learning and technology computer supported collaborative learning
TRANSCRIPT
Learning and Technology
Computer Supported Collaborative Learning
Paradigms in Educational Computing
‘60s – Computer Assisted Learning (CAL)
‘70s – Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITS)
‘80s – Interactive Learning Environments (ILEs)
‘90s – Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL)
Theories of Collaborative Learning
• Sociocognitive theory– Jean Piaget– Wilhelm Doise & Gabriel Mugny
• Sociocultural theory– Lev Vygotsky– Barbara Rogoff
• Situated learning– Lev Vygotsky – Jean Lave
Socio-Cognitive TheorySocio-Cognitive Theory
• Piagetian theory – Piaget (1926, 1932)
• Restructuring of prior knowledge requires challenging existing views and coordinating old with new knowledge (Piaget, 1977)
• These conditions will be present if children interact with peers of differing but also inadequate views (Piaget, 1932)
Learning mechanismsLearning mechanisms
• Social interaction leads to a recognition of alternative perspectives
• Recognition of alternative perspectives leads to mutual challenge (cognitive conflict)
• Mutual challenge of perspectives motivates coordination of alternatives to arrive at a solution
Learning mechanismsLearning mechanisms
• Inter-individual conflict is a more powerful stimulus for cognitive change than intra-individual conflict– Social conflict is harder to ignore than
individual conflict– Partner can provide cues for solving the
problem– The child is more likely to be actively
involved in the joint task
Task characteristicsTask characteristics
• Perspective-taking tasks• Conservation and coordination tasks• Planning tasks• Problem-solving tasks
Perspective Taking
Piaget’s ‘three mountains’ task
a
b c
Implications for learningImplications for learning
"Criticism is born of discussion, and discussion is only possible among equals"(Piaget, 1932, p. 409) – Participants should be at an equivalent
intellectual level (shared understanding)– Participants should recognise that they should not
contradict themselves– Participants should recognise the need to reach
agreement or find ways of justifying their different points of view
– Reciprocity between participants
Implications for learningImplications for learning
• Tasks should be designed to promote differences in perspectives or solutions
• Tasks should involve opportunity for discussion of competing hypotheses or solutions
• Participants should be at equivalent intellectual levels
Implications for learningImplications for learning
• Symmetrical or assymmetrical peers?• Differing vs similar views• What is meant by "cognitive conflict"?• Conflict in predictions vs conflict in
conceptions – Howe et al. (1993)
• Equivalence in developmental level vs equivalence in expertise– Verba & Winnykamen (1992)
How can technology help?How can technology help?
• Catalyst for discussion of competing solutions• Role differentiation• Making hypotheses and predictions explicit• Providing opportunities to disconfirm
hypotheses or obtain correct solutions
Sociocultural Theories
"What children can do with others today, they can do alone tomorrow"(Vygotsky, 1962, p. 104)
Learning mechanismsLearning mechanisms
• Development proceeds from the inter-psychological to the intra-psychological
• Focus on the joint construction (co-construction) of solutions
• Attempts to coordinate perspectives and co-construct hypotheses to arrive at a joint answer are more valuable than simply differences in perspectives
Learning mechanismsLearning mechanisms
• Causal relationship between the social and the cognitive
• The "zone of proximal development"• The "general genetic law of cultural
development"• Semiotic mediation
The Zone of Proximal Development
"...the distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers." (Vygotsky, 1978)
The Zone of Proximal DevelopmentThe Zone of Proximal Development
• ZOPD as a "leading activity" (Leontiev)• Related ideas
– Scaffolding (Bruner)– Contingent instruction
(Wood, Bruner & Ross, 1976)– Apprenticeship (Rogoff, 1990)
The Genetic Law of Cultural DevelopmentThe Genetic Law of Cultural Development
• Development appears on two planes:first on the inter-psychological, then on the intra-psychological (Vygotsky)
• The individual's appropriation of what takes place on the social plane involves an active transformation
Internalisation
• Properties of the social world are not simply transferred"The process of internalisation is not the
transferral of an external activity to a preexisting, internal 'plane of consciousness': it is the process in which this internal plane is formed." (Leontiev, 1981, p. 57)
Semiotic mediationSemiotic mediation
• Mediation as a "psychological tool"• Intersubjectivity
– Vygotsky —intersubjectivity as a process that takes place between people
– Piaget — perspective-taking & decentration as individual processes working on socially-derived information
Task characteristics
• Skill acquisition• Joint planning & co-construction• Memory• Task x age interactions?
Implications for learningImplications for learning
• Assymmetrical dyads (adult or more competent peer) vs symmetrical dyads
• Peer tutoring vs peer collaboration– Peer tutoring most effective when learners
need to acquire new information or skills that do not extend beyond their conceptual reach (Damon, 1984; Rogoff, 1990)
• Differences in domain expertisevs differences in general intellectual level
• Developmental constraints?
Development of collaborative learning
Skills underlying effective collaboration and peer tutoring
• Coordinating mental representations– Piaget; Flavell; Doise & Mugny
• Understanding mental states– Tomasello
• Self- and other-regulation– Vygotsky; Rogoff
• Executive function & self-inhibition– Russell
Predictions
• Effective tutoring involves– Skill in the task– Planning ahead– Monitoring learner’s actions– Modifying next step– Inhibiting temptation to do the task
• Clear changes should emerge between 3 and 7 years
Peer tutoring in 3-7 year olds
Proportion of instructional moves
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Show (5,4,3) Tell (2,1)
3 years5 years7 years
Proportion of instructional moves
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
5 4 3 2 1
3 years5 years7 years
Contingent Instruction
Contingent Non-contingentTutor Learner Tutor Learner
4c -- 4c ---- success -- success3c -- 5n ---- success -- in trouble1c -- 1n ---- in trouble -- wrong blocks2c -- 1n ---- wrong construct -- success3c -- 3n --
Rate of Contingent Instruction
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
3 year olds 5 year olds 7 year olds
Summary
• Children who found the task easier to learn were more effective tutors
• Task sharing difficult for 3 & 5 year olds• Systematic planning emerges at 5 years• High proportion of self-regulatory speech in 3 & 5
year olds; replaced by other-regulation by 7 years• 3 & 5 year olds teach by demonstration; 7 year olds
better at watching and telling (self-inhibition)• 7 year olds were highly contingent in tutoring• 5 year olds learn effectively from observing others
Theory of Mind and Collaborative Play
Predictions
• Children who pass ToM (TT pairs) should show greater sustainment of shared task focus than those who fail (XX pairs)
• TT pairs should show greater levels of reciprocity in interactions than XX pairs
• Pairing a child who fails ToM with one who passes (TX) should improve the dyad’s collaboration over XX pairs
Method
• 24 same-gender friendship pairs– TT (both pass) 4;0 - 5;0– TX (pass/fail) 3;10 - 4;11– XX (fail/fail) 3;6 - 4;11
• 15-20 min sessions of dyadic play with props for bathing/changing a doll
• Videotapes coded for– Joint attention– Shared task focus– Reciprocity of play
Coding Scheme
Visual Regard
Divided Visual attention divided / different
Sharedscan
Both children scanningenvironment or looking at E
Sharedprops
Mutual attention on shared props
Sharedpartner
Looking at same props andmaking eye contact with partner
Coding Scheme
Social Play
Non-interactive
Uninvolved with specific person,object or activity
Object Each child engaged with differentobjects and playing alone
Person Engaged in person play / verbalplay only
Coordinated Coordinated partner-object play
Social Play
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Non-interactive
Object Person Coordinated
XX
TT
TX
**
**
Coding of play bids
Turn 1Initiate bid
Turn 2Partnerresponse
Turn 3Initiatorreaction
Reciprocitycode
Persists ReciprocalPartneraccepts Does not
persistPassive
Persists Non-reciprocal
Deliberateattempt toengagepartner inplay Partner does
not accept Does notpersist
Terminated
Reciprocity in Play
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Reciprocal Passive Non-reciprocal
Terminated
XXTTTX
**
**
**
Summary
• Composition of dyads with respect to ToM status leads to differences in quality of social play– XX pairs show less co-ordinated play and joint
attention– TT and TX pairs engage in more shared visual
attention and co-ordinated play – XX pairs initiate fewer play bids than TT and TX
pairs– XX pairs show less reciprocity in play bids than TT
and TX pairs– TT pairs show more reciprocal bid sequences than
TX pairs
Conclusions• The ability of a child to provide contingent support
for a peer’s learning emerges at 6-7 years• Developmental trend in the emergence of
sustained task sharing, self- and other- regulation between 3 and 7 years
• Emergence of collaborative learning & contingent tutoring linked to development of– Understanding mental states in others
– Self-regulation
– Skills in referential communication
How can technology help?How can technology help?
• Instructional support– Guided discovery learning– Scaffolding– Contingent control of instruction
• Tools for (re)mediation
Situated Learning• The mutual knowledge problem
– Communication depends upon a "common ground" of mutually-held knowledge(Krauss & Fussell, 1990)
• Distributed cognition– Joint construction of a problem interpretation(Hutchins, 1991; Pea, 1993)
• Situated cognition– Competent performance of real word tasks
"is an emergent property of moment-by-moment interactions between actors, and between actors and the environments of their action"
(Suchman, 1987, p. 179)
Problems for cognitive psychology
• Practical action is not always driven by plans• People aren’t very good at formal reasoning• Transfer of knowledge from context to context
is hard to achieve• Ecological validity is problematic because we
treat context as a ‘nuisance variable’
Characteristics of a contextual approach
• recognition of the relationship between psychological processes and their social, cultural and historical settings
• explanation of how different contexts create and reflect different forms of mental functioning
• explanation of how human action is mediated via context
The culture of learning
just plain folks
causal stories
situations
negotiable meanings
socially constructed understanding
students
laws
symbols
fixed meanings
immutable concepts
practitionerscausal models
conceptual situations
negotiable meanings
socially constructed understanding
"take three-quarters of two-thirds of a cup of cottage cheese"
3/4 x 2/3
OR
Situated Problem Solving
Cognition and Context• situations shape activities• relation between the problem solver and the
problem• salience of the activity varies in different
settings• theories of situated cognition do not preclude
knowledge which is invariant across related situations (i.e., abstractions); they argue instead that knowledge in the abstract is insufficent for competent practice
Implications for LearningImplications for Learning
• Learning occurs most effectively in situations resembling those of eventual practice
• Learning should involve "legitimate peripheral participation" in communities of practice(Lave & Wenger, 1991)
• Learning occurs when the learner is confronted with a "problematic" situation
• Argument for collaboration– Situated action is inherently social– Learning is a special case of situated action
How can technology help?
• Technology can provide access to authentic situations of practice
• Example - Schoolchildren interacting with scientists over the Internet
Dimensions of CSCL Applications
• Locus of use (space)– Intra-classroom– Inter-classroom– Extra-classroom
• Context of use (time)– Synchronous– Asynchronous
• Role of Technology– Problem Presentation– Mediated Communication– Representational Formalism– Etc.
Shared ARK
Supporting• co-construction of
problem solutions
Through• shared workspaces• multiple representations• joint tasks• structured discussion
Figure 1: A sequence of views in KidPad as we zoom into a simple story (from left to right, and then top to bottom)