TITLE OF PAPER: An analysis of learning
conversations in two networked collaborative teaching interventions
AUTHORS: Tony Carr, Glenda Cox, Andrea
Eden, Maria Loopuyt
INSTITUTION: Multimedia Education Group
University of Cape Town
SESSION TYPE: Paper
NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTACT PERSON: Tony
Carr, Multimedia Education Group, Centre for Higher Education Development,
University of Cape Town, Private Bag, Rondebosch, 7701, Cape Town, South Africa
TELEPHONE: +27216505033
E-MAIL: tcarr@ched.uct.ac.za
NUMBER OF WORDS: 562
FIVE KEY WORDS: online collaboration, mixed
mode, trade simulation, Exchange Structure Analysis, academic literacies
PROPOSAL:
Introduction
The Multimedia Education Group at the University of Cape
Town researches a growing number of teaching interventions which make use of
online discussions to facilitate students in knowledge management and
collaboration either at the level of the whole class or within smaller project
groups. These interventions are designed to support the development of
information literacy, writing skills, numeracy and economic literacy. Project
design generally incorporates both constructivist assumptions and scaffolding
of learning experiences.
Theoretical Basis
A number of relevant assertions emerge from the literature
of online collaboration and online collaborative learning including :
1)
The online environment fosters fluidity and multiplicity
of identity which contributes to the narrowing of social differences. (Turkle
1995, Rheingold 1994, Sproull and Kiesler 1995)
2)
Online communication can be used for shared reflective
conversations in communities of practice and in learning contexts (Comstock and
Fox 1995, DiMauro and Gal 1994)
3)
The social design is a key determinant of successful online
collaboration. (Pattison-Gordon 1998, DiMauro and Gal 1994)
4)
Thoughtful choices need to be made concerning the balance
of online and face to face communication (Lipniak and Stamps 1997) and the
balance of group and individual communication. (Pallof and Pratt 1999, Salmon
2000)
5)
Effective facilitation and shared agreements concerning
process contribute to successful online collaboration. (Pallof and Pratt 1999,
Salmon 2000)
Many of these assertions require rethinking in a formal
educational environment when most online collaboration occurs across limited
physical distance in a laboratory and where their peers typically know
participants’ real life identities.
Research into online collaboration in the Multimedia
Education Group at the University of Cape Town is intended to 1) develop
instruments for the analysis of online discussions and chats; 2) Analyse the
relationships between face to face and online learning conversations; 3)
Analyse the costs and benefits of online collaboration interventions. This paper
will focus on the first two objectives in the context of two case studies:
a)
The International Trade Bargaining simulation
is a module in Economics 3. In the second semester of 2001 approximately 100
students took part in a simulated World Trade Organisation bargaining round as
representatives of member states. They made extensive use of online chats,
online discussions and e-mail for knowledge management and bargaining.
b)
Images of Africa is a postgraduate module
offered by the Centre for African Studies. In the second semester of 2001
approximately 25 students took part in a series of face to face seminars and
online discussions about representations of Africa. (Cox and Hall 2001)
The analysis of online discussions and chats through the
use of metrics of online interaction (Hall 2000) and through the coding of
conversational moves (Mason 1992) is essential to this research. There are
several highly sophisticated approaches to discourse analysis which require
considerable experience and subject specific knowledge for their effective use.
Some schemas attempt cognitive classification of educator or student moves
(Henri 1992) but finegrained classifications (used by researchers such as
Newman et al 1996) limit inter-coder reliability. Exchange Structure Analysis
(Kneser et al 2000) is a subset of the far larger DISCOUNT scheme (Pilkington
1999) and has been used to analyse the relative roles of students and educators
in online learning conversations. It is
contended that a relatively simple coding of online conversation can support a
rich analysis when used in combination with data from classroom observations
and educator and student interviews and surveys.
References
Comstock, D. and Fox, S. (1995) Computer conferencing
in a learning community:
opportunities and obstacles.
Available: http://www.seattleantioch.edu/gmp/compcon1.htm
Cox, G. and Hall, M., Analysing student interaction and
collaboration on-line using communicative action theory and exchange structure
analysis. Presented at the International Literacy Conference in Cape Town
November 2001.
DiMauro, V. and Gal, S. (1994) The use of
telecommunications for reflective discourse of science teacher leaders. Available:
http://www.terc.edu/papers/labnet/Articles/Reflective/reflective.html
Hall, T. (2000) Practitioner's Guide to Evaluating
Collaborative Systems. The Mitre Corporation. Available: http://collaboration.mitre.org/practguide/PractionersGuide.html
Henri, F. (1992) Computer Conferencing and Content
Analysis. In A. R. Kaye (Ed.), Collaborative Learning Through Computer
Conferencing: The Najaden Papers (pp. 117-136). London:Springer-Verlag
Kneser, C., Pilkington, R., and Treasure-Jones, T. (2000)
The Tutor's Role: An investigation into the power of Exchange Structure
Analysis to identify different roles in CMC seminars. International Journal
of Artificial Intelligence in Education (2000), 12
Lipniak, J. and Stamps, J. Virtual Teams - Reaching
Across Space, Time and Organizations with Technology. New York:John Wiley
and Sons
Mason, R. (1992) Evaluation Methodologies for Computer
Conferencing Applications. In A. R. Kaye (Ed.), Collaborative Learning
Through Computer Conferencing: The Najaden Papers (pp. 117-136).
London:Springer-Verlag
Newman, D.R., Johnson, C., Cochrane, C. and Webb, B. (undated)
An experiment in group learning technology: evaluating critical thinking in
face-to-face and computer-supported seminars. Available: http://www.qub.ac.uk/mgt/papers/ccvsem/contents.html
Pallof, R., and Pratt, P. (1999) Building Learning
Communities in Cyberspace. Jossey-Bass
Pilkington, R. (1999) Analysing Educational Discourse: The
DISCOUNT Scheme. Technical Report No. 99/2. Computer Based Learning Unit,
University of Leeds. Available: http://www.cbl.leeds.ac.uk/rachel/papers/Discoun99/DISCoun99.html
Pattison-Gordon, L. (1998) Best Practices in Collaborative
Technology.
Available: http://copernicus.bbn.com/lab/ocsc/
Rheingold, H. (1994) The virtual community. London:Minerva
Salmon, G. (2000) E-moderating: the key to teaching and
learning online. London:Kogan Page
Sproull, L. and Kiesler, S (1995) Connections.
London: MIT Press
Turkle, S. (1995) Life on the screen.
London:Phoenix