We can know someone’s tone and emotion better. More media richness will provide more satisfaction
We can know someone’s tone and emotion better. To allow them to meet f2f
We can know someone’s tone and emotion better.
OCWC Global Conference 2013: Needs Analysis of the Meetup Function Design for Massive Open Online Course Learners in Taiwan
Needs Analysis of the Meetup Function Designfor Massive Open Online Course Learnersin TaiwanWei-Ting Lin, Chao-Hsiu Chen, & Wei-I Lee
Massive open online course, MOOC• Complete courseincludes course videos, syllabus, lecture notes, assignments,reading lists, reading materials, tests, and interaction• Openfree for registration, watching videos, downloading learningmaterials• Coursera, edX
Massive open online course, MOOC• MOOC vs. OCWcourse vs. coursewarecertification vs. non-creditcollaborative learning vs. self learning• A major difference between MOOC & OCW is“interaction”
Interactions in an online environment• More interactions can enhance cognitive presence,social presence, and teaching presence (Moore, Masterson,Christophel, & Shea, 1996).• Interactions increase learner satisfaction and learningeffectiveness (Swan, 2002).
Interactions in an online environment• However, interaction in online learning environments isoften restricted by devices and technologies.• Commonly used text-based technologies:discussion boards, short message services (SMS), e-mail,etc.
Interactions in an online environment• Text-based technologies have less media richness thanface-to-face conversation (Lan & Sie, 2010).F2F > Telephone > Text-based communication• Media richness is a critical factor that influences usersatisfaction in online environments (Simon & Peppas, 2004).
Interactions in an online environment• From computer-mediated communication to face-to-face: Meetup
Interactions in an online environment• Is the Meetup design useful to Taiwan learners?
Method• Reviewing relevant research and Coursera Meetup toform a basic design.• Analyzing learners’ needs and attitudes toward face-to-face discussion. (Survey: 62 participants)• Interviewing 3 online learners and 1 professor who hadincorporate OCW materials to his instruction.
Results(b) Is it hard to you to postand describe learningquestions on discussionboard?(c) Is it hard to you to replyand answer others’questions on discussionboard?(a) 87.1% of the participants prefer face-to-face discussion tocomputer-mediated communication
Results(e) Willingness of face-to-face discussion with otherlearners; some learners areyour familiar friends(d) Willingness of face-to-face discussion with otherlearners you don’t familiar
Results(f) Willingness of face-to-face discussion with otherlearners who are all yourfamiliar friends.Taiwan learners are shy!
Results• Interviewees’ suggestions:– Function allows users to set group criteria such as “groupsonly visible to friends”, “groups only visible to MOOCclassmates”, and “groups only visible to learners who hadjoined the same group(s) with me.”– Learners should be able to remain anonymous if they lookfor help from someone they don’t know.– Every user has a personal reputation score which getshigher if the user frequently helps others.– History logs.
Scenario 3A businessman waswaiting for his flightat the airport. Heused mobile phone,launched theMOOC-meetup andclicked “Who’saround?” to searchother users withthe same learninginterests.
Conclusion1. Learners prefer face-to-face discussion to computer-mediated communication.2. Learners prefer joining a learning group with peoplethey know.3. Learners prefer setting the criteria to screen groupmembers.4. The function should include history logs of meet-upgroups and participants.
References1. An, Y.-J., & Frick, T. (2006). Student Perceptions of Asynchronous Computer-Mediated Communication in Face-to-Face Courses.Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(2), 485-499.2. Balaji, M. S., & Chakrabarti, D. (2010). Student Interactions in Online Discussion Forum: Empirical Research from Media RichnessTheory Perspective. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 9(1).3. Carson, S. (2009). The unwalled garden: growth of the OpenCourseWare Consortium,2001-2008. Open Learning, 24(1), 23-29.4. Dyson, L. E., Litchfield, A., Lawrence, E., Raban, R., & Leijdekkers, P. (2009). Advancing the m-learning research agenda for active,experiential learning: Four case studies. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(2), 250-267.5. Hiltz, S. R. (1997). The Impact of Online Assessment on Grades in Community College Distance Education Mathematics Courses.Journal Of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 1(2), 1-19.6. Lan, Y.-F., & Sie, Y.-S. (2010). Using RSS to support mobile learning based on media richness theory. Computers & Education, 55(1),723-732.7. Meetup.com. (2012a). edX global community, from http://www.meetup.com/edX-Global-Community/8. Meetup.com. (2012b). Official Coursera Meetup Channel, from http://www.meetup.com/Coursera/9. Moore, A., Masterson, J. T., Christophel, D. M., & Shea, K. A. (1996). College teacher immediacy and student ratings of instruction.Communication Education, 45(1), 29-39.10. Motiwalla, L. F. (2007). Mobile learning: A framework and evaluation. Computers & Education, 49, 581-596.11. Simon, S. J., & Peppas, S. C. (2004). An examination of media richness theory in product Web site design: an empirical study. info,6(4), 270-281.12. Song, Y. (2009). Handheld Educational Applications: A Review of the Research.13. Swan, K. (2002). Building Learning Communities in Online Courses: the importance of interaction. Education, Communication &Information, 2(1), 23-49.14. Willging, P. A., & Johnson, S. D. (2009). Factors that influence students decision to dropout of online courses. Journal ofAsynchronous Learning Networks, 13(3), 115-127.