participation patterns in formal, non-formal, and informal online learning environments

Patterns of Participation in Formal, Non-Formal and Informal Online

Learning Communities

Richard A. SchwierJennifer X Seaton

Virtual Learning Communities Research LaboratoryEducational Technology and Design

University of Saskatchewan

Central Concerns

• Shifting focus of research• Atomized view of communities• Tools for analysis• Generation of models• Using research to inform development

of online learning environments

Community

Constituents

Comparison

Modeling

Formality of Learning Environment

• Formal• Non-Formal• Informal

Selection of Groups

• Active, regular online conversations• Discussion board transcripts• Membership • Active facilitator *• All conversations considered *• Topics not restricted

Two Measures of Participation

• Interaction analysis– Transcript Analysis Tools (Fahy, Crawford & Ally)– Intensity, Density, Reciprocity

• Engagement analysis– Density– Mean Reply Depth (Wiley)

Interaction analysisMessages/participant

Informal 1 Informal 2 Non-formal 1 Non-formal 2 Formal 1 Formal 2

1.55 3.90 8.08 21.9 57.8 95.5

Interaction analysisMessages/discussion

Informal 1 Informal 2 Non-formal 1 Non-formal 2 Formal 1 Formal 2

31.4 15.2 8.08 29.2 148.7 40.2

Interaction AnalysisIntensity

• Intensity– “levels of participation," or the degree to which

the number of postings observed in a group exceed the number of required or expected postings

Informal 1 Informal 2 Non-formal 1 Non-formal 2 Formal 1 Formal 2

.03 * .09 * .34 1.82 4.1 2.51

Interaction analysisDensity

• Density = 2a/N(N-1), – Included only peripheral interactions in formal

environments– the ratio of the actual number of connections

observed, to the total potential number of possible connections

Informal 1 Informal 2 Non-formal 1 Non-formal 2 Formal 1 Formal 2

cliques cliques .47 .40 1.0 .78

Interaction AnalysisReciprocity

the parity of communication among participants

Interaction AnalysisReciprocity

Informal 1 Informal 2 Non-formal 1 Non-formal 2 Formal 1 Formal 2

Low Low .92

(sd=.94)

1.74

(sd=4.77)

1.10

(sd=.42)

2.51

(sd=.37)

Plotting Reciprocity

Engagement

Engagement analysis

• Thread density and depth (Wiley, 2010)– Calculation of levels of replies in conversation

threads– Data flawed, but useful

Mean Reply Depth (MRD crude) = sum of reply depth for all messages/messages in the thread

Mean Reply Depth (corrected)= MRD (crude) x ((n-b(childless messages)/n)

Mean reply depth (MRD) equationsMean Reply Depth (MRD crude) = sum of reply depth for all messages/messages in the thread

Mean Reply Depth (corrected)= MRD (crude) x ((n-b(childless messages)/n)

Do not attempt to read this!

Do not attempt to read this!

Mulitlogue/discussion

Simple Q&A/chit-chat

Monologue/no discussion

Engagement analysisMean Reply Density

Informal 1 Informal 2 Non-formal 1 Non-formal 2 Formal 1 Formal 2

.71 1.16 .60 .70 1.76 1.40

Formal 1 Formal 2 Informal 1 Informal 2 Non-formal 1 Non-formal 2

Regular

Formal 1 Formal 2 Informal 1 Informal 2 Non-formal 1 Non-formal 2

Extended

Conclusions

• Interaction and engagement data tell similar stories• Baseline data are needed to situate findings

• Most enjoyable part: the hunt, not the kill