Abstract
Social constructivism emphasises the role of meaningful interactions as a vehicle for learning. Meaningful interactions engage learners cognitively and socially with others to construct knowledge. Such interactions, however, require an environment specially designed to facilitate and guide learners’ cognitive and social processes towards the construction of knowledge. Forums in massive open online courses (MOOCs) could potentially provide such an environment. However, research on how MOOC forums are designed to facilitate and guide cognitive and social processes is scarce. This study adopts a qualitative lens to examine the specifications, pedagogical instructions, and guidance provided in the forums of 4 edX MOOCs to help learners engage in meaningful interactions. We sought to uncover how MOOC forums are designed to support the social construction of knowledge. We found that MOOC forums mainly seek to facilitate cognitive processes while giving scant support or guidance to social processes. Such a learning design might favour the individual over the social construction of knowledge. To a certain extent, our findings help explain the questionable effectiveness of MOOC forums as social learning environments.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Data Availability Statement
The dataset analsyed in this study is available from the corresponding author on request.
References
Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 261–271. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.84.3.261
Arbaugh, J., Cleveland-Innes, M., Diaz, S., Garrison, D., Ice, P., Richardson, J., & Swan, K. (2008). Developing a community of inquiry instrument: Testing a measure of the community of inquiry framework using a multi-institutional sample. The Internet and Higher Education, 11(3–4), 133–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2008.06.003
Asterhan, C. (2018). Exploring enablers and inhibitors of productive peer argumentation: The role of individual achievement goals and of gender. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 54, 66–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2018.05.002
Bali, M. (2014). MOOC pedagogy: Gleaning good practice from existing MOOCs. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 10(1), 44–56.
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Prentice Hall.
Barman, L., Engquist, M., Jansson, M., & Enoksson, F. (2019). Interactions in online discussion forums—An underutilized resource for learning? In IEEE frontiers in education conference (pp. 1–5). https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE43999.2019.9028512.
Biggs, J., & Collis, K. (1982). Evaluating the quality of learning: The SOLO taxonomy. Academic Press.
Bloom, B. (1956). A taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: The cognitive domain. McKay.
Brookfield, S. (2009). Self-directed learning. In R. Maclean & D. Wilson (Eds.), International handbook of education for the changing world of work. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-5281-1_172
Bryant, L., Vincent, R., Shaqlaih, A., & Moss, G. (2013). Behaviorism and behavioral learning theory. In B. Irby, G. Brown, R. Lara-Alecio, & S. Jackson (Eds.), The handbook of educational theories (pp. 91–103). IAP Information Age Publishing.
Buchs, C., Darnon, C., Quiamzade, A., Mugny, G., & Butera, F. (2008). Conflits et apprentissage. Régulation des conflits sociocognitifs et apprentissage. Revue Française De Pédagogie, 163, 105–125. https://doi.org/10.4000/rfp.1013
Card, K., & Horton, L. (2000). Providing access to graduate education using computer-mediated communication. International Journal of Instructional Media, 27(3), 235–245.
Cha, H., & So, H. (2020). Integration of formal, non-formal and informal learning through MOOCs. In D. Burgos (Ed.), Radical solutions and open science. Lecture notes in educational technology. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-4276-3_9
Collier, D., Hidalgo, F., & Maciuceanu, A. (2006). Essentially contested concepts: Debates and applications. Journal of Political Ideologies, 11(3), 211–246.
Conole, G. (2013). MOOCs as disruptive technologies: Strategies for enhancing the learner experience and quality of MOOCs. Revista De Educación a Distancia (RED), 39, 1–17.
Crane, R., & Comley, S. (2021). Influence of social learning on the completion rate of massive online open courses. Education and Information Technologies., 26, 2285–2293. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10362-6
De Vries, P., Hennis, T., & Skrypnyk, A. (2014). Understanding social learning behaviours of xMOOC completers. In Proceedings of SEFI Annual Conference 2014. https://onlinelearningresearch.weblog.tudelft.nl/2014/09/20/sefi2014-understanding-social-learning-behaviours-of-xmooc-completers/.
Deng, R., & Benckendorff, P. (2021). What are the key themes associated with the positive learning experience in MOOCs? An empirical investigation of learners’ ratings and reviews. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18, 9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00244-3
Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (1994). Handbook of qualitative research. Sage Publications, Inc.
Dockter, J. (2016). The problem of teaching presence in transactional theories of distance education. Computers and Composition, 40, 73–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2016.03.009
Downe-Wamboldt, B. (1992). Content analysis: Method, applications, and issues. Healthcare for Women International, 13(3), 313–321.
Ertmer, P., & Newby, T. (2013). Behaviourism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. International Society for Performance Improvement, 26(2), 43–71. https://doi.org/10.1002/piq.21143
Fang, J., Tang, L., Yang, J., & Peng, M. (2019). Social interaction in MOOCs: The mediating effects of immersive experience and psychological needs satisfaction. Telematics and Informatics, 39, 75–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2019.01.006
Fereday, J., & Muir-Cochrane, E. (2006). Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5(1), 80–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690600500107
Gagné, R., Briggs, L., & Wager, W. (1992). Principles of instructional design. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers.
Galikyan, I., Admiraal, W., & Kester, L. (2021). MOOC discussion forums: The interplay of the cognitive and the social. Computers & Education, 165, 104133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104133
Garrison, D. (2021). Teaching presence meta-analysis. http://www.thecommunityofinquiry.org/editorial29.
Garrison, D., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (1999). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education model. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2–3), 87–105.
Gorsky, P., Caspi, A., Blau, I., Vine, Y., & Billet, A. (2012). Toward a COI population parameter: The impact of unit (sentence vs. message) on the results of quantitative content analysis. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 13(1), 17–37. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v13i1.1073
Guldberg, K., & Pilkington, R. (2007). Tutor roles in facilitating reflection on practice through online discussion. Educational Technology & Society, 10(1), 61–72.
Gunawardena, C., Lowe, C., & Anderson, T. (1997). Analysis of global online debate and the development of an interaction analysis model for examining social construction of knowledge in computer conferencing. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 17(4), 397–431. https://doi.org/10.2190/7MQV-X9UJ-C7Q3-NRAG
Ha, C., & Wanphet, P. (2016). Exploring EFL teachers’ use of written instructions and their subsequent verbal instructions for the same tasks. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 15(4), 135–159.
Hein, G. (1991). Constructivist learning theory. Paper presented at the CECA (International Committee of Museum Educators) Conference. https://www.exploratorium.edu/education/ifi/constructivist-learning
Henri, F. (1992). Computer conferencing and content analysis. In A. R. Kaye (Ed.), Collaborative learning through computer conferencing. NATO ASI Series F: Computer and Systems Sciences, 90. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-77684-7_8.
Henri, F., Peraya, D., & Charlier, B. (2007). La recherche sur les forums de discussion en milieu éducatif: Critères de qualité et des pratiques. Revue STICEF, 14, 155–192.
Hew, K. (2018). Unpacking the strategies of ten highly rated MOOCs: Implications for engaging students in large online courses. Teachers College Record, 120(1), 1–41.
Hirumi, A. (2002). The design and sequencing of e-learning interactions: A grounded approach. International Journal on E-Learning, 1(1), 19–27. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
Hutchby, I. (2001). Technologies, texts and affordances. Sociology, 35(2), 441–456. https://doi.org/10.1177/S0038038501000219
Johnson, D., & Johnson, R. (1987). Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning. Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Johnson, D., & Johnson, R. (1999). Structuring academic controversy. In S. Sharan (Ed.), Handbook of cooperative learning methods (pp. 66–81). Greenwood.
Johnson, R., Hornik, S., & Salas, E. (2008). An empirical examination of factors contributing to the creation of successful e-learning environments. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 66(5), 356–369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2007.11.003
Kasch, J., Van Rosmalen, P., & Kalz, M. (2021). Educational scalability in MOOCs: Analysing instructional designs to find best practices. Computers & Education. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104054
Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1). https://citejournal.org/volume-9/issue-1-09/general/what-is-technological-pedagogicalcontent-knowledge.
Kopp, M., & Lackner, E. (2014). Do MOOCs need a special instructional design? In Proceedings of the 6th international conference on education and new learning technologies (pp. 7138–7147).
Koseoglu, S., & Koutropoulos, A. (2016). Teaching presence in MOOCs: Perspectives and learning design strategies. Paper presented at the 10th International Conference on Networked Learning. Lancaster.
Krch, D. (2011). Cognitive processing. In J. Kreutzer, J. DeLuca, & B. Caplan (Eds.), Encyclopedia of clinical neuropsychology. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-79948-3_1443
Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P., & Jochems, W. (2002). The sociability of computer-supported collaborative learning environments. Educational Technology & Society, 5(1), 8–22.
Lackner, E., Kopp, M., & Ebner, M. (2014). How to MOOC?—A pedagogical guideline for practitioners. In I. Roceanu (Ed.), Proceedings of the 10th international scientific conference "eLearning and Software for Education". Editura Universitatii Nationale de Aparare "Carol I”.
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159–174. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310
Larson, B. (2000). Classroom discussion: A method of instruction and a curriculum outcome. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16(5–6), 661–677. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(00)00013-5
Lu, J., & Churchill, D. (2014). The effect of social interaction on learning engagement in a social networking environment. Interactive Learning Environments, 22(4), 401–417. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2012.680966
Margaryan, A., Bianco, M., & Littlejohn, A. (2015). Instructional quality of massive open online courses (MOOCs). Computers & Education, 80, 77–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.08.005
Marquet, P. (2011). E-Learning et conflit instrumental. Recherche Et Formation, 68, 31–46. https://doi.org/10.4000/rechercheformation.1499
Morse, J. (2008). Confusing categories and themes. Qualitative Health Research, 18(6), 727–728. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732308314930
Okita, S. (2012). Social interactions and learning. In N. Seel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the sciences of learning. Boston: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1428-6_1770
Onah, D., Sinclair, J., & Boyatt, R. (2014). Exploring the use of MOOC discussion forums. In Proceedings of London international conference on education (pp. 1–4).
Panther, K., & Köpcke, K. (2008). A prototype approach to sentences and sentence types. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 6(1), 83–112. https://doi.org/10.1075/arcl.6.05pan
Park, S., Na, E., & Kim, E. (2014). The relationship between online activities, netiquette and cyberbullying. Children and Youth Services Review, 42, 74–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2014.04.002
Piaget, J. (1985). The equilibration of cognitive structures: The central problem of intellectual development. University of Chicago Press [Original work published in 1975].
Poquet, O., Dowell, N., Brooks, C., & Dawson, S. (2018). Are MOOC forums changing? In Proceedings of the 8th international conference on learning analytics and knowledge. Association for Computing Machinery (340–349). https://doi.org/10.1145/3170358.3170416.
Reigeluth, C., & Carr-Chellman, A. (Eds.). (2009). Instructional-design theories and models, Volume III: Building a common knowledge base (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203872130.
Rhode, J. (2009). Interaction equivalency in self-paced online learning environments: An exploration of learner preferences. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 10(1), 1–23.
Rodriguez, O. (2013). The concept of openness behind c and x-MOOCs (massive open online courses). Open Praxis, 5(1), 67–73. https://doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.5.1.42
Rovai, A. (2001). Building classroom community at a distance: A case study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(4), 33–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504946
Sergis, S., Sampson D., & Pelliccione L. (2017). Educational design for MOOCs: Design considerations for technology-supported learning at large scale. In M. Jemni, K. M. Kinshuk, & Khribi M. (Eds.), Open education: From OERs to MOOCs. Lecture notes in educational technology (pp. 39–71). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-52925-6_3.
Shea, P., Li, C., & Pickett, A. (2006). A study of teaching presence and student sense of learning community in fully online and web-enhanced college courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 9(3), 175–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2006.06.005
Skinner, B. (1963). Operant behaviour. American Psychologist, 18, 503–515. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0045185
Somuncu, D., & Sert, O. (2019). EFL trainee teachers “orientations to students” non-understanding: A focus on task instructions. In H. Nguyen & T. Malabarba (Eds.), Conversation analytic perspectives on English language learning, teaching and testing in global contexts (pp. 110–131). Blue Ridge Summit: Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781788922890-007
Staquet, C. (2007). Une classe qui coopère. Pourquoi ? Comment ? Chronique sociale.
Stavredes, T., & Herder, T. (2013). Student persistence—And teaching strategies to support it. In M. Moore (Ed.), The handbook of distance education (3rd ed., pp. 155–169). Routledge.
St. John, O., & Cromdal, J. (2016). Crafting instructions collaboratively: Student questions and dual addressivity in classroom task instructions. Discourse Processes, 53(4), 252–279. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2015.1038128
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research. Sage.
Tawfik, A., Reeves, T., Stich, A., Gill, A., Hong, C., McDade, J., Pillutla, V., Zhou, Z., & Giabbanelli, P. (2017). The nature and level of learner–learner interaction in a chemistry massive open online course (MOOC). Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 29(3), 411–431. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-017-9135-3
Tiene, D. (2000). Online discussions: A survey of advantages and disadvantages compared to face-to-face discussions. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 9(4), 369–382.
Todd, R. W., Chaiyasuk, I., & Tantisawetrat, N. (2008). A functional analysis of teachers’ instructions. RELC Journal, 39(1), 25–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688208091139
Verenikina, I., Jones, P., & Delahunty, J. (2017). The guide to fostering asynchronous online discussion in higher education. FOLD. http://www.fold.org.au/docs/TheGuide_Final.pdf.
Vogel, F., Kollar, I., Ufer, S., Reichersdorfer, E., Reiss, K., & Fischer, F. (2016). Developing argumentation skills in mathematics through computer-supported collaborative learning: The role of transactivity. Instructional Science, 44(5), 477–500.
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society. Harvard University Press.
Wang, Q., & Woo, H. (2007). Comparing asynchronous online discussions and face-to-face discussions in a classroom setting. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(2), 272–286. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2006.00621.x
Wang, Y., & Stein, D. (2021). Effects of online teaching presence on students’ cognitive conflict and engagement. Distance Education, 42(4), 547–566. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2021.1987837
Waring, H., & Hruska, B. (2012). Problematic directives in pedagogical interaction. Linguistics and Education, 23(3), 289–300.
Watson, W., Watson, S., & Janakiraman, S. (2017). Instructional quality of massive open online courses: A review of attitudinal change MOOCs. International Journal of Learning Technology, 12(3), 219–224. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJLT.2017.088406
Webb, N. (1989). Peer interaction and learning in small groups. International Journal of Educational Research, 13(1), 21–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-0355(89)90014-1
Wirtz, M. (2020). Interrater reliability. In V. Zeigler-Hill & T. K. Shackelford (Eds.), Encyclopedia of personality and individual differences. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24612-3_1317
Witthaus, G. (2018). Findings from a case study on refugees using MOOCs to (re)enter higher education. Open Praxis, 10(4), 343–357. https://doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.10.4.910
Woo, Y., & Reeves, T. (2007). Meaningful interaction in web-based learning: A social constructivist interpretation. The Internet and Higher Education, 10(1), 15–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2006.10.005
Yao, M., Sahebi, S., & Feyzi Behnagh, R. (2020). Analyzing student procrastination in MOOCs: A multivariate Hawkes approach. In Proceedings of the 13th Conference on Educational Data Mining (EDM2020).
Zhao, H., & Sullivan, K. (2017). Teaching presence in computer conferencing. British Journal of Education Technology, 48, 538–551. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12383
Zhu, M., Bonk, C., & Doo, M. (2020). Self-directed learning in MOOCs: Exploring the relationships among motivation, self-monitoring, and self-management. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68, 2073–2093. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09747-8
Funding
This research was funded by Collective Research Initiatives (ARC) grant N° 19/24–099. The ARC was not involved in the development of this paper.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Conceptualization, methodology, investigation, and writing – original draft: DR Supervision, conceptualization, and writing – review and editing: MF Supervision, methodology, and writing – review and editing: VS. These author contributions are based on the CRediT taxonomy.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors of this paper have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose. The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendices
Appendix 1
Categories, sub-categories, and codes in FTSSs
Sub-categories | Codes | Specification given from instructors |
|---|---|---|
Category: technical specifications | ||
Navigating the platform | 1. Using the Course Tab | We invite you to post your messages from the Course tab rather than from the Discussion tab |
2. Seeing particular messages | If you only want to see messages related to a particular discussion thread, click on “All Topics” | |
Forum affordances | 1. Adding a post | To take part to a specific discussion, click on “Add a post” and you will directly access the discussion thread |
2. Choosing the correct post type | Make sure you chose the correct post type (either a question or a discussion) | |
3. Following other posts | If you find a post particularly interesting and want to return to it in the future, click on the “follow” button (the star icon) | |
4. Receiving email notifications | If you'd like to receive notification emails about updates on the messages you are following, click on the ad hoc button | |
5. Seeing other learners’ posts | To see previous messages from other students, click on Show Discussion | |
6. Posting a response | Si vous répondez à un message de quelqu'un d'autre, utilisez la fonctionnalité “Poster une réponse” en dessous de son message. *(transl.) If you reply another learner’s message, click on the “post a response” button below | |
7. Voting for a post | If you like a post, vote for it | |
Category: social specifications | ||
Interacting with others | 1. Responding to questions | Répondez aux questions des autres, si vous connaissez la réponse. *(transl.) Respond to questions raised by others if you know the answer |
2. Developing on ideas | To add value to the discussion, take the time to read the opinions already expressed and try to develop these good ideas even further | |
3. Letting others react | You can always add a follow-up post, but give others the opportunity to react | |
Politeness and diversity | 1. Being polite | Be civil and polite |
2. Avoiding aggressions | Insulting, demeaning, or aggressive behaviour will not be tolerated | |
3. Being aware of diversity | Remember you have a broad, multicultural audience; so, don’t presume that your readers share your background | |
4. Avoiding humour | Don’t forget that humour and irony do not translate easily; that is, your readers might take offense at expressions that seem quite innocuous to you | |
Other specifications | ||
General specifications | Using specific forums | Please note that there is a specific page from which you can send your technical, administrative and general questions |
Following own posts | It's a good idea to follow your own posts so that you can easily find them again in the future and see the answers to them | |
Flagging posts for moderation | You can flag any post, response, or comment for a discussion moderator to review | |
Posting specifications | Being concise | Évitez les longs messages, difficiles à lire en ligne. *(transl.) Avoid long messages because they are difficult to read online |
Staying on topic | Stay on topic, and avoid being distracted by secondary issues or off-topic remarks | |
Checking for similar questions | Before asking a question, check if someone else has already raised the same issue! | |
Working off-line | Work on your text offline, and then copy and paste them into the forum to prevent you from accidentally losing your text due to technical difficulties | |
Proof-reading your post | The majority of learners are not native English speakers, but even for those who are, it is always useful to proof-read posts before submitting them | |
Reading edX guidelines | If you have any doubts, you can always check the edX Guide for Students | |
Appendix 2
Learning processes facilitated in MOOC forum pedagogical instructions
Code | MOOC forum pedagogical instruction | |
|---|---|---|
Social processes | ||
SP01 | Comment on other posts | Comment on at least one other response |
SP02 | Vote for other learners’ posts | Vote for what you feel are the best proposals |
SP03 | Introduce oneself to the community | Please present yourself in the following thread of discussion |
Socio-cognitive processes | ||
SC01 | Confront opinions and ideas | N'hésitez pas à interagir avec les autres apprenant(e)s à ce propos et à confronter vos différents points de vue ! *(transl.) Feel free to interact with other learners and confront your different points of view! |
SC02 | Exchange ideas with other learners | We strongly encourage you to exchange your ideas and opinions with the community of your co-participants |
SC03 | Answer each other questions | J'invite tous/toutes les participant(e)s du MOOC à s'aider mutuellement et à tenter de répondre aux questions posées par les autres apprenant(e)s. *(transl.) I invite all MOOC participants to help each other and try to answer the questions asked by other learners |
Cognitive processes | ||
CP01 | Create things or extend ideas | Create your own representation of the Netherworld |
CP02 | Offer criticism | It's time for you to share with our community the main criticisms you would formulate against the CSR concept |
CP03 | Propose solutions or make recommendations | In this context, what recommendations can you offer for companies that make genuine CSR efforts when it comes to communicating about CSR while also trying to avoid accusations of CSR-washing? |
CP04 | Analyse, relate, or reflect upon ideas | After reading those different extracts from Machiavelli's The Prince, would you say that “the end justifies the means”? |
CP05 | Find mistakes / errors | Can you find the calculation error? In this unit we look at an allegory designed by the Ikhwun al-uafu. The allegory is nice, but is based on incorrect calculations! |
CP06 | Look for similarities and differences | We invite you to look for similar features in the work of Pieter Huys (1547), Max Ernst (1945) or in any other painting you find depicting such traits |
CP07 | Present (for and against) arguments | Please explain your answer in the discussion forum, such that you help build a list of arguments for and against CSR communication |
CP08 | Provide examples or further explanations | Could you give a concrete example of a good CSR communication? |
CP09 | Ask questions for clarification | Do you have comments or questions about those videos? Please share them in the discussion thread below |
CP10 | Express opinions and feelings | What are your thoughts and feelings about the Nestlé company? |
CP11 | Describe facts or past experiences | In your own culture, are there any divinities linked to natural elements? Which ones, and what do they represent? |
Appendix 3
Different types of guidance provided in MOOC forums
Type of guidance | Definition of the guidance | MOOC forum pedagogical instruction | |
|---|---|---|---|
Example of guidance provided | Context of the guidance | ||
GD01—Supportive questions | |||
GD01A—Questions to support social processes | Questions helping learners structure their social answers | What is your name? Where are you from? Why did you register? | Please present yourself in the following thread of discussion |
GD01B—Questions to support cognitive processes | Questions helping learners structure their cognitive answers | Answer the following questions: What creates your enthusiasm? What surprises you? What creates your scepticism? | Choose the project that you find the most interesting and contribute your insights to the discussion forum |
GD02—Connecting prior content | Sentences mentioning previously studied content | You may remember the description of Bidu from Unit 3.3 about Demons in Mesopotamia | Look for similar features in the work of Pieter Huys (1547) or Max Ernst (1945) and share your discoveries with the community in the forum below! |
GD03—Providing examples | Examples given by the MOOC instructors | Your smart checklist can be a list of bullet points in a.doc file; in a.xls file or under the format of a mind map, such as in the following example | You should engage in designing a smart checklist. We encourage you to exchange ideas and opinions with the community of your co-participants, using the dedicated discussion forum |
GD04—Procedural guidance | |||
GD04A—Content expectations | Sentences indicating what to include in the message | Mention the most interesting or positive elements | Let’s discuss your thoughts and feelings about this report |
GD04B—Requiring examples | Sentences requiring learners to give examples | Do you have any examples other than those cited in the videos? | Please share your thoughts about why Pazuzu is still popular nowadays |
GD04C—Share material | Sentences inviting learners to share images, links, etc | Don't hesitate to share comments, photos, videos and articles on this topic | In your own culture, are there any divinities linked to natural elements? |
GD04D—Learning path | Sentences providing options for engaging in the forum | Don't hesitate to create your own drawings or edit existing images | Create your own representation of the Netherworld |
GD04E—Provide translations | Sentences requiring translations | If the poster is not in English, please provide a translation | To what extent does an election poster reflect an ideology? Post an electoral poster of your choice |
GD04F—Justify a position | Sentences asking learners to justify, support, or explain a position | Please motivate your choice | In your opinion, what is the state? Post a photo illustrating what a state is, in your opinion |
GD04G—Academic integrity | Sentences emphasizing academic integrity | Do not copy and paste text that already appears on Wikipedia | Share with our community the main criticisms you would formulate against this concept |
GD04H—Exhibit creativity | Sentences encouraging creativity | Be creative! | Post other possible solutions to this exercise in the forums |
GD04I—Interaction requirements | Sentences informing learners about the amount of interaction expected | Please read one or two other responses in the discussion. Comment on at least one other response | What is power? We would like you to post a photo in the forum that illustrates what power is or what represents it for you |
GD04J—Show respect | Sentences emphasizing good social behaviour | Develop respectful, meaningful interactions across our community | Share with our community the main criticisms you would formulate against this concept |
GD05—Learning resources | Sentences informing learners about available information or documents | For more information, read the following PDF | Contribute with your insights (about this project) in the discussion forum |
GD06—Technical guidance | |||
GD06A—Forum affordances | Sentences referring to the affordances of the forums | You can vote by clicking on the “ + ” button, on the right-hand side, next to the title of the post you like | Find another example of a miracle that you think could be suitable for a cross-analysis |
GD06B—Referring to FTSSs | Sentences asking learners to read the FTSSs | For more information on the best practices in the forums, please become familiar with the guide made available to you | What is power? We would like you to post a photo in the forum that illustrates what power is or what represents it for you |
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Rivera, D.A., Frenay, M. & Swaen, V. The Learning Design of MOOC Discussion Forums: An Analysis of Forum Instructions and Their Role in Supporting the Social Construction of Knowledge. Tech Know Learn 29, 585–615 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-023-09670-w
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-023-09670-w