Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/2460296.2460330acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageslakConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Deconstructing disengagement: analyzing learner subpopulations in massive open online courses

Published: 08 April 2013 Publication History

Abstract

As MOOCs grow in popularity, the relatively low completion rates of learners has been a central criticism. This focus on completion rates, however, reflects a monolithic view of disengagement that does not allow MOOC designers to target interventions or develop adaptive course features for particular subpopulations of learners. To address this, we present a simple, scalable, and informative classification method that identifies a small number of longitudinal engagement trajectories in MOOCs. Learners are classified based on their patterns of interaction with video lectures and assessments, the primary features of most MOOCs to date.
In an analysis of three computer science MOOCs, the classifier consistently identifies four prototypical trajectories of engagement. The most notable of these is the learners who stay engaged through the course without taking assessments. These trajectories are also a useful framework for the comparison of learner engagement between different course structures or instructional approaches. We compare learners in each trajectory and course across demographics, forum participation, video access, and reports of overall experience. These results inform a discussion of future interventions, research, and design directions for MOOCs. Potential improvements to the classification mechanism are also discussed, including the introduction of more fine-grained analytics.

References

[1]
S. Amershi and C. Conati. Automatic recognition of learner types in exploratory learning environments. Handbook of Educational Data Mining, page 213, 2010.
[2]
P. Bahr. The bird's eye view of community colleges: A behavioral typology of first-time students based on cluster analytic classification. Research in Higher Education, 51(8):724--749, 2010.
[3]
P. Black and D. Wiliam. Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in education, 5(1):7--74, 1998.
[4]
J. Bransford, A. Brown, and R. Cocking. How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. National Academies Press, 2000.
[5]
P. Brusilovsky and E. Millán. User models for adaptive hypermedia and adaptive educational systems. The adaptive web, pages 3--53, 2007.
[6]
J. Cohen. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum, 1988.
[7]
B. De Wever, T. Schellens, M. Valcke, and H. Van Keer. Content analysis schemes to analyze transcripts of online asynchronous discussion groups: A review. Computers & Education, 46(1):6--28, 2006.
[8]
S. Downes. New technology supporting informal learning. Journal of Emerging Technologies in Web Intelligence, 2(1):27--33, 2010.
[9]
C. Dweck. Mindset: The new psychology of success. Ballantine Books, 2007.
[10]
C. Dweck, G. Walton, and G. Cohen. Academic tenacity: Mindset and skills that promote long-term learning. Gates Foundation. Seattle, WA: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, 2011.
[11]
B. Everitt and T. Hothorn. A handbook of statistical analyses using R. Chapman & Hall/CRC, 2009.
[12]
C. Farrington, M. Roderick, E. Allensworth, J. Nagaoka, T. Keyes, D. Johnson, and N. Beechum. Teaching adolescents to become learners: The role of noncognitive factors in shaping school performance: A critical literature review. Chicago: University of Chicago Consortium on Chicago School Research, 2012.
[13]
B. Fogg. A behavior model for persuasive design. In Proceedings of the 4th international Conference on Persuasive Technology, page 40. ACM, 2009.
[14]
S. Goldrick-Rab. Challenges and opportunities for improving community college student success. Review of Educational Research, 80(3):437--469, 2010.
[15]
B. Kim and T. Reeves. Reframing research on learning with technology: in search of the meaning of cognitive tools. Instructional Science, 35(3):207--256, 2007.
[16]
K. Koedinger, A. Corbett, et al. Cognitive tutors: Technology bringing learning science to the classroom. The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences, pages 61--78, 2006.
[17]
R. Kraut, P. Resnick, S. Kiesler, Y. Ren, Y. Chen, M. Burke, N. Kittur, J. Riedl, and J. Konstan. Building successful online communities: Evidence-based social design. The MIT Press, 2012.
[18]
M. McDaniel, H. Roediger, and K. McDermott. Generalizing test-enhanced learning from the laboratory to the classroom. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14(2):200--206, 2007.
[19]
E. Ophir, C. Nass, and A. Wagner. Cognitive control in media multitaskers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(37):15583--15587, 2009.
[20]
C. Rodriguez. Moocs and the ai-stanford like courses: Two successful and distinct course formats for massive open online courses. Learning, 2012.
[21]
H. Roediger III and J. Karpicke. Test-enhanced learning taking memory tests improves long-term retention. Psychological Science, 17(3):249--255, 2006.
[22]
P. J. Rousseeuw. Silhouettes: A graphical aid to the interpretation and validation of cluster analysis. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, 20(0):53--65, 1987.
[23]
V. Saenz, D. Hatch, B. Bukoski, S. Kim, K. Lee, and P. Valdez. Community college student engagement patterns a typology revealed through exploratory cluster analysis. Community College Review, 39(3):235--267, 2011.
[24]
C. Shirky. Cognitive surplus: Creativity and generosity in a connected age. ePenguin, 2010.
[25]
G. Siemens. Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. 2004.
[26]
S. Spencer, C. Steele, and D. Quinn. Stereotype threat and women's math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35(1):4--28, 1999.
[27]
G. Stahl, T. Koschmann, and D. Suthers. Computer-supported collaborative learning: An historical perspective. In R. K. Sawyer, editor, Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences, pages 409--426. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2006.
[28]
C. Steele, S. Spencer, and J. Aronson. Contending with group image: The psychology of stereotype and social identity threat. Advances in experimental social psychology, 34:379--440, 2002.
[29]
United Nations Development Programme. 2011 human development report. Retrieved from http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/HDR_2011_Statistical_Tables.xls. (Accessed 18-Jan-2013).

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Student’s Experiences Using ChatGPT for Academic PurposesJournal of Interdisciplinary Perspectives10.69569/jip.2024.06153:1Online publication date: 2024
  • (2024)Development of a Training Course Focused on Enhancing Teachers' Abilities in Using Interactive Electronic Whiteboard ApplicationsInternational Journal of Sociologies and Anthropologies Science Reviews10.60027/ijsasr.2024.45384:6(31-46)Online publication date: 7-Nov-2024
  • (2024)Beliefs in Online Professional Learning in Early Mathematics Teaching and Their Effects on Course EngagementInternational Journal of Virtual and Personal Learning Environments10.4018/IJVPLE.35730514:1(1-19)Online publication date: 7-Nov-2024
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. Deconstructing disengagement: analyzing learner subpopulations in massive open online courses

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    LAK '13: Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge
    April 2013
    300 pages
    ISBN:9781450317856
    DOI:10.1145/2460296
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Sponsors

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 08 April 2013

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. MOOCs
    2. learner engagement patterns
    3. learning analytics

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article

    Conference

    LAK '13
    Sponsor:

    Acceptance Rates

    LAK '13 Paper Acceptance Rate 16 of 58 submissions, 28%;
    Overall Acceptance Rate 236 of 782 submissions, 30%

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)232
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)24
    Reflects downloads up to 01 Jan 2025

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2024)Student’s Experiences Using ChatGPT for Academic PurposesJournal of Interdisciplinary Perspectives10.69569/jip.2024.06153:1Online publication date: 2024
    • (2024)Development of a Training Course Focused on Enhancing Teachers' Abilities in Using Interactive Electronic Whiteboard ApplicationsInternational Journal of Sociologies and Anthropologies Science Reviews10.60027/ijsasr.2024.45384:6(31-46)Online publication date: 7-Nov-2024
    • (2024)Beliefs in Online Professional Learning in Early Mathematics Teaching and Their Effects on Course EngagementInternational Journal of Virtual and Personal Learning Environments10.4018/IJVPLE.35730514:1(1-19)Online publication date: 7-Nov-2024
    • (2024)The Ethical Dimensions of AI Development in the Future of Higher EducationEthical Dimensions of AI Development10.4018/979-8-3693-4147-6.ch018(401-436)Online publication date: 16-Aug-2024
    • (2024)Individual learning paths mastering teachers’ professional visionFrontiers in Education10.3389/feduc.2024.13050739Online publication date: 1-Feb-2024
    • (2024)Exploration of the online learners’ actions: A sequence mining approachOnline Journal of Communication and Media Technologies10.30935/ojcmt/1495714:4(e202446)Online publication date: 2024
    • (2024)Health Care Workers’ Motivations for Enrolling in Massive Open Online Courses During a Public Health Emergency: Descriptive AnalysisJMIR Medical Education10.2196/5191510(e51915-e51915)Online publication date: 19-Jun-2024
    • (2024)IDENTIFYING BEHAVIORAL PATTERNS IN MOOC VIDEO ENGAGEMENT USING CLUSTERING APPROACHEğitim Teknolojisi Kuram ve Uygulama10.17943/etku.1367188Online publication date: 13-Feb-2024
    • (2024)Performance of students with different accessibility needs and preferences in “Design for All” MOOCsPLOS ONE10.1371/journal.pone.029909019:3(e0299090)Online publication date: 7-Mar-2024
    • (2024)Overview of Artificial Intelligence Applications in Educational ResearchProceedings of the 2024 International Symposium on Artificial Intelligence for Education10.1145/3700297.3700315(101-108)Online publication date: 6-Sep-2024
    • Show More Cited By

    View Options

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media