Advertisement

An approach for coaching collaboration based on difference recognition and participation tracking

  • María de los Ángeles Constantino-González
  • Daniel D. Suthers
Part of the Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning book series (CULS, volume 9)

Abstract: This chapter describes a new approach to coaching collaboration in a synchronous computer mediated learning context. Prior work on supporting collaboration has relied largely on comparing student discourse to models of collaborative discourse. Comparison of student work to expert solutions is prevalent in individual coaching paradigms. Although these approaches are valuable, our approach evaluates the potential contribution of tracking student participation during group problem solving and comparing students' individual and group solutions. Our theoretical motivation is that conflicts between individual and group solutions constitute learning opportunities, provided that students recognize and address these conflicts. The coach encourages such negotiation when differences are detected, and also encourages participation in other ways. Our evaluation relied primarily on expert judgement and secondarily on student reactions to the coach. Results show that the quality of the generated advice was good; however, other knowledge sources should be consulted to improve coverage of advice to a broader range of situations and advice types. This coaching approach could be applied in those learning tasks oriented towards the solution of a problem and in which structured representations of problem solutions exist.

Keywords

Collaborative Learning Knowledge Source Intelligent Tutor System Computer Support Collaborative Learn Advice Type 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abrami, P. C., & Bures, E. M. (1996). Computer Supported Collaborative Learning and Distance Education, Reviews of lead article. The American Journal of Distance Education, 10 (2), 37-42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ayala, G., & Yano, Y. (1996). Learner models for supporting awareness and collaboration in a CSCL environment. Proceedings of the Third International Conference of Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITS’96), Montreal, Canada, 158-167.Google Scholar
  3. Baghaei, N., & Mitrovic, A. (2005). COLLECT-UML: Supporting Individual and Collaborative Learning of UML class diagrams in a Constraint-Based Intelligent Tutoring System. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Knowledge-Based & Intelligent Information & Engineering Systems, Melbourne, Australia, 458-464.Google Scholar
  4. Baker, M. J., & Bielaczyc, K. (1995). Missed opportunities for learning in collaborative problem-solving interactions. In J. Greer (Ed. ), Proceedings of the AI-ED 95-World Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (pp. 210-217), Washington, DC, August 16-19. AACE.Google Scholar
  5. Baker, M. J., & Lund, K. (1996). Flexibly structuring the interaction in a CSCL environment. In P. Brna, A. Paiva & J. Self (Eds. ), Proceedings of the Euro-AIED Conference (European Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Education) (pp. 401-407), Lisbon, October.Google Scholar
  6. Barros, B., & Verdejo, F. M. (2000). Analyzing student interaction processes in order to improve collaboration. The DEGREE approach, International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 11, 221-241.Google Scholar
  7. Batini, C., Ceri, S., & Navathe, S. B. (1992). Conceptual Database Design: An Entity-Relationship Approach. Benjamin/Cummings, Redwood City, California.Google Scholar
  8. Batra, D., & Antony, S. R. (1994). Novice errors in conceptual database design. European Journal of Information Systems, 3(1), 57-69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brown, A. L., & Palincsar, A. S. (1989). Guided, cooperative learning and individual knowledge acquisition. In L. Resnick (Ed. ), Knowing, Learning and Instruction: Essays in Honor of Robert Glaser. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  10. Burton, R. R., & Brown, J. S. (1982). An investigation of computer coaching for informal learning activities. In D. Sleeman, & J. S. Brown (Eds. ), Intelligent Tutoring Systems (pp. 79-98). London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  11. Castaños, J. M., Morales, L. C., Tun, J. A., & Constantino, M. A. (2005, October). A coached Collaborative Learning Environment for Entity-Relationship Modeling: COLER, Poster Session presented at XXI Simposio Internacional de Computación en la Educación SOMECE 2005, Hermosillo, Sonora, México.Google Scholar
  12. Constantino-González, M. A. (2000). A Computer Coach to Support Synchronous Computer-Mediated Collaborative Learning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Monterrey Institute of Technology (ITESM) Campus Monterrey, Monterrey, N. L., México.Google Scholar
  13. Constantino-González, M. A., & Suthers, D. D. (2000). A Coached Collaborative Learning Environment for Entity-Relationship Modeling. In G. Gauthier, C. Frasson, & K. VanLehn (Eds. ), Intelligent Tutoring Systems, Proceedings of the 5th International Conference ITS-2000 (pp. 324-333). Berlín: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  14. Constantino-González, M. A., Suthers, D. D., & Icaza, J. (2001). Designing and Evaluating a Collaboration Coach: Knowledge and Reasoning. In J. D. Moore, C. L. Redfield, & W. L. Johnson (Eds. ). Artificial Intelligence in Education: AI-ED in the Wired and Wireless Future, Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (pp. 176-187). Amsterdam: IOS Press.Google Scholar
  15. Constantino-González, M. A., & Suthers, D. D. (2001). Coaching Collaboration by Comparing Solutions and Tracking Participation. In P. Dillenbourg, A. Eurelings, & K. Hakkarainen (Eds. ) European Perspectives on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, Proceedings of the First European Conference on CSCL(pp. 173-180). Netherlands: Universiteit Maastricht.Google Scholar
  16. Constantino-González, M. A., & Suthers, D. D. (2003). Automated Coaching of Collaboration based on Workspace Analysis: Evaluation and Implications for Future Learning Environments. In Proceedings of the 36th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-36), January 6-9, Wakoloa, Hawaii (CD-ROM), Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. (IEEE).Google Scholar
  17. Constantino-González, M. A., Suthers, D. D., & Escamilla, J. G. (2003). Coaching Web-based Collaborative Learning based on Problem Solution Differences and Participation. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 13(2-4), 263-299.Google Scholar
  18. Coronado-López, F. J. (2000). Diseño y desarrollo del módulo del profesor para COLER, Unpublished master’s thesis. Monterrey Institute of Technology (ITESM) Campus Monterrey, Monterrey, N. L. México.Google Scholar
  19. Corbett, A. T., Koedinger, K. R., & Anderson, J. R. (1997). Intelligent tutoring systems. In M. G. Helander, T. K. Landauer, & P. Prabhu (Eds. ), Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction (2nd ed., pp. 849-874). Amsterdan, The Netherlands: Elsevier Science.Google Scholar
  20. Dimitracopoulou, A., & Petrou, A. (2005). Advanced collaborative distance learning systems for young students: Design issues and current trends on new cognitive and metacognitive tools, THEMES in Education International Journal.Google Scholar
  21. Dolonen, J. A., Chen, W., & Mǿrch, A. I. Integrating software agents with FLE3. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning2003(CSCL 2003)(pp. 157-161). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  22. Fesakis, G., Petrou, A., & Dimitracopoulou, A. (2004). Collaboration activity function: an interaction analysis tool for computer supported collaborative learning activities. Proceedings of the 4th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT 2004), 196-200.Google Scholar
  23. Gokhale, A. A. (1995). Collaborative Learning Enhances Critical Thinking, Journal of Technology Education, 7(1), 22-30.Google Scholar
  24. Gordon, A., & Hall, L. (1998). A Collaborative Learning Environment for Data Modeling. In Proceedings of the Eleventh International Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Symposium Conference (pp. 158-162). Menlo Park, Calif.: AAAI Press.Google Scholar
  25. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1994). Learning Together and Alone, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  26. Les, J., Cumming, G., & Finch, S. (1999). Agent systems for diversity in human learning. In S. P. Lajioe, & M. Vivet (Eds. ) Artificial Intelligence in Education: Open Learning Environments: New Computer Technologies to Support Learning, Exploration and Collaboration: Proceedings of the AI-ED 99 Conference (pp. 13-20). Amsterdan: IOS Press.Google Scholar
  27. McManus, M. M., & Aiken, R. M. (1995). Monitoring Computer Based Collaborative Problem Solving, Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 6(4), 308-336.Google Scholar
  28. Muehlenbrock, M., & Hoppe, H. U. (1999). Computer supported interaction analysis of group problem solving. In C. Hoadley, & J. Roschelle (Eds. ) Proceedings of the Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning CSCL-99 (pp. 398-405), Palo Alto, CA. December. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  29. Okamoto, T., Inaba, A., & Hasaba, Y. (1995). The Intelligent Learning Support System on the Distributed Cooperative Environment. In J. Greer (Ed. ), Proceedings of Artificial Intelligence in Education AI-ED’95, August, Washington, D. C., 588.Google Scholar
  30. Petrou, A., & Dimitracopoulou, A. (2003). Is synchronous computer mediated collaborative problem solving ‘justified’ only when by distance? Teachers’ point of views and interventions with co-located groups during every day class activities. In H. U. Hoppe (Ed. ), Proceedings of the Computer Support for Collaborative Learning Conference: Designing for Change in Networked Learning Environments, CSCL 2003, June, Bergen, Norway, 449-455.Google Scholar
  31. Ram, S., & Ramesh, V. (1998). Collaborative Conceptual Schema Design: A Process Model and a Prototype System, ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 16(4), 347-371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Senge, P. (1994). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization, Currency Doubleday.Google Scholar
  33. Slavin, R. E. (1995). Cooperative Learning (2nd ed. ). Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  34. Soller, A., Martinez, A., Jermann, P., & Muehlenbrock, M. (2005). From Mirroring to Guiding: A Review of State of the Art Technology for Supporting Collaborative Learning. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 15, 261-290.Google Scholar
  35. Suraweera, P., & Mitrovic, A. (2004). An Intelligent Tutoring System for Entity Relationship Modelling, International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 14(3-4), 375-417.Google Scholar
  36. Suthers, D. D., & Jones, D. (1997). An Architecture for Intelligent Collaborative Educational Systems. In Proceedings of the 8th World Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED’97), August, Kobe, 55-62.Google Scholar
  37. Suthers, D. D. Toth, E. E., & Weiner, A. (1997). An integrated approach to implementing collaborative inquiry in the classroom. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL’97), Toronto, 272-279.Google Scholar
  38. Suthers, D. (2005). Collaborative Knowledge Construction through Shared Representations. In Proceedings of the 38th Hawai’i International Conference on the System Sciences (HICSS-38), January, Waikoloa, Hawai’i(CD-ROM), Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. (IEEE).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • María de los Ángeles Constantino-González
    • 1
  • Daniel D. Suthers
    • 2
  1. 1.ITESM Campus LagunaTorreónMexico
  2. 2.University of Hawai`i at ManoaHonoluluUSA

Personalised recommendations