Toby Dragon 1 , Sergio Gutierrez-Santos 2 , Manolis Mavrikis 2 , and Bruce M. McLaren 1,3

Analysing and Supporting Students’ Interactions in Synthesized Learning Environments:

A Case Study with a Microworld and a Discussion Tool

Toby Dragon1, Sergio Gutierrez-Santos2, Manolis Mavrikis2, and Bruce M. McLaren1,3

1CeLTech, Saarland University, Germany 2London Knowledge Lab, University of London, UK

3Carnegie Mellon University, USA [email protected], {sergut,m.mavrikis}@lkl.ac.uk,

[email protected]

Technology-Enhanced Learning for Mathematics And Science, September 21, 2011. Palermo, Italy

2TELMAS@EC-TEL, 21 September 2011, Palermo

Agenda

• Introduction

• Tools & Integration

• The Tools in Action

• Synthesizing Support Across Tools

• Conclusion

Agenda


Agenda

• Introduction• Tools & Integration



• Conclusion

Agenda


Introduction

• Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) system to

enable 12 to 16-years-old students to learn science and

mathematics using long-term, self-organized, project-based

approach.

• Tools:• Planning Tool

• Microworlds

• Discussion Tool

Metafora – Learning to Learn Together


Introduction

• Combine tools and analysis to support collaboration across tools in a pedagogically meaningful way to help students solve their given task.

• For today, we focus on subsection of system:

• eXpresser (microworld)

• Discussion Tool

Our Challenge


Agenda

• Introduction

• Tools & Integration• The Tools in Action


• Conclusion

Agenda


Tools & Integration

• A microworld where students can construct models made out of

patterns of square tiles.

• Underlying goal: students develop ways of thinking that underpin

algebraic generalization.

• Helping students visualize and understand algebraic concepts

from a different perspective.

eXpresser


Tools & Integration

• Generalized framework for

graphical argumentation.

• Create statements, questions, etc.

• Graphically link with supporting

and opposing facts, examples,

explanations, etc.

• Domain-independent tool is

authored to work for different uses,

specifically catered here for use in

the Metafora system.

LASAD


Tools & Integration

The Metafora Platform


Tools & Integration

Referable Objects


Agenda

• Introduction


• The Tools in Action• Synthesizing Support Across Tools

• Conclusion

Agenda


Tools In Action

The TaskConstruct “Train Track” model in eXpresser in different ways. • Find the rule for the number of square tiles for any model number.

• Discuss with your partner about whether your rules are correct or not and whether they are equivalent or not.

• Students begin by meeting, discussing plans and thoughts, and start working on their own expresser worlds, within the system.


Tools In Action

Recognizing Discussion Opportunity- Alice

System detectsa

“general model created”


Tools In Action

Recognizing Discussion Opportunity-Bob

System detects tool having given feedback about

“model is not general” several

times


Tools In Action

Recognizing Discussion Opportunity- Bob

Share your modelDiscuss with Alice how to make a general model.


Tools In ActionDiscussion


Agenda

• Introduction



• Synthesizing Support Across Tools• Conclusion

Agenda


Synthesizing Support Across Tools

Centralized vs. Distributed Support

• Concerns:• Overload• Local expertise, global view• Scalability• Connectivity

• Need the benefits of both worlds.


Combined ApproachSynthesizing Support Across Tools


Combined Approach

Internal Tool Feedback


Analysis


Combined Approach

Internal Tool Feedback

Analysis


Feedback



Abstraction for Distributed Support

• Indicators: low-level, action-based markers of student behavior

within a given tool.• Examples: Creating a node in LASAD, Attempting to make a rule in eXpresser.

• Landmarks: High-level, accomplishment-based markers of student

behavior within a single tool or across tools. • Examples: Creating a “general rule” in eXpresser, being a “helper” in LASAD.


Agenda

• Introduction




• Conclusion

Agenda


Conclusion

Summary

• Using integrated tools to provide support by combining

analysis across multiple tools.

• Taking a decentralized approach that allows for both tool-

specific and cross-tool support.

• Example demonstrating collaborative support

promoting interaction between the right students at

the right time.


Conclusion

Next Steps

• Classroom facilitators (teachers / researchers) watching

monitoring tools showing indicators, providing

interventions.

• Improvement iteration, from observation• What indicators were useful?

• What did facilitators observe from watching student work directly

that can’t be seen indicators?

• What types of interventions do facilitators choose to make?

Thank you.Questions, Comments?

Analysing and Supporting Students’ Interactions in Synthesized Learning Environments:

A Case Study with a Microworld and a Discussion Tool

Toby Dragon1, Sergio Gutierrez-Santos2, Manolis Mavrikis2, and Bruce M. McLaren1,3

1CeLTech, Saarland University, Germany 2London Knowledge Lab, University of London, UK

3Carnegie Mellon University, USA [email protected], {sergut,m.mavrikis}@lkl.ac.uk,

[email protected]

Technology-Enhanced Learning for Mathematics And Science, September 21, 2011. Palermo, Italy

Toby Dragon 1 , Sergio Gutierrez-Santos 2 , Manolis Mavrikis 2 , and Bruce M. McLaren 1,3

Documents

Transcript of Toby Dragon 1 , Sergio Gutierrez-Santos 2 , Manolis Mavrikis 2 , and Bruce M. McLaren 1,3