Reactividad del anión 26b frente a moléculas con enlaces E–H

In Chapter 2, we briefly reviewed collaborative learning, but in this section we recapture the main concept of it with a special focus on MOOCs. This is followed by a literature review in collaborative viewing and contextual help, which are of high relevance to the collaborative MOOC learning scenario that the BOOC Player is targeted for.

Collaborative Learning for MOOCs

As we are thinking of MOOC study group, one may naturally associate it with online study groups. In fact, online study groups have been well studied in literature. As an example, Curtis and Lawson (2001) studied groups in this format in a small course of 24 students, who were required to work on course assignments in self-selected groups via a dedicatedly designed web-based application or emails, students reported to have suffered from asynchronous discussion and collaboration with strangers of diverse background. Similarly, Smith et al. (2011) found that learners reported to have experienced more frustrations in online groups than in their face-to-face counterpart. The frustrations may attribute to the differences in study goals, imbalanced participation and the quality of individual contribution, as summarized by Capdeferro and Romero (2012). Despite of these possible frustrations, online study groups still have potentials for stimulating collaborations. As another MOOC initiative, NovoED4 creates a social incentive system to tackle the challenges of online MOOC groups: small group collaborations are enforced and are implemented via Google Doc and Hangouts. Individual contribution in a group is peer-rated so as to encourage participation and contribution. Most of the courses offered on NovoED are entrepreneurship courses whose curriculum consists of group projects, where online collaborations are expected to take place. In other words, collectively creating knowledge in group projects is an explicit requirement for most NovoED courses. In comparison, courses in other domains, such as in technology and mathematics, focus on mastery learning with knowledge duplication (Siemens, 2012), and they do not necessarily have tasks designed for groups.

In contrast to online collaboration groups, collocated study groups are common practices in schools and universities, regardless of the requirements of group-based projects. Students often form spontaneous study groups to learn a course together, and such spontaneously formed groups are shown to be effective in achieving better outcome in terms of grades than individual learning (Tang, 1993). However, concerns are more given to the seemingly im- practicalness of collocated study groups in MOOCs. In fact, as MOOCs have reached large scale, geographical clusters of students are likely to emerge. This trend can be seen from the Coursera Meetup5, where students that are geographically close to each other have the oppor- tunity to study together. We have observed that local meetings are actually being organized spontaneously, but they are mostly unstructured. Meetup in its current form does not provide

4_{https://novoed.com/}

body of research in the field of collaborative video watching in research literature. One of the earliest study may date back to the 1970s, when Gibbons et al. (1977) coined a term Tutored

Video Instruction (TVI) to denote the scenario where remote students watch video lectures in

small collocated groups with a tutor. With TVI, both students and tutors were able to pause video lectures initiate discussions when problems and questions arose. Gibbons et al. found that in terms of average grade obtained by the students, TVI students outperformed students who watched live video lectures in the classroom and those who watched offline video lectures. Surprisingly, TVI students also outperformed on-campus students who attended the lecture in the classroom. In another study, Stone (1990) found that even in the situations where tutors were not present, i.e. simply watching lecture videos in a collocated group was still advantageous.

In the late 1990s, a group of Sun and Microsoft researchers (Sipusic et al., 1999; Smith et al., 1999) extended the original TVI methodology to distance learning, where the webcams and microphones were used to mimic the collocated version of TVI. The authors coined a new term Distributed Tutor Video Instruction (DTVI) to distinguish it from the original collocated TVI. They found that the advantages of group watching video lectures were repeated in the distributed condition as well. A follow-up research on DTVI without tutors also confirm the same conclusion (Cadiz et al., 2000). In this work, a new term Collaborative Video Viewing

(CVV) was coined to represent the scenario where TVI is conducted without tutors. Similar

to DTVI as compared with TVI, DCVV was used to represent the distributed condition. In addition, Cadiz et al. (2000) compared CVV with DCVV on learning and interaction behaviors. Their results exhibited that the co-located groups were significantly more comfortable with pausing videos so that they discussed for longer duration both in total and per pause as compared to the distributed groups. More discussions are considered as beneficial for TVI groups, as Weisz et al. (2007) showed in their research that discussing while video watching was perceived to be an engaging and enriching social experience by the participants.

From the above review of prior research on CVV, the advantage of this model is notable. Early research on TVI required the presence of a tutor, which is not a realistic solution for MOOC. DCVV can be potentially feasible, but current MOOCs do not technically offer synchronous online collaborative video watching experiences. In comparison, CVV can be achieved for

students that are close to each other.

Contextual Help

The BOOC Player links textbook pages to lecture video content, so alternative or comple- mentary explanations are provided to learners in case they are required. This is similar to the notion of contextual help (Capobianco and Carbonell, 2001; Carenini and Moore, 1993), which is described as delivering specific information that users may need at the right moment, when they are carrying out a task with a computer. Such contextual help can be of operational guidance, which is intended to assist users in using the functions of a computer program. It can also be of task guidance, which is designed to help users complete a task (Heift, 2006). In research literature, many research projects about contextual help have been devoted to operational guidance. ToolClips(Grossman and Fitzmaurice, 2010) embeds video tutorials as contextual assistance for tool functionality understanding in a software application; Inter- Twine (Fourney et al., 2014) creates information scents by linking Web browsers with software features to assist users in finding help information on the Web. Other projects focused on the design of contextual help to support learning procedural knowledge of a software. These projects endeavored to create links between graphical interface to be learned and video tutori- als. FollowUs (Lafreniere et al., 2013) demonstrates that software learning can be enhanced by multiple demonstrations of tutorial videos from other community members. Pause-and-Play (Pongnumkul et al., 2011) is similar to the BOOC Player, it employs a method to detect task- performing events in the video and link them with user actions in the target application as the user tried to imitate the procedure. This method avoids manually switching between the user context and the online tutorial. Contextual help for supporting learning tasks has also been explored. The E-tutor (Heift, 2006) is a language tutoring system that instructs learners to complete a language-learning task. It automatically generates error-specific feedback, grammar hints as well as additional help from a dictionary, in case a learner has failed in the task.