ICALT 2001 : August 6-8 Panel Discussion PANEL CHAIR Dr Elspeth McKay RMIT University [email protected] Collaborative Context–Mediated Experiential

IICALTCALT 200 20011 : : AugustAugust 6 6-8 -8 PanelPanel DiscussionDiscussion

PANEL CHAIRDr Elspeth

McKayRMIT

[email protected] Context–Mediated

Experiential Learning Through Asynchronous Learning Networks

Collaborative Context–Mediated Experiential Learning Through Asynchronous

Learning Networks

Ass. Prof Piet Kommers

University of Twente

Prof. Toshio Okamoto

University of Electro-

Communications

Dr David WileyUtah State University

Prof. Brian GarnerDeakin

University

PanelisPaneliststs

PANEL CHAIRDr Elspeth

McKayRMIT

[email protected]

10 10 10

Panel-1 : Discussion ForumPanel-1 : Discussion Forum

Question / Discussion time 40 Question / Discussion time 40 minsmins

Panel Discussion Forum Panel Discussion Forum

Human-Computer Interactive Learning

Synchronous Asynchronous

Panel Discussion Forum Panel Discussion Forum

Representation Mode

Mechanics

Peer-to-PeerLearning Objects

Collaborative Learning

ALN Knowledge Management

Learner characteristics

Shared Learning Experiences Notational TransferInternal External Exchange

Versatile RepresentationsVersatile Representations

Asynchronous Asynchronous Learning Learning

Transactions via the Transactions via the WebWeb


Representation Mode

Method of Delivery Agent

Learner characteristicsInstructional Format

ALN Coal Face: M e a s u r a b l e I n s t r u c t i o n a l

O u t c o m e s

M e a s u r a b l e I n s t r u c t i o n a l

O u t c o m e s

Do courseware designers have enough Do courseware designers have enough expertise to identify expertise to identify educational educational granularitygranularity when using notational when using notational

scaffoldingscaffolding??

working with instructional

material

ALN Coal Face:

Interaction of Spatial Interaction of Spatial RepresentationsRepresentations

Which type of learning strategyWhich type of learning strategy

Instructional Conditions Forum:

Guided communication tool

Text generates a visual hierarchy of responses

Instructional Format



O u t c o m e s


O u t c o m e s

Learner characteristicsInstructor guided resons for discussions:

quality, frequency, adaptiveexperiences of instructor

Event Conditions Internal External

Effective Notational ScaffoldingEffective Notational Scaffolding


material

ALN Coal Face:


I me my

you them us

they them those

Chicken and Egg SyndromeChicken and Egg SyndromeSpatial ability : natural / learned Spatial ability : natural / learned


material

ALN Coal Face:



O u t c o m e s


O u t c o m e s



Design for Embedded Cognitive Design for Embedded Cognitive Processing Processing


material

ALN Coal Face:




ss

Awareness of Personal Cognition Awareness of Personal Cognition

External Stakeholder Influence:

varying degrees of

planning for tool integration

level of faculty participation in

planning progress

milestones


material

ALN Coal Face:




Panel-1 : Next SpeakerPanel-1 : Next Speaker

Brian GarnerBrian GarnerProfessor of Computing

School of Computing and Mathematics

Deakin University, Geelong, Australia



ALN Knowledge ALN Knowledge ManagementManagement

Professor Brian GarnerProfessor Brian Garner


Experiential Experiential Learning SupportLearning Support

• Human Motivation for Human Motivation for Collaborative Learning Collaborative Learning

• Research PedagogyResearch Pedagogy

• Tacit and Explicit KnowledgeTacit and Explicit Knowledge

• Knowledge DomainsKnowledge Domains

• Research SignificanceResearch Significance

ALN Knowledge ManagementALN Knowledge Management Experiential Learning SupportExperiential Learning Support

Experiential Learning SupportExperiential Learning Support Human Motivation for Collaborative Human Motivation for Collaborative

LearningLearning

Davenport & Prusak (1998) define Davenport & Prusak (1998) define knowledge as …knowledge as …

A fluid mix of framed experience, values, A fluid mix of framed experience, values, contextual information, and expert contextual information, and expert insight that provides a framework for insight that provides a framework for evaluating and incorporating new evaluating and incorporating new experiences and information. It experiences and information. It originates and is applied in the mind of originates and is applied in the mind of knowers. In organisations it often knowers. In organisations it often becomes embedded not only in becomes embedded not only in documents or repositories but also in documents or repositories but also in organisational routines, processes organisational routines, processes practices and norms.practices and norms.

Experiential Learning SupportExperiential Learning Support

Contexts

and Standards

Knowledge Domains

Project Scenario

Modelling (eg Application

integration)

Control Knowledge

Case Histories

Infer Successful

Quality Propositions

Quality Process Evaluation

CSF’s

Experiential Learning SupportExperiential Learning SupportKnowledge Domain for Inferring Software Knowledge Domain for Inferring Software

Quality Propositions for EC ProjectsQuality Propositions for EC Projects

•…….Learner Activation of and Access to .Learner Activation of and Access to Stored KnowledgeStored Knowledge

•…….Knowledge as Contextual Forms and .Knowledge as Contextual Forms and Reference ModelsReference Models

•…….Validation of Spreading Activation .Validation of Spreading Activation Theories in Experiential LearningTheories in Experiential Learning

•…….Context Mining Algorithms.Context Mining Algorithms

Experiential Learning SupportExperiential Learning SupportResearch PedagogyResearch Pedagogy

•…….Development of Novel Evaluation .Development of Novel Evaluation Instruments for Measuring Cognitive Instruments for Measuring Cognitive

Performance DynamicsPerformance Dynamics

•…….Discovery of New Instructional .Discovery of New Instructional Strategies that Activate Context-Strategies that Activate Context-Mediated Reasoning ProcessesMediated Reasoning Processes

Experiential Learning SupportExperiential Learning SupportResearch SignificanceResearch Significance



Professor Toshio OkamotoProfessor Toshio OkamotoDirector, Research Station of Advanced e-Learning

Graduate School of Information Systems

University of Electro-Communications, Tokyo, Japan

Meanings/Benefits to standardizationMeanings/Benefits to standardization

ALN Knowledge ALN Knowledge ManagementManagement


Experiential Experiential Learning SupportLearning Support

Current SituationCurrent Situation

There is an increasing requirement for an There is an increasing requirement for an infrastructure to enable user interactions and infrastructure to enable user interactions and collaborations based around mutual goals and collaborations based around mutual goals and shared data. shared data.

Geographically distributed organizations/persons Geographically distributed organizations/persons require this support for their internal/external require this support for their internal/external learning/activity. learning/activity.

Shared objects and communication, space in which Shared objects and communication, space in which users are aware of one another while learning in users are aware of one another while learning in shared objects(user- and task awareness, and units shared objects(user- and task awareness, and units of resource management).of resource management).

Shared resource management, support for user Shared resource management, support for user interactioninteraction

DefinitionsDefinitions

““collaborative learning is defined as a learning collaborative learning is defined as a learning process that emphasizes group or cooperative process that emphasizes group or cooperative efforts among faculty and learners.”efforts among faculty and learners.”

Interpersonal collaboration in the learning Interpersonal collaboration in the learning process and provide an interface to a shared process and provide an interface to a shared environment.environment.

there are desired leaning goals and results there are desired leaning goals and results (achievement) for each of learners.(achievement) for each of learners.

Needs for CL in Japanese Needs for CL in Japanese UniversityUniversity

Deepening knowledge, concepts & skills after Deepening knowledge, concepts & skills after lecturinglecturing

Managing research projectsManaging research projects MotivationMotivation Sharing and re-using Knowledge and ResourcesSharing and re-using Knowledge and Resources Assessment by Portfolio of collaborative activitiesAssessment by Portfolio of collaborative activities Challenge a new teaching method for Project Challenge a new teaching method for Project

based Learning and so onbased Learning and so on Reflection by sharing/exchanging ideas, opinionsReflection by sharing/exchanging ideas, opinions Learning efficiencyLearning efficiency

Functions/Tools for CLFunctions/Tools for CL Chat, and Web(CGI)Chat, and Web(CGI) WEB/client-serverWEB/client-server

Cross platform password managmentCross platform password managment Blackboard(whiteboard)/Note…..BBSBlackboard(whiteboard)/Note…..BBS

Collaborative simulation and tools (concept mapping, Collaborative simulation and tools (concept mapping, work-flow diagram, CAD, CASE)work-flow diagram, CAD, CASE)

TV-ConferenceTV-Conference 3D-data viewer(data sharing)3D-data viewer(data sharing) Portfolio and Data sharingPortfolio and Data sharing

Managing/Coordinating CL process with dialogue, Managing/Coordinating CL process with dialogue, documents and datadocuments and data

What is “Collaborative learning”

Figure below (included in N0034) is an example of the typical collaborative learning system. Learners are solving an assignment given by a coach. Through discussions in the collaborative workplace, learners gain “problem solving “ skills in a more effective way than in a personal learning environment (such as the conventional WBT).

(3) question to

new logged-on user

（１）Assignment:circular angle

and triangle

similarity

(4) Draw an additionalline CD ontothe collaborativeworkplace

(5) I think

it ’s enough to certify

congruence between

△ABC and △ CDA

（８） Any questions? (as

you have no prompting)

（７）△ABC is not

congruent with △ CDA

posted by learner B

（９）Discussion

monitoring Instructor/Facilitator

LearningResources

(APIS /Tools)agent

agent （10 ） All learners completedAssignment. Next please.

（２）Certify

∠ ABC ＝∠ DEC

Communicationtool

Collaborativeworkplace

* Agent: a support program for a real learner

Learner B

Learner A

Learner C

Learner D

(6) Read article

Question Opin Agree Disagree Propose Others

Select

MENU[Q]

[O][D]

[A]

[Q][O]

[A][P][A][O][O][A]

Model Editor

Case Study Case Study “Object Model” editor with Chat tool“Object Model” editor with Chat tool

Case Study – 3

Information Reference Layer

Performance Layer

Dialogue Layer

Digital

Collaborative Workplace

(CWP)

Various Materials for Learning

Personal Workplace n (PWP)

Personal Workplace1 (PWP)…..…..APIs/

Tools

Plug in

The Unified Model of the Collaborative Learning Environment

APIs Tools Chat

Shared Workplace

CollaborativeMemory

Repository

Record of input data and data editing for reusing

Reference and Documentationfor collaborativelearning

Unify collaborative environment logically

The unified environment for collaborative learningThe unified environment for collaborative learning

Learning objectives (Basic knowledge/skill - Meta)Learning objectives (Basic knowledge/skill - Meta) Instructor/facilitator commitmentInstructor/facilitator commitment Role(fixed - turn taking)Role(fixed - turn taking) Members’ profile and group sizeMembers’ profile and group size Collaboration mode( open ended - goal oriented)Collaboration mode( open ended - goal oriented) Structured degree(ex. group norm, Structured degree(ex. group norm,

communication pattern etc.)communication pattern etc.) Utilized/prepared facilities/materialsUtilized/prepared facilities/materials ………………..

Some examples of GOMSome examples of GOM



Ass.Professor Piet KommersAss.Professor Piet Kommers

Faculty of Educational Science and Technology

University of Twente, The Netherlands

Shared Learning Shared Learning ExperiencesExperiences


Through Web Through Web CorrespondenceCorrespondence


Learning Effectiveness of Learning Effectiveness of Concept Concept

Mapping in a Computer-Mapping in a Computer-SupportedSupported

Collaborative Problem Solving Collaborative Problem Solving DesignDesign


Neli Stoyanova

Piet Kommers

Shared cognition is substantial for Shared cognition is substantial for cognitive construction cognitive construction /reconstruction/reconstruction

HypothesesHypotheses

Concept mapping is an effective tool for mediating computer supported collaboration

Three scenarios for concept Three scenarios for concept mapping mediated group mapping mediated group

interaction interaction


• Distributed

• Moderated

• Shared

Distributed cognition: Distributed cognition: is is defined as an extension of the defined as an extension of the internal cognition of the internal cognition of the personality in the outside world personality in the outside world


Shared cognition: is building upon the individual inputs in the collaborative process

• Distributed

Members work autonomously, make concept maps that reflect their knowledge, and pass them to their group members. This process is continued until all members reach a common vision of the problem. The thinking process is individual.


• Moderated

The interaction is moderated by one central person, who adjusts individual notations until a common group vision is reached. The group members have no direct access to the individual representations of the other members. They negotiate via the moderator.


• Shared

Members interact synchronously and try to solve the problem as a group. They share their knowledge in action. Knowledge contributions are perceived as collective knowledge.


• Distributed mapping mode Distributed mapping mode .... 2 2 groupsgroups

• Moderated mapping mode Moderated mapping mode .... 1 1 groupgroup

• Shared mapping modeShared mapping mode .... 2 2 groupsgroups

• Control, non-mapping modeControl, non-mapping mode .... 1 1 groupgroup

The control group was The control group was instructed to use the instructed to use the brainstorming method for brainstorming method for their collaborationtheir collaboration


Pre-test:Pre-test: Before the experimental session a Before the experimental session a pre-test was conducted as an individual task. pre-test was conducted as an individual task. Students were asked to make a paper and pencil Students were asked to make a paper and pencil concept map representing their personal concept map representing their personal knowledge, vision and understanding of the task.knowledge, vision and understanding of the task.


Collaborative experimental session:Collaborative experimental session: Students Students were assigned to the groups and receive written were assigned to the groups and receive written instructions how to proceed their group work. instructions how to proceed their group work.

Post-test: Post-test: In order to capture the individual In order to capture the individual learning outputs after the group work the same learning outputs after the group work the same task as in the pre-test was proposed to the task as in the pre-test was proposed to the students a week after the experimental session. students a week after the experimental session.

Concept map drawn by a Shared groupConcept map drawn by a Shared group

Nederland

Gouda Alkmaar

Verkopen

markt

raspen

soorten

komijne

brie

limburger

parmesaanse

mosarella

edammer

goudse oud

jong

belegen

Productie

f abriek

Stremmen

wei

keurenkloppen

rijpen persen

Kaas

boer

klompen

koe

weiland

gras

melk

witzwart/wit

ton

geiten

geiten

zuiv el

y oghurt

karnemelk

boter

eieren

export

meisje

doek

eten

tosti blokje

prikkertje

v laggetje

boterham

Mosterd Kaasschaaf

eigenschappenlekker

zoutkorst

gaten

geel

oranje

Concept map drawn by a Moderated groupConcept map drawn by a Moderated group

Kaas Soorten kaas

distributie

verkoop

kaasproductie

snijtechniekencursus

marketing

klant

kaasgebruik

reclame

cursus supermarkt

kaasboer

kunst


Independent VariablesIndependent Variables

Testing the first hypothesis:Testing the first hypothesis: the use of the use of concept mapping technique in concept mapping technique in collaboration process with two levels – collaboration process with two levels – mapping and control groupsmapping and control groups

Testing the second hypothesis:Testing the second hypothesis: the mode the mode of group interaction with three levelsof group interaction with three levels

DistributedDistributed

ModeratedModerated

SharedShared


Learning effectiveness at the level of individual Learning effectiveness at the level of individual student, scored numerically on post-test student, scored numerically on post-test concept mapping productionconcept mapping production

Learning effectiveness as an interaction between Learning effectiveness as an interaction between individual students and group achievements, individual students and group achievements, scored numerically on both individual and group scored numerically on both individual and group outputsoutputs

Learning effectiveness at the level of the group Learning effectiveness at the level of the group as a whole, scored numerically on group as a whole, scored numerically on group concept mapping productionconcept mapping production

Individual Fluency and FlexibilityIndividual Fluency and Flexibility

Mapping groupsControl groups

Nu

mb

er

of

co

nc

ep

ts

30

20

10

0

Total

Level1

Level2

Level3

Level4

Level5+

Enrichment, Knowledge Acquisition and RetentionEnrichment, Knowledge Acquisition and Retention at Group Level at Group Level

Mapping groups Control groups Mea

n no

des

20

15

10

5

0

-5

-10

Enrichment Knowledge acquisition Retention


Mapping students include much more new Mapping students include much more new concepts in their post-test than students of the concepts in their post-test than students of the control groupscontrol groups

(M(Mmap map = 15.71; M= 15.71; Mcontr. contr. = 4.00; F = 4.457, Sig. = 4.00; F = 4.457, Sig.

= .048).= .048).On the criteria On the criteria of individual creativity and of individual creativity and reconfigurationreconfiguration no significant difference was found. no significant difference was found.

Our assumption that the use of concept mapping will Our assumption that the use of concept mapping will provoke in general a high opportunity for individual provoke in general a high opportunity for individual patterns breaking is not confirmed.patterns breaking is not confirmed.


The interaction between group The interaction between group work and individual cognitive work and individual cognitive

reconstructionreconstruction

Group-to-individual transfer, that is significantly Group-to-individual transfer, that is significantly higher for mapping groupshigher for mapping groups


= .047)= .047)

Individual-to-group transfer, that shows a Individual-to-group transfer, that shows a difference near to the significant in favour of difference near to the significant in favour of mapping groups mapping groups


= .052)= .052)


In collaborative settings concept mapping is predictive In collaborative settings concept mapping is predictive for a conceptual change and cognitive reconstruction, for a conceptual change and cognitive reconstruction, for acquiring concepts and incorporating them in the for acquiring concepts and incorporating them in the existing cognitive structure as well as for the existing cognitive structure as well as for the reconstruction of the cognition. reconstruction of the cognition. The use of concept mapping makes individual The use of concept mapping makes individual knowledge more explicit and more meaningful for other knowledge more explicit and more meaningful for other group members. It is easier to be communicated, group members. It is easier to be communicated, reflected and elaborated and easier incorporated into reflected and elaborated and easier incorporated into one’s individual cognition. one’s individual cognition.

Concept mapping as a mediating tool is beneficial for Concept mapping as a mediating tool is beneficial for group collaborative learning both at group and at group collaborative learning both at group and at individual level. It promotes establishing a common individual level. It promotes establishing a common reference structure that is a basis for building shared reference structure that is a basis for building shared group cognition. group cognition.

The mode of group interaction influences significantly The mode of group interaction influences significantly the the

concepts fluency (F = 3.827, Sig. = .047) concepts fluency (F = 3.827, Sig. = .047)

and links fluency (F = 3.797, Sig. = .048)and links fluency (F = 3.797, Sig. = .048)

Groups

SharedModeratedDistr ibuted

Nu

mb

er

of

co

nc

ep

ts

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

Total

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

Level 4

Level 5+

The mode of group interaction influences significantly The mode of group interaction influences significantly the the

concepts fluency (F = 3.827, Sig. = .047) and concepts fluency (F = 3.827, Sig. = .047) and

links fluency (F = 3.797, Sig. = .048)links fluency (F = 3.797, Sig. = .048)

Groups

Shared Moderated Distributed

Num

ber

of nodes

30

20

10

0

-10

-20

Enrichment

Knowledge acquisition

Retention

The analysis of group learning effectiveness The analysis of group learning effectiveness shows (as expected) a priority of the Shared shows (as expected) a priority of the Shared mode of interaction on the criteria of mode of interaction on the criteria of concepts and links fluency as well as on the concepts and links fluency as well as on the criterion of group creativitycriterion of group creativity

The Moderated groups produce a higher concept fluency The Moderated groups produce a higher concept fluency than the Distributed groups. than the Distributed groups.

It was assumed that the opportunity to review all members’ It was assumed that the opportunity to review all members’ individual maps as an access to a considerable amount of individual maps as an access to a considerable amount of distributed cognitive resources should influence positively distributed cognitive resources should influence positively the broadness of group problem solution. In fact the way the broadness of group problem solution. In fact the way and the form in which individual cognitive resources are and the form in which individual cognitive resources are represented and manipulated in the group interaction is a represented and manipulated in the group interaction is a stronger factor of the group learning effectiveness than the stronger factor of the group learning effectiveness than the amount of distributed resources to which students have amount of distributed resources to which students have accessaccess

The data indicate a great difference in the acquired The data indicate a great difference in the acquired knowledge especially between the Shared and the other knowledge especially between the Shared and the other two types of groups. The broadness of the group vision two types of groups. The broadness of the group vision about the problem is strongly influenced by the mode of about the problem is strongly influenced by the mode of interaction.interaction.


No significant difference was found on the No significant difference was found on the criterion of criterion of individual – to - group individual – to - group transfertransfer. All three scenarios enabled . All three scenarios enabled students to present and incorporate their students to present and incorporate their knowledge in the group process.knowledge in the group process.

The data analysis shows that the mode of The data analysis shows that the mode of interaction itself does not influence the interaction itself does not influence the process of eliciting individual knowledge in process of eliciting individual knowledge in group collaboration and its incorporation in group collaboration and its incorporation in the group final output. the group final output.

Shared Learning Shared Learning ExperiencesExperiencesIn summaryIn summary

The experiment reveals that learning effectiveness The experiment reveals that learning effectiveness is influenced significantly by the mode of group is influenced significantly by the mode of group interaction. In general, the Shared interaction interaction. In general, the Shared interaction scenario proves to be the most effective in scenario proves to be the most effective in collaborative learning and problem solving. collaborative learning and problem solving.

This leads to the conclusion that the learning This leads to the conclusion that the learning effectiveness depends on the extent to which effectiveness depends on the extent to which students share their learning not only as results students share their learning not only as results but also as a process of knowledge acquisition and but also as a process of knowledge acquisition and creation by a direct interactioncreation by a direct interaction

Discussion Forum Discussion Forum Review Review

Representation Mode

Mechanics

Peer-to-PeerLearning Objects

ALN Knowledge Management



Collaborative Context–Mediated Experiential Learning Through Asynchronous

Learning Networks

Documents

ICALT 2001 : August 6-8 Panel Discussion PANEL CHAIR Dr Elspeth McKay RMIT University [email protected] Collaborative Context–Mediated Experiential