Article Sidebar

Submitted
Sep 2, 2019
Accepted
Sep 29, 2019
Published
Oct 12, 2019
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 705 Download : 505

Main Article Content

Abstract

The contribution is aimed at reporting and commenting on some significant data collected from a MOOC on language awareness, addressed to teachers, trainers and educators from all over the world, promoted by the European Commission through the School Education Gateway platform and moderated by the authors.
The role of MOOCs for teachers' continuous quality professional development will represent the starting point of the discussion. 
After a brief overview of the inspirational background and of the MOOC syllabus, data will be highlighted and commented on with reference to the attendees’ participation, motivation and online social interaction, according to the following categories: learner issues, pedagogical issues, technical issues. 
Among the different learning environments and media channels used during the course, the Facebook Group, the forum and the Twitter chat will be described and commented on as crucial dimensions of the learning experience.

Keywords

MOOCs Language Awareness

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

The author declares that the submitted to Journal of e-Learning and Knowledge Society (Je-LKS) is original and that is has neither been published previously nor is currently being considered for publication elsewhere.
The author agrees that SIe-L (Italian Society of e-Learning) has the right to publish the material sent for inclusion in the journal Je-LKS.
The author agree that articles may be published in digital format (on the Internet or on any digital support and media) and in printed format, including future re-editions, in any language and in any license including proprietary licenses, creative commons license or open access license. SIe-L may also use parts of the work to advertise and promote the publication.
The author declares s/he has all the necessary rights to authorize the editor and SIe-L to publish the work.
The author assures that the publication of the work in no way infringes the rights of third parties, nor violates any penal norms and absolves SIe-L from all damages and costs which may result from publication.

The author declares further s/he has received written permission without limits of time, territory, or language from the rights holders for the free use of all images and parts of works still covered by copyright, without any cost or expenses to SIe-L.

For all the information please check the Ethical Code of Je-LKS, available at http://www.je-lks.org/index.php/ethical-code

How to Cite
Cinganotto, L., & Cuccurullo, D. (2019). Learning analytics in online social interactions. The case of a MOOC on ‘language awareness’ promoted by the European Commission. Journal of E-Learning and Knowledge Society, 15(3), 263-286. https://doi.org/10.20368/1971-8829/1135030

References

  1. Baker R., Siemens G. (2014), Educational Data Mining and Learning Analytics, in Keith Sawyer R. (edited by), The Cambridge Handbook of Learning Sciences, Second Edition, Cambridge University Press.
  2. Bali, M. (2013), 5 reasons teachers should dip into MOOCs for professional development. MOOC news & reviews. Url: http://moocnewsandreviews.com/5-reasons-teachersshould-dip-into-moocs-for-professional-development-2/ (Accessed 30 July 2019).
  3. Cacciamani, S. (2003) Elementi per la costruzione di un protocollo di analisi dell’attività di un webforum, Form@re,
  4. Url: http://formare.erickson.it/archivio/maggio_04/1cacciamani.html. (Accessed 30 July 2019).
  5. Chatti, M.A. Dyckhoff, A.L., Schroeder, U., Thüs, H. (2012), A Reference Model for Learning Analytics, International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning (IJTEL) – Special Issue on “State-of-the-Art in TEL.
  6. Cinganotto L. (2018), Apprendimento CLIL e interazione in classe, Aracne.
  7. Cinganotto L., Cuccurullo D. (2019), Techno-CLIL – Fare CLIL in digitale, I Quaderni della Ricerca 42, Loescher.
  8. Coyle D., Hood P., Marsh D. (2010), CLIL Content and Language Integrated Learning, Cambridge.
  9. Evans, L. (2002), What is teacher development? Oxford Review of Education, 28(1), 123- 137.
  10. Downes, S. (2012), Connectivism and connective knowledge: Essays on meaning and learning networks. National Research Council Canada. Url: http://www.downes.ca/files/books/Connective_Knowledge-19May2012.pdf. (Accessed 30 July 2019).
  11. Han, J. & Kamber, M. (2006), Data Mining: Concepts and Techniques. San Francisco, CA: Elsevier.
  12. Hawkins, E.W. (1984), Awareness of language: an introduction, Cambridge University Press.
  13. Johnson, L., Smith, R., Willis, H., Levine, A. & Haywood, K. (2011), The 2011 Horizon Report. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.
  14. Khalil, M., Wong, J., de Koning, B. B., Ebner, M., & Paas, F. (2018), Gamification in MOOCs: A Review of the State of the Art. In proceedings of the 2018 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (pp. 1635-1644). Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Canary Islands, Spain. Url:
  15. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/324528892_Gamification_in_MOOCs_A_Review_of_the_State_of_the_Art (Accessed 30 July 2019).
  16. Koukis, N., & Jimoyiannis, A. (2017), Designing MOOCs for teacher professional development: Analysis of participants’ engagement. In A. Mesquita and P. Peres (Eds.), Proceedings of the 16th European Conference on e-Learning, ECEL 2017 (pp. 271–280). Porto: Academic Conferences and Publishing International.
  17. Kumari, A. (2016), MOOCs – An online platform for teacher professional development. Asian Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies, 4(5), 102–107. Url: http://www.ajms.co.in/sites/ajms2015/ index.php/ajms/article/view/1799. (Accessed 30 July 2019).
  18. Laurillard, D. (2016), The educational problem that MOOCs could solve: Professional development for teachers of disadvantaged students. Research in Learning Technology, 24. http://dx.doi. org/10.3402/rlt.v24.29369. (Accessed 30 July 2019).
  19. Littlejohn, A., Hood, N., Milligan, C., & Mustain, P. (2016), Learning in MOOCs: Motivations and self-regulated learning in MOOCs. The Internet and Higher Education, 29, 40–48. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.12.003. (Accessed 30 July 2019).
  20. Liu, B. (2006). Web Data Mining. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.
  21. Marquis, J. (2013), Why MOOCs are good for teacher professional development! OnlineUniversities.com. Url: http://www.onlineuniversities.com/blog/2013/05/whymoocs-are-good-for-teacher-professional-development/ (Accessed 30 July 2019).
  22. Narcy-Combes M.F., Narcy-Combes J.P., McAllister J., Leclere M., Miras G. (2019), Language Learning and Teaching in a Multilingual World, Multilingual Matters.
  23. Nikula T., Dafouz E., Moore P., Smit U. (2016), Conceptualising Integration in CLIL and Multilingual Education, Multilingual Matters.
  24. Romero, C., Ventura, S. (2007), Educational Data Mining: a Survey from 1995 to 2005. Expert Systems with Applications, 33(1), 135-146.
  25. Siemens, G. (2010), What are Learning Analytics? Url:
  26. http://www.elearnspace.org/blog/2010/08/25/what-are-learning-analytics/ (Accessed 30 July 2019).
  27. Wenger, E. (1999), Communities of Practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.