Hao-Fei Cheng
Jian Zhao
Joseph Konstan
Loren Terveen
Svetlana Yarosh
Haiyi Zhu
ABSTRACT
Group projects are an essential component of teaching user interface (UI) design. We identified six challenges in transferring traditional group projects into the context of Massive Open Online Courses: managing dropout, avoiding free-riding, appropriate scaffolding, cultural and time zone differences, and establishing common ground. We present a case study of the design of a group project for a UI Design MOOC, in which we implemented technical tools and social structures to cope with the above challenges. Based on survey analysis, interviews, and team chat data from the students over a six-month period, we found that our socio-technical design addressed many of the obstacles that MOOC learners encountered during remote collaboration. We translate our findings into design implications for better group learning experiences at scale.
- Panagiotis Adamopoulos. 2013. What Makes a Great MOOC? An Interdisciplinary Analysis of Student Retention in Online Courses. In Proc. of ICIS 2013. Association for Information Systems.Google Scholar
- Praveen Aggarwal and Connie L O'Brien. 2008. Social loafing on group projects: Structural antecedents and effect on student satisfaction. Journal of Marketing Education 30, 3 (2008), 255--264.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Gloria Allione and Rebecca M Stein. 2016. Mass attrition: An analysis of drop out from principles of microeconomics MOOC. The Journal of Economic Education 47, 2 (2016), 174--186.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Matthew J Bietz, Steve Abrams, Dan M Cooper, Kathleen R Stevens, Frank Puga, Darpan I Patel, Gary M Olson, and Judith S Olson. 2012. Improving the odds through the Collaboration Success Wizard. Translational behavioral medicine 2, 4 (2012), 480--486.Google Scholar
- Lori Breslow, David E Pritchard, Jennifer DeBoer, Glenda S Stump, Andrew D Ho, and Daniel T Seaton. 2013. Studying learning in the worldwide classroom: Research into edX's first MOOC. Research & Practice in Assessment 8 (2013).Google Scholar
- Derek O Bruff, Douglas H Fisher, Kathryn E McEwen, and Blaine E Smith. 2013. Wrapping a MOOC: Student perceptions of an experiment in blended learning. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching 9, 2 (2013), 187.Google Scholar
- Kathy Charmaz. 2014. Constructing grounded theory. Sage.Google Scholar
- Herbert H Clark. 1996. Using language. Cambridge university press.Google Scholar
- Pierre Dillenbourg. 1999. Collaborative Learning: Cognitive and Computational Approaches. Advances in Learning and Instruction Series. ERIC.Google Scholar
- Joanna C Dunlap. 2005. Problem-based learning and self-efficacy: How a capstone course prepares students for a profession. Educational Technology Research and Development 53, 1 (2005), 65--83.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Siwei Fu, Jian Zhao, Hao Fei Cheng, Haiyi Zhu, and Jennifer Marlow. 2018. T-Cal: Understanding Team Conversational Data with Calendar-based Visualization. In Proc. of CHI '18. ACM, 500. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Susan R Fussell, Robert E Kraut, F Javier Lerch, William L Scherlis, Matthew M McNally, and Jonathan J Cadiz. 1998. Coordination, overload and team performance: effects of team communication strategies. In Proc. of CSCW '98. ACM, 275--284. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Anuradha A Gokhale. 1995. Collaborative learning enhances critical thinking. (1995).Google Scholar
- Christian Gütl, Rocael Hernández Rizzardini, Vanessa Chang, and Miguel Morales. 2014. Attrition in MOOC: Lessons learned from drop-out students. In International Workshop on Learning Technology for Education in Cloud. Springer, 37--48.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Nathan Heller. 2013. "Laptop U". The New Yorker 89, 14 (2013), 80--91.Google Scholar
- Norbert L Kerr. 1983. Motivation losses in small groups: A social dilemma analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 45, 4 (1983), 819.Google ScholarCross Ref
- David A Kravitz and Barbara Martin. 1986. Ringelmann rediscovered: The original article. (1986).Google Scholar
- Chinmay Kulkarni, Julia Cambre, Yasmine Kotturi, Michael S Bernstein, and Scott R Klemmer. 2015. Talkabout: Making distance matter with small groups in massive classes. In Proc. of CSCW '15. ACM, 1116--1128. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Chinmay Kulkarni, Koh Pang Wei, Huy Le, Daniel Chia, Kathryn Papadopoulos, Justin Cheng, Daphne Koller, and Scott R Klemmer. 2013. Peer and self assessment in massive online classes. ACM TOCHI 20, 6 (2013), 33. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Mark R Lepper, Maria Woolverton, Donna L Mumme, and Jean-Luc Gurtner. 1993. Motivational Techniques of Expert Human Tutors: Lessons for the Design of Computer-Based Tutors. Computers as Cognitive Tools: 1 1 (1993), 75.Google Scholar
- Anoush Margaryan, Manuela Bianco, and Allison Littlejohn. 2015. Instructional quality of massive open online courses (MOOCs). Computers & Education 80 (2015), 77--83. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Paul W Mulvey and Howard J Klein. 1998. The impact of perceived loafing and collective efficacy on group goal processes and group performance. Organizational behavior and human decision processes 74, 1 (1998), 62--87.Google Scholar
- Gary M Olson and Judith S Olson. 2000. Distance matters. Human-computer interaction 15, 2 (2000), 139--178. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Judith S Olson and Gary M Olson. 2014. How to make distance work work. interactions 21, 2 (2014), 28--35. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Sherry L Piezon and Robin L Donaldson. 2005. Online Groups and Social Loafing: Understanding Student-Group Interactions. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration 8, 4 (2005), n4.Google Scholar
- Stuart Rose, Dave Engel, Nick Cramer, and Wendy Cowley. 2010. Automatic keyword extraction from individual documents. Text Mining: Applications and Theory (2010), 1--20.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Pnina Shachaf. 2008. Cultural diversity and information and communication technology impacts on global virtual teams: An exploratory study. Information & Management 45, 2 (2008), 131--142. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Elliot Soloway, Mark Guzdial, and Kenneth E Hay. 1994. Learner-centered design: The challenge for HCI in the 21st century. interactions 1, 2 (1994), 36--48. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Rajan Vaish, Snehalkumar Neil S Gaikwad, Geza Kovacs, Andreas Veit, Ranjay Krishna, Imanol Arrieta Ibarra, Camelia Simoiu, Michael Wilber, Serge Belongie, Sharad Goel, and others. 2017. Crowd research: Open and scalable university laboratories. In Proc. of UIST '17. ACM, 829--843. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Astrid Von Kotze and Linda Cooper. 2000. Exploring the transformative potential of project-based learning in university adult education. Studies in the Education of Adults 32, 2 (2000), 212--228.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hao-Chuan Wang, Susan F Fussell, and Leslie D Setlock. 2009. Cultural difference and adaptation of communication styles in computer-mediated group brainstorming. In Proc. of CHI' 09. ACM, 669--678. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Miaomiao Wen, Keith Maki, Steven Dow, James D Herbsleb, and Carolyn Rose. 2017. Supporting Virtual Team Formation through Community-Wide Deliberation. In Proc. CSCW' 17. ACM, 109.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Miaomiao Wen, Diyi Yang, and Carolyn Penstein Rosé. 2015. Virtual teams in massive open online courses. In International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education. Springer, 820--824.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Saijing Zheng, Mary Beth Rosson, Patrick C Shih, and John M Carroll. 2015a. Designing MOOCs as interactive places for collaborative learning. In Proc. of ACM Learning@ Scale '15. ACM, 343--346. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Saijing Zheng, Mary Beth Rosson, Patrick C Shih, and John M Carroll. 2015b. Understanding student motivation, behaviors and perceptions in MOOCs. In Proc. of CSCW '15. ACM, 1882--1895. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Teaching UI Design at Global Scales: A Case Study of the Design of Collaborative Capstone Projects for MOOCs
Recommendations
The Effect of Peer Assessment Rubrics on Learners' Satisfaction and Performance Within a Blended MOOC Environment
CSEDU 2015: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Computer Supported Education - Volume 2Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) have a remarkable ability to expand access to a large scale of
participants worldwide, beyond the formality of the higher education systems. MOOCs support participants
to be actively involved in collaborative learning ...
ProjectLens: Supporting Project-based Collaborative Learning on MOOCs
L@S '17: Proceedings of the Fourth (2017) ACM Conference on Learning @ ScaleTeam project, which emphasizes collaborative learning in a project-based context, is one of the most commonly-used teaching and learning methods in higher education classrooms, but is not well-supported on existing Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) ...
Learning outside the classroom through MOOCs
The rapid increase use of information technologies throughout educational institutions is changing the way teachers and students learn, work, and establish collaboration. The learning cycle is an ongoing process that is designed to improve the quality ...
Comments