Learning analytics in collaborative learning supported by Slack: From the perspective of engagement

Computers in Human Behavior

Volumn 92, Issue , 2019, Pages 625-633

  Zhang, Xi ^a   Meng, Yao ^a   Ordóñez de Pablos, Patricia ^b   Sun, Yongqiang ^c  

^a TIANJIN UNIVERSITY   (China)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OVIEDO   (Spain)

^c WUHAN UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

Collaborative learning; Learning analytics; Slack; Social influence; Student engagement

Indexed keywords

ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS; EDUCATION COMPUTING;

COLLABORATIVE LEARNING; LEARNING ANALYTICS; SLACK; SOCIAL INFLUENCE; STUDENT ENGAGEMENT;

STUDENTS;

EID: 85030028213     PISSN: 07475632     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2017.08.012     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. Baron, R.A., Social capital. 2000, Wiley Online Library.
2. Cavanagh, M., Students’ experiences of active engagement through cooperative learning activities in lectures. Active Learning in Higher Education 12:1 (2011), 23–33.
3. Cheung, R., Vogel, D., Predicting user acceptance of collaborative technologies: An extension of the technology acceptance model for e-learning. Computers & Education 63 (2013), 160–175.
4. Chin, W.W., How to write up and report PLS analyses. Handbook of partial least squares, 2010, Springer, 655–690.
5. Cialdini, R.B., Demaine, L.J., Sagarin, B.J., Barrett, D.W., Rhoads, K., Winter, P.L., Managing social norms for persuasive impact. Social Influence 1:1 (2006), 3–15.
6. Cialdini, R.B., Goldstein, N.J., Social influence: Compliance and conformity. Annual Review of Psychology 55 (2004), 591–621.
7. Clarke, T., Minocha, S., Role of social software tools in education: A literature review. Education+ Training 51:5/6 (2009), 353–369.
8. Davidson, N., Major, C.H., Michaelsen, L.K., Small-group learning in higher education—cooperative, collaborative, problem-based, and team-based learning: An introduction by the guest editors. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching 25:3&4 (2014), 1–6.
9. Davis, J.L., Le, B., Coy, A.E., Rickert, J., Regan, B., Ridgeway, K., Commitment to the environment: The role of subjective norms in college and community samples. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 45:10 (2015), 568–583.
10. De Jong, B.A., Elfring, T., How does trust affect the performance of ongoing teams? The mediating role of reflexivity, monitoring, and effort. Academy of Management Journal 53:3 (2010), 535–549.
11. Dewiyanti, S., Brand-Gruwel, S., Jochems, W., Broers, N.J., Students’ experiences with collaborative learning in asynchronous computer-supported collaborative learning environments. Computers in Human Behavior 23:1 (2007), 496–514.
12. Eklöf, H., Skill and will: Test-taking motivation and assessment quality. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice 17:4 (2010), 345–356.
13. Ennen, N.L., Stark, E., Lassiter, A., The importance of trust for satisfaction, motivation, and academic performance in student learning groups. Social Psychology of Education 18:3 (2015), 615–633.
14. Erez, A., Isen, A.M., The influence of positive affect on the components of expectancy motivation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(6), 2002, 1055.
15. Fallon, E., Walsh, S., Prendergast, T., An activity-based approach to the learning and teaching of research methods: Measuring student engagement and learning. Irish Journal of Academic Practice, 2(1), 2013, 2.
16. Falloon, G., What's the difference? Learning collaboratively using iPads in conventional classrooms. Computers & Education 84 (2015), 62–77.
17. Feichtner, S.B., Davis, E.A., Why some groups fail: A survey of students’ experiences with learning groups. Journal of Management Education 9:4 (1984), 58–73.
18. Ferreri, S.P., O'Connor, S.K., Redesign of a large lecture course into a small-group learning course. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 77(1), 2013.
19. Fornell, C., Larcker, D.F., Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 1981, 39–50.
20. Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., Straub, D.W., Trust and TAM in online shopping: an integrated model. MIS Quarterly 27:1 (2003), 51–90.
21. Gillies, R.M., Structuring cooperative group work in classrooms. International Journal of Educational Research 39:1 (2003), 35–49.
22. Giuliodori, M.J., Lujan, H.L., DiCarlo, S.E., Collaborative group testing benefits high-and low-performing students. Advances in Physiology Education 32:4 (2008), 274–278.
23. Gubbins, C., MacCurtain, S., Understanding the dynamics of collective learning: The role of trust and social capital. Advances in Developing Human Resources 10:4 (2008), 578–599.
24. Hair, J.F., Ringle, C.M., Sarstedt, M., PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice 19:2 (2011), 139–152.
25. Hair, J.F., Ringle, C.M., Sarstedt, M., Editorial-partial least squares: The better approach to structural equation modeling?. Long Range Planning 45:5–6 (2012), 312–319.
26. Hall, D., Buzwell, S., The problem of free-riding in group projects: Looking beyond social loafing as reason for non-contribution. Active Learning in Higher Education, 1469787412467123, 2012.
27. Hanham, J., McCormick, J., Group work in schools with close friends and acquaintances: Linking self-processes with group processes. Learning and Instruction 19:3 (2009), 214–227.
28. Hijzen, D., Boekaerts, M., Vedder, P., Exploring the links between students’ engagement in cooperative learning, their goal preferences and appraisals of instructional conditions in the classroom. Learning and Instruction 17:6 (2007), 673–687.
29. Hoegl, M., Gemuenden, H.G., Teamwork quality and the success of innovative projects: A theoretical concept and empirical evidence. Organization Science 12:4 (2001), 435–449.
30. Hütter, M., Diehl, M., Motivation losses in teamwork: The effects of team diversity and equity sensitivity on reactions to free-riding. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations 14:6 (2011), 845–856.
31. Jang, H., Reeve, J., Deci, E.L., Engaging students in learning activities: It is not autonomy support or structure but autonomy support and structure. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(3), 2010, 588.
32. Janssen, J., Erkens, G., Kanselaar, G., Jaspers, J., Visualization of participation: Does it contribute to successful computer-supported collaborative learning?. Computers & Education 49:4 (2007), 1037–1065.
33. Kearsley, G., Shneiderman, B., Engagement theory: A framework for technology-based teaching and learning. Educational Technology 38:5 (1998), 20–23.
34. Kominis, G., Emmanuel, C.R., The expectancy–valence theory revisited: Developing an extended model of managerial motivation. Management Accounting Research 18:1 (2007), 49–75.
35. Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P.A., Jochems, W., Identifying the pitfalls for social interaction in computer-supported collaborative learning environments: A review of the research. Computers in Human Behavior 19:3 (2003), 335–353.
36. Laal, M., Ghodsi, S.M., Benefits of collaborative learning. Procedia-social and Behavioral Sciences 31 (2012), 486–490.
37. Levin, D.Z., Cross, R., The strength of weak ties you can trust: The mediating role of trust in effective knowledge transfer. Management Science 50:11 (2004), 1477–1490.
38. Mangos, P.M., Steele-Johnson, D., The role of subjective task complexity in goal orientation, self-efficacy, and performance relations. Human Performance 14:2 (2001), 169–185.
39. Mao, J., Social media for learning: A mixed methods study on high school students’ technology affordances and perspectives. Computers in Human Behavior 33 (2014), 213–223.
40. Marshall, S., Engagement theory, WebCT, and academic writing in Australia. International Journal of Education and Development Using ICT, 3(2), 2007.
41. Nolan, J.M., Schultz, P.W., Cialdini, R.B., Goldstein, N.J., Griskevicius, V., Normative social influence is underdetected. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 34:7 (2008), 913–923.
42. Novo-Corti, I., Varela-Candamio, L., Ramil-DíAz, M., E-learning and face to face mixed methodology: Evaluating effectiveness of e-learning and perceived satisfaction for a microeconomic course using the Moodle platform. Computers in Human Behavior 29:2 (2013), 410–415.
43. Parappilly, M.B., De Ritter, S., Schmidt, L., Improving student learning and engagement in stem disciplines using team-based learning. Paper presented at the proceedings of the australian conference on science and mathematics education (formerly UniServe science conference), 2015.
44. Popescu, E., Providing collaborative learning support with social media in an integrated environment. World Wide Web 17:2 (2014), 199–212.
45. Reeve, J., Jang, H., Carrell, D., Jeon, S., Barch, J., Enhancing students’ engagement by increasing teachers’ autonomy support. Motivation and Emotion 28:2 (2004), 147–169.
46. Rich, B.L., Lepine, J.A., Crawford, E.R., Job engagement: Antecedents and effects on job performance. Academy of Management Journal 53:3 (2010), 617–635.
47. Ryan, R.M., Deci, E.L., Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology 25:1 (2000), 54–67.
48. Sanchez, R.J., Truxillo, D.M., Bauer, T.N., Development and examination of an expectancy-based measure of test-taking motivation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(5), 2000, 739.
49. Schoor, C., Bannert, M., Motivation in a computer-supported collaborative learning scenario and its impact on learning activities and knowledge acquisition. Learning and Instruction 21:4 (2011), 560–573.
50. Seijts, G.H., Latham, G.P., Tasa, K., Latham, B.W., Goal setting and goal orientation: An integration of two different yet related literature. Academy of Management Journal 47:2 (2004), 227–239.
51. Siemens, G., Long, P., Penetrating the fog: Analytics in learning and education. EDUCAUSE Review, 46(5), 2011, 30.
52. Sun, Y., Wang, N., Yin, C., Zhang, J.X., Understanding the relationships between motivators and effort in crowdsourcing marketplaces: A nonlinear analysis. International Journal of Information Management 35:3 (2015), 267–276.
53. Swift, P.E., Hwang, A., The impact of affective and cognitive trust on knowledge sharing and organizational learning. The Learning Organization 20:1 (2013), 20–37.
54. Taylor, M.S., The motivational effects of task challenge: A laboratory investigation. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 27:2 (1981), 255–278.
55. Tenenhaus, M., Vinzi, V.E., Chatelin, Y.-M., Lauro, C., PLS path modeling. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 48:1 (2005), 159–205.
56. Tess, P.A., The role of social media in higher education classes (real and virtual)–A literature review. Computers in Human Behavior 29:5 (2013), A60–A68.
57. Uzunboylu, H., Bicen, H., Cavus, N., The efficient virtual learning environment: A case study of web 2.0 tools and windows live spaces. Computers & Education 56:3 (2011), 720–726.
58. Wächter, T., Lungu, O.V., Liu, T., Willingham, D.T., Ashe, J., Differential effect of reward and punishment on procedural learning. The Journal of Neuroscience 29:2 (2009), 436–443.
59. Webber, S.S., Development of cognitive and affective trust in teams: a longitudinal study. Small Group Research 39:6 (2008), 746–769.
60. Xue, Y., Bradley, J., Liang, H., Team climate, empowering leadership, and knowledge sharing. Journal of Knowledge Management 15:2 (2011), 299–312.
61. Yeo, G.B., Neal, A., A multilevel analysis of effort, practice, and performance: Effects; of ability, conscientiousness, and goal orientation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(2), 2004, 231.
62. Young, H.P., Innovation diffusion in heterogeneous populations: Contagion, social influence, and social learning. The American Economic Review, 2009, 1899–1924.
63. Yuan, M., Zhang, X., Chen, Z., Vogel, D.R., Chu, X., Antecedents of coordination effectiveness of software developer dyads from interacting teams: An empirical investigation. Engineering Management, IEEE Transactions on 56:3 (2009), 494–507.
64. Zaheer, A., McEvily, B., Perrone, V., Does trust matter? Exploring the effects of interorganizational and interpersonal trust on performance. Organization Science 9:2 (1998), 141–159.
65. Zepke, N., Leach, L., Improving student engagement: Ten proposals for action. Active Learning in Higher Education 11:3 (2010), 167–177.
66. Zhang, X., Ordonez de Pablos, P., Zhang, Y., The relationship between incentives, explicit and tacit knowledge contribution in online engineering education project,. International Journal of Engineering Education 28:6 (2012), 1341–1346.
67. Zhang, X., Vogel, D.R., Zhou, Z., Effects of information technologies, department characteristics and individual roles on improving knowledge sharing visibility: A qualitative case study. Behaviour & Information Technology 31:11 (2012), 1117–1131.
68. Zhang, X., Meng, Y., Students’ engagement in collaborative learning group supported by communication tools: an empirical study. Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems, 2016.