1. Diagram-mediated Collaborative Learning Carla Van Boxtel Utrecht University Department of Educational Sciences Arja Veerman TNO-human Factors Training and Instruction

2. 22-24 march 2001Euro CSCL 2001, Maastricht tools Collaborative concept learning enable support constrain provoke How can diagrams facilitate elaboration and argumentation in both face-to-face and electronic collaborative learning?

3. 22-24 march 2001Euro CSCL 2001, Maastricht Concept Map Face-to-face Collaborative elaboration enable support constrain provoke Study 1

4. 22-24 march 2001Euro CSCL 2001, Maastricht Argumentative Diagram CMC Collaborative argumentation enable support constrain provoke Study 2

5. 22-24 march 2001Euro CSCL 2001, Maastricht Concept Map Diagram in which Nodes represent concepts Lines represent interrelationships among concepts Labels on the lines represent the nature of the relations current resistance length Less resistance, less current strength Longer wire, more resistance

6. 22-24 march 2001Euro CSCL 2001, Maastricht Experimental Study Learning goal: improving understanding of electricity concepts Task: introductory task of max. 45 minutes Subjects: 40 students (15/16 year old) working in dyads Learning outcomes: pre-test and post-test Verbal interaction: video-taped and transcribed

7. 22-24 march 2001Euro CSCL 2001, Maastricht Design Concept map : Construction of a concept map on a large paper with given electricity concepts 10 dyads Poster: Explaining the working of an electric torch on a large paper with given electricity concepts 10 dyads

8. 22-24 march 2001Euro CSCL 2001, Maastricht Analysis of Student Interaction Amount and type of talk about electricity concepts Propositions: utterances about the meaning or relations of concepts Amount and type of elaboration Elaborative episodes: elaborated answers on questions, elaboration of conflict, reasoning Amount and type of co-construction Co-construction episodes: collaborative elaboration of conflicts, collaborative reasoning

9. 22-24 march 2001Euro CSCL 2001, Maastricht Results Significant higher scores on the post-test Almost no off-task and procedural talk Type of product has no effect on learning outcomes Type of product has an effect on the quality of the collaborative learning processes: In the concept mapping condition: -More talk about electricity concepts -More collaborative elaboration of conflicts -More reasoning

10. 22-24 march 2001Euro CSCL 2001, Maastricht Concept map provokes and supports collaborative elaboration Focuses on the concepts to be learned: their meaning and relationships Facilitates verbalization of own ideas Facilitates the maintaining of a shared focus Stimulates argumentation, because the concept map requires an explicit answer

11. 22-24 march 2001Euro CSCL 2001, Maastricht Argumentative Diagram Diagram in which Nodes represent claims and statements Lines represent relations between claims and arguments Colors on the lines represent positive, negative or neutral relations

12. 22-24 march 2001Euro CSCL 2001, Maastricht Explorative Study Learning goal: Development of a CBT program Task: Discussion task to justify pedagogical choices (45-60 min. per issue), by use of the Belvedere system Subjects: 8 small student groups (university level) Learning outcomes: process measurement of the production of constructive activities Verbal interaction: logged discussions & diagrams

13. 22-24 march 2001Euro CSCL 2001, Maastricht Design Argumentative diagram Construction of an argumentative diagram by use of the belvedere system, including a synchronous chat system and a graphical diagram construction window. Self-defined claims were used to trigger discussion 8 small groups (dyads/triples)

14. 22-24 march 2001Euro CSCL 2001, Maastricht Analysis of Student Interaction Chat: amount and type of talk (per message) Focus: technical/off-task, planning, thematic  thematic: dialogue moves, (incl. arguments), constructive activities Diagram: themes, statements, links, chat overlap Elaborative episodes: elaborated answers on questions, elaboration of conflict, reasoning

15. 22-24 march 2001Euro CSCL 2001, Maastricht Results Chat: majority of messages concerned technical/off-task talk and planning issues Diagrams: strongly focused on thematic issues Chats & diagrams: diagram types tends to be related to types of chats Chats & diagrams: the more overlap between chat and diagram, the more constructive activities

16. 22-24 march 2001Euro CSCL 2001, Maastricht Argumentative Diagram Supports Focusing and Argumentation Focuses on the concepts to be learned: their meaning and relationships Facilitates maintenance of a shared focus Facilitates verbalization of arguments pro and contra claims/statements

17. 22-24 march 2001Euro CSCL 2001, Maastricht Conclusions & Discussion Diagrams provoke and support meaningful discussions and collaborative learning by facilitating focus maintenance, elaboration and argumentation F2F facilitates focusing (use of non-verbal cues and correction in speed of talk) CMC facilitates critical behavior (no non- verbal cues to inhibit argumentation and time to think through slow flow of communication)

18. 22-24 march 2001Euro CSCL 2001, Maastricht Recommendations for Design Use tasks that aim at elaborate talk and argumentation Use visually shared products CMC: use support for co-ordination and focusing F2F: use support for critical question asking and argumentation