[email protected] DISCLAIMER The intensive usage of PowerPoint may damage your...

Pie

rre.D

illenbourg

@te

cfa.u

nig

e.c

h

DISCLAIMER

The intensive usage of PowerPoint may damage

your understanding of a pedagogical relationship.

DISCLAIMER

The intensive usage of PowerPoint may damage

your understanding of a pedagogical relationship.

The

colour of

wires

The

colour of

wires

Pie

rre.D

illenbourg

@te

cfa.u

nig

e.c

h DISCLAIMER

The effects of collaborative learning may not

apply to the situation you have designed.

DISCLAIMER

The effects of collaborative learning may not

apply to the situation you have designed.

Pie

rre.D

illenbourg

@te

cfa.u

nig

e.c

h

Computer Supported Collaborative Learning

Give them e-mail

Add the video

CMC has to be like F2F 22

Scenario11

Pie

rre.D

illenbourg

@te

cfa.u

nig

e.c

h

Explanation Abstraction

GroundingArgumentation

Mutual Regulation

Mutuality

Structuration

Regulation

WYSIWISAwareness

Semi-structured interfaces

PersistencyReflectivity

Contextuality

COMPUTER

SUPPORTED

COLLABORATIVE

LEARNING

2211

Pie

rre.D

illenbourg

@te

cfa.u

nig

e.c

h

Scenario "ArgueGraph" Scenario "ArgueGraph"

Phase1Phase1

Pie

rre.D

illenbourg

@te

cfa.u

nig

e.c

h

Phase 2Phase 2Scenario "ArgueGraph" Scenario "ArgueGraph"

Pie

rre.D

illenbourg

@te

cfa.u

nig

e.c

h


Pie

rre.D

illenbourg

@te

cfa.u

nig

e.c

h Design choices

Immediate FB

Delayed FB

Microworld FB

Theories

Behavioursim

Constructivism

Metacognition


Pie

rre.D

illenbourg

@te

cfa.u

nig

e.c

hArgueGraph DataArgueGraph Data (Exp.3)(Exp.3)

Reformulation Justification

Solo 57 % 43 %

Duo 15 % 85 %

Pie

rre.D

illenbourg

@te

cfa.u

nig

e.c

h

Accept Condition Discard

No Conflict 28 1 3

Conflict 23 11 1

"We answer 3 because motivation is important"

"We answer 3 because motivation is important"

"We choose 3 because 2 does not work"

"We choose 3 because 2 does not work"

ArgueGraph DataArgueGraph Data (Exp.3)(Exp.3)

"We answer 2 if the learner is a child but we answer 3 for adult learners"

"We answer 2 if the learner is a child but we answer 3 for adult learners"

Pie

rre.D

illenbourg

@te

cfa.u

nig

e.c

h

New Union Victory

No Conflict 6 16 10

Conflict 14 8 13

X2=6.2, p<.05)

ArgueGraph DataArgueGraph Data (Exp.3)(Exp.3)

Arg(AB) <> Arg(A) & Arg(AB) <> Arg(B)

Arg(AB) <> Arg(A) & Arg(AB) <> Arg(B)

Arg(AB) =Arg(A) or

Arg(AB) =Arg(B )

Arg(AB) =Arg(A) or

Arg(AB) =Arg(B )Arg(AB)=Arg(A) U Arg(B )Arg(AB)=Arg(A) U Arg(B )

Pie

rre.D

illenbourg

@te

cfa.u

nig

e.c

hNew version of ArgueGraphNew version of ArgueGraph

Pie

rre.D

illenbourg

@te

cfa.u

nig

e.c

hWhat's the problem with exp 4 ?What's the problem with exp 4 ?

pseudo-task

debriefing

debriefing

Coffee-break

1 week

Exp 1-3Exp 1-3 Exp 4Exp 4

pseudo-task

Pie

rre.D

illenbourg

@te

cfa.u

nig

e.c

h

Part 1: So what?Part 1: So what?

• Collaboration has to be structured. – Web environments provide the structure by making a

scenario (phases & roles) concrete.

– Scenario are hard to generalize • ergonomics, • timing, • didactic contract,• …

– Integrate communication in the task.

• Collaboration has to be regulated (…)

Pie

rre.D

illenbourg

@te

cfa.u

nig

e.c

h

Tools for distance educationTools for distance education

Tools for distance activities in hybrid teaching

Tools for distance activities in hybrid teaching

Tools for supporting presential activities with computer-activitiesTools for supporting presential

activities with computer-activities

Tools for supporting face-to-face interactions

Tools for supporting face-to-face interactions

Pie

rre.D

illenbourg

@te

cfa.u

nig

e.c

h

Part 2:Part 2:

The more F2F-like is not necessarily the betterThe more F2F-like is not necessarily the better!!

Number of disrupted Q-A pairs

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

ICQ (WYSIWIS) ICQ (+ turn markers) mIRC (private edit)

Série1

Phillips B., Should we take Turns ?, CHI2000

Pie

rre.D

illenbourg

@te

cfa.u

nig

e.c

h

Brainstorming task

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5


Série1


Pie

rre.D

illenbourg

@te

cfa.u

nig

e.c

h

The more F2F-like is not necessarily the betterThe more F2F-like is not necessarily the better!!Recall task

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70


Série1


Pie

rre.D

illenbourg

@te

cfa.u

nig

e.c

h

Restaurant

Kitchen

Private

Bar

Room5 Room6 Room7 Room8

Room1 Room2 Room3 Room4

Lobby Entrance

Auberge du Bout de Nappe

MLVMLVLisa JonesClaire & Rolf

Loretan

Colonel Von Schneider

Lucie Salève Heidi Zeller

Hans Wenger

Marie Salève

Oscar Salève

Jacques Salève

Giuzeppe Vesuvio

Ski jacketSki jacket

GunGun

PaintingPainting

InsuranceInsurance

NoteNote

Gun OylsterGun Oylster

PhoneLogPhoneLog

RegistryRegistry

WHO KILLED MONA-LISA?

Pie

rre.D

illenbourg

@te

cfa.u

nig

e.c

h

> " Hi colleague

> ' Where are you?

> ask MS about last night

> look gun

> ask MS about last gun

> read insurance

> read all from DN2

> read Hans from DN2

> compare DN1 with DN2

> " skjhkjh

dfsdfsf

> ask Helmut about last night

> ask MS about mona

> look painting

> read all from DN1

> read Hans from DN1

> compare DN1 with DN1

MOO Whiteboard

MOO Whiteboard

Pie

rre.D

illenbourg

@te

cfa.u

nig

e.c

h Low acknowledgers: 0.9

High acknowledgers: 0.9

Index of complexity

Bootnap experiments, Dillenbourg & Traum, 1997

Pie

rre.D

illenbourg

@te

cfa.u

nig

e.c

h

Interwoven TurnsInterwoven Turns

88.5 r1 H page sherlock but what about the gun?

88.8 Priv S 'Hercule which motive jealousy? He would have killed hans no?

89.3 Priv S 'Hercule he stole it when the colonel was in the bar

90.3 r1 H page sherlock Giuzeppe wanted to avoid that one discovers that the painting was fake.

HSSH turns (from Pair 11, translated )

43.5 Bar H Why does Heidi have a motive ?

43.6 Bar S How do you propose we should go further?

43.9 Bar H Should we merge our note books?

44.1 Bar S She said that she didn't like her (and Hans)

HSHS turns (from Pair 12 )

Pie

rre.D

illenbourg

@te

cfa.u

nig

e.c

h

Pie

rre.D

illenbourg

@te

cfa.u

nig

e.c

h

Persistent Non-Persistent

Persistent

Non Persistent

Display

Kn

owle

dge

Communication8% Facts

14%

Inferences41%

Management33%

Technical4%

Communication8% Facts

14%

Inferences41%

Management33%

Technical4%

MOO dialogues

Communication1%

Facts49%Inferences

41%

Management9%

Communication1%

Facts49%Inferences

41%

Management9% Whiteboard

Pie

rre.D

illenbourg

@te

cfa.u

nig

e.c

h

Persistency Contexuality Reflexivity Persistency Contexuality Reflexivity

CMC is a different system from F2FCMC is a different system from F2F

Pie

rre.D

illenbourg

@te

cfa.u

nig

e.c

h

Acknowledgment Delay:

Acknowledgment Rate:

39 sec

50%

59 sec.

34 %

Virtual places modify communication patterns

Pie

rre.D

illenbourg

@te

cfa.u

nig

e.c

h

Places create a shared context

He lies!

Pie

rre.D

illenbourg

@te

cfa.u

nig

e.c

h

Proximity creates a shared context

Pie

rre.D

illenbourg

@te

cfa.u

nig

e.c

h



E. Churchill et al, FX Palo Alto Lab

Pie

rre.D

illenbourg

@te

cfa.u

nig

e.c

h



ArgueGraph

Pie

rre.D

illenbourg

@te

cfa.u

nig

e.c

h



Lehtinen et al. (1999)

Pie

rre.D

illenbourg

@te

cfa.u

nig

e.c

h



R. Rodenstein & J. Donath, MIT Media Lab

Pie

rre.D

illenbourg

@te

cfa.u

nig

e.c

h



Patrick Jermann (TECFA/LRDC)

Pie

rre.D

illenbourg

@te

cfa.u

nig

e.c

h

Cotemporality (messages received at the same time as sent).

Simultaneity (can both parties send messages at the same time or do they have to take turns)

Sequentiality (can the turns get out of sequence).

Reviewability (can they review messages, after they have been first received).

Reviseability (can the producer edit the message privately before sending

Co-presence (can see the same things).

Visibility (can see each other).

Audibility (can hear each other)

Clark &

Brennan

(1991)

Clark &

Brennan

(1991)

Persistency (how long it remains displayed).

Reflexivity (representing interactions).

Contextuality (keep the context with the message) Distributed

Cognitive S

ystem

Distributed

Cognitive S

ystem

Media features

Pie

rre.D

illenbourg

@te

cfa.u

nig

e.c

h

• Persistency• Reflexivity• Contextuality

Tool featuresTool features

• Group memory• Group regulation• Group understanding

Distributed Cognitive System

Distributed Cognitive System

The CMC tools are parts of the The CMC tools are parts of the distributed cognitive systemdistributed cognitive system

Pie

rre.D

illenbourg

@te

cfa.u

nig

e.c

h

New

sN

ews

CSCL Book Series CSCL Book Series (Kluwer)(Kluwer)

Euro-CSCL Conference: Euro-CSCL Conference: Maastricht, NL, March 2001 Maastricht, NL, March 2001

deadline: October 15thdeadline: October 15th

Jobs @ Jobs @ Geneva Interaction LabGeneva Interaction Lab

[email protected] DISCLAIMER The intensive usage of PowerPoint may damage your...

Documents

Transcript of [email protected] DISCLAIMER The intensive usage of PowerPoint may damage your...