Bringing representational practice from log to light

People implicitly negotiate use of representations during learning, even in distributed online settings, but due to the temporally and spatially distributed nature of interaction, special analytic tools are required to uncover the development of representational practices in such settings. In this paper we show how logs of online activity can be analyzed to recognize patterns in use of representations and show how negotiated representational practices affect how learners collaborate and influence each other.

[1]  Amy Bruckman,et al.  Chapter 58: Analysis of Log File Data to Understand Behavior and Learning in an Online Community , 2006 .

[2]  Noel Enyedy,et al.  Negotiated representational mediators: How young children decide what to include in their science representations , 2007 .

[3]  Maarten Overdijk,et al.  Appropriation of a shared workspace: Organizing principles and their application , 2008, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[4]  Tammy Schellens,et al.  Content analysis schemes to analyze transcripts of online asynchronous discussion groups: A review , 2006, Comput. Educ..

[5]  Daniel D. Suthers,et al.  Conceptual representations enhance knowledge construction in asynchronous collaboration , 2007, CSCL.

[6]  Alejandra Martínez-Monés,et al.  Combining qualitative evaluation and social network analysis for the study of classroom social interactions , 2003, Comput. Educ..

[7]  G. Stasser,et al.  Information salience and the discovery of hidden profiles by decision-making groups: A “thought experiment”☆ , 1992 .

[8]  Penelope M. Sanderson,et al.  Exploratory Sequential Data Analysis: Foundations , 1994, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[9]  Cindy E. Hmelo-Silver,et al.  Analyzing collaborative knowledge construction: multiple methods for integrated understanding , 2003, Comput. Educ..

[10]  Françoise Détienne,et al.  A study of online discussions in an Open-Source Software Community: Reconstructing thematic coherence and argumentation from quotation practices , 2005 .

[11]  J. Roschelle.  Designing for cognitive communication: epistemic fidelity or mediating collaborative inquiry? , 1997, Computers, Communication and Mental Models.

[12]  Hans Spada,et al.  Barriers and Biases in Computer-Mediated Knowledge Communication , 2005 .

[13]  Jason Nolan,et al.  The International Handbook of Virtual Learning Environments , 2006 .

[14]  Daniel D. Suthers,et al.  A study of the foundations of artifact-mediated collaboration , 2005, CSCL.

[15]  Daniel D. Suthers,et al.  A Qualitative Analysis of Collaborative Knowledge Construction through Shared Representations , 2006, Res. Pract. Technol. Enhanc. Learn..

[16]  Frank M. Shipman,et al.  Supporting knowledge-base evolution with incremental formalization , 1994, CHI '94.

[17]  Richard Alterman,et al.  Tracking Online Collaborative Work as Representational Practice: Analysis and Tool , 2007 .

[18]  Daniel D. Suthers,et al.  An Experimental Study of the Effects of Representational Guidance on Collaborative Learning Processes , 2003 .

[19]  Austin Henderson,et al.  Interaction Analysis: Foundations and Practice , 1995 .

[20]  Gerry Stahl,et al.  Group Cognition: Computer Support for Building Collaborative Knowledge (Acting with Technology) , 2006 .

[21]  Daniel D. Suthers,et al.  A framework for eclectic analysis of collaborative interaction , 2007, CSCL.

[22]  Timothy Koschmann,et al.  How Do People Learn , 2005 .

[23]  Peter W. Foltz,et al.  An introduction to latent semantic analysis , 1998 .