Do professors matter? Using an A/B test to evaluate the impact of instructor involvement on MOOC student outcomes

L@S 2014 - Proceedings of the 1st ACM Conference on Learning at Scale

Volumn , Issue , 2014, Pages 71-77

  Tomkin, Jonathan H ^a   Charlevoix, Donna ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

^b UNAVCO ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

A B testing; Collaborative learning; MOOC

Indexed keywords

A/B TESTING; COLLABORATIVE LEARNING; MOOC; PARTICIPATION RATE; STUDENT PARTICIPATION; STUDENT SATISFACTION; TEACHING ASSISTANTS; UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS;

STUDENTS;

EID: 84899690676     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/2556325.2566245     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (42)

1. Anagnostopoulos, D., Basmadjian, K.G., & McCrory, R.S. (2005). The decentered teacher and the construction of social space in the virtual classroom. Teachers College Record 107: 1699-1729.
2. Anderson, T., Rourke, L., Garrison, D.R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing teaching presence in a computer conferencing context. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 5(2).
3. Arbough, J. B. (2007, April). An empirical verification of the community of inquiry framework. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 11(1), 73-85.
4. Arbaugh, J.B. & Benbunon-Finch, R. (2005). Contextual factors that influence ALN effectiveness. In S. R. Hiltz, & R. Goldman (Eds.), Learning Together Online. Research on Asynchronous Learning networks (pp. 123-144). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
5. Arbaugh, J. B., Cleveland-Innes, M., R, D. S., and Garrison., D. R., Ice, P., Richardson, J. C., et al. (2008). Developing a Community of Inquiry instrument: Testing a measure of the Community of Inquiry framework using a multi-institutional sample. Internet and Higher Education, 11, 133-136.
6. Arbough, J.B. & Hwang, A. (2006). Does "teaching presence," exist in online MBA courses? The Internet and Higher Education, 9:9-21.
7. Bain, K. (2004). What the best college teachers do. Harvard Univ. Press. Cambridge, MA
8. Bates, A.W., & Poole, G. (2003). Effective Teaching with Technology in Higher Education: Foundations for Success. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
9. Bell, F., Connectivism: Its place in theory-informed research and innovation in technology-enabled learning. 2011. 12(3), Athabasca University; The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning
10. Beuchot, A., & Bullen, M. (2005) Interacttion and interpersonality in online discussion forums. Distance Education 26(1): 67-87.
11. Black, E. W., Beck, D., Dawson, K., Jinks, S., & DiPietro, M. (2007). The other side of the LMS: Considering implementation and use in the adoption of an LMS in online and blended learning environments. TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 51(2), 5.
12. Brookfield, S.D. (1995). Becoming a Critically Reflective Teacher. Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education Series. San Francisco, CA.
13. Brown, A. L., & Campione, J.C. (1994). Guided discovery in a community of learners. In K. McGilly (Ed.), Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practices (pp. 229-270). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
14. Charlevoix. D.J., Strey, S.T., & Mills, C. (2009). Design and implementation of inquiry-based, technology-rich learning activities in a large enrollment blended learning course. Journal of the Research Center for Educational Technology, 5(3):15-28.
15. Coppola, N.W., Hiltz, S.R., & Rotter, N.G. (2002). Becoming a virtual professor: Pedagogical roles and asynchronous learning networks. Journal of Management Information Systems 18(4): 169-189.
16. Cranton, P. (1994). Understanding and Promoting Transformative Learning: A Guide for Educators of Adults. Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education Series. San Francisco, CA.
17. Deutsch, M. (1949). A theory of cooperation and competition, Human Relations, 2, 129-152.
18. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T. & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education 2:87-105.
19. Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2000). A transactional perspective on teaching-learning: A framework for adult and higher education. Oxford, U.K.: Peragmon.
20. Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. D. (2007). Blended learning in higher education: Framework, principles, and guidelines. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
21. Gorsky, P., Caspi, A. & Blau, I. (2012). A Comparison of Non-Mandatory Online Dialogic Behavior in Two Higher Education Blended Environments. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 16(4), 55-69.
22. Henze, N. & Nejdl, W. (2000). Extendible Adaptive Hypermedia Courseware: Integrating Different Courses and Web Material. Lecture Notes in Computer Science Volume 1892; 109-120
23. Lee, J-M. & Lee, Y. (2006). Personality types and learners' interaction in web-based threaded discussion. Quarterly Review of Distance Education 7(1): 83-94.
24. Lewin, K. (1935). A dynamic theory of personality. New York: McGraw Hill.
25. Mackness, J., Mak, S. and Williams, Roy (2010) The ideals and reality of participating in a MOOC. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Networked Learning 2010. University of Lancaster, Lancaster, pp. 266-275. ISBN 9781862202252
26. Mazzolini, M. & Maddison, S. (2007) When to jump in: The role of the instructor in online discussion forums. Computers & Education, 49(2): 193-213.
27. Mazzolini, M. & Maddison, S. (2003) Sage, guide or ghost? The effect of instructor intervention on student participation in online discussion forums, Computers & Education, 40(3): 237-253.
28. McAuley, A., B. Stewart, G. Siemens and D. Cormier, (2010). The MOOC Model for Digital Practice. https://oerknowledgecloud.org/sites/ oerknowledgecloud.org/files/MOOC-Final.pdf
29. Moore, J.S., & Marra, R.M. (2005). A comparative analysis of onlikne discussion participation protocols. Journal of Research on Technology in Education 28:191-212.
30. Molinari, D.L. (2004). The role of social comments in problem-solving groups in an online class. American Journal of Distance Education 18(2): 89-101.
31. Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2005). Collaborative online learning together in community. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
32. Rovai, A. P. (2002). Sense of community, perceived cognitive learning, and persistence in asynchronous learning networks. The Internet and Higher Education, 5(4), 319-332.
33. Rovai, A. P., & Jordan, H. M. (2004). Blended learning and sense of community: A comparative analysis with traditional and fully online graduate courses. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 5(2), 1-3.
34. Saadatmand, M., Kumpulainen, K., (2012). Content aggregation and knowledge sharing in a personal learning environment: Serendipitous and emergent learning in open online networks 2012 15th International Conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning, ICL 2012, art. no. 6402224.
35. Shea, P., and Li., C. S., & Pickett, A. (2006). A comparative study of teaching presence and student sense of learning community in fully online and web-enhanced college courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 9(3), 175-190.
36. Stern, M.K. & Woolf, B.P. (2000). Adaptive content in an online lecture system. Lecture Notes in Computer Science Volume 1892; 227-238.
37. Story, A. E. & Dielsi, J. (2003). Community building easier in blended format? Distance Education Report, 7(11), 2, 7.
38. Sviniki, M. and McKeachie, W. (2013). McKeachie's Teaching Tips. Cengage Learning, Stamford, CT.
39. Walther, J. (1992). Interpersonal effects in computer mediated interaction: A relational perspective. Communication Research 19(1):52-90.
40. Wise, A., Chang, J., Duffy, T., & del Valle, R. (2004). The effects of teacher social presence on student satisfaction, engagement, and learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research 31:247-271.
41. Woolf, B.P. (2009). Building Intelligent Interactive Tutors: Student-centered strategies for revolutionizing e-learning. Elsevier, Burlington, MA.
42. Zydney, J.M., deNoyelles, A., Seo, K. (2012). Creating a community of inquiry in online environments: An exploratory study on the effect of protocols on interactions within asynchronous discussions. Computers & Education, 58(1), 77-87.