collaborative learning environments

73
EDUC 730 Dr. Holder Liberty University Summer 2011 Jaunine Fouche Igino Sabucco Rebecca Streetman Cory Valentine

Upload: arthur-kennedy

Post on 01-Jan-2016

38 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

Collaborative Learning Environments. Jaunine Fouche Igino Sabucco Rebecca Streetman Cory Valentine. EDUC 730 Dr. Holder Liberty University Summer 2011. Collaborative Environments. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Collaborative Learning Environments

EDUC 730Dr. Holder

Liberty UniversitySummer 2011

Jaunine FoucheIgino Sabucco

Rebecca StreetmanCory Valentine

Page 2: Collaborative Learning Environments

Collaborative Environments

• “Collaborative environments are online spaces where the focus is on making it easy to collaborate and work in groups, no matter where the participants may be”

Horizon Report2010 K-12 Edition

Page 3: Collaborative Learning Environments

Why Collaborate?

• Students and teachers are now interacting from different locations at different times

• Studies suggest that seeing and reading other group members’ ideas is thought to lead to mutual cognitive stimulation

• There are indicators that this style of learning better reflects the real-world business environment; thus, it prepares students for the workplace – global organizations working across time zones– strict deadlines in the business world

Page 4: Collaborative Learning Environments

Theoretical Impact

• Dewey– Reflective inquiry– Community

• Vygotsky– Knowledge construction occurs through

reflective thinking– Communication and collaboration with others

Page 5: Collaborative Learning Environments

Socialization

• Pre-requisite for effective collaboration

• Also the outcome of collaboration

• Persistent throughout entire process

• Studies indicate that a simple icebreaker at the beginning of the process may not be sufficient in developing and maintaining mutual trust and social presence

Page 6: Collaborative Learning Environments

Theoretical Framework

Community of Inquiry

(COI)

Page 7: Collaborative Learning Environments

Explanation for Framework

• Prior research focused only on social presence

• Teaching and learning elements must be included as well

Page 8: Collaborative Learning Environments

Knowledge Creation Process

–Socialization

–Externalization

–Combination

–Internalization

Page 9: Collaborative Learning Environments

Elements of a CLE

• Different verbiage within literature, but all agree that certain elements should be evaluated:– Individual participation– Interaction among group members– Social cues– Cognitive skills– Meta-cognitive skills & knowledge

Page 10: Collaborative Learning Environments

How to Structure Collaborative Environments

• In order to be effective, teachers should structure CLEs to include:– Basic clarifications and identification of relevant elements

(the problem is identified)– In-depth clarifications where a deeper understanding of

the problem is established– Inference where deductions are made in regards to

solving the problem– Judgment where the decision has been made– Applications where action occurs

Page 11: Collaborative Learning Environments

Designed with Assessment in Mind

• Teachers should design CLEs so that results can be easily translated into quantitative indicators– Easy to acquire

• Avoid delays in mail delivery

– Easy to process• Needs to allow for immediate feedback

Page 12: Collaborative Learning Environments

Specifics• Teachers should not just look at

participation alone:– Extent of participation– Attitude– Extent of roles– Rhythm (regular participation)– Reciprocal readings– Depth development– Responsiveness to contributions– conclusiveness

Page 13: Collaborative Learning Environments

The Missing Pieces

• Much of the literature suggests assigning roles to group members:– “there is a clear benefit to having a defined

management structure, with a precise division of tasks” (Gosper, McNeill, & Woo, 2010)

– the project “in this case would have clearly identified roles for easy allocation according to member strengths” (Jones, 2010)

• But none of the literature we found indicates how to go about structuring those groups

Page 14: Collaborative Learning Environments

Elements of an Effective Group

• Comfortable social atmosphere

• Regular group involvement from all members

• Consideration of other group members

Page 15: Collaborative Learning Environments

Blended Format

• Some of the literature indicates that the most successful CLEs consists of a good mix of the following:– Face-to-face meetings– Online collaboration– Asynchronous discussions

Page 16: Collaborative Learning Environments

Face-to-Face (F2F)

• Something worth noting is that the literature actually indicates that a blended format is best.– Studies have shown that F2F meetings at

certain phases are critical– Synchronous interactions add a human touch

that can be missed otherwise

Page 17: Collaborative Learning Environments

Evolving Process

• Also consistent throughout the literature is the fact that establishing success factors does not happen automatically nor is it predetermined at the onset of a project. They must be nurtured in order to evolve throughout the process and are based on the dedication and cooperation of all team members.

Page 18: Collaborative Learning Environments

Teacher’s Role

• Establish clear indicators of success

• Distribute information to students on a regular basis

• Provide individualized responses to bridge gaps

• Assist in creating mutual trust among all students

• Identify experts within each group

• Ensure participation and interactivity

Page 19: Collaborative Learning Environments

Initiating the Project

• Determine the nature and scope of project

• Understand environment

• Identify students and their expectations (know your customer)

• Establish diverse groups

• Have clearly defined goals and align these with agendas– Strict deadlines should be built into the project

Page 20: Collaborative Learning Environments

A Teacher’s Work is Never Done

• An effective teacher should monitor throughout the entire process

• Identify risk factors and develop strategies to manage these risks

• Utilize tools which are equipped with effective interaction management scaffolds (monitoring instruments)

Page 21: Collaborative Learning Environments

Misconceptions

Misconception Truth

Reduces teacher workloadRequires as much preparation, management and involvement

Technology is too expensiveSome current technology (Avatar) are more cost-efficient than traditional methods (teleconferencing)

Page 22: Collaborative Learning Environments

Trouble-Shooting

• If there are problems within a group, the instructor may need to step in– Send encouraging messages– Identify obstacles that may be preventing

participation– Rotate roles within group

Page 23: Collaborative Learning Environments

Project Management Methodology

• Plan

• Execute

• Monitor

• Problem-solve

• Closure

Page 24: Collaborative Learning Environments

Incorporating Technology

• Consistently, throughout the literature, studies have proven that technologies play a major role in contributing to the success of CLEs– Helps to facilitate regular communication– Overcomes distance barriers– Keeps instructors up-to-date on progress

Page 25: Collaborative Learning Environments

Selecting Technology Tools

• Teachers must carefully select the technology tools to be used– Should be driven by the needs of the learner

and context of learning– Should be designed to help students scaffold

each other’s learning– Cost of technology (purchases, maintenance,

security) should not compromise availability of support staff

Page 26: Collaborative Learning Environments
Page 27: Collaborative Learning Environments

Key Technologies

• Virtual Environments

• Shared Document Editors

• Social Media

• Collaborative Multimedia

Page 28: Collaborative Learning Environments

Virtual Environments

• Collaborative Virtual Environments (CVEs) provide virtual space in which users can collaborate and interact through avatars in computer simulated environments.

• Examples: Second Life, Active Worlds, and Whyville

Page 29: Collaborative Learning Environments

• New York middle school students entered Second Life to create avatars based on characters from a novel about the American Revolution. After the design and description of their avatars, they interacted with characters from other novels.

• (Weir, n.d)

Second Life

Page 30: Collaborative Learning Environments

Benefits•Cross-cultural interaction increases intersubjectivity•Students engage more freely in CVEs, pool knowledge and resources within the group context, and create final products with contain fewer errors•Most CVE allow groups to meet in private learning areas Challenges• Time constraints• In some cases, students felt learning to navigate CVE difficult and distracting from the learning process

Pros & Cons

Page 31: Collaborative Learning Environments

Shared Document Editors

• Shared document editors allow for collaboration on single products.

• Examples: Google Docs, EtherPad, wikis, and group blogging

Page 32: Collaborative Learning Environments

http://www.tothetech.com/tools-and-utilities/online-file-sharing-and-net-meeting-in-one-place.html

This shared document editor exemplifies some of the key features of this type of technology.

Showdocument.com

Page 33: Collaborative Learning Environments

Benefits•Production of higher quality documents•Increased student engagement and reflection

Challenges•Reluctance to edit another user’s work•Students with higher digital competence felt more positive about the technology than those with less digital competence

Pros & Cons

Page 34: Collaborative Learning Environments

Social Media

• Social media facilitates the connection to like-minded users and the sharing of knowledge across distances.

• Examples: Video conferencing (Skype, Google video chat); and FaceBook, Ning, and Google+

Page 35: Collaborative Learning Environments

Real-time CommunicationUsing Skype

Sharing vital information with incoming students on facebookhttp://blogs.miis.edu/recruiting/2010/03/02/new-facebook-group-for-incoming-students/

Page 36: Collaborative Learning Environments

Benefits•Online social interaction engages cognitive processes with potential to advance academic achievement •Video conferencing provides real-time, “face-to-face” interaction•Social media sites allow students to interact with those of like educational interests through “groups”

Challenges•Legal issues arise regarding the public sharing of student information•The “social” aspect of social media can be a distraction from the learning process

Pros & Cons

Page 37: Collaborative Learning Environments

Collaborative Multimedia

• Technology that allows the creation of products expressing content through video, audio, graphics, and other digital media.

• Glogster and TeacherTube/Youtube

Page 38: Collaborative Learning Environments

This glog about the “Sharks of Virginia” includes interactive images that link users to a website providing more information about each shark.

Digital Posters

Page 39: Collaborative Learning Environments

Benefits•Creative expression and blending of content through various forms of multimedia

Challenges•Accessibility and site navigation

Pros & Cons

Page 40: Collaborative Learning Environments
Page 41: Collaborative Learning Environments

Types of Assessment

• General types:– Assessment of the CLE itself– Student self-assessment– Peer to peer assessment– Instructor to student assessment

• All are important, but the last three are most critical to evaluate learning

Page 42: Collaborative Learning Environments

Engaging Students

• Engagement is:– critical to effective CLEs in which deep

learning occurs (Community of Inquiry model)– enhanced when assessment is used– drops off when assessment is over

Page 43: Collaborative Learning Environments

Effective Assessments

• Assessing learning:– Process (measure of purposeful collaboration skills)– Product (measure of co-created content)

• Most effective assessment is:– Varied (form./summ. and types)– Timely– Consists of feedback (targeted, constructive,

substantive) and grades– Has numerous opportunities for self, peer, and

instructor components

Page 44: Collaborative Learning Environments

Benefits

• Assessment is easier in CLE because:– Interactions within the CLE are trackable– Data collection methods and programs can be used to

analyze interaction patterns and responses– Conventional assessment results (e.g. – tests, quizzes)

can be given to students automatically and immediately

– “tools and resources [in CLE] provide an easier and more effective system to conduct problem-based assessment because of the emphasis on interactive, formative and continuous assessment” (Moallem, 2009)

Page 45: Collaborative Learning Environments

Example of Measurement Tool

Page 46: Collaborative Learning Environments

Drawbacks

• Assessment is harder in CLE because:• Interactions outside of the CLE are not trackable

• More difficult to assess equality of contributions• Authentic, problem-based assessment requires:

• Formative as well as summative components• Additional time on part of instructor• Use of philosophical constructs, instructional components, &

assessment strategies that instructor may not be familiar with or comfortable using

• Rubric creation is much more complex

GROUP POSTS PARTICIPANTS

Group 1 39 5

Group 2 27 5

Page 47: Collaborative Learning Environments

Gaps & Future Research

• Gaps and areas for future research:– Peer assessment empirical studies in

educational contexts are rare; makes designing more effective peer assessment challenging (Van Zundert, Sluijsmans, & Van Merriënboer, 2010)

– Processes and terminology regarding assessment components and designs are yet to be agreed upon across the literature

Page 48: Collaborative Learning Environments

Gaps & Future Research

• Gaps and areas for future research:– Parallel research is needed in related fields to

bolster findings and deepen understanding– Assessment is limited by currently used

formats that assign “jobs” or “job descriptions” to students; If roles were able to be left more open-ended, and students would still engage, more authentic assessment scenarios with shared responsibility may occur – true collaboration & self-regulation

Page 49: Collaborative Learning Environments

Gaps & Future Research

• Gaps and areas for future research :– Methods for assessing deep learning may conflict

with current focus in education• closed product vs. open-ended inquiry/problem-solving

• Assessment for learning vs. assessment for grading

– Studies that explore student engagement and its impact on the quality of peer assessment are needed (e.g. - motivational, emotional, competency); these factors may be difficult to study empirically; may need qualitative studies

Page 50: Collaborative Learning Environments

Gaps & Future Research

• Gaps and areas for future research:– Impact of self- and co-regulation on

assessment performance (process and product

outcomes) quality needs to be examined – Underlying theoretical framework (e.g. – CoI)

research is needed to better explain interaction of learner presence and assessment performance (process and product

outcomes) quality

Page 51: Collaborative Learning Environments

Big Picture

Take-Away:• Learning outcomes dealing with 21st century skills in

CLEs are complex

• Better theoretical models and assessment tools need to be developed

• Emerging fields of research and a greater interest in studying CLEs is resulting in a growing body of knowledge and new journals reporting that knowledge

Page 52: Collaborative Learning Environments
Page 53: Collaborative Learning Environments

Goal

Move students from isolated learning to social-based learning

1. School to School

2. State to State

3. Country to Country

Page 54: Collaborative Learning Environments

Three Dimensions of Practice

– Information Experience

• Body of knowledge forms foundation for learning and experience

• Learning is impacted by experience and application

(Twining, 2009, 507)

Page 55: Collaborative Learning Environments

Three Dimensions of Practice

- Individual Social

• Focus of learning starts with the individual• Social interaction leads to collaboration and

discussion to increase learning

Page 56: Collaborative Learning Environments

Three Dimensions of Practice

- Reflection Non-reflection

• Reflection on social learning experience transforms into new knowledge

• Individual processes reinforces learning• Conditioning• Memorization• Skills learning

Page 57: Collaborative Learning Environments

Beginning of Collaborative Environments

-Online chats and discussions• Emails, discussion boards• Performed outside of traditional schools• Performed in isolation and asynchronous• Provided opportunities for reflection among peers

for deeper meaning

Page 58: Collaborative Learning Environments

Next Step in Collaborative Environments

– Blended Learning• Widens the spectrum of learning• Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning

Environments (CSCL)• Encourages collaboration among different

programs and institutions• Coordination between face-to-face and online

interaction as critical component of collaborative learning process

Page 59: Collaborative Learning Environments

Current Status

– Virtual Learning Environment• Schome Iniative (combination school and home)

– Implementing virtual literacy ethnography

• Collaborative Educational Virtual Environments (CEVE)

• Second Life providing multiple phases of learning– Currently interacting online without contact in the real

world– Potential to interact in virtual settings and real world

» Promote learning through role play» Promote learning be becoming

Page 60: Collaborative Learning Environments

Goal of Virtual World

(Twining,2009, 507)

Page 61: Collaborative Learning Environments

Virtual World

• In 3D virtual learners need to discover strategies to present authentic feelings

• Current avatars do not express true human feelings– Misleading to other virtual learners – Does not allow human nature to read verbal

and body language cues

Page 62: Collaborative Learning Environments

Further Research

1. How to bridge the gap between technological and pedagogical expertise? (Rogerson-Revell, 2007)

2. How do educators take full advantage of potential of virtual learning environments? (Twining, 2009)

3. How does CSCL increase student engagement and flexibility? (So and Bonk, 2010)

Page 63: Collaborative Learning Environments

4. What are design issues to blended learning approaches to support CSCL to create seamless and effective integration of face-to-face online interaction? (So and Bonk, 2010)

5. How do educator apply the framework of Collaborative Educational Virtual Environments (CEVEs)? (Tsiatsos, Andreas, & Pomportsis, 2010)

Further Research

Page 64: Collaborative Learning Environments

6. How do you measure group cohesiveness and performance in online collaboration learning? (Choi and Kang, 2010)

7. How does virtual literacy ethnography translate to everyday literacy? (Gillen, 2009)

Further Research

Page 65: Collaborative Learning Environments

What’s on the Horizon?

• CLEs were addressed in the 2009 Horizon Report: K-12 Edition

• Still considered among the most important issues in education

• “Typically, once a topic has appeared on the near-term horizon, it does not appear in a report again, but the Advisory Board clearly felt that collaborative environments continue to bear watching.”

Horizon Report2010 K-12 Edition

Page 66: Collaborative Learning Environments

Final Thoughts

• In conclusion, after extensive review of the literature, the one thing we know for sure, is…

Page 67: Collaborative Learning Environments

When we work together: Amazing things can happen…

Page 68: Collaborative Learning Environments
Page 69: Collaborative Learning Environments

Anderson, B. (2007). Book review. [Review of the book Designing collaborative systems, by A. Crabtree]. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 16(6), 615-617. doi: 10.1007/s10606-007-9057-0

 Brodahl, C., Hadjerrouit, S., & Hansen, N. K. (2011). Collaborative writing with Web 2.0 technologies:

Education students' perceptions. Journal of Information Technology Education, 10, 73-103. Burton, B., & Martin, B. (2010). Learning in 3D virtual environments: Collaboration and knowledge spirals.

Journal of Educational Computing Research, 43(2), 259-273.  Bye, L., Smith, S., & Rallis, H. M. (2009).  Reflection using an online discussion forum: Impact on student

learning and satisfaction.  Social Work Education.  28(8) 841-855. Calvani, A., Fini, A., Molino, M., & Ranieri, M. (2010).  Visualizing and monitoring effective interactions in

online collaborative groups.  British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(2) 213-226. Chang, V., Gütl, C., Kopeinik, S., & Williams, R. (2009). Evaluation of collaborative learning settings in 3D

virtual worlds. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, (S3), 6-17. doi:10.3991/ijet.v4s3.1112

Chih-Kai, C. (2010).  Acceptability of an asynchronous learning forum on mobile devices. Behaviour & Information Technology.  29(1) 23-33.

 Devaney, L. (2010). Digital access, collaboration a must for students. eSchool News. Retrieved from:

http://www.eschoolnews.com/2010/03/16/digital-access-collaboration-a-must-for-students/

References

Page 70: Collaborative Learning Environments

Diaz, V. (2010).  Web 2.0 and emerging technologies in online learning.  New Directions for Community Colleges. 150, 57-66. Falloon, G. (2011). Making the connection:  Moore’s theory of transactional distance and its relevance to the use of a virtual classroom in

postgraduate online teacher education.   Journal of Research on Technology in Education.  43(3) 187-209. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2010). The first decade of the community of inquiry framework: A retrospective. Internet & Higher

Education, 13(1/2), 5-9.  Gosper, M. V., McNeill, M. A., & Woo, K. (2010). Harnessing the power of technologies to manage collaborative e-learning projects in dispersed

environments. Journal of Distance Education, 24(1), 167-186. Hargadon, S. (2009). Educational networking: The important role web 2.0 will play in education. Retrieved from Elluminate website:

http://audio.edtechlive.com/lc/EducationalSocialNetworkingWhitepaper.pdf Hopfer, S., & MacEachren, A. M. (2007). Leveraging the potential of geospatial annotations for collaboration: a communication theory

perspective. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 21(8), 921-934.  Huang, Y., Jeng, Y., & Huang, T. (2009). An educational mobile blogging system for supporting collaborative learning. Educational Technology

& Society, 12(2), 163-175.

Hyo-Jeong S. & Bonk, C.J. (2010). Examining the roles of blended learning approaches in computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) environments: A delphi study.  Journal of Educational Technology & Society. 13(3) 189-200.

References

Page 71: Collaborative Learning Environments

Johnson, L., Smith, R., Levine, A., and Haywood, K., (2010). The 2010 Horizon Report: K-12 Edition.Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.

 Jones, M. (2010). A CSCL approach to blended learning in the integration of technology in teaching.

Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning & Learning Objects, 6, 103-113. Kollar, I., & Fischer, F. (2010). Peer assessment as collaborative learning: A cognitive perspective. Learning &

Instruction, 20, 344-348. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.005 Kolfschoten, G., Vreede, G., Briggs, R., & Sol, H. (2010). Collaboration ‘engineerability’. Group Decision and

Negotiation, 19(3), 301-321.  Konstantinidis, A., Tsiatsos, T., & Pomportsis, A. (2009). Collaborative virtual learning environments: design

and evaluation. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 44(2), 279-304. Kubo, M. M., Tori, R., & Kirner, C. (2002). Interaction in collaborative educational virtual environments.

CyberPsychology and Behavior, 5(5), 399-407. Lakkala, M., Ilomäki, L., & Palonen, T. (2007). Implementing virtual collaborative inquiry practises in a middle-

school context. Behaviour & Information Technology, 26(1), 37-53. Ligorio, M., Cesareni, D., & Schwartz, N. (2008). Collaborative virtual environments as means to increase the

level of intersubjectivity in a distributed cognition system. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 40(3), 339-357.

References

Page 72: Collaborative Learning Environments

Ligorio, M., & Van Veen, K. (2006). Constructing a successful cross-national virtual learning environment in primary and secondary education. AACE Journal, 14(2), 103-128.

 Macdonald, J. (2003). Assessing online collaborative learning: process and product. Computers & Education,

40(4), 377-391. Minocha, S., & Roberts, D. (2008). Laying the groundwork for socialisation and knowledge construction within

3D virtual worlds. ALT-J: Association for Learning Technology Journal, 16(3), 181-196. Moallem, M. (2009). Assessment of complex learning outcomes in online learning environments. In P. Rogers

(Ed.), Encyclopedia of distance learning (pp. 94-102). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. Nicholas, H. & Wan, N. (2009).  Engaging secondary school students in extended and open learning

supported by online technologies. Journal of Research on Technology in Education. 41(3) 305-328. Paraskeva, F., Mysirlaki, S., & Choustoulakis, E. (2009). Designing collaborative learning environments using

educational scenarios based on self-regulation. International Journal of Advanced Corporate Learning, 2(1), 42-49. doi: 10.3991/ijac.v2i1.606

 Persico, D., Pozzi, F., & Sarti, L. (2010). Monitoring Collaborative Activities in Computer Supported

Collaborative Learning. Distance Education, 31(1), 5-22. Resta, P., & Laferrière, T. (2007). Technology in support of collaborative learning. Educational Psychology

Review, 19(1), 65-83.

References

Page 73: Collaborative Learning Environments

Rimor, R., Rosen, Y., & Naser, K. (2010). Complexity of Social Interactions in Collaborative Learning: The Case of Online Database Environment. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning & Learning Objects, 6, 355-365.

 Rogerson-Revell, P. (2007).  Directions in e-learning tools and technologies and their relevance to online distance language education.  Open

Learning.  22(1) 57-74. Shea, P., & Bidjerano, T. (2010). Learning presence: Towards a theory of self-efficacy, self-regulation, and the development of a communities of

inquiry in online and blended learning environments. Computers & Education, 55(4), 1721-1731. Slagter van T., Patricia J., & Bishop, M. J. (2009).  Theoretical foundations for enhancing social connectedness in online learning environments. 

Distance Education. 30(3) 291-315. So, H.-J., Seah, L. H., & Toh-Heng, H. L. (2010). Designing collaborative knowledge building environments accessible to all learners: Impacts

and design challenges. Computers & Education, 54(2), 479-490. Tsai, A. (2011). A hybrid e-learning model incorporating some of the principal learning theories. Social Behavior & Personality: An International

Journal, 39(2), 145-152. Vonderwell, S., Liang, X., & Alderman, K. (2007). Asynchronous discussions and assessment in online learning. Journal of Research on

Technology in Education, 39(3), 309. Weir, L. (n.d.). Get a life: Students collaborate in simulated roles. Edutopia. Retrieved from http://www.edutopia.org/second-life-virtual-reality-

collaboration Yueh-Min, H., Yu-Lin, J., & Tien-Chi, H. (2009). An educational mobile blogging system for supporting collaborative learning. Journal of

Educational Technology & Society, 12(2), 163-175.

References