Präsentation zum Thema: "Internal and External Scripts: Studies on the Interplay of Discourse, Cognition and Instruction in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Frank Fischer."— Präsentation transkript:
1Internal and External Scripts: Studies on the Interplay of Discourse, Cognition and Instruction in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Frank Fischer Keynote at the International Conference of the Learning Sciences, Utrecht, NL, June 25, 2008
3Major contributions of Armin Weinberger Ingo Kollar Karsten Stegmann Christof Wecker Jan Zottmann Kati Mäkitalo-Siegl COSSICLE European Research Team Heinz Mandl
4Discourse activities are assumed to be related to cognitive processes of learning in “Spirals of Reciprocity” (Salomon & Perkins, 1998) Epistemic activities: How learners work on a knowledge construction task (Baker, 2002) Argumentation: How arguments are warranted and how argument sequences evolve in the discussion Social mode of co-construction/ transactivity or How learners built on the contributions of their learning partners (Teasley, 1997) (Weinberger & Fischer, 2006: Multidimensional coding scheme)
5Construction of argumentation sequences (cf. Leitão, 2000) Argumentation and learning (e.g. Lund,Erkens, Baker,Andriessen,Schwarz)Construction of single arguments (cf. Voss, et al., 1993; Toulmin, 1958)Construction of argumentation sequences (cf. Leitão, 2000)claimdata/evidencewarrantargumentcounterargumentintegration
10Obviously, there is a lack of knowledge on the side of the learners how to beneficially engage in peer discussions.
11Collaboration Scripts Collaboration Scripts: activity programs that activate or assign roles and associated activities that help individuals to understand and to act in specific collaborative situations (in part: Schank & Abelson, 1975).Cultural and personal scripts on collaboration (“internal collaboration scripts”)Re-conceptualising “lack of knowledge”: Erroneous, lacking or heterogeneous application of (internal) scripts in computer-supported peer discussions.
12External collaboration scripts Instruction: External collaboration scripts include scaffolds for activating appropriate “internal scripts” or for guiding, sequencing and coordinating different roles and activities in collaborative learning situations (see Kollar et al., 2006; e.g., O’Donnell, 1999; Dillenbourg 2002; Rummel & Spada, 2005; Schellens et al., 2007).External scripts supporting Zones of Proximal DevelopmentStudents are supported by a set of procedural (software) scaffolds that aim at supporting active participation on a discourse level which is beyond what learners would accomplish spontaneously (i.e., with their internal scripts; King, 2007; Kollar et al., 2003)
13Empirical research program on scripting Several experimental studies in three series on scripted discussions, embedded in the curriculumStudies with about 350 groups of 3 university students in the domain of educational psychologyStudies with about 200 science education students learning in groups of two (high school level)Follow-up field studies in medicine, computer science, and educational science
14Script for the construction of single arguments ClaimWarrant + DataMichael suffers from an inefficient self-attribution in maths.He believes he is not talented due to failures. This means an internal stable attribution of failures.QualifierMichael simply might be lazy or swamped with maths or suffer from bad instruction.Claim...Warrant + DataQualifierStegmann, Weinberger & Fischer (2007). Scripting argumentative knowledge construction. ijCSCL.
15Script for the construction of argumentation sequences
16Example sequencing roles and activities: The „social script“ (peer critique script) Case Analyst: New AnalysisCase Analyst: First AnalysisConstructive Critic: CritiqueConstructive Critic: CritiqueCase Analyst: ReplyCase Analyst: ReplyConstructive Critic: CritiqueConstructive Critic: Critique
18OK! Lasst uns zum Fall Klassentreffen wechseln. Andrea:Ich hab irgendwie den Überblick verloren! Sind wir uns einig dass das ein internal stabiles Verhalten ist und das eine negative Attribution der Eltern vorliegt. Zusätzlich könnte man sagen, dass der Lehrer eine Reattribution fördern sollte (um das Verhalten zu ändern). Und natürlich auch bei den Eltern.Ben:>Ich hab irgendwie den Überblick verloren! Sind wir uns >einig dass das ein internal stabiles Verhalten ist und das eine >negative Attribution der Eltern vorliegt. Zusätzlich könnte >man sagen, dass der Lehrer eine Reattribution fördern sollte >(um das Verhalten zu ändern). Und natürlich auch bei den >Eltern.OK! Lasst uns zum Fall Klassentreffen wechseln.OT/FNN/BSR3/FBF/FRAR4/FBF/FRAR7/FBF/FRAR17/ERG/BSTherefore, our data consists of written discourses of these online discussions.On this foil you can see two messages within such a discourse.Andrea try to solve the problem and Ben agree with her solution and suggestto go the next problem without conflict-orientation.The first step in analysing is to segemnt the discourse.---klick---Some segments are easier to determine than other ....After segemnting, each segment will be coded on several dimensionsQUOTEDKOO/AKZ/PLA
19Script component for the construction of argumentation sequences
21Effects of specific script components on the processes of online discussions Parti- Epist. Argument Argument Transactivity.cipation Activity constr. sequenceParticipation Script componentEpistemic Script componentArgument construction Script componentArgument sequencing Script componentSocial Script component
22Effects of specific script components on the outcomes of online collaborative learning Individual level outcomedomain-general domain-specificParticipation Script componentEpistemic Script componentArgument Script componentArgumentation Script componentSocial Script componentKarsten, könntest du mir hier die Effektstärken angeben?Und ein Sternchen machen, wenn Replikation gelungen ist?Christof, könntest du die Effekte für Fading ebenfalls beziffern?
23How do external collaboration scripts work (i. e How do external collaboration scripts work (i.e., change cognitive processing) ?
24Some say, discourse and cognition are inseparable and basically the two sides of one medal Hidden below the surface: Cognitive activities
25Discourse processes Cognitive processes Stegmann, Wecker, Weinberger & Fischer (2007). In: Proceedings of the CSCL conference Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
26A think-aloud study in asynchronous discussion (Stegmann et al., 2007)
27Discourse and cognition in an online discussion Learner with low knowledge gainsWeinberger, Stegmann & Fischer: Saturday hrs, Room B
34Computer-supported collaboration scripts for inquiry learning environments Kollar, Fischer and Slotta (2007)
35Measuring the learners’ internal scripts on collaborative argumentation: Test (prior to collaborative learning phase): Protocol of a fictitious dialogue about a science topicProtocol included complete and incomplete arguments and argumentation sequences sensu Toulmin (1958) and Leitao (2000)Task: Identification of good and poor “argumentative moves” and giving reasons for thatMedian split procedure on the basis of individual point score
36Interaction of internal and external scripts - Results External script supported the acquisition of knowledge on argumentation (i.e. fostering internal scripts; without hampering domain knowledge acquisition)Only the internal script was effective for the acquisition of domain knowledgeProcess analyses reveal: external scripts are only effective in writing phases, not during (quantitatively dominating) oral discussion phases. There, internal scripts are more effective.
37Getting rid of (external) scripts: Fading How can external collaboration script components be faded out once appropriate internal scripts are accessible? (e.g., Pea, 2004; Renkl et al., 2005)Christof Wecker & Frank Fischer, Friday, hrs, Room A
38Condition of relevance ClaimArgumentType of argumentType of claimCondition of relevanceApplication supportSequencingCounterargument
39argument schemata:type of argumenttype of claimapplication support: after 2 counterarguments
40Results on fading of scripts Simply hiding more and more of the script components does not help muchEffect of fading can be increased by using collaboration: distributed monitoring supports learners to take over the regulation of their skill→ Ongoing: longer-term study on fading of scripts in classroom setting
41Interdisciplinary challenges: Specification and formalisation of (external) collaboration scripts Collaboration Script as a „boundary concept“ - addressed by the European Research Team „Cossicle“The challenge: psychologically valid, educationally effective and technically re-usable external scripts
42European Research Team „Cossicle“ (NoE Kaleidoscope) Stavros DemetriadisPierre DillenbourgAndreas HarrerComputer ScienceEducationPäivi HäkkinenPierre TchounikinePsychologyTeam Leader:Armin WeinbergerFrank Fischer
43Components and Mechanisms ParticipantsGroupsRolesActivitiesResourcesMechanismsComponentsFadingTraversionRotationRepetitionDistributionFormation123Kobbe et al. (2007). Specifying collaboration scripts.International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning.
44An editor for external collaboration scripts Graphical modeling and editing of scripts (Harrer et al., 2006)
45ConclusionLearning through online peer discussion typically needs supportHow to improve? Computer-supported collaboration scripts can indeed establish ZPDs; they have highly specific effects on processes and individual outcomes (but also side effects)External scripts can re-orchestrate the interplay of discourse, cognition, and instruction in peer discussionsComplex interplay of internal and external collaboration scripts over time: External scripts promote knowledge on argumentation and the development of internal scripts; internal scripts are more effective for domain knowledge acquisitionEffective fading (Davies, 2003; Pea, 2004) of external scripts is not a straight forward removal of script components - collaboration can be effectively usedWe suggest the scripting framework by Kobbe et al. (2007) as interdisciplinary joint reference to accumulate scientific knowledge as well as to represent effective script designs.
46Research has partly been funded By Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG)By Noe Kaleidoscope (EU 6 FP)By the Federal State Baden-Württemberg (Strukturfonds)Most of the papers can be found in the TELEARN open archive
47Fostering simulation-based learning in medical education with Collaboration Scripts Jan Zottmann, Peter Dieckmann, Marcus Rall, Frank Fischer & Tatjana Taraszow: Paper #, Session #, Date
48Simulation-Based Courses with Video-Assisted Debriefing Hands-on simulation courses2-3 active participants8-10 live observing participantsZiel des Simulatorkurses: Erhöhung der PatientensicherheitLernen mit Simulation: aktivBeobachtungslernen: passiv - praktisch ohne Vorgaben und in nicht strukturierter FormUmgestaltung in eine aktivere Lernsituation & stärkerer Fokus auf CRM-Heuristiken möglich?
49Kollar et al. (2004), Wecker et al. (2005) Findings of two classroom studies with CSCL:No difference between classroom setting and “lab” settingExplanations:CSCL environment are not flexible enough to be easily integrated into the overall classroom instructionLack of appropriate classroom scriptsStudents hardly use the expertise of the teacher appropriately
50Future Challenge: Orchestrating CSCL and classroom instruction Bringing the teacher back into the conductor’s roleTowards an orchestration of scripts on small group level and classroom scripts (Wecker, Kollar & Fischer, in prep.)More adaptable/flexible scripts (e.g. Tchounikine & Dillenbourg, 2006)Automated analyses of peer discussion (Rosé et al., 2008)
51An editor for collaboration scripts Harrer and Cossicle (2006):Based on joint framework for the specification of scriptsEasy-to-use visual language for teachers and instructional designersSupporting different families of scripts (e.g., Jigsaw, Reciprocal...)Simulation of visual models model-based predictionsCompilable to standard e-learning description language, e.g. IMS/LD descriptions
52Framework for the specification of collaboration scripts a common terminology as a basis for knowledge exchange and integration in research
53Research questionHow can we get learners to take over the metacognitive control of their skill application as soon as the fading of the script starts?Use of collaboration!Hypothesis:only the combination of fading and distributed monitoring by a learning partner fosters the acquisition of the cognitive skill of argumentation (interaction effect)
54The orchestration of discourse and cognition with collaboration scripts Collaboration scripts may lead to an alternative orchestration of argumentation in discourse, and cognitive processesArgumentation scripts in particular fosterArgumentation quality in discussionindividual knowledge on argumentationLearning in groups is only better than learning alone fifthe groups are appropriately (e.g., scripted)
55Scripted Interaction current case: Asia current role: analyst current role: criticcurrent role: critic
57How should it work? Cognitive processing, e. g. self-explanations Individual acquisition of knowledgeCollaborative discourse
58Important reason: Ineffective patterns of interaction Learners do not discuss the content adequatelyLearners do not negotiate meaning but build consensus quickly
59How to improve online peer discussions with collaboration scripts?
60Script effects:Scaffolding interaction - changing rhythms of collaborative knowledge building
61Fading: Getting rid of external scripts Research question: How can fading of script components be used to support learners to increasingly take over the metacognitive control of their argumentation skills?
63Main effect external script: F(1,87) = 10.20; p < .01; Eta² = .11 Effects of differently structured internal and external scripts on the acquisition of domain-general knowledge on argumentationMean scores in the domain-gernaral knowledge on argumentation testSo what were the results? Concerning the effects of internal and external scripts on the acquisition of domain-general knowledge on argumentation, we found a significant main effect for the external script. It helped both learners with low and with high structured internal scripts to acquire more knowledge about argumentation which you can see in that the second and the fourth column are higher than the first and the third.Experimental ConditionsMain effect external script: F(1,87) = 10.20; p < .01; Eta² = .11
64Effects of differently structured internal and external scripts on the acquisition of domain-specific content knowledgeMain effect internal script: F(1,87) = 9.27; p < .05; Eta² = .10Effects of differently structured internal and external scripts on the acquisition of domain-general knowledge (on argumentation)Main effect external script: F(1,87) = 10.20; p < .01; Eta² = .11With respect to the acquisition of domain-specific content knowledge, we however get a completely different picture. Here, we did not find an effect of the external script but we found instead a significant main effect for the structuredness of the internal script saying that learners with high structured internal scripts acquired more domain-specific content knowledge than learners with low structured internal scripts. The high structured external script was not able to further support the acquisition of domain-specific content knowledge.
65Quality of arguments in written discourse Medium qualityHigh qualityLow str. ext. scriptHigh str. ext. scriptMarg. significant main effect for external scripts (F(1,41) < 3.14; p = .08; Eta² = .07)Significant main effect for external scripts (F(1,41) < 23.86; p < .01; Eta² = .37)
66Structural quality of arguments in overall discourse Medium qualityHigh qualityNumber of argumentsLow str. ext. scriptHigh str. ext. scriptSignificant interaction effect (F(1,40) < 5.62; p < .05; Eta² = .12)Significant main effect for internal scripts (F(1,40) < 10.48; p < .01; Eta² = .21)
67Scripting argumentative knowledge construction 1. The promises of argumentative knowledge construction2. Does it work spontaneously?3. Why should it work?4. How to improve with collaboration scripts?5. Educational Psychology meets Computer Science: Specification and formalisation of collaboration scripts6. Challenges
68Scripting argumentative knowledge construction 1. The promises of argumentative knowledge construction2. Does it work spontaneously?3. Why should it work?4. How to improve with collaboration scripts?5. Educational Psychology meets Computer Science: Specification and formalisation of collaboration scripts6. Challenges
72Script for the construction of single arguments ClaimWarrant + DataMichael suffers from an inefficient self-attribution in maths.He thinks he is not talented due to failures. This equals an internal stable attribution of failures.QualifierMichael simply might be lazy or swamped with maths or suffer from bad instruction.Claim...Warrant + DataQualifierStegmann, Weinberger & Fischer (rin press). Scripting argumentative knowledge construction. ijCSCL
73Learning through discussion Students are supposed to acquire knowledge and skills to participate in argumentative discourse in their fieldRegular lectures and seminars rarely provide opportunities for students to participate in high-level argumentative discourseTechnology-enhanced learning environments might provide these opportunities with specific tools supporting students in learning from discussionPeers and technology can be part of a Zone of Proximal Development
77Script for the construction of single arguments ClaimWarrant + DataMichael suffers from an inefficient self-attribution in maths.He thinks he is not talented due to failures. This equals an internal stable attribution of failures.QualifierMichael simply might be lazy or swamped with maths or suffer from bad instruction.Claim...Warrant + DataQualifierStegmann, Weinberger & Fischer (in press). Scripting argumentative knowledge construction. ijCSCL
78Formalization of the Arguegraph Script (see Dillenbourg & Jermann, 2007)
79Mediation of learning outcomes: Learner or learning partners?
81Mediator AnalysesOwn quality of argumentation in discourse X knowledge acquisition on content (attribution theory):r = 0.30*Quality of argumentation of learning partner X knowledge acquisition on argumentationr = 0.11, n.s.
82ResultsScripts can facilitate collaborative learning beyond individual learning it may be sometimes better to let students learn alone then in unstructured collaboration82
83Interaction of internal and external scripts Processes: Evidence of negative interactionOutcomes: internal scripts are much more effective than external: skills of argumentation help you learn content knowledge; maybe wm capacity problem with external scripts and complex phenomenon(Ingo fragen)
86Summary of results so far Computer-supported collaboration scripts can change interaction dramatically and highly specifically - with side- effectsComputer-supported scripts can indeed establish Zones of Proximal Development: Students can discuss quite beyond their current competence levels.Through scripted discussions, students improve their knowledge on argumentation.Only some of the scripts facilitate domain knowledge
87The orchestration of discourse and cognition in a scripted discussion Learner with social script: Critic role
88Script for the construction of single arguments ClaimWarrant + DataMichael suffers from an inefficient self-attribution in maths.He believes he is not talented due to failures. This means an internal stable attribution of failures.QualifierMichael simply might be lazy or swamped with maths or suffer from bad instruction.Claim...Warrant + DataQualifierStegmann, Weinberger & Fischer (2007). Scripting argumentative knowledge construction. ijCSCL.
89Script for the construction of arguments R1 R2 R3 R4 R R6 R7 R8 R9Application of new knowledge in discourseOpen discoursetR1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R R7Application of new knowledge in discourseScript for the construction of argumentsDepth of Cognitive Processing (Stegmann et al., 2007)
90Mediator AnalysesArgumentation in discourse is a mediator between argumentation scripts and knowledge acquisition on argumentation as well as knowledge on content.
91Method Structuredness of the external collaboration script Low High Participants: 90 students (= 45 dyads) from five classes of two German secondary schools (grades 8 to 10)Learning environment: Module of the inquiry learning environment WISE about “Deformed Frogs”Learning partners collaborated in front of one computer screen2x2-factorial design:Structuredness of the external collaboration scriptLowHighStructuredness of the internal argumentation-specific scriptsN = 20(10 dyads)N = 22(11 dyads)N = 26(13 dyads)
92Results - Individual Elaboration Kontrolle der Lernvoraussetzungen: Bedingungen unterschieden sich nicht im Vorfragebogen zur Kompetenzeinschätzung.Bedingung „mit Skript“ elaborierte sign. mehr zu Heuristiken als Bedingung „ohne Skript“; Bedingungen unterschieden sich nicht bzgl. Elaborationen zu Medizin.U-TestElaborationen zu Medizin: U(-0,80) = 145,00, n.s.Elaborationen zu Heuristiken: U(-5,30) = 10,50, p < 0,001
93Results - CRM skillsBedingung „ohne Skript“ schätzte ihre Kompetenz im Vorwissen bereinigten Nachfragebogen besser ein als Bedingung „mit Skript“!
94Results: Knowledge about argumentation fading x distributed monitoring: F(3; 56) = 6,80; p = 0,001; h2 = 0,267