
[14]
W. Huang, K.F. Hew, D.E. Gonda, Designing and evaluating three chatbot-enhanced activities for a flipped graduate course, International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Robotics Research 8 (5) (2019) 6,.
[15]
F. Iniesto, P. McAndrew, S. Minocha, T. Coughlan, Auditing the accessibility of MOOCs: A four-component approach, in: European conference on technology enhanced learning, Springer, Cham, 2019, September, pp. 650–654,.
[16]
M.C. Jenkins, R. Churchill, S. Cox, D. Smith, Analysis of user interaction with service oriented chatbot systems, in: International conference on human-computer interaction, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2007, July, pp. 76–83,.
[17]
K. Julia, K. Marco, Educational scalability in MOOCs: Analysing instructional designs to find best practices, Computers & Education 161 (2021),.
[18]
D. Kahneman, D.T. Miller, Norm theory: Comparing reality to its alternatives, Psychological Review 93 (2) (1986) 136–153,.
[19]
D.L. Kasilingam, Understanding the attitude and intention to use smartphone chatbots for shopping, Technology in Society 62 (2020),.
[20]
A. Kaveri, S. Gunasekar, D. Gupta, M. Pratap, Decoding the Indian MOOC learner, in: 2015 IEEE 3RD international conference on MOOCS, innovation and technology in education (MITE), IEEE, 2015, October, pp. 182–187,.
[21]
M.L. Kent, M. Taylor, Toward a dialogic theory of public relations, Public Relations Review 28 (1) (2002) 21–37,.
[22]
S. Kim, J. Lee, G. Gweon, Comparing data from chatbot and web surveys: Effects of platform and conversational style on survey response quality, in: Proceedings of the 2019 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems , 2019, May, pp. 1–12,.
[23]
C.D. Kloos, C. Catálan, P.J. Muñoz-Merino, C. Alario-Hoyos, Design of a conversational agent as an educational tool, in: 2018 learning with MOOCS (LWMOOCS), IEEE, 2018, September, pp. 27–30,.
[24]
S.R. Lambert, Do MOOCs contribute to student equity and social inclusion? A systematic review 2014–18, Computers & Education 145 (2020),.
[25]
A. Littlejohn, N. Hood, Reconceptualising learning in the digital age: The (Un)democratising of learning, Springer, Singapore, 2018,.
[26]
M. Liu, W. Zou, Y. Shi, Z. Pan, C. Li, What do participants think of today's MOOCs: An updated look at the benefits and challenges of MOOCs designed for working professionals, Journal of Computing in Higher Education 32 (2019) 1–23,.
[28]
O. Poquet, J. Jovanovic, S. Dawson, Differences in forum communication of residents and visitors in MOOCS, Computers & Education 156 (2020),.
[29]
C.E. Rhee, J. Choi, Effects of personalization and social role in voice shopping: An experimental study on product recommendation by a conversational voice agent, Computers in Human Behavior 109 (2020),.
[30]
G. Robino, Is 2018 the year of voice interfaces?, ConvComp.it, 2018, January 24, https://convcomp.it/il-2018-%C3%A8-lanno-delle-voice-user-interfaces-3134ca939497.
[31]
V.L. Rubin, Y. Chen, L.M. Thorimbert, Artificially intelligent conversational agents in libraries, Library Hi Tech, 2010,.
[32]
Z.V. Sandoval, Design and implementation of a chatbot in online higher education settings, Issues in Information Systems 19 (4) (2018),.
[33]
J.R. Searle, Minds, brains, and programs, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 3 (3) (1980) 417–424,.
[34]
T. Seltzer, M.A. Mitrook, The dialogic potential of weblogs in relationship building, Public Relations Review 33 (2) (2007) 227–229,.
[35]
N. Selwyn, e-Learning or she-learning? Exploring students' gendered perceptions of education technology, British Journal of Educational Technology 38 (4) (2007) 744–746,.
[36]
A. Shaw, Using chatbots to easily create interactive and intelligent FAQ webpages, Journal of Applied Global Research 5 (15) (2012) 10–15.
[37]
B.A. Shawar, E. Atwell, Chatbots: Are they really useful?, LDV Forum 22 (1) (2007) 29–49. http://www.jlcl.org/2007_Heft1/Bayan_Abu-Shawar_and_Eric_Atwell.pdf.
[38]
M. Shumanov, L. Johnson, Making conversations with chatbots more personalized, Computers in Human Behavior 117 (2021),.
[39]
P. Smutny, P. Schreiberova, Chatbots for learning: A review of educational chatbots for the facebook messenger, Computers & Education 151 (2020),.
[40]
D. Song, M. Rice, E.Y. Oh, Participation in online courses and interaction with a virtual agent, International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning 20 (1) (2019),.
[41]
J.M. Spector, Remarks on progress in educational technology, Educational Technology Research & Development 68 (2020) 833–836,.
[42]
L. Suchman, J. Blomberg, J.E. Orr, R. Trigg, Reconstructing technologies as social practice, American Behavioral Scientist 43 (3) (1999) 392–408.
[43]
A.M. Turing, Computing machinery and intelligence, in: R. Epstein, G. Roberts, G. Beber (Eds.), Parsing the turing test, Springer, Dordrecht, 2009, pp. 23–65,.
[44]
S. Valtolina, B.R. Barricelli, S. Di Gaetano, Communicability of traditional interfaces VS chatbots in healthcare and smart home domains, Behaviour & Information Technology 39 (1) (2020) 108–132,.
[45]
T. Wambsganss, R. Winkler, M. Söllner, J.M. Leimeister, A conversational agent to improve response quality in course evaluations, in: Extended abstracts of the 2020 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, 2020, April, pp. 1–9,.
[46]
R. Winkler, S. Hobert, A. Salovaara, M. Söllner, J.M. Leimeister, Sara, the lecturer: Improving learning in online education with a scaffolding-based conversational agent, in: Proceedings of the 2020 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, 2020, April, pp. 1–14,.

Cited By

View all
  • (2025)User Interaction Patterns and Breakdowns in Conversing with LLM-Powered Voice AssistantsInternational Journal of Human-Computer Studies10.1016/j.ijhcs.2024.103406195:COnline publication date: 1-Jan-2025
  • (2024)Human vs. AI: Exploring students’ preferences between human and AI TA and the effect of social anxiety and problem complexityEducation and Information Technologies10.1007/s10639-023-12374-429:1(1217-1246)Online publication date: 1-Jan-2024
  • (2023)What do students want to know while taking massive open online courses?LAK23: 13th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference10.1145/3576050.3576072(572-578)Online publication date: 13-Mar-2023
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Computers & Education
Computers & Education  Volume 179, Issue C
Apr 2022
273 pages

Publisher

Elsevier Science Ltd.

United Kingdom

Publication History

Published: 01 April 2022

Author Tags

  1. Chatbot
  2. Massive open online courses
  3. Human and computer interaction
  4. Inclusive learning environment
  5. Accessibility

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 08 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2025)User Interaction Patterns and Breakdowns in Conversing with LLM-Powered Voice AssistantsInternational Journal of Human-Computer Studies10.1016/j.ijhcs.2024.103406195:COnline publication date: 1-Jan-2025
  • (2024)Human vs. AI: Exploring students’ preferences between human and AI TA and the effect of social anxiety and problem complexityEducation and Information Technologies10.1007/s10639-023-12374-429:1(1217-1246)Online publication date: 1-Jan-2024
  • (2023)What do students want to know while taking massive open online courses?LAK23: 13th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference10.1145/3576050.3576072(572-578)Online publication date: 13-Mar-2023
  • (2023)Comparing button-based chatbots with webpages for presenting fact-checking resultsInformation Processing and Management: an International Journal10.1016/j.ipm.2022.10320360:2Online publication date: 1-Mar-2023
  • (2023)EduPort: An Intelligent Learning System Based on Deep Learning - A Preliminary EvaluationEmerging Technologies for Education10.1007/978-981-97-4243-1_7(79-93)Online publication date: 26-Nov-2023
  • (2022)Developing an AI-based chatbot for practicing responsive teaching in mathematicsComputers & Education10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104646191:COnline publication date: 1-Dec-2022
  • (2022)An analysis of children’ interaction with an AI chatbot and its impact on their interest in readingComputers & Education10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104576189:COnline publication date: 1-Nov-2022

View Options

View options

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media