SlideShare a Scribd company logo
Moving through MOOCs: Pedagogy,
Learning and Patterns of Engagement
Rebecca Ferguson, Doug Clow (OU)
Russell Beale, Alison J Cooper (Birmingham)
Neil Morris (Leeds)
Siân Bayne, Amy Woodgate (Edinburgh)
Current context
Students seek not
merely access, but
access to success
“
John Daniel, 2012
% complete from: www.katyjordan.com/MOOCproject
”
Patterns of engagement: Coursera
● Sampling
learners explored some course
materials
● Auditing
learners watched most videos, but
completed assessments rarely, if at all
● Disengaging
learners completed assessments at the
start of the course and then reduced
their engagement
● Completing
learners completed most assessments
MOOC designers can apply this
simple and scalable
categorization to target
interventions and develop
adaptive course features
“
”
Coursera study Kizilcec, R., Piech, C., and Schneider, E., 2013. Deconstructing disengagement:
analyzing learner subpopulations in massive open online courses. LAK13
4
Replication
Open University FutureLearn data
Replication
MOOC1 MOOC2 MOOC3 MOOC4
Subject area Physical
sciences
Life
sciences
Arts Business
M 51% 39% 32% 35%
F 48% 61% 67% 65%
Participants 5,069 3,238 16,118 9,778
Fully participating 1,548 684 3,616 1,416
Participation rate 31% 21% 22% 14%
5
Calculating an activity profile
Replicating the method
● T = on track (3)
undertook the assessment on time
● B = behind (2)
submitted the assessment late
● A = auditing (1)
engaged with content but not
assessment
● O = out (0)
did not participate
Replication
6
Replication
Identifying dissimilarity between engagement patterns
Assigned numerical value to each label
● On track = 3
● Behind = 2
● Auditing = 1
● Out = 0
Calculated L1 norm for each
engagement pattern
Used that as the basis for
one-dimensional k-means clustering
Repeated clustering 100 times
and selected solution with
highest likelihood
Focused on extracting four clusters
Replication
7
Replication
Coursera and FutureLearn results were different
● Sampling
learners explored some course materials
● Auditing
learners watched most videos, but completed assessments
rarely, if at all
● Disengaging
learners completed assessments at the start of the course
and then reduced their engagement
● Completing
learners completed most assessments
√
√
x
x
They also differed when we tried
●Different values for k
●A one-dimensional approach
●Running k means directly on engagement profiles
Replication
8
FutureLearn is different
Conversation is a central feature
Sharples, M., & Ferguson, R. (2014). Innovative Pedagogy at Massive Scale:
Teaching and Learning in MOOCs. ECTEL 2014.
9
Revising the numeric values
OU FL study
1 only visited content (for example, video, audio, text)
2 commented but visited no new content
3 visited content and commented
4 did the assessment late and did nothing else that week
5 visited content and did the assessment late
6 did the assessment late, commented, but visited no new content
7 visited content, commented, late assessment
8 assessment early or on time, but nothing else that week
9 visited content and completed assessment early / on time
10 assessment early or on time, commented, but visited no new content
11 visited, posted, completed assessment early / on time
10
Typical engagement profiles
These profiles apply to an eight-week course
● Samplers visit only briefly
[1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] – 1 means they visited content
● Strong Starters do first assessment
[9, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] – 9 means they visited content and did assessment on time
● Returners come back in Week 2 [9, 9, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0]
● Mid-way Dropouts
[9, 9, 9, 4, 1, 1, 0, 0] – 4 means they submitted assessment late
● Nearly There drop out near the end
[11, 11, 9, 11, 9, 9, 0, 0] – 11 means full engagement, 8 means submission on time
● Late Completers finish
[5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 9, 9, 9] – 5 means they viewed content and submitted late
● Keen Completers do almost everything [11, 11, 9, 9, 11, 11, 9, 9]
OU FL study
11
Samplers & Strong starters
Samplers (1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0)
● The largest group in all MOOCs
● Typically accounted for 37% – 39% of
learners
● Visited the materials, but only briefly
● Active in a small number of weeks
● 25% – 40% joined after Week 1
● Very few Samplers posted
comments (6% – 15%)
● Almost no Samplers submitted
any assessment
Strong starters (9, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0)
●All Strong Starters submitted the first
assignment
●Engagement dropped off sharply after that
●A little over a third of them posted
comments
●Typically posted fewer than four comments
OU FL study
12
Returners & Mid-way dropouts
Returners (9, 9, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0)
● Completed the assessment in the
first week
● Completed the assessment in the
second week
● Then dropped out
● Over 97% completed those two
assessments, although some
submittted late
● No Returner explored all
course steps
● Average amount of steps visited
varied (23% – 47%)
Mid-way dropouts (9, 9, 9, 4, 1, 1, 0, 0)
●A much smaller cluster (6% of learners on
MOOC1, 7% on MOOC4)
●These learners completed three or four
assessments
●They dropped out around halfway
through the course
●Mid-way dropouts visited about half
the steps on the course
●Just under half posted comments
●Posted just over six comments on average
OU FL study
13
Nearly There
Nearly there (11, 11, 9, 11, 9, 9, 0, 0)
● Another small cluster (5% – 6% of learners)
● Consistently completed assessments
● Dropped out just before the end of the course
● Visited around 80% of the course
● Submitted assignments consistently (>90%) and
typically on time until Week 5
● Activity then declined steeply
● Few completed the final assessment
● None completed the final assessment on time
OU FL study
14
Late completers & keen completers
Late completers (5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 9, 9, 9)
● Submitted the final assessment
● Submitted most other assessments
● However, either submitted late or
missed some assessments
● Each week, more than 94% of this
cluster submitted their assessments
● More than three-quarters submitted
the final assessment on time
(78% – 90%)
● Around 40% of them posted
comments (76% did so on MOOC3)
Keen completers (11, 11, 9, 9, 11, 11, 9, 9)
●Accounted for 7% – 23% of learners
●All Keen Completers submitted all
assessments
●More than 80% of these were submitted
on time
●Typically, Keen Completers visited more
than 90% of course content
●Over two-thirds contributed comments
(68% – 73%)
●Mean number of comments varied from
21 to 54
OU FL study
15
Cross-university dataset
FutureLearn data from four universities
Cross-university
Name Duration University Discipline Active
learners
LongMOOC1 8 OU Hard
science
5,069
LongMOOC2 7 Edinburgh Hard
science
10,136
TalkMOOC3 6 Edinburgh Politics 6,141
ShortMOOC4 3 Birmingham Medical
science
6,839
ShortMOOC5 3 Leeds Medical
science
4,756
16
Values for k used in this study
Different values were used for the three study phases
Cross-university
Name Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3
LongMOOC1 7 – –
LongMOOC2 7 – –
TalkMOOC3 – 7 3
ShortMOOC4 – 7 4
ShortMOOC5 – 7 5
Phase 1: Best-fit value for k aligned with OU study
Phase 2: Testing k=7 where this was not the best fit
Phase 3: Most suitable value for k in each set of data
17
Phase two: k ≠ 7
Why k≠7 in Talk MOOC3
Phase two
The absence of assessment in TalkMOOC3 limited its coding profile
1 only visited content (for example, video, audio, text)
2 commented but visited no new content
3 visited content and commented
4 did the assessment late and did nothing else that week
5 visited content and did the assessment late
6 did the assessment late, commented, but visited no new content
7 visited content, commented, late assessment
8 assessment early or on time, but nothing else that week
9 visited content and completed assessment early / on time
10 assessment early or on time, commented, but visited no new content
11 visited, posted, completed assessment early / on time
18
Phase two: k ≠ 7
Why k≠7 in ShortMOOC4 and ShortMOOC5
Phase two
Three clusters are indistinguishable in a three-week MOOC
Returners who come back in Week 2
Mid-way Dropouts who drop out mid-course
Nearly There who drop out near the end
With only three opportunities for late submission, there are no
Late Completers (who typically submit assessment late five times)
The three-week course design means other clusters emerge, such as:
Surgers concentrate their effort after the first week of a three-week course
Improvers fall behind in Week 1, begin to catch up in Week 2 and complete on time
19
Phase three: suitable values for k
TalkMOOC3: k=3
Phase three
Quiet (1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0)
● The largest cluster
● Visit a quarter of course
steps
● Do not comment in first
week
● Only 7% comment at all
● Only 9% engage with
second half of course
Contributors (3, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0)
● 19% of cohort
● Visit 38% of course
steps
● Every cluster member
posts in first week of
course
● Half do not comment
again
Consistent engagers
(3, 3, 3, 3, 1, 1)
● 11% of cohort
● Visit 82% of course steps
● Engage throughout course
● Every cluster member posts
a comment
● 95% contribute more than
three comments
● 7% contribute more than
100 comments
20
Phase three: suitable values for k
ShortMOOC4: k=4
Phase three
Very weak starters (2, 1, 0)
● The largest cluster
● Visit 20% of steps
● 20% do not engage in
first week
Strong starters (truncated)
(10, 1, 0)
● 17% of cohort
● Submit week 1 assessment
● Do not submit another
assessment
● Almost half post comment
Returners (truncated)
(3, 3, 3, 3, 1, 1)
● Most submit week 1
assessment
● All submit week 2
assessment
● Half submit
at least one
comment
Keen completers
(truncated) (9, 9, 9)
● Visit more than 90% of
steps
● Submit work on time
● Engage throughout
21
Phase three: suitable values for k
ShortMOOC5: k=5
Phase three
Samplers (truncated)
(1, 0, 0)
● Visit few steps
● Includes many latecomers
(>25%)
● Very few submit
assessment
Strong starters (truncated)
(9, 1, 0)
● Submit week 1 assessment
● Do not submit another
assessment
Returners (truncated)
(8, 8, 2)
● Most submit week 1
assessment
● All submit week 2
assessment
Keen completers
(truncated) (9, 9, 9)
● Visit more than 90% of
steps
● Submit work on time
● Engage throughout
Improvers (5, 6, 9)
● Activity increases each
week
● Final assessment submitte
on time
22
Learning design and pedagogy
● The Coursera Study suggested that MOOC designers would be
able to apply the four engagement patterns they had identified
‘to target interventions and develop adaptive course features’
● These subsequent studies show that this is not necessarily the
case –engagement patterns are not consistent across MOOCs
● Changes to the basic pedagogic elements of a course are
associated with shifts in patterns of engagement.
● Shifts in pedagogic approach can change the elements of a
course that can be regarded as key
● Changes to some elements of learning design can change
learners’ patterns of engagement with a MOOC
23
Shorter courses
● Reducing course length does not necessarily increase
engagement
● Many learners do not approach a three-week course in the
same way as an eight-week course
● Many focus their attention on later weeks and may miss out the
content and activities in the first week
● A three-week course offers limited opportunities to get ahead of,
or behind, the cohort
● It is possible to dip in at different points without losing the sense
of being a cohort member
24
Improving learning and learning environments
Closing the loop
● Previews of course material would allow Samplers to make a
more informed decision about whether to join the course
● Sign-up pages could draw attention to the problems
experienced by those who are out of step with the cohort
● Discussion steps for latecomers could support those who fall
behind at the start
● Prompts might encourage flagging learners to return and
register for a subsequent presentation
● Bridges between course weeks could indicate links and point
learners forward
25
View these slides at www.slideshare.net/R3beccaF
Rebecca Ferguson @R3beccaF
Doug Clow @dougclow

More Related Content

PPTX
Moving through MOOCs
PPTX
R ferguson lak15
PPT
Teaching in MOOCs: Unbundling the roles of the educator
PPTX
Learning design and learning analytics
PPTX
Pedagogy with Technology: getting the horse out in front of the cart
PPT
Rethinking education
PPTX
LAK15 panel - European Perspectives
PPTX
Ah yes, but that would never work with my students
Moving through MOOCs
R ferguson lak15
Teaching in MOOCs: Unbundling the roles of the educator
Learning design and learning analytics
Pedagogy with Technology: getting the horse out in front of the cart
Rethinking education
LAK15 panel - European Perspectives
Ah yes, but that would never work with my students

What's hot (20)

PDF
PeerWise Bates (STLHE 2013)
PDF
Aapt peer wise_bates
PPTX
Moocs
PDF
Wcse slides bates_galloway_denny
PDF
Keynote lecture at 2016 NTU Learning and Teaching Seminar - Students as Partn...
PDF
Plenary lecture at 2016 NTU Learning and Teaching Seminar - Students as Partn...
PDF
Personalized Learning: Implications for curricula, staff and students
PDF
Faculty and students; as collaborators, coproducers and makers
PPTX
Scaling up learning analytics
PPTX
Learning analytics FAQs
PPTX
CCCOER May 11 Webinar: 3 Faculty Perpectives on OER Adoption
PDF
Expert guided crowd sourced learning content: a pilot study
PPTX
Dr. Valerie Irvine 2014 Keynote
PDF
A Blended Approach to Facilitating Professional Development
PPTX
Opening Up an Open University
PPTX
Supporting Higher Education to Integrate Learning Analytics_EUNIS20171107
PPTX
Lumen Learning OER Degree Program Support
PDF
The Anatomy of a 21st Century Educator
PPT
PPT
From Theory to Practice, Balancing Pedagogy and Technology for Diverse Profes...
PeerWise Bates (STLHE 2013)
Aapt peer wise_bates
Moocs
Wcse slides bates_galloway_denny
Keynote lecture at 2016 NTU Learning and Teaching Seminar - Students as Partn...
Plenary lecture at 2016 NTU Learning and Teaching Seminar - Students as Partn...
Personalized Learning: Implications for curricula, staff and students
Faculty and students; as collaborators, coproducers and makers
Scaling up learning analytics
Learning analytics FAQs
CCCOER May 11 Webinar: 3 Faculty Perpectives on OER Adoption
Expert guided crowd sourced learning content: a pilot study
Dr. Valerie Irvine 2014 Keynote
A Blended Approach to Facilitating Professional Development
Opening Up an Open University
Supporting Higher Education to Integrate Learning Analytics_EUNIS20171107
Lumen Learning OER Degree Program Support
The Anatomy of a 21st Century Educator
From Theory to Practice, Balancing Pedagogy and Technology for Diverse Profes...
Ad

Viewers also liked (20)

PDF
Coursera Impact Revealed: Learner Outcomes in Open Online Courses
PPTX
How MOOCs help to enhance your skill and career
PDF
Open badges for Open Education
PDF
Preparing our students for Web 3.0 learning
PPSX
21 Inspiring Quotes & Thoughts On Mobile Learning
DOCX
Field Study 3 Episode 7
PPT
Epistolary interviews
PPTX
The ethics of MOOC research: why we should involve learners
PDF
Coursera Mentoring Certificate
PPTX
Δημιουργία Ιστοσελίδων
PDF
Wearable Learning to enhance Creativity, Learning and Healthy Ageing: Concept...
PPTX
Learning design and learning analytics
PPTX
Moocs: what the research tells us
PDF
Coursera Final
DOC
Myporfolio Jen
PPTX
Mobile learning: Five Mistakes to Avoid
PPTX
Where is the evidence? A call to action for learning analytics
DOCX
Fs 3 episode3
DOCX
DOCX
Field Study 2 Episode 3
Coursera Impact Revealed: Learner Outcomes in Open Online Courses
How MOOCs help to enhance your skill and career
Open badges for Open Education
Preparing our students for Web 3.0 learning
21 Inspiring Quotes & Thoughts On Mobile Learning
Field Study 3 Episode 7
Epistolary interviews
The ethics of MOOC research: why we should involve learners
Coursera Mentoring Certificate
Δημιουργία Ιστοσελίδων
Wearable Learning to enhance Creativity, Learning and Healthy Ageing: Concept...
Learning design and learning analytics
Moocs: what the research tells us
Coursera Final
Myporfolio Jen
Mobile learning: Five Mistakes to Avoid
Where is the evidence? A call to action for learning analytics
Fs 3 episode3
Field Study 2 Episode 3
Ad

Similar to Moving through MOOCs: Pedagogy, Learning and Patterns of Engagement (20)

PDF
Conceptualizing Interaction & Learning in MOOCs
PDF
A Tale of two MOOCs, M. Cisel & M. Mano
PDF
Rebecca eynon learning & interaction in moo cs
PDF
Intermediate statistics CY Tech
PDF
M. CISEL, M. MANO emoocs2015
PPTX
Humanizing Online Instruction: A MOOC project report
PPT
Towards conceptualising interaction and learning in Massive Open Online Cours...
PPTX
MOOCs and personal learning: reality or myth?
PDF
«Implicaciones de datos de aprendizaje procedentes de MOOCs», por Edmundo Tov...
PDF
A Case Study Of An Open Online Course
PPTX
Prez epfl
PPT
MOOCs and the Funnel of Participation
PDF
IRJET - Investigating the Common Factor of Drop Out based on Learner’s Perspe...
PPTX
Wsu guest lecture_2015_czlv_v3
PPTX
Twenty Shades of Grey: Reflecting on Digital Realities and Digital Futures
PPTX
Wanted: MOOC pedagogy
PDF
Dan Davis EDM 2016 Presentation Slides
PPTX
Personal Learning Graph (PLeG)
PPTX
Sanna Ruhalahti: Wanted - MOOC Pedagogy
PPTX
Wanted MOOC pedagogy OEB 2015
Conceptualizing Interaction & Learning in MOOCs
A Tale of two MOOCs, M. Cisel & M. Mano
Rebecca eynon learning & interaction in moo cs
Intermediate statistics CY Tech
M. CISEL, M. MANO emoocs2015
Humanizing Online Instruction: A MOOC project report
Towards conceptualising interaction and learning in Massive Open Online Cours...
MOOCs and personal learning: reality or myth?
«Implicaciones de datos de aprendizaje procedentes de MOOCs», por Edmundo Tov...
A Case Study Of An Open Online Course
Prez epfl
MOOCs and the Funnel of Participation
IRJET - Investigating the Common Factor of Drop Out based on Learner’s Perspe...
Wsu guest lecture_2015_czlv_v3
Twenty Shades of Grey: Reflecting on Digital Realities and Digital Futures
Wanted: MOOC pedagogy
Dan Davis EDM 2016 Presentation Slides
Personal Learning Graph (PLeG)
Sanna Ruhalahti: Wanted - MOOC Pedagogy
Wanted MOOC pedagogy OEB 2015

More from Rebecca Ferguson (20)

PPTX
What's the value of a doctoral consortium
PPTX
Looking to the Future – LASI Europe 2024
PPTX
Podcasts as pedagogy: integrating podcasts in teaching and learning
PPTX
OpenCreate OpenTEL SIG presentation.pptx
PPTX
Responsive sustainable education futures.pptx
PPTX
Learning fun-damentals.pptx
PPTX
Learning analytics - what can we achieve together.pptx
PPTX
2023 Introduction to learning analytics.pptx
PPTX
Innnovations in online teaching and learning: CHatGPT and other artificial as...
PPTX
Edu 4.0: Getting Ready for Industry 4.0.pptx
PPTX
Pedagogies for Today 2022 ICCE Malaysia.pptx
PPTX
2022 AICRIE Rebecca Ferguson.pptx
PPTX
Microcredentials benefits and challenges.pptx
PPTX
Innovating Pedagogy: ICOIE 2022
PPTX
Introduction to learning analytics (T1).pptx
PPTX
Qualitative perspectives on open science
PPTX
Microcredentials at The Open University
PPTX
Teaching and learning futures
PPTX
Accessible learning, accessible analytics
PPTX
'I went to a marvellous party': a manifesto for online meetings
What's the value of a doctoral consortium
Looking to the Future – LASI Europe 2024
Podcasts as pedagogy: integrating podcasts in teaching and learning
OpenCreate OpenTEL SIG presentation.pptx
Responsive sustainable education futures.pptx
Learning fun-damentals.pptx
Learning analytics - what can we achieve together.pptx
2023 Introduction to learning analytics.pptx
Innnovations in online teaching and learning: CHatGPT and other artificial as...
Edu 4.0: Getting Ready for Industry 4.0.pptx
Pedagogies for Today 2022 ICCE Malaysia.pptx
2022 AICRIE Rebecca Ferguson.pptx
Microcredentials benefits and challenges.pptx
Innovating Pedagogy: ICOIE 2022
Introduction to learning analytics (T1).pptx
Qualitative perspectives on open science
Microcredentials at The Open University
Teaching and learning futures
Accessible learning, accessible analytics
'I went to a marvellous party': a manifesto for online meetings

Recently uploaded (20)

PDF
Classroom Observation Tools for Teachers
PPTX
UNIT III MENTAL HEALTH NURSING ASSESSMENT
PDF
SOIL: Factor, Horizon, Process, Classification, Degradation, Conservation
PPTX
Tissue processing ( HISTOPATHOLOGICAL TECHNIQUE
PDF
Supply Chain Operations Speaking Notes -ICLT Program
PPTX
Final Presentation General Medicine 03-08-2024.pptx
PDF
A systematic review of self-coping strategies used by university students to ...
PDF
Trump Administration's workforce development strategy
PDF
Weekly quiz Compilation Jan -July 25.pdf
PPTX
History, Philosophy and sociology of education (1).pptx
PDF
OBE - B.A.(HON'S) IN INTERIOR ARCHITECTURE -Ar.MOHIUDDIN.pdf
PDF
LNK 2025 (2).pdf MWEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHE
PDF
Practical Manual AGRO-233 Principles and Practices of Natural Farming
PDF
Complications of Minimal Access Surgery at WLH
PPTX
Final Presentation General Medicine 03-08-2024.pptx
PDF
IGGE1 Understanding the Self1234567891011
PDF
Indian roads congress 037 - 2012 Flexible pavement
PDF
Chinmaya Tiranga quiz Grand Finale.pdf
DOC
Soft-furnishing-By-Architect-A.F.M.Mohiuddin-Akhand.doc
PDF
LDMMIA Reiki Yoga Finals Review Spring Summer
Classroom Observation Tools for Teachers
UNIT III MENTAL HEALTH NURSING ASSESSMENT
SOIL: Factor, Horizon, Process, Classification, Degradation, Conservation
Tissue processing ( HISTOPATHOLOGICAL TECHNIQUE
Supply Chain Operations Speaking Notes -ICLT Program
Final Presentation General Medicine 03-08-2024.pptx
A systematic review of self-coping strategies used by university students to ...
Trump Administration's workforce development strategy
Weekly quiz Compilation Jan -July 25.pdf
History, Philosophy and sociology of education (1).pptx
OBE - B.A.(HON'S) IN INTERIOR ARCHITECTURE -Ar.MOHIUDDIN.pdf
LNK 2025 (2).pdf MWEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHE
Practical Manual AGRO-233 Principles and Practices of Natural Farming
Complications of Minimal Access Surgery at WLH
Final Presentation General Medicine 03-08-2024.pptx
IGGE1 Understanding the Self1234567891011
Indian roads congress 037 - 2012 Flexible pavement
Chinmaya Tiranga quiz Grand Finale.pdf
Soft-furnishing-By-Architect-A.F.M.Mohiuddin-Akhand.doc
LDMMIA Reiki Yoga Finals Review Spring Summer

Moving through MOOCs: Pedagogy, Learning and Patterns of Engagement

  • 1. Moving through MOOCs: Pedagogy, Learning and Patterns of Engagement Rebecca Ferguson, Doug Clow (OU) Russell Beale, Alison J Cooper (Birmingham) Neil Morris (Leeds) Siân Bayne, Amy Woodgate (Edinburgh)
  • 2. Current context Students seek not merely access, but access to success “ John Daniel, 2012 % complete from: www.katyjordan.com/MOOCproject ”
  • 3. Patterns of engagement: Coursera ● Sampling learners explored some course materials ● Auditing learners watched most videos, but completed assessments rarely, if at all ● Disengaging learners completed assessments at the start of the course and then reduced their engagement ● Completing learners completed most assessments MOOC designers can apply this simple and scalable categorization to target interventions and develop adaptive course features “ ” Coursera study Kizilcec, R., Piech, C., and Schneider, E., 2013. Deconstructing disengagement: analyzing learner subpopulations in massive open online courses. LAK13
  • 4. 4 Replication Open University FutureLearn data Replication MOOC1 MOOC2 MOOC3 MOOC4 Subject area Physical sciences Life sciences Arts Business M 51% 39% 32% 35% F 48% 61% 67% 65% Participants 5,069 3,238 16,118 9,778 Fully participating 1,548 684 3,616 1,416 Participation rate 31% 21% 22% 14%
  • 5. 5 Calculating an activity profile Replicating the method ● T = on track (3) undertook the assessment on time ● B = behind (2) submitted the assessment late ● A = auditing (1) engaged with content but not assessment ● O = out (0) did not participate Replication
  • 6. 6 Replication Identifying dissimilarity between engagement patterns Assigned numerical value to each label ● On track = 3 ● Behind = 2 ● Auditing = 1 ● Out = 0 Calculated L1 norm for each engagement pattern Used that as the basis for one-dimensional k-means clustering Repeated clustering 100 times and selected solution with highest likelihood Focused on extracting four clusters Replication
  • 7. 7 Replication Coursera and FutureLearn results were different ● Sampling learners explored some course materials ● Auditing learners watched most videos, but completed assessments rarely, if at all ● Disengaging learners completed assessments at the start of the course and then reduced their engagement ● Completing learners completed most assessments √ √ x x They also differed when we tried ●Different values for k ●A one-dimensional approach ●Running k means directly on engagement profiles Replication
  • 8. 8 FutureLearn is different Conversation is a central feature Sharples, M., & Ferguson, R. (2014). Innovative Pedagogy at Massive Scale: Teaching and Learning in MOOCs. ECTEL 2014.
  • 9. 9 Revising the numeric values OU FL study 1 only visited content (for example, video, audio, text) 2 commented but visited no new content 3 visited content and commented 4 did the assessment late and did nothing else that week 5 visited content and did the assessment late 6 did the assessment late, commented, but visited no new content 7 visited content, commented, late assessment 8 assessment early or on time, but nothing else that week 9 visited content and completed assessment early / on time 10 assessment early or on time, commented, but visited no new content 11 visited, posted, completed assessment early / on time
  • 10. 10 Typical engagement profiles These profiles apply to an eight-week course ● Samplers visit only briefly [1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] – 1 means they visited content ● Strong Starters do first assessment [9, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] – 9 means they visited content and did assessment on time ● Returners come back in Week 2 [9, 9, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] ● Mid-way Dropouts [9, 9, 9, 4, 1, 1, 0, 0] – 4 means they submitted assessment late ● Nearly There drop out near the end [11, 11, 9, 11, 9, 9, 0, 0] – 11 means full engagement, 8 means submission on time ● Late Completers finish [5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 9, 9, 9] – 5 means they viewed content and submitted late ● Keen Completers do almost everything [11, 11, 9, 9, 11, 11, 9, 9] OU FL study
  • 11. 11 Samplers & Strong starters Samplers (1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0) ● The largest group in all MOOCs ● Typically accounted for 37% – 39% of learners ● Visited the materials, but only briefly ● Active in a small number of weeks ● 25% – 40% joined after Week 1 ● Very few Samplers posted comments (6% – 15%) ● Almost no Samplers submitted any assessment Strong starters (9, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0) ●All Strong Starters submitted the first assignment ●Engagement dropped off sharply after that ●A little over a third of them posted comments ●Typically posted fewer than four comments OU FL study
  • 12. 12 Returners & Mid-way dropouts Returners (9, 9, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0) ● Completed the assessment in the first week ● Completed the assessment in the second week ● Then dropped out ● Over 97% completed those two assessments, although some submittted late ● No Returner explored all course steps ● Average amount of steps visited varied (23% – 47%) Mid-way dropouts (9, 9, 9, 4, 1, 1, 0, 0) ●A much smaller cluster (6% of learners on MOOC1, 7% on MOOC4) ●These learners completed three or four assessments ●They dropped out around halfway through the course ●Mid-way dropouts visited about half the steps on the course ●Just under half posted comments ●Posted just over six comments on average OU FL study
  • 13. 13 Nearly There Nearly there (11, 11, 9, 11, 9, 9, 0, 0) ● Another small cluster (5% – 6% of learners) ● Consistently completed assessments ● Dropped out just before the end of the course ● Visited around 80% of the course ● Submitted assignments consistently (>90%) and typically on time until Week 5 ● Activity then declined steeply ● Few completed the final assessment ● None completed the final assessment on time OU FL study
  • 14. 14 Late completers & keen completers Late completers (5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 9, 9, 9) ● Submitted the final assessment ● Submitted most other assessments ● However, either submitted late or missed some assessments ● Each week, more than 94% of this cluster submitted their assessments ● More than three-quarters submitted the final assessment on time (78% – 90%) ● Around 40% of them posted comments (76% did so on MOOC3) Keen completers (11, 11, 9, 9, 11, 11, 9, 9) ●Accounted for 7% – 23% of learners ●All Keen Completers submitted all assessments ●More than 80% of these were submitted on time ●Typically, Keen Completers visited more than 90% of course content ●Over two-thirds contributed comments (68% – 73%) ●Mean number of comments varied from 21 to 54 OU FL study
  • 15. 15 Cross-university dataset FutureLearn data from four universities Cross-university Name Duration University Discipline Active learners LongMOOC1 8 OU Hard science 5,069 LongMOOC2 7 Edinburgh Hard science 10,136 TalkMOOC3 6 Edinburgh Politics 6,141 ShortMOOC4 3 Birmingham Medical science 6,839 ShortMOOC5 3 Leeds Medical science 4,756
  • 16. 16 Values for k used in this study Different values were used for the three study phases Cross-university Name Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 LongMOOC1 7 – – LongMOOC2 7 – – TalkMOOC3 – 7 3 ShortMOOC4 – 7 4 ShortMOOC5 – 7 5 Phase 1: Best-fit value for k aligned with OU study Phase 2: Testing k=7 where this was not the best fit Phase 3: Most suitable value for k in each set of data
  • 17. 17 Phase two: k ≠ 7 Why k≠7 in Talk MOOC3 Phase two The absence of assessment in TalkMOOC3 limited its coding profile 1 only visited content (for example, video, audio, text) 2 commented but visited no new content 3 visited content and commented 4 did the assessment late and did nothing else that week 5 visited content and did the assessment late 6 did the assessment late, commented, but visited no new content 7 visited content, commented, late assessment 8 assessment early or on time, but nothing else that week 9 visited content and completed assessment early / on time 10 assessment early or on time, commented, but visited no new content 11 visited, posted, completed assessment early / on time
  • 18. 18 Phase two: k ≠ 7 Why k≠7 in ShortMOOC4 and ShortMOOC5 Phase two Three clusters are indistinguishable in a three-week MOOC Returners who come back in Week 2 Mid-way Dropouts who drop out mid-course Nearly There who drop out near the end With only three opportunities for late submission, there are no Late Completers (who typically submit assessment late five times) The three-week course design means other clusters emerge, such as: Surgers concentrate their effort after the first week of a three-week course Improvers fall behind in Week 1, begin to catch up in Week 2 and complete on time
  • 19. 19 Phase three: suitable values for k TalkMOOC3: k=3 Phase three Quiet (1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0) ● The largest cluster ● Visit a quarter of course steps ● Do not comment in first week ● Only 7% comment at all ● Only 9% engage with second half of course Contributors (3, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0) ● 19% of cohort ● Visit 38% of course steps ● Every cluster member posts in first week of course ● Half do not comment again Consistent engagers (3, 3, 3, 3, 1, 1) ● 11% of cohort ● Visit 82% of course steps ● Engage throughout course ● Every cluster member posts a comment ● 95% contribute more than three comments ● 7% contribute more than 100 comments
  • 20. 20 Phase three: suitable values for k ShortMOOC4: k=4 Phase three Very weak starters (2, 1, 0) ● The largest cluster ● Visit 20% of steps ● 20% do not engage in first week Strong starters (truncated) (10, 1, 0) ● 17% of cohort ● Submit week 1 assessment ● Do not submit another assessment ● Almost half post comment Returners (truncated) (3, 3, 3, 3, 1, 1) ● Most submit week 1 assessment ● All submit week 2 assessment ● Half submit at least one comment Keen completers (truncated) (9, 9, 9) ● Visit more than 90% of steps ● Submit work on time ● Engage throughout
  • 21. 21 Phase three: suitable values for k ShortMOOC5: k=5 Phase three Samplers (truncated) (1, 0, 0) ● Visit few steps ● Includes many latecomers (>25%) ● Very few submit assessment Strong starters (truncated) (9, 1, 0) ● Submit week 1 assessment ● Do not submit another assessment Returners (truncated) (8, 8, 2) ● Most submit week 1 assessment ● All submit week 2 assessment Keen completers (truncated) (9, 9, 9) ● Visit more than 90% of steps ● Submit work on time ● Engage throughout Improvers (5, 6, 9) ● Activity increases each week ● Final assessment submitte on time
  • 22. 22 Learning design and pedagogy ● The Coursera Study suggested that MOOC designers would be able to apply the four engagement patterns they had identified ‘to target interventions and develop adaptive course features’ ● These subsequent studies show that this is not necessarily the case –engagement patterns are not consistent across MOOCs ● Changes to the basic pedagogic elements of a course are associated with shifts in patterns of engagement. ● Shifts in pedagogic approach can change the elements of a course that can be regarded as key ● Changes to some elements of learning design can change learners’ patterns of engagement with a MOOC
  • 23. 23 Shorter courses ● Reducing course length does not necessarily increase engagement ● Many learners do not approach a three-week course in the same way as an eight-week course ● Many focus their attention on later weeks and may miss out the content and activities in the first week ● A three-week course offers limited opportunities to get ahead of, or behind, the cohort ● It is possible to dip in at different points without losing the sense of being a cohort member
  • 24. 24 Improving learning and learning environments Closing the loop ● Previews of course material would allow Samplers to make a more informed decision about whether to join the course ● Sign-up pages could draw attention to the problems experienced by those who are out of step with the cohort ● Discussion steps for latecomers could support those who fall behind at the start ● Prompts might encourage flagging learners to return and register for a subsequent presentation ● Bridges between course weeks could indicate links and point learners forward
  • 25. 25 View these slides at www.slideshare.net/R3beccaF Rebecca Ferguson @R3beccaF Doug Clow @dougclow