skip to main content
10.1145/3300115.3309514acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescompedConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

VUC: Visualizing Daily Video Utilization to Promote Student Engagement in Online Distance Education

Published: 09 May 2019 Publication History

Abstract

Online video is widely used in various courses in online distance education (ODE). For ODE students, it is challenging to study multiple online courses and keep track of the video viewing progress each semester. In this paper, we introduce a visualization tool called video utilization calendar (VUC) for promoting student engagement with the videos of multiple online courses. VUC is designed to visualize both the current viewing progress and the daily viewing history for all the courses in a semester for students to check their viewing progress for all videos and choose any course video to view directly. To evaluate VUC, we conducted a randomized controlled trial and a survey in an ODE school. Our results demonstrate that students may spend more days online and view more course videos with the support of VUC, whereas the total video viewing time does not increase significantly. In addition, course instructors identified two patterns of video utilization, which suggests that VUC may also be of assistance to instructors in understanding how students schedule their video viewing for multiple courses.

References

[1]
Ashton Anderson, Daniel Huttenlocher, Jon Kleinberg, and Jure Leskovec. 2014. Engaging with Massive Online Courses. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW '14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 687--698.
[2]
T. Auvinen, L. Hakulinen, and L. Malmi. 2015. Increasing Students' Awareness of Their Behavior in Online Learning Environments with Visualizations and Achievement Badges. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, Vol. 8, 3 (July 2015), 261--273.
[3]
Jiye Baek and Jesse Shore. 2016. Promoting Student Engagement in MOOCs. In Proceedings of the Third (2016) ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale (L@S '16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 293--296.
[4]
Miguel L. Bote-Lorenzo and Eduardo Gómez-Sánchez. 2017. Predicting the Decrease of Engagement Indicators in a MOOC. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conference (LAK '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 143--147.
[5]
Emma Brunskill, Dawn Zimmaro, and Candace Thille. 2018. Exploring the Impact of the Default Option on Student Engagement and Performance in a Statistics MOOC. In Proceedings of the Fifth Annual ACM Conference on Learning at Scale (L@S '18). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 34:1--34:4.
[6]
Qing Chen, Yuanzhe Chen, Dongyu Liu, Conglei Shi, Yingcai Wu, and Huamin Qu. 2016. PeakVizor: Visual Analytics of Peaks in Video Clickstreams from Massive Open Online Courses. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, Vol. 22, 10 (Oct. 2016), 2315--2330.
[7]
Carleton Coffrin, Linda Corrin, Paula de Barba, and Gregor Kennedy. 2014. Visualizing Patterns of Student Engagement and Performance in MOOCs. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Learning Analytics And Knowledge (LAK '14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 83--92.
[8]
R. Wes Crues, Nigel Bosch, Michelle Perry, Lawrence Angrave, Najmuddin Shaik, and Suma Bhat. 2018. Refocusing the Lens on Engagement in MOOCs. In Proceedings of the Fifth Annual ACM Conference on Learning at Scale (L@S '18). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 11:1--11:10.
[9]
Paul Denny. 2013. The Effect of Virtual Achievements on Student Engagement. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '13). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 763--772.
[10]
Jennifer A Fredricks, Phyllis C Blumenfeld, and Alison H Paris. 2004. School Engagement: Potential of the Concept, State of the Evidence. Review of Educational Research, Vol. 74, 1 (March 2004), 59--109.
[11]
Philip J. Guo, Juho Kim, and Rob Rubin. 2014. How video production affects student engagement: an empirical study of MOOC videos. In Proceedings of the First (2014) ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale. ACM Press, 41--50.
[12]
Curtis R. Henrie, Lisa R. Halverson, and Charles R. Graham. 2015. Measuring student engagement in technology-mediated learning: A review. Computers & Education, Vol. 90 (Dec. 2015), 36--53.
[13]
Khe Foon Hew. 2015. Promoting engagement in online courses: What strategies can we learn from three highly rated MOOCS. British Journal of Educational Technology (2015), n/a--n/a.
[14]
Kalle Ilves, Juho Leinonen, and Arto Hellas. 2018. Supporting Self-Regulated Learning with Visualizations in Online Learning Environments. In Proceedings of the 49th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE '18). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 257--262.
[15]
Ryosuke Ishizue, Kazunori Sakamoto, Hironori Washizaki, and Yoshiaki Fukazawa. 2018. PVC: Visualizing C Programs on Web Browsers for Novices. In Proceedings of the 49th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE '18). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 245--250.
[16]
Yeonji Jung and Jeongmin Lee. 2018. Learning engagement and persistence in massive open online courses (MOOCS). Computers & Education (Feb. 2018).
[17]
Geza Kovacs. 2016. Effects of In-Video Quizzes on MOOC Lecture Viewing. In Proceedings of the Third (2016) ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale (L@S '16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 31--40.
[18]
Kyungmee Lee. 2017. Rethinking the accessibility of online higher education: A historical review. The Internet and Higher Education, Vol. 33 (April 2017), 15--23.
[19]
Deqing Li, Honghui Mei, Yi Shen, Shuang Su, Wenli Zhang, Junting Wang, Ming Zu, and Wei Chen. 2018. ECharts: A declarative framework for rapid construction of web-based visualization. Visual Informatics, Vol. 2, 2 (June 2018), 136--146.
[20]
M. Liu, R. A. Calvo, A. Pardo, and A. Martin. 2015. Measuring and Visualizing Students? Behavioral Engagement in Writing Activities. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, Vol. 8, 2 (April 2015), 215--224.
[21]
Jing Ma, Xibin Han, Juan Yang, and Jiangang Cheng. 2015. Examining the necessary condition for engagement in an online learning environment based on learning analytics approach: The role of the instructor. The Internet and Higher Education, Vol. 24 (2015), 26--34.
[22]
Trang Phan, Sara G. McNeil, and Bernard R. Robin. 2015. Students' Patterns of Engagement and Course Performance in a Massive Open Online Course. Computers & Education (Dec. 2015).
[23]
Vivek Singh, Balaji Padmanabhan, Triparna de Vreede, Gert-Jan de Vreede, Stephanie Andel, Paul E. Spector, Steve Benfield, and Ahmad Aslami. 2018. A Content Engagement Score for Online Learning Platforms. In Proceedings of the Fifth Annual ACM Conference on Learning at Scale (L@S '18). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 25:1--25:4.
[24]
Frans Van der Sluis, Jasper Ginn, and Tim Van der Zee. 2016. Explaining Student Behavior at Scale: The Influence of Video Complexity on Student Dwelling Time. In Proceedings of the Third (2016) ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale (L@S '16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 51--60.
[25]
Jinyue Xia and David C. Wilson. 2018. Instructor Perspectives on Comparative Heatmap Visualizations of Student Engagement with Lecture Video. In Proceedings of the 49th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE '18). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 251--256.
[26]
Qian Zhao, Sashank Varma, and Joseph A. Konstan. 2017. In-Video Reuse of Discussion Threads in MOOCs. In Proceedings of the Fourth (2017) ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale (L@S '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 153--156.

Cited By

View all

Index Terms

  1. VUC: Visualizing Daily Video Utilization to Promote Student Engagement in Online Distance Education

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Information & Contributors

      Information

      Published In

      cover image ACM Conferences
      CompEd '19: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Global Computing Education
      May 2019
      260 pages
      ISBN:9781450362597
      DOI:10.1145/3300115
      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Sponsors

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      Published: 09 May 2019

      Permissions

      Request permissions for this article.

      Check for updates

      Author Tags

      1. distance education
      2. video utilization
      3. visualization

      Qualifiers

      • Research-article

      Funding Sources

      • National Science Foundation of China
      • MOE Innovation Research Team
      • Project of China Knowledge Center for Engineering Science and Technology
      • National Key Research and Development Program of China

      Conference

      CompEd '19
      Sponsor:

      Acceptance Rates

      CompEd '19 Paper Acceptance Rate 33 of 100 submissions, 33%;
      Overall Acceptance Rate 33 of 100 submissions, 33%

      Upcoming Conference

      CompEd '25
      ACM Global Computing Education Conference 2025
      October 21 - 25, 2025
      Gaborone , Botswana

      Contributors

      Other Metrics

      Bibliometrics & Citations

      Bibliometrics

      Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)20
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
      Reflects downloads up to 13 Jan 2025

      Other Metrics

      Citations

      Cited By

      View all

      View Options

      Login options

      View options

      PDF

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      Media

      Figures

      Other

      Tables

      Share

      Share

      Share this Publication link

      Share on social media