Social Evaluation of Learning Material

Paolo Avogadro, Silvia Calegari, Matteo Dominoni


In academic environments the success of a course is given by the interaction among students, teachers and learning material. This paper is focused on the definition of a model to establish the quality of learning material within a Social Learning Management System (Social LMS). This is done by analyzing how teachers and students interact by: (1) objective evaluations (e.g., grades), and (2) subjective evaluations (e.g., social data from the Social LMS). As a reference, we use the Kirkpatrick-Philips model to characterize learning material with novel key performance indicators. As an example, we propose a social environment where students and teachers interact with the help of a wall modified for the evaluation of learning material.


  1. Buckingham Shum, S. and Ferguson, R. (2012). Social learning analytics. Ed. Tech. & Society.
  2. Claypool, M., Brown, D., Le, P., and Waseda, M. (2001). Inferring user interest. IEEE Internet Computing, 5:32-39.
  3. Dominoni, M., Pinardi, S., and Riva, G. (2010). Omega network: An adaptive approach to social learning. In 10th Inter. Conference on Intelligent Systems Design and Applications, ISDA 2010, November 29 - December 1, 2010, Cairo, Egypt, pages 953-958. IEEE.
  4. Guerin, J. T. and Michler, D. (2011). Analysis of undergraduate teaching evaluations in computer science. In Proceedings of the 42Nd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, SIGCSE 7811, pages 679-684, New York, NY, USA. ACM.
  5. Kirkpatrick, D. L. and Kirkpatrick, J. D. (2010). Evaluating training programs : the four levels. ; Berrett-Koehler Publishers, [Sydney, NSW, Australia]; San Francisco, CA.
  6. Larsson, E., Amirijoo, M., Karlsson, D., and Eles, P. I. (2007). What Impacts Course Evaluation?
  7. Newstrom, J. W. (1995). Evaluating training programs: The four levels, by donald l. kirkpatrick. (1994). Human Resource Development Quarterly, 6(3):317-320.
  8. Osguthorpe, R. T. and Graham, C. R. (2003). Blended learning environments: Definitions and directions. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 4(3):227- 233.
  9. Phillips, J. J. and Phillips, P. P. (2003). Using action plans to measure roi. Performance Improvement, 42(1):24-33.
  10. Siemens, G. and Baker, R. S. J. d. (2012). Learning analytics and educational data mining: Towards communication and collaboration. In Proceedings of the 2Nd International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge, LAK 7812, pages 252-254, New York, NY, USA. ACM.
  11. Touré, F., Aïmeur, E., and Dalkir, K. (2014). AM2O - An Efficient Approach for Managing Training in Enterprise. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Sharing, pages 405-412.

Paper Citation

in Harvard Style

Avogadro P., Calegari S. and Dominoni M. (2016). Social Evaluation of Learning Material . In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Data Management Technologies and Applications - Volume 1: DATA, ISBN 978-989-758-193-9, pages 164-169. DOI: 10.5220/0005994401640169

in Bibtex Style

author={Paolo Avogadro and Silvia Calegari and Matteo Dominoni},
title={Social Evaluation of Learning Material},
booktitle={Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Data Management Technologies and Applications - Volume 1: DATA,},

in EndNote Style

JO - Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Data Management Technologies and Applications - Volume 1: DATA,
TI - Social Evaluation of Learning Material
SN - 978-989-758-193-9
AU - Avogadro P.
AU - Calegari S.
AU - Dominoni M.
PY - 2016
SP - 164
EP - 169
DO - 10.5220/0005994401640169