PeerWise - The Marmite of Veterinary Student Learning

PeerWise is a free online student-centred collaborative learning tool with which students anonymously author, answer, and evaluate multiple choice questions (MCQs). Features such as commenting on questions, rating questions and comments, and appearing on leaderboards, can encourage healthy competition, engage students in reflection and debate, and enhance their communication skills. PeerWise has been used in diverse subject areas but never previously in Veterinary Medicine. The Veterinary undergraduates at the University of Glasgow are a distinct cohort; academically gifted and often highly strategic in their learning due to time pressures and volume of course material. In 2010-11 we introduced PeerWise into 1st year Veterinary Biomolecular Sciences in the Glasgow Bachelor of Veterinary Medicine and Surgery programme. To scaffold PeerWise use, a short interactive session introduced students to the tool and to the basic principles of good MCQ authorship. Students were asked to author four and answer forty MCQs throughout the academic year. Participation was encouraged by an allocation of up to 5% of the final year mark and inclusion of studentauthored questions in the first summative examination. Our analysis focuses on engagement of the class with the\ud tool and their perceptions of its use. All 141 students in the class engaged with PeerWise and the majority contributed beyond that which was stipulated. Student engagement with PeerWise prior to a summative exam was positively correlated to exam score, yielding a relationship that was highly significant (p<0.001). Student perceptions of PeerWise were predominantly positive with explicit recognition of its value as a learning and revision tool, and more than two thirds of the class in agreement that question authoring and answering reinforced their learning. There was clear polarisation of views, however, and those students who did not like PeerWise were vociferous in their dislike, the biggest criticism being lack of moderation by staff

Chatbots for learning: A review of educational chatbots for the Facebook Messenger

With the exponential growth in the mobile device market over the last decade, chatbots are becoming an increasingly popular option to interact with users, and their popularity and adoption are rapidly spreading. These mobile devices change the way we communicate and allow ever-present learning in various environments. This study examined educational chatbots for Facebook Messenger to support learning. The independent web directory was screened to assess chatbots for this study resulting in the identification of 89 unique chatbots. Each chatbot was classified by language, subject matter and developer's platform. Finally, we evaluated 47 educational chatbots using the Facebook Messenger platform based on the analytic hierarchy process against the quality attributes of teaching, humanity, affect, and accessibility. We found that educational chatbots on the Facebook Messenger platform vary from the basic level of sending personalized messages to recommending learning content. Results show that chatbots which are part of the instant messaging application are still in its early stages to become artificial intelligence teaching assistants. The findings provide tips for teachers to integrate chatbots into classroom practice and advice what types of chatbots they can try out.Web of Science151art. no. 10386

Social e-learning in topolor : a case study

Social e-learning is a process through which learners achieve their learning goals via social interactions with each other by sharing knowledge, skills, abilities and educational materials. Adaptive e-learning enables adaptation and personalization of the learning process, based on learner needs, knowledge, preferences and other characteristics. In this paper, we present a case study that analyzes the social interaction features of a social personalized adaptive e-learning system developed at the University of Warwick, called Topolor. We discuss the results of a quantitative case study that evaluates the perceived usefulness and usability. The results demonstrate a generally high level of learner satisfaction with their learning experience. We extend the discussion of the results to explore future research directions and suggest further improvements for the studied social personalized adaptive e-learning system

Student questioning : a componential analysis

This article reviews the literature on student questioning, organized through a modified version of Dillon's (1988a, 1990) componential model of questioning. Special attention is given to the properties of assumptions, questions, and answers. Each of these main elements are the result of certain actions of the questioner, which are described. Within this framework a variety of aspects of questioning are highlighted. One focus of the article is individual differences in question asking. The complex interactions between students' personal characteristics, social factors, and questioning are examined. In addition, a number of important but neglected topics for research are identified. Together, the views that are presented should deepen our understanding of student questioning

How explicable are differences between reviews that appear to address a similar research question? A review of reviews of physical activity interventions

Background Systematic reviews are promoted as being important to inform decision-making. However, when presented with a set of reviews in a complex area, how easy is it to understand how and why they may differ from one another? Methods An analysis of eight reviews reporting evidence on effectiveness of community interventions to promote physical activity. We assessed review quality and investigated overlap of included studies, citation of relevant reviews, consistency in reporting, and reasons why specific studies may be excluded. Results There were 28 included studies. The majority (n = 22; 79%) were included only in one review. There was little cross-citation between reviews (n = 4/28 possible citations; 14%). Where studies appeared in multiple reviews, results were consistently reported except for complex studies with multiple publications. Review conclusions were similar. For most reviews (n = 6/8; 75%), we could explain why primary data were not included; this was usually due to the scope of the reviews. Most reviews tended to be narrow in focus, making it difficult to gain an understanding of the field as a whole. Conclusions In areas where evaluating impact is known to be difficult, review findings often relate to uncertainty of data and methodologies, rather than providing substantive findings for policy and practice. Systematic ‘maps’ of research can help identify where existing research is robust enough for multiple in-depth syntheses and also show where new reviews are needed. To ensure quality and fidelity, review authors should systematically search for all publications from complex studies. Other relevant reviews should be searched for and cited to facilitate knowledge-building

Is adaptation of e-advertising the way forward?

E-advertising is a multi-billion dollar industry that has shown exponential growth in the last few years. However, although the number of users accessing the Internet increases, users don’t respond positively to adverts. Adaptive e-advertising may be the key to ensuring effectiveness of the ads reaching their target. Moreover, social networks are good sources of user information and can be used to extract user behaviour and characteristics for presentation of personalized advertising. Here we present a two-sided study based on two questionnaires, one directed to Internet users and the other to businesses. Our study shows that businesses agree that personalized advertising is the best way for the future, to maximize effectiveness and profit. In addition, our results indicate that most Internet users would prefer adaptive advertisements. From this study, we can propose a new design for a system that meets both Internet users’ and businesses’ requirements

Reducing social inequalities in smoking: can evidence inform policy? A pilot study

Objective: To assess the potential contribution of evidence from existing systematic reviews of effectiveness to answering the question: what works in reducing social inequalities in smoking? Data source: The Cochrane Library (2002/4). Study selection: Systematic reviews of the effectiveness of community based tobacco control interventions, and all the primary studies included in one of these reviews. Data extraction: Reviews and primary studies were assessed for intent to assess the social distribution of intervention effects, information about the social inclusiveness or targeting of interventions, baseline sociodemographic data collected on participants, and estimates of effect size stratified by sociodemographic variables. Data synthesis: Only one review aimed to examine outcomes stratified by sex, age or socioeconomic status, and these aims were only achieved with respect to sex. Sociodemographic data about participants were frequently collected in primary studies, but not used to compare intervention effects between social groups. Conclusions: There may be scope for using existing research more effectively to contribute to evidence based policy to reduce social inequalities in smoking—by explicitly seeking stratified outcome data in new systematic reviews, by re-analysing original datasets, and/or by meta-analysis of individual participant data

Supporting Answerers with Feedback in Social Q&A

Prior research has examined the use of Social Question and Answer (Q&A) websites for answer and help seeking. However, the potential for these websites to support domain learning has not yet been realized. Helping users write effective answers can be beneficial for subject area learning for both answerers and the recipients of answers. In this study, we examine the utility of crowdsourced, criteria-based feedback for answerers on a student-centered Q&A website, Brainly.com. In an experiment with 55 users, we compared perceptions of the current rating system against two feedback designs with explicit criteria (Appropriate, Understandable, and Generalizable). Contrary to our hypotheses, answerers disagreed with and rejected the criteria-based feedback. Although the criteria aligned with answerers' goals, and crowdsourced ratings were found to be objectively accurate, the norms and expectations for answers on Brainly conflicted with our design. We conclude with implications for the design of feedback in social Q&A.Comment: Published in Proceedings of the Fifth Annual ACM Conference on Learning at Scale, Article No. 10, London, United Kingdom. June 26 - 28, 201