1. Collaboration in Educational Settings Nathan Campbell Lisa Doan Kirill Kireyev Malte Winkler

2. Traditional Instruction “Sage on Stage” Limited interaction, participation –Hard to ask questions Cramming for tests –Shallow understanding –Low retention rate Competitive grading discourages cooperation Not taught how to find information Material not personally interesting, relevant

3. Why Collaboration? Solve large problems Teaches valuable “people” skills Self-empowerment, responsibility, self- expression Attitudes towards learning “When you teach, you learn” Synergy of ideas, “symmetry of ignorance” Cognitive Dissonance Theory –Learning by resolving disagreements

4. Why Computer-aided Collaboration? Easy to organize/visualize information Special Technological capabilities –Interactivity, connectivity Helps mediate opinions (everyone is heard) Work remotely Reach out to wider audience Contribute at any time Store information, discussions for later access Fun

5. Clickers

6. FEEL (DLC 2004)

7. Collaborative Tools Universidad de Vigo, Spain

8. Collaborative Tools Georgia Institute of Technology

9. Handheld Applications “Ecosystem”“Match-My-Graph”

10. Handheld/Wireless Applications ClassTalk – asking questions –Multiple choice, text, numerical ImageMap – interactive images –Maps, graphs, photos Probeware – physical measurements Participatory simulations –Tracking student’s movement, position Exploratorium – interactive museums

11. Collaboration: Challenges Re-structuring educational practices Creating supportive environment –Non-competitive –Open-ended creative projects Re-thinking grading policies “Free-rider” problem Scheduling overhead Teaching collaboration skills

12. Technology Design Questions Balance online vs. face-to-face –How to integrate? Structured (WebCT) vs Unstructured (wiki) –Freedom may be messy, overwhelming General vs. specific Mediation? Support flexibility, evolution –Users will use in different ways Sensitive to context, time

13. Making Collaboration Successful Shared motivations, common goals Adequate incentives Positive interdependence Symmetry of ignorance –Diversity of opinions, backgrounds Flexibility, opportunities for creativity Establishing team goals, deadlines, roles Regular synchronous meetings Social relationship building

14. Challenges of Large Lectures Difficult to gauge students’ understanding and engagement Students hesitate to ask questions –Stall large class –Personal embarrassment No peer discourse –Lacking useful elaboration –Less engaging –Stern, anti-social atmosphere

15. Opportunities of Large Lectures Large lectures are prevalent and inevitable Can we positively exploit: –Large body of knowledge? –Diversity of opinions? –Teaching assistants? –Existing technologies (laptops)?

16. Clickers Pros Pros: Inexpensive Easy to use Instructor learns about students’ performance Students test their skills Peer discussion

17. Clickers (cont) Cons: One-way communication –Students can’t ask questions –Students can’t give feedback No justifications for answers No means to store questions/answers in context

18. FEEL (DLC 2004)

19. FEEL (Cont) Pros Students can ask questions –Anonymously –No interruption Students may “support” other’s Q’s Students give feedback –e.g. “Lecture Too Fast” Cons Distracting –Overloads instructor Limited student discussion Not integrated with notes, context

20. Technology Design Questions Balance online vs. face-to-face –How to integrate? Structured (WebCT) vs Unstructured (wiki) –Freedom may be messy, overwhelming General vs. specific Mediation? Support flexibility, evolution –Users will use in different ways Sensitive to context, time

21. Making Collaboration Successful Shared motivations, common goals Adequate incentives Positive interdependence Symmetry of ignorance –Diversity of opinions, backgrounds Flexibility, opportunities for creativity Establishing team goals, deadlines, roles Regular synchronous meetings Social relationship building

22. Our Design Goals Build on previous projects –Student’s inquiries, feedback Leverage the TAs time, knowledge Students can ask questions –Others give “support” vote Raises question’s importance –Instructor sees “confusion level” Incorporate note-taking

23. Our Design Goals Justifications for answers –Carl Wieman does this “by hand” –Students become exposed to opinions, justifications Stimulates thinking Promotes engagement “Beaten Path” –Provide submitted justifications during the questions Catalyses discussion –Incorporate into grading (e.g. extra credit)?

24. SLE Notes Clicker Questions Random Justifications Students’ Questions Current Questions What is “L3D”? Student’s View

25. Students’ Questions Answer/ Discuss Ask Questions Justifications Notes TA’s View

26. SLE: Instructor’s View Try to make Instructor’s UI minimally distracting “Confusion” Level Ask Clicker Quesionts

27. Architecture Web Application –Portable –No installation required PHP pages Dynamic content via Ajax XML data persistence Authentication

28. Future Work: End-User Design Lecturer –Create animations, interactive demos –Images/charts/pages –Applets, AgentSheets TA’s –Gather statistics Students –Integrate into email, calendar, chat –Personal profiles/pages

29. Other Future Work More robust Interface Integrate with presentation, multimedia Better notetaking system Timeline reflecting notes, questions Chat?

30. Conclusions Large lectures are a challenging environment... Yet many opportunities exist Technology may make large lectures more –informative –engaging –collaborative