N@tschool keynote Bart Rienties_17-06-2010

Welcometo Maastricht University

School of Business and Economics

N@tschool gebruikers dag 2010

Keynote Online Communities

Dr. Bart Rienties


Samenvatting

Online Communities werken als:• Duidelijk doel• Kritische massa van

participanten• Sterke motivatie van

participanten• Sterke links• Waardevolle links• Kreatieve links

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=1876238&id=569029116


Wie is er lid van een online community?

• LinkedIn?• Facebook?• Hyves?• Wiki?• Newsgroup/discussion forum

community?


LinkedIn vs Facebook for finding a new job• Growing importance of internet on job-searcher’s

strategies (Fountain, 2005).• Job-search strategies ‘formal’, ‘informal’ and

‘direct application’.• Informal job-search strategies include the use of

personal contacts, such as relatives, friends and co-workers whom act as referrals and provide ‘inside’ information on job openings.

• Informal search saves on search costs.

Rienties, B., Tempelaar, D. T., Pinckaers, M., Giesbers, B., Lichel, L., (2010). The effects of online social networks sites on receiving job information, International Journal of Sociotechnology

and Knowledge Development, XX (XX), p. XX-XX.


Theoretical framework I Strength of weak ties• Granovetter (1974): strength of a social relationship or tie

affects job-searchers by amount + quality of job-information.• A tie is defined as ‘weak’ when personal contacts see each

other ‘occasionally’.• Such a weak tie can have a bridging function.

H1. SNS members who have received information about job openings via their SNS have a greater amount of weak ties in their SNS than SNS members who have not received information about job openings via their SNS.




Theoretical framework II Structural Holes

• Burt (1992):individuals gain more from social networks as structural hole• Structural holes are those places in between networks where relations or bridges

are absent and links do not exist,

H2. SNS members who did receive information about job openings via their SNS have a higher network entrepreneur personality index than SNS members who have not received information about job openings via their SNS.




Theoretical framework III Social Capital Theory (Lin, 2001)Social Capital: value of the resources that off- or online social

network ties hold:

1. Embedded resources facilitate information flows reducing transaction costs to find job opportunities.

2. Social ties may influence recruiters who play a critical role in decisions involving the job searcher.

3. Social ties may be conceived by a recruiter as certification of social credentials.

4. Provides emotional support but also public acknowledgement of one’s accessibility to certain sources.

H3. SNS members who have received a job offer via their SNS hold higher levels of resources then SNS members who have not received a job offer via their SNS.




Table 1 Descriptive statistics of SNS membership, network contacts and information about a job opening

StudentsNon-

Manager Manager FLinkedIn Membership (in %) 49.38 81.81 89.86 35.064**Facebook Membership (in %) 87.65 75.00 52.53 20.287**Contacts in LinkedIn 63.77 78.14 120.29 3.882*Contacts in Facebook 184.07 120.72 122.45 4.360*W eak contacts in LinkedIn 41.55 57.04 91.37 3.473*W eak contacts in Facebook 149.35 94.50 99.55 3.975*Close contacts in LinkedIn 22.23 21.10 29.23 1.839Close contacts in Facebook 34.72 26.23 22.50 1.801Network Entrepeneur Personality Index 5.75 5.52 5.62 0.570Job information received (in %) 22.22 32.95 42.39 5.554**ANOVA with s tudents (N= 81), non-managers (n=88) and managers (n=217) **Coefficient is s ignificant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).*Coefficient is s ignificant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

Rienties, B., Tempelaar, D. T., Pinckaers, M., Giesbers, B., Lichel, L., (2010). The effects of online social networks sites on receiving job information, International Journal of Sociotechnology and Knowledge Development, XX (XX), p. XX-XX.


Table 3 Comparison of receivers of information about a job opening and non-receivers

Stu d en tsNo n -

M an ag er M an ag erLin ked In M emb ers h ip (in % ) 2.832* * 2.578* 3.904* *Faceb o o k M emb ers h ip (in % )Co n tacts in Lin ked In 3.414* * 3.061* *Co n tacts in Faceb o o kW eak co n tacts in Lin ked In 2.683* 3.205* * 2.304*W eak co n tacts in Faceb o o kClo s e co n tacts in Lin ked In 2.272* 2.285* 4.357* *Clo s e co n tacts in Faceb o o kNetwo rk En trep en eu r Pers o n ality In d ex 1.756† 2.681* *A NOVA F-v alu e o f jo b -in fo receiv ed v s n o jo b -in fo receiv edwith s tu d en ts (N= 81), n o n -man ag ers (n =88), an d man ag ers (n =217)* * Co efficien t is s ig n ifican t at th e 0.01 lev el (2-tailed ).* Co efficien t is s ig n ifican t at th e 0.05 lev el (2-tailed ).† Co efficien t is s ig n ifican t at th e 0.10 lev el (2-tailed ).Rienties, B., Tempelaar, D. T., Pinckaers, M., Giesbers, B., Lichel, L., (2010). The effects of online social networks sites on receiving job information, International Journal of Sociotechnology and Knowledge Development, XX (XX), p. XX-XX.


Thus….

• For LinkedIn members: close ties (b = 0.20) and weak ties (b = 0.18)

• The structural holes hypothesis is rejected in our sample.• Neither tie-strength nor network entrepreneurial personality

index good predictor for students• For non-managers, weak-ties (b = 0.44) significantly predict

receiving information about job openings• For managers it is primarily close ties (b = 0.27)

Thus use LinkedIn and your close contacts to find a new job ☺

Rienties, B., Tempelaar, D. T., Pinckaers, M., Giesbers, B., Lichel, L., (2010). The effects of online social networks sites on receiving job information, International Journal of Sociotechnology and Knowledge Development, XX (XX), p. XX-XX.


School of Business and Economics1.Wat zijn nu online communities?

2.Hoe werken online communities in praktijk

3.Wat zijn gekende problemen van communities of learning?

4.Welke vormen van communities of learning werken wel? Resultaten van 2 studies

5.Conclusie en discussie

Agenda


+ e-book system

https://connect.surfgroepen.nl/p49674515/



1. Dynamics of community of learning are complex (De Laat et al. 2007; Ahuja et al. 2003)

2. Most community of learnings actually perform differently than anticipated (Alexander, 2006; Giesbers, Rienties, et al., 2009) De Laat & Lally, 2004; Schellens & Valcke, 2005, Rienties et al., 2009).

3. High degree of informal communication. Because of a lack of formal rules, procedures, clear reporting relationships, and norms, more extensive informal communication is required (Ahuja et al. 1999, Rienties et al., 2009)

4. How to establish team cohesiveness, identity and ego involvement (Van de Bossche et al., 2006)?

5. Role of learner complex (Williamson et al. 2006, Rienties et al., 2009, Tempelaar et al., 2009)

6. Role of teacher in community of learning complex (Anderson & Rourke, 2001), De Laat et al. 2007)

3. Common problems in community of learning learning


4. Major Research findings• Effectiveness team problem solving is determined by how

well team members are communicating with each other (Jonassen & Kwon, 2001, Rienties et al., 2009)

• Barron (2003) found that successful teams are able to create a joint problem-solving space

• Focus of discourse should be broader than just cognitive perspectives (Arts, Gijselaers, & Segers, 2002; Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 2000; Roschelle & Teasley, 1995; Van den Bossche, Gijselaers, Segers, & Kirschner, 2006)

• teams have to make an effort in order to establish a dual- problem space, where participants simultaneously contribute both to the content space as well as the relational space (Barron, 2003)


Study 1 Role of Motivation in CSCLSubjects• 100 participants were randomly assigned in six groups. • The six groups had an average of 13.66 members (SD= 2.16, range = 11-

17) per team. • The average age was 19 years and 45% of the learners were female.

Rienties, B., Tempelaar, D. T., Van den Bossche, P., Gijselaers, W. H., & Segers, M. (2009). The role of academic motivation in CSCL. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(6), 1195-1206.


Social interaction in week 1: With whom are learners interacting?

Jonas central after 1st week of discussions9 students participate, 6 do not participate


Social interaction in week 1-6

Jonas, Veronica and Tutor 3 central in 6 weeks of discussions14 students have participated, 1 student does not participateSeveral students on outer ring of social interaction (Bernard, Felix, Philip, Christina, Elena, Sandra, Jonathan, Bart)


METHOD: integrated multi-method approach

Individual contribution to discourse using Content Analysis• Content Analysis on social and cognitive discourse of Veerman & Veldhuis-Diermanse

(2001), whereby a distinction is made between non-task related (Veerman NTR: 1 planning; 2 technical; 3 social; 4 non-sense) and task-related discourse activity (Veerman TR: 5 facts; 6 experience/opinion; 7 theoretical ideas; 8 explication; 9 evaluation).

– Three coders independently coded all messages based on unit of meaning– Students posted 2307 messages of which 2075 (90%)were considered as codeable

(90%). – The Cronbach

alpha (α) 0.928, the Cohen’s kappa was 0.71, 0.71 and 0.68

Position of individual within team using Social Network Analysis• Degree of centralisation of each individual of all communication as well as higher

cognitive communication;• Size of ego density network of each individual.• Higher cognitive degree of centralisation using results CA• Higher cognitive size of ego density network using CA

Academic motivation Scale of Vallerand et al. (1992): • Three aspects of intrinsic motivation (IMTK, to know; IMTA, to accomplish; IMES, to

experience stimulation)• Four other scales of decreasing level of intrinsic, and an increasing level of extrinsic

motivation (EMID, identified regulation; EMIN, introjected regulation; EMER, external regulation; AMOT, amotivation).

– Response-rate 93%, Cronbach

alpha for the seven items ranged from .760 to .856– Learners who are high on intrinsic motivation relative to all other students as “intrinsically motivated learners”. – Learners who are relatively high on extrinsic motivation are labelled as “extrinsically motivated learners”. – Learner can have both high levels of intrinsic as well as extrinsic motivation.(90%).



Higher Cognitive Discourse in week 1-6: Who interacts with whom on a higher cognitive level?

Paul, Jonas and Chris central in higher cognitive discourse in week 1-611 students contribute to higher cognitive discourse, 4 students and 1 tutor do not.


Overall findings study 11. Large differences between students with respect

to amount and quality of discourse2. Differences in contributions explained (in part)

by motivation1. Intrinsically motivated students contribute

more to task-related communication2. Intrinsically motivated students have more

connections3. Intrinsically motivated students are more in

the center of the social network4. Extrinsically motivated students contribute

“on average” but lower on social contributions, which is important for group development (Barron, 2003)

5. Extrinsically motivated students are scattered throughout the network



Study 2 Increasing learning satisfaction with webvideoconference

• Cohort 1 as described above (82 participants in 6 groups)• Cohort 2:

– weekly videoconferences + discussion forums– 69 participants in 5 groups

Instruments• Academic Motivation Scale• Prior Expectations of the course• Perceived usefullness of course

– 33 questions of seven categories: assessment (four items), course design (six items); course materials (three items); goals and tasks (four items); group collaboration (five items); instruction by teacher (five items); and learning satisfaction (five items).

Giesbers, B., Rienties, B., Gijselaers, W. H., Segers, M., & Tempelaar, D. T. (2009). Social presence, web-videoconferencing and learning in community of learnings. Industry and Higher Education, 23(4), 301-310.



Videoconferences vs. discussion forums

t-test CohenM SD M SD difference d-value

Assessment 14.80 2.41 14.23 2.60Course Materials 11.29 1.66 10.65 1.80 .058† .37

Course Design 24.69 2.59 23.76 2.48 .064† .36Group Collaboration 18.24 3.34 17.42 3.28Goals and Tasks 15.15 2.51 15.40 1.82Instruction 19.53 2.13 20.57 2.09 .012* -.50Learning Satisfaction 19.83 2.50 19.27 2.73

Independent sample T-test (2-sided) of Discussion forum (n=59) vs. Videoconference and Discussion forum (n=*Coefficient is significant at the .05 level (2-tailed).† Coefficient is significant at the .10 level (2-tailed).

VideoconferenceDiscussion Forum



Overall findings study 21. Students videoconference not more satisfied

than students discussion forums2. Students videoconference less satisfied with

course materials and course design3. Students videoconference more satisfied with

instructional support



5. Conclusies1. 80-20 rule2. Sociale interactie in community of learnings

complex3. Persoonlijkheid (motivatie)4. Meer Social presence leidt niet automatisch

tot meer tevredenheid5. Rol docent bepalend maar complex complex


5. Aanbevelingen

1. Kreeer een veilige omgeving vanaf het begin

2. Wees een actieve coach van het begin3. Let op persoonlijkheidsverschillen!4. Kreeer een community voor

verschillende lerenden5. Gebruik SNA en log-in data als early

warning system


Samenvatting

Online Communities werken als:• Duidelijk doel• Kritische massa van

participanten• Sterke motivatie van

participanten• Sterke links• Waardevolle links• Kreatieve links



Keynote adres Online Communities

18 juni 2010, Rotterdam

[email protected]://www.personeel.unimaas.nl/bart.rienties

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.personeel.unimaas.nl/bart.rienties

N@tschool keynote Bart Rienties_17-06-2010

Education

Transcript of N@tschool keynote Bart Rienties_17-06-2010