You are here:

Help-Seekers and Help-Providers in MOOCs
PROCEEDING

, , , , University of Toronto, Canada

E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, in Las Vegas, NV, United States ISBN 978-1-939797-35-3 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), San Diego, CA

Full Text

Abstract

We conducted content analysis on 441 help-seeking posts in discussion forums of three Coursera MOOCs to examine MOOC learners’ help-seeking experience. We coded each help-seeking message submitted in 2017 that was related to an assessed component of the courses according to the type of help sought: seeking further explanation or technical guidance vs. requesting correct answer; the type of help received: guidance vs. direct answer; and, the source of help: instructors, mentors, or peers. In all three MOOCs we found that: help-seekers had a higher completion rate compared to all other learners who had submitted at least one graded course component; at least 89% of all help-seeking questions sought guidance rather than a direct answer; type of help received corresponded with type of help sought; the majority of help-seekers successfully completed the respective assessment; and, the help-providers (instructors or the Coursera-assigned course mentors) addressed at least 81% of help-seeking questions.

Citation

Najafi, H., Rolheiser, C., Harrison, L. & Heikoop, W. (2018). Help-Seekers and Help-Providers in MOOCs. In Proceedings of E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 1476-1485). Las Vegas, NV, United States: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 12, 2024 from .

© 2018 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Corrin, L., de Barba, P.G., & Bakharia, A. (2017, March). Using learning analytics to explore help-seeking learner profiles in MOOCs. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conference (pp. 424-428). ACM. Doi:
  2. Gillani, N., Eynon, R., Osborne, M., Hjorth, I., & Roberts, S. (2014). Communication communities in MOOCs. Poster presented in Data Mining for Educational Assessment and Feedback workshop at the 2014 SIGKDD (Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining). Retrieved from: http://www.aspiringminds.com/pages/assess/2014/camera_ready/poster/gillani_etal.pdf
  3. Karabenick, S.A. (2003). Seeking help in large college classes: A person-centered approach. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28(1), 37-58.
  4. Karabenick, S.A., & Dembo, M.H. (2011). Understanding and facilitating self-regulated help seeking. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 126, 33-43.
  5. Lin, J., & Cantoni, L. (2018). Decision, implementation, and confirmation: Experiences of instructors behind tourism and hospitality MOOCs. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 19(1). Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v19i1.3402
  6. Mäkitalo-Siegl, K., Kohnle, C., & Fischer, F. (2011). Computer-supported collaborative inquiry learning and classroom scripts: Effects on help-seeking processes and learning outcomes. Learning and Instruction, 21(2), 257-266.
  7. Melrose, S., Shapiro, B., & LaVallie, C. (2005). Help-seeking experiences of health care learners in a WebCT online graduate study program. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 31(2). Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21432/T2KW3C
  8. Milligan, C., & Littlejohn, A. (2016). How health professionals regulate their learning in massive open online courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 31, 113-121.
  9. Nelimarkka, M., & Hellas, A. (2018, February). Social help-seeking strategies in a programming MOOC. In Proceedings of the 49th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (pp. 116-121). ACM.
  10. Puustinen, M., Bernicot, J., & Bert-Erboul, A. (2011). Written computer-mediated requests for help by French-speaking students: An analysis of their forms and functions. Learning and Instruction, 21(2), 281-289.
  11. Schreier, M. (2012). Qualitative content analysis in practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  12. Shirvani Boroujeni, M., Hecking, T., Hoppe, H.U., & Dillenbourg, P. (2017, March). Dynamics of MOOC discussion forums. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conference (pp. 128-137). ACM. Doi:
  13. Watson, S., Watson, W., Janakiraman, S., & Richardson, J. (2017). A team of instructors’ use of social presence, teaching presence, and attitudinal dissonance strategies: An animal behaviour and welfare MOOC. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(2). Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v18i2.2663
  14. Wolters, C.A., Pintrich, P.R., & Karabenick, S.A. (2005). Assessing academic self-regulated learning. In What Do Children Need to Flourish? (pp. 251-270). Boston, MA: Springer.
  15. Zelinski, M., Hicks, N.M., Wang, S., Douglas, K.A., Bermel, P., Diefes-Dux, H.A., & Madhavan, K. (2017, October). Instructor outcomes of teaching a STEM MOOC. In Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) (pp. 1-7). IEEE.
  16. Zimmerman, B.J. (2008). Investigating self-regulation and motivation: Historical background, methodological developments, and future prospects. American Educational Research Journal, 45(1), 166-183.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Also Read

Related Collections