Adapting and personalizing the communication in a synchronous communication tool

In this paper, we present a synchronous text-based communication tool, referred to as Adaptive Communication Tool (ACT), which provides capabilities for adaptation and personalization. ACT supports both the free and the structured form of dialogue. The structured dialogue is implemented by two types of Scaffolding Sentence Templates (SST); i.e. sentence openers or communicative acts. The capability of adaptation is considered in the sense of making suggestions for the supported form of dialogue and SST type and providing the most meaningful and complete set of SST with respect to the learning outcomes addressed by the collaborative learning activity and the model of collaboration followed by the group members. Also, ACT enables learners to have control on the adaptation by selecting the form of dialogue and the SST type they prefer to use and enriching the provided SST set with their own ones in order to cover their communication needs. The results from the formative evaluation of the tool showed that (i) the proposed dialogue form, SST type and the provided set of SST cover students’ communication needs, (ii) the capability of personalizing the communication by selecting the desired communication means as well as by enriching the provided SST set satisfied students, and (iii) students used adequately both types of SST resulting into on-task and coherent dialogues.

[1]  Pierre Dillenbourg,et al.  Over-scripting CSCL: The risks of blending collaborative learning with instructional design , 2002 .

[2]  Judy Robertson,et al.  BetterBlether: The Design and Evaluation of a Discussion Tool for education , 1998 .

[3]  Ard W. Lazonder,et al.  Using sentence openers to foster student interaction in computer-mediated learning environments , 2003, Comput. Educ..

[4]  Maria Samarakou,et al.  Supporting and Guiding Learners' Collaboration Through a Structured Adaptive Communication Tool , 2005 .

[5]  Michael J. Baker,et al.  Computer-mediated epistemic interactions for co-constructing scientific notions: Lessons learned from a five-year research programme , 2001 .

[6]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Learning Together and Alone , 1999 .

[7]  Richard E. Mayer,et al.  A taxonomy for computer-based assessment of problem solving , 2002, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[8]  Sanghee Yeo.  Handbook of individual differences, learning, and instruction. , 2010, Korean journal of medical education.

[9]  Judy Kay,et al.  Learner Control , 2001, User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction.

[10]  F. Fischer,et al.  Scripts and scaffolds in problem-based computer supported collaborative learning environments: Fostering participation and transfer , 2001 .

[11]  Michael J. Baker,et al.  Flexibly structuring the interaction in a CSCL environment , 1996 .

[12]  Angelique Dimitracopoulou,et al.  Designing collaborative learning systems: current trends & future research agenda , 2005, CSCL.

[13]  Maria Samarakou,et al.  Adapting the "Communication-Scaffolding" Tools in a Web-based Collaborative Learning Environment , 2004 .

[14]  Maria Samarakou,et al.  ACT: a web-based adaptive communication tool , 2005, CSCL.

[15]  H. C. Bunt.  Dialogue control functions and interaction design , 1994 .

[16]  Pierre Dillenbourg,et al.  Collaborative Learning: Cognitive and Computational Approaches , 1999 .

[17]  Amy Soller,et al.  Computer software support for CSCL , 2004 .

[18]  Eileen Scanlon,et al.  Combining interaction and context design to support collaborative argumentation using a tool for synchronous CMC , 2004, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[19]  Alan M. Lesgold,et al.  What Makes Peer Interaction Effective? Modeling Effective Communication in an Intelligent CSCL , 1999 .

[20]  Sébastien George,et al.  An Approach to Automatic Analysis of Learners' Social Behavior During Computer-Mediated Synchronous Conversations , 2002, Intelligent Tutoring Systems.

[21]  Maria Samarakou,et al.  Towards the Development of an Adaptive Communication Tool Promoting Cognitive and Communication Skills , 2004 .

[22]  Michael J. Baker,et al.  Promoting reflective interactions in a CSCL environment , 1997, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[23]  Michael J. Baker,et al.  Promoting reflective interactions in a computer-supported collaborative learning environment , 1997 .

[24]  John A. Self,et al.  A Collaborative Case Study System for Distance Learning , 2004, Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ..

[25]  Amy Soller,et al.  Supporting Social Interaction in an Intelligent Collaborative Learning System , 2001 .

[26]  Departamento de Ingeniería Eléctrica.  Analysing student interaction processes in order to improve collaboration . The DEGREE approach , 2000 .

[27]  M. Scardamalia,et al.  The CSILE project: Trying to bring the classroom into World 3. , 1994 .

[28]  Shlomo Nir,et al.  NATO ASI Series , 1995 .

[29]  Marco Aurélio Gerosa,et al.  Use of categorization and structuring of messages in order to organize the discussion and reduce information overload in asynchronous textual communication tools , 2001, Proceedings Seventh International Workshop on Groupware. CRIWG 2001.

[30]  F. Hesse,et al.  Implicit and explicit dialogue structuring in virtual learning groups. , 2000, The British journal of educational psychology.

[31]  Beatriz Barros,et al.  Analysing student interaction processes in order to improve collaboration. The DEGREE approach , 2000 .

[32]  R. Snow.  Aptitude, learner control, and adaptive instruction , 1980 .

[33]  Andrew Ravenscroft,et al.  Promoting thinking and conceptual change with digital dialogue games , 2007, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..