Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Karsten D. WolfClosing the Participation Gap - User Generated Content in E-LearningUser Generated Content is an important aspect of Web 2.0's appeal to education, allowing learners to participate and fostering deeper elaboration. In an analysis of open participation projects such as Wikipedia, one can observe the long or thick tail effect, meaning that even low activity authors contribute a substantial part of such collaborative services. 1. Motivation for participation in open content projects (OCP)The main factors of motivation for participation in Open Source Software (OSS) projects are summarized based on the empirical research in this field. This contribution discusses, what differences are to be considered in the study of Open Content Projects (OCP). A motivational model for OCP participation is presented based on self-determination theory (Deci/Ryan). Furthermore, important content factors are proposed and analysed, such as content size, audience size, difficulty level, and marketability. For the content factors examples are presented from different user generated content platforms such as Wikis, Blogs, social bookmarking services, and Friend-of-a-friend networks. An analysis of successful OCPs shows that there are different "hot spots" for open content, and that "Don't Repeat Yourself (and others)" as well as smaller content sizes are the strongest forces to increase open content creation. 2. Structure and learning effects of participationBased on the analysis of activity data of 3000 students in an user generated content learning platform at the virtual university of bavaria, the structure of and differences between user activities will be presented.The idea of „Learning by Teaching“ (Papert, Kafai, Harel) and „Writing pedagogy“ (Elbow, Bereiter) assumes, that people learn more by participating actively. In a detailed analysis of learners activities’ impact on learning a business education course it can be shown that users who create more content also learn more.3. How to "thicken" the tail of user participation?If we target user participation, how can we achieve equality? And should we try at all?Based on the same data, different didactical scenarios are compared with regard to the participation gap. The main results are, that groups with a higher level of peer interaction and a higher number of common tasks reduce the gap between the learners. Still, clear differences in the amount of participation between users remain visible.4. Discussion of obstacles and enablers of participation While providing strong arguments for user generated content in education and detailing ways how to close the participation gap with Web 2.0 techology, this presentation concludes with a discussion of technical barriers and the idea of personal learning environments to even further increase the participation of all learners in open education settings.
Citation preview
cc by Karsten D. Wolf 2007
Closing the Participation Gap - User Generated Content in E-Learning
Karsten D. WolfDidactical Design of Interactive Learning Environments
Online Educa 2007Berlin, 30.11.2007
attr
ibut
ion:
jam
esgr
ayki
ng o
n fli
ckr
What is the participation gap?
attribution: wasta on flickr
//bwr
cc by Karsten D. Wolf 2007
1,731,000 569,000
474,000 367,000
353,000 288,000
283,000 251,000
222,000 221,000
19.04.2007Slides: www.slideshare.net/kadewe
cc by Karsten D. Wolf 2007
native speakers of language Wikipedia article
Slides: www.slideshare.net/kadewe
cc by Karsten D. Wolf 2007
articles ratio
Suomi 109,454 48
German 569,000 176
native speakers of language Wikipedia article
Slides: www.slideshare.net/kadewe
cc by Karsten D. Wolf 2007
articles ratio
Suomi 109,454 48
German 569,000 176
native speakers of language Wikipedia article
Wikipediaarticle
1
Slides: www.slideshare.net/kadewe
cc by Karsten D. Wolf 2007
+17% +13%
+19% +17%
+18% +27%
+25% +15%
+27% +14%
ca. 6 months later (1.10.2007)
Suomi +22%
Slides: www.slideshare.net/kadewe
cc by Karsten D. Wolf 2007
statistics*
really old: October 2005 = 2 Internet years ≈ 14 years ago
50% of all edits done by 0.7% of users (615 people)
72% of text written by 1.8% of users (1,500 people)
cc by Karsten D. Wolf 2007
0 25 50 75 100 125
25
50
75
100
cum
ulat
ive
% o
f con
tent
% of authors ranked by contribution
cc by Karsten D. Wolf 2007
0 25 50 75 100 125
25
50
75
100
actual data
cum
ulat
ive
% o
f con
tent
% of authors ranked by contribution
cc by Karsten D. Wolf 2007
0 25 50 75 100 125
25
50
75
100
rough estimation
cum
ulat
ive
% o
f con
tent
% of authors ranked by contribution
cc by Karsten D. Wolf 2007
0 25 50 75 100 125
25
50
75
100
very few people
cum
ulat
ive
% o
f con
tent
% of authors ranked by contribution
cc by Karsten D. Wolf 2007
0 25 50 75 100 125
25
50
75
100
very few people
do very much
cum
ulat
ive
% o
f con
tent
% of authors ranked by contribution
cc by Karsten D. Wolf 2007
20% of people are doing 80% of the work
cc by Karsten D. Wolf 2007
I am doing all the work and everyone else is lazy!
cc by Karsten D. Wolf 2007
0 25 50 75 100 125
25
50
75
100
equal participation
cum
ulat
ive
% o
f con
tent
% of authors ranked by contribution
cc by Karsten D. Wolf 2007
0 25 50 75 100 125
25
50
75
100 equal participation
gapcu
mul
ativ
e %
of c
onte
nt
% of authors ranked by contribution
cc by Karsten D. Wolf 2007
# of
edi
ts
authors ranked by # of edits
as of February 2007
Datasource: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:List_of_Wikipedians_by_number_of_edits
cc by Karsten D. Wolf 2007
# of
edi
ts
authors ranked by # of edits
Wikipediholism#1 159,825#10 79,162#30 53,500#50 46,529#100 36,608#500 17,305#1,000 11,101#2,500 5,300
cc by Karsten D. Wolf 2007
# of
edi
ts
authors ranked by # of edits
Wikipediholism#1 159,825#10 79,162#30 53,500#50 46,529#100 36,608#500 17,305#1,000 11,101#2,500 5,300
10 edits a dayfor 3 years
cc by Karsten D. Wolf 2007
# of
edi
ts
authors ranked by # of edits
as of February 2007
Long Tail of Authors
cc by Karsten D. Wolf 2007
Wikipedia: consuming vs. producing?
20k requests per second1,728,000,000 requests/day
200,000 edits a day8,640 requests/edit
(0.01%)
67,000 editors active in November 2006approximately <0.01% of user base editors
cc by Karsten D. Wolf 2007
cc by Karsten D. Wolf 2007
German youths
25% Creators
Datasource JIM 2007 Press release
cc by Karsten D. Wolf 2007
Why participate?
© Karsten D. Wolf 2007
Why engage for free in OSS?
• The economist‘s view: It‘s just signaling for self-promotion (Lerner & Tirole, 2002)
• Empirical studies contradict: it is intrinsic motivation!
• Hertel, Guido, Sven Nieder and Stefanie Herrmann (2003)
• Lakhani, Karim R. and Robert G. Wolf (2003)
© Karsten D. Wolf 2007
Understanding Open Content Authors Motivation
• Altruism – for the love of other people
• Reputation – showing off one‘s own capability = self-promotion
• Interest, Fun and Flow – doing it for the Joy of it
• Learning – learning by authoring public entities
• Collaboration – tackling something not feasible for oneself
• Job – getting a paycheck
• Saving – no need to buy textbooks and giving back some time
• Political Statement – e.g. anti capitalist point of view, anti copyrights pov…
• Assignment – getting a grade and a diploma
• Convenience – it is easier to find notes in public repositories than on my HD
© Karsten D. Wolf 2007
What kind of content makes good candidate for OCP?
• both basic and advanced level of content, doesn‘t matter
• both Super Special Interest and Mass Audience
• Opportunity costs of making it open is low for most scientific SSI and school market
• Reputation gain is great for Mass Audience
© Karsten D. Wolf 2007
Content size, team size & collaboration
• Smaller snippets are easier
• Wikipedia = collective
• Blogs = individual
• The bigger, the more authors = more difficult (e.g. WikiBooks)
• Solution: snippets!
• Problem: Thousands of snippets do not make great textbooks
© Karsten D. Wolf 2007
Commented Collections
• DRY = Don‘t Repeat Yourself
• DRY(AO) = Don‘t Repeat Yourself and Others!
• Good bye Open Content Books
• Hello Commented Collections of Open Snippets
• Makes sense from the Personal Learning Environment viewpoint, too!
Why participation in education?
cc by Karsten D. Wolf 2007
buildpublicentities
Seymour PapertFather of Logo
Constructionist
cc by Karsten D. Wolf 2007
culture of participation
recreation to become a form of re-creation (remix, tinkering, sharing) based on productive inquiry situated in communities of co-creation
learning about ➙ learning to behttp://mitworld.mit.edu/video/419/
John Seely BrownXerox Parc
Cognitive Apprenticeship
Structure and effects of participation?
cc by Karsten D. Wolf 2007
Research project settings
• Learning environment EverLearn (http://www.everlearn.info)
• about 4000 active users (= having completed a course)
• logs from fall 2004 to summer 2007
• about 1,85 million logged actions of users
• non-reactive observational data (level 5, Fritsche & Linneweber 2006):the users are not aware of the observation and they don‘t know, that their data is used for research
cc by Karsten D. Wolf 2007
Consumptive usage
• read pages
• navigate the course
• download files
• …
cc by Karsten D. Wolf 2007
Productive usage
• Edit pages
• Upload files
• Discuss
• Chat
• …
Usage by time: consumption vs. production
Usage by time: consumption vs. production
Usage by time: consumption vs. production
Correlation between production and problem solving
Chat Messages
Discussion entries
Created content in
words
Problemsolving Score
.03(.425)
.28*(.048)
.43**(.005)
n=36 (Wolf/Prasser 2006)
Gender: productive vs. consumptive usage
Cons. Prod. Total P/T
M 677,2 106,7 783,9 13,6%
F 924,2 130,6 1054,9 12,4%
n = 1688
Wikipedialinear
MeanMedian
exponential
50% edit morethan median!
0.001% edit morethan median!
Wikipedialinear
MeanMedian
exponential
50% edit morethan median!
0.001% edit morethan median!
production is harder than
consumption
participation isless equal distributed
How to close the gap?
technical: make it easy
social: make it a smallaccountable community
motivational: build up interest and develop meaningful taks
cc by Karsten D. Wolf 2007
Get more info [email protected]://www.karsten-d-wolf.dehttp://blog.didactalab.dehttp://teachlab.didactalab.de
