This five-year Collective Research Initiative (ARC, 2019-2024) project addresses the challenges of fostering social interactions and socio-cognitive conflicts (i.e. differences in point of view that are socially experienced and cognitively resolved) to promote learning in an online learning platform. With the help of various disciplinary methodological toolkits (content analysis, corpus linguistics, and social media analytics), we investigate the presence and unfolding of socio-cognitive conflicts in the forums of massive open online courses (MOOCs) developed by LouvainX on the edX platform.
MOOC forums are a unique environment where learners with different professional experience and cultural backgrounds are invited to discuss disciplinary concepts and/or society issues that can potentially induce socio-cognitive conflicts and/or controversies. We adopt a mixed-method approach and examine the forum discussions from a multidisciplinary perspective that builds on theories from several disciplines from the humanities and social sciences (linguistics, natural language processing, communication sciences, education, and management studies). The sub-projects involved in the MOOCresearch2.0 are:
This subproject investigates how MOOC learners engage in socio-cognitive conflicts on MOOC discussion forums. It investigates how the MOOC discipline, the instructional context conditions, and the learners’ individual characteristics affect the way in which learners engage in these conflicts; This subproject seeks to develop in-depth understanding of the dynamic process of social learning in MOOCs and pinpoint the possible factors that may trigger the most fruitful socio-cognitive interactions.
2. Essentially contested concepts in social sciences: The case of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)
This subproject investigates the preconceptions and understandings that MOOC learners have about Essentially Contested Concepts (ECCs) theough the case of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). It studies how these preconceptions vary with learners’ individual profiles (e.g., socio-demographics, values, experience), and geographical origins. It explores how different pedagogical and communication mechanisms can stimulate content-related debate and facilitate learning about scientific ECCs.
This subproject delves into the rhetoric of controversies to explore how controversial debates unfold. It considers the relational, sequential and longitudinal construction of stances to analyze typical utterances of controversial debates (e.g., proof, refutation, politeness) and examine how these utterances are triggered, stabilize, transform and close.
This subproject investigates the differences between native and non-native speakers in the way they communicate online through MOOC discussion forums. Specifically, the project examines (1) whether native and non-native speakers behave similarly, are as present and take similar roles on these forums, (2) whether the contribution of native vs. non-native speakers to discussions mostly concerns language use difficulties, also concerns course content related questions and touches upon cognitive (dis)agreement, and (3) whether a non-native speaker's proficiency level plays a role in these differences.
This subproject investigates how argumentation skills affects the quality of interactions on MOOC discussion forums, as well as learning. Specifically, the goal of the subproject is to develop interventions aimed at teaching MOOC learners basics of argumentation knowledge and skills, and to test the efficacy of these interventions. Doing so, the subproject seeks to identify the specificities of MOOC platforms when it comes to the design, implementation, and assessment of argumentation-based interventions.
Dr. Magali Paquot, project spokesperson