Collaboration in computer conferencing

1. Collaboration in computer conferencing Rutgers University, May 16, 2002 Gellof Kanselaar Jerry Andriessen (absent, sorry)

2. Collaborative learning (Stahl)

3. Students differ

4. Discussion-forums

5. Forums: individual contributions per week and mean ratings • Theoretical: 4.1 - 8.0/10 • Applied: 4.1 - 7.8 • Comprehension 1.9 - 6.0 • Threads: 1.8 - 6.2 • Help: 1.8 - 5.6 • Practice: 1.8 - 6.0 • News: management, announcements, sites, issues: 3.8 - 7.7 • Social chat: 1.9 - 5.3

6. Convergence and divergence (van der Pol)

7. Personal reference (Brand)

8. Focusing, checking, argumentation (Veerman)

9. KOM: Forums Social: explicitly for chatting, not related to group tasks Texts: forums in which participants contributed texts for the final product Ccourse: theoretical discussions about authenticity of the course Cmoderate: Theoretical discussions about moderating electronic discussions Cbook: Theoretical discussions about the book to review Orgwrite: negotiations about the organization of the writing task Orgcourse: negotiations about the organization of the course Other: other discussions

11. Instrument Pedagogical scenarios 1:diagnosis 2: Goal setting Collaboration scenarios 3: Task design 5: Scenario implementation and collaborative learning 4: ICT design Agents, tools, menus, interface, ontology Experimentation: action research Experimental Cycle Spread the word (Dissemination) Socio-cultural-historical educational context

12. Scenario-approach is about • Changing education • By changing user’s representations of collaboration • Through a designed, scenario-based evolution (top-down) • Of increasingly sophisticated collaborative learning tasks • The nature of which is the outcome of negotiations with users (bottom-up) • Supported by advanced technology

13. Task goal Roles Personal knowledge Activities Task execution Learning Teacher Etc…. Product, end result Expert/beginner Misconceptions Propose ideas Linear Understanding facts Sets all goals, product feedback Traditional Representation of collaboration (transmission)

14. Task goal Roles Personal knowledge Activities Task sequence Learning Teacher Etc…. Shared understanding Task dependent Shared Explain & argue Cyclic General skills Sets task goals, process feedback More advanced Representation of collaboration (studio)

15. Task goal Roles Personal knowledge Activities Task sequence Learning Teacher Etc…. Advance knowledge Group dependent Co-construction Meaningful/Epistemic Tuned Collaborative knowledge On demand Even more advanced Representation of collaboration (negotiation)

16. Curriculum development in social/cultural/historical context • Based on advancing existing representations of learning • Based on permanent negotiation • Based on shared understanding of goals at all levels • Based on mutual trust, shared responsibility and future needs

17. Example 1: collaborative writing Context: produce an argumentative text Phase1 [Task1]: Generate ideas • Goal 1: Produce and elaborate useful ideas for the text • Scenario: Idea production • Activities: Propose, check, explain • Support: question asking • Learning: elaboration

18. Question types [relate to discourse activities] 1. Goal-oriented question 2. Cause-consequence question 3. Evaluative question 4. Other open questions 5. Verification question 6. Other closed questions • Question generation mechanisms [relate to ontology] • Inferring knowledge • Correcting knowledge • Monitoring common ground • …. Question asking Is it true that...? Why...? Can you explain...? Can you give an example...? Can you give a characteristic...? What can you infer on...? What do you mean...? Is that true...?

19. Possible roles of ICT • Agents or menus propose different question types (by agents) • Monitor use of discourse actions • Diagnose according to ontology of discourse patterns • Agent provides feedback as alternatives or missed opportunities • User profile update

20. Example 2: collaborative writing Context: produce an argumentative text Phase1 [Task1]: Generate ideas • Goal 2: Relate useful ideas for the text • Scenario: Representing ideas • Activities: Propose, check, explain, counter & challenge and relate • Support: concept mapping, argumentation • Learning: elaboration

21. ICT support for representing ideas

22. ICT-support for discussing relations between ideas • Organize ideas in multiple ways • Prompt discourse moves focusing on argumentation • Inquire about the strength and relevance of arguments • Link chat to concept map • Ontology, diagnose, student profile

23. Others….. • Idea verification • Idea completeness • Sound conclusions • etc,…. Increasing complexity and integration of tasks

24. For studio: sharing understanding Studio is about the process • Eliciting a partner’s knowledge • Focusing and grounding during a debate • Confrontation scenario’s: solving conflicts, getting your way • Arriving at consensus • How to deal with lack of information • Role play under different task constraints • Knowledge management: sharing information

25. For negotiation: knowledge building Negotiation to arrive at new knowledge • How to represent the status of ideas: personal, certainty, source reliability • How to define a project goal and strategy • Social relationships in electronic forums • Projects, teams, roles and activities