Wei-Ting Lin, Chao-Hsiu Chen & Wei-l Lee

1. Needs Analysis of the Meetup Function Design
for Massive Open Online Course Learners
in Taiwan
Wei-Ting Lin, Chao-Hsiu Chen, & Wei-I Lee

2. Massive open online course, MOOC
• Complete course
includes course videos, syllabus, lecture notes, assignments,
reading lists, reading materials, tests, and interaction
• Open
free for registration, watching videos, downloading learning
materials
• Coursera, edX

3. Massive open online course, MOOC
• MOOC vs. OCW
course vs. courseware
certification vs. non-credit
collaborative learning vs. self learning
• A major difference between MOOC & OCW is
“interaction”

4. 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 learning
effectiveness (Swan, 2002).

5. Interactions in an online environment
• However, interaction in online learning environments is
often restricted by devices and technologies.
• Commonly used text-based technologies:
discussion boards, short message services (SMS), e-mail,
etc.

6. Interactions in an online environment
• Text-based technologies have less media richness than
face-to-face conversation (Lan & Sie, 2010).
F2F > Telephone > Text-based communication
• Media richness is a critical factor that influences user
satisfaction in online environments (Simon & Peppas, 2004).

7. Interactions in an online environment
• From computer-mediated communication to face-to-
face: Meetup

8. Interactions in an online environment
• Is the Meetup design useful to Taiwan learners?

9. Method
• Reviewing relevant research and Coursera Meetup to
form a basic design.
• Analyzing learners’ needs and attitudes toward face-to-
face discussion. (Survey: 62 participants)
• Interviewing 3 online learners and 1 professor who had
incorporate OCW materials to his instruction.

10. Results
(b) Is it hard to you to post
and describe learning
questions on discussion
board?
(c) Is it hard to you to reply
and answer others’
questions on discussion
board?
(a) 87.1% of the participants prefer face-to-face discussion to
computer-mediated communication

11. Results
(e) Willingness of face-to-
face discussion with other
learners; some learners are
your familiar friends
(d) Willingness of face-to-
face discussion with other
learners you don’t familiar

12. Results
(f) Willingness of face-to-
face discussion with other
learners who are all your
familiar friends.
Taiwan learners are shy!

13. Results
• Interviewees’ suggestions:
– Function allows users to set group criteria such as “groups
only visible to friends”, “groups only visible to MOOC
classmates”, and “groups only visible to learners who had
joined the same group(s) with me.”
– Learners should be able to remain anonymous if they look
for help from someone they don’t know.
– Every user has a personal reputation score which gets
higher if the user frequently helps others.
– History logs.

14. Scenario 1
A student used his
mobile device to
learn statistics, and
he encountered a
problem about
ANOVA.

15. Scenario 2
Several students
taking “Introduction
to Computer Science”
wanted to start a
scheduled study
group.

16. Scenario 3
A businessman was
waiting for his flight
at the airport. He
used mobile phone,
launched the
MOOC-meetup and
clicked “Who’s
around?” to search
other users with
the same learning
interests.

17. Conclusion
1. Learners prefer face-to-face discussion to computer-
mediated communication.
2. Learners prefer joining a learning group with people
they know.
3. Learners prefer setting the criteria to screen group
members.
4. The function should include history logs of meet-up
groups and participants.

18. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION!

19. References
1. 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 Richness
Theory' 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 of
Asynchronous Learning Networks, 13(3), 115-127.