Patterns of Participation in Formal, Non-Formal and Informal Online
Learning Communities
Richard A. SchwierJennifer X Seaton
Virtual Learning Communities Research LaboratoryEducational Technology and Design
University of Saskatchewan
Central Concerns
• Shifting focus of research• Atomized view of communities• Tools for analysis• Generation of models• Using research to inform development
of online learning environments
Community
Constituents
Comparison
Modeling
Formality of Learning Environment
• Formal• Non-Formal• Informal
Selection of Groups
• Active, regular online conversations• Discussion board transcripts• Membership • Active facilitator *• All conversations considered *• Topics not restricted
Two Measures of Participation
• Interaction analysis– Transcript Analysis Tools (Fahy, Crawford & Ally)– Intensity, Density, Reciprocity
• Engagement analysis– Density– Mean Reply Depth (Wiley)
Interaction analysisMessages/participant
Informal 1 Informal 2 Non-formal 1 Non-formal 2 Formal 1 Formal 2
1.55 3.90 8.08 21.9 57.8 95.5
Interaction analysisMessages/discussion
Informal 1 Informal 2 Non-formal 1 Non-formal 2 Formal 1 Formal 2
31.4 15.2 8.08 29.2 148.7 40.2
Interaction AnalysisIntensity
• Intensity– “levels of participation," or the degree to which
the number of postings observed in a group exceed the number of required or expected postings
Informal 1 Informal 2 Non-formal 1 Non-formal 2 Formal 1 Formal 2
.03 * .09 * .34 1.82 4.1 2.51
Interaction analysisDensity
• Density = 2a/N(N-1), – Included only peripheral interactions in formal
environments– the ratio of the actual number of connections
observed, to the total potential number of possible connections
Informal 1 Informal 2 Non-formal 1 Non-formal 2 Formal 1 Formal 2
cliques cliques .47 .40 1.0 .78
Interaction AnalysisReciprocity
the parity of communication among participants
Interaction AnalysisReciprocity
Informal 1 Informal 2 Non-formal 1 Non-formal 2 Formal 1 Formal 2
Low Low .92
(sd=.94)
1.74
(sd=4.77)
1.10
(sd=.42)
2.51
(sd=.37)
Plotting Reciprocity
Engagement
Engagement analysis
• Thread density and depth (Wiley, 2010)– Calculation of levels of replies in conversation
threads– Data flawed, but useful
Mean Reply Depth (MRD crude) = sum of reply depth for all messages/messages in the thread
Mean Reply Depth (corrected)= MRD (crude) x ((n-b(childless messages)/n)
Mean reply depth (MRD) equationsMean Reply Depth (MRD crude) = sum of reply depth for all messages/messages in the thread
Mean Reply Depth (corrected)= MRD (crude) x ((n-b(childless messages)/n)
Do not attempt to read this!
Do not attempt to read this!
Mulitlogue/discussion
Simple Q&A/chit-chat
Monologue/no discussion
Engagement analysisMean Reply Density
Informal 1 Informal 2 Non-formal 1 Non-formal 2 Formal 1 Formal 2
.71 1.16 .60 .70 1.76 1.40
Formal 1 Formal 2 Informal 1 Informal 2 Non-formal 1 Non-formal 2
Regular
Formal 1 Formal 2 Informal 1 Informal 2 Non-formal 1 Non-formal 2
Extended
Conclusions
• Interaction and engagement data tell similar stories• Baseline data are needed to situate findings
• Most enjoyable part: the hunt, not the kill