Analysis of Forum Interaction Behavior Based on Cloud Class

  • Mingzhang Zuo
  • Yanli XuEmail author
  • Zhifeng Wang
  • Rong Zhao
  • Xiangyong Li
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 1048)


The forum is one of the auxiliary tools for formal learning. Some studies have shown that students’ performance in the forum is strongly related to their learning effectiveness. This study took the online forum posting texts in the blended class of Educational Technology Research Methodology as the research object. First, the literature analysis method was adopted to comb and analyze the related research, and the social network analysis method was used to find out the learners who participated in the interaction in the forum and characterize their features. Next, a statistical analysis tool was used to cluster the learners, thus they were divided into three types those were activists, followers, and silencers. Then, the correlation analysis was performed with the number of interactions between the three types of learners in the forum and the academic scores. Semantic analysis was used to analyze learners’ emotions, and different learners’ emotions were correlated with their academic performance. The study found that in the blended class, there was no significant correlation between the number of interactions among different types of learners and their course performance, and there was a significant correlation between the emotional coefficient and the course performance. Finally, this paper proposed some instructional strategies in the forum of blended class.


Forum Interactive behavior Sentiment analysis Blended class 


  1. 1.
    Yang, N., Ghislandi, P., Dellantonio, S.: Online collaboration in a large university class supports quality teaching. Etr&D-Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 66(3), 671–691 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Awofeso, N., Hassan, M., Hamidi, S.: Individual and collaborative technology-mediated learning using question & answer online discussion forums - perceptions of Public Health learners in Dubai, UAE. Open Learn. 31(1), 54–63 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gillani, N., Eynon, R.: Communication patterns in massively open online courses. Internet High. Educ. 23, 18–26 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cabiria, J.: Connectivist learning environments: massive open online courses (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Murias, T.F.: Content analysis of asynchronous communication in university education. Revista De Educ. 358, 282–309 (2012)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Siemens, G.: Connectivism: a learning theory for the digital age. Int. J. Instr. Technol. Distance Learn. 2(s101), 3–10 (2005)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wise, A.F., Cui, Y.: Learning communities in the crowd: characteristics of content related interactions and social relationships in MOOC discussion forums. Comput. Educ. 122, 221–242 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zheng, Q., Li, Q., Chen, L.: An empirical study on the correlativity of students’ interactivity and quality of content in MOOCs forum. Chin. Educ. Technol. (2016)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Liu, Z., Zhang, W.J., Sun, W.C., Liu, S.Y., Peng, X., Zhang, H.: Analysis of learners’ interactive discourse behaviors in the cloud classroom forum. e-Educ. Res. (2016)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ezen-Can, A., Boyer, K.E.: Unsupervised classification of student dialogue acts with query likelihood clustering (2013)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ferguson, R., Wei, Z., He, Y., Shum, S.B. (eds.): An evaluation of learning analytics to identify exploratory dialogue in online discussions. In: International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (2013)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wen, M., Yang, D., Rosé, C.P. (eds.): Sentiment analysis in MOOC discussion forums: what does it tell us? Educ. Data Min. (2014)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wolfe, A.W.: Social network analysis: methods and applications by Stanley Wasserman; Katherine Faust. Contemp. Soc. 91(435), 219–220 (1994)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kim, S.-J.: The semantic analysis of “Tatsu” and aspects of meaning extension: from the perspective of cognitive semantics. J. Japan. Lang. Lit., 78 (2018)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wang, Y., Li, X. (eds.): An exploration of social network analysis on cohesion in online collaborative learning. In: IEEE International Symposium on It in Medicine and Education (2008)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Samelson, F.: Struggle for scientific authority: the reception of Watson’s Behaviorism, 1913–1920. J. Hist. Behav. Sci. 17(3), 399–425 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Back, M.D., Schmukle, S.C., Egloff, B.: Predicting actual behavior from the explicit and implicit self-concept of personality. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 97(3), 533–548 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Liang, W.: The design and implementation of experiential online learning space based on virtual environment. Chin. Educ. Technol. (2014)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dev, P., Jyoti, S.K., Dhawan. S.: A pragmatic analysis to detect escalating implicit behavior in online social websites (2015)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Weiss, H.M., Cropanzano, R.: Affective events theory: a theoretical discussion of the structure, causes and consequences of affective experiences at work. Res. Organ. Behav. 18(3), 1–74 (1996)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gao, J.: Impact of online academic emotion on learning engagement: a social cognitive perspective. Open Educ. Res. (2016)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mingzhang Zuo
    • 1
  • Yanli Xu
    • 1
    Email author
  • Zhifeng Wang
    • 1
  • Rong Zhao
    • 1
  • Xiangyong Li
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Educational Information TechnologyCentral China Normal UniversityWuhanChina

Personalised recommendations