Exploring development of social capital in a CMOOC through language and discourse

Abstract Connectivist pedagogies are geared towards building a network of learners that actively employ technologies to establish interpersonal connections in open online settings. In this context, as course participants increasingly establish interpersonal relationships among peers they have greater opportunity to draw on and leverage the latent social capital that resides in such a distributed learning environment. However, to date there have been a limited number of studies exploring how learners build their social capital in open large-scale courses. To inform the facilitation of learner networks in open online settings and beyond, this study analyzed factors associated with how learners accumulate social capital in the form of learner connections over time. The study was conducted in two massive open online course offerings (Connectivism and Connective Knowledge) that were designed on the principles of connectivist pedagogy and that made use of data about social interaction from Twitter, blogs, and Facebook. For this purpose, linear mixed modeling was used to understand the associations between learner social capital, linguistic and discourse patterns, media used for interaction, as well as the time in the course when interaction took place. The results highlight the association between the language used by the learners and the creation of ties between them. Analyses on the accumulation of connections over time have implications for the pedagogical choices that would be expected to help learners leverage access to potential social capital in a networked context.

[1]  Denis Gillet,et al.  A social media platform in higher education , 2012, Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON).

[2]  Nan Lin,et al.  The Position Generator: Measurement Techniques for Investigations of Social Capital , 2017 .

[3]  S. Herring,et al.  Beyond Microblogging: Conversation and Collaboration via Twitter , 2009, 2009 42nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[4]  Kate Williams,et al.  Social Networks and Social Capital: Rethinking Theory in Community Informatics , 2008, J. Community Informatics.

[5]  Marek Hatala,et al.  What is the Source of Social Capital? The Association between Social Network Position and Social Presence in Communities of Inquiry , 2014, EDM.

[6]  Jon M. Kleinberg,et al.  Group formation in large social networks: membership, growth, and evolution , 2006, KDD '06.

[7]  Arthur C. Graesser,et al.  Coh-Metrix Measures Text Characteristics at Multiple Levels of Language and Discourse , 2014, The Elementary School Journal.

[8]  T. Snijders,et al.  Proposals for the measurement of individual social capital , 2003 .

[9]  S. Borgatti,et al.  Network Measures of Social Capital , 2012 .

[10]  Robert M. Bernard,et al.  A Meta-Analysis of Three Types of Interaction Treatments in Distance Education , 2009 .

[11]  Jon Dron,et al.  Three Generations of Distance Education Pedagogy , 2020 .

[12]  Jeremy Knox,et al.  Digital culture clash: “massive” education in the E-learning and Digital Cultures MOOC , 2014 .

[13]  Anthony S. Bryk,et al.  Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods , 1992 .

[14]  Robert M. Bernard,et al.  Are contextual and designed student–student interaction treatments equally effective in distance education? , 2012 .

[15]  Nataša Golubovi,et al.  NETWORK STRUCTURE OF SOCIAL CAPITAL , 2010 .

[16]  Justin Reich,et al.  Rebooting MOOC Research , 2015, Science.

[17]  Walter Kintsch,et al.  Comprehension: A Paradigm for Cognition , 1998 .

[18]  Marek Hatala,et al.  Learning at distance: Effects of interaction traces on academic achievement , 2015, Comput. Educ..

[19]  Basil Bernstein,et al.  Class, Codes and Control, Volume I: Theoretical Studies towards a Sociology of Language , 1973 .

[20]  Amit P. Sheth,et al.  What kind of #conversation is Twitter? Mining #psycholinguistic cues for emergency coordination , 2013, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[21]  Arthur C. Graesser,et al.  What Works: Creating Adaptive and Intelligent Systems for Collaborative Learning Support , 2014, Intelligent Tutoring Systems.

[22]  S. Marginson Competition and Markets in Higher Education: A ‘Glonacal’ Analysis , 2004 .

[23]  George Siemens,et al.  Analytics to literacies: The development of a learning analytics framework for multiliteracies assessment , 2014 .

[24]  Jean Aitchison,et al.  Language and the Internet , 2002, Lit. Linguistic Comput..

[25]  George Siemens Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age , 2004 .

[26]  Stanley Wasserman,et al.  Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications , 1994, Structural analysis in the social sciences.

[27]  V. Carey,et al.  Mixed-Effects Models in S and S-Plus , 2001 .

[28]  William S. Horton,et al.  Conversational Common Ground and Memory Processes in Language Production , 2005 .

[29]  H. H. Clark,et al.  Speaking while monitoring addressees for understanding , 2004 .

[30]  Bonnie Stewart,et al.  Massiveness + Openness = New Literacies of Participation? , 2013 .

[31]  R. Xu Measuring explained variation in linear mixed effects models , 2003, Statistics in medicine.

[32]  Carolyn Penstein Rosé,et al.  Social factors that contribute to attrition in MOOCs , 2014, L@S.

[33]  Elisabeth Dévière,et al.  Analyzing linguistic data: a practical introduction to statistics using R , 2009 .

[34]  Peter Reimann,et al.  Time is precious: Variable- and event-centred approaches to process analysis in CSCL research , 2009, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[35]  Arthur C. Graesser,et al.  How do you connect?: analysis of social capital accumulation in connectivist MOOCs , 2015, LAK.

[36]  Lisa Marie Blaschke,et al.  Using social media to engage and develop the online learner in self-determined learning , 2014 .

[37]  H. H. Clark,et al.  Conceptual pacts and lexical choice in conversation. , 1996, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[38]  Dah-Kwei Liou,et al.  Investigating information sharing behavior: the mediating roles of the desire to share information in virtual communities , 2016, Inf. Syst. E Bus. Manag..

[39]  Hosung Park,et al.  What is Twitter, a social network or a news media? , 2010, WWW '10.

[40]  F. Bell Connectivism: Its place in theory-informed research and innovation in technology-enabled learning , 2011 .

[41]  Manuel Cebrián,et al.  The Weakness of Weak Ties in the Classroom , 2012, ArXiv.

[42]  D. Garrison,et al.  Exploring causal relationships among teaching, cognitive and social presence: Student perceptions of the community of inquiry framework , 2010, Internet High. Educ..

[43]  Mark S. Granovetter The Strength of Weak Ties , 1973, American Journal of Sociology.

[44]  Philip R. Cohen,et al.  Referring as a Collaborative Process , 2003 .

[45]  Allison Littlejohn,et al.  Merlot Journal of Online Learning and Teaching Patterns of Engagement in Connectivist Moocs , 2022 .

[46]  Sarah A. Webster,et al.  Learner Participation and Engagement in Open Online Courses: Insights from the Peer 2 Peer University , 2013 .

[47]  Marek Hatala,et al.  Penetrating the black box of time-on-task estimation , 2015, LAK.

[48]  Arthur C. Graesser,et al.  Modeling Learners' Social Centrality and Performance through Language and Discourse , 2015, EDM.

[49]  Anirban Dasgupta,et al.  Superposter behavior in MOOC forums , 2014, L@S.

[50]  June Lu,et al.  Is social capital effective for online learning? , 2013, Inf. Manag..

[51]  George Siemens,et al.  Where is research on massive open online courses headed? A data analysis of the MOOC research initiative , 2014 .

[52]  D. Garrison,et al.  The Development of a Community of Inquiry over Time in an Online Course: Understanding the Progression and Integration of Social, Cognitive and Teaching Presence. , 2008 .

[53]  Eija Ventola,et al.  Handbook of interpersonal communication , 2008 .

[54]  B. Wellman,et al.  Imagining Twitter as an Imagined Community , 2011 .

[55]  P. Bourdieu Forms of Capital , 2002 .

[56]  S. Brennan,et al.  Processes of Interactive Spoken Discourse: The Role of the Partner , 2003 .

[57]  付伶俐 打磨Using Language,倡导新理念 , 2014 .

[58]  N. Ellison,et al.  Social Network Site Affordances and Their Relationship to Social Capital Processes , 2015 .

[59]  Joseph Rene Corbeil,et al.  The birth of a social networking phenomenon , 2011 .

[60]  Gábor Csárdi,et al.  The igraph software package for complex network research , 2006 .

[61]  J. Coleman,et al.  Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital , 1988, American Journal of Sociology.

[62]  Justin Reich,et al.  The Civic Mission of MOOCs: Measuring Engagement across Political Differences in Forums , 2016, L@S.

[63]  Antonio Fini,et al.  The Technological Dimension of a Massive Open Online Course: The Case of the CCK08 Course Tools , 2009 .

[64]  Caroline Haythornthwaite,et al.  Strong, Weak, and Latent Ties and the Impact of New Media , 2002, Inf. Soc..

[65]  Herbert H. Clark,et al.  Grounding in communication , 1991, Perspectives on socially shared cognition.

[66]  Stephen Pax Leonard,et al.  Language change and digital media: A review of conceptions and evidence , 2011 .

[67]  S. Gerhand,et al.  THE NEUROCOGNITION OF LANGUAGE. , 2000 .

[68]  H. H. Clark,et al.  Psychology and language : an introduction to psycholinguistics , 1979 .

[69]  K. Cook,et al.  Social Capital: Theory and Research , 2017 .

[70]  Arthur C. Graesser,et al.  Automated Evaluation of Text and Discourse with Coh-Metrix: The Introduction , 2014 .

[71]  Howard Coonley,et al.  Making democracy work , 1941, Electrical Engineering.

[72]  Jannis Androutsopoulos Introduction: Sociolinguistics and computer-mediated communication , 2006 .

[73]  Charles A. Perfetti,et al.  Comprehending written language: a blueprint of the reader , 2000 .

[74]  Inna Kouper,et al.  Conversations in the Blogosphere: An Analysis "From the Bottom Up" , 2005, Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[75]  H. H. Clark Arenas of language use , 1993 .

[76]  Jennifer DeBoer,et al.  Tracking progress: predictors of students' weekly achievement during a circuits and electronics MOOC , 2014, L@S.

[77]  Trevor Hastie,et al.  The Elements of Statistical Learning , 2001 .

[78]  D. Bates,et al.  Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4 , 2014, 1406.5823.

[79]  Rita Kop,et al.  The Challenges to Connectivist Learning on Open Online Networks: Learning Experiences during a Massive Open Online Course , 2011 .

[80]  Basil B. Bernstein,et al.  Class, codes, and control : theoretical studies towards a sociology of language , 1975 .

[81]  George Siemens,et al.  The MOOC model for digital practice , 2010 .

[82]  Susan C. Herring,et al.  Beyond Microblogging: Conversation and Collaboration via Twitter , 2009 .

[83]  L. Freeman Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification , 1978 .

[84]  L. Milroy,et al.  Vernacular language loyalty and social network , 1980, Language in Society.

[85]  Caroline Haythornthwaite,et al.  Social Network Informed Design for Learning with Educational Technology , 2012 .

[86]  N. Lin Buidling a Network Theory of Social Capital , 1999, Connections.

[87]  N. Coupland,et al.  Standard languages and language standards in a changing Europe , 2011 .

[88]  Helene Fournier,et al.  A pedagogy of abundance or a pedagogy to support human beings? Participant support on massive open online courses , 2011 .

[89]  Dragan Gasevic,et al.  Roles of Course Facilitators, Learners, and Technology in the Flow of Information of a CMOOC , 2015 .

[90]  Jaejeung Rho,et al.  Why people use Twitter: social conformity and social value perspectives , 2014, Online Inf. Rev..

[91]  Peter Reimann,et al.  Assessment and Evaluation of Time Factors in Online Teaching and Learning , 2014 .

[92]  Luis M. Vaquero,et al.  The rich club phenomenon in the classroom , 2013, Scientific Reports.

[93]  M. Paldam Social Capital: One or Many? Definition and Measurement , 2000 .

[94]  Simon Atkinson Embodied and Embedded Theory in Practice: The Student-Owned Learning-Engagement (SOLE) Model , 2011 .

[95]  Arthur C. Graesser,et al.  Computational Analyses of Multilevel Discourse Comprehension , 2011, Top. Cogn. Sci..