摘要
SPOC论坛的话语数据是反映学习者知识建构方式、认知策略和互动质量的重要载体。作为一种限制性学习社区,SPOC论坛存在大量与学习成效相关的认知行为样本,但学习者互动话语的认知行为类型及其序列模式未被充分发掘。为此,本研究先制定话语认知的评定规则以实现论坛帖子的认知行为分类;然后基于语义内容的自动化编码机制统计学习者认知行为类型(定义、描述、比较、推断或解释);最后采用卡方检验与滞后序列分析法验证不同群体关键认知行为及其序列模式的差异。研究结果包括:1)必修、旁听类群体倾向于发布高阶认知行为帖,在讨论中呈现"循序渐进""一鸣惊人"的序列模式,选修类群体倾向于发布低阶认知行为帖,表现出"循环往复"的序列模式;2)不同性别群体的认知行为无显著差异,然而,在序列模式方面,男性呈现"循序渐进"的模式,女性表现出"反向补救"模式;3)高、中成就群体倾向于发布低阶认知行为帖且呈现"循序渐进""反向补救"序列模式,低成就群体呈现"一鸣惊人"的序列模式。教师可对不同群体的认知目标、讨论内容和互动形式进行调适或指导,促进学习群体的互动学习积极性及认知水平的提升。
The discourse data in SPOC forums reflects learners' knowledge construction patterns, cognitive strategies, and interaction quality. As an exclusive learning community, there exists a large body of cognitive behavioral samples related to learning gains, but the cognitive behaviors and their sequential patterns of learners in forum interactions have not been sufficiently explored. To this end, this study first categorizes cognitive behaviors within the forum posts according to the classic discourse cognitive evaluation strategy. Second, based on a semantic-based automatic coding scheme, this study counts the cognitive behaviors of learners in postings(Defining, Describing, Comparing, Inferring, or Explaining). Finally, the methods of chi-square test and lag sequential analysis are used to verify the differences between different groups of learners on key cognitive behaviors and related sequential cognitive patterns. The results indicated that: 1) Compulsory and by-pass groups both tend to publish high-level cognitive behavioral posts and exhibit the sequential patterns of "step-by-step" and "blockbuster"; the elective group tends to publish low-level cognitive behavioral posts and shows the sequence pattern of "recirculation." 2) There is no significant difference in cognitive behaviors between different gender groups. In terms of sequence pattern, however, the male group shows the pattern of "step-by-step," while the female group adopts the pattern of "reverse remedy." 3) High-and medium-achievement groups tend to publish low-level cognitive behavioral posts, and they show the sequence patterns of "step-by-step" and "reverse remedy"; while the low-achievement group tends to adopt the sequence pattern of "blockbuster." Hence, teachers can appropriately adjust or guide the cognitive goals, discussion content and interactive forms for different groups to promote the enthusiasm and cognitive levels of learners in interactive learning.
引文
[1] Arnold, K. E., & Pistilli, M. D. (2012). Course signals at Purdue: Using learning analytics to increase student success[A].Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Learning Analytics and knowledge[C]. (4): 267-270.
[2] Artz, A. F., & Armour-Thomas, E. (1992). Development of a cognitive-metacognitive framework for protocol analysis of mathematical problem solving in small groups[J].Cognition and instruction, 9(2): 137-175.
[3] Chen, R. S., & Tsai, C. C. (2007).Gender differences in Taiwan university students' attitudes toward web-based learning[J].Cyberpsychology & behavior, 10(5): 645-654.
[4] Chi, M. T. (2009). Active-constructive-interactive: A conceptual framework for differentiating learning activities[J].Topics in cognitive science, 1(1): 73-105.
[5] Cho, M. H., & Heron, M. L. (2015). Self-regulated learning: the role of motivation, emotion, and use of learning strategies in students’ learning experiences in a self-paced online mathematics course[J]. Distance Education, 36(1): 80-99.
[6] Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E., & Ecclestone, K. (2004). Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning: A systematic and critical review[J].Learning and Skills Research Centre, (8): 182.
[7] 董奇, 周勇 (1994).论学生学习的自我监控[J].北京师范大学学报: 社会科学版, 1(8): 8-14.
[8] Fu, S., Zhao, J., Cui, W., & Qu, H. (2017). Visual analysis of MOOC forums with iForum[J].IEEE Transactions on Visualization & Computer Graphics, (1): 1-1.
[9] Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education[J].American Journal of distance education, 15(1): 7-23.
[10] Garrison, D. R., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2005). Facilitating cognitive presence in online learning: Interaction is not enough[J].The American journal of distance education, 19(3): 133-148.
[11] Holec, H. (1981). Autonomy and foreign language learning[M].Qxford:Pergamon Press.
[12] Kelley, T. L. (1939). The selection of upper and lower groups for the validation of test items[J].Journal of educational psychology, 30(1): 17-24.
[13] Khalid, R., & Hasan, S. S. (2009). Test anxiety in high and low achievers[J].Pakistan Journal of Psychological Research, 24(2): 97-114.
[14] Kursun, E. (2016). Does formal credit work for MOOC-like learning environments?[J].The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(3): 75-91.
[15] 李良, 乔海英, 王淑平. (2012).基于Moodle平台的学习者社会性交互特征研究[J].电化教育研究, (7): 48-53.
[16] Lin, C. C., & Tsai, C. C. (2012). Participatory learning through behavioral and cognitive engagements in an online collective information searching activity[J].International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 7(4): 543-566.
[17] 刘三女牙, 彭晛, 刘智, 孙建文, 刘海(2017).面向MOOC课程评论的学习者话题挖掘研究[J].电化教育研究, 38(10): 30-36.
[18] 刘智, 王亚妮, 郑年亨, 刘三女牙, 孙建文, 杨重阳(2017).高校SPOC环境下学习者行为序列的差异性分析研究[J].中国电化教育, (7): 88-94.
[19] Lopez, M. I., Luna, J. M., Romero, C., & Ventura, S. (2012). Classification via clustering for predicting final marks based on student participation in forums[J].International Educational Data Mining Society, (6): 148-151.
[20] McKendree, J., Stenning, K., Mayes, T., Lee, J., & Cox, R. (1998). Why observing a dialogue may benefit learning[J].Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 14(2): 110-119.
[21] Messick, S. (1984). The nature of cognitive styles: Problems and promise in educational practice[J]. Educational psychologist, 19(2): 59-74.
[22] Rowntree, D. (1995). Teaching and learning online: A correspondence education for the 21st century? [J]. British journal of educational technology, 26(3): 205-215.
[23] Tsai, C. C. (1999). Content analysis of Taiwanese 14 year olds’ information processing operations shown in cognitive structures following physics instruction, with relations to science attainment and scientific epistemological beliefs[J].Research in science & technological education, 17(2): 125-138.
[24] Wang, X., Wen, M., & Rosé, C. P. (2016). Towards triggering higher-order thinking behaviors in MOOCs[A]. Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Learning Analytics & Knowledge[C]. (4): 398-407.
[25] 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[J].International Educational Data Mining Society, (6): 26-29.
[26] Wong, J. S., Pursel, B., Divinsky, A., & Jansen, B. J. (2015). Analyzing MOOC discussion forum messages to identify cognitive learning information exchanges[A].Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology[C]. 52(1): 1-10.
[27] Wu, Y. T., & Tsai, C. C. (2005). Effects of constructivist-oriented instruction on elementary school students' cognitive structures[J].Journal of biological Education, 39(3): 113-119.
[28] 邢红军( 2009).自组织表征理论:一种物理问题解决的新理论[J].课程·教材·教法, 29(4):60-64.
[29] 张浩,吴秀娟(2012).深度学习的内涵及认知理论基础探析[J].中国电化教育, (10): 7-11+21.
[30] 钟志贤(2004).教学设计的宗旨:促进学习者高阶能力发展[J].电化教育研究, (11): 13-19.
