Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

A major issue with using "useful/helpful-ness" as our metric for success is quantifying the term. A self-report Likert scale is susceptible to users just rating 1 or 7, or saying its useful even when it was not (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-report_study#Disadvantage..., not the greatest citation, but I am short for time).

The issue then looks at what is "success" in a MOOC. If the goal is to just have videos online, I'll just watch YouTube (as I have my own lecture series there). However, observing is considered one of the lower level of learning and things like Bloom's taxonomy point out there needs to be some type of interaction for better learning gains. These interactions require the student to have a more active role in the learning process. If they are not interacting with the system (logging in, watching videos, completing exercises, etc.), then they are not taking this needed active role. This is where "drop out" begins to be quantified and where then we can measure what worked, what didn't.

To address you example, if the user stops at 70%, researchers will ask "why?" From there, analysis of student behaviors, effectiveness of interface/instruction/material, etc. will arise. If the ability to study these things is confounded by the fact that the vast majority quit before completion, it makes it harder to answer the "Why" and "How do we fix it" questions.

Again, what we quantify as "successful" is still up for debate; but if a student drops out, it becomes harder to tell if they learned from the course and if it was student or material that drove that decision.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: