Conference PaperPDF Available

Socio-Temporal Dynamics in Peer Interaction Events

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

Asynchronous online discussions are broadly used to support peer interaction in online and hybrid courses. In this paper, we argue that the analysis of online peer interactions would benefit from the focus on relational events that are temporal and occur due to a range of factors. To demonstrate the possibility, we applied Relational Event Modeling (REM) to a dataset from online discussions in seven online classes. Informed by a conceptual model of social interaction in online discussions, this modeling included (a) a learner attribute capturing aspects of temporal participation, (b) social dynamics factors such as preferential attachment and reciprocity, and (c) turn- by-turn sequential patterns. Results showed that learner activity and familiarity from recent interactions affected their propensity to form ties. Turn-by-turn sequential patterns, that capture individual posting in bursts, explain how two-star network patterns form. Since two-star network patterns could further facilitate small group formation in the network, we expected the models to also capture communication in triads (i.e. triadic closure). Yet, models, devoid of the content of exchanges, did not capture the social dynamics well, and failed to predict patterns for communication across triads. By bringing in discourse features, future work can investigate the role of knowledge building behaviours in triadic closure of digital networks. This study contributes fresh insights into social interaction in online discussions, calls for attention to micro-level temporal patterns, and motivates future work to scaffold learner participation in similar contexts.
Content may be subject to copyright.
Socio-Temporal Dynamics in Peer Interaction Events
Bodong Chen
College of Education and Human Development
University of Minnesota–Twin Cities
Minneapolis, USA
chenbd@umn.edu
Oleksandra Poquet
Centre for Change and Complexity in Learning (C3L)
University of South Australia
Adelaide, SA, Australia
sasha.poquet@unisa.edu.au
ABSTRACT
Asynchronous online discussions are broadly used to support peer
interaction in online and hybrid courses. In this paper, we argue
that the analysis of online peer interactions would benet from the
focus on relational events that are temporal and occur due to a range
of factors. To demonstrate the possibility, we applied Relational
Event Modeling (REM) to a dataset from online discussions in seven
online classes. Informed by a conceptual model of social interaction
in online discussions, this modeling included (a) a learner attribute
capturing aspects of temporal participation, (b) social dynamics
factors such as preferential attachment and reciprocity, and (c) turn-
by-turn sequential patterns. Results showed that learner activity
and familiarity from recent interactions aected their propensity to
form ties. Turn-by-turn sequential patterns, that capture individual
posting in bursts, explain how two-star network patterns form.
Since two-star network patterns could further facilitate small group
formation in the network, we expected the models to also capture
communication in triads (i.e. triadic closure). Yet, models, devoid of
the content of exchanges, did not capture the social dynamics well,
and failed to predict patterns for communication across triads. By
bringing in discourse features, future work can investigate the role
of knowledge building behaviours in triadic closure of digital net-
works. This study contributes fresh insights into social interaction
in online discussions, calls for attention to micro-level temporal
patterns, and motivates future work to scaold learner participation
in similar contexts.
CCS CONCEPTS
Human-centered computing Social network analysis
;
Web-based interaction
;
Information systems
Social net-
working sites;Clustering.
KEYWORDS
Relational event modelling, temporality, digital peer networks
ACM Reference Format:
Bodong Chen and Oleksandra Poquet. 2020. Socio-Temporal Dynamics in
Peer Interaction Events. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference
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 prot or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation
on the rst page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the
author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or
republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specic permission
and/or a fee. Request permissions from permissions@acm.org.
LAK ’20, March 23–27, 2020, Frankfurt, Germany
©2020 Copyright held by the owner/author(s). Publication rights licensed to ACM.
ACM ISBN 978-1-4503-7712-6/20/03. . . $15.00
https://doi.org/10.1145/3375462.3375535
on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (LAK ’20), March 23–27, 2020, Frank-
furt, Germany. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 6 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/
3375462.3375535
1 INTRODUCTION
Online learning frequently appears in the strategic plan of educa-
tional institutions. In higher education, an increasing number of
universities and colleges are putting their degrees online, while
hybrid courses have become the “new normal”. In K-12, the applica-
tion of online learning is also growing, not only to facilitate student
learning but also to enable richer teacher professional development
opportunities.
In online and hybrid learning experiences, asynchronous online
discussion is broadly used to support learners’ social participa-
tion and peer interaction. Online learning environments are often
equipped with asynchronous discussion forums. Instructional de-
signs also tend to incorporate online discussions to facilitate various
learning activities, such as reection on readings, question and an-
swers, and peer dialogues [
8
]. To support productive discussion
experiences, pedagogical strategies are proposed such as incorpo-
rating questioning strategies [
27
], engaging students in role-taking
[
28
], and inviting learners to take responsibility in identifying key
or promising ideas in discussion threads [
5
,
10
]. Technological in-
novations are also proposed to promote active participation and
deep engagement in online discussions. For instance, new graphi-
cal interfaces are invented to better support purposeful attention
to existing posts in online discussions[
17
]; social network sites,
such as Facebook and Edmodo, are adopted in both formal and
informal learning settings to foster peer connectedness and collabo-
ration [
24
,
29
]. Empirical studies in various contexts have reported
a positive association between discussion participation and learn-
ing performance [
11
,
12
,
31
], showing the promise of sustaining
eective discussions for learning.
In spite of prior work in these areas, the fundamental social
mechanisms that drive peer interaction in asynchronous online
discussions remain under-examined. Extant work rarely addresses
peer interaction in online discussions as a complex phenomenon
shaped by a range of factors related to learner attributes, social
dynamics, pedagogical designs, and technological constraints. This
study attempts to bridge the knowledge gap by tackling the fol-
lowing overarching question: What are the mechanisms of social
interaction in asynchronous online discussions? To this end, we
applied relational event modeling (REM)—a powerful network mod-
elling approach—to a rich dataset comprising seven online classes.
In the following sections, we rst construct a conceptual model of
social interaction in online discussions. We then introduce the REM
study and report its ndings. Finally, conceptual, pedagogical, and
methodological implications are discussed.
LAK ’20, March 23–27, 2020, Frankfurt, Germany Bodong Chen and Oleksandra Poquet
2 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
Conceptually, we posit that social interactions in online forums
need to be examined as events instead of states. Current research
is predominately focused on examining the state of “social rela-
tions” as static relationship networks. We argue for the need to
unpack the process in which a series of events engender a partic-
ular state. For an event, e.g., A posts a comment on a post made
by B, we need to recognize a “conceptual leap” often made by re-
searchers from such a socio-technical interaction (that involves
people, ideas, and technology) to an interpersonal interaction (i.e.,
A->B). This conceptual leap, often done unintentionally, has im-
portant consequences for our understanding of online discussions.
One signicant consequence is we lose sight of the nuanced context
in which an event occurs, as well as the unfolding events come
to shape future events. Therefore, we propose to investigate in-
teractions in online discussions as temporal networks that unfold
temporally through participation that focus on relational events in-
stead of states engendered by these events. To conceptually ground
this study, in this section we outline dierent factors that could
impact the formation of such temporal activity-driven networks in
online discussions.
2.1 Learner Heterogeneity in Posting Activity
Learners bring unique understandings, habits, and dispositions
into online discussions. Learners may set their own participation
goals based on personal interests and aspirations. They may have a
unique schedule of participation. Some would prefer more “listen-
ing” before posting ideas.
The analysis of relational events needs to nd ways to account
for learner heterogeneity. For example, to capture the intensity
of learners’ posting activity, one common approach is to count
the number of posts contributed by each learner. The timing and
spacing of each learner’s engagement can also be characterized
using log data [
23
]. In an early work, Macfadyen and Dawson [
16
]
showed a strong association between the number of discussion
replies posted and learner nal grade (r =.94, p<.0001). Joksimovic
et al. [
13
] note the number of posts as the most common measure
of social learning in MOOCs. Although studies have reported di-
verse evidence around the strength of relationship between learner
posting activity and grades, forum posts are commonly included in
modelling learner engagement and predicting completion [14].
2.2 Pedagogical Practices
Online discussions are not created equal. Research shows factors
such as discussion guidelines, deadlines, feedback, and instructor
presence aect the resulting discourse [
8
]. Types of discussion activ-
ities, such as discussing course readings, sharing new stories, peer
feedback, and building group knowledge, are all of educational value
and present in online and hybrid courses. The discussion guidelines
would naturally shape the nature and intensity of discussion. So
does the instructor’s decision to participate in the discussion [8].
Among these factors, time, in particular, shapes the learner’s
perception, experience, understanding of time online, and hereby
one’s online participation [
20
]. There is a delicate dance between the
instructor’s temporal expectations (e.g., participation deadlines) and
learner heterogeneity in individual posting that would contribute
to social structures in an online discussion space. Recent work
highlights the association between learners’ social positions and
their timing behaviors in online discussions; in particular, learners
organize themselves around the pedagogical structure of deadlines,
leading to varied conditions for social encountering and positioning
[4].
2.3 Social Dynamics
For a given pedagogical condition, there are a range of sociological
factors that could inuence social interaction. For example, while
instructor presence may set a general tone for class dialogues [
8
],
at a micro-level being the instructor poses superior pressure that
attracts student attention and interactions. Empirical studies, how-
ever, have arrived at mixed ndings, with some ndings showing
the instructor’s posts did not show higher probabilities of being
replied [
32
]. Peer pressure can have a positive impact on participa-
tion intent as well [
30
]. Even when the instructor sets participation
goals, active or “super” posters in a class could generate peer pres-
sure on a learner’s participation. Like in other social environments,
being popular (e.g., receiving more replies) helps attract even more
attention [
26
]; this eect of preferential attachment is observed in
scientic collaboration networks and social network sites [18, 19].
Reciprocity is also found to play a role in online discussions based
on quantitative and qualitative accounts [
1
,
6
]. These sociologi-
cal factors contribute to one’s social or relational capital in online
discussion environments, which in turn shapes forthcoming inter-
actions.
Figure 1: Conceptual model of social interaction in online
discussions
2.4 Technological Features
Besides individual, pedagogical, and social conditions, technolog-
ical congurations of online discussions are too often neglected
in research reports. As a matter of fact, technological features of
forums shape a learner’s interaction with technology and peers [
9
].
For example, when discussion posts are presented as a dynamic
hyperbolic tree instead of a discussion thread, students are found
purposefully selecting which discussion threads to read [
17
]. When
Socio-Temporal Dynamics in Peer Interaction Events LAK ’20, March 23–27, 2020, Frankfurt, Germany
online discussions happen in specialty software designed by re-
searchers, we need to be transparent about “pedagogical biases”
embodied in technological features [
25
]. When general purpose
tools such as Facebook and Twitter are used, we need to be clear
about how their technological features are mobilized to serve ed-
ucational purposes [
22
]. In addition, we need to interrogate ways
in which technological features and algorithmic decisions (e.g.,
sorting algorithms) implicitly shape interaction patterns in online
discussions [4].
Taken together, social participation and interaction in asynchro-
nous online discussions is a complex phenomenon shaped by vari-
ous factors. Figure 1 illustrates a conceptual model we developed to
guide our investigation of contributing factors. This model intends
to help us operationalize our study and is by no means comprehen-
sive. Cross-cutting factors may also exist and interact with factors
elaborated above.
3 METHODS
To examine social interaction in online discussions as networks un-
folding temporally, we adopted Relational Event Modelling (REM),
a framework that allows researchers to understand how networked
structures emerge from relational events and shape subsequent
interactions [
2
]. We applied REM to a secondary dataset from an
online discussion environment.
3.1 Description of Data
3.1.1 Context. The study was situated in seven online courses at a
large public university in the United States. Six courses were about
business management, information technologies, and ethics.
3.1.2 The Discussion Environment. All courses incorporated Yel-
lowdig, a discussion environment for educational use, as a primary
medium for peer interaction. Students in all classes participated
weekly on Yellowdig to discuss readings and share ideas. Dier-
ent courses have set dierent expectations of participation. For
example, one course required students to minimally contribute one
post in response to instructor prompts and comment on two posts
each week; another course asked students to generally share news
articles related to the course content and comment on each other
to earn up to 10 points each week.
3.1.3 Data Structure. The discussion environment Yellowdig re-
sembles social network sites like Facebook. Students could initiate
a post, known as a pin, that can be commented on or reacted to by
members of the class. Students could also mention each other in
a post or comment. Like most social network sites, Yellowdig was
also implemented with a news feed powered by a sorting algorithm,
which placed posts with the most recent activities on the top. As
such, technological features in Yellowdig are designed to promote
social interaction.
Interaction data from Yellowdig, including 6,354 discussion ac-
tions (e.g., making a pin, commenting on a pin, reacting to a pin)
from a total of 281 students, were the primary data source. Course
materials, including the syllabus and weekly announcements, were
gathered to contextualize the interpretation.
3.2 Data Analyses
3.2.1 Profiling Learners on Timing. Given that no demographic
information, performance, or discourse about the learners was
available for this study, modelling had very little information about
the learners. To this end, we adopted an approach similar to that
in Park et al. [
21
] where nite mixture models [
7
] were used to
group learners based on the total of their logs per each day of
the week. These latent classes captured how much platform use
learner engaged in on each given weekday. The latent classes, i.e.
those interpreted as time-consistent posters and last-minute posters,
were regressed to the volume of platform-use-logs, to help interpret
the clusters. Information about the timing of activity was used as
controls in the nal REM model – to improve the estimation of the
relationship between posting events and emergent social dynamics.
Clustered logs included diverse granular behaviors, namely: cre-
ating a pin (making an initial thematic post), visiting a pin, editing
a pin, editing a comment, liking a comment, ‘loving’ a pin, deleting
a pin, as well as creating and voting a pin.
We do not include any statistics related to the timing proles,
as this paper’s scope is limited to presenting the results of the
modelling, and timing proles were used only to capture similarity
in synchronous patterns of the learners reported in the nal REM
models for each course.
3.2.2 Relational Event Modelling. To address the major research
question about potential contributing factors, we applied a novel
network analysis approach named Relational Event Modeling (REM)
[
2
]. Detailed explanations of REM can be found elsewhere [
2
,
15
].
Formally, Butts and Marcum [
3
], expressed a relational event model
as
λaAtθ=(exp(θτu(s(a),r(a),c(a),Xa,At)) i f a A(At)
0otherwise (1)
where
λ
represents the hazard of potential event aat time tgiven
history At; whereas a vector of real-valued parameters is
θ
; and
uis a vector of statistics, such as the sender, receiver, covariates,
prior event history (p.8).
Put simply, a relational event is dened as a “discrete event gen-
erated by a social actor and directed toward one or more targets”
[
2
, p. 159]. For example, Student A replies to B at time t1 is one
relational event a1, and B responds to A at a later time t2 is a newer
relational event that might have been triggered by a1. The cen-
tral goal of REM is to “understand how past interactions aect
the emergence of future interactions” [
2
, p. 533], based on a set of
derived statistics about (a) past relational events (e.g., frequency of
previous A
B events), (b) actor attributes (e.g., gender, roles), and
(c) exogenous contextual factors (e.g., friendship). Take the statistic
of reciprocity, for example. It indicates the likelihood of Student B
replying to A if A has recently commented on B. Statistics as such
capture both social and sequential information and are also referred
to as Sequential Structural Signatures (SSSs) of group dynamics
[
15
]. In this study, we trained multiple relational event models in-
corporating a range of SSSs, which could potentially shape peer
interaction in our research context. We tted these models follow-
ing a forward selection strategy and evaluated model adequacy
LAK ’20, March 23–27, 2020, Frankfurt, Germany Bodong Chen and Oleksandra Poquet
Table 1: Relational event modelling of interactive activity that comprised: created_pin, created_comment, like_pin,
liked_comment, love_pin, unliked_comment events.
Course 1 Course 2 Course 3 Course 4 Course 5 Course 6 Course 7
Node & Dyad Attributes
Sending (Time Consistent (TC)) 0.01 (0.1) 0.4 (0.1) *** 0.3 (0.1) 0.5 (0.2) *** 0.34 (0.1) * 0.2 (0.1)* 0.2 (0.1) .
Receiving TC 0.23 (0.1) * 0.02 (0.1) 0.4 (0.1) ** -0.42 (0.2) * -0.2 (0.2) 0.1 (0.1) 0.1 (0.1)
Homophily TC Controlled for
Sending Teacher 0.8 (0.2) *** 0.7 (0.2) *** 0.4 (0.2) 0.5 (0.2)** 1 (0.2) *** -0.8 (0.4)* 0.1 (0.3)
Receiving Teacher -2.1 (0.4) *** -2 (0.3) *** -0.8 (0.2) ** -0.5 (0.2) * -0.7 (0.3) * 0.3 (0.2) . 0.7 (0.2) ***
Structure
Degree (NTDegRec) 9.6 12.6 (0.8)*** 11.3 (1.4) *** 11.5 (1) *** 7.9 (1.3)*** 14 (1) *** 14 (1.2) ***
Reciprocity (RRecSnd) 0.47 (0.1)** 1.04 (0.1) *** 0.8 (0.1) *** 0.6 (0.2) ** 0.44 (0.2) . 0.3 (0.2) . 0.56 (0.2)***
Familiarity (RSndSnd) 1.06 (0.1)*** 2.42 (0.1) *** 2.2 (0.1) *** 2.3 (0.1)*** 1.6 (0.2) *** 2 (0.11) *** 1.29 (0.12)***
Closure (ISPSnd) 0.04 (0.01)*** 0.06 (0.02)*** -0.06 (0.1) ** 0.03 (0.01)* 0.03 (0.4) 0.01 (0.01) 0.03 (0.08)***
Immedaite Eects
Reciprocity (AB-BA) -0.33 (0.4) 2.3 (0.4)*** 1.8 (0.4) ** 1.5 (0.6)* 0.99 (0.8) 0.9 (1) 2 (0.5)***
Pay-it-forward (AB-BY) -2.4 (0.3)*** 0.9 (0.2) *** 0.83 (0.27) ** 0.1 (0.3) -0.1 (0.4) -0.1 (0.3) 0.56 (0.2)***
Activity bursts (AB-AY) 1.22 (0.1)*** 4.5 (0.1) *** 3.58 (0.1) *** 3.4 (0.1)*** 2.74 (0.2) *** 3.8 (0.1) *** 3.8 (0.1) ***
Popularity (AB-XB) -0.48 (0.1)*** 2.6 (0.1) *** 1.6 (0.2) *** 1.1 (0.2)*** 1 (0.2) *** 1.7 (0.1) *** 1.4 (0.2)***
AIC Null 6897 34130 6213 7616 3503 13053 12042
BIC Null 6897 34130 6213 7616 3503 13053 12042
AIC Final 5610 27201 4916 6286 3003 10756 9875
BIC Final 65610 27274 4969 6342 3051 10818 9936
Accuracy 0.72 0.68 0.78 0.69 0.67 0.68 0.67
based on the AIC (Akaike information criterion) and BIC (Bayesian
information criterion) scores [
2
]. A maximum likelihood estimate
(MLE) in a model provides an indication of the odds of a relational
event given the specied conditions.
4 RESULTS
4.1 Social and Temporal Dynamics
Outputs of the relational event models are reported in Table 1.
The rst set of hypotheses related to the propensity of individual-
level attributes to aect tie formation. Specically, we examined if
learners with time-consistent patterns of logging into the platform
to post were also more likely to send or receive ties (Hypotheses
1a and 1b). We observed that those learners who engaged with the
platform on the same weekdays with eort spread out across several
days (i.e. time-consistent) showed a positive tendency to send ties
to other learners. A signicantly positive propensity for these more
self-regulated learners to send ties was observed in three out of
seven models. These learners were also more likely to receive ties -
with positive and signicant coecients in two models. It is worth
noting that the sending and receiving dynamics for time-consistent
posters was not co-occurrent, i.e. we did not observe it in the same
courses. Generally, this suggests that timing of posting is a factor in
how networked structures of digital learning communication form.
Another set of hypothesis related to the role of the instructor
in how communication evolves (Hypotheses 1c and 1d). In four out
of seven models, the instructor was more likely to send ties. In six
out of seven models, the instructor was less likely to receive ties.
This suggests that instructors were present in the communication,
but their involvement was likely to facilitate inter-peer behaviors,
rather than instructor-learner interactions.
In terms of the structural elements, we modelled series of dier-
ent hypotheses.
H2a. Learner total activity aected future incoming ties. This hy-
pothesis was conrmed as positive and signicant in six out of
seven models, with large coecients for all courses. That is, the
more active the learner was, the more likely she was to receive
replies with the course progression.
H2b. Networks are described by temporal reciprocity, i.e. fraction
of ties from A to B, aected future sending ties of B to A. This hypoth-
esis was conrmed as positive and signicant in four out of seven
models. That is, the more replies a learner sent to the same person,
the higher the likelihood that this person would also be replying
with the progression of time.
H2c. Familiarity aects future tie formation, i.e. recency of sending
from A to B, aects tie formation from A to B. Recency of sending
ties was found to aect tie-sending in the future through positively
signicant coecient in all seven models. That is, learners were
more likely to reply to someone in the future, if they had engaged
with the person in a discussion previously.
H2d. Two learners who reply to the same third learner will form a
tie, i.e. closure hypothesis. Although closure was signicant in four
models, the coecients were low, suggesting that closure was not
captured well.
Finally, the third set of hypotheses examined diverse patterns of
sequential micro-level patterns. The eects related to immediacy in
learner interactions improved the model t signicantly across all
the courses. Immediate reciprocity, i.e. B would respond to A right
after A would send a tie to B, was conrmed through positive and
signicant coecients in four models (Hypothesis 3a). Immediate
two-path feature (A sending ties to B, B sending ties to C right
afterwards) that hypothesized that learners were likely to engage
if they received a reply, produced mixed results (Hypothesis 3b).
Socio-Temporal Dynamics in Peer Interaction Events LAK ’20, March 23–27, 2020, Frankfurt, Germany
Overall the coecients were low, and positive or negative across
the models. Perhaps one of the strongest immediacy parameters
was that of activity bursts (Hypothesis 3c). Sending ties consequently
to dierent learners (A to B, A to C) in a two-star pattern showed
large coecients that were positive and signicant in all seven
models. This reects the nature of posting behaviour as a part of
assignment - when learners respond to several learners as they log
into the platform. Finally, popularity, or more precisely, sequential
incoming replies, modeled as a temporal in-degree 2-star (A to B, C
to B) showed positive and signicant coecients across all models,
except one (Hypothesis 3d).
4.2 Goodness of Fit
Although all the nal REM models (tted iteratively to capture
degree, reciprocity, closure, as well as exogenous factors, and imme-
diacy patterns) showed improvement in AIC from the null model
(reported in the Results, Table 1), the accuracy of prediction var-
ied. We examined what events (posting activity) the models were
failing to predict. From the plots of surprising events (i.e. events
that the models did not predict well), it appeared that closure was
not explained by the closure patterns included in the model. In
other words, discussion online was resulting in patterns of triads
that were not explained by any of the parameters included in the
models. Although we controlled for possible homophily through
attributes of learner activity and learner timing, the models still
did not capture clustering well. One reason for this could be that
these models exclusively used log data and timestamps from the
discussion forums. We suggest that the closure in the network is
subject to the text posted by learners that mediates these peer in-
teractions. It is also plausible that the closure resulted from visiting
someone’s pin that was found attractive. Perhaps, interviews with
students and collection of self-reports around their reactions to
posted discourse can help shed light on the potential dynamics.
5 DISCUSSION
The study is framed from the perspective that interactions in digital
learning settings would benet from focusing on relational events
rather than relational states. To demonstrate the possibility, we
applied Relational Event Modeling (REM) to a dataset from seven
online classes. In the modelling, we included a learner attribute of
temporal participation, alongside socio-temporal factors such as
preferential attachment and reciprocity formed through timing or
sequences of peer interaction. We found that temporality adds a new
dimension to the analyses of peer interactions. Social dynamics and
temporal dynamics in these networks are intertwined as showed
by improvement in the models when adding immediacy eects.
Activity is heavily driving network formation, whereas social eects
of reciprocity and closure are rather low.
Approaching digital peer interactions as relational events high-
lights that peer event networks are formed by learner activity.
Teacher presence was observed as signicant across most courses,
but it appears not to impact learner reciprocal activity towards the
instructor. Instead, tie formation between the learners seems to
result from rather random processes, such as familiarity based on
recency and co-occurrence. We have not observed the eect from
homophily based on timing controls.
REMs also reveal that temporal behaviors at the dyadic level may
emulate structures similar to social dynamics (i.e. transitivity, two-
paths, or two-stars). Yet, failure of the model to predict clustering
in the network suggests that these patterns only look like social
dynamics, without necessarily representing it.
Empirical ndings from this study are of scholarly and practical
signicance. Compared to earlier studies applying REM in educa-
tional contexts, we theorised dierent processes of network forma-
tion in online discussions, applied REM to a unique context, and
combined temporal and social dimensions of network formation. To
better understand underlying social dynamics in such text-mediated
peer interaction events, we suggest that future work should focus
on the role of knowledge construction behaviors in relation to
triadic closure patterns and homophily. It may be plausible that
learners exchange interactions based on demographic variables
underpinning their identities. However, it is more likely that the
complementarity of learner communication strategies drives the
interpersonal aspects of their interaction. Future work can also
explore comparing and combining REM with discourse analyses.
This study contributes fresh insights into social interaction in
online discussions, calls for attention to micro-level temporal pat-
terns, and motivates future work to scaold learner participation in
similar contexts. Results suggest that including information about
temporality of peer interaction events is relevant. However, further
information is required to better understand what mediates these
interaction events.
REFERENCES
[1]
Reuven Aviv and Gilad Ravid. 2005. Reciprocity analysis of online learning
networks. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 9, 4 (2005), 3–13.
[2]
Carter T Butts. 2008. A Relational Event Framework for Social Action. Sociological
Methodology 38, 1 (2008), 155–200.
[3]
Carter T Butts and Christopher Steven Marcum. 2017. A relational event approach
to modeling behavioral dynamics. In Group Processes. Springer, 51–92.
[4]
Bodong Chen and Tianhui Huang. 2019. It is about timing: Network prestige in
asynchronous online discussions. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning (2019).
[5]
Bodong Chen, Marlene Scardamalia, and Carl Bereiter. 2015. Advancing
knowledge-building discourse through judgments of promising ideas. Interna-
tional Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning 10, 4 (2015), 345–366.
[6]
Wing Sum Cheung, Khe Foon Hew, and Connie Siew Ling Ng. 2008. Toward an
understanding of why students contribute in asynchronous online discussions.
Journal of Educational Computing Research 38, 1 (2008), 29–50.
[7]
Partha Deb and Pravin K Trivedi. 2013. Finite mixture for panels with xed
eects. Journal of Econometric Methods 2, 1 (2013), 35–51.
[8]
Vanessa Paz Dennen*. 2005. From message posting to learning dialogues: Factors
aecting learner participation in asynchronous discussion. Distance Education
26, 1 (2005), 127–148.
[9]
Mark Guzdial and Jennifer Turns. 2000. Eective discussion through a computer-
mediated anchored forum. The journal of the learning sciences 9, 4 (2000), 437–469.
[10]
Jim Hewitt and Clare Brett. 2011. Engaging learners in the identication of
key ideas in complex online discussions.. In Connecting Computer-Supported
Collaborative Learning to Policy and Practice (CSCL2011 Conference Proceedings).
960–961.
[11]
I Jo, Yeonjeong Park, and H Lee. 2017. Three interaction patterns on asynchronous
online discussion behaviours: A methodological comparison. Journal of Computer
Assisted Learning 33, 2 (2017), 106–122.
[12]
Srećko Joksimović, Dragan Gašević, Vitomir Kovanović, Bernhard E Riecke, and
Marek Hatala. 2015. Social presence in online discussions as a process predictor
of academic performance. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 31, 6 (2015),
638–654.
[13]
Srećko Joksimović, Oleksandra Poquet, Vitomir Kovanović, Nia Dowell, Caitlin
Mills, Dragan Gašević, Shane Dawson, Arthur C Graesser, and Christopher
Brooks. 2018. How do we model learning at scale? A systematic review of
research on MOOCs. Review of Educational Research 88, 1 (2018), 43–86.
[14]
René F Kizilcec and Emily Schneider. 2015. Motivation as a lens to understand
online learners: Towarddata-driven design with the OLEI scale. ACMTransactions
on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) 22, 2 (2015), 6.
LAK ’20, March 23–27, 2020, Frankfurt, Germany Bodong Chen and Oleksandra Poquet
[15]
Contractor Noshir Leenders, Roger and Leslie DeChurch. 2016. Once upon a
time: Understanding team processes as relational event networks. Organizational
Psychology Review 6, 1 (2016), 92–115.
[16]
Leah P Macfadyen and Shane Dawson. 2012. Numbers are not enough. Why
e-learning analytics failed to inform an institutional strategic plan. Journal of
Educational Technology & Society 15, 3 (2012), 149–163.
[17]
Farshid Marbouti and Alyssa Friend Wise. 2016. Starburst: a new graphical
interface to support purposeful attention to others’ posts in online discussions.
Educational Technology Research and Development 64, 1 (2016), 87–113.
[18]
Alan Mislove, Hema Swetha Koppula, Krishna P Gummadi, Peter Druschel, and
Bobby Bhattacharjee. 2008. Growth of the ickr social network. In Proceedings of
the rst workshop on Online social networks. ACM, 25–30.
[19]
Mark EJ Newman. 2001. Clustering and preferential attachment in growing
networks. Physical review E 64, 2 (2001), 025102.
[20]
Murat Oztok, Lesley Wilton, Kyungmee Lee, Daniel Zingaro, Kim Mackinnon,
Alexandra Makos, Krystle Phirangee, Clare Brett, and Jim Hewitt. 2014. Polysyn-
chronous: dialogic construction of time in online learning. E-learning and digital
media 11, 2 (2014), 154–161.
[21]
Jihyun Park, Renzhe Yu, Fernando Rodriguez, Rachel Baker, Padhraic Smyth, and
Mark Warschauer. 2018. Understanding Student Procrastination via Mixture
Models. International Educational Data Mining Society (2018).
[22]
Peter Ractham, Laddawan Kaewkitipong, and Daniel Firpo. 2012. The use of Face-
book in an introductory MIS course: Social constructivist learning environment.
Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education 10, 2 (2012), 165–188.
[23]
Jeremy Riel, Kimberly A Lawless, and Scott W Brown. 2018. Timing Matters:
Approaches for Measuring and Visualizing Behaviours of Timing and Spacing of
Work in Self-Paced Online Teacher Professional Development Courses. Journal
of Learning Analytics 5, 1 (2018), 25–40.
[24]
Christina Sadowski, Mika Pediaditis, and Robert Townsend. 2017. University
students’ perceptions of social networking sites (SNSs) in their educational expe-
riences at a regional Australian university. Australasian Journal of Educational
Technology 33, 5 (2017).
[25]
Marlene Scardamalia and Carl Bereiter. 2008. Pedagogical biases in educational
technologies. Educational Technology (2008), 3–11.
[26]
Luis Vaquero and Manuel Cebrian. 2013. The rich club phenomenon in the
classroom. Scientic reports 3 (2013), 1174.
[27]
C-H Wang. 2005. Questioning skills facilitate online synchronous discussions.
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 21, 4 (2005), 303–313.
[28]
Alyssa Wise and Ming Ming. Chiu. 2011. Knowledge construction patterns in
online conversation: A statistical discourse analysis of a role-based discussion
forum.. In Connecting Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning to Policy and
Practice (CSCL2011 Conference Proceedings). 64–71.
[29]
Samantha Won, Michael Evans, and Lixiao Huang. 2017. Engagement and knowl-
edge building in an afterschool STEM Club: analyzing youth and facilitator
posting behavior on a social networking site. Learning, Media and Technology 42,
3 (2017), 331–356.
[30]
Xue Yang, Yan Li, Chuan-Hoo Tan, and Hock-Hai Teo. 2007. Students’ partic-
ipation intention in an online discussion forum: Why is computer-mediated
interaction attractive? Information & Management 44, 5 (2007), 456–466.
[31]
Binbin Zheng and Mark Warschauer. 2015. Participation, interaction, and aca-
demic achievement in an online discussion environment. Computers & Education
84 (2015), 78–89.
[32]
Daniel Zingaro and Murat Oztok. 2012. Interaction in an asynchronous online
course: A synthesis of quantitative predictors. Journal of Asynchronous Learning
Networks 16, 4 (2012), 71–82.
... In parallel to these more conventional applications, recent work has started to extend inquiry that is typical of social science and complex network research to educational settings, particularly those that are digitally mediated. Examples include research focused on network mechanisms (i.e., why digital networks form [37], (identification of network measurements that properly account for time in relational processes [38], and network approaches for the analysis of multivariate psychological survey data [39], [40]. Routinely collected digital data of student location, such as WiFi, have also been analyzed via network approaches to understand student collocation in face-to-face settings in relation to performance [41]. ...
... Network inference methods go beyond describing the network and offer a powerful analytical framework for causal inference and theory formulation that can help understand the processes behind network generation while accounting for the complex dependencies between network elements [106], [113]. In doing so, it allows us to explain why a phenomenon occurs, i.e., why a student chose to engage in an interaction, why and how a collaborative group formed, or why there is an association between an element of discourse and another [37]. Given the complexity, the relational nature, and the multiple dependencies between learners and learning processes, network inference methods seem to offer a muchneeded solution that could advance our understanding of learning [114]. ...
Article
Full-text available
For over five decades, researchers have used network analysis to understand educational contexts, spanning diverse disciplines and thematic areas. The wealth of traditions and insights accumulated through these interdisciplinary efforts is a challenge to synthesize with a traditional systematic review. To overcome this difficulty in reviewing 1791 articles researching the intersection of networks and education, this study combined a scientometric approach with a more qualitative analysis of metadata, such as keywords and authors. Our analysis shows rapidly growing research that employs network analysis in educational contexts. This research output is produced by researchers in a small number of developed countries. The field has grown more recently, through the surge in the popularity of data-driven methods, the adoption of social media, and themes as teacher professional development and the now-declining MOOC research. Our analysis suggests that research combining networks and educational phenomena continues to lack an academic home, as well as remains dominated by descriptive network methods that depict phenomena such as interpersonal friendship or patterns of discourse-based collaboration.
... In parallel to these more conventional applications, recent work has started to extend inquiry that is typical of social science and complex network research to educational settings, particularly those that are digitally mediated. Examples include research focused on network mechanisms (i.e., why digital networks form; [37], (identification of network measurements that properly account for time in relational processes [38], and network approaches for the analysis of multivariate psychological survey data [39], [40]. Routinely collected digital data of student location, such as WiFi, have also been analyzed via network approaches to understand student collocation in face-to-face settings in relation to performance [41]. ...
... Network inference methods go beyond describing the network and offer a powerful analytical framework for causal inference and theory formulation that can help understand the processes behind network generation while accounting for the complex dependencies between network elements [106], [113]. In doing so, it allows us to explain why a phenomenon occurs, i.e., why a student chose to engage in an interaction, why and how a collaborative group formed, or why there is an association between an element of discourse and another [37]. Given the complexity, the relational nature, and the multiple dependencies between learners and learning processes, network inference methods seem to offer a muchneeded solution that could advance our understanding of learning [114]. ...
Preprint
Full-text available
For over five decades, researchers have used network analysis to understand educational contexts, spanning diverse disciplines and thematic areas. The wealth of traditions and insights accumulated through these interdisciplinary efforts is a challenge to synthesize with a traditional systematic review. To overcome this difficulty in reviewing 1791 articles researching the intersection of networks and education, this study combined a scientometric approach with a more qualitative analysis of metadata, such as keywords and authors. Our analysis shows rapidly growing research that employs network analysis in educational contexts. This research output is produced by researchers in a small number of developed countries. The field has grown more recently, through the surge in the popularity of data-driven methods, the adoption of social media, and themes as teacher professional development and the now-declining MOOC research. Our analysis suggests that research combining networks and educational phenomena continues to lack an academic home, as well as remains dominated by descriptive network methods that depict phenomena such as interpersonal friendship or patterns of discourse-based collaboration.
... Recently, attention to the dynamics of learning has kindled the interest in methods that can be used to uncover the time dimension of the learning process, based on the examination of students' (log) data (Chen & Poquet, 2020;Csanadi et al., 2018;Vu et al., 2015). In their study on the use of log data for CSCL research, Wise and Schwarz (2017) assert that there is a wealth of data mining, natural language processing and multimodal analytics to support online and collocated CSCL. ...
... Their findings stress the mutual dependency between interactions in discussion forums on the one hand, and the measured academic success on the other, as well as between interactions in discussion forums and predicting future success. Similarly, Chen and Poquet (2020) have applied REM to capture aspects of temporal participation and social dynamic factors such as preferential attachment and reciprocity. They have been able to capture the bursty nature of interactions and the role of familiarity as a motivator to form ties. Saqr and Nouri (2020) used temporal network methods to visualize and quantify student interactions in a collaborative learning course setting. ...
Article
Full-text available
Social Network Analysis (SNA) has enabled researchers to understand and optimize the key dimensions of collaborative learning. A majority of SNA research has so far used static networks, ie, aggregated networks that compile interactions without considering when certain activities or relationships occurred. Compressing a temporal process by discarding time, however, may result in reductionist oversimplifications. In this study, we demonstrate the potentials of temporal networks in the analysis of on-line peer collaboration. In particular, we study: (1) social interactions by analysing learners' collaborative behaviour, part of a case study in which they worked on academic writing tasks, and (2) cognitive interactions through the analysis of students' self-regulated learning tactics. The study included 123 students and 2550 interactions. By using temporal networks, we show how to analyse the longitudinal evolution of a collaborative network visually and quantitatively. Correlation coefficients with grades, when calculated with time-respecting temporal measures of central-ity, were more correlated with learning outcomes than traditional centrality measures. Using temporal networks to analyse the co-temporal and longitudinal development, reach, and diffusion patterns of Funding information None
... In short, although the study offered insights about the types of interactions at different time points throughout the course, the modelling itself considered temporal change in a superficial manner. Other examples involve temporal modelling of posting as a networked activity (Castellanos-Reyes, 2021;Chen & Poquet, 2020). These studies are more sophisticated in how they integrate dynamics into modelling, but they fail to recognise that these changes occur at multiple levels, and that the levels can also interact (i.e. may serve as input for each other's dynamics). ...
... These examples quantify dynamics but are limited in their potential to explain the mechanism/dynamics of change -be it change at the level of a learner, group formation, or an evolution of a collective discussion. Throughout these examples the change is modelled only at one level of the system, i.e. at the level of the posting event (Chen & Poquet, 2020) or at the level of the state of the network tie representing presence of communication between the learners (Castellanos-Reyes, 2021). These temporal analyses do not integrate different system-levels bridging individual posting with communication ties. ...
Article
The ability to develop new skills and competencies is a central concept of lifelong learning. Research to date has largely focused on the processes and support individuals require to engage in upskilling, re-learning or training. However, there has been limited attention examining the types of support that are necessary to assist a learner’s transition from “old” workplace contexts to “new”. Professionals often undergo significant restructuring of their knowledge, skills, and identities as they transition between career roles, industries, and sectors. Domains such as learning analytics (LA) have the potential to support learners as they use the analysis of fine-grained data collected from education technologies. However, we argue that to support transitions throughout lifelong learning, LA needs fundamentally new analytical and methodological approaches. To enable insights, research needs to capture and explain variability, dynamics, and causal interactions between different levels of individual development, at varying time scales. Scholarly conceptions of the context in which transitions occur are also required. Our interdisciplinary argument builds on the synthesis of literature about transitions in the range of disciplinary and thematic domains such as conceptual change, shifts between educational systems, and changing roles during life course. We highlight specific areas in research designs and current analytical methods that hinder insight into transformational changes during transitions. The paper concludes with starting points and frameworks that can advance research in this area.
... As a first step, it is vital to determine appropriate time frames for such an analysis (Gašević et al., 2017) in order to organise activities and events into meaningful groups. The burst patterns that could be observed in this study and in similar studies in the field (e.g., Chen & Poquet, 2020;Saqr & Nouri, 2020) can serve as indicators to divide the interaction and collaboration process online into different clusters or cycles. ...
Chapter
The present chapter formulates and applies a range of network methods for the analysis of computer-mediated communication (CMC) to improve our understanding of CMC text in educational contexts. It uses data from a case study in which foreign language learners (N = 188) at a Japanese private university were given the opportunity to interact with their peers in a collaborative online space, part of a strategic self-regulated learning module. Special attention is paid to some key aspects of the social network analysis approach, including the need to incorporate temporal measures in such an analysis, as well as to some basic building blocks, including the creation of heatmaps. This chapter, furthermore, demonstrates how Smart CALL can serve as a contemporary, comprehensive lens through which data-driven methods for text analysis can be contextualised and explained.
... The final manuscript has been read and approved by all the authors. Chen and Poquet, 2020. ...
Article
Full-text available
Research has shown the value of social collaboration and the benefits it brings to learners. In this study, we investigate the worth of Social Network Analysis (SNA) in translating students' interactions in computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) into proxy indicators of achievement. Previous research has tested the correlation between SNA centrality measures and achievement. Some results indicate a positive association, while others do not. To synthesize research efforts, investigate which measures are of value, and how strong of an association exists, this article presents a systematic review and meta-analysis of 19 studies that included 33 cohorts and 16 centrality measures. Achievement was operationalized in most of the reviewed studies as final course or task grade. All studies reported that one or more centrality measures had a positive and significant correlation with, or a potential for predicting, achievement. Every centrality measure in the reviewed sample has shown a positive correlation with achievement in at least one study. In all the reviewed studies, degree centralities correlated with achievement in terms of final course grades or other achievement measure with the highest magnitude. Eigenvector-based centralities (Eigenvector, PageRank, hub, and authority values) were also positively correlated and mostly statistically significant in all the reviewed studies. These findings emphasize the robustness and reliability of degree-and eigenvector-based centrality measures in understanding students' interactions in relation to achievement. In contrast, betweenness and close-ness centralities have shown mixed or weak correlations with achievement. Taken together, our findings support the use of centrality measures as valid proxy indicators of academic achievement and their utility for monitoring interactions in collaborative learning settings.
... The participation of triadic closure in the formation of real complex networks was initially described in Rapoport (1953). Triadic closure is a generating mechanism that explains community creation in a variety of complex networks (Stolov et al. 2000;Mack 2001), including knowledge, citation and research collaboration (Jin et al. 2001;Wu and Holme 2009;Juhasz and Lengyel 2017;Golosovsky and Solomon 2017;Muppidi and Reddy 2020;Ren et al. 2012;Carayol et al. 2019), affiliation (Brunson 2015), social (Fang and Tang 2015;Bianconi et al. 2014;Huang et al. 2015Huang et al. , 2018Linyi and Shugang 2017;Huang et al. 2015), mobile network (Zhou et al. 2018), social interaction (Song et al. 2019;Li et al. 2013;Chen and Poquet 2020;Wharrie et al. 2019;Yin et al. 2019), financial (Souza and Aste 2019) and WWW-based networks (Louzoun et al. 2006). ...
Article
Full-text available
Many empirical studies have shown that in social, citation, collaboration, and other types of networks in real world, the degree of almost every node is less than the average degree of its neighbors. This imbalance is well known in sociology as the friendship paradox and states that your friends are more popular than you on average. If we introduce a value equal to the ratio of the average degree of the neighbors for a certain node to the degree of this node (which is called the ‘friendship index’, FI), then the FI value of more than 1 for most nodes indicates the presence of the friendship paradox in the network. In this paper, we study the behavior of the FI over time for networks generated by growth network models. We will focus our analysis on two models based on the use of the preferential attachment mechanism: the Barabási–Albert model and the triadic closure model. Using the mean-field approach, we obtain differential equations describing the dynamics of changes in the FI over time, and accordingly, after obtaining their solutions, we find the expected values of this index over iterations. The results show that the values of FI are decreasing over time for all nodes in both models. However, for networks constructed in accordance with the triadic closure model, this decrease occurs at a much slower rate than for the Barabási–Albert graphs. In addition, we analyze several real-world networks and show that their FI distributions follow a power law. We show that both the Barabási–Albert and the triadic closure networks exhibit the same behavior. However, for networks based on the triadic closure model, the distributions of FI are more heavy-tailed and, in this sense, are closer to the distributions for real networks.
Article
Full-text available
Network analytics has the potential to examine new behaviour patterns that are often hidden by the complexity of online interactions. One of the varied network analytics approaches and methods, the model of collective attention, takes an ecological system perspective to exploring the dynamic process of participation patterns in online and flexible learning environments. This study selected “Fundamentals of C++ programming (Spring 2019)” on XuetangX as an example through which to observe the allocation patterns of attention within MOOC videos, as well as how video features and engagement correlate with the accumulation, circulation, and dissipation pattern of collective attention. The results showed that the types of instructions in videos predicted attention allocation patterns, but they did not predict the engagement of video watching. Instead, the length and whether the full screen was used in the videos had a strong impact on engagement. Learners were more likely to reach a high level of engagement in video watching when their attention had been circulated around the videos. The results imply that understanding the patterns and dynamics of attention flow and how learners engage with videos will allow us to design cost-effective learning resources to prevent learners from becoming overloaded.
Article
Full-text available
FULL TEXT: https://learning-analytics.info/index.php/JLA/article/view/7697 ABSTRACT: Network analysis has contributed to the emergence of learning analytics. In this editorial, we briefly introduce network science as a field and situate it within learning analytics. Drawing on the Learning Analytics Cycle, we highlight that effective application of network science methods in learning analytics involves critical considerations of learning processes, data, methods and metrics, and interventions, as well as ethics and value systems surrounding these areas. Careful work must meaningfully situate network methods and interventions within the theoretical assumptions explaining learning, as well as within pedagogical and technological factors shaping learning processes. The five empirical papers in the special section demonstrate diverse applications of network analysis, and the invited commentaries from cognitive network science and physics education research further discuss potential synergies between learning analytics and other sister fields with a shared interest in leveraging network science. We conclude by discussing opportunities to strengthen the rigour of network-based learning analytics projects, expand current work into nascent areas, and achieve more impact by holistically addressing the full cycle of learning analytics.
Chapter
The triadic closure model attempts to reflect the well-known fact that many real-world networks have a much higher likelihood of a link between a pair of nodes with a common neighbor than in the random null model. The effect is especially evident in social networks and is also widely present in cooperation networks in the field of knowledge, citation and research, and many others. It should be noted that in the triadic closure model proposed by P. Holme and B.J. Kim, at the triad formation step, the new link is attached to any random neighbor (which is chosen evenly) of the node selected in the previous step (which is chosen using the preferential attachment mechanism). However, in many real-world complex networks, the second link is also usually selected using the preferential attachment mechanism. In this paper, we propose to make adjustments to the triadic closure model for the case when the nodes are selected using the preferential attachment mechanism at the triad formation step. We empirically investigate the dynamics of the mean value of node degree in the networks generated by this model and show that it follows a power law.
Article
Full-text available
Lay Description What is already known about this topic: Social interaction is important for learning, and asynchronous online discussions are broadly used to support social learning. Teaching practices and strategies have been developed to support student participation in online discussions. In some contexts, participation intensity predicts learning performance. However, researchers have documented a participation gap in online discussions. What this paper adds: We applied prestige, a sociological term, to a study of the participation gap in an online undergraduate class and revealed varied levels of prestige among students. Lower prestige students were not inactive; rather, they initiated an equivalent volume of connections with peers but were often ignored. The timing of discussion participation can be a probable contributor to the gap, as lower prestige students' participation was less timely and more compressed together. Implications for practice and/or policy: Pedagogical supports are needed to help students develop advanced self‐regulation skills conducive to productive discussion participation. The design of online discussion environments and analytics tools needs to consider students' discussion dispositions and behaviours.
Article
Full-text available
One feature of self-paced online courses is greater learner control over the timing of their work in a course. However, the greater timing flexibility that learners enjoy in such environments may play a different role in the learning process than has been previously observed in formal online or face-to-face courses. As such, the study of work timing merits further investigation. Toward this goal, this study forwards two measures that represent the timing of coursework: 1) the timing index, or the degree to which a participant completes 50% of their work, and 2) the spacing count, the frequency of work performed across the course timeframe. In this study, the authors demonstrate the use of these measures from a data set of 42 U.S. middle-school teachers who participated in a self-paced, online professional development course to support teacher implementation of a new blended-learning curriculum. Using the two measures, the authors identify timing behaviours of participants and examine the effects that timing has on teacher self-efficacy after completing the course. The two measures and visualizations demonstrated in this paper yield useful individual-level variables for course timing that can be used for further study on the effects on learning outcomes.
Article
Full-text available
Despite a surge of empirical work on student participation in online learning environments, the causal links between the learning-related factors and processes with the desired learning outcomes remain unexplored. This study presents a systematic literature review of approaches to model learning in Massive Open Online Courses offering an analysis of learning related constructs used in the prediction and measurement of student engagement and learning outcome. Based on our literature review, we identify current gaps in the research, including a lack of solid frameworks to explain learning in open online setting. Finally, we put forward a novel framework suitable for open online contexts based on a well-established model of student engagement. Our model is intended to guide future work studying the association between contextual factors (i.e., demographic, classroom, and individual needs), student engagement (i.e., academic, behavioral, cognitive, and affective engagement metrics) and learning outcomes (i.e., academic, social, and affective). The proposed model affords further inter-study comparisons as well as comparative studies with more traditional education models.
Chapter
Full-text available
This chapter provides an introduction to the analysis of relational event data (i.e., actions, interactions, or other events involving multiple actors that occur over time) within the R/statnet platform. We begin by reviewing the basics of relational event modeling, with an emphasis on models with piecewise constant hazards. We then discuss estimation for dyadic and more general relational event models using the relevent package, with an emphasis on hands-on applications of the methods and interpretation of results. Statnet is a collection of packages for the R statistical computing system that supports the representation, manipulation, visualization, modeling, simulation, and analysis of relational data. Statnet packages are contributed by a team of volunteer developers, and are made freely available under the GNU Public License. These packages are written for the R statistical computing environment, and can be used with any computing platform that supports R (including Windows, Linux, and Mac).
Article
Full-text available
Higher education institutions, and the way education is delivered and supported, are being transformed by digital technologies. Internationally, institutions are increasingly incorporating online technologies into delivery frameworks and administration – both through internal learning management systems (LMS) and external social networking sites (SNSs). This study aims to explore how higher education students in a regional Australian dual-sector institute use and manage SNS for personal and study-related activities and their perceptions of how this impacts their educational experiences. This mixed-methods study involved a quantitative and qualitative survey of 355 vocational training and higher education students and in-depth focus groups with ten higher education students. Four key themes were identified through thematic analysis: SNS as a tool for fostering peer connectedness with fellow students; deliberate and distinct variation between personal and educational use of SNS; resistance to external SNS within education settings; and, need for a balance between digital and face-to-face learning and connectedness. Implications for curriculum design and delivery, and development of support for students in diverse learning contexts, are considered.
Article
Full-text available
Social networking sites (SNSs) are popular technologies used frequently among youth for recreational purposes. Increasing attention has been paid to the use of SNSs in educational settings as a way to engage youth interest and encourage academically productive discussion. Potential affordances of using SNSs for education include knowledge building, collaborative communities, and the ability to document and share processes and designs. In this study, the SNS, Edmodo, is examined as an educational tool used with Studio STEM. Results indicated that youth appropriated Edmodo to exhibit engagement and articulate knowledge through reciting facts, acknowledging learning, and documenting progress with the guidance of instructors and facilitators. Based on results, we suggest that efforts to include SNSs in integrative science, technology, engineering, and mathematics programming for youth prioritize consistent monitoring and guidance by supportive and more knowledgeable others as this serves to develop community and encourage youth engagement.
Article
Full-text available
Evaluating promisingness of ideas is an important but underdeveloped aspect of knowledge building. The goal of this research was to examine the extent to which Grade 3 students could make promisingness judgments to facilitate knowledge-building discourse. A Promising Ideas Tool was added to Knowledge Forum software to better support knowledge‐building discourse. The tool helped students select promising ideas from their group’s written online discourse and then aggregate and display selections to support collective decision making regarding most promising directions for subsequent work. Students knew in advance that their selections would influence the direction of group work, and through iterations of procedures came to better understand how individually selected ideas would become the focus of class discussions and next knowledge‐building efforts. The basic design was repeated over two cycles of promising-idea selections, discussions, and follow-up activity to refine ideas. Qualitative and quantitative results indicated that students as young as 8 years of age could make promisingness judgments benefiting their community. Through use of the Promising Ideas Tool and discussion based on results from its use, Grade 3 students achieved significantly greater knowledge advances than students not engaged in promisingness judgments and discussions.
Article
An asynchronous online discussion (AOD) is one format of instructional methods that facilitate student-centered learning. In the wealth of AOD research, this study evaluated how students' behavior on AOD influences their academic outcomes. This case study compared the differential analytic methods including web log mining, social network analysis and content analysis which were selected by three interaction patterns: person to system (P2S), person to person (P2P) and person to content (P2C) interaction. Forty-three undergraduate students participated in an online discussion forum for 12 weeks. Multiple regression analyses with the predictor variables from P2S, P2P and P2C and with a criterion variable of a final grade indicated several interesting findings. For P2S analysis, visits on board (VOB) had a significant variable to predict final grades. Also, the result of P2P analysis proved that in-degree and out-degree centrality predicted final grades. The P2C results based on cognitive presence represent that students' messages were mostly affiliated to the exploration and integration levels and also predicted the final grades. This study ultimately demonstrated the effectiveness of using multiple analytic methodologies to address and facilitate students' participation at AOD.