1.
«Использование анализа
социальных сетей для
формирования учебных групп»
Александр Пронин, Александр Семёнов
IV международная конференция Российской ассоциации исследователей
высшего образования
«Университетские традиции: ресурс или бремя?»
Москва
28.09.2013

2.
Forming students groups seems to be
a tough problem!

3.
Challenge
Task: regroup 4 student groups into 3
equally sized, homogenous groups with
equal average score
group A
Group 1
group B
N1 = N2 = N3 = 26
Group 2
group C
group D
Group 3
N – group size
S – average score
S1 = S2 = S3

4.
2 Approaches
Approach1: «Weak link»
Approach2: «Melting pot»

5.
“Weak link” principle
Boys
Girls
Subgroup 1
Subgroup 2
Subgroup 3

6.
Approach 1 results
Standard Network Analysis
Row count
Column count
Link count
Density
Components of 1 node (isolates)
Components of 2 nodes (dyadic isolates)
Components of 3 or more nodes
Reciprocity
Characteristic path length
Clustering coefficient
Network levels (diameter)
Network fragmentation
Krackhardt connectedness
Krackhardt efficiency
Krackhardt hierarchy
Krackhardt upperboundedness
Degree centralization
Betweenness centralization
Closeness centralization
Eigenvector centralization
Reciprocal (symmetric)?
221_1
18.000
18.000
63.000
0.206
0
0
2
0.575
1.548
0.637
4.000
0.471
0.529
0.631
0.575
0.877
0.099
0.057
0.053
0.468
No (57% of
the links
are
reciprocal)
221_2
18.000
18.000
48.000
0.157
0
0
1
0.333
3.167
0.348
9.000
0.000
1.000
0.860
0.314
1.000
0.121
0.323
0.314
0.301
No (33% of
the links
are
reciprocal)
222_1
19.000
19.000
60.000
0.175
2
0
1
0.500
2.570
0.485
6.000
0.205
0.795
0.800
0.221
1.000
0.145
0.229
0.116
0.325
No (50% of
the links
are
reciprocal)
222_2
19.000
19.000
46.000
0.135
2
0
1
0.533
2.759
0.296
7.000
0.205
0.795
0.883
0.412
1.000
0.191
0.191
0.125
0.305
No (53% of
the links
are
reciprocal)
223_1
22.000
22.000
74.000
0.160
0
0
1
0.423
2.910
0.454
6.000
0.000
1.000
0.852
0.250
1.000
0.112
0.239
0.268
0.258
No (42% of
the links
are
reciprocal)
223_2
22.000
22.000
58.000
0.126
0
0
1
0.349
2.379
0.351
6.000
0.000
1.000
0.895
0.820
0.767
0.176
0.070
0.177
0.425
No (34% of
the links
are
reciprocal)
224_1
19.000
19.000
58.000
0.170
2
0
1
0.611
2.547
0.519
6.000
0.205
0.795
0.833
0.538
1.000
0.121
0.120
0.205
0.457
No (61% of
the links
are
reciprocal)
224_2
19.000
19.000
49.000
0.143
2
0
1
0.531
2.365
0.391
6.000
0.205
0.795
0.867
0.724
1.000
0.119
0.143
0.242
0.482
No (53% of
the links
are
reciprocal)

7.
Approach 2 principle
Initial groups
Faculty-level ties
New Groups
Clustering

8.
Group level
Sociometric questionnaire
Communication
Approach 1
Trust
Faculty level
Approach 2
Information
Advice
Improvement

9.
Key Results
1st interval
Average
score
Rating
position
2nd interval
Year later
57%
37%
42%
35%
68%
52%
% - percentage of students, who increased their average score and position in cumulative rating

10.
Comparative results
1st interval
Type of groups
Score
change
Score
increase
2nd interval
Score
change
Score
increase
Year later
Score
change
Score
increase
48% +0,24
48% +0,84
48% +1
63% +0,49
34% +0,44
41% +0,45
Score change -- % of students, who increased their average score according to current rating
Avg. score increase – mean increase of average score

11.
Future steps
•
•
•
•
Finalize data analysis
Conduct a survey
Publish a paper with results
Present a methodology

12.
Thank you!
• Александр Пронин
aspronin@hse.ru
• Александр Семёнов
semenoffalex@gmail.com
http://jarens.ru