Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Theory Background:
Conceptual challenges from a learner-centered perspective
Experimental Study:
Effects emerging from different tasks framing the usage of online-video (tools) on student collaboration and learning
Discussion:
Future Research relating to MOOCs
Carmen Zahn
10.02.2014
Assessment Community E.g. In-video quizzes, homework, E.g. Discussion board, social group projects media, video chat, text chat
(Taxonomy: General Features of Moocs, Schneider, 2013)
Carmen Zahn
10.02.2014
Design challenge # 1
Instruction E.g. Lecture, readings, videos, interactivity Content E.g. Domain, Modularization, Pacing
Carmen Zahn
10.02.2014
Design Challenge # 2
Assessment Community E.g. In-video quizzes, homework, E.g. Discussion board, social (Taxonomy: General Features of Moocs, Schneider, 2013) group projects media, video chat, text chat
Connect video materials to meaningful learning experiences and the community = Effective (collaborative) tasks & assessment
Carmen Zahn
10.02.2014
Showing video is not the most efficient way to activate learners` mental effort especially problematic for learning of complex topics (e.g., compared to text, Salomon, 1984)
Digital video tools (e.g. highlighting, editing functions, annotation tools, hypervideo) successfully enable learning activities necessary for learning of complex topics (e.g.,
Schwan & Riempp, 2004; Spiro, et al. 2007; Zahn, Pea, et al., 2005)
Embedding video in collaborative and creative tasks is a powerful strategy to stimulate and enhance learning from video (e.g., Schwartz & Hartmann, 2007; Zahn et al., 2013)
Video collaboration tools (e.g., hypervideo with discussion tool, webspaces for coediting and sharing comments, etc.) improve learning of complex topics (e.g., Goldman, 2004; Zahn, Pea, Hesse & Rosen, 2010) not only in lab, but in real learning scenarios of school-based and university education (Pea et al., 2004; Pea et al., 2006; Stahl, Zahn, Finke, 2005; Zahn, Krauskopf, Hesse & Pea, 2010) Extra-support for social interactions when learning with video tools increases success
(e.g., Zahn, Krauskopf, Hesse & Pea, 2012)
Theory Background:
Conceptual challenges from a learner-centered perspective
Experimental Study:
Effects emerging from different tasks framing the usage of online-video (tools) on student collaboration and learning
Discussion:
Future Research relating to MOOCs
Carmen Zahn
10.02.2014
Test if specific video tools can be helpful for collaborative online-learning in a complex domain like history
Initial exploration of the question Which effects can we expect from different tasks framing the use of those video tools on collaborative online-learning and outcome?
10
Students used WebDiverTM for discussion and multimedia assignments Online-Lesson: German History (Berlin Airlift) Video & Materials: Original Newsreel (historical source) & Textbook information Learning Goal: Integration of content knowledge and an understanding of the propagandistic functions of the newsreel = Evaluation of historical source of evidence
(e.g., Lindsay et al. 2013)
Group 1:analyse and comment on the video within an online-discussion Group 2:analyse and comment on video in order to design a hypertext-like product, so that other student learners can come to a good understanding of the newsreel (multimedia design)
11
2: Surface level effects on Performance, collaboration and collaboration and learning learning - quantity
Number of panels created in partnership Number of comments Length of comments Collaboration index
3: Deeper level effects on Performance, collaboration and collaboration and learning learning - quality
Number of panels referring to details Number of utterances in comments addressing historical content Number of utterances in comments addressing filmic style Number of utterances in comments integrating aspects of historical content and filmic style
12
Indicator
SD
SD
SD
t(34)
33.4
2.5
34.0
1.7
33.7
2.1
-0.85
.40
25.7
1.3
24.9
1.4
25.3
1.3
1.79
.08
0.7
In sum: Similar cognitive outcome from both tasks, marginal on picture recognition, medium effect size (Cohen, 1988)
13
SD 8.7 161.1
M 36.1 610.6
SD 10.6 290.6
n = 6 dyads Collaboration index Dives created in partnership 12.3 4.2 10.6 4.2
n = 12 dyads 22.6 8.1 16.3 5.6 -2.08 -2.26 .07+ .05* 0.7 1.4
14
5.2
1.7
3.3
1.2
4.3
1.5
2.23
.05*
1.3
5.8
3.1
4.6
1.7
5.2
2.4
0.87
.41
12.7
5.2
18.1
2.9
15.4
4.1
-2.24
.05*
1.3
n = 17 1.5 1.4
In sum: Design group *stronger in discussing an integrative view of historic content and filmic style (source evaluation!), while discussion group focuses on one aspect
15
Summary
Under the surface of apparently similar cognitive outcomes in multiple choice tests asking for factual knowledge, fine-grained differences in important other aspects of online learning became explicit:
While the discussion task stimulated significantly more collaborative surface activity than the design task
the design task stimulated for more knowledge intensive elaboration than the discussion task, such as an integrative view on video content and style
16
If we know that tasks can influence what we see in an online-video Teachers can decide according to their specific teaching goals which task is to prefer (discussion or multimedia design assignments)
We might only speculate about how such differences (obtained in an ad-hoc experiment, not MOOC) might add up in longer-lasting courses (e.g., tasks over several weeks time) and then extend to cognitive outcomes (e.g., multiple choice quizzes).
17
Video editing and annotation tools provided with video lectures and video sources make video a true working medium which students can use actively and collaboratively for learning.
18
Carmen Zahn
10.02.2014
19
Theory Background:
Conceptual challenges from a learner-centered perspective
Experimental Study:
Effects emerging from different tasks framing the usage of online-video (tools) on student collaboration and learning
Discussion:
Future Research relating to MOOCs
Carmen Zahn
10.02.2014
20