WebGuide: Guiding Collaborative Learning on the Web with Perspectives

Stahl, Gerry

doi:10.5334/2001-1

Cited by 21 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Other researchers have their own perspective on interactive learning, which include blended learning (Garrison and Kanuka, 2004;Graham, 2006), collaborative learning (Stahl 2001;Stahl et al, 2006) and flexible learning (Freeman and Capper, 1999). Blended learning focuses on the "types" of learning that make learning effective.…”

Section: Interactive Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Review and discussion: E-learning for academia and industry

Chang

2016

International Journal of Information Management

190

118

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a high level review and discussion about e-learning and proposes the use of interactive learning as a recommended method for staff training in industry and academia. Interactive learning is focused on the integrated e-learning and face-to-face learning to ensure that the process of learning can stimulate learners' interests, report their progress and have tutors to provide their feedback and guide learners to the expected targets. Learning activities and varieties have been illustrated with discussion about how industry and academia can use interactive learning. Five successful examples of interactive learning to demonstrate the effectiveness of interactive learning. Positive impacts have been reported in RBS, SMEs using SAP, University of Cambridge, University of Greenwich and Leeds Beckett University to support the positive outcomes for learners and trainers. Future directions have been discussed, particularly the use of emerging services can enhance the learning experience and satisfaction for learners and trainers.

show abstract

Section: Interactive Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Blended learning focuses on the "types" of learning that make learning effective. In collaborative learning, the emphasis is on the use of technology that makes learning effective (Stahl 2001;Stahl et al, 2006). Flexible learning is a vague term because many types of learning are claimed to be "flexible".…”

Section: Interactive Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review and discussion: E-learning for academia and industry

Chang

2016

International Journal of Information Management

190

118

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The design of the EDC is based on assessment of our own prior work (as discussed in Arias et al [1997]) as well as a study of the strengths and limitations of other theoretical work, approaches, and systems, including ubiquitous computing [Abowd et al 1998;Weiser 1991;, collaborato-ries [Erickson et al 1999;Olson and Olson 1997], and "Roomware" [Streitz et al 1994;1999]. This is an ongoing activity throughout the design process, not just the starting point for our investigations.…”

Section: Assessment In Design and Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

Transcending the individual human mind—creating shared understanding through collaborative design

Arias

Eden

Fischer

et al. 2000

ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact.

365

275

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Complex design problems require more knowledge than any single person possesses because the knowledge relevant to a problem is usually distributed among stakeholders. Bringing different and often controversial points of view together to create a shared understanding among these stakeholders can lead to new insights, new ideas, and new artifacts. New media that allow owners of problems to contribute to framing and resolving complex design problems can extend the power of the individual human mind. Based on our past work and study of other approaches, systems, and collaborative and participatory processes, this article identifies challenges we see as the limiting factors for future collaborative human-computer systems. The Envisionment and Discovery Collaboratory (EDC) is introduced as an integrated physical and computational environment addressing some of these challenges. The vision behind the EDC shifts future development away from the computer as the focal point, toward an emphasis that tries to improve our understanding of the human, social, and cultural system that creates the context for use. This work is based on new conceptual principles that include creating shared understanding among various stakeholders, contextualizing information to the task at hand, and creating objects to think with in collaborative design activities. Although the EDC framework is applicable to different domains; our initial effort has focused on the domain of urban planning (specifically transportation planning) and community development. Permission to make digital / hard copy of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that the copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage, the copyright notice, the title of the publication, and its date appear, and notice is given that copying is by permission of the ACM, Inc. To copy otherwise, to republish, to post on servers, or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and / or a fee. Categories and INTRODUCTIONHuman-computer interaction (HCI) research over the last 20 years has made fundamental contributions to the creation of new paradigms and new forms of working, learning, and collaborating in the information age. Its major emphasis has been to develop new technologies (e.g., at the hardware, basic software, and application levels), new interaction techniques (e.g., graphical user interfaces), and new design approaches (e.g., usercentered, human-centered, work-oriented, and learner-centered design). Much of this research has emphasized and pioneered socio-technical approaches. In the process, HCI work has progressed from early concerns with low-level computer issues to a focus on people's tasks [Myers 1998;Newell and Card 1985;Norman 1990]. The greatest progress in HCI research has been made at the operator and task level, where events are studied in time scales ranging from microseconds to minutes (and in some cases hours or days). At these time scales, the relevant theory is drawn from psychology ...

show abstract

“…Collaborative technology, on the other hand, refers to dedicated tools designed to provide specific support: dialogue structuring (C-CHENE) (Baker & Lund, 1997), diagrammatic representations (Belvedere) (Suthers, 1999), thinking types (CSILE; Knowledge Forum) (Scardamalia & Bereiter, 1991), anchoring through writing or discussion prompts (CaMILE) (Guzdial & Turns, 2000), or perspectives to represent information in a communal database (e.g. individual, team, class or comparison) (Webguide) (Stahl, 2001). A third important aspect that needs to be considered is how technology is used during interaction.…”

Section: Computer Supportmentioning

confidence: 99%

Designing for interaction: Six steps to designing computer-supported group-based learning

Strijbos

Martens

Jochems

2004

Computers & Education

242

123

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

At present, the design of computer-supported group-based learning (CS)GBL) is often based on subjective decisions regarding tasks, pedagogy and technology, or concepts such as 'cooperative learning' and 'collaborative learning'. Critical review reveals these concepts as insufficiently substantial to serve as a basis for (CS)GBL design. Furthermore, the relationship between outcome and group interaction is rarely specified a priori. Thus, there is a need for a more systematic approach to designing (CS)GBL that focuses on the elicitation of expected interaction processes. A framework for such a process-oriented methodology is proposed. Critical elements that affect interaction are identified: learning objectives, tasktype, level of pre-structuring, group size and computer support. The proposed process-oriented method aims to stimulate designers to adopt a more systematic approach to (CS)GBL design according to the interaction expected, while paying attention to critical elements that affect interaction. This approach may bridge the gap between observed quality of interaction and learning outcomes and foster (CS)GBL design that focuses on the heart of the matter: interaction.

show abstract

WebGuide: Guiding Collaborative Learning on the Web with Perspectives

Cited by 21 publications

References 17 publications

Review and discussion: E-learning for academia and industry

Review and discussion: E-learning for academia and industry

Transcending the individual human mind—creating shared understanding through collaborative design

Designing for interaction: Six steps to designing computer-supported group-based learning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About