Abstract
Networked and digital technologies are increasingly being used for learning in formal and informal contexts, and participant engagement occurs primarily via online discussions. In this paper, we describe an ongoing research project that focuses on examining and understanding student engagement in collaborative online discussions within a formal educational context. We use multiple methodologies including social network analysis and discourse analysis to answer our main research questions, which relate to examining students’ behavioral and cognitive engagement in online discussion at the individual and group level. To support our discourse analyses, we also designed and implemented a machine learning model that uses the Interactive–Constructive–Active–Passive framework (Chi, 2009) to rapidly categorize student discourse. Data analyses indicate that social network analyses can provide immediate visual clues about individual and group behavioral engagement, and degree centrality data can clearly highlight the direction and valence of engagement. Similarly, discourse analyses can provide useful categorization of student discourse at the individual and group level. We conclude by illustrating how both types of analyses together allow for a nuanced insight into the types of roles that individual students may assume, as well as the ways in which individual and collaborative activity might unfold. Our methodology and results support the need to assume a broader perspective on learning by focusing on process and the integration of multiple methods.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Atapattu, T., Thilakaratne, M., Vivian, R., & Falkner, K. (2019). Detecting cognitive engagement using word embeddings within an online teacher professional development community. Computers and Education, 140. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPEDU.2019.05.020
Bakharia, A., & Dawson, S. (2011). SNAPP: A bird’s-eye view of temporal participant interaction. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, 168–173. https://doi.org/10.1145/2090116.2090144
Bell, P., Lewenstein, B., Shouse, W. A., & Feder, M. A. (2009). Learning science in informal environments-people, places and pursuits. In learning science in informal environments-people, places and pursuits. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958964.2011.623734
Bielaczyc, K., & Collins, A. (1999). Learning communities in classrooms: A reconceptualization of educational practice. Instructional Design Theories and Models. https://doi.org/10.1177/019263659908360402
Cela, K. L., Ángel Sicilia, M., Sánchez, S., Cela, K. L., Sicilia, Á., & M., & Sánchez, S. (2015). Social network analysis in E-learning environments: A preliminary systematic review. Educational Psychology Review, 27, 219–246. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-014-9276-0
Cesareni, D., Cacciamani, S., & Fujita, N. (2016). Role taking and knowledge building in a blended university course. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-015-9224-0
Chen, B., Chang, Y. H., Ouyang, F., & Zhou, W. (2018). Fostering student engagement in online discussion through social learning analytics. Internet and Higher Education, 37, 21–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2017.12.002
Chen, B., & Huang, T. (2019). It is about timing: Network prestige in asynchronous online discussions. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 35, 503–515. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12355
Chi, M. T. H. (2009). Active-constructive-interactive: A conceptual framework for differentiating learning activities. Topics in Cognitive Science. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-8765.2008.01005.x
Chi, M. T. H., & Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational Psychologist. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.965823
Cobb, P. (1994). Where is the mind? Constructivist and sociocultural perspectives on mathematical development. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 13–20. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X023007013
Farrow, E., Moore, J., & Gaševic, D. (2020). Dialogue attributes that inform depth and quality of participation in course discussion forums. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series. https://doi.org/10.1145/3375462.3375481
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
Freeman, L. C. (2004). The development of social network analysis: A study in the sociology of science. Empirical Press.
Fu, E. L. F., van Aalst, J., & Chan, C. K. K. (2016). Toward a classification of discourse patterns in asynchronous online discussions. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 11(4), 441–478. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-016-9245-3
Gee, J. P. (2004). Situated language and learning: A critique of traditional schooling. In D. Barton (Ed.), Literacies. Routledge.
Gillani, N., & Eynon, R. (2014). Communication patterns in massively open online courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 23, 18–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IHEDUC.2014.05.004
Hernández-García, Á., González-González, I., Jiménez-Zarco, A. I., & Chaparro-Peláez, J. (2015). Applying social learning analytics to message boards in online distance learning: A case study. Computers in Human Behavior, 47, 68–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CHB.2014.10.038
Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EDPR.0000034022.16470.f3
Hou, H. T., & Wu, S. Y. (2011). Analyzing the social knowledge construction behavioral patterns of an online synchronous collaborative discussion instructional activity using an instant messaging tool: A case study. Computers and Education, 57(2), 1459–1468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.02.012
Hrastinski, S. (2009). A theory of online learning as online participation. Computers and Education, 52(1), 78–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.06.009
Ito, M., Gutiérrez, K., Livingstone, S., Penuel, B., Rhodes, J., Salor, K., Schor, J., Sefton-Green, J., & Watkins, S. C. (2013). Connected learning an agenda for research and design. Digital Media and Learning Research Hub.
Jan, S. K., Vlachopoulos, P., & Parsell, M. (2019). Social network analysis and online learning communities in higher education: A systematic literature review. Online Learning. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v23i1.1398
Järvelä, S., Malmberg, J., & Koivuniemi, M. (2016). Recognizing socially shared regulation by using the temporal sequences of online chat and logs in CSCL. Learning and Instruction, 42, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2015.10.006
Jo, I., Park, Y., & Lee, H. (2017). Three interaction patterns on asynchronous online discussion behaviours: A methodological comparison. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 33(2), 106–122. https://doi.org/10.1111/JCAL.12168
Keengwe, J., & Kidd, T. (2010). Towards best practices in online learning and teaching in higher education. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 6(2), 533–541. https://doi.org/10.1108/17506200710779521
Kraut, R. E., & Resnick, P. (2011). Building Successful Online Communities. MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/8472.001.0001
Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P. A., & Vermeulen, M. (2013). Social aspects of CSCL environments: A research framework. Educational Psychologist, 48(4), 229–242. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2012.750225
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press.
Lee, A. V. Y., & Tan, S. C. (2017). Understanding idea flow: Applying learning analytics in discourse. Learning Research and Practice, 3(1), 12–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/23735082.2017.1283437
Lee, A. V. Y., & Tan, S. C. (2017b). Temporal analytics with discourse analysis. LAK’17, 120–127. https://doi.org/10.1145/3027385.3027386
Van Leeuwen, A., Teasley, S. D., & Wise, A. F. (2022). Teacher and Student Facing Learning Analytics. In Handbook of Learning Analytics (2nd ed., pp. 130–140). https://doi.org/10.18608/hla22.013
Linn, M. C., & Eylon, B. S. (2011). Science learning and instruction: Taking advantage of technology to promote knowledge integration. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203806524
Linnenbrink-Garcia, L., Rogat, T. K., & Koskey, K. L. K. (2011). Affect and engagement during small group instruction. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(1), 13–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CEDPSYCH.2010.09.001
Lipponen, L., Rahikainen, M., Lallimo, J., & Hakkarainen, K. (2003). Patterns of participation and discourse in elementary students’ computer-supported collaborative learning. Learning and Instruction, 13(5), 487–509. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(02)00042-7
Liu, S., Liu, S., Liu, Z., Peng, X., & Yang, Z. (2022). Automated detection of emotional and cognitive engagement in MOOC discussions to predict learning achievement. Computers and Education. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPEDU.2022.104461
Mandinach, E. B., & Abrams, L. M. (2022). Data Literacy and Learning Analytics. In C. Lang, G. Siemens, A. F. Wise, D. Gašević, & A. Merceron (Eds.), Handbook of learning analytics—Second edition (pp. 196–204). Society for Learning Analytics Research. https://doi.org/10.18608/hla22.019
Marcos-García, J. A., Martínez-Monés, A., & Dimitriadis, Y. (2015). DESPRO: A method based on roles to provide collaboration analysis support adapted to the participants in CSCL situations. Computers and Education, 82, 335–353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.10.027
Menekse, M. (2012). Interactive-constructive-active-passive: The relative effectiveness of differentiated activities on students’ learning. Arizona State University.
Menekse, M., Stump, G. S., Krause, S., & Chi, M. T. H. (2013). Differentiated overt learning activities for effective instruction in engineering classrooms. Journal of Engineering Education. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20021
Moser, C., Groenewegen, P., & Huysman, M. (2013). Extending social network analysis with discourse analysis combining relational with interpretive data. In T. Özyer, J. Rokne, G. Wagner, & A. H. P. Reuser (Eds.), The influence of technology on social network analysis and mining (pp. 547–561). Vienna: Springer.
Nandi, D., Hamilton, M., & Harland, J. (2012). Evaluating the quality of interaction in asynchronous discussion forums in fully online courses. Distance Education, 33(1), 5–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2012.667957
National Academy of Sciences. (2018). How people learn II: Learners, contexts, and cultures. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/24783
Ouyang, F., & Chang, Y. H. (2019). The relationships between social participatory roles and cognitive engagement levels in online discussions. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(3), 1396–1414. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12647
Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2007). Building online learning communities: Effective strategies for the virtual classroom (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.33
Poquet, O., Dawson, S., & Dowell, N. (2017). How effective is your facilitation? Group-level analytics of MOOC forums. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, 208–217. https://doi.org/10.1145/3027385.3027404
Rabbany, R. K., Takaffoli, M., & Zäiane, O. R. (2011). Analyzing participation of students in online courses using social network analysis techniques. EDM 2011—Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Educational Data Mining, 21–30.
Rabbany, R. K., Elatia, S., Takaffoli, M., & Zaïane, O. R. (2014). Collaborative learning of students in online discussion forums: A social network analysis perspective. In Studies in computational intelligence (Vol. 524, pp. 441–466). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02738-8_16
Rogers, R. (2011). An introduction to critical discourse analysis in education. In R. Rogers (Ed.), An introduction to critical discourse analysis in education (pp. 1–18). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203836149
Roschelle, J., & Teasley, S. D. (1995). The Construction Of Shared Knowledge In Collaborative Problem Solving. In C. O’Malley (Ed.), Computer supported collaborative learning (pp. 69–97). Springer.
Rovai, A. P. (2002). Sense of community, perceived cognitive learning, and persistence in asynchronous learning networks. Internet and Higher Education, 5(4), 319–332. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(02)00130-6
Ryu, S., & Lombardi, D. (2015). Coding classroom interactions for collective and individual engagement. Educational Psychologist, 50(1), 70–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.1001891
Saqr, M., Fors, U., Tedre, M., & Nouri, J. (2018). How social network analysis can be used to monitor online collaborative learning and guide an informed intervention. PloS one. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0194777
Scardamalia, M. (2002). Collective Cognitive Responsibility. In B. Jones (Ed.), Liberal education in the knowledge age. Open Court.
Schaffer, J., Huynh, B., O’Donovan, J., Hollerer, T., Xia, Y., & Lin, S. (2016). An analysis of student behavior in two massive open online courses. Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining, ASONAM 2016. https://doi.org/10.1109/ASONAM.2016.7752262
Schrire, S. (2006). Knowledge building in asynchronous discussion groups: Going beyond quantitative analysis. Computers and Education, 46(1), 49–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPEDU.2005.04.006
Scott, J. (2011). Social network analysis: Developments, advances, and prospects. Social Network Analysis and Mining, 1(1), 21–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13278-010-0012-6
Stahl, G. (2006). Supporting group cognition in an online math community: A cognitive tool for small-group referencing in text chat. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 35(2), 103–122. https://doi.org/10.2190/Q435-7611-2561-720P
Stahl, G., & Hakkarainen, K. (2021). Theories of CSCL. In International Handbook of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-65291-3_2
Strijbos, J. W., Martens, R. L., Jochems, W. M. G., & Broers, N. J. (2004). The effect of functional roles on group efficiency: using multilevel modeling and content analysis to investigate computer-supported collaboration in small groups. Small Group Research, 35(2), 195–229. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496403260843
Strijbos, J. W., & Weinberger, A. (2010). Emerging and scripted roles in computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers in Human Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2009.08.006
Swan, K. (2002). Building learning communities in online courses: The importance of interaction. Education, Communication & Information. https://doi.org/10.1080/1463631022000005016
Swinnerton, B., Hotchkiss, S., & Morris, N. P. (2017). Comments in MOOCs: Who is doing the talking and does it help? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12165
Trammell, B. A., & Laforge, C. (2017). Common challenges for instructors in large online courses: Strategies to mitigate student and instructor frustration. Journal of Educators Online, 14(n1), 1.
Uttamchandani, S., & Quick, J. (2022). An Introduction to Fairness, Absence of Bias, and Equity in Learning Analytics. In Handbook of Learning Analytics—Second Edition (pp. 205–212).
Van Aalst, J. (2013). Assessment in collaborative learning. In The International Handbook of Collaborative Learning (pp. 280–296). https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203837290-25
Verbert, K., Duval, E., Klerkx, J., Govaerts, S., & Santos, J. L. (2013). Learning analytics dashboard applications. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(10), 1500–1509. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764213479363
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-92784-6
Wagner, C. J., & González-Howard, M. (2018). Studying discourse as social interaction: The potential of social network analysis for discourse studies. Educational Researcher, 47(6), 375–383. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X18777741
Wang, M., & Kang, M. (2006). Cybergogy for engaged learning: A framework for creating learner engagement through information and communication technology. In Engaged Learning with Emerging Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3669-8_11
Wang, X., Yang, D., Wen, M., Koedinger, K., & Rosé, C. P. (2015). Investigating how student ’ s cognitive behavior in MOOC discussion forums affect learning gains. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Educational Data Mining, 226–233.
Wölfer, R., Faber, N. S., & Hewstone, M. (2015). Social network analysis in the science of groups: Cross-sectional and longitudinal applications for studying intra- and intergroup behavior. Group Dynamics, 19(1), 45–61. https://doi.org/10.1037/gdn0000021
Zhu, E. (2006). Interaction and cognitive engagement: An analysis of four asynchronous online discussions. Instructional Science, 34(6), 451–480. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-006-0004-0
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
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
Sharma, P., Akgun, M. & Li, Q. Understanding student interaction and cognitive engagement in online discussions using social network and discourse analyses. Education Tech Research Dev (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10261-w
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10261-w