Luento aiheesta tietokoneavusteinen yhteisöllinen oppiminen. Luennon runkona on käytetty tätä kirjankappaletta: "Dillenbourg, P., Järvelä, S., & Fischer, F. (2009). The evolution of research on computer-supported collaborative learning: from design to orchestration. In Technology-Enhanced Learning. Principles and products (p. 3-19). Edited by N. Balacheff, S. Ludvigsen, T. de Jong, T., A. Lazonder & S. Barnes. Springer.

2. Tieto- ja viestintätekniikka pedagogisena työvälineenä, luennot http://www.slideshare.net/larux/johdantoluento-tieto-ja-viestinttekniikan-perusteet-opintojaksolle http://www.slideshare.net/larux/1-luento-tieto-ja-viestinttekniikan-perusteet-opintojaksolla-tvt-opetuskytn-historia http://www.slideshare.net/larux/2-luento-tieto-ja-viestinttekniikan-pedagogiset-perusteet-kurssilla-tvt-ja-yhteiskunta http://www.slideshare.net/larux/3-luento-tieto-ja-viestinttekniikan-pedagogiset-perusteet-tietokoneavusteinen-yhteisllinen-oppiminen-cscl http://www.slideshare.net/larux/4-luento-tieto-ja-viestinttekniikan-pedagogiset-perusteet-nykyajan-medialukutataito http://www.slideshare.net/larux/5-luento-tieto-ja-viestinttekniikan-pedagoginen-opetuskytt-kurssil Http://www.slideshare.net/larux & http://jarinopetus.wordpress.com

3. Collaborative learning / Collaborative education – ”history” “ Collaborative education in the U.S. began in the 1970s as a response to the previous decade’s mentality that students who needed help and didn’t seek this help did not belong in college. In response to this, colleges began providing peer tutoring and in-class group work. This led to the discovery that these forms of collaboration did not change what people learned, but how they learned”

4. Learning of technology Learning with technology Taylor, R. (1980). The Computer in the School: Tutor, Tool, Tutee. NY: Teachers College Press

5. What is collaborative learning? Dillenbourg, P. (1999). What do you mean by collaborative learning. Collaborative learning Cognitive and computational approaches , 1–16. Citeseer. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.167.4896&rep=rep1&type=pdf A coordinated synchronous activity that is the result of continued attempt to construct and maintain a shared conception of a problem (Roschelle & Teasley, 1995) Roschelle, J., & Teasley, S. (1995). The construction of shared knowledge in paired problem solving. Computersupported collaborative learning (pp. 69-97). Springer-Verlag.

9. 1. More interaction balances out less individualisation

10. 1. More interaction balances out less individualisation Dickson, W. & Vereen, M. A. (1983). Two students at one microcomputer. Theory Into Practice , 22 (4), 296-300. doi:10.1080/00405848309543077 “ it appeared that when we did have to put two children in front of a computer, the results were actually positive: the imperfect individualisation was compensated for by the benefits of social interactions ” 1983: Key educational principle was the adaptation of instruction to individual needs

11. 2. There is an illusion of convergence, actually CSCL practises lie at crossroads of two different perspectives: A. Distributed cognition (socio-cognitive) B. Situated cognition (socio-cultural )

13. Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.

18. 3. The formal/informal border is blurred

21. 4. Collaborative learning is not a recipe

23. The key consequence is at design level: the purpose of a CSCL environment is not simply to enable collaboration across distance but to create condition in which effective group interactions are expected to occur

24. Learning design example: Supporting small-group learning using multiple Web 2.0 tools: A case study in the higher education contex Jari Laru, Piia Naykki, Sanna Jarvela, Supporting small-group learning using multiple Web 2.0 tools: A case study in the higher education context, The Internet and Higher Education, In Press, Accepted Manuscript, Available online 28 August 2011, ISSN 1096-7516, DOI: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.08.004 Lecture Discussion Phototaking Blogging Lecture Discussion Phototaking Blogging Lecture Discussion Phototaking Blogging Week 1 Learning infrastructures Lecture Discussion Phototaking Blogging Lecture Discussion Phototaking Blogging Lecture Discussion Phototaking Blogging A.Ground B.Reflect Discussion (week 4) Discussion (week 9) Wikiwork (weeks 4-12) C.Conceptualize D. Reflect & elaborate E. Review & evaluate F. Co-construct knowledge Phases 1 day 6 days Collaborative Solo Collaborative Week 2 Learning communities Week 3 Metacognition Week 6 Self-regulated learning Week 7 Learning design Week 8 Social media in learning 1 day G.monitor

25. 5. Media effectiviness is a myth

27. LET - Oppimisen ja koulutusteknologian tutkimusyksikkö Jari Laru, 22.4.2009

28. Example: FLE3mobile & mlearning Overall, the analyses revealed nonparticipative behaviour within the online community . The social network analysis revealed structural holes and sparse collaboration among participants in the offline community. It was found that due to their separated practices in the offline community, they did not have a need for mobile collaboration tools in their practices Laru, J. & Jarvela, S. (2008). Social Patterns in Mobile Technology Mediated Collaboration among Members of the Professional Distance Education Community. Educational Media International, 45(1), 17-32

29. 6.What matters is the effort required to construct shared knowledge

34. Case Flyers & fieldtrip A B C D S ending off Story Snippet Story snippet 1 B A Story snippet 1 1/1 Story snippet text Grounding T ask Iintroduction Task feedback Conclusion S nippet types Group 1 Other groups Laru, J., Järvelä, S. & Clariana, R. B. (2010). Supporting collaborative inquiry during a biology field trip with mobile peer-to-peer tools for learning: a case study with K-12 learners. Interactive Learning Environments Subject : research question Group: name, task: # Caim: We claim Ground : Because we see Warrant: textbook says I mage placed here Research question Other research qu.. D ate / time D ate / time Story snippet 1 D ate / time Research question D ate / time

35. 7. Greater resemblance to face-to-face interaction is not necessarily better

37. Example of media effectiviness Traditional virtual learning environments - e.g. Optima & Blackboard

40. ..new features apply to: 2. augmenting face-to-face situations Tinkertable: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSwuyM4WkN4 Tinkersheets : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bms4_i9DI2g&feature=related “ Traditional learning technologies fit with students who sit on a chair in front of a table with a computer in a quiet environment. What is the potential of learning technologies for students who move all the time, carry objects, may have dirty hands and work in a noisy environment? Are learning technologies irrelevant for them or should we develop new ways to use technologies that are more appropriate to these contexts? ” Leading House - DUAL T project: Integrating technologies in heterogeneous contexts, CRAFT-EPFL Switzerland

41. ..new features apply to: 2. augmenting face-to-face situations http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxdoKsjQbyw

42. Roschelle, J., & Pea, R. (2002). A walk on the WILD side: how wireless handhelds may change CSCL, 51-60. Retrieved from http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1658616.1658624 2002 “ His 2002 paper with Roy Pea, "Walk on the Wild Side," has been influential in understanding the future possibilities for wireless handheld learning devices”

43. ONE-TO-ONE TECHNOLOGY ENHANCED LEARNING http://www.flickr.com/photos/olpc/3038680654/ Chan, T.-W., Roschelle, J., Hsi, S., Kinshuk, K., BROWN, T., Brown, T., Patton, C., et al. (2006). One-to-one technology-enhanced learning: an opportunity for global research collaboration. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 1(1), 1-26. Retrieved from http://www.worldscinet.com/abstract?id=pii:S1793206806000032

45. 8. Task representations mediate verbal interactions

47. Examples I Beldevere argumentation tool - Suthers, Weiner, Connelly & Paolucci, 1995 Microworlds - Roschelle & Teasley, 1995

48. Examples II

49. 9. Structuring communication is a subtle compromise

51. Solution: CSCL scripts Scripts originate from the fact that it is difficult to predict the effects of collaborative learning by controlling external conditions such as group composition or task features. Actually, the effects of collaborative learning depend on the quality of interactions that take place among group members. Therefore, scripts aim to enhance the probability that knowledge generative interactions such as conflict resolution, explanation or mutual regulation occur during the collaboration process.

53. Arguegraph script

54. 10. Interaction analysis can be partly automated

58. 11. There is a shift from personal to interpersonal computers

59. 2008: interpersonal computers http://www.slideshare.net/larux/3-luento-tieto-ja-viestinttekniikan-pedagogiset-perusteet-tietokoneavusteinen-yhteisllinen-oppiminen-cscl http://www.fkaplan.com/file/caif-interpersonal.doc Kaplan, F., DoLenh, S., Bachour, K., Kao, G. Y.-ing, Gault, C., Dillenbourg, P., Huang, J., et al. (2009). Interactive Artifacts and Furniture Supporting Collaborative Work and Learning (Vol. 10, pp. 1-17). Boston, MA: Springer US. Retrieved from http://www.springerlink.com/content/uxr3q7t022751275/

60. Roomware Tangibles http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5GWUx3ZSMw Tangibles Phidgets Wearables http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4hXM6paYOME http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5UPiFeJhwS4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RmLU4GS7zAI

61. Multi-input devices Computers with multiple mices Pawar, U. S., Pal, J., & Toyama, K. (2006). Multiple mice for computers in education in developing countries. In Proceedings of IEEE/ACM ICTD 2006. http://www.webtlk.com/2008/12/19/how-to-install-multiple-mice-mouse-and-keyboards-on-the-same-computer/ First axis: phidgets, tangibles, wearables, roomware

62. Tangible objects & interfaces http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5UPiFeJhwS4 First axis: phidgets, tangibles, wearables, roomware

63. Roomware http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baDJNtBT1Fg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0U05WeXPGlk First axis: phidgets, tangibles, wearables, roomware

64. Mobiles & phidgets Second Axis: Location based mobile technologies http://vimeo.com/11739878

65. Conclusions

67. CSCL in short From PPT by Jermann, P. Scripting collaboration with ManyScripts http://manyscripts.epfl.ch/

68. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLC8Ew8J9Hg