Learning is Not a Spectator Sport: Doing is Better than Watching for Learning from a MOOC

K. Koedinger, Ji Hee Kim, J. Z. Jia, Elizabeth Mclaughlin, Norman L. Bier
{"title":"Learning is Not a Spectator Sport: Doing is Better than Watching for Learning from a MOOC","authors":"K. Koedinger, Ji Hee Kim, J. Z. Jia, Elizabeth Mclaughlin, Norman L. Bier","doi":"10.1145/2724660.2724681","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The printing press long ago and the computer today have made widespread access to information possible. Learning theorists have suggested, however, that mere information is a poor way to learn. Instead, more effective learning comes through doing. While the most popularized element of today's MOOCs are the video lectures, many MOOCs also include interactive activities that can afford learning by doing. This paper explores the learning benefits of the use of informational assets (e.g., videos and text) in MOOCs, versus the learning by doing opportunities that interactive activities provide. We find that students doing more activities learn more than students watching more videos or reading more pages. We estimate the learning benefit from extra doing (1 SD increase) to be more than six times that of extra watching or reading. Our data, from a psychology MOOC, is correlational in character, however we employ causal inference mechanisms to lend support for the claim that the associations we find are causal.","PeriodicalId":20664,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Second (2015) ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"231","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the Second (2015) ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/2724660.2724681","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 231

Abstract

The printing press long ago and the computer today have made widespread access to information possible. Learning theorists have suggested, however, that mere information is a poor way to learn. Instead, more effective learning comes through doing. While the most popularized element of today's MOOCs are the video lectures, many MOOCs also include interactive activities that can afford learning by doing. This paper explores the learning benefits of the use of informational assets (e.g., videos and text) in MOOCs, versus the learning by doing opportunities that interactive activities provide. We find that students doing more activities learn more than students watching more videos or reading more pages. We estimate the learning benefit from extra doing (1 SD increase) to be more than six times that of extra watching or reading. Our data, from a psychology MOOC, is correlational in character, however we employ causal inference mechanisms to lend support for the claim that the associations we find are causal.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
学习不是一项观赏性的运动:从MOOC上学习,做比看更好
很久以前的印刷机和今天的计算机使人们广泛获取信息成为可能。然而,学习理论家认为,单纯的信息是一种糟糕的学习方式。相反,更有效的学习来自于实践。虽然当今mooc最受欢迎的元素是视频讲座,但许多mooc还包括互动活动,让人们可以边做边学。本文探讨了在mooc中使用信息资产(如视频和文本)与互动活动提供的实践学习机会相比的学习效益。我们发现,做更多活动的学生比看更多视频或阅读更多页面的学生学得更多。我们估计,额外行动(增加1个标准差)的学习效益是额外观看或阅读的六倍以上。我们的数据来自心理学MOOC,在性质上是相关的,但是我们使用因果推理机制来支持我们发现的关联是因果关系的说法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Learning is Not a Spectator Sport: Doing is Better than Watching for Learning from a MOOC Learnersourcing of Complex Assessments All It Takes Is One: Evidence for a Strategy for Seeding Large Scale Peer Learning Interactions Designing MOOCs as Interactive Places for Collaborative Learning Who You Are or What You Do: Comparing the Predictive Power of Demographics vs. Activity Patterns in Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1