chat v W/B Dillenbourgh and Traum

Pierre Dillenbourg & David Traum (2006)

Sharing solutions: Persistence and Grounding in Multimodal Collaborative Problem Solving

The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(1), 121-151

Questions

P122

‘What are the cognitive effects of specific types of interaction?’

‘Under what conditions do these interactions appear?’

Emphasis on

· differences in scale( how many, how long)

· complexities of what is being shared.

Grounding ( originally a term used in psycholinguistics for communication between pairs)

‘When community members interact over months and years they develop a specific culture ( relevance to group character). This culture is what common ground is to the pair. Cultures share not only concepts but a system of values, a frame for interpreting situations, a set of stories, and a history ( KRO also a way of communicating) .

Software for collaboration (***)

P122-123 “If collaborative learning is a side effect of the process of building shared understanding then CSCL should investigate how software contributes to build shared understanding. On obvious answer is that building a common visual representation (textual or graphical) of the problem at hand contributes to the construction of shared understanding’. WSIWIS ( what you see is what I see). N.b. no individual will share exactly the same understanding of this space as another.

Collaboration as a process

Communication

Diagnosis ( leads to feedback)

Feedback (acknowledgement, repair, KRO ?? support and can only take place in the forum)

‘Misunderstanding has a different epistemic value in research on efficient communication and research in collaborative learning’ For the former it is communication break down ( KRO the social aspect of group collaboration) and in the latter a learning opportunity.

To repair misunderstandings about knowledge learners have to engage in construction activities , i.e. extra effort. ( KRO and therefore the need for a forum)

Grounding behaviour varies with the media involved. There are media- related constraints

Clark & Brenman (1991)	Dillenbourg & Traum (2006)
Co-presence
Visibility object is present
Audibility have to elicit information about an object as it is not visible
cotemporality
simultaneity
sequentiality
reviewability	persistence
revisability	Mutual reveisability

Research Question

‘What is the complementarity between a whiteboard and a chat interface in constructing shared understanding?’

Hypothesis ‘W/B would be subordinated to the chat interface and that the role of the WB would be to support the grounding of the textual interactions in the MOO’ note W/B allows for deitic gestures and therefore reduces the distance of what is being represented. That the whiteboard would enable pairs to draw schemata that carry information that is difficult to carry through verbal expression’

Participants

20 pairs of post grad psychology students. Different l amounts of MOO expertise and most had no previous experience of working with each other.

Chat interface, a MOO ( a text based virtual environment, users represented by an avatar that is able to perform actions in space , including leaving and entering). Language based, sequential)

W/B graphically and spatially orientated, colour

Cost of interaction higher in both of these environments than in f-to-f.

Task – solve a murder

Crime scene - Hotel , spatial map in the MOO environment . 11 people, 1 victim several objects.

Role of grounding – what variables were measured

· Acknowledgement rate

· Medium used ( chat or W/B)

· Content categories of acknowledgements

Task knowledge

Management

Meta communication

Technical

· Measures of redundancy ( KRO good measure to think about) in terms of learning it is a measure of inefficiency.

Findings

Interaction more likely to be acknowledge if it carries an emotional load

For task knowledge there is more acknowledgement for inferences than for facts

Hypothesis about the role of the w/b was not supported . Although some pairs drew timelines, maps graphs (SNA type) W/B was mainly used for organising information – the facts and inferences and representing the state of the problem.

Conclusions

The dialogues were instrumental for grounding whiteboard information

Due to persistency of display information on W/b acted as a trigger

W/B does not ground utterances, it grounds the discussion

wikis as systems

Ulrike Cress, Joachim Kimmerle (2008)

A systematic and cognitive view on collaborative knowledge building with wikis

Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3, 105-122

Aim

(Stahl, G(2002) Contributions to a theoretical framework for CSCL. In Stahl (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Education(pp. 62-71). USA: Boulder - for the relevance of artefacts in CSCL)

p107 ‘ wikis potential for collaborative learning lies in theor ability to allow for debate-based learning experiences’

P106 ‘ the systematic analysis of the potential of wikis as tools for knowledge building’

Question

“What makes wikis supportive of learning and knowledge building’ ( deliberately avoids discussing shortcomings)

The question presupposes that a person’s individual knowledge can serve as a resource for other people’s learning. ( Scardamelia & Bereiter, 1994)

Approach

Systematic (KRO ? systems) ‘ the differential modes of operation in social and cognitive systems

Cognitive :

Social systems ( e.g. wiki)

thinks in terms of learning (internal) and knowledge building (external). Makes a distinction between internal (learning) and knowledge building (external).

See wikis as a social system.

attributes motivation to the perception of incongruities although acknowledges that motivational aspects are intrinsically linked to the cognitive and the socio-cultural, in particular, the cognitive and socio-cognitive processes can help to explain the motivational processes.

Influences

Luhmann, 1984 on systems p108 ‘ systems are dynamic – they develop over time and consist of operations. A system ceases when the mode of operation ceases. Such operations are defined as production of elements with the help of elements in the same system. This definition implies that systems are autopoietic and self-referential.

The environment can irritate. ‘The system cannot anticipate what will happen in the environment……. But after being irritated, a system may be able to select a limited amount of information available outside its borders. By operating on this information it reduces external complexity, establishes new elements and relations, and this increases its internal complexity’

Systems

· Biological

· Cognitive

· Social

communication without cognitions. Luhmann points out that systems are operationally closed, …… social and cognitive systems cannot directly correspond with each other’ but they can influence each other based on the concept of structural coupling.

In terms of this paper

Cognitive system is the wiki user/contributor

Social system is the wiki

P109 ‘ Social systems are structurally coupled with cognitive systems via language’ ( KRO for a wiki this is written)

And that processes of internalisation and externalisation allow for a crossing of the borders between internalisation and externalisation.

Externalisation

The user needs to be able to transfer internal knowledge to the wiki. After this process of externalisation the wiki exists independently from the person’ knowledge. In order to externalise the user has to deepen and clarify own knowledge (Flower and Hayes (1980) as well as Webb (1982). Therefore the process of externalisation leads to learning for the individual

Internalisation

If people internalise information from the wiki knowledge can develop which was formerly neither part of their personal knowledge nor part of the wiki’ i.e. p112 ‘ if people are able to infer new knowledge out of the knowledge they internalized through the work with the wiki and the knowledge they had before then leaning has occurred’ i.e.emergent knowledge.

Authors argue that this process of internalisation and externalisation’ is more than knowledge sharing’ it is built and if externalised to the wiki it is represented within the wiki

How do people internalise

Piagetian concepts - assimilation, accommodation and equilibrium

Assimilation - the way a person ‘understands new information on the basis of existing knowledge and then integrates it into prior knowledge’ i.e. the bits of information that fit with existing knowledge are added

Accomodation ‘people interact with new knowledge in a way that changes their knowledge’

When using a wiki assimilation and accommodation take place in the social systems ( the wiki)

Majchrzak, A., Wagner, C., & Yates, D. (2006) Corporate wiki users: results of a survey. Proceddings of WikiSym’06 -2006 International Symposium on Wikis 2006, 99-104.’ That there are ‘adders’ and ‘synthesisers’

Learning and knowledge building considered together

Internal assimilation

Internal accommodation

External assimilation

External accommodation

Motivational aspects of the model

Piaget – idea of equilibration

Luhmann – idea of irritation from outside a system

The effects of a lack of equilibration ( Piaget) or irritation ( system) depends on the valence of the topic. Figure on p118

KRO As with stress) there is an optimal level of incongruity. ( KRO too little incongruity and its not worth bothering about, too much incongruity and users give up) For any levels of incongruity between these extremes the cognitive conflict is higher more meaningful the topic.

(KRO remember this is a proposition that is not evidenced)

Collaboration and interaction

(KRO makes one think about what constitutes interaction here, - there is interaction with the knowledge but to what extent is there interaction with others)

Collaboration p211 “ Inter-individual knowledge transfer and collaborative knowledge building takes place when people have the opportunity to work with a wiki and internalize the information available in the wiki’ i.e. they have to integrate it ( either by assimilation or accommodation) into their own knowledge’

wiki, RE,

Shailey Minocha & Peter G. Thomas

Collaborative Learning in Wiki Environment: Experiences from a software engineering course.

New Review of Hypermedia and Multimedia, 13,2, 187-209

Pedagogical claims for the wiki

P190

‘allows for the generation of social constructivist scenarios wherein a group of learners collaboratively construct shared artifacts’

( KRO – an artifact implies a finished product. What aspects of the finished product influence learning?)

‘facilitates student collaboration via co-production of text and development of argument and concensus by communication of ideas through a shared online workspace’

(KRO I thought there were some methodological flaws – see later; more importantly I do not think that there is any evidence for concensus nor would I expect that the wiki to provide a way of reaching a concensus. When you write something to a wiki you are externalizing an idea as a product rather than offering up as an idea in progress . A discussion does just that it invites a different opinion whereas committing to a wiki does not.)

Purpose of collaboration

P195 in a RE context ‘ the collaboration involves discussing duplications, conflicts, and ambiguities with the aim of achieving an agreed set of unambiguous requirements’

p188

‘wiki can grow and evolve and therefore address pedagogical objectives such as ‘

student involvement

· group activity

· peer and tutor review

· knowledge sharing

· knowledge creation

· all from Minocha et al, 2007.

Design

Salmon’s 5 stage model influenced the design.

Used assessment as main design element ( Shared wiki 4-7 students)

TMA01

Papers about wikis

Guidance on using a wiki including for collaborative work, wiki-netiquette,

Ice- breaker using the wiki - add a small piece of biographical information, opt for a stakeholder role – seen as exchange of information stage of the Salmon model.

TMA02

Each student adds three requirements to the wiki from his/her chosen perspective

TMA03

Agree on a set of fit criteria ( KRO only time there is real sense of having to work together?)

Through the exercise on reflection ( see below)

Reflective activity

P196 ‘ Reflection is a strategy that facilitates learning ( Moon ,2000). It is the reexamination and reinterpretation of experiences and is central to effective learning and development.’ ( KRO inner language)

The course provided a reflective tool ( trigger questions) and asked students to apply it across 3 dimensions

Experience of using the wiki as a tool

Personal views of the course and collaboration in particular

Role of collaboration in RE. Requirements engineering)

Data sources

Sample of 40 reflective account ( from TMA03)

Discussion forum – no of messages = 40 for 117+ students)

Direct emails from students (15)

Direct emails from tutors (14)

Research questions

1. Did the wiki activities facilitate collaborative learning? 26 said tes, 5 to some extent 77.5%

(KRO rather an ambiguous formulation)

2. did the wiki activities enhance understanding of RE 75%

3. was reflection effective 95%

Findings

KRO findings based on a thematic analysis that was strange . Themes identified , then sub themes.

Also

Question of whther or not the responses were influenced by being part of the assessment.

Also

Not sure whether or not the findings relate directly to the themes.

Collaboration & learning

P201 ‘group knowledge quickly becomes aggregated in one place.’

Wiki is an inappropriate medium for discussion, lack of threading & time stamps

Wiki as a tool

Continual availability

Facilitative qualities ( used group discussion pages – although overall this discussion page was not considered the appropriate tool }

Cost savings

Traceability ( impoerant for assessment and for RE)

Tensions

Collaborative work and self pacing of the busy distance learner

P202 ‘ I organize my studying around my life NOW….. I’m being asked to organize my life around my studying’

P204 ‘ synchronous discussion medium for timely decision making’ (KRO producing a collaborative artifact inevitably requires this’

Navigation poor – always have to return to the root page no alerts ( now there is a facility)

No locking facility (KRO I think this is now available)