20,475 research outputs found
A framework to analyze argumentative knowledge construction in computer-supported collaborative learning
Computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) is often based on written argumentative discourse of learners, who discuss their perspectives on a problem with the goal to acquire knowledge. Lately, CSCL research focuses on the facilitation of specific processes of argumentative knowledge construction, e.g., with computer-supported collaboration scripts. In order to refine process-oriented instructional support, such as scripts, we need to measure the influence of scripts on specific processes of argumentative knowledge construction. In this article, we propose a multi-dimensional approach to analyze argumentative knowledge construction in CSCL from sampling and segmentation of the discourse corpora to the analysis of four process dimensions (participation, epistemic, argumentative, social mode)
The Evidence Hub: harnessing the collective intelligence of communities to build evidence-based knowledge
Conventional document and discussion websites provide users with no help in assessing the quality or quantity of evidence behind any given idea. Besides, the very meaning of what evidence is may not be unequivocally defined within a community, and may require deep understanding, common ground and debate. An Evidence Hub is a tool to pool the community collective intelligence on what is evidence for an idea. It provides an infrastructure for debating and building evidence-based knowledge and practice. An Evidence Hub is best thought of as a filter onto other websites â a map that distills the most important issues, ideas and evidence from the noise by making clear why ideas and web resources may be worth further investigation. This paper describes the Evidence Hub concept and rationale, the breath of user engagement and the evolution of specific features, derived from our work with different community groups in the healthcare and educational sector
Recommended from our members
Scientific literacy through co-inquiry based on non-formal and informal learning
This paper presents a collaborative research on scientific citizenship developed by the Open University UK (OU) through the weSPOT project for inquiry based learning and the Universidade do Estado da Bahia (UNEB) responsible for coordinating the Telecentros.BR training programme for Digital Inclusion in Brazil. The European weSPOT project (2013-2015) is a working environment with social, personal and open technologies for inquiry based learning (IBL). The Telecentros.BR training programme (2013-2014) is a non-credit online course supported by the Brazil Government, whose participants are more than 2000 young educators in diverse areas with low access to digital technology. The role of these young educators is to promote better use of ICT and support the Telecentro.BRâs projects created by the communities for their development in various dimensions. The objective of this research is to create a framework for applying collaborative inquiry to scaffold citizenâs scientific skills through digital technologies. This framework, drawn on qualitative and quantitative study, synthesizes key abilities related to multiple literacies to foster scientific skills in the digital age of open education, open science and open citizenship
Recommended from our members
Proceedings ICPW'07: 2nd International Conference on the Pragmatic Web, 22-23 Oct. 2007, Tilburg: NL
Proceedings ICPW'07: 2nd International Conference on the Pragmatic Web, 22-23 Oct. 2007, Tilburg: N
Recommended from our members
A debate dashboard to enhance on-line knowledge sharing
Purpose â Web 2.0 technologies have radically modified the way in which knowledge is created, managed and shared, improving productivity and accelerating innovation processes for the enterprises. These technologies have allowed enterprises to produce knowledge, leverage collective intelligence and build social capital on a scale that was unimaginable a few years ago. In this paper we focus on a particular kind of web-based collaborative platforms known as argument mapping tools and we discuss the main barriers to the adoption of them. Literature has proved that these argument mapping tools provide large and small and medium enterprise with several advantages, but nevertheless, they have low level adoption. In this paper we explore new technological solutions to support the adoption of argument mapping tools. In particular, we propose the design of a Debate Dashboard to provide visual feedback to support online deliberation. These visual feedback aims at compensating the loss of information due to the mediation of the technology. The Debate Dashboard is composed of a set of suitable visualization tools that have been selected on the basis of a literature review of the visualization tools.
Design/methodology/approach - We propose a literature review of existing visualization tools. Building on the literature review we selected thirty visualization tools, which have been classified on the basis of the kind of feedback they are able to provide. We identify three classes of feedback: Community feedback (identikit of users), Interaction feedback (about how users interact) and Absorption feedback (about generated content and its organization). We distilled the Debate Dashboard features by building on results of a literature review on Web 2.0 tools for data visualization. As output of literature review we selected six visualization tools. We consider these selected tools as a sort of starting point. Indeed, our aim is the improvement of them through the addition of further features and functions in order to make them more effective in providing feedback.
Originality/value â Our paper enriches the debate about computer mediated conversation and visualization tools. We propose a Dashboard prototype to augment collaborative
knowledge mapping tools by providing visual feedback on conversations. The Dashboard will provide at the same time three different kinds of feedback about: details of the
participants to the conversation, interaction processes and generated content. This will allow the improvement of the benefits and reduce the costs deriving from the use of
mapping tools. Moreover, another important novelty is that visualization tools will be integrated to mapping tools, as until now they have been used only to visualize data contained in forums (as Usenet or Slash.dot), chat or email archives
Practical implications â The Dashboard provides feedback about participants, interaction processes and generated contents, thus supporting the adoption of mapping tools as
technologies able to foster knowledge sharing among remote workers or/and customers and supplier.
The integration of Debate Dashboard with common online argument mapping tools aims at enabling the following advantages:
1. Reduction of misunderstanding;
2. Reduction of cognitive effort required to use argument mapping tools;
3. Improvement of the exploration and the analysis of the maps - the Debate Dashboard feedback improves the usability of the object (the map), thus allowing users to pitch into the conversation in the right place
Analytic frameworks for assessing dialogic argumentation in online learning environments
Over the last decade, researchers have developed sophisticated online learning environments to support students engaging in argumentation. This review first considers the range of functionalities incorporated within these online environments. The review then presents five categories of analytic frameworks focusing on (1) formal argumentation structure, (2) normative quality, (3) nature and function of contributions within the dialog, (4) epistemic nature of reasoning, and (5) patterns and trajectories of participant interaction. Example analytic frameworks from each category are presented in detail rich enough to illustrate their nature and structure. This rich detail is intended to facilitate researchersâ identification of possible frameworks to draw upon in developing or adopting analytic methods for their own work. Each framework is applied to a shared segment of student dialog to facilitate this illustration and comparison process. Synthetic discussions of each category consider the frameworks in light of the underlying theoretical perspectives on argumentation, pedagogical goals, and online environmental structures. Ultimately the review underscores the diversity of perspectives represented in this research, the importance of clearly specifying theoretical and environmental commitments throughout the process of developing or adopting an analytic framework, and the role of analytic frameworks in the future development of online learning environments for argumentation
Designing for interaction
At present, the design of computer-supported group-based learning (CS)GBL) is often based on subjective decisions regarding tasks, pedagogy and technology, or concepts such as âcooperative learningâ and âcollaborative learningâ. Critical review reveals these concepts as insufficiently substantial to serve as a basis for (CS)GBL design. Furthermore, the relationship between outcome and group interaction is rarely specified a priori. Thus, there is a need for a more systematic approach to designing (CS)GBL that focuses on the elicitation of expected interaction processes. A framework for such a process-oriented methodology is proposed. Critical elements that affect interaction are identified: learning objectives, task-type, level of pre-structuring, group size and computer support. The proposed process-oriented method aims to stimulate designers to adopt a more systematic approach to (CS)GBL design according to the interaction expected, while paying attention to critical elements that affect interaction. This approach may bridge the gap between observed quality of interaction and learning outcomes and foster (CS)GBL design that focuses on the heart of the matter: interaction
Analyzing collaborative learning processes automatically
In this article we describe the emerging area of text classification research focused on the problem of collaborative learning process analysis both from a broad perspective and more specifically in terms of a publicly available tool set called TagHelper tools. Analyzing the variety of pedagogically valuable facets of learnersâ interactions is a time consuming and effortful process. Improving automated analyses of such highly valued processes of collaborative learning by adapting and applying recent text classification technologies would make it a less arduous task to obtain insights from corpus data. This endeavor also holds the potential for enabling substantially improved on-line instruction both by providing teachers and facilitators with reports about the groups they are moderating and by triggering context sensitive collaborative learning support on an as-needed basis. In this article, we report on an interdisciplinary research project, which has been investigating the effectiveness of applying text classification technology to a large CSCL corpus that has been analyzed by human coders using a theory-based multidimensional coding scheme. We report promising results and include an in-depth discussion of important issues such as reliability, validity, and efficiency that should be considered when deciding on the appropriateness of adopting a new technology such as TagHelper tools. One major technical contribution of this work is a demonstration that an important piece of the work towards making text classification technology effective for this purpose is designing and building linguistic pattern detectors, otherwise known as features, that can be extracted reliably from texts and that have high predictive power for the categories of discourse actions that the CSCL community is interested in
Recommended from our members
Sketch-Based Interfaces to Support Collaborative Conceptual Design Learning
In order to gain a better understanding of online collaborative conceptual design processes this paper investigates how student designers make use of Lyceum, a shared virtual synchronous environment when engaged in conceptual design. The software enables users to talk to each other and share sketches when they are remotely located. The paper describes a novel methodology for observing and analysing collaborative design processes by adapting the concepts of grounded theory. Rather than concentrating on narrow aspects of the final artefacts, emerging 'themes' are generated that provide a broader picture of collaborative design process and context descriptions. Findings on the themes of 'grounding â mutual understanding' and 'support creativity' complement findings from other research, while important themes associated with 'near-synchrony' have not been emphasised in other research. From the study, a series of design recommendations are made for the development of tools to support online computer-supported collaborative work in design using a shared virtual environment
Thinking, Interthinking, and Technological Tools
Language use is widely regarded as an important indicator of high quality learning and reasoning ability. Yet this masks an irony: language is fundamentally a social, collaborative tool, yet despite the widespread recognition of its importance in relation to learning, the role of dialogue is undervalued in learning contexts. In this chapter we argue that to see language as only a tool for individual thought presents a limited view of its transformative power. This power, we argue, lies in the ways in which dialogue is used to interthink â that is, to think together, to build knowledge co-constructively through our shared understanding. Technology can play an important role in resourcing thinking through the provision of information, and support to provide a space to think alone. It can moreover provide significant support for learners to build shared representations together, particularly through giving learners access to a wealth of âgivenâ inter-related texts which resource the co-construction of knowledge
- âŠ