Teacher regulation of cognitive activities during student collaboration: Effects of learning analytics

By collaboratively solving a task, students are challenged to share ideas, express their thoughts, and engage in discussion. Collaborating groups of students may encounter problems concerning cognitive activities (such as a misunderstanding of the task material). If these problems are not addressed and resolved in time, the collaborative process is hindered. The teacher plays an important role in monitoring and solving the occurrence of problems. To provide adaptive support, teachers continuously have to be aware of students' activities in order to identify relevant events, including those that require intervention. Because the amount of available information is high, teachers may be supported by learning analytics. The present experimental study (n?=?40) explored the effect of two learning analytics tools (the Concept Trail and Progress Statistics) that give information about students' cognitive activities. The results showed that when teachers had access to learning analytics, they were not better at detecting problematic groups, but they did offer more support in general, and more specifically targeted groups that experienced problems. This could indicate that learning analytics increase teachers' confidence to act, which in turn means students could benefit more from the teacher's presence. It was examined whether learning analytics (LA) support teachers during CSCL.LA visualized students' cognitive activities.LA did not improve detection of students' problems nor lowered cognitive load.LA increased the frequency and probability of teacher interventions.It is hypothesized that LA increase teachers' confidence of their diagnoses.

[1]  E. Duval.  Attention please!: learning analytics for visualization and recommendation , 2011, LAK.

[2]  Anastasios A. Economides,et al.  Learning Analytics and Educational Data Mining in Practice: A Systematic Literature Review of Empirical Evidence , 2014, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[3]  Baruch B. Schwarz,et al.  Online moderation of synchronous e-argumentation , 2010, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[4]  Nikolaos M. Avouris,et al.  Towards the real-time evaluation of collaborative activities: Integration of an automatic rater of collaboration quality in the classroom from the teacher’s perspective , 2014, Education and Information Technologies.

[5]  J. Carroll.  A Model of School Learning , 1963, Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education.

[6]  F. Paas,et al.  Cognitive Load Measurement as a Means to Advance Cognitive Load Theory , 2003 .

[7]  Julia Gil,et al.  Small-group, computer-mediated argumentation in middle-school classrooms: the effects of gender and different types of online teacher guidance. , 2012, The British journal of educational psychology.

[8]  Dennis Zielke,et al.  Design and Implementation of a Learning Analytics Toolkit for Teachers , 2012, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[9]  Christa S. C. Asterhan,et al.  Introducing synchronous e-discussion tools in co-located classrooms: A study on the experiences of 'active' and 'silent' secondary school students , 2011, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[10]  Andrea Solimeno,et al.  The influence of students and teachers characteristics on the efficacy of face-to-face and computer supported collaborative learning , 2008, Comput. Educ..

[11]  N. Rummel,et al.  Learning to Collaborate: An Instructional Approach to Promoting Collaborative Problem Solving in Computer-Mediated Settings , 2005 .

[12]  Ulrik Schroeder,et al.  A reference model for learning analytics , 2012 .

[13]  Martin Valcke,et al.  Cross-age peer tutors in asynchronous discussion groups: Exploring the impact of three types of tutor training on patterns in tutor support and on tutor characteristics , 2010, Comput. Educ..

[14]  N. Rummel,et al.  Teacher Competencies for the Implementation of Collaborative Learning in the Classroom: a Framework and Research Review , 2015 .

[15]  Michael J. Baker,et al.  Rainbow: A framework for analysing computer-mediated pedagogical debates , 2007, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[16]  Jodi Forlizzi,et al.  Psycho-physiological measures for assessing cognitive load , 2010, UbiComp.

[17]  George Siemens,et al.  Guest Editorial - Learning and Knowledge Analytics , 2012, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[18]  M. F. Salinas,et al.  From Dewey to Gates: A model to integrate psychoeducational principles in the selection and use of instructional technology , 2008, Comput. Educ..

[19]  Analía Amandi,et al.  Intelligent assistance for teachers in collaborative e-learning environments , 2009, Comput. Educ..

[20]  Carol K. K. Chan.  Bridging research and practice: Implementing and sustaining knowledge building in Hong Kong classrooms , 2011, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[21]  David F. Feldon,et al.  Cognitive Load and Classroom Teaching: The Double-Edged Sword of Automaticity , 2007 .

[22]  Vania Dimitrova,et al.  CourseVis: A graphical student monitoring tool for supporting instructors in web-based distance courses , 2007, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

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

[24]  Richard C. Anderson,et al.  Less Is More: Teachers' Influence during Peer Collaboration. , 2014 .

[25]  Anouschka van Leeuwen,et al.  Supporting teachers in guiding collaborating students: Effects of learning analytics in CSCL , 2014, Comput. Educ..

[26]  Angelique Dimitracopoulou,et al.  Is Synchronous Computer Mediated Collaborative Problem-Solving 'Justified' Only When by Distance? Teachers' Points of Views and Interventions with CO-Located Groups, during Everyday Class Activities , 2003, CSCL.

[27]  Erik Duval,et al.  Learning dashboards: an overview and future research opportunities , 2013, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing.

[28]  Annegret Goold,et al.  An Examination of the Role of the E-Tutor. , 2010 .

[29]  P. Kirschner,et al.  Toward a Framework for CSCL Research , 2013 .

[30]  J. Vermunt,et al.  Congruence and friction between learning and teaching , 1999 .

[31]  Heinz Ulrich Hoppe,et al.  Computer supported moderation of e-discussions: the ARGUNAUT approach , 2007, CSCL.

[32]  Baruch B. Schwarz,et al.  E-Moderation of Synchronous Discussions in Educational Settings: A Nascent Practice , 2011 .

[33]  Chin-Chung Tsai,et al.  The effect of moderator's facilitative strategies on online synchronous discussions , 2012, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[34]  Friedrich W. Hesse,et al.  Guiding knowledge communication in CSCL via group knowledge awareness , 2011, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[35]  Kinshuk,et al.  Guest Editorial - Technology Supported Cognition and Exploratory Learning , 2012, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[36]  John M. Malouff,et al.  The Risk of a Halo Bias as a Reason to Keep Students Anonymous During Grading , 2013 .

[37]  Nicolas Michinov,et al.  Improving productivity and creativity in online groups through social comparison process: New evidence for asynchronous electronic brainstorming , 2005, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[38]  Anouschka van Leeuwen,et al.  Teacher interventions in a synchronous, co-located CSCL setting: Analyzing focus, means, and temporality , 2013, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[39]  Lars Bollen,et al.  Creating cognitive tutors for collaborative learning: steps toward realization , 2006, User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction.

[40]  Anna Engel,et al.  Strategies for collaborative writing and phases of knowledge construction in CSCL environments , 2009, Comput. Educ..

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

[42]  Ryan Shaun Joazeiro de Baker,et al.  Off-task behavior in the cognitive tutor classroom: when students "game the system" , 2004, CHI.

[43]  F. Fischer,et al.  A framework to analyze argumentative knowledge construction in computer-supported collaborative learning , 2006, Comput. Educ..

[44]  Nikolaos M. Avouris,et al.  Support for the teacher in technology-enhanced collaborative classroom , 2012, Education and Information Technologies.

[45]  Daniel Bodemer,et al.  Supporting controversial CSCL discussions with augmented group awareness tools , 2007, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[46]  G. Gibbs,et al.  Conditions Under Which Assessment Supports Students’ Learning , 2005 .

[47]  Birgitta Kopp,et al.  E-tutorial support for collaborative online learning: An explorative study on experienced and inexperienced e-tutors , 2012, Comput. Educ..

[48]  Teresa Cerratto Pargman,et al.  Collaborating with writing tools: An instrumental perspective on the problem of computer-supported collaborative activities , 2003 .

[49]  J. Vermunt,et al.  Patterns in Student Learning: Relationships Between Learning Strategies, Conceptions of Learning, and Learning Orientations , 2004 .

[50]  Jeroen Janssen,et al.  Visualization of participation: Does it contribute to successful computer-supported collaborative learning? , 2007, Comput. Educ..

[51]  Sebastián Ventura,et al.  Educational Data Mining: A Review of the State of the Art , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C (Applications and Reviews).

[52]  Walter Doyle,et al.  Ecological Approaches to Classroom Management , 2006 .

[53]  César Coll,et al.  Supporting online collaborative learning in small groups: Teacher feedback on learning content, academic task and social participation , 2014, Comput. Educ..

[54]  Anna Engel,et al.  The role of teacher assistance on the effects of a macro-script in collaborative writing tasks , 2012, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[55]  Gijsbert Erkens,et al.  Coordination processes in computer supported collaborative writing , 2005, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[56]  Daniel D. Suthers,et al.  Computer-supported collaborative learning: An historical perspective , 2006 .

[57]  Anouschka van Leeuwen,et al.  Teacher regulation of multiple computer-supported collaborating groups , 2015, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[58]  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..

[59]  Hans Spada,et al.  The Active Integration of Information during Learning with Dynamic and Interactive Visualisations , 2004 .

[60]  Paulien C. Meijer,et al.  Types and frequencies of feedback interventions in classroom interaction in secondary education , 2012 .