Promoting Effective Peer Interaction in an Intelligent Collaborative Learning System

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1452)


Placing students in a group and assigning them a task does not guarantee that the students will engage in effective collaborative learning behavior. The collaborative learning model described in this paper identifies the specific characteristics exhibited by effective collaborative learning teams, and based on these characteristics, suggests strategies for promoting effective peer interaction. The model is designed to help an intelligent collaborative learning system recognize and target group interaction problem areas. Once targeted, the system can take actions to help students collaborate more effectively with their peers, maximizing individual student and group learning.


Collaborative Learning Student Model Learning Team Social Grounding Group Conversation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Blumenfeld, P., Marx, R., Soloway, E., & Krajcik, J. (1996). Learning with peers: From small group cooperation to collaborative communities. Educational Researcher, 25(8),37–40.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brown, A. & Palincsar, A. (1989). Guided, cooperative learning and individual knowledge acquisition. In L. Resnick (Ed.), Knowledge, learning and instruction (pp. 307–336), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bruffee, K. (1993). Collaborative learning. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bull, S. & Broady, E. (1997). Spontaneous peer tutoring from sharing student models. Proceedings of the 8th World Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AI-ED 97), Kobe, Japan, 143–150.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Burton, M., Brna, P., & Treasure-Jones, T. (1997). Splitting the collaborative atom. Proceedings of the 8th World Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AI-ED 97), Kobe, Japan, 135–142.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chan, T.W. & Baskin, A. (1988). Studying with the prince: The computer as a learning companion. Proceedings of the ITS’ 88 Conference, Montreal, Canada, 194–200.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Deutsch, M. (1962). Cooperation and trust: Some theoretical notes. In M. Jones (Ed.) Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (pp. 275–320). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dillenbourg, P., Baker, M., Blaye, A., & O’Malley, C. (1995). The evolution of research on collaborative learning. In H. Spada and P. Reinmann (Eds.), Learning in Humans and Machines, Elsevier Science.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Goodman, B., Soller, A., Linton, F., & Gaimari, R. (1997). Encouraging student reflection and articulation using a learning companion. Proceedings of the 8th World Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AI-ED 97), Kobe, Japan, 151–158.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jarboe, S. (1996). Procedures for enhancing group decision making. In B. Hirokawa and M. Poole (Eds.), Communication and Group Decision Making (pp. 345–383). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Johnson, D., Johnson, R., & Holubec, E. (1990). Circles of learning: Cooperation in the classroom (3rd ed.). Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Koschmann, T., Kelson, A., Feltovich, P., & Barrows, H. (1996). Computer-supported problem-based learning. In T. Koschmann (Ed.), CSCL: Theory and Practice of an Emerging Paradigm (pp. 83–124). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    McManus, M, & Aiken, R. (1995). Monitoring computer-based problem solving. Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 6(4), 307–336.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Robertson, J. (1997). BetterBlether: An educational communication tool. Unpublished undergraduate honours dissertation, Departments of Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Soller, A. (1997). Toward an intelligent CSCL communication interface. Proceedings of AI-ED 97 Workshop IV, Kobe, Japan, 94–95.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Soller, A., Linton, F., Goodman, B., & Gaimari, R. (1996). [Videotaped study: 3 groups of 4–5 students each solving software system design problems using Object Modeling Technique during a one week course at The MITRE Institute]. Unpublished raw data.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Teasley, S. & Roschelle, J. (1993). Constructing a joint problem space. In S. Lajoie & S. Derry (Eds.), Computers as cognitive tools (pp. 229–257). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Webb, N. (1992). Testing a theoretical model of student interaction and learning in small groups. In R. Hertz-Lazarowitz and N. Miller (Eds.), Interaction in Cooperative Groups: The Theoretical Anatomy of Group Learning (pp. 102–119). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The MITRE CorporationBedford

Personalised recommendations