Our slides for HICSS-ATLT 2020
- 1. The Impact of Motivation and Strategy Use on Course Outcome in Digital Learning Environment- A case Analysis of a Business School Course Shadi Esnaashari, Lesley Gardner, Michael Rehm, January, 2020
- 2. Overview • Introduction • Literature review • Theoretical frame work • Research methodology • Data Analysis
- 7. Top Hat
- 8. Research Gaps • How does the motivation of students change over the course and to what extent does student motivation affect their course outcome?”
- 9. Literature review- Prediction Techniques Studies Decision tree (Cortez & Silva, 2008), (Bresfelean, 2007), (Kabra & Bichkar, 2011), (Romero, Ventura, Espejo, & Hervás, 2008) Neural network (Sheel, Vrooman, Renner, & Dawsey, 2001), (Lykourentzou et al., 2009), (Pinninghoff Junemann, Salcedo Lagos, & Contreras Arriagada, 2007), (Cortez & Silva, 2008), (Fausett & Elwasif, 1994), (Romero et al., 2008) Regression techniques (Kotsiantis & Pintelas, 2005), (Talavera & Gaudioso, 2004), (Hämäläinen & Vinni, 2006), Lykourentzou, Giannoukos, Mpardis, Nikolopoulos, & Loumos, 2009) Bayesian network (Ayers & Junker, 2006), (Hämäläinen & Vinni, 2006)
- 10. Theoretical framework We have to remind ourselves • “learning analytics is about learning”. (Gašević, Dawson, and Siemens, 2015)
- 11. Activity theory Leontiev extended by Engeström (2001)
- 12. Self-regulated learning Learners construct their knowledge Learners use tools to operate on raw materials to construct a product Learners are agents Learners are agents which means that they decide what to study and when to stop their studies. Students evaluate themselves during the process of learning.
- 13. Method • Context of the study • Participants • Ethics • Data collection • Data analysis
- 14. STUDY DESIGN • Students in a Business School at a New Zealand university. • The courses lasted for 12 weeks. • Data is available for 189 students. • TechSmith platform. • Tests at the end of each video module. • Tournaments through Top Hat. • Survey questionnaire to understand the perception of students regarding using different tools. • The Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ)
- 15. Research process
- 16. Data collection(Quantitative and qualitative) • In-class participation data (Top Hat) • Out of class participation data (Canvas) • The Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) • Students interviews
- 17. Motivation Value Affective Expectancy Intrinsic goal orientation Extrinsic goal orientation Task Value Control Beliefs Self-efficacy Test Anxiety
- 18. Strategy Rehearsal Cognitive and Meta cognitive strategy Resource management strategies Elaboration Organization Critical Thinking Metacognitive self- regulation Time and Study Environment Effort regulation Peer learning Help Seeking
- 20. Instrum ents Benefits Videos Students exercised control over their own learning, and reviewed resources at their own and pace. They had captions. They did not have to commute to and from the University They did not have to carry hard copy books. Students found Learning was enjoyable and they were encouraged to attend classes Lecturer directly communicated with students Quizzes Quizzes were used as a revision tool. Students could encoding the main concepts of the course Students could reflect on their learning. Supporting the lecturer Top hat Students’ answers were anonymized. Students appreciated revisiting concepts. Piazza Students did not trust using Piazza. Review sessions The environment was engaging and fun. Opportunity for students to reflect on their learning. Help to understand most important content
- 21. Factors Description Sense of community loss Having no classes, students feel they don’t have any community to interact with. Students could not forge friendships. Mental health issues Staying at home all the time impacted students’ wellbeing. Less engagement in the blended environment Helped students to procrastinate Attending the physical classroom was more helpful- students would write more notes and did not postpone things. Procrastination Students needed to have a minimum self-control in order to be able to control their learning.
- 22. Time 1 Time 2 Time 3 Mean S.D Mean S.D Mean S.D Motivation Value Components Intrinsic goal orientation 4.71 .85 4.55 .89 4.52 1.00 Extrinsic goal orientation 5.40 1.08 5.11 1.10 5.10 1.11 Task Value 5.32 1.00 4.28 .81 5.10 1.03 Value Components 15.43 2.25 13.95 2.19 14.71 2.59 Expectancy Components Control Beliefs 5.16 .86 5.14 .81 5.05 .916 Self-efficacy for Learning and Performance 4.96 .88 4.89 .91 4.84 .99 Expectancy Components 10.13 1.49 10.03 1.49 9.88 1.69 Affective Components Test Anxiety 4.64 1.13 4.50 1.14 4.60 1.22 Affective Components 4.65 1.14 4.51 1.14 4.60 1.22 Motivation 30.22 3.70 28.49 3.61 29.20 4.37 Strategyuse Cognitive and Metacognitive Strategies Rehearsal 4.43 1.02 4.67 1.03 4.77 1.05 Elaboration 4.58 .83 4.60 .94 4.71 .95 Organization 4.88 .84 4.72 .90 4.82 .93 Critical Thinking 3.84 1.03 3.91 .96 3.91 1.15 Metacognitive self-regulation 4.30 .69 4.38 .71 4.42 .74 Cognitive and Metacognitive Strategies 21.93 3.41 22.29 3.47 22.64 3.72 Resource Management Strategies Time and Study Environment 4.82 .78 4.70 .85 4.60 .87 Effort regulation 4.85 1.06 4.72 1.04 3.72 .84 Peer learning 3.42 1.34 3.33 1.40 3.59 1.42 Help Seeking 3.24 1.21 3.20 1.24 3.33 1.30 Resource Management Strategies 16.25 2.78 15.95 2.86 15.25 2.87
- 23. Time 1 Time 2 Time 2 Mean Std. Deviation Mean Std. Deviation Mean Std. Deviation Motivation 30.22 3.70 28.49 3.61 29.20 4.37 Strategy 38.18 5.36 38.23 5.48 37.89 5.75
- 24. Time 1 Time 2 Time 3 Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Value Components 15.43 2.25 13.95 2.19 14.71 2.59 Expectancy Components 10.13 1.49 10.03 1.49 9.88 1.69 Affective Components 4.65 1.14 4.51 1.14 4.60 1.22 Cognitive and Metacognitive Strategies 21.93 3.41 22.29 3.47 22.64 3.72 Resource Management Strategies 16.25 2.78 15.95 2.86 15.25 2.87
- 25. MSLQ analysisTime 1 Time 2 Time 3 Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Intrinsic goal orientation 4.71 .85 4.55 .89 4.52 1.00 Extrinsic goal orientation 5.40 1.08 5.11 1.10 5.10 1.11 Task Value 5.32 1.00 4.28 .81 5.10 1.03 Control Beliefs 5.16 .86 5.14 .81 5.05 .916 Self-efficacy for Learning and Performance 4.96 .88 4.89 .91 4.84 .99 Test Anxiety 4.64 1.13 4.50 1.14 4.60 1.22 Rehearsal 4.43 1.02 4.67 1.03 4.77 1.05 Elaboration 4.58 .83 4.60 .94 4.71 .95 Organization 4.88 .84 4.72 .90 4.82 .93 Critical Thinking 3.84 1.03 3.91 .96 3.91 1.15 Metacognitive self-regulation 4.30 .69 4.38 .71 4.42 .74 Time and Study Environment 4.82 .78 4.70 .85 4.60 .87 Effort regulation 4.85 1.06 4.72 1.04 3.72 .84 Peer learning 3.42 1.34 3.33 1.40 3.59 1.42 Help Seeking 3.24 1.21 3.20 1.24 3.33 1.30
- 26. Cluster Analysis 1 2 3 Value Components1 11.00 20.17 11.50 Expectancy Components1 9.13 12.00 11.63 Affective Components1 4.40 6.40 4.60 Cognitive and Metacognitive Strategies1 16.80 20.43 19.50 Resource Management Strategies1 13.50 17.29 11.92 Value Components2 8.83 17.92 9.92 Expectancy Components2 9.13 12.88 12.38 Affective Components2 3.80 6.00 2.00 Cognitive and Metacognitive Strategies2 16.57 29.35 13.85 Resource Management Strategies2 11.46 20.46 6.88 Value Components3 6.00 19.25 10.33 Expectancy Components3 8.63 12.25 12.00 Affective Components3 3.80 5.60 1.20 Cognitive and Metacognitive Strategies3 16.83 29.00 18.38 Resource Management Strategies3 10.07 20.78 8.93 Final Score 13.66 47.82 43.39
- 27. • Thank you for listening. • Any questions and comments: S.Esnaashari@Auckland.ac.nz