computer supported collaborative learning track introduction

Download Computer Supported Collaborative Learning Track Introduction

Post on 19-Jan-2016




0 download

Embed Size (px)


Computer Supported Collaborative Learning Track Introduction. Carolyn Penstein Rosé Carnegie Mellon University Language Technologies Institute and Human-Computer Interaction Institute School of Computer Science. Track Helpers. Rohit Kumar Iris Howley - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • Computer Supported Collaborative Learning Track Introduction

    Carolyn Penstein Ros

    Carnegie Mellon UniversityLanguage Technologies Institute and Human-Computer Interaction InstituteSchool of Computer Science

  • Track Helpers*Rohit Kumarrohitk@andrew.cmu.eduIris

  • OutlineIndividual learning with technology to collaborative learning

    Vision for dynamic collaborative learning support

    Research Issues

    Current Directions*

  • Historical PerspectiveSocratic tutoring: directed lines of reasoningEvidence that socratic tutoring is more beneficial than didactic tutoring (Ros et al., 2001a)

    Socratic style implemented in Knowledge Construction Dialogues (KCDs)General attempt to model effective human tutoringHierarchical structure: adaptive to student needsUsed to elicit reflectionFirst used to support individual learning in Physics Atlas-Andes (Ros et al., 2001)WHY-Atlas (Ros et al., 2003; Ros & VanLehn, 2005)

  • Empirical Foundation for CycleTalkHuman tutoring not always better than non-interactive support (VanLehn et al., 2007)Focus shift to capturing what it is about interaction that is effective for instruction

    Human tutors guide students towards opportunities for reflection (Ros & Torrey, 2004)

    Human tutor support by effective tutors is significantly better than hint based support (Ros et al., 2005)

  • Towards enriching the interactionStudent interaction with dialogue agents lacks elaboration (Ros et al., 2003)

    Students expect to behave differently with agents (Ros & Torrey, 2004)

    Students can benefit from working with another student, even in the absence of computer scaffolding (Gweon et al., 2006; Kumar et al., 2007)*

  • VMT-Basilica** Students learn up to 1.25 standard deviations more when interactive support is provided in the environment.

  • Monitoring Collaboration with Machine Learning Technology

  • Basilica Tutor Agent DesignKumar, R. & Ros, C. P. (2011). Architecture for building Conversational Agents that support Collaborative Learning, IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies special issue on Intelligent and Innovative Support Systems for Computer Supported Collaborative Learning

    TutorOne last thing on this topic, Does more (or less) stress in a wrench make it easier to use?S95no change?TutorYou are correct about that.. Stress doesn't determine ease of use.TutorIt's the moment achieved by the wrench that determines the ease of use.S89yay!TutorIt's good to have your contributions in the discussion Jackie :-)TutorGo team :-)S89Go team yayTutorI am happy to be working with our teamS89Me tooS95whoa the bot knows my nameTutorUnfortunately maximum stress (12800) in our design1 is way above the maximum allowed stress (i.e. 8750)TutorThis wrench cannot be safely used!

  • Computer Supported Learning in Large Classroom StudiesUniversity LevelFreshman EngineeringCalculusSophomore ThermodynamicsHigh School9th Grade BiologyEarth SciencesMiddle SchoolEngineering Outreach6th grade math

  • First-Year and Middle School ProjectsFirst-Year ProjectWrench Design CompetitionPart of Computer Aided Engineering Labs using Pro/ENGINEER, Pro/MECHANICA and Pro/MANUFACTURING Software (3 sessions)Students Work in Teams of 3 4 with Unknown Team Members in Other Parts of the RoomOnly Communication is via the Chat Interface with Agent InteractionsTeach Relationships between Moment, Force and Stress Related to Design Goals

    Middle-School Practical Considerations in Designing a WrenchA Simplified Version of the Freshman Project (Using the Pro/ENGINEER CAD Package)Part of the CMU C-MITES ProgramStudents Work in Teams of 3 4 with Unknown Team Members in Other Parts of the RoomActivity Designed to Elicit Broad Discussions on Engineering and Product Design

    Middle School Students in the Wrench Design Project

  • Sophomore Thermodynamics Course Rankine Cycle Design CompetitionPart of a Thermodynamic Cycles Lab (1 session)Students Work in Teams of 2 with Their Partner in Another Part of the RoomInstructed on Effects of Changing System Variables (Temperature, Pressure) on System Output (Power, Waste Heat)Goal: Increase Efficiency within Practical ConstraintsSoftware Package is CyclePad (Developed at Northwestern University (Forbes et. al. 1999) to Allow Students to Construct and Analyze a Variety of Thermodynamic Cycles)

    Second-Year Thermodynamics Project

  • Thermo Collaborative TaskGoal: Design a power plant based on the Rankine Cycle paradigmEach pair turns in exactly one designCompeting Student Goals:Power: Design a power plant that achieves maximum power outputMotivated by economic concernsGreen: Design a power plant that has the minimum impact on the environmentMotivated by environmental concerns

  • Increasing Conceptual DepthStudent: so i think the best thing to go with first is to increase the pressure entering the connectorTutor: You might want to review what you saw earlier in the sensitivity analysis investigating the effect of changing P-max on steam quality and efficiency, from the top half of page 13 in your book.Tutor: type: HELP WITH CHANGEPMAX if you want to discuss it with me.Student: help with changepmaxTutor: Remember the sensitivity analysis you have completed where you manipulated P-Max and observed it's effect on the efficiency of the cycle. You can refer back to Figure 11 on page 13 of your booklet, which

  • Example Interaction

  • Core Research Focus*Identify conversational interactions that are valuable for learningAutomatic conversation analysis Facilitates learning researchAutomates assessment of group processesEnables context sensitive triggering of supportInteractive support technologies

  • Operationalization of Productive Talk for Learning*Drawn from multiple frameworks valuing sociocognitive engagementStudents explicitly display their reasoningStudents orient their contributions towards previous contributionsStudents increase in their ownership of their ideasMade precise through constructs from linguisticsIntegrative book chapters (Sionti, Ai, Ros, & Resnick, in press; Howley, Mayfield, & Ros, in press)

  • Learning ResultsStudents in accountable talk classrooms (where transactivity is elicited) learn more than students in a traditional classroom (OConnor, Michaels, & Resnick, in preparation)

    Transactivity correlates with learning (Joshi & Ros, 2007; Kumar et al., 2007)Consistent with results in connection with elaborated explanations (e.g., Webb, Nemer, Zuniga, 2002)

    Collaboration support that increases transactivity increases learning (Wang et al., 2007)*

  • Research Question:Tutorial dialogue agents are effective for individual learning However!Students appear to ignore tutorial dialogue agents when another human is in the environmentAlthough they learn from them!Dialogue agents have been seen as an interruption in collaborative contextsHow must the design of intelligent tutoring technology change in order to be effective in collaborative contexts?

  • Accountable Talk (OConnor, Michaels, & Resnick)Eddie: Well, i don't think it matters what order the numbers are in. You still get the same answer. But three times four and four times three seem like they could be talking about different things.Teacher: Rebecca, do you agree or disagree with what Eddie is saying?Rebecca: Well, I agree that it doesn't matter which number is first, because they both give you twelve. But I don't get what Eddie means about them saying different things.Teacher: Eddie, would you explain what you mean?Eddie: Well, I just think that like three times four can mean three groups of four things, like three bags of four apples. And four times three means four bags of three apples, and those don't seem like the same thing.Tiffany: But you still have the same number of apples, so they are the same!Teacher: OK, so we have two different ideas here to talk about. Eddie says the order does matter, because the two orders can be used to describe different situations. So Tiffany, are you saying that three times four and four times three can't be used to describe two different situations?

  • Supporting Accountable Talk

    Research question: What form of support for small group discussion is most effective:Elevating quality of small group discussionLearning during small group discussionPreparation for whole group discussion

    Instruction: Students read about Diffusion and receive training on Accountable TalkOnline Lab in ConcertChat environmentVideos alternate with small group discussionStudents watch experimental setup and then predict outcomesStudents watch results at 1 hour, 5 hours, and 24 hours and then discuss whether effects matched predictions and what they learned*

  • 3 students per groupEach student assigned a roleRevoicer: Responsible for looking for revoicing opportunitiesChallenger: Responsible for looking for opportunities to check agreement or challenge a claimExplainer: Responsible for looking for opportunities to push for more explicationEach group assigned a conditionNo support: students just assigned rolesIndirect Agent: agent reminds students to do their roleDirect Agent: agent does accountable talk moves


  • Accountable Talk Agents*

  • Results from Coded ChatsSignificantly more Academically Productive Talk moves in supported conditionsF(2,42) = 13.9, p < .0001 Weak correlation between Academically Productive Talk moves and student reasoning, R2 = .11, p < .05 Students in Direct contribu


View more >