soller-etal-its98

8/3/2019 Soller-etal-ITS98

1/11

In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems

(ITS 98). San Antonio, TX, 186-195.

Promoting Effective Peer Interaction in an Intelligent

Collaborative Learning System1

Amy Soller, Bradley Goodman, Frank Linton, and Robert Gaimari

The MITRE Corporation

202 Burlington Road, Bedford, MA, 01730-1420

[email protected]

Abstract. Placing students in a group and assigning them a task does notguarantee that the students will engage in effective collaborative learning

behavior. The collaborative learning model described in this paper identifies

the specific characteristics exhibited by effective collaborative learning teams,

and based on these characteristics, suggests strategies for promoting effective

peer interaction. The model is designed to help an intelligent collaborative

learning system recognize and target group interaction problem areas. Once

targeted, the system can take actions to help students collaborate more

effectively with their peers, maximizing individual student and group learning.

1 Introduction

Research has shown that classroom learning improves significantly when students

participate in learning activities with small groups of peers [2]. Students learning in

small groups encourage each other to ask questions, explain and justify their

opinions, articulate their reasoning, and elaborate and reflect upon their knowledge,

thereby motivating and improving learning. These benefits, however, are only

achieved by active and well-functioning learning teams. Placing students in a group

and assigning them a task does not guarantee that the students will engage in

effective collaborative learning behavior. While some peer groups seem to interact

naturally, others struggle to maintain a balance of participation, leadership,

understanding, and encouragement. Traditional lecture-oriented classrooms do not

teach students the social skills they need to interact effectively in a team, and few

students involved in team projects or exposed to integrated working environmentslearn these skills well [11].

The collaborative learning model (CL Model) described in this paper identifies the

characteristics exhibited by effective collaborative learning teams, and based on these

characteristics, suggests strategies for promoting more effective student interaction.

The model is designed to help an intelligent collaborative learning system recognize

and target group interaction problem areas. Once targeted, the system can take

1 This work was supported by the MITRE Sponsored Research Program.


2/11

actions to help students collaborate more effectively with their peers, maximizing

individual student and group learning.

The next section describes the characteristics exhibited by effective collaborative

learning teams, and section 3 proposes strategies for helping groups achieve these

characteristics. Section 4 describes our ongoing efforts to implement the strategies in

an intelligent collaborative learning system, and section 5 summarizes the CL Model.

2 Characteristics of Effective Collaborative Learning Teams

This section describes the characteristics exhibited by effective collaborative learning

teams based on a review of research in educational psychology and computer-supported collaborative learning [2] [10] [11] [13] [18], and empirical data from a

study conducted by the authors of this paper [16]. The study was conducted during a

five day course in which students learned and used Object Modeling Technique to

collaboratively design software systems. The students were videotaped as they

worked in groups of four or five. The videotape transcriptions were coded with a

speech act based coding scheme, and studied using summary and sequential analysis

techniques.

The characteristics studied and seen to be exhibited during effective collaborative

learning interaction fall into five categories: participation, social grounding,

collaborative learning conversation skills, performance analysis and group

processing, and promotive interaction. The following five subsections describe these

categories and their corresponding characteristics.

2.1 Participation

A teams learning potential is maximized when all the students actively participate in

the groups discussions. Building involvement in group discussions increases the

amount of information available to the group, enhancing group decision making and

improving the students quality of thought during the learning process [10].

Encouraging active participation also increases the likelihood that all group members

will learn the subject matter, and decreases the likelihood that only a few students

will understand the material, leaving the others behind.

2.2 Social Grounding

Teams with social grounding skills establish and maintain a shared understanding of

meanings. The students take turns questioning, clarifying and rewording their peers

comments to ensure their own understanding of the teams interpretation of the

problem and the proposed solutions. In periods of successful collaborative activity,

students conversational turns build upon each other and the content contributes to

the joint problem solving activity [17].


3/11

Analysis of the data collected from our study [16] revealed that students in

effective collaborative learning teams naturally take turns speaking by playing

characteristic roles [5] such as such as questioner, facilitator, and motivator.

2.3 Collaborative Learning Conversation Skills

An individuals learning achievement in a team can often be determined by the

quality of his communication in the group discussions [10]. Skill in learning

collaboratively means knowing when and how to question, inform, and motivate

ones teammates, knowing how to mediate and facilitate conversation, and knowing

how to deal with conflicting opinions.

The Collaborative Learning Skills Network (shown in part by Figure 1) illustratesthe conversation skills which are key to collaborative learning and problem solving,

based on our study [16]. This network is a modified version of McManus and

Aikens Collaborative Skills Network [13], which breaks down each cooperative

learning skill type (Communication, Trust, Leadership, and Creative Conflict) into its

corresponding subskills (e.g. Acknowledgment, Negotiation), and attributes (e.g.

Appreciation, Asking for information). Each attribute is assigned a sentence opener

which conveys the appropriate dialogue intention.

The goal of collaborative learning is for all the students to help each other learn

all the material together, whereas in cooperative learning each student individually

performs his or her assigned learning task, independently contributing to the groups

Collabo

rativeLearning

Skills

ActiveLearning

Motivate

Inform

Reques

t

C l a r i f ic a t i o n

J u s t i f i c a t i o n

O p i n i o n

E l a b o r a t i o n

R e i n f o r c e

R e p h r a s e

L e a d

S u g g e s t

E l a b o r a t e

E x p l a i n / C l a r i f y

J u s t i f y

A s s e r t

I n f o r m a t i o n

E n c o u r a g e

" T o e l a b o r a t e "

" I t h i n k "

" I t h i n k w e s h o u l d "

" In o t h e r w o r d s "

" T h a t ' s r i g h t "

" V e r y G o o d " , " G o o d P o i n t "

" W h y d o y o u t h i n k t h a t "

" C a n y o u e x p l a i n w h y / h o w "

" C a n y o u t e l l m e m o r e "

" D o y o u k n o w "

" I ' m r e a s o n a b l y s u r e "

" T o j u s t i f y "

" L e t m e e x p l a i n i t t h i s w a y "

" D o y o u t h i n k "

S k i l l S u b s k i l l A t t r i b u t e S e n t e n c e O p e n e r

Fig. 1. The Active Learning Skills section of the Collaborative Learning Skill Network

(adapted from McManus and Aikens Collaborative Skill Network, [13])


4/11

final solution [8]. Effective collaborative learning interaction differs from

cooperative learning interaction in that students learning collaboratively utilize fewer

Trust and Leadership skills, and more Active Learning skills such as Justify,

Elaborate, Encourage, and Explain [16]. The Collaborative Learning Skills Network

reflects this difference.

2.4 Performance Analysis and Group Processing

Group processing exists when groups discuss their progress, and decide what

behaviors to continue or change [11]. Group processing can be facilitated by giving

students the opportunity to individually and collectively assess their performance.

During this self evaluation, each student learns individually how to collaborate moreeffectively with his teammates, and the group as a whole reflects on its performance.

2.5 Promotive Interaction

A group achievespromotive interdependence when the students in the group perceive

that their goals are positively correlated such that an individual can only attain his

goal if his team members also attain their goals [7]. In collaborative learning, these

goals correspond to each students need to understand his team members ideas,

questions, explanations, and problem solutions.

Students who are influenced by promotive interdependence engage in promotive

interaction; they verbally promote each others understanding through support, help,

and encouragement [11]. If a student does not understand the answer to a question or

solution to a problem, his teammates make special accommodations to address his

misunderstanding before the group moves on. Ensuring that each student receives the

help he needs from his peers is key to promoting effective collaborative interaction.

3 Strategies for Promoting Effective Peer Interaction

This section suggests implementation strategies for helping students attain the

collaborative learning skills required to excel in each of the five CL Model

categories.

3.1 Encouraging Participation

An intelligent collaborative learning system (ICLS) can encourage participation by

initiating and facilitating round-robin brainstorming sessions [10] at appropriate

times during learning activities. Consider the following scenario. An ICLS presents

an exercise to a group of students. After reading the problem description to himself

or herself, each group member individually formulates procedures for going about


5/11

solving the problem. A student who is confident that he has the right procedure

may naturally speak up and suggest his ideas, whereas the student who is unsure (but

may actually have the best proposal) may remain quiet. During this phase of learning,

it is key that all students bring their suggestions and ideas into the group discussion,

especially since quiet students of lower ability have particular difficulty learning the

material [18]. The ICLS initiates and facilitates a round-robin brainstorming session a

few minutes after the students have read the problem description. Each student in the

group is required to openly state his rationale for solving the problem while the other

students listen. Round-robin brainstorming sessions establish an environment in

which each student in turn has the opportunity to express himself openly without his

teammates interrupting or evaluating his opinion. An ICLS can help ensure active

participation by engaging students in these sessions at appropriate times.

Personal Learning Assistants (PaLs), personified by animated computer agents,can be designed to partner with a student, building his confidence level and

encouraging him to participate. Providing a private channel of communication [12]

between a student and his personal learning assistant allows the student to openly

discuss his ideas with his PaL without worrying about his peers criticisms. A

students PaL could help him develop his ideas before he proposes them to the other

students. The personal learning assistant may also ask the student questions in order

to obtain a more accurate representation of his knowledge for input to the student

model. A more accurate student model allows coaching to better meet student needs.

3.2 Maintaining Social Grounding

An ICLS can model the turn-taking behavior that is characteristic of teams with

social grounding skills (section 2.2), by assigning the students roles [5] such as

questioner, clarifier, mediator, informer, and facilitator (among others), and rotating

these roles around the group for each consecutive dialogue segment. The beginning

of a new dialogue segment is identified by the start of a new context, often initiated

by sentence openers such as, OK, lets move on, or Now, what about this [16].

One or more critical roles, such as questioner or motivator, may be missing in a

group if there are too few students to fill all the necessary roles. A missing role can

be played by a simulated peer, or learning companion [6] [9]. The learning

companion can be dynamically adapted to best fit the needs of the group, playing the

role of critic during one dialogue segment, and facilitator during the next.

Identifying and characterizing the natural role switches that take place between

dialogue segments will aid in further developing advanced strategies for maintaining

social grounding through role playing.

3.3 Supporting Collaborative Learning Conversation Skills Practice

Students solving open-ended problems, in which an absolute answer or solution may

not exist, must explain their viewpoints to their peers, and justify their opinions.


6/11

Assigning students open-ended activities encourages them to practice these essential

active learning conversation skills. A learning companion in an ICLS can also

encourage students to elaborate upon and justify their reasoning by playing the role

of devils advocate [10].

Providing students with collaborative learning skill usage statistics (e.g. 10%

Inform, 50% Request, 40% Argue) raises their awareness about the types of

contributions they are making to the group conversation. This capability, however,

requires either the ICLS to understand and code the students dialogue, or the

students to tell the system from which skill categories their utterances belong.

Section 4 describes an alternate method of obtaining collaborative learning skill

information.

3.4 Evaluating Student Performance and Promoting Group Processing

An ICLS can promote group processing by evaluating students individual and group

performance, and providing them with feedback. Students should receive individual

evaluations in private, along with suggestions for improving their individual

performance. The team should receive a group evaluation in public, along with

suggestions for improving group performance. The purpose of providing a group

evaluation is to inspire the students to openly discuss their effectiveness while they

are learning and determine how to improve their performance. This introspective

discussion may also be provoked by allowing the students to collaboratively view

and make comments on their student and group models [4].

3.5 Supporting Promotive Interaction

Webb [18] outlines five criteria for ensuring that students provide effective help to

their peers in a collaborative environment. These criteria are (1) help is timely, (2)

help is relevant to the students need, (3) the correct amount of elaboration or detail is

given, (4) the help is understood by the student, and (5) the student has an

opportunity to apply the help in solving the problem (and uses it!). The following

paragraphs suggest strategies to address each criteria.

When a student requests help, the ICLS can encourage his teammates to respond

in a timely manner. Assigning a mentor to each student provides them with a

personal support system. Student mentors feel responsible to ensure their mentees

understanding, and mentees know where to get help when they need it.In response to their questions, students must be provided with relevant

explanations containing an adequate level of elaboration. Their peers, however, may

not know how to compose high-quality, elaborated explanations, and may need

special training in using examples, analogies, and multiple representations in their

explanations [1]. To increase the frequency and quality of explanations, and ICLS

could strategically assign students roles such as Questioner and Explainer to help

them practice and improve these skills.


7/11

Webbs fourth and fifth criteria can be met by an ICLS by observing and

analyzing a students actions in conjunction with his communicative actions to

determine whether or not a student understood and applied the help received.

4 Applying the CL Model to an ICLS

This section describes our ongoing research in the development of an intelligent

collaborative learning system based on the CL Model. Ideally, an ICLS would be

able to understand and interpret the group conversation, and could actively support

the group during their learning activities by applying the strategies described in

section 3. In working toward the realization of this vision, we have focused ourefforts on implementing group support strategies; later these strategies may draw

upon natural language understanding functionality.

Fig. 2. Sentence opener based communication interface

To enable student communication over a computer network, a chat style interface

(Figure 2), based on the Collaborative Learning Skill Network, was developed [15]

(see also [13] [14]). Students begin their statement with a sentence opener by


8/11

selecting one of eight subskill categories: Request, Inform, Motivate, Argue,

Mediate, Task, Maintenance, or Acknowledge. The sentence openers represent

characteristic sentence starters from the subskill categories to which they belong.

Students view the group conversation as it progresses in the large window displaying

the students names and utterances. This sentence opener interface structures the

groups conversation, making the students actively aware of the dialogue focus and

discourse intent.

Each time a student makes a contribution to the group conversation, the

communication interface records the date, time, students name, and subskill applied

in the student action log (Figure 3). By dynamically performing summary analysis on

a groups logged interaction data, an ICLS can determine to what extent each student

is participating, and from which subskill categories he is contributing. This type of

data may allow the system to determine a students role within the group and what

skills he needs to practice. For example, although John has been following the group

conversation closely and interacting often, his summary CLC skill statistics show that

90% of his contributions are from the category Acknowledge.

The information in the student action log combined with knowledge of the student

actions taken on a shared workspace provides insight into the students competence

in the subject matter. For example, consider the sequence of actions shown in Figure

3. Brad asks Amy a question and Amy responds. Brad asks Amy a second question

and Amy responds again. Brad acknowledges Amys response and then creates a link

on the shared workspace, showing the relationship between his proposed hypothesis

and some new evidence he has discovered. Finally, Amy praises Brad for taking a

correct action. From this interaction sequence, the ICLS could deduce that Amy

helped Brad learn and apply the rule relating his hypothesis and the new evidence.This information could be used, for example, to enrich Amy and Brads student

models, enabling the ICLS to provide more effective coaching to them

Fig. 3. Example log generated from student communication and actions on a shared

workspace

The components of an ICLS, based on the CL Model, are responsible for using the

information obtained from the communication interface and shared tools to determine

when and how to apply the strategies described in section 3. For example, the


9/11

instructional planning component may be responsible for not only selecting

appropriate exercises to present to the students, but also selecting roles to assign to

students. Table 1 summarizes the strategies that address each of the five CL Model

categories, and shows how the ICLS components can implement these strategies.

In the next stage of this research, a second study will be conducted in which

students from the first study will be asked to collaboratively solve problems similar

to those they solved before, however this time they will be required to communicate

using the sentence opener interface. The students will jointly design their software

system using a shared workspace. This study will test the usability of the

communication interface, and reveal any refinements needed to the collaborative

learning skill network. The ICLS components shown in Table 1 will then be

developed and tested to evaluate the CL Model.

5 Conclusion

Learning effective collaboration skills is essential to successfully learning course

Table 1. The CL Model support strategies that could be executed by each ICLS component

ICLS Component

CL Model Facet CL Skill CoachInstructionalPlanner

Student/ GroupModel

LearningCompanion

PersonalLearningAssistant

Participation

Facilitate round-

robin

brainstorming

sessions

Initiate round-

robin

brainstorming

sessions

Encourage

participation

SocialGrounding

Assign roles to

students, and

rotate roles

around group

Fill in missing

roles in

group

Ensure

students are

playing their

assigned roles

CollaborativeLearningConversationSkills

Provide

feedback on CL

skill usage

Assign tasks that

require students

to practice CL

skills

Store student/

group CL skill

usage statistics

Play devils

advocate to

encourage

active learning

PerformanceAnalysis &GroupProcessing

Provide

feedback on

group/

individual

performance

Allow students

to inspect and

comment on

their student/

group models

Promotive

Interaction

Ensure adequate

elaboration is

provided in

explanations

Assign mentors

or helpers to

students

Update

student/group

models when

students receive

help

Alert students

to their peers

requests for

help


10/11

material with peers [3]. These skills are often not inherent, however they can be

learned through practice and support during structured group learning activities.

The CL Model described in this paper provides ICLS developers with a

framework and set of recommendations for helping groups acquire effective

collaborative learning skills. The model describes the characteristics exhibited by

effective learning teams, namely participation, social grounding, performance

analysis and group processing, application of collaborative learning conversation

skills, and promotive interaction.

References

1. Blumenfeld, P., Marx, R., Soloway, E., & Krajcik, J. (1996). Learning with peers: Fromsmall group cooperation to collaborative communities. Educational Researcher, 25(8),37-40.

2. Brown, A. & Palincsar, A. (1989). Guided, cooperative learning and individual knowledgeacquisition. In L. Resnick (Ed.), Knowledge, learning and instruction (pp. 307-336),Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

3. Bruffee, K. (1993). Collaborative learning. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins UniversityPress.

4. Bull, S. & Broady, E. (1997). Spontaneous peer tutoring from sharing student models.Proceedings of the 8th World Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AI-ED97), Kobe, Japan, 143-150.

5. Burton, M., Brna, P., & Treasure-Jones, T. (1997). Splitting the collaborative atom.Proceedings of the 8th World Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AI-ED97), Kobe, Japan, 135-142.

6. Chan, T.W. & Baskin, A. (1988). Studying with the prince: The computer as a learningcompanion. Proceedings of the ITS 88 Conference, Montreal, Canada, 194-200.

7. Deutsch, M. (1962). Cooperation and trust: Some theoretical notes. In M. Jones (Ed.)Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (pp. 275-320). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

8. Dillenbourg, P., Baker, M., Blaye, A., & OMalley, C. (1995). The evolution of research oncollaborative learning. In H. Spada and P. Reinmann (Eds.), Learning in Humans andMachines, Elsevier Science.

9. Goodman, B., Soller, A., Linton, F., & Gaimari, R. (1997). Encouraging student reflectionand articulation using a learning companion. Proceedings of the 8th World Conference onArtificial Intelligence in Education (AI-ED 97), Kobe, Japan, 151-158.

10. Jarboe, S. (1996). Procedures for enhancing group decision making. In B. Hirokawa andM. Poole (Eds.), Communication and Group Decision Making (pp. 345-383). ThousandOaks, CA: Sage Publications.

11. Johnson, D., Johnson, R., & Holubec, E. (1990). Circles of learning: Cooperation in theclassroom (3rd ed.). Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.

12. Koschmann, T., Kelson, A., Feltovich, P., & Barrows, H. (1996). Computer-supportedproblem-based learning. In T. Koschmann (Ed.), CSCL: Theory and Practice of anEmerging Paradigm (pp. 83-124). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

13. McManus, M, & Aiken, R. (1995). Monitoring computer-based problem solving. Journalof Artificial Intelligence in Education, 6(4), 307-336.

14. Robertson, J. (1997). BetterBlether: An educational communication tool. Unpublishedundergraduate honours dissertation, Departments of Computer Science and ArtificialIntelligence, University of Edinburgh.

15. Soller, A. (1997). Toward an intelligent CSCL communication interface. Proceedings ofAI-ED 97 Workshop IV, Kobe, Japan, 94-95.


11/11

16. Soller, A., Linton, F., Goodman, B., & Gaimari, R. (1996). [Videotaped study: 3 groups of4-5 students each solving software system design problems using Object ModelingTechnique during a one week course at The MITRE Institute]. Unpublished raw data.

17. Teasley, S. & Roschelle, J. (1993). Constructing a joint problem space. In S. Lajoie & S.Derry (Eds.), Computers as cognitive tools (pp. 229-257). Hillsdale, NJ: LawrenceErlbaum.

18. Webb, N. (1992). Testing a theoretical model of student interaction and learning in smallgroups. In R. Hertz-Lazarowitz and N. Miller (Eds.), Interaction in Cooperative Groups:The Theoretical Anatomy of Group Learning (pp. 102-119). New York: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Acknowledgments

Special thanks to the students in the OMT class we studied, and to the instructor for beingexceptionally cooperative. Thanks also to Brant Cheikes and Mark Burton for their support.

soller-etal-its98

Documents