1. Learner's arguments in a collective learning environment: Argue & Graph Patrick.Jermann, Pierre.Dillenbourg @tecfa.unige.ch Is different from collaborative See proceedings on page 265

2. Context Postgrad course on educational technologies Hybrid format [presence + distance]: 6 X [1 week on campus + 5 weeks at home] Web-based since 1993

3. Lessons … Communication for ? Web as a workspace Less text, more activity... @ @ Radio silence Looking for innovative activities Looking for innovative activities

4. Spatial metaphor Zones = courses Buildings = activities Rooms = steps Zones People in same room News & who is where Identity Tecfa Virtual Campus PHP 3 + MySQL

5. pseudo-task solo individual differences debriefing pseudo-task duo group differencesArgueGraph

6. pseudo-task solo individual differences debriefing pseudo-task duo group differencesArgueGraph

7. pseudo-task solo Individual differences debriefing pseudo-task duo group differencesArgueGraph

8. pseudo-task solo individual differences debriefing pseudo-task duo group differencesArgueGraph

9. Design choices Immediate FB Delayed FB Microworld FB Theories Behavioursim Constructivism Metacognition pseudo-task solo individual differences debriefing pseudo-task duo group differencesArgueGraph

10. Does it work ? Exp. 1 (97) 16 master students Exp. 2 (98) 15 cont. Education adults Exp. 3 (98) 18 master students Exp. 4 (99) 16 master students Intuitively yes (noise) No pre/post test data (hence probably not) Not for the last experiment Let's look process variables.

11. ArgueGraph Data (Exp.3) Reformulation Justification Solo57 % 43 % Duo15 % 85 % Restatment of the question At least one new idea...

12. AcceptCondition Discard No Conflict28 13 Conflict23 111 "We answer 3 because motivation is important" "We answer 3 because motivation is important" "We choose 3 because 2 does not work" "We answer 2 if the learner is a child but we answer 3 for adult learners" "We answer 2 if the learner is a child but we answer 3 for adult learners" ArgueGraph Data (Exp.3)

13. NewUnion Victory No Conflict6 1610 Conflict14 813 Arg(AB)  Arg(A) & Arg(AB)  Arg(B Arg(AB) =Arg(A) or Arg(AB) =Arg(B ) Arg(AB)=Arg(A) U Arg(B ) X 2 =6.2, p<.05) ArgueGraph Data (Exp.3)

14. So what? Fostering conflict seems to produce more elaborated arguments

15. What design is suggested by exp 3 ?

16. What's the problem with exp 4 ? pseudo-task debriefing Coffee-break 1 week Exp 1-3 Exp 4 pseudo-task

17. Group representations foster participation This structured collective activity produced elaborated arguments Other activities, based on a similar scenario, "worked well" too. Activities are very sensitive to timing issuesLessons

18. … is looking for contributions… Pierre.Dillenbourg@tecfa.unige.ch KLUWER