Supporting controversial CSCL discussions with augmented group awareness tools

This paper describes the development of augmented group awareness tools that take mutual user ratings of their online discussion contributions as input, aggregate these data, and visually feed these data back to the members in real time, thereby informing participants about how the group as a whole perceives their contributions. A specific group awareness tool was experimentally tested in a CSCL scenario using online controversies about a physics domain. The learning material was distributed across group members to create a situation where an individual minority member with a scientifically correct viewpoint faces a majority favoring a plausible, but incorrect viewpoint. It was hypothesized that in unsupported CSCL groups an incorrect majority would dominate a correct minority, whereas in groups that were supported by an augmented group awareness tool minority influence could be strengthened by making minority contributions salient. The paper reports results in support of this hypothesis, and discusses the mechanisms leading to the benefits of group awareness tools for collaborative learning.

[1]  Ulrike Cress,et al.  Group awareness and self-presentation in computer-supported information exchange , 2008, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[2]  S. Asch.  Studies of independence and conformity: I. A minority of one against a unanimous majority. , 1956 .

[3]  A. Vinokur,et al.  Novel argumentation and attitude change: The case of polarization following group discussion , 1978 .

[4]  M. Baker.  A model for negotiation in teaching-learning dialogues , 1994 .

[5]  Robert S. Baron,et al.  The eyes have it : Minority influence in face-to-face and computer-mediated group discussion , 1997 .

[6]  E. Cohen.  Restructuring the Classroom: Conditions for Productive Small Groups , 1994 .

[7]  J. Rubin,et al.  Negotiation , 1983 .

[8]  Carl Gutwin,et al.  A Descriptive Framework of Workspace Awareness for Real-Time Groupware , 2002, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[9]  S. Moscovici,et al.  Social Influence And Social Change , 1976 .

[10]  Daniel D. Suthers,et al.  Technology affordances for intersubjective meaning making: A research agenda for CSCL , 2006, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[11]  W. Wood,et al.  Minority influence: a meta-analytic review of social influence processes. , 1994, Psychological bulletin.

[12]  M. Hewstone,et al.  Systematic and Heuristic Processing of Majority and Minority-Endorsed Messages: The Effects of Varying Outcome Relevance and Levels of Orientation on Attitude and Message Processing , 2007, Personality & social psychology bulletin.

[13]  Alejandra Martínez-Monés,et al.  From Mirroring to Guiding: A Review of State of the Art Technology for Supporting Collaborative Learning , 2005, Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ..

[14]  Paul A. Kirschner,et al.  The sociability of computer-supported collaborative learning environment , 2002, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[15]  M. Deutsch,et al.  A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgement. , 1955, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[16]  Jeroen Janssen,et al.  Visualization of agreement and discussion processes during computer-supported collaborative learning , 2007, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[17]  Mary Beth Rosson,et al.  Notification and awareness: synchronizing task-oriented collaborative activity , 2003, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[18]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Conflict in the Classroom: Controversy And Learning , 1979 .

[19]  Tom Gross,et al.  User-Centered Awareness in Computer-Supported Cooperative Work-Systems: Structured Embedding of Findings from Social Sciences , 2005, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[20]  S. Schulz-Hardt,et al.  The dissemination of critical, unshared information in decision-making groups: the effects of pre-discussion dissent , 2002 .

[21]  Mica R. Endsley,et al.  Toward a Theory of Situation Awareness in Dynamic Systems , 1995, Hum. Factors.

[22]  M. Linn,et al.  Computers, Teachers, Peers: Science Learning Partners , 2000 .

[23]  Peter Paolucci,et al.  Designing Information Spaces: The Social Navigation Approach , 2003, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[24]  G. Stasser,et al.  Pooling of Unshared Information in Group Decision Making: Biased Information Sampling During Discussion , 1985 .

[25]  P. Dillenbourg,et al.  Three worlds of CSCL: Can we support CSCL? , 2002 .

[26]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  A Theoretical Perspective of Negotiation Support Systems , 1992, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[27]  J. Roschelle.  Learning by Collaborating: Convergent Conceptual Change , 1992 .

[28]  N. Pennington,et al.  Inside the Jury. , 1985 .

[29]  Joseph A. Konstan,et al.  Collaborative Filtering: Supporting Social Navigation in Large, Crowded Infospaces , 2003, Designing Information Spaces.

[30]  C. Nemeth.  Differential contributions of majority and minority influence , 1986 .

[31]  W. Doise.  The social development of the intellect , 1984 .

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

[33]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Cognitive issues in virtual reality , 1995 .

[34]  Garold Stasser,et al.  The sampling of critical, unshared information in decision-making groups: the role of an informed minority , 1998 .