Cited By
View all- Li SZhao YGuo LRen MLi JZhang LLi K(2024)Quantification and prediction of engagementInformation Processing and Management: an International Journal10.1016/j.ipm.2023.10353661:1Online publication date: 1-Jan-2024
A Novel Search Ranking Method for MOOCs Using Unstructured Course Information
Authors: 
Weiqiang Yao, Haiquan Sun, Xiaoxuan Hu Academic Editor: Yin ZhangAuthors Info & Claims
Weiqiang Yao, Haiquan Sun, Xiaoxuan Hu Academic Editor: Yin ZhangAuthors Info & ClaimsAbstract
Massive open online courses (MOOCs) are a technical trend in the field of education. As the number of available MOOCs continues to grow dramatically, the difficulty for learners to find courses that satisfy their personalized learning goals has also increased. Unstructured texts, such as course descriptions and course skills, contain rich course information and are useful for MOOC platforms in constructing personalized services. This paper proposes a novel search ranking method for MOOCs that integrates unstructured course information. We propose a latent Dirichlet allocation-based model to cluster courses into groups based on course descriptions. Courses in the same cluster are considered to share similar educational contents. We then propose the CourseRank algorithm based on the information of course skills to recommend and rank courses when students search for or click on a specific course. Our experiments on the dataset from Coursera indicate that our method is able to cluster courses effectively and produce satisfactory ranking results for courses in MOOC platforms.
References
[1]
R. F. Kizilcec, A. J. Saltarelli, J. Reich, and G. L. Cohen, “Closing global achievement gaps in moocs,” Science, vol. 355, no. 6322, pp. 251–252, 2017.
[2]
D. Shah, By the Numbers: Moocs in 2018, Class Central Moocreport, 2018, https://www.classcentral.com/report/mooc-stats-2018/.
[3]
F. Bousbahi and H. Chorfi, “Mooc-rec: a case based recommender system for moocs,” Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol. 195, pp. 1813–1822, 2015.
[4]
A. Elbadrawy and G. Karypis, “Domain-aware grade prediction and top-n course recommendation,” in Proceedings of the 10th ACM Conference on Recommender Systems, pp. 183–190, Boston, MA, USA, 2016.
[5]
M. Lin and D. W. Cheung, “An automatic approach for tagging web services using machine learning techniques1,” in Presented at Web Intelligence, vol. 14, pp. 99–118, IOS Press, 2016.
[6]
B. K. Daniel, “Big data and data science: a critical review of issues for educational research,” British Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 101–113, 2019.
[7]
J. A. Ruipérez-Valiente, S. Halawa, R. Slama, and J. Reich, “Using multi-platform learning analytics to compare regional and global mooc learning in the Arab world,” Computers & Education, vol. 146, p. 103776, 2020.
[8]
R. Bodily, H. Leary, and R. E. West, “Research trends in instructional design and technology journals,” British Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 64–79, 2019.
[9]
M. Zhu, A. Sari, and M. M. Lee, “A systematic review of research methods and topics of the empirical mooc literature (2014–2016),” The Internet and Higher Education, vol. 37, pp. 31–39, 2018.
[10]
E. Costello, M. Brown, M. N. G. Mhichíl, and J. Zhang, “Big course small talk: twitter and moocs—a systematic review of research designs 2011–2017,” International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, vol. 15, no. 1, p. 44, 2018.
[11]
M. Aparicio, T. Oliveira, F. Bacao, and M. Painho, “Gamification: a key determinant of massive open online course (mooc) success,” Information & Management, vol. 56, no. 1, pp. 39–54, 2019.
[12]
R. Deng, P. Benckendorff, and D. Gannaway, “Learner engagement in moocs: scale development and validation,” British Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 245–262, 2019.
[13]
P. Luik, R. Suviste, M. Lepp, T. Palts, E. Tõnisson, M. Säde, and K. Papli, “What motivates enrolment in programming moocs?” British Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 153–165, 2019.
[14]
Y. Sun, L. Ni, Y. Zhao, X. L. Shen, and N. Wang, “Understanding students’ engagement in moocs: an integration of self-determination theory and theory of relationship quality,” British Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 50, no. 6, pp. 3156–3174, 2018.
[15]
A. Cohen, U. Shimony, R. Nachmias, and T. Soffer, “Active learners’ characterization in mooc forums and their generated knowledge,” British Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 177–198, 2019.
[16]
N. Hood, A. Littlejohn, and C. Milligan, “Context counts: how learners' contexts influence learning in a mooc,” Computers & Education, vol. 91, pp. 83–91, 2015.
[17]
P. J. Guo and K. Reinecke, “Demographic differences in how students navigate through moocs,” in Presented at Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning@ scale conference, pp. 21–30, Atlanta, GA, USA, 2014.
[18]
K. Li, “Mooc learners’ demographics, self-regulated learning strategy, perceived learning and satisfaction: a structural equation modeling approach,” Computers & Education, vol. 132, pp. 16–30, 2019.
[19]
J. Reich and J. A. Ruipérez-Valiente, “The mooc pivot,” Science, vol. 363, no. 6423, pp. 130–131, 2019.
[20]
B. Hong, Z. Wei, and Y. Yang, “Discovering learning behavior patterns to predict dropout in mooc,” in Presented at 2017 12th International Conference on Computer Science and Education (ICCSE), pp. 700–704, Houston, TX, USA, 2017.
[21]
D. Peng and G. Aggarwal, “Modeling mooc dropouts,” Entropy, vol. 10, pp. 1–5, 2015.
[22]
A. Ramesh, D. Goldwasser, B. Huang, H. Daume, and L. Getoor, “Understanding mooc discussion forums using seeded lda,” in Presented at Proceedings of the ninth workshop on innovative use of NLP for building educational applications, pp. 28–33, Baltimore, Maryland USA, 2014.
[23]
T. Atapattu and K. Falkner, “A framework for topic generation and labeling from mooc discussions,” in Presented at Proceedings of the Third (2016) ACM conference on learning@ scale, pp. 201–204, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK, 2016.
[24]
Y. Pang, Y. Jin, Y. Zhang, and T. Zhu, “Collaborative filtering recommendation for mooc application,” Computer Applications in Engineering Education, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 120–128, 2017.
[25]
C. Lang, R. Levy-Cohen, C. Woo, B. Roberts, S. Pepe, R. Verma, and Y. Xu, “Automated extraction of learning goals and objectives from syllabi using lda and neural nets,” Presented at Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge, 2018.
[26]
J. A. Hartigan and M. A. Wong, “Algorithm as 136: a k-means clustering algorithm,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series C (Applied Statistics), vol. 28, pp. 100–108, 1979.
[27]
M. Ester, H.-P. Kriegel, J. Sander, and X. Xu, “A density-based algorithm for discovering clusters in large spatial databases with noise,” Presented at Kdd, vol. 96, pp. 226–231, 1996.
[28]
R. I. Chang, Y. H. Hung, and C. F. Lin, “Survey of learning experiences and influence of learning style preferences on user intentions regarding MOOCs,” British Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 528–541, 2015.
[29]
Y. Chen, Q. Chen, M. Zhao, S. Boyer, K. Veeramachaneni, and H. Qu, “Dropoutseer: visualizing learning patterns in massive open online courses for dropout reasoning and prediction,” in Presented at 2016 IEEE conference on visual analytics science and technology (VAST), pp. 111–120, Baltimore, MD, USA, 2016.
[30]
R. R. Larson, “Introduction to information retrieval,” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, vol. 61, pp. 852–853, 2010.
[31]
D. Mimno, H. M. Wallach, E. Talley, M. Leenders, and A. McCallum, “Optimizing semantic coherence in topic models,” in Presented at Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Edinburgh, United Kingdom, pp. 262–272, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK, 2011.
[32]
S. Mankad, H. S. Han, J. Goh, and S. Gavirneni, “Understanding online hotel reviews through automated text analysis,” Service Science, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 124–138, 2016.
Index Terms
- A Novel Search Ranking Method for MOOCs Using Unstructured Course Information
Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.
Recommendations
Re-ranking search results using query logs
CIKM '06: Proceedings of the 15th ACM international conference on Information and knowledge managementThis work addresses two common problems in search, frequently occurring with underspecified user queries: the top-ranked results for such queries may not contain documents relevant to the user's search intent, and fresh and relevant pages may not get ...
Using learning analytics to explore help-seeking learner profiles in MOOCs
LAK '17: Proceedings of the Seventh International Learning Analytics & Knowledge ConferenceIn online learning environments, learners are often required to be more autonomous in their approach to learning. In scaled online learning environments, like Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs), there are differences in the ability of learners to ...
Identifying popular search goals behind search queries to improve web search ranking
AIRS'11: Proceedings of the 7th Asia conference on Information Retrieval TechnologyWeb users usually have a certain search goal before they submit a search query. However, many laypersons can't transform their search goals into suitable queries. Thus, understanding original search goals behind a query is very important for search ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
Copyright © 2020 Weiqiang Yao et al.
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Publisher
John Wiley and Sons Ltd.
United Kingdom
Publication History
Published: 01 January 2020
Qualifiers
- Research-article
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- View Citations1Total Citations
- 0Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)0
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 18 Aug 2024
Other Metrics
Citations
Cited By
View all- Li SZhao YGuo LRen MLi JZhang LLi K(2024)Quantification and prediction of engagementInformation Processing and Management: an International Journal10.1016/j.ipm.2023.10353661:1Online publication date: 1-Jan-2024
View Options
View options
Get Access
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in