nach oben

International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning

Erschienen in:

01.12.2015

ReaderBench: Automated evaluation of collaboration based on cohesion and dialogism

verfasst von: Mihai Dascalu, Stefan Trausan-Matu, Danielle S. McNamara, Philippe Dessus

Erschienen in: International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning | Ausgabe 4/2015

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

As Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) gains a broader usage, the need for automated tools capable of supporting tutors in the time-consuming process of analyzing conversations becomes more pressing. Moreover, collaboration, which presumes the intertwining of ideas or points of view among participants, is a central element of dialogue performed in CSCL environments. Therefore, starting from dialogism and a cohesion-based model of discourse, we propose and validate two computational models for assessing collaboration. The first model is based on a cohesion graph and can be perceived as a longitudinal analysis of the ongoing conversation, thus accounting for collaboration from a social knowledge-building perspective. In the second approach, collaboration is regarded from a dialogical perspective as the intertwining or synergy of voices pertaining to different speakers, therefore enabling a transversal analysis of subsequent discussion slices.

Vorheriger Artikel Investigating the effects of prompts on argumentation style, consensus and perceived efficacy in collaborative learning

Nächster Artikel AMOEBA: Designing for collaboration in computer science classrooms through live learning analytics

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Adams, P.H., & Martell, C.H. (2008). Topic detection and extraction in chat. In IEEE Int. Conf. on Semantic Computing (ICSC 2008) (pp. 581–588). Santa Clara, CA: IEEE.

Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Bakhtin, M.M. (1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays (C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Trans.). Austin and London: The University of Texas Press.

Bakhtin, M.M. (1984). Problems of Dostoevsky’s poetics (C. Emerson, Trans. C. Emerson Ed.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Bakhtin, M.M. (1986). Speech genres and other late essays (V. W. McGee, Trans.). Austin: University of Texas.

Bereiter, C. (2002). Education and mind in the knowledge age. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Blei, D. M., Ng, A. Y., & Jordan, M. I. (2003). Latent Dirichlet allocation. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 3(4–5), 993–1022.

Budanitsky, A., & Hirst, G. (2006). Evaluating WordNet-based measures of lexical semantic relatedness. Computational Linguistics, 32(1), 13–47.CrossRef

Cress, U. (2013). Mass collaboration and learning. In R. Luckin, S. Puntambekar, P. Goodyear, B. Grabowski, J. Underwood, & N. Winters (Eds.), Handbook of design in educational technology (pp. 416–424). New York: Routledge.

Dascalu, M. (2014). Analyzing discourse and text complexity for learning and collaborating, Studies in Computational Intelligence (Vol. 534). Switzerland: Springer.CrossRef

Dascalu, M., Rebedea, T., & Trausan-Matu, S. (2010). A deep insight in chat analysis: Collaboration, evolution and evaluation, summarization and search. In D. Dochev & D. Dicheva (Eds.), 14th Int. Conf. on Artificial Intelligence: Methodology, Systems, Applications (AIMSA 2010) (pp. 191–200). Varna: Springer.

Dascalu, M., Rebedea, T., Trausan-Matu, S., & Armitt, G. (2011). PolyCAFe: Collaboration and utterance assessment for online CSCL conversations. In H. Spada, G. Stahl, N. Miyake & N. Law (Eds.), 9th Int. Conf. on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL 2011) (pp. 781–785). Hong Kong: ISLS.

Dascalu, M., Trausan-Matu, S., & Dessus, P. (2013a). Cohesion-based analysis of CSCL conversations: Holistic and individual perspectives. In N. Rummel, M. Kapur, M. Nathan & S. Puntambekar (Eds.), 10th Int. Conf. on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL 2013) (pp. 145–152). Madison: ISLS.

Dascalu, M., Dessus, P., Trausan-Matu, S., Bianco, M., & Nardy, A. (2013b). ReaderBench, an environment for analyzing text complexity and reading strategies. In H. C. Lane, K. Yacef, J. Mostow & P. Pavlik (Eds.), 16th Int. Conf. on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED 2013) (pp. 379–388). Memphis: Springer.

Dascalu, M., Trausan-Matu, S., & Dessus, P. (2013c). Voices’ inter-animation detection with ReaderBench – Modelling and assessing polyphony in CSCL chats as voice synergy. In 2nd Int. Workshop on Semantic and Collaborative Technologies for the Web, in conjunction with the 2nd Int. Conf. on Systems and Computer Science (ICSCS) (pp. 280–285). Villeneuve d'Ascq, France: IEEE.

Dascalu, M., Dessus, P., Bianco, M., Trausan-Matu, S., & Nardy, A. (2014a). Mining texts, learners productions and strategies with ReaderBench. In A. Peña-Ayala (Ed.), Educational data mining: Applications and trends (pp. 335–377). Switzerland: Springer.

Dascalu, M., Trausan-Matu, S., & Dessus, P. (2014b). Validating the Automated Assessment of Participation and of Collaboration in Chat Conversations. In S. Trausan-Matu, K. E. Boyer, M. Crosby & K. Panourgia (Eds.), 12th Int. Conf. on Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITS 2014) (pp. 230–235). Honolulu: Springer.

Dascalu, M., Trausan-Matu, S., Dessus, P., & McNamara, D.S. (2015a). Dialogism: A Framework for CSCL and a Signature of Collaboration. In O. Lindwall, P. Häkkinen, T. Koschmann, P. Tchounikine & S. Ludvigsen (Eds.), 11th Int. Conf. on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL 2015) (pp. 86–93). Gothenburg: ISLS.

Dascalu, M., Stavarache, L.L., Dessus, P., Trausan-Matu, S., McNamara, D.S., & Bianco, M. (2015b). Predicting Comprehension from Students’ Summaries. In 17th Int. Conf. on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED 2015) (pp. 95–104). Madrid, Spain: Springer.

Dascalu, M., Trausan-Matu, S., Dessus, P., & McNamara, D.S. (2015c). Discourse cohesion: A signature of collaboration. In 5th Int. Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conf. (LAK’15) (pp. 350–354). Poughkeepsie: ACM.

Dong, A. (2005). The latent semantic approach to studying design team communication. Design Studies, 26(5), 445–461.CrossRef

Dong, A. (2006). Concept formation as knowledge accumulation: A computational linguistics study. AIE EDAM: Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis, and Manufacturing, 20(1), 35–53.

Dong, A. (2009). The language of design: Theory and computation. New York: Springer.

Fano, R. M. (1961). Transmission of information: A statistical theory of communication. Cambridge: MIT Press.

François, F. (1993). Pratiques de l’oral. Dialogique, jeu et variations de figures du sens. Paris: Nathan Pédagogie.

Galley, M., & McKeown, K. (2003). Improving word sense disambiguation in lexical chaining. In G. Gottlob & T. Walsh (Eds.), 18th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI’03) (pp. 1486–1488). Acapulco: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc.

Graesser, A. C., McNamara, D. S., Louwerse, M. M., & Cai, Z. (2004). Coh-Metrix: Analysis of text on cohesion and language. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 36(2), 193–202.CrossRef

Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.

Hastie, T., Tibshirani, R., & Friedman, J. (2009). The elements of statistical learning (2nd ed.). New York: Springer.CrossRef

Holmer, T., Kienle, A., & Wessner, M. (2006). Explicit referencing in learning chats: Needs and acceptance. In W. Nejdl & K. Tochtermann (Eds.), Innovative approaches for learning and knowledge sharing, first European conference on technology enhanced learning, EC-TEL 2006 (pp. 170–184). Crete: Springer.

Hudelot, C. (1994). La circulation interactive du sens dans le dialogue. In A. Trognon, U. Dausendschön-Gay, U. Krafft, & C. Riboni (Eds.), La construction interactive du quotidien (p. 15). Nancy: Presses Universitaires de Nancy.

Hummel, G. K., Houcke, J., van Nadolski, R. J., Hiele, T., van der Kurvers, H., & Löhr, A. (2011). Scripted collaboration in serious gaming for complex learning: Effects of multiple perspectives when acquiring water management skills. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(6), 1029–1041.CrossRef

Joshi, M., & Rosé, C.P. (2007). Using Transactivity in Conversation Summarization in Educational Dialog. In SLaTE Workshop on Speech and Language Technology in Education. Farmington, Pennsylvania, USA.

Jurafsky, D., & Martin, J. H. (2009). An introduction to natural language processing. Computational linguistics, and speech recognition (2nd ed.). London: Pearson Prentice Hall.

Kontostathis, A., Edwards, L., Bayzick, J., McGhee, I., Leatherman, A., & Moore, K. (2009). Comparison of Rule-based to Human Analysis of Chat Logs. In P. Meseguer, L. Mandow & R. M. Gasca (Eds.), 1st International Workshop on Mining Social Media Programme, Conferencia de la Asociación Española Para La Inteligencia Artificial (pp. 12). Seville: Springer.

Koschmann, T. (1999). Toward a dialogic theory of learning: Bakhtin’s contribution to understanding learning in settings of collaboration. In C. M. Hoadley & J. Roschelle (Eds.), Int. Conf. on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning (CSCL’99) (pp. 308–313). Palo Alto: ISLS.

Landauer, T. K., & Dumais, S. T. (1997). A solution to Plato’s problem: The latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition, induction and representation of knowledge. Psychological Review, 104(2), 211–240.CrossRef

Lefebvre, H. (2004). Rhythmanalysis: Space, Time and Everyday Life (S. Elden & G. Moore, Trans.). London: Continuum.

Linell, P. (2009). Rethinking language, mind, and world dialogically: Interactional and contextual theories of human sense-making. Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.

Manning, C. D., & Schütze, H. (1999). Foundations of Statistical Natural Language Processing. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Manning, C. D., Raghavan, P., & Schütze, H. (2008). Introduction to information retrieval (Vol. 1). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Marková, I., Linell, P., Grossen, M., & Salazar Orvig, A. (2007). Dialogue in focus groups: Exploring socially shared knowledge. London: Equinox.

McNamara, D. S., Louwerse, M. M., McCarthy, P. M., & Graesser, A. C. (2010). Coh-Metrix: Capturing linguistic features of cohesion. Discourse Processes, 47(4), 292–330.CrossRef

McNamara, D. S., Graesser, A. C., McCarthy, P., & Cai, Z. (2014). Automated evaluation of text and discourse with Coh-Metrix. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Medina, R., & Suthers, D. (2009). Using a contingency graph to discover representational practices in an online collaborative environment. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 4(3), 281–305.CrossRef

Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63(2), 81–97.CrossRef

Miller, G. A. (1995). WordNet: A lexical database for English. Communications of the ACM, 38(11), 39–41.CrossRef

Mislove, A., Marcon, M., Gummadi, K.P., Druschel, P., & Bhattacharjee, B. (2007). Measurement and analysis of online social networks. In 7th ACM SIGCOMM Conference on Internet measurement (pp. 29–42). San Diego: ACM.

Raghunathan, K., Lee, H., Rangarajan, S., Chambers, N., Surdeanu, M., Jurafsky, D., & Manning, C.D. (2010). A Multi-Pass Sieve for Coreference Resolution. In Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP ’10) (pp. 492–501). Cambridge: ACL.

Randel, D. M. (Ed.) (2003). The New Harvard Dictionary of Music (4th ed.). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Rebedea, T. (2012). Computer-Based Support and Feedback for Collaborative Chat Conversations and Discussion Forums. (Doctoral dissertation), University Politehnica of Bucharest: Bucharest.

Rosé, C. P., Wang, Y. C., Cui, Y., Arguello, J., Stegmann, K., Weinberger, A., & Fischer, F. (2008). Analyzing collaborative learning processes automatically: Exploiting the advances of computational linguistics in computer-supported collaborative learning. International Journal of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, 3(3), 237–271.CrossRef

Salazar Orvig, A. (1999). Les mouvements du discours: Style, réfèrences et dialogue dans des entretiens cliniques. Paris, France: L’Harmattan.

Scardamalia, M. (2002). Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. In B. Smith & C. Bereiter (Eds.), Liberal education in a knowledge society (pp. 67–98). Chicago: Open Court Publishing.

Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2006). Knowledge building: Theory, pedagogy, and technology. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 97–118). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Schiffrin, D. (1987). Discourse markers. London: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Searle, J. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Shannon, C.E. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. The Bell System Technical Journal, 27, 379–423 & 623–656.

Stahl, G. (2006). Group cognition. Computer support for building collaborative knowledge. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Stahl, G., Koschmann, T., & Suthers, D. (2006). Computer-supported collaborative learning: An historical perspective. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 409–426). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Stent, A. J., & Allen, J. F. (2000). Annotating argumentation acts in spoken dialogue. Rochester: University of Rochester. Computer Science Department.

Stolcke, A., Ries, K., Coccaro, N., Shriberg, J., Bates, R., Jurafsky, D., & Meteer, M. (2000). Dialogue act modeling for automatic tagging and recognition of conversational speech. Computational Linguistics, 26(3), 339–373.CrossRef

Suthers, D., & Desiato, C. (2012). Exposing chat features through analysis of uptake between Contributions. In 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 3368–3377). Maui: IEEE.

Tapiero, I. (2007). Situation models and levels of coherence. Mahwah: Erlbaum.

Teplovs, C. (2008). The Knowledge Space Visualizer: A Tool for Visualizing Online Discourse. In Workshop on A Common Framework for CSCL Interaction Analysis, ICLS 2008 (pp. 12). Utrecht, Netherland.

Trausan-Matu, S. (2010a). Automatic support for the analysis of online collaborative learning chat conversations. In P. M. Tsang, S. K. S. Cheung, V. S. K. Lee & R. Huang (Eds.), 3rd Int. Conf. on Hybrid Learning (pp. 383–394). Beijing: Springer.

Trausan-Matu, S. (2010b). Computer support for creativity in small groups using chats. Annals of the Academy of Romanian Scientists, Series on Science and Technology of Information, 3(2), 81–90.

Trausan-Matu, S. (2013). From two-part inventions for three voices, to fugues and creative discourse building in CSCL Chats. Unpublished manuscript.

Trausan-Matu, S., & Rebedea, T. (2010). A polyphonic model and system for inter-animation analysis in chat conversations with multiple participants. In A. F. Gelbukh (Ed.), 11th Int. Conf. Computational Linguistics and Intelligent Text Processing (CICLing 2010) (pp. 354–363). New York: Springer.

Trausan-Matu, S., & Stahl, G. (2007). Polyphonic inter-animation of voices in chats. In CSCL’07 Workshop on Chat Analysis in Virtual Math Teams (pp. 12). New Brunwick: ISLS.

Trausan-Matu, S., Stahl, G., & Zemel, A. (2005). Polyphonic inter-animation in collaborative problem solving chats. Philadelphia: Drexel University.

Trausan-Matu, S., Stahl, G., & Sarmiento, J. (2006). Polyphonic Support for Collaborative Learning. In Y. A. Dimitriadis, I. Zigurs & E. Gómez-Sánchez (Eds.), Groupware: Design, Implementation, and Use, 12th International Workshop (CRIWG 2006) (pp. 132–139). Medina del Campo: Springer.

Trausan-Matu, S., Rebedea, T., Dragan, A., & Alexandru, C. (2007a). Visualisation of learners’ contributions in chat conversations. In J. Fong & F. L. Wang (Eds.), Blended learning (pp. 217–226). Singapour: Pearson/Prentice Hall.

Trausan-Matu, S., Stahl, G., & Sarmiento, J. (2007b). Supporting polyphonic collaborative learning. Indiana University Press, E-service Journal, 6(1), 58–74.

Trausan-Matu, S., Dascalu, M., & Dessus, P. (2012). Textual complexity and discourse structure in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning. In S. A. Cerri, W. J. Clancey, G. Papadourakis & K. Panourgia (Eds.), 11th Int. Conf. on Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITS 2012) (pp. 352–357). Chania: Springer.

Trausan-Matu, S., Dascalu, M., & Rebedea, T. (2012). A system for the automatic analysis of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning chats. In C. Giovannella, D.G. Sampson & I. Aedo (Eds.), 12th IEEE Int. Conf. on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT 2012) (pp. 95–99). Rome: IEEE.

Trausan-Matu, S., Dascalu, M., & Rebedea, T. (2014). PolyCAFe – Automatic support for the analysis of CSCL chats. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 9(2), 127–156. doi:10.1007/s11412-014-9190-y.CrossRef

Upton, G., & Cook, I. (2008). A dictionary of statistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRef

van Dijk, T. A. (1977). Coherence text and context: Exploration in the semantics and pragmatics of discourse (pp. 93–129). London: Longman.

van Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academic.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Wegerif, R. (2006). A dialogical understanding of the relationship between CSCL and teaching thinking skills. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(1), 143–157.CrossRef

Weinberger, A., & Fischer, F. (2006). A framework to analyze argumentative knowledge construction in computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers & Education, 46, 71–95.CrossRef

Wu, Z., & Palmer, M. (1994). Verb semantics and lexical selection. In 32nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, ACL ’94 (pp. 133–138). New Mexico: ACL.

Titel: ReaderBench: Automated evaluation of collaboration based on cohesion and dialogism
verfasst von: Mihai Dascalu
Stefan Trausan-Matu
Danielle S. McNamara
Philippe Dessus
Publikationsdatum: 01.12.2015
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning / Ausgabe 4/2015
Print ISSN: 1556-1607
Elektronische ISSN: 1556-1615
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-015-9226-y

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2015

Advancing knowledge‐building discourse through judgments of promising ideas

A decade of CSCL

AMOEBA: Designing for collaboration in computer science classrooms through live learning analytics

Investigating the effects of prompts on argumentation style, consensus and perceived efficacy in collaborative learning

Premium Partner