Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Evaluating How Students would use a Collaborative Linked Learning Space
Evaluating How Students would use a Collaborative Linked Learning Space
Evaluating How Students would use a Collaborative Linked Learning Space
Evaluating How Students would use a Collaborative Linked Learning Space
Evaluating How Students would use a Collaborative Linked Learning Space
Evaluating How Students would use a Collaborative Linked Learning Space
Evaluating How Students would use a Collaborative Linked Learning Space
Evaluating How Students would use a Collaborative Linked Learning Space
Evaluating How Students would use a Collaborative Linked Learning Space
Evaluating How Students would use a Collaborative Linked Learning Space
Evaluating How Students would use a Collaborative Linked Learning Space
Evaluating How Students would use a Collaborative Linked Learning Space
Evaluating How Students would use a Collaborative Linked Learning Space
Evaluating How Students would use a Collaborative Linked Learning Space
Evaluating How Students would use a Collaborative Linked Learning Space
Evaluating How Students would use a Collaborative Linked Learning Space
Evaluating How Students would use a Collaborative Linked Learning Space
Evaluating How Students would use a Collaborative Linked Learning Space
Evaluating How Students would use a Collaborative Linked Learning Space
Evaluating How Students would use a Collaborative Linked Learning Space
Evaluating How Students would use a Collaborative Linked Learning Space
Evaluating How Students would use a Collaborative Linked Learning Space
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Evaluating How Students would use a Collaborative Linked Learning Space

155

Published on

Presentation at ITiCSE 2011. Related paper can be retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1999747.1999774

Presentation at ITiCSE 2011. Related paper can be retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1999747.1999774

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
155
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Evalua&ng  how  students  would  use  a  Collabora&ve  Linked  Learning  Space Kai  Michael  Höver Michael  Hartle Guido  Rößling Max  Mühlhäuser Technische  Universität  Darmstadt        
  • 2. Outline1)  Mo@va@on  for  CLLS  (Collabora@ve  Linked  Learning  Space)2)  Demo  of  CLLS3)  User  study  results Telecoopera@on 2
  • 3. Students‘  usage  of  addi&onal  learning   resources  Previously  conducted  survey  with  104  CS  students  [1]   Students  use  the  Web  for  learning,  especially   Wikipedia   Google  to  find  learning  resources   Forum  discussions[1] Höver, K.M., Rößling, G. & Mühlhäuser, M., 2010, DeLFI 2010: Die 8. e-Learning Fachtagung Informatik der Gesellschaft für Informatike.V, Studierende, das Web und Vorlesungsaufzeichnungen. GI Telecoopera@on 3
  • 4. Students  use  Google:Google  trends  sta&s&cs  for  „Quicksort“ Start  of   End  of   Start  of   summer   summer   winter   term term term Telecoopera@on 4
  • 5. Example contradicts explains Diagram Wikipedia article illustrates Q&A Forum discussion Lecture MaterialDiagram Telecoopera@on 5
  • 6. Problem  Students  use  a  broad  variety  of  different  learning   resources.  However,  these  learning  resources  are  not  explicitly   interlinked  with  each  other  (may  be  only  in  a  student‘s   mind) ➡  they  cannot  be  shared ➡  can  hardly  be  retrieved   Telecoopera@on 6
  • 7. Focus  of  the  survey  Ques@ons  for  students:   How  do  students  assess  the  opportunity  to  link  learning  resources  with  other   material  including  a  seman@c  descrip@on?   How  do  students  assess  the  usability  of  CLLS?   Do  students  see  a  benefit  in  using  CLLS  and  how  would  they  use  it?  Ques@ons  for  educators:   How  do  educators  assess  the  opportunity  to  link  learning  resources  with  each   other  and  how  would  they  use  this?   Would  educators  use  such  a  system  for  their  courses?   Which  pros  and  cons  do  they  see? Telecoopera@on 8
  • 8. Survey  Methodology  Semi-­‐structured  interviews  (ø  1.5h  each)   14  CS  students   6  CS  educators  Assessment  ques@ons   5-­‐point  Likert  scale   1  =  strongly  disagree  /  not  helpful   5  =  strongly  agree  /  very  helpful   Computa@on  of  arithme@c  mean  (AM)  and  standard  devia@on  (SD)   One-­‐sample  t-­‐tests  on  the  0.05  level Telecoopera@on 9
  • 9. Survey  StructureA)  UsabilityB)  Linking  learning  resourcesC)  Sharing  learning  resourcesD)  Filtering  shared  learning  resourcesE)  Visualiza@onF)  Archiving  linked  learning  resources Telecoopera@on 10
  • 10. Usability  System  Usability  Scale  test  [1]   Average  score  =  88  /  100   Standard  devia@on  =  4  Students  would  use  such  a  system  mainly  with   laptops   tablets  such  as  iPad   (mobile  devices  if        UI  is  appropriate)  Need  for  suppor@ng  different  OSs  and  devices[1] Brooke, J. (1996). SUS - A quick and dirty usability scale. Usability Evaluation in Industry, 189-194. Telecoopera@on 11
  • 11. Linking  learning  resources  Possibility  of  linking  learning  resources     Students:  AM=4.71,  SD=0.47;     Educators:   contradicts   for  themselves:  AM=4.5,  SD=0.84   for  students:  AM=4.83,  SD=0.41  Possibility  of  describing  the  seman@c  rela@on   Students:  AM=4.57,  SD=0.65  Educators:     for  themselves:  AM=3.67,  SD=0.52 explains   for  students:  AM=4.20,  SD=0.84 Telecoopera@on 12
  • 12. Linking  learning  resources -­‐  Assessment  of  link  descrip6ons Students Educators explains 4,86 4,83example for 4,57 5 illustrates 4,14 4 also  important: 3,86 -­‐  prerequisite  for extends -­‐  ques0on  to 4,6contradicts 3,79 3,4 agrees 2,57 2,8 0 1 3 4 5 Telecoopera@on 13
  • 13. Linking  learning  resources -­‐  Assessment  of  types  of  learning  resources Students Educators 5 Slide 5 4,93 PDF document 4,8 4,57 Website 4,8 4,5 Figure, diagram 4,4Wikipedia article 4,07 4,6 Furthermore: Forum post 3,64 -­‐ Anima2on 5 Video 3,57 -­‐ Source  Code 4,8 3,5Word proc. doc. 3,2 3,36 digital pen note 4 3,14Spreadsheet doc. 3,2 2,79 Chat message 3,8 2,64 Blog post 4,6 0 1 3 4 5 Telecoopera@on 14
  • 14. Linking  learning  resources -­‐  detail  level  of  anchors  A  more  fine-­‐grained  level  than  on  the   document  level  is  important  Need  for  referencing   paragraphs,  sentences,  words   @mestamps,  periods  of  @me   code  snippets contradicts Telecoopera@on 15
  • 15. Sharing  learning  resources  Students  already  share  created  or  found   learning  resources  with  fellow  students  by   eMail   Messenger   Web  storage Exchanging learning resources with CLLS Private links should is helpful be supported AM=4,71 (0,47) AM=2,93 (1,49) AM=4,67 (0,82) Telecoopera@on 16
  • 16. Filtering  learning  resources Educator 5 Type 4,5 Chain of filters Semantic 4,36 is helpful ∅ Rating 4,14 AM=4.36 (0.93) Group/Person 3,21 Period of time 3 0 1 3 4 5 Telecoopera@on 17
  • 17. Visualiza&on  A  graphical  representa@on  of  a  knowledge  graph  is  helpful   Students:    AM  =  4.0  (SD  =  0.88)   Educators:   for  themselves:  AM  =  3.8  (SD  =  0.84)   for  students:  AM  =  4.0  (SD  =  1.0)  Visualiza@on  approaches:  Different  shape  and  colors  for  different  kinds  of  resources  Different  sizes  and  distances  regarding  their  importance Telecoopera@on 18
  • 18. Archiving  linked  learning  resources  Making  a  snapshot  is  helpful   Students:  AM  =  3.79  (SD  =  1.19)   Educators:  AM  =  4.6  (SD  =  0.55)  Making  copies  of  Web  resources  prevents  them  from  being   deleted  or  modified.   Telecoopera@on 19
  • 19. Pros  &  Cons  Students:   Ac@ve  augmenta@on  of  learning  material   Everything  is  in  one  place  and  integrated   Exchange  of  learning  resources  Educators:   Possible  to  observe  students‘  ac@vi@es  outside  the  classroom   Recognize  possible  comprehension  difficul@es  of  students   Alterna@ve  or  addi@onal  representa@ons  of  the  lecture  material   Ac@ve  working  with  the  learning  material   Social  presence  Students  &  Educator  Cons:   online  only   spam Telecoopera@on 20
  • 20. Future  work  Long  term  study  Integra@on  of  collabora@on  tools   and  social  networks  Support  of  fine-­‐grained  anchors  of   different  media  types  Visualiza@on  Archiving  the  learning  space Telecoopera@on 21
  • 21. Thank  you  for  listening!  Ques&ons? Telecoopera@on 22

×