Collaborative knowledge constructionCollaborative knowledge construction in the web supported in the web supported

by the KnowCat systemby the KnowCat system

Presenter: Ming-Chuan Chen

Advisor: Ming-Puu Chen

Date: 12/29/2008

Cobos, R., & Pifarre, M. (2008). Collaborative knowledge construction in the web supported by the KnowCat system, Computers & Education, 50(3), 962-978.

22

Introduction (1)

Collaboration involves the construction of meaning through interactions with others and can be characterized by a joint commitment to a shared goal. (Littleton & Hakkinen, 1999)

KnowCat (“Knowledge Catalyser”):– To generate quality educational materials as a result

of users’ interaction with the materials– Based on the mechanism called “Knowledge Crystalli

sation”– It has been used, tested and improved over the last si

x years

33

Introduction (2) The main characteristics of the system:

– To organize the knowledge in a tree structure– To express the opinions about any documents

• Votes, annotations & a new version• Sorted by their degree of acceptance

Research questions– The students’ collaboration process that occurred in the s

ystem– The role of annotations of KowCat in collaborative knowle

dge construction process– To improve the mechanism of knowledge crystallisation p

rocess

44

Knowledge crystallisation (1)

Knowledge crystallisation:– Based on the virtual communities– The opinions of other users will decide whether these

elements of knowledge are useful or not• Useful =>remaining in the system longer• Useless =>disappearing from the system

55

Knowledge crystallisation(2) Each document in the system has a value called “d

egree of acceptance” (0~1) – Calculated by (1) Votes and notes (2) Number of times– Beyond the “crystallisation point” for a period of time => crystallised

The knowledge crystallisation process determines when a new document version replaces the previous one.

– Continuity point– Improvement point

Knowledge evolution:– Through a sequence of document versions

66

Participants & Procedure

31 students enrolled in the course “learning strategies” at the “UdL”

The students used the system during 10 weeks

77

Instructional tasks

(a)To obtain a crystallised document– search a document related to the selected to the topic– vote for the best document described the topic

(b)To write a report about the selected topic– Main idea, Relations & reflections

(c)To add noted to other classmates reports– At least 3 notes

(d)To vote the best description of the topic (e)To write the new document version (f) To decide which document version will be reserved

– Continuity & Improvement

88

Students’ participation in the system

Passive (just reading notes) v.s. active– Students show active and high participation by contributi

ng with new knowledge– An active learning attitude is crucial to promote knowled

ge contribution and better learning. (e.g. Dillenbourg, 1999, 2002; Stahl, 2002; Veldhuis-Diermanse, 2002)

75% of students read the notes and rewrote a new version

– The rewrite task implies the development cognitive and metacognitive activities by the students and deeper knowledge construction. (Allal, 2004; Allal, Mottier Lopez, Lehraus, & Forget, 2005)

99

The different types of notes

Type of notes

Description Example

Explanation Clarify some parts of the document

The following link doesn’t work now, but it

worked a week ago.

Support Positive feedback This document is very useful and is easy to read.

Addition the new relevant information, new approaches or procedures

I think you should link the instructional program with the concept of learning strategy defined by Monereo (1992)

Delete Deletions In the summary there are some examples, which perhaps were not necessary.

Correlation Significant changes You present too many ideas without focusing in none of them. Choose one key idea and develop it better

1010

These activities influence the way in which acquired information can be transformed into knowledge, and the way in which knowledge can be transferred to other contexts (Laurillard, 1993)

“Addition” notes get the highest number– Related to high levels of knowledge construction

1111

Content analysis of notes added in the system(1)

“Addition”, “Correction” & “Delete” notes – external regulation process in which students’ plan an

d monitor the other’s work. “Addition” or “Correction” note

– a metacognitive activity (Flavell, 1992; Schraw, 1998).– The use of metacognitive learning activities is essenti

al to explain successful collaborative learning. (Salovaara & Ja rvela , 2003; Stahl, 2003; Veerman & Veldhuis-Dierm‥ ‥anse, 2001).

1212

Students used the notes as explicit scaffolds among peers and the students realized which notes were more useful for the learning purpose.

“support” notes– Positive feedback

• Positive feedback encourages people to participate in discussion and thereby engage in the group, actively contributing to the web-based learning environment (Hara, Bonk, and Angeli, 2000).

Content analysis of notes added in the system(2)

1313

Analysis of document quality

The average number of documents per topic : 8 The average number of new document versions

per topic : 6 91% of document versions received better

evaluation than the original ones.– The paired t test shows the versioned documents

were statistically better than the original.

68% of the notes received are explicitly introduced in the new document versions.

1414

Comparison between instructor’s and students’ opinion about the “improvement”

1515

Conclusions

KnowCat is based on the “knowledge crystallization”

This computing research must be supported by instructional studies using CSCL environment. (Dillenbourg, 1999,2002; Jarvela & Hakkinen, 2002; Hakkinen, 2004)

Future work– How the system may be used in an instructional desig

n to support and improve students’ interaction process

• To analyze the effect of students’ participation in the KnowCat instructional process