Learners on the Periphery: Lurkers as Invisible Learners

1. Anderson, C. (2004, October 1). The Long Tail. Wired Magazine. Wired [Blog post]. Retrieved from http://archive.wired.com/wired/archive/12.10/tail.html10.1038/427010aSearch in Google Scholar

2. Beaudoin, M. (2003) Learning or Lurking? Tracking the ‘Invisible’ Online Student. In U. Bernath & E. Rubin (Eds.), Reflections on Teaching and Learning in an Online Master Program - A Case Study (pp. 121-130). Retrieved from https://www.unioldenburg\de/fileadmin/user_upload/c3l/master/mde/download/asfvolume6_ebook.pdfSearch in Google Scholar

3. Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. Pearson.Search in Google Scholar

4. Dennen, V. P. (2008). Pedagogical lurking: Student engagement in non-posting discussion behavior. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(4), 1624-1633.10.1016/j.chb.2007.06.003Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

5. Dron, J. (2016). p-Learning’s unwelcome legacy. TD Tecnologie Didattiche, 24(2), 72. http://dx.doi.org/10.17471/2499-4324/89110.17471/2499-4324/891Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

6. Egan, C., Jefferies, A., & Johal, J. (2006). Providing fine-grained feedback within an on-line learning system - identifying the workers from the Lurkers and the Shirkers. The Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 4(1), 15-24.Search in Google Scholar

7. Farzan, R., DiMicco, J. M., & Brownholtz, B. (2010) Mobilizing Lurkers with a Targeted Task. Proceedings of the 4th International lAAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM ‘10).10.1609/icwsm.v4i1.14050Search in Google Scholar

8. Fritsch, H. (1997). Host contacted, waiting for reply. Final report and documentation of the virtual seminar for professional development in distance education. Oldenburg: Bibliotecks und Informationssystems der Universitat Oldenburg (Virtual seminar held January -March).Search in Google Scholar

9. Gourlay, L. (2015). ‘Student engagement’ and the tyranny of participation. Teaching in Higher Education, 20(4), 402-411. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2015.102078410.1080/13562517.2015.1020784Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

10. Hagel, J., & Arthur, A. (1997). Net gain: Expanding markets through virtual communities. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Search in Google Scholar

11. Hill, P. (2013, March 10). Emerging Student Patterns in MOOCs: A (Revised) Graphical View. E-Literate [Blog post]. Retrieved from http://mfeldstein.com/emerging-studentpatterns- in-moocs-a-revised-graphical-view/Search in Google Scholar

12. Hrastinski, S. (2008). What is online learner participation? A literature review. Computrs & Education, 51(4), 1755-1765.10.1016/j.compedu.2008.05.005Search in Google Scholar

13. Hrastinski, S. (2009). A theory of online learning as online participation. Computers & Education, 52(1), 78-82.10.1016/j.compedu.2008.06.009Search in Google Scholar

14. Juran, J. M. (1975). The non-Pareto principle; mea culpa. Quality Progress, 8(5), 8-9.Search in Google Scholar

15. Kizilcec, R. F., Piech C., & Schneider E., (2013) Deconstructing Disengagement: Analyzing Learner Subpopulations in Massive Open Online Courses. Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge-LAK’13, 170-179. ACM New York.10.1145/2460296.2460330Search in Google Scholar

16. Kollock, P., & Smith, M. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Linguistic, social, and cross-cultural perspectives. In S. Herring (Ed.), Managing the virtual commons: Cooperation and conflict in computer communities. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Search in Google Scholar

17. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511815355Search in Google Scholar

18. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (2002). Legitimate peripheral participation in communities of practice. In R. Harrison & F. Reeve (Eds.), Supporting lifelong learning: perspectives in learning (pp. 111-126). Psychology Press.Search in Google Scholar

19. Lee, J., & McKendree, J. (1999). Learning vicariously in a distributed environment. Active Learning, 10, 4-9.Search in Google Scholar

20. Merriam-Webster Dictionary, The (n.d.). Lurk. Retrieved from http://www.merriamwebster.com/dictionary/lurkSearch in Google Scholar

21. McDonald, J. (2003). Let’s get more positive about the term ‘lurker’ - CPSquare Class Project. Retrieved from http://www.cpsquare.orgSearch in Google Scholar

22. Munzel, A., & Kunz, W. H. (2014). Creators, multipliers, and lurkers: who contributes and who benefits at online review sites. Journal of Service Management, 25(1), 49-74. doi 10.1108/JOSM-04-2013-011510.1108/JOSM-04-2013-0115Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

23. NetLingo (n.d). Lurkers. Retrieved from http://www.netlingo.com/dictionary/l.phpSearch in Google Scholar

24. Nielsen, J. (2006, October 9). Participation Inequality: Encouraging More Users to Contribute. Nielsen Norman Group [Blog post]. Retrieved from http://www.nngroup.com/articles/participation-inequality/Search in Google Scholar

25. Nonnecke, B., & Preece, J. (2001). Why lurkers lurk. Paper presented at the Americas Conference on Information Systems, Boston.Search in Google Scholar

26. Nonnecke, B., Preece, J., & Andrews, D. (2004). What lurkers and posters think of each other. Proceedings of the 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 195-203. IEEE Computer Society.Search in Google Scholar

27. Preece, J., Nonnecke, B., & Andrews, D. (2004). The top 5 reasons for lurking: Improving community experiences for everyone. Computers in Human Behavior, 20(2), 201-223.10.1016/j.chb.2003.10.015Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

28. Rafaeli, S., Ravid, G., & Soroka, V. (2004). De-lurking in virtual communities: A social communication network approach to measuring the effects of social and cultural capital. Proceedings of the 37th Hawaii International conference on System Science.10.1109/HICSS.2004.1265478Search in Google Scholar

29. Ridings, C., Gefen, D., & Arinze. B. (2006). Psychological barriers: Lurker and Poster motivation and behavior in online communities. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 18, 329-354.10.17705/1CAIS.01816Search in Google Scholar

30. Salmon, G. (2002). E-tivities the key to active online learning. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 4(1).Search in Google Scholar

31. Sun, N., Rau, P. P. L., & Ma, L. (2014). Understanding lurkers in online communities: A literature review. Computers in Human Behavior, 38, 110-117.10.1016/j.chb.2014.05.022Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

32. Sweeney, J. W. (1973). An experimental investigation of the free-rider problem. Social Science Research, 2(2), 277-292.10.1016/0049-089X(73)90004-5Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

33. Waite, M., Mackness, J., Roberts, G., & Lovegrove, E. (2013). Liminal participants and skilled orienteers: Learner participation in a MOOC for new lecturers. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 9(2), 200-2015.Search in Google Scholar

34. Walker, B., Redmond, J., & Lengyel, A. (2010). Are They All the Same? Lurkers and Posters on The Net. eCULTURE, 3(1), 155-165.Search in Google Scholar

35. de Waard, I., Koutropoulos, A., Özdamar Keskin, N., Abajian, S. C., Hogue, R., Rodriguez, C.O., & Gallagher, M. S. (2011). Exploring the MOOC format as a pedagogical approach for mLearning. Proceedings of mLearn 2011, Beijing, China.Search in Google Scholar

36. Wenger, E. (1999). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University Press. Search in Google Scholar

37. Williams, B. (2004). Participation in on-line courses - how essential is it? Educational Technology & Society, 7(2), 1-8.Search in Google Scholar