Book review dillenbourgh

The book emphasizes that in collaborative learning environments particular forms of interaction are needed to trigger the desired learning mechanisms. There is, however, no guarantee that those interactions will actually occur. Hence, a general concern across the book is to develop ways of increasing the probability that they will happen. The chapters illustrate these points relatively well. Particularly, the book focuses on collaboration between two or a few human or artificial agents for a well-defined learning or problem-solving task.

In chapter 2, Littleton and Hakkinen outline some of the theoretical approaches currently informing the analysis of learning interactions and demonstrate how the study of collaborative activity in computer-based settings can enhance the understanding of the processes of productive interaction.

Chapter 3 discusses relations between grounding, collaboration and learning. According to Baker, Hansen, Joiner and Traum, grounding is the process by which the participants of a collaborative learning task maintain some degree of mutual understanding. They illustrate the perspective with reference to a particular computer-mediated collaborative learning situation in the domain of physics.

Chapters 4 and 5 focus on multi-agent learning. First, Weiss and Dillenbourg in chapter 4 provide a general characterization of multi-agent learning from two different perspectives: the perspective of single-agent learning (the ``machine learning perspective'') and the perspective of human-human collaborative learning (the ``psychological perspective''). They also offer a brief guide to agents and multi-agents systems as studied in artificial intelligence, and suggest directions for future research on multi-agent learning. In chapter 5, Joiner, Issroff and Demiris describe some differences between multi-agent systems and cognitive psychology. The chapter reviews recent research concerning the analysis of multi-robot systems and research on human-human computer-supported collaborative learning and illustrates how researchers in both areas can benefit from each other's fields.

The relation between dialogue with oneself and with a peer is addressed by Ploetzer, Dillenbourg, Preier and Traum in chapter 6 and by Nguifo, Baker and Dillenbourg in chapter 7. They compare the basic operators used to model the co-construction of knowledge through dialogue and those used in machine-learning research to model individual learning. These chapters are rather modest in their scope and in their results. Their modesty has, however, to be compared with the width of the gap that separates cognitive psychology and DAI (Distributed Artificial Intelligence).

One of the weakness of the book is that it focuses only on cognitive psychology and neglects the socio-affective aspects of collaborative learning. Social and affective aspects are crucial to understanding human-human collaboration. Yet, the editor says that this was intentional,

This choice does not imply that social and affective aspects are not crucial to understanding human-human collaboration, but that the cognitive layer is probably the easiest to start with when engaging with computer scientists.

)'Regan 2003

Kerry O’Regan

Emotion and E-Learning

Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks

Vol 7,3 78-92

Argues for the centrality of emotion whilst learning

Considers emotion from a variety of perspectives

Individual phenomena – experiential knowing is part of the human condition

· Darwin – mechanisms for adaptation and survival

· Behaviorist – states, elicited by ‘ the delivery, omission or termination of rewarding or punishing stimuli’ (Roll, E., The Brain and Emotion, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1984.) i.e. emotions as instrumental in influencing choices

· P79 ‘ emotion as some combination ( with various emphases and sequences) of physiological, psychological and psychomotor components.

Socio-cultural

· Goleman ‘things we catch from each other ‘as though they were some kind of social virus’

· Denzin (Denzin, N. On Understanding Emotion, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1984) ‘social acts involving interactions with self and interactions with others’ Averill ‘a transitory social role’

· Damasio P79 ‘ most recent developments are in the field of neurobiology) Damasio -emotions ‘ retain a primacy that subtly pervades our mental life ….. having a say on how the rest of the brain and cognition go about their business’

What is an emotion and what is not?

How to define a functional relationship between emotion and learning?

RQS

· What emotions are associated with studying online

· What are the teaching-learning contexts of these emotions?

· How do they relate to student learning

· What are the practical implications for teaching and learning online

Method

P82 ‘ explores in qualitative terms the lived experience of students learning online particularly in relation to its social dimensions

11 volunteers, 6, mature, studying a variety of online courses

interviewed , interviewer selected specific topics logging on, following instructions, accessing resources and they were provided with a checklist of emotions, which the interviewer referred to

Findings

Frustration ( all 11 Ps) – p84 ‘appeared as the most pervasive emotion’ cumulative aspect of minor things’ broken links, disruption to service, lack of clarity about navigation ‘ the instructions were quite simple, but the application of them seemed quite difficult’, locating oneself, p84 ‘ rambling or superficial nature of unmoderated online discussion’ ‘ I think a whole group of people who really don’t have a better understanding of the issues than you do, all offering up opinions and there doesn’t seem to be very much comes out of that’ p86 ‘ a general desire to get things done quickly with a minimum expenditure of unnecessary time’ ‘ I don’t know what they look like, where they live, who they really are’

Frustration –other workers

Hara and King p81 and 82 ‘ identify considerable frustration experienced by students with the technical aspects of learning online, with interpreting and following instructions and with managing the enormous amounts of email

Fear, anxiety, apprehension ( many Ps)

Submitting assignments – has it got through? – lack of control over process

Prospect of public exposure of learning work to people who were anonymous

Shame/embarrassment (many)

Online exposure inadequacies and mistakes there for everyone to see

Enthusiasm/excitement

P87 ‘ it was quite exciting that we were so technically advanced’, being able to learn with other people. Other commented that they had found f-to-f more exciting

Pride

In assignments well done and having peers compliment p88 ‘ in the online environment with its characteristics for publicness and permanence , the potential for pride is very great’

Conclusion

Makes a number of recommendations made for minimizing negative emotions

In terms of collaborative learning

P89 ‘processes are put in place for students to have an indication of the actual make up of the audience for any submissions they post online; provision is made for class members to become known to each other as real people with their own idiosyncratic interests and characteristics’

‘where possible, online communication is augmented with face to face meetings’ ( KRO why? Author did not say , KRO is it always appropriate?)

Kirwood, Price (2005), 2008, Kirkwwod 2008

Adrian Kirkwood* and Linda Price

Learners and learning in the twenty-first century: what do we know about students’ attitudes towards and experiences of information and communication technologies that will help us design courses?

Studies in Higher Education Vol. 30, No. 3, June 2005, pp. 257–274

Method Range of Survey data at the OU

‘Learning can be enhanced when innovations take into account not only the characteristics of the technology, but also the pedagogic design, the context within which learning takes place, student characteristics and their prior experience, and familiarity with the technologies involved. So, although ICTs can enable new forms of teaching and learning to take place, they cannot ensure that effective and appropriate learning outcomes are achieved. It is not technologies, but educational purposes, that must provide the lead. Students need to understand not only how to work with ICTs, but why it can be of benefit to do so.’

‘The OU has not sought to replicate or copy traditional classroom-based education. Instead it has aimed to create a different—but equivalent—educational experience.’

‘So, students need to know not only what they are supposed to do, but also why they are expected to do it and how it will contribute to their learning. Otherwise ‘learner control’ will prove to be counterproductive, as it can promote the adoption of ‘unfocussed and inconclusive’ approaches (Laurillard, 1998).’

‘Since participants do not have visual or auditory contact with each other, contributions are not overtly influenced by preconceived notions or prejudices based upon accent or physical attributes, although any written communication can present cues about the social and gender characteristics of the writer (see, for example, Mann & Stewart, 2000). Reserved individuals need not be intimidated by the speed of response or tone of voice of other contributors. Hence learners are able to participate in a manner that is more considered and reflective than is normally possible in face-to-face sessions. However, it is a different form of discourse from face-to-face communication, and most new students have limited experience of its use and need guidance.’

Mann, C. & Stewart, C. (2000) Internet communication and qualitative research (London, Sage).

‘Some would argue that interpersonal communication, cooperation and collaboration are essential elements of higher education in the early twenty-first century (see, for example, Beaty et al., 2002).’

Beaty, L., Hodgson, V., Mann, S. & McConnell, D. (Conveners) (2002) Manifesto: Towards e- quality in networked e-learning in higher education. Available online at: http://csalt.lancs.ac.uk/ esrc/manifesto.htm (accessed 4 August 2003).

‘The most important point to conclude from the studies presented in this article is that the medium itself is not the most important factor in any educational programme— what really matters is how it is creatively exploited and constructively aligned. The educational benefits that students perceive as gains from using ICT are more significant than the intrinsic characteristics of any particular medium.’

Adrian Kirkwood* and Linda Price (2008)

Assessment and student learning: a fundamental relationship and the role of information and communication technologies

Open Learning Vol. 23, No. 1, February 2008, 5–16

‘An individual’s conception of learning will determine their expectations of what should happen in any educational situation and influence the approach to learning they adopt for specific tasks or activities. These are discussed in the following sections.’

‘Hence an important task for staff is to engender in students an appropriate conception of teaching and learning and to provide an educational rationale for learning activities. This is especially pertinent when teachers expect learners to cooperate or collaborate with others through’

‘it is how they will be assessed (or think that they will be assessed) on the task that determines an individual’s approach (Laurillard, 1979).’

‘Students’ expectations can be as important as the actual requirements for any test or assign- ment. Sambell and McDowell (1998) argue that students participate in the construction of the ‘hidden curriculum’ through their individual interpretations, perceptions and actions, which in turn reflect their orientations, prior experiences and expectations.’

‘Further, there is a relationship between the approach to teaching adopted and the approach to learning taken up by students (Lindblom-Ylänne, Trigwell, Nevgi, & Ashwin, 2006; Trigwell, Prosser, & Waterhouse, 1999).’

A. Kirkwood

Getting it from the Web: why and how online resources are used by independent undergraduate learners

Journal of Computer Assisted Learning; Oct2008, Vol. 24 Issue 5, p372-382,

Method Telephone Interview study based on volunteers from one of 4 courses two science two in Health and social care. Formal assessment requirement varied between courses.

Requirement for web activity ‘This article reports an interview study that aimed to investigate why and how independent learners use resources on the World Wide Web (subsequently referred to as the Web) while undertaking their normal coursework. The investigation was concerned not only with the academic context of courses being studied, but also any personal, domestic and employment-related experiences and circumstances that were pertinent.’

‘Insufficient attention appears to have been paid to two key aspects relating to students gaining access to and making use of Web resources. First, what factors are likely to encourage (or discourage) students in their use of Internet information resources? Second, how do learners develop the information literacy skills necessary to make effective use of the multitude of resources available via the Internet? Too little concern for the educational context and rationale for students’ use of online resources has resulted in disappointing levels of access and use by learners (Rowley et al. 2002).’

Rowley J., Banwell L., Childs S., Gannon-Leary P., Lonsdale R., Urquhart C. & Armstrong C. (2002) User behaviour in relation to electronic information services within the UK higher education academic community. Journal of Educa- tional Media 27, 107–122.

‘While all participants made some use of the Internet for social, domestic or work-related purposes, the extent to which each used the Internet for their studies seemed to be subject to various factors. Some of these acted as an incentive or approach factor, while others were a disincentive or avoidance factor. Most of the students mentioned several factors that coexisted con- currently, reflecting the complexity of their personal circumstances.’

‘The relative impact of factors in combination was shown in the four illustrative examples earlier. Although no single factor was predominant, the influence of assessment was strong in many instances, for example, in the different responses to technical difficulties encountered by Carol and Eve, and the selective attention to course elements reported by most participants.’

not technologies per se, but a wide range of contextual factors (personal as well as educational), that are important in determining whether and how students use Web resources in their learning

Open Learning 2008 Vol 23, no 1

Hopkins, Gibson, Ros i Solé, Savvides, and Starkey from Spain and the United Kingdom, who provide an overview of research on the subject of interaction. They examine the ways in which asynchronous computer-mediated communication can provide student–student and student–tutor interaction that leads to higher-order thinking and the social construction of knowledge. Learners reportedly value the opportunity to interact with their peers and tutors in online conferences but, in practice, tend to post individual messages with no reference to other postings. Conferences, therefore, tend to consist of serial monologues rather than the types of interactive discussion that would lead to the social construction of meaning. Through an examination of the effect of social presence, the role of the tutor, and the impact of task type, the authors conclude that asynchronous computer conferencing is not only welcomed by most students, but also that the ‘social presence’ facilitated by this mode can improve student satisfaction, engagement and retention.

Wosnitza & Volet (2005)

Marold Wosnitza & Simone Volet (2005)

Origin, direction and impact of emotions in social online learning.

Learning and Instruction, 15, 449-464

Notes

· KRO - Concept of emotional arousal can be questioned

· Authors talk in terms of emotions ‘ directed at’ e.g. p456 task directed emotions, but surely using their framework the appraisal would be the causal agent. It is inherent in the description of the student reactions but it is not described in that way. Also talk in terms of emotions as a trigger.

· Multiple sources for emotion

· Interventions (teachers) depend on source and need to be able to recognize the source ( ? link to DP work)

· See individuals as p455 ‘mediating emotions’ (KRO link to frontal)

· How does conflict fit into this and in fact any work from any author about motivation? Although note authors do not talk specifically in terms of motivation

· Authors never found any evidence of positive emotions ‘ directed at’ the technology

· Claim that emoticons are common but do not evidence

· In social learning case study the participation record of others was a key factor of emotional ?arousal( KRO link to task relevance and values)

describe how within a group a group course of action is discussed; is this how emotion links to collaborative?

Concepts

Identifies the following as concepts that have developed around socio-emotional experience in online environments

· Social presence

· Sociability (Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P. A., & Jochems, W. (2002). The sociability of computer-supported collaborative learning environments. Journal of Education Technology and Society, 5(1), 8e22.)

· Social-emotional affordances Volet, S., & Wosnitza, M. (2004). Social affordances and students’ engagement in cross-national online learning: an exploratory study. Journal of Research in International Education, 3(1), 5e29.

· Distributed emotions

however

P450 ‘ mediating role of students’ appraisals of online learning activities and the process of emotion arousal remains less well known.

Emotion

Agrees that the literature on emotions is very diverse but claims that p450 ‘ but only a few of the extant theories form the basis of research on emotions related to learning ‘

Appraisal

Base their approach on appraisal theory

Frijda, N. H. (1986). The emotions. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Lazarus, R. S., & Lazarus, B. N. (1994). Passion and reason: Making sense of our emotions. New York: Oxford University Press.

Ellsworth, P. C., & Scherer, K. R. (2003). Appraisal processes in emotion. In R. J. Davidson,

H. Goldsmith, & K. R. Scherer (Eds.), Handbook of the affective sciences (pp. 572e595). New York:

Oxford University Press.

They conceptualise appraisal operating at two levels

The primary level involves an assessment of familiarity, degree of challenge, which are considered alongside relevance to personal goals and interests. More specifically things that are familiar and not too challenging do not arouse much emotion whilst the unfamiliar and challenging lead to anxiety.

(KRO but surely these only relate to the task?, technology rather than the interaction. Also Jones described in more in terms of previous experience)

The secondary level is concerned with evaluating o the appropriateness of the different courses of action available to the learner.

In this way, the emotional valence and the appraisal of action will impact on learning although students will vary as to whether any action taken stems from a positive or a negative valence.

P455 ‘ their arousal ( emotions) is an appraisal process triggered by a perceived potential harm or benefit for the learner in the learning situation’ the reason for the arousal being linked to an attribution process.

Emotion type

Get the following as a source for another approach

Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Titz, W., & Perry, R. (2002). Academic emotions in students’ self-regulated learning and achievement: a program of qualitative and quantitative research. Educational Psychologist, 37(2), 91e105.

After a review of the various methods available an particularly the timing of data collection, they concluded that a multiple method approach is desirable

Evidence their claims about appraisal based on two case studies

1. Maths class, 8^th graders, thinking aloud and simulated recall

2. University students, online course, transcripts of CMC and questionnaire.

Based on case study 2 p457 ‘ in summary, the analysis of social online learning situations reveals a range of other directed emotions in addition to self, task, and technology directed emotions. Emotions generated in social online environments are not different in nature from those generated in face-to-face ( they didn’t convincingly evidence this claim ( ? rather assumed) therefore (thesis will question this). What is different in online learning is the fact that emotions are expressed via technology ( how? No specific information) and the disclosure of emotions is of necessity voluntary ( thesis will not make this assumption). In contrast face to face situations offer the possibility of detecting emotions through facial expression and bodily language which may not always be voluntary disclosures of emotions’

The impact of emotions on learning and the significance for teacher intervention

P458 A number of studies have shown that ‘ when education based on computer conferencing fails, it is usually because there has not been a responsible teaching presence an appropriate leadership and direction exercised ‘ ( G, A & A, 2000, p96)

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment:

computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2e3), 87e105.

The process of emotion arousal is triggered by an activity that presents different degrees of challenge or familiarity to the learner and also difference degrees of relevance .

sw

Authors claim that appraisal and emotional arousal processes be used as conceptual tools to illustrate the impact of emotions on the individual students learning process.

The authors provide two case studies that ‘s stress the importance of teachers’ understanding the processes that trigger negative emotions in order to intervene effectively’

But

‘if emotions are not spontaneously disclosed, as is necessary in online learning ( a point the thesis will consider without making prior assumption) , teachers are unable to appreciate their significance on the learning process. Teachers also need to understand the full complexity, as evidenced from empirical work of the impact of student’s emotions on their motivation and further work.

Authors review of method

Considered in terms of a distinction between methods that collect evidence during learning and those that collect after.

(1) survey , specifically of emotions ( Pekrun paper) Emotions bring draw attention to the problematic nature of disclosure particularly when emotional experience is salient. Process of emotional experience is not revealed ( KRO ?process of empathizing with the experience revealed by the DP work ) KRO retrospective and therefore surely involves attribution

(2) observation

(i) Facial expression - FACs – ( details on this method from old notes ). For online it would require video recording ( with the attendant problems of that method)

(ii) Content analysis , inobtrusive, but maybe privacy issues. Inference and interpretation although methodologies have been developed

(3) emotion diary

(4) simulated recall – present some record of the learning process (KRO not available as a continuous record it can be challenging . For group work there are complex issues, particularly ethical

(5) Practitioner records

P454 ‘overall the methods that are applicable to social online learning provide only limited (KRO for thesis one aim is to extend these) access to the complex set of emotions experienced during the learning process.’ Each of these methods has limitations. When used in combination these methods provide a more comprehensive picture of the emotion arousal process and its impact on the learning process ( actually it doesn’t, as described, tell you anything about the learning process)

J & J (2005) - volition ( emotion and learning)

Hanna Jarvenjo & Sanna Jarvela (2005)

How students describe the sources of their emotional and motivational experiences during the learning process: A qualitative approach

Learning and Instruction 15, 465-480

Introduction

P466 ‘ In learning situations, individuals make personal appraisals of the situation’s meaning based on their former knowledge and experiences ( Fredrickson, 2001). ( from page 477 Emotional experiences arise when the students interpret the situation and begin to compare it to their former experiences, and to construct personal meanings (Fredrickson, 2001).These appraisals along with situational factors and the individual’s interpretations of them arouse emotions, which then need to be controlled, at least to some extent, to ensure meaningful goal directed behaviour’

‘Research on emotions has shown that students experience a rich variety of emotions in academic settings ( Schutz & De Cuir, 2002).

Schutz, D. H., & DeCuir, J. T. (2002). Inquiry on emotions in education. Educational Psychologist, 37(2), 125e134.

Results show that academic emotions are significantly related to student motivation, learning strategies, cognitive resources, self-regulation and academic achievement (Pekrun, Goetz, Titz, & Perry, 2002)

Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Titz, W., & Perry, R. P. (2002). Academic emotions in students’ self-regulated

learning and achievement: a program of qualitative and quantitative research. Educational

Psychologist, 37(2), 91e105.

Also, not only do the emotions themselves vary, but also their sources. Learning situations instigate a variety of self-referenced, task-related and social emotions. However, even though there is a lot of research on the effects of emotional factors on classroom learning (see, e.g., Mayring & von Rhoeneck, 2003), there is hardly any research on these issues in technology-based classroom learning contexts.

Aim

1. The aim of this study was to identify the sources of emotional experiences in computer-supported inquiry learning. Specifically, we analysed the reasons the students give as sources of their emotional experiences

2. Another aim of the study was to analyze how the case students expressed and controlled their emotions in actual learning situations. by combining the interviews with the video data uur purpose was to illustrate the aspects of students’ behaviour that are not readily observable,

Framework – volition how is it used to strengthen motivation that in turn backs up goal-directed behaviours.

Learning context

Computer – supported inquiry projects in literature taking place over 12-24 lessons of 75 min duration based in a conventional Finnish classroom context. Students aged 12-15, 7 boys and 11 girls

Forum for knowledge construction discussion

Method

Interviews– students own attributions regarding the source of their emotions obtained through semi structured interviews

All 18 Students asked to describe their goals , learning strategies, interpretations of the learning environment and self-related beliefs and feelings during semi-structured interviews.

In the first phase of the data driven analysis, students’ different kinds of descriptions of their emotional expressions were identified. After several repeated coding sessions, five coding categories were formulated based on the dialectics of data and theory (Miles & Huberman, 1994). The categories were self, task, performance, context, and social (see Table 1).

Video data and case descriptions ( 2 students one boy and one girl

Process-orientated data collection. Working processes videotaped during ten lessons.

When the researcher was familiar with the data, she looked again at the videotapes with the transcriptions and wrote specific descriptions of the students’ emotional and motivational expressions and volitional behaviour. Finally, the descriptions of the two case students were made. Also, the case students’ interview data from the same project were used to complement the case descriptions

Findings

Interview data

Emotions attributed to

self (37%), context (32%), task(12%), performance(11%) social (8%)

What follows are some relevant extracts from the interview data – note p474 ‘students’ descriptions often included more than one source for their experienced emotions’

The self-category included descriptions of experiences that derive from the students’ former endeavours, their individual interests or general thoughts concerning the situation, as well as their personal motivational beliefs about themselves when confronted with the current learning context

Context in Example 7 in which the task requires writing and sharing the created theory in the learning environment and Student 7 does not understand how commenting on the other students’ work in the computer-supported learning environment helps him with his own project

The contextual element e the implemented inquiry learning model e emphasizes collaboration and sharing, and leads the student to situations where she has to share her ideas with other students. In any case, the main source for the student’s negative emotion is social instead of contextual, since she emphasizes the interaction with her classmates. The student feels anxious when the other students can read her notes in the computer-supported learning environment. The main source for the emotional experience is social although the situation was created by the inquiry model.

Combining interview data with video data

In the descriptions that follow the focus is on the expression of the emotions and how control of these emotional experiences varied in the different phases of the learning project and between the case students.

Despite the fact that for both these students 38% ( Ville) and 37%(Anna) of emotions were attributed to self, Anna talked about her emotional experiences in the interviews approximately as much as Ville, and her answers included emotional descriptions in all categories, compared to Ville’s, who did not have any performance descriptions there were some contrasts when it came to looking at the video data.

Ville ( male student) ‘ he expresses his non-task orientation and frustration by shaking his head and talking to himself e.g. non, non, no . “he lays his head on his desk and mumbles to himself

Anna ( female student) ‘almost never expresses her feelings by talking or using gestures

Conclusions

‘The cases of Anna and Ville illustrate the importance of volitional control. Anna had good self-regulation skills and she managed to control her emotional reactions and action towards the goal during the whole project. The analyses of the interviews and video data showed that she was able to highlight the motivational aspects of the task, as can be seen in Example 14, and she also seemed to be able to maintain focus and effort toward the goals despite distractions.

Ville’s working improved after he managed to control his emotions. When the goal became clearer, he was able to better regulate his actions. At the end of the project he seemed to take more responsibility for his own learning, and even if he still expressed his emotions and got distracted from time to time, he managed to return to work after the distractions much more easily.

‘Anna and Ville’s cases demonstrate how emotions can be controlled during the learning process. As Ville showed during the first part of the project, if the emotions overcome the control efforts, learning and cognitive actions become impossible. Cognitive actions may also indicate emotional control, as can be seen in Ville’s Example 14, where writing the computer notes is used as both a cognitive strategy and for controlling the emotional state.’

Learning through discussion

In this study there were surprisingly few responses in the social-category, even though the pedagogical model and computer-supported learning environment emphasized collaboration and knowledge sharing. It seems that social sources for emotional experiences are difficult to investigate and identify from the data, even though students seem to recognize the social aspects of the learning situation. It could be that emotions caused by social sources are so private that students do not want to disclose them.