臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：大規模開放式線上課程學習行為研究-以社交媒體資料探勘為例
作者：郭金鈤
作者(外文)：Chin-Jin Guo
校院名稱：國立中央大學
系所名稱：企業管理學系
指導教授：沈建文
學位類別：博士
出版日期：2015
主題關鍵詞：MOOC；學習；資料探勘；社交媒體；情緒分析；社交網絡；MOOC；learning；social media；data mining；sentiment analysis；social networks
原始連結：連回原系統網址new window
相關次數：
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:0
由於許多大規模開放式線上課程(Massive Open Online Courses, MOOCs)已經運用社交媒體工具來支援大批學生，針對Twitter社交媒體進行共同知識創造及集體學習，本研究採用各種社交媒體探勘方式，分析MOOCs的推文訊息，並進一步調查相關「MOOCs學習」的各種訊息。在Twitter社交媒體上，MOOCs推文的描述性統計和趨勢分析表明，MOOCs推文中平日發佈的訊息較為活躍，是週末的5倍。在Twitter社交媒體上每月分析表明，10月份是一年中最活躍的月份，而8月是最不活躍的月份。因此，MOOCs從業人員應著重於MOOCs高峰時段訊息發佈中討論的重點，並立即對學生的回饋作出反應。此外，Twitter每月訊息活動涉及的情緒分析結果表明，輿論對整體MOOCs推文的情緒是略偏向負面，然而「MOOCs學習」推文普遍呈現較正面的信息。因此，MOOCs從業人員應調查對於MOOCs推文的負面訊息，並瞭解其背後的原因。如果當MOOCs社群中，用戶產生具體的新聞討論話題時，MOOCs從業者可以針對當日發佈的訊息進行調查，計算正面和負面推文數之間的差異，以了解公眾對新聞的看法。此外，我們針對MOOCs轉推的影響力研究表明，具影響力的用戶中前5％-10％，通常約占MOOCs正面及負面轉推訊息的50％。隨後繪製的社交網路圖可顯示出，在Twitter社交媒體訊息中MOOCs推文中，擁有最多MOOCs正面及負面推文的關鍵影響用戶是如何傳播訊息的。此外，Twitter社交網絡中MOOCs訊息通常最多可傳播到第二層的用戶。我們針對社交媒體進行訊息探勘的研究結果，認為Twitter社交媒體能夠幫助MOOCs從業者提高對MOOCs的見解，且有效地提高學生的學習。
Many massive open online courses(MOOCs)have adopted social media tools for large student audiences to co-create knowledge and engage in collective learning processes. To further understand the public opinion toward MOOCs learning, this study adopted various social media mining approaches to investigate Twitter messages. An analysis of the descriptive statistics and trends of MOOC-related Twitter messages revealed that MOOC-related discussions on Twitter were 5-fold more active on weekdays than at the weekend. A monthly analysis on Twitter showed that October was the most active month of the year, whereas August was the least active month. Therefore, MOOC practitioners should focus on MOOC discussions during peak periods to respond immediately to student feedback. In addition, the results of a sentiment analysis involving observations of monthly activities on Twitter indicated that public opinion toward MOOCs was slightly negative, although there were generally more positive messages about learning through MOOCs than there were negative ones. Therefore, MOOC practitioners should investigate negative Twitter messages related to MOOCs to understand the underlying reasons for them. When MOOCs communities discuss specific news topics, MOOC practitioners can investigate the difference between the number of positive and negative tweets on a given day to understand public opinion toward the news. Furthermore, our findings regarding the influencers of MOOCs retweets indicate that the top 5%–10% of influencers typically account for 50% of sentimental retweets about MOOCs. Social network diagrams were also developed to reveal how sentimental messages about MOOCs on Twitter were disseminated from the top influencers with the highest number of positive/negative retweets about MOOCs. The MOOCs were generally disseminated to a maximum of 2 layers of users in Twitter social networks. Our findings of social media mining show that Twitter can assist MOOC practitioners in improving their understanding of the insights of MOOCs to effectively improve student learning.
Abeywardena, I. S. (2014). Public Opinion on OER and MOOC: A Sentiment Analysis of Twitter Data. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the International Conference on Open and Flexible Education (ICOFE 2014), Hong Kong SAR, China.
Adamopoulos, P. (2013). What makes a great MOOC? An interdisciplinary analysis of student retention in online courses. Paper presented at the 34th International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS 2013), Milan.
Alario-Hoyos, C., Pérez-Sanagustín, M., Delgado-Kloos, C., Parada G, H. A., Muñoz-Organero, M., & Rodríguez-de-las-Heras, A. (2013). Analysing the Impact of Built-In and External Social Tools in a MOOC on Educational Technologies. In D. Hernández-Leo, T. Ley, R. Klamma & A. Harrer (Eds.), Scaling up Learning for Sustained Impact (Vol. 8095, pp. 5-18): Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Bates, T. (2012). What's right and what's wrong about Coursera-style MOOCs. Retrieved July 01, 2014, from http://www.tonybates.ca/2012/08/05/whats-right-and-whats-wrong-about-coursera-style-moocs/
Bollen, J., Pepe, A., & Mao, H. (2011). Modeling public mood and emotion: Twitter sentiment and socio-economic phenomena. Paper presented at the Fifth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media.
Booth, N., & Matic, J. A. (2011). Mapping and leveraging influencers in social media to shape corporate brand perceptions. Corporate Communications, 16(3), 184-191.
Brinton, C., Chiang, M., Jain, S., Lam, H., Liu, Z., & Wong, F. (2014). Learning about social learning in MOOCs: From statistical analysis to generative model. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, PP(99), 1-1.
Brown, B., Chui, M., & Manyika, J. (2011). Are you ready for the era of ‘big data’? McKinsey Quarterly, 4, 24-35.
Brownson, S. (2014). Embedding Social Media Tools in Online Learning Courses. Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching, 7(1), 112-118.
Camilleri, A. F. , & Tannhäuser, A. C. (2013). Assessment and Recognition of Open Learning. Openness and Education, 1, 85-118.
Chen, Y. (2014). Investigating MOOCs through blog mining. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 15(2).
Choi, Y., Cardie, C., Riloff, E., & Patwardhan, S. (2005). Identifying sources of opinions with conditional random fields and extraction patterns. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the conference on Human Language Technology and Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Clarke, T. (2013). The advance of the MOOCs (massive open online courses): The impending globalisation of business education? Education + Training, 55(4), 403-413.
Cooper, S., & Sahami, M. (2013). Reflections on Stanford's MOOCs. Communications of the ACM, 56(2), 28-30.
Davis, H. C., Dickens, K., Leon Urrutia, M., Sanchéz Vera, Maria del Mar, & White, S. (2014). MOOCs for Universities and Learners An analysis of motivating factors. Paper presented at the 6th International Conference on Computer Supported Education.
de Waard, I., Abajian, S., Gallagher, M. S., Hogue, R., Keskin, N., Koutropoulos, A., & Rodriguez, O. C. (2011). Using mLearning and MOOCs to understand chaos, emergence, and complexity in education. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(7), 94-115.
de Waard, I., Koutropoulos, A., Hogue, R. J., Abajian, S. C., Keskin, N. O., Rodriguez, C. O., & Gallagher, M. S. (2012). Merging MOOC and mLearning for Increased Learner Interactions. International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning(IJMBL), 4(4), 34-46.
de Waard, I., Koutropoulos, A., Keskin, N. O., Abajian, S. C., Hogue, R. J., Rodriguez, C. O., & Gallagher, M. S. (2011). Exploring the MOOC format as a pedagogical approach for mLearning. Paper presented at the 10th World Conference on Mobile and Contextual Learning, Beijing, China.
Del Favero, L., Boscolo, P., Vidotto, G., & Vicentini, M. (2007). Classroom discussion and individual problem-solving in the teaching of history: Do different instructional approaches affect interest in different ways? Learning and Instruction, 17(6), 635-657.
Downes, S. (2007). An introduction to connective knowledge. Paper presented at the International Conference on Media, knowledge & education—exploring new spaces, relations and dynamics in digital media ecologies.
Drozdova, M., Dado, M., Malcik, M., & Mechlova, E. (2013). Open education at universities, quo vadis. Paper presented at the 2013 IEEE 11th International Conference on Emerging eLearning Technologies and Applications (ICETA).
Ediger, D., Jiang, K., Riedy, J., Bader, D. A. , Corley, C., Farber, R., & Reynolds, W. N. . (2010). Massive Social Network Analysis: Mining Twitter for Social Good. Paper presented at the 2010 39th International Conference on Parallel Processing (ICPP).
edX. (2014). Verified Certificates of Achievement. Retrieved July 01, 2014, from https://www.edx.org/verified-certificate
Enriquez-Gibson, J. (2014). Following hushtag (#) MOOC: mobility of online courses on twitter. Paper presented at the 9th International Conference on Networked Learning.
Faloutsos, M., Faloutsos, P., & Faloutsos, C. (1999). On power-law relationships of the Internet topology. SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev., 29(4), 251-262.
Fernández, R. T. , & Losada, D. E. . (2009). Using opinion-based features to boost sentence retrieval. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 18th ACM conference on Information and knowledge management, Hong Kong, China.
Godbole, N., Srinivasaiah, M., & Skiena, S. (2007). Large-Scale Sentiment Analysis for News and Blogs. ICWSM, 7.
Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2011). Two hearts in three-quarter time: How to waltz the social media/viral marketing dance. Business Horizons, 54(3), 253-263.
Karsenti, T. (2013). The MOOC - what the research says. International Journal of Technologies in Higher Education, 10(2), 23–37.
Kop, R., Fournier, H., & Mak, J. S. F. (2011). A pedagogy of abundance or a pedagogy to support human beings? Participant support on massive open online courses. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(7), 74-93.
Koutropoulos, A., Abajian, S. C., DeWaard, I., Hogue, R. J., Keskin, N. O., & Rodriguez, C. O. (2014). What Tweets Tell us About MOOC Participation. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 9(1), 8.
Kravvaris, D., Kermanidis, K. L., & Ntanis, G. (2014). How MOOCs Link with Social Media. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 1-27.
Lafferty, J. D. , McCallum, A. , & Pereira, F. C. N. . (2001). Conditional Random Fields: Probabilistic Models for Segmenting and Labeling Sequence Data. Paper presented at the Eighteenth International Conference on Machine Learning.
Lu, J., Yang, J., & Yu, C. S. (2013). Is social capital effective for online learning? Information & Management, 50(7), 507-522.
Mackness, J., Mak, S., & Williams, R. (2010). The ideals and reality of participating in a MOOC. Paper presented at the 7th International Conference on Networked Learning 2010, University of Lancaster, Lancaster.
Mason, W., & Watts, D. J. (2012). Collaborative learning in networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(3), 764-769.
McAuley, A., Stewart, B., Siemens, G., & Cormier, D. (2010). The MOOC model for digital practice. from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/MOOC_Final.pdf
Moran, M., Seaman, J., & Tinti-Kane, H. (2011). Teaching, Learning, and Sharing: How Today's Higher Education Faculty Use Social Media. Babson Survey Research Group.
Newman, M. (2005). Power laws, Pareto distributions and Zipf's law. Contemporary Physics, 46(5), 323-351. doi: 10.1080/00107510500052444
Nicoară, E. S. (2013, April 25-26, 2013). The impact of massive online open courses in academic environments. Paper presented at the 9th International Scientific Conference eLearning and Software for Education, Bucharest.
Odom, L. (2013). A SWOT Analysis of The Potential Impact of MOOCs. Paper presented at the World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2013, Victoria, Canada.
Pang, B., & Lee, L. (2004). A sentimental education: Sentiment analysis using subjectivity summarization based on minimum cuts. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 42nd annual meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics.
Pang, B., & Lee, L. (2008). Opinion Mining and Sentiment Analysis. Found. Trends Inf. Retr., 2(1-2), 1-135.
Ramesh, A., Goldwasser, D., Huang, B., Daume III, H., & Getoor, L. (2013). Modeling learner engagement in moocs using probabilistic soft logic. Paper presented at the NIPS Workshop on Data Driven Education.
Riloff, E. (1996). An empirical study of automated dictionary construction for information extraction in three domains. Artificial intelligence, 85(1), 101-134.
Riloff, E., & Phillips, W. (2004). An introduction to the sundance and autoslog systems: Technical Report UUCS-04-015, School of Computing, University of Utah.
Riloff, E., & Wiebe, J. (2003). Learning extraction patterns for subjective expressions. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2003 conference on Empirical methods in natural language processing.
Riloff, E., Wiebe, J., & Phillips, W. (2005). Exploiting subjectivity classification to improve information extraction. Paper presented at the 20th national conference on Artificial intelligence, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Rodriguez, O. (2013). The concept of openness behind c and x-MOOCs (Massive Open Online Courses). Open Praxis, 5(1), 67-73.
Schapire, R. E., & Singer, Y. (2000). BoosTexter: A boosting-based system for text categorization. Machine learning, 39(2-3), 135-168.
Siemens, G. (2006). Knowing knowledge. from https://www.knowingknowledge.com/book.php
Stieglitz, S., & Dang-Xuan, L. (2012). Political Communication and Influence through Microblogging--An Empirical Analysis of Sentiment in Twitter Messages and Retweet Behavior. Paper presented at the 2012 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Science (HICSS).
Su, F., & Markert, K. (2008). From words to senses: a case study of subjectivity recognition. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Computational Linguistics-Volume 1.
Subramani, M. R. , & Rajagopalan, B. (2003). Knowledge-sharing and influence in online social networks via viral marketing. Commun. ACM, 46(12), 300-307.
Thelwall, M. (2013). Heart and soul: Sentiment strength detection in the social web with sentistrength. Cyberemotions, 1-14.
van Treeck, T., & Ebner, M. (2013). How Useful Is Twitter for Learning in Massive Communities? An Analysis of Two MOOCs. In K. Weller, A. Bruns, J. Burgess, M. Mahrt & C. Puschmann (Eds.), Twitter and Society (pp. 411–424): Peter Lang International Academic Publishers.
Weiser Friedman, L., & Friedman, H. (2014). Using Social Media Technologies to Enhance Online Learning. Journal of Educators Online, 10(1), 1-22.
Wen, M., Yang, D. , & Rosé, C. P. (2014). Sentiment Analysis in MOOC Discussion Forums: What does it tell us? Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Educational Data Mining.
Weng, J., Lim, E. P., Jiang, J., & He, Q. (2010). TwitterRank: finding topic-sensitive influential twitterers. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the third ACM international conference on Web search and data mining, New York, New York, USA.
Wilson, L. (2013). Ten Ways to Sharpen Your Use of Clusters and Collaborative Learning. Journal of Interdisciplinary Research in Education Volume, 3(1), 1.
Wilson, T., Hoffmann, P., Somasundaran, S. , Kessler, J., Wiebe, J. , Choi, Y., . . . Patwardhan, S. (2005). OpinionFinder: a system for subjectivity analysis. Paper presented at the HLT/EMNLP on Interactive Demonstrations, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Wilson, T., Wiebe, J., & Hoffmann, P. (2005). Recognizing contextual polarity in phrase-level sentiment analysis. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the conference on Human Language Technology and Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Yamaguchi, Y., Takahashi, T., Amagasa, T., & Kitagawa, H. (2010). TURank: Twitter User Ranking Based on User-Tweet Graph Analysis. In L. Chen, P. Triantafillou & T. Suel (Eds.), Web Information Systems Engineering – WISE 2010 (Vol. 6488, pp. 240-253): Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Yuan, L., & Powell, S. (2013). Moocs and open education: Implications for higher education. Cetis White Paper. from http://publications.cetis.ac.uk/2013/667
Zafarani, R., Abbasi, M. A., & Liu, H. (2014). Social Media Mining: An Introduction. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
QR Code
QRCODE

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：529（臺灣：525，外國：4） ／ 本年度總使用人次：2196945 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67993125
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上