| Literature DB >> 31113441 |
Mohammed Saqr1,2, Ahmad Alamro3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Social network analysis (SNA) might have an unexplored value in the study of interactions in technology-enhanced learning at large and in online (Problem Based Learning) PBL in particular. Using SNA to study students' positions in information exchange networks, communicational activities, and interactions, we can broaden our understanding of the process of PBL, evaluate the significance of each participant role and learn how interactions can affect academic performance. The aim of this study was to study how SNA visual and mathematical analysis can be sued to investigate online PBL, furthermore, to see if students' position and interaction parameters are associated with better performance.Entities:
Keywords: Blended learning, blended problem-based learning; Learning analytics; Social network analysis, problem-based learning
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31113441 PMCID: PMC6530148 DOI: 10.1186/s12909-019-1599-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Med Educ ISSN: 1472-6920 Impact factor: 2.463
Summary of interaction types in each group
| Group ID | Student to student | Student to tutor | Tutor to tutor | Total | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | % | n | % | n | % | n | % | |
| 140 | 70 | 84.34 | 3 | 3.61 | 10 | 12.05 | 83 | 100 |
| 141 | 72 | 96 | 1 | 1.33 | 2 | 2.67 | 75 | 100 |
| 142 | 157 | 83.51 | 5 | 2.66 | 26 | 13.83 | 188 | 100 |
| 143 | 153 | 95.63 | 3 | 1.88 | 4 | 2.5 | 160 | 100 |
| 144 | 276 | 99.64 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.36 | 277 | 100 |
| 145 | 107 | 90.68 | 3 | 2.54 | 8 | 6.78 | 118 | 100 |
| 146 | 47 | 97.92 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2.08 | 48 | 100 |
| 147 | 84 | 94.38 | 2 | 2.25 | 3 | 3.37 | 89 | 100 |
| 148 | 198 | 89.19 | 12 | 5.41 | 12 | 5.41 | 222 | 100 |
| 149 | 277 | 92.95 | 7 | 2.35 | 14 | 4.7 | 298 | 100 |
| 150 | 271 | 81.63 | 23 | 6.93 | 38 | 11.45 | 332 | 100 |
| 151 | 163 | 98.79 | 1 | 0.61 | 1 | 0.61 | 165 | 100 |
| 152 | 51 | 39.53 | 56 | 43.41 | 22 | 17.05 | 129 | 100 |
| 153 | 241 | 91.29 | 12 | 4.55 | 11 | 4.17 | 264 | 100 |
| 154 | 164 | 95.35 | 1 | 0.58 | 7 | 4.07 | 172 | 100 |
| Total | 2331 | 100 | 129 | 100 | 160 | 100 | 2620 | 100 |
Fig. 1Interactions in all groups. Each circle represents an actor, each arrow represents an interaction, groups were coloured with unique colours to be easy to distinguish
Fig. 2Interactions in group A. The node size was configured as degree centrality to reflect participants’ activity. The edges were configured so that the more frequent the interactions between two participants are, the thicker the line will be. The colour intensity reflects role in moderating interactions
Fig. 3Interactions in group I. The node size was configured as degree centrality to reflect participants’ activity. The edges were configured so that the more frequent the interactions between two participants are, the thicker the line will be. The colour intensity reflects role in moderating interactions
Fig. 4The tutor ego network compared to the whole network showing the tutor has interacted with a limited number of students. The node size was configured as degree centrality to reflect participants’ activity. The edges were configured so that the more frequent the interactions between two participants are, the thicker the line will be. The colour intensity reflects role in moderating interactions
Descriptive statistics of participants
| Parameter | n | Mean | SD |
|---|---|---|---|
| Indegree centrality | 150 | 17.47 | 20.81 |
| Outdegree centrality | 150 | 17.47 | 18.03 |
| Degree centrality | 150 | 34.93 | 36.54 |
| Closeness centrality | 150 | 0.66 | 0.19 |
| Betweenness centrality | 150 | 4.55 | 7.53 |
Fig. 5A social network profile model
Correlation between SNA parameters and achievement
| Factors | Correlation with achievement | Sig. (2-tailed) |
|---|---|---|
| Student’s factors | ||
| Indegree | 0.08 | 0.38 |
| Outdegree | 0.27 | 0.01 |
| Degree | 0.17 | 0.06 |
| Closeness centrality | 0.13 | 0.16 |
| Betweenness centrality | 0.08 | 0.39 |
| Group’s factors | ||
| Average Degree | 0.02 | 0.84 |
| Average Group grade | 0.39 | 0.00 |
| Number of users | −0.07 | 0.47 |
| Tutor’s factors | ||
| Teacher-student | −0.02 | 0.79 |
| Student -teacher | 0.22 | 0.02 |