skip to main content
research-article

Cocode: Providing Social Presence with Co-learner Screen Sharing in Online Programming Classes

Published:18 October 2021Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Social presence is known to be important for distance education, and a common approach in online classes is to provide chat boxes and forums to provide the social presence. In such a class, however, learners must explicitly act beyond their normal learning activities, so often there is no social presence in the class even when there are several learners working on the same course material. In this paper, we develop an approach where learners can share the social presence without any explicit action; their normal learning activities would be used to provide visual cues for social presence. We present Cocode, a system designed for an online programming class that shows other learners' code editors and running output in the programming environment with minimum privacy issues. For evaluation, we ran two user studies with groups of participants who took an offline class and an online programming class from the university; results from the studies showed that learners felt less social presence in Cocode than in offline classes, but they felt significantly more social presence in Cocode than in online classes with live video lectures, forums, and chat sessions.

References

  1. Carlos Alario-Hoyos, Mar Pérez-Sanagustin, Carlos Delgado-Kloos, Mario Mu noz-Organero, Antonio Rodriguez-de-las Heras, et al. 2013. Analysing the impact of built-in and external social tools in a MOOC on educational technologies. In European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning. Springer, 5--18.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Mohamed Ally. 2004. Foundations of educational theory for online learning. Theory and practice of online learning, Vol. 2 (2004), 15--44.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Lucy Barnard-Brak, Valerie Osland Paton, and William Y Lan. 2010. Profiles in self-regulated learning in the online learning environment. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, Vol. 11, 1 (2010), 61--80.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Kamal Bijlani, P Venkat Rangan, Sethu Subramanian, Vivek Vijayan, and KR Jayahari. 2010. A-VIEW: Adaptive bandwidth for telepresence and large user sets in live distance education. In 2010 2nd International Conference on Education Technology and Computer, Vol. 2. IEEE, V2--219.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Frank Biocca. 1997. The cyborg's dilemma: Progressive embodiment in virtual environments. Journal of computer-mediated communication, Vol. 3, 2 (1997), JCMC324.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Hart Blanton, Bram P Buunk, Frederick X Gibbons, and Hans Kuyper. 1999. When better-than-others compare upward: Choice of comparison and comparative evaluation as independent predictors of academic performance. Journal of personality and social psychology, Vol. 76, 3 (1999), 420.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Andreas Böhm. 2004. Theoretical Coding: Text Analysis in Grounded Theory. A companion to qualitative research, Vol. 1 (2004).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Jürgen Börstler, Marie Nordström, and James H Paterson. 2011. On the quality of examples in introductory Java textbooks. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE), Vol. 11, 1 (2011), 1--21.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Elizabeth Burpee, Cheryl Allendoerfer, Denise Wilson, and Mee Joo Kim. 2012. Why do some engineering students study alone?. In 2012 Frontiers in Education Conference Proceedings. IEEE, 1--6.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Cynthia Clark, Neal Strudler, and Karen Grove. 2015. Comparing asynchronous and synchronous video vs. text based discussions in an online teacher education course. Online Learning, Vol. 19, 3 (2015), 48--69.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Zoom Video Communications. 2021. System Requirements for Zoom Rooms. https://support.zoom.us/hc/en-us/articles/204003179-System-requirements-for-Zoom-RoomsGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Sarah D'Angelo and Andrew Begel. 2017. Improving communication between pair programmers using shared gaze awareness. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 6245--6290.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. John Dewey. 1903. Democracy in education. The elementary school teacher, Vol. 4, 4 (1903), 193--204.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Rafael Duque and Crescencio Bravo. 2008. Analyzing work productivity and program quality in collaborative programming. In 2008 The Third International Conference on Software Engineering Advances. IEEE, 270--276.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Jesus Favela, Hiroshi Natsu, Cynthia Pérez, Omar Robles, Alberto L Morán, Raul Romero, Ana M Mart'inez-Enr'iquez, and Dominique Decouchant. 2004. Empirical evaluation of collaborative support for distributed pair programming. In International Conference on Collaboration and Technology. Springer, 215--222.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Oliver Ferschke, Diyi Yang, Gaurav Tomar, and Carolyn Penstein Rosé. 2015. Positive impact of collaborative chat participation in an edX MOOC. In International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education. Springer, 115--124.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases (NCIRD). 2020. How COVID-19 Spreads. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/how-covid-spreads.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. D Randy Garrison, Terry Anderson, and Walter Archer. 1999. Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The internet and higher education, Vol. 2, 2--3 (1999), 87--105.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Elena L Glassman, Jeremy Scott, Rishabh Singh, Philip J Guo, and Robert C Miller. 2015. OverCode: Visualizing variation in student solutions to programming problems at scale. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), Vol. 22, 2 (2015), 1--35.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Joan E Grusec. 1994. Social learning theory and developmental psychology: The legacies of Robert R. Sears and Albert Bandura. (1994).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Philip J Guo. 2015. Codeopticon: Real-time, one-to-many human tutoring for computer programming. In Proceedings of the 28th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software & Technology. 599--608.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Brian Hanks. 2008. Empirical evaluation of distributed pair programming. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, Vol. 66, 7 (2008), 530--544.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Randall S Hansen. 2006. Benefits and problems with student teams: Suggestions for improving team projects. Journal of Education for business, Vol. 82, 1 (2006), 11--19.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Noriko Hara. 2000. Student distress in a web-based distance education course. Information, Communication & Society, Vol. 3, 4 (2000), 557--579.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Pascal Huguet, Florence Dumas, Jean M Monteil, and Nicolas Genestoux. 2001. Social comparison choices in the classroom: Further evidence for students' upward comparison tendency and its beneficial impact on performance. European journal of social psychology, Vol. 31, 5 (2001), 557--578.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Nataliya V Ivankova and Sheldon L Stick. 2007. Students' persistence in a distributed doctoral program in educational leadership in higher education: A mixed methods study. Research in Higher Education, Vol. 48, 1 (2007), 93.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Shraboni Jana, Amit Pande, An Chan, and Prasant Mohapatra. 2013. Mobile video chat: issues and challenges. IEEE Communications Magazine, Vol. 51, 6 (2013), 144--151.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Benjamin Kehrwald. 2008. Understanding social presence in text-based online learning environments. Distance Education, Vol. 29, 1 (2008), 89--106.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Juho Kim, Elena L Glassman, Andrés Monroy-Hernández, and Meredith Ringel Morris. 2015. RIMES: Embedding interactive multimedia exercises in lecture videos. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1535--1544.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Femke Kirschner, Fred Paas, and Paul A Kirschner. 2009. A cognitive load approach to collaborative learning: United brains for complex tasks. Educational psychology review, Vol. 21, 1 (2009), 31--42.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Karel Kreijns, Paul A Kirschner, and Wim Jochems. 2003. Identifying the pitfalls for social interaction in computer-supported collaborative learning environments: a review of the research. Computers in human behavior, Vol. 19, 3 (2003), 335--353.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. Essi Lahtinen, Kirsti Ala-Mutka, and Hannu-Matti J"arvinen. 2005. A study of the difficulties of novice programmers. Acm sigcse bulletin, Vol. 37, 3 (2005), 14--18.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Terry Mayes and Sara De Freitas. 2004. Review of e-learning theories, frameworks and models. JISC e-learning models study report. (2004).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Robert McCartney, Anna Eckerdal, Jan Erik Moström, Kate Sanders, Lynda Thomas, and Carol Zander. 2010. Computing students learning computing informally. In Proceedings of the 10th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research. 43--48.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Robert McCartney, Anna Eckerdal, Jan Erik Mostrom, Kate Sanders, and Carol Zander. 2007. Successful students' strategies for getting unstuck. In Proceedings of the 12th annual SIGCSE conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education. 156--160.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Libby V Morris, Catherine Finnegan, and Sz-Shyan Wu. 2005. Tracking student behavior, persistence, and achievement in online courses. The Internet and Higher Education, Vol. 8, 3 (2005), 221--231.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. Christophe Mouton, Kristian Sons, and Ian Grimstead. 2011. Collaborative visualization: current systems and future trends. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on 3D Web Technology. 101--110.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Inah Omoronyia, John Ferguson, Marc Roper, and Murray Wood. 2009. Using developer activity data to enhance awareness during collaborative software development. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), Vol. 18, 5--6 (2009), 509.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Nathaniel Ostashewski, Jennifer Howell, and Jon Dron. 2016. Crowdsourcing MOOC Interactions: Using a Social Media Site cMOOC to Engage Students in University Course Activities. (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Glen Postle, Andrew Sturman, Francis Mangubhai, Peter Cronk, Ann Carmichael, Jacquie McDonald, Shirley Reushle, Lesley Richardson, and Bruce Vickery. 2003. Online teaching and learning in higher education: A case study.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Liam Rourke, Terry Anderson, D Randy Garrison, and Walter Archer. 1999. Assessing social presence in asynchronous text-based computer conferencing. The Journal of Distance Education/Revue de l'ducation Distance, Vol. 14, 2 (1999), 50--71.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Stephan Salinger, Christopher Oezbek, Karl Beecher, and Julia Schenk. 2010. Saros: an eclipse plug-in for distributed party programming. In Proceedings of the 2010 ICSE Workshop on Cooperative and Human Aspects of Software Engineering. 48--55.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Stefan Seedorf, Christian Thum, Thimo Schulze, and Lea Pfrogner. 2014. Social co-browsing in online shopping: the impact of real-time collaboration on user engagement. (2014).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Christine Steeples, Chris Jones, and Peter Goodyear. 2002. Beyond e-learning: A future for networked learning. In Networked learning: Perspectives and issues. Springer, 323--341.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Igor Steinmacher, Ana Paula Chaves, and Marco Aurélio Gerosa. 2013. Awareness support in distributed software development: A systematic review and mapping of the literature. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), Vol. 22, 2--3 (2013), 113--158.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Chih-Hsiung Tu and Marina McIsaac. 2002. The relationship of social presence and interaction in online classes. The American journal of distance education, Vol. 16, 3 (2002), 131--150.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. George Veletsianos, Amy Collier, and Emily Schneider. 2015. Digging deeper into learners' experiences in MOOC s: Participation in social networks outside of MOOC s, notetaking and contexts surrounding content consumption. British Journal of Educational Technology, Vol. 46, 3 (2015), 570--587.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  48. James Wallace. 1992. Do Students Who Prefer To Learn Alone Achieve Better Than Students Who Prefer To Learn with Peers?. (1992).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Dakuo Wang. 2016. How people write together now: Exploring and supporting today's computer-supported collaborative writing. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing Companion. 175--179.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  50. Dakuo Wang, Judith S Olson, Jingwen Zhang, Trung Nguyen, and Gary M Olson. 2015a. DocuViz: visualizing collaborative writing. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1865--1874.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  51. Xu Wang, Diyi Yang, Miaomiao Wen, Kenneth Koedinger, and Carolyn P Rosé. 2015b. Investigating How Student's Cognitive Behavior in MOOC Discussion Forums Affect Learning Gains. International Educational Data Mining Society (2015).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. Jeremy Warner and Philip J Guo. 2017. Codepilot: Scaffolding end-to-end collaborative software development for novice programmers. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1136--1141.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  53. Jie Wei, Stefan Seedorf, Paul Benjamin Lowry, Christian Thum, and Thimo Schulze. 2017. How increased social presence through co-browsing influences user engagement in collaborative online shopping. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, Vol. 24 (2017), 84--99.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  54. Diyi Yang, David Adamson, and Carolyn Penstein Rosé. 2014. Question recommendation with constraints for massive open online courses. In Proceedings of the 8th ACM Conference on Recommender systems. 49--56.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  55. Soobin Yim, Dakuo Wang, Judith Olson, Viet Vu, and Mark Warschauer. 2017. Synchronous Collaborative Writing in the Classroom: Undergraduates' Collaboration Practices and their Impact on Writing Style, Quality, and Quantity. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing. 468--479.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  56. Carol Zander, Lynda Thomas, Jan Erik Moström, and Anna Eckerdal. 2020. Copying Can Be Good: How Students View Imitation as a Tool in Learning to Program. In 2020 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE). IEEE, 1--9.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  57. Lei Zhu, Izak Benbasat, and Zhenhui Jiang. 2010. Let's shop online together: An empirical investigation of collaborative online shopping support. Information Systems Research, Vol. 21, 4 (2010), 872--891.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Cocode: Providing Social Presence with Co-learner Screen Sharing in Online Programming Classes

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader
    About Cookies On This Site

    We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

    Learn more

    Got it!