Individual Learning Vs. Interactive Learning: A Cognitive Diagnostic Analysis of MOOC Students’ Learning Behaviors

References

• Anderson, A., Huttenlocher, D., Kleinberg, J., & Leskovec, J. (2014, April). Engaging with massive online courses. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on World Wide Web (pp. 687–698). Seoul, Korea: Association for Computing Machinery.
   Google Scholar
• Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Baturay, M. H. (2015). An overview of the world of MOOCs. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 427–433. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.685
   Google Scholar
• Bodemer, D., Ploetzner, R., Feuerlein, I., & Spada, H. (2004). The active integration of information during learning with dynamic and interactive visualisations. Learning and Instruction, 14(3), 325–341. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2004.06.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Breslow, L. B., Pritchard, D. E., Deboer, J., Stump, G. S., Ho, A. D., & Seaton, D. T. (2013). Studying learning in the worldwide classroom: Research into edX’s first MOOC. Research & Practice in Assessment, 8(1), 13–25.
   Google Scholar
• Castaño‐Muñoz, J., Duart, J. M., & Sancho‐Vinuesa, T. (2014). The internet in face‐to‐face higher education: Can interactive learning improve academic achievement? British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(1), 149–159. doi:10.1111/bjet.12007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, J., de la Torre, J., & Zhang, Z. (2013). Relative and absolute fit evaluation in cognitive diagnostic modeling. Journal of Educational Measurement, 50(2), 123–140. doi:10.1111/j.1745-3984.2012.00185.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chi, M. T. H. (2009). Active-constructive-interactive: A conceptual framework for differentiating learning activities. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1(1), 73–105. doi:10.1111/tops.2009.1.issue-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chi, M. T. H., & Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 219–243. doi:10.1080/00461520.2014.965823
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de la Torre, J. (2011). The generalized DINA model framework. Psychometrika, 76(2), 179–199. doi:10.1007/s11336-011-9207-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeBoer, J., Ho, A. D., Stump, G. S., & Breslow, L. (2014). Changing “course” reconceptualizing educational variables for massive open online courses. Educational Researcher, 43(2), 74–84. doi:10.3102/0013189X14523038
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DiBello, L. V., Roussos, L. A., & Stout, W. F. (2007). Review of cognitively diagnostic assessment and a summary of psychometric models. In C. R. Rao & S. Sinharay (Eds.), Handbook of statistics (Vol. 26, pp. 979–1030). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• DiBello, L. V., & Stout, W. (2007). Guest editors’ introduction and overview: IRT-based cognitive diagnostic models and related methods. Journal of Educational Measurement, 44(4), 285–291. doi:10.1111/jedm.2007.44.issue-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dillenbourg, P. (1999). Collaborative learning: Cognitive and computational approaches. Oxford, UK: Elsevier Science.
   Google Scholar
• Greene, B. A. (2015). Measuring cognitive engagement with self-report scales: Reflections from over 20 years of research. Educational Psychologist, 50(1), 14–30. doi:10.1080/00461520.2014.989230
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• He, Q., & von Davier, M. (2016). Analyzing process data from problem-solving items with N-Grams: Insights from a computer-based large-scale assessment. In Y. Rosen, S. Ferrara, & M. Mosharraf (Eds.), Handbook of research on technology tools for real-world skill development (pp. 750–777). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.
   Google Scholar
• Ho, A. D., Reich, J., Nesterko, S. O., Seaton, D. T., Mullaney, T., Waldo, J., & Chuang, I. (2014). HarvardX and MITx: The first year of open online courses, Fall 2012-Summer 2013. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2381263
   Google Scholar
• Jang, E. E. (2009). Cognitive diagnostic assessment of L2 reading comprehension ability: Validity arguments for applying fusion model to LanguEdge assessment. Language Testing, 26(1), 31–73. doi:10.1177/0265532208097336
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, C. (2016). Networked learning: An educational paradigm for the age of digital networks. New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Kane, M. T. (2006). Validation. In R. L. Brennan (Ed.), Educational measurement (4th ed., pp. 17–64). Westport, CT: American Council on Education and Praeger.
   Google Scholar
• Kizilcec, R. F., Piech, C., & Schneider, E. (2013). Deconstructing disengagement: Analyzing learner subpopulations in massive open online courses. In Proceedings of International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (pp. 170–179). Belgium: Leuven.
   Google Scholar
• Koedinger, K. R., Kim, J., Jia, J. Z., McLaughlin, E. A., & Bier, N. L. (2015). Learning is not a spectator sport: Doing is better than watching for learning from a MOOC. In Proceedings of the Second ACM Conference on Learning (pp. 111–120). Vancouver, BC: Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Koller, D., Ng, A., Do, C., & Chen, Z. (2013). Retention and intention in massive open online courses. Educause Review. Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/retention-and-intention-massive-open-online-courses
   Google Scholar
• Lee, S.-Y., Poon, W. Y., & Bentler, P. M. (1995). A two-stage estimation of structural equation models with continuous and polytomous variables. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 48, 339–358. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8317.1995.tb01067.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, Y.-W., & Sawaki, Y. (2009). Cognitive diagnosis approaches to language assessment: An overview. Language Assessment Quarterly, 6(3), 172–189. doi:10.1080/15434300902985108
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lei, P.-W., & Li, H. (2016). Performance of fit indices in choosing correct cognitive diagnostic models and Q-matrices. Applied Psychological Measurement, 40(6), 405–417. doi:10.1177/0146621616647954
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, H., & Suen, H. K. (2012). Constructing and validating a Q-Matrix for cognitive diagnostic analyses of a reading test. Educational Assessment, 18(1), 1–25. doi:10.1080/10627197.2013.761522
   Google Scholar
• Lord, F. M., & Novick, M. R. (1968). Statistical theories of mental test scores. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Mackness, J., Mak, S., & Williams, R. (2010). The ideals and reality of participating in a MOOC. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Networked Learning, Lancaster, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Margaryan, A., Bianco, M., & Littlejohn, A. (2015). Instructional quality of massive open online courses (MOOCs). Computers & Education, 80, 77–83. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.08.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDonald, R. P., & Mok, M. M.-C. (1995). Goodness of fit in item response models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 30(1), 23–40. doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr3001_2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2009). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/tech/evidence-based-practices/finalreport.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Milligan, S. K. (2016). Measurement of the ability to generate higher order learning in MOOCs (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
   Google Scholar
• Mislevy, R. J., Behrens, J. T., Dicerbo, K. E., & Levy, R. (2012). Design and discovery in educational assessment: Evidence-centered design, psychometrics, and educational data mining. Journal of Educational Data Mining, 4(1), 11–48.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson, B., Nugent, R., & Rupp, A. A. (2012). On instructional utility, statistical methodology, and the added value of ECD: Lessons learned from the special issue. Journal of Educational Data Mining, 4(1), 224–230.
   Google Scholar
• Pun, W., Xiong, Y., Guo, X., Goins, D., Gevara, J., & Suen, H. K. (2016). A generalizable framework for classifying MOOC students. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of American Educational Research Association (AERA), Washington, DC.
   Google Scholar
• Robitzsch, A., Kiefer, T., George, A. C., & Uenlue, A. (2017). Cognitive diagnosis modeling. R Package Version, 5, 8–9.
   Google Scholar
• Rupp, A., Templin, J., & Henson, R. (2010). Diagnostic measurement: Theory, methods, and applications. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rupp, A. A., Levy, R., Dicerbo, K. E., Sweet, S. J., Crawford, A. V., Calico, T., … Behrens, J. T. (2012). Putting ECD into practice: The interplay of theory and data in evidence models within a digital learning environment. Journal of Educational Data Mining, 4(1), 49–110.
   Google Scholar
• Rupp, A. A., & Templin, J. L. (2008). Unique characteristics of diagnostic classification models: A comprehensive review of the current state-of-the-art. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 6(4), 219–262.
   Google Scholar
• Tatsuoka, K. K. (1983). Rule space: An approach for dealing with misconceptions based on item response theory. Journal of Educational Measurement, 20(4), 345–354. doi:10.1111/jedm.1983.20.issue-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vygotsky, L. (1930/1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wise, A. F., & Cui, Y. (2018). Unpacking the relationship between discussion forum participation and learning in MOOCs: Content is key. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge, 330–339.
   Google Scholar
• Zheng, S., Rosson, M. B., Shih, P. C., & Carroll, J. M. (2015). Designing MOOCs as interactive places for collaborative learning. Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Learning@ Scale, 343–346.
   Google Scholar