Conversational analysis


Published on

Talk at HICSS 2007 track on persistent conversation. This talk uses rhetorical analysis to describe student interactions on an e-learning site.

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Conversational analysis

  1. 1. Conversational Analysis Concert e-Learning System HICSS Workshop on Persistent Conversation Kona, Hawaii January 3, 2007 John C. Thomas IBM T. J. Watson Research Center
  2. 2. Outline <ul><li>Dynamic Learning Environment </li></ul><ul><li>General Quality of Learning in Concert </li></ul><ul><li>Quantitative Analysis of Comments </li></ul><ul><li>Level of Learning </li></ul><ul><li>Critical Incidents and Missed Opportunities </li></ul><ul><li>Suggestions for Systems to Support Learning </li></ul>
  3. 3. Initial Qualitative Observations <ul><li>Uncertainty about and awkwardness in using tool pervades conversation </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Leads to group-bonding humor </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Leads to division of labor </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>“ Facilitator” interrupts flow of problem solving with technology issues </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Uncertainty about what the problem is </li></ul><ul><li>Uncertainty about times and participants </li></ul><ul><li>Conversation seems to be “tip of the iceberg” </li></ul><ul><li>Real names  politeness & inclusion ? Hard to know complete context but this is very “nice talk” for Internet </li></ul><ul><li>Medium seems conducive to small “snippets” of thought rather than extended problem solving </li></ul><ul><li>Actual Problem Solving (Wang) apparently takes place individually and off-line </li></ul>
  4. 4. Dynamic Learning Environment <ul><li>Designed for adult professionals </li></ul><ul><li>User entered query and learning constraints such as time and type of material and chosen results </li></ul><ul><li>“Custom Course” constructed from Learning Objects and ontology </li></ul><ul><li>Mechanisms for groups but focus on individual learner </li></ul>
  5. 5. Dynamic Learning Environment <ul><li>Experiment compared Query Only with Dynamic Learning Environment (DLE) </li></ul><ul><li>DLE users spent more time on fewer objects </li></ul><ul><li>Users in Dynamic Learning Environment made more extensive and better designs </li></ul><ul><li>Verbal behavior had more “cognitive” words; fewer “search and find” words </li></ul><ul><li>Use of DLE encouraged learning “set” and gave overall structure </li></ul>
  6. 6. P: Problem Solving T: Technology Discussion C: Clarification Dialogue S: Sociality: apology, thanks, greetings, goodbye, praise, emotion,etc. O: Okay, nods, short agreement with previous speaker D: Direction: problem selection and formulation M: Meeting logistics: who is here; when do we meet, etc.
  7. 7. 23.0 % 8.02 % Second “Half” Social Comments First “Half” Social Comments
  8. 8. P: Problem Solving T: Technology Discussion C: Clarification Dialogue S: Sociality: apology, thanks, greetings, goodbye, praise, emotion,etc. D: Direction: problem selection and formulation M: Meeting logistics: who is here; when do we meet, etc. 131 14 9 9 31 40 S 17 97 22 7 28 9 P 9 22 102 7 18 10 C 10 7 3 130 17 7 T 28 27 23 18 191 23 D 40 9 7 6 28 131 M S P C T D M
  9. 9. Longest “string” of one type of comment with no more than one continuous string of interruptions 10 P (problem solving) 14 M (meeting logistics) 15 S (social) 15 C (clarification) 21 T (technology) 24 D (direction) Longest String CODE
  10. 10. R Reference to message No. 742 (Text: &quot;so clarice, can you wrap this up and finish it?&quot;) 09.34.29 07.06.2006 you did good job at putting your findings on the whiteboard, which makes it easier to summarize your work nan 747 P   09.34.25 07.06.2006 it is 9+(N-2)*3 Wang 746 D   09.34.04 07.06.2006 plz rmb to type this formula carefully Wang 745
  11. 11. D   09.07.19 26.05.2006 know ...the others have come up with complicated formulas.i think we're doing the thing directly.i'm not sure if we're supposed to solve the question just like that? Amanda2 271
  12. 12. D   08.45.31 08.06.2006 so why dun we stick with hexagon Wang 938 C   08.45.30 08.06.2006 so that means we cannot use octagons? Clarice2 937 D   08.45.23 08.06.2006 i think octogon is not suitabe for this prob Wang 936 O   08.45.20 08.06.2006 yes Clarice2 935 O   08.45.14 08.06.2006 yea Amanda2 934 R   08.45.11 08.06.2006 sorry Wang 933 P   08.45.05 08.06.2006 yep cause they cant join on all sides properly dchia 932 P   08.44.50 08.06.2006 something is wrong Clarice2 931 C   08.44.49 08.06.2006 wait Clarice2 930 C   08.44.38 08.06.2006 are the octogons successfully drawn Wang 929 C   08.44.23 08.06.2006 so how is it with the drawing Wang 928
  13. 13. Possible continuations… <ul><li>What is it about octagons that makes them not suitable? </li></ul><ul><li>Which shapes “work” for this type of problem? </li></ul><ul><li>Does the fact that they don’t pack evenly (really) mean we cannot find a method or formula? </li></ul>
  14. 14. D   08.48.25 08.06.2006 i have racked my brain yesterdAY TO only come up with that formula Wang 952
  15. 15. Possible continuations…. <ul><li>Algorithmic generation versus mathematical formula: what are the advantages and disadvantages? </li></ul><ul><li>Can all formulae be described as algorithms? Vice versa? </li></ul>
  16. 16. C   09.11.50 08.06.2006 ya dchia 1049 C   09.11.43 08.06.2006 the difference between the number of sticks is 9 right? Clarice2 1048 C   09.11.30 08.06.2006 look under pattern 1 and 2 Clarice2 1047 C   09.11.23 08.06.2006 see ar Clarice2 1046 C   09.11.03 08.06.2006 eh guys? sorry bt i really dont know what u mean by the multiples of 3 method.. dchia 1045 D   09.10.44 08.06.2006 why don't we try substitutinf life situations in the patterns instead of shapes Clarice2 1044
  17. 17. Possible continuations… <ul><li>Are you joking? What did you mean? </li></ul><ul><li>How could we model life situations in terms of geometry? </li></ul><ul><li>Life situations? Like what? </li></ul><ul><li>Life situations? You mean like human relationships? </li></ul>
  18. 18. O   08.38.07 09.06.2006 ya i noie Clarice2 1390 D   08.37.53 09.06.2006 coz who puts two sticks at the same place Amanda2 1389 D   08.37.44 09.06.2006 i don't think we shd include htem Amanda2 1388 C   08.37.37 09.06.2006 when i count i leave out the sticks next to it Amanda2 1387 M   08.37.29 09.06.2006 oh oh clarice Amanda2 1386 C   08.37.16 09.06.2006 ok then Clarice2 1385
  19. 19. Possible continuations… <ul><li>Do “extra” sticks make structures stronger? Under what conditions? </li></ul><ul><li>What is the relationship among our diagrams, mathematical abstractions, and real world objects? </li></ul><ul><li>Would the “extra” sticks be useful if we were building objects in a virtual world? Under what conditions? </li></ul>
  20. 20. Design Thoughts… <ul><li>Use Socio-Technical Pattern Language </li></ul><ul><li>Special Roles </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Learning Facilitator </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Scribe </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Process Support </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Stages: Problem Finding, Problem Formulation, Problem Solving, Reflection: What did we learn? How could we solve such problems more effectively in the future? </li></ul></ul>
  21. 21. References <ul><li>Farrell, R., Liburd, S.D. and Thomas, J.C. Dynamic Assembly of Learning Objects. Proceedings of the World-Wide Web Conference , (2004) New York, NY. </li></ul><ul><li>Thomas, J. C. and Farrell, R. G. An experimental investigation on the effectiveness of individualized web-based learning based on the dynamic assembly of learning objects, IBM Technical Report, (2004)RC 23338. </li></ul><ul><li>Dynamic Learning Experience. http:// </li></ul><ul><li>Farrell, R., Liburd, S., and Thomas, J. “Dynamic Assembly of Learning Objects”, Proceedings of the 13th International World-Wide Web Conference (New York, NY, May 2004). </li></ul><ul><li>Brookfield, S., D. (1986) Understanding and Facilitating Adult Learning . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. </li></ul><ul><li>Carroll, J. M. and Mack, R. L. (1984). Learning to use a word processor: By doing, by thinking, by knowing. In J. C. Thomas & M. L. Schenider (Eds.), Human factors in computer systems. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex. </li></ul><ul><li>Ausubel, D.P. (1960). The use of advance organizers in the learning and retention of meaningful verbal material. Journal of Educational Psychology , 51 , 267-272. </li></ul>