Supporting collaborative learning among Cuban university students through the use of social software
Dissertation for the academic degree of Doctor in Educational Sciences
Roberto Carlos Rodríguez Hidalgo
Promotors: Prof. dr. Chang ZhuProf. dr. Aida María Torres Alfonso
June 17, 2014
Universidad Central “Marta Abreu” de Las VillasPr
oble
mst
atem
ent
UCLV
Overview
Introduction• Problem
statement• Scope
Research design• 5 empirical
studies
Results• Diagnostic• Didactic Model• Integration• Validation
Conclusions• Limitations• Future
Research
Current teaching & learning problems in UCLV
Some teachers support many
students
Students don’t have effective ways to
collaborate
Students don’t have effective ways to
collaborate
Many teachers don’t like ICTMany teachers don’t like ICT
4
Prob
lem
stat
emen
t
Cuban HE situation
D
…Blended-learning
Collaborative learningICT use
…
RedUniv
Prob
lem
stat
emen
t
Benefits of collaborative learning
• Both facilitators and learners become active participants in the educational process (Brookfield, 1986).
• The hierarchy between facilitators and learners is eliminated (Bruffle, 1999).
• A sense of community is created (Kaplan, 2002).• Knowledge is created, not transferred (Sheridan,
1989).• Knowledge is considered to be located in the
community rather than in the individual (Whipple, 1987).
6
Prob
lem
stat
emen
t
Benefits of collaborative learning
• Both facilitators and learners become active participants in the educational process (Brookfield, 1986).
• The hierarchy between facilitators and learners is eliminated (Bruffle, 1999).
• A sense of community is created (Kaplan, 2002).• Knowledge is created, not transferred (Sheridan,
1989).• Knowledge is considered to be located in the
community rather than in the individual (Whipple, 1987).
Process
Product7
Prob
lem
stat
emen
t
Benefits of social software use in education
• can be individualized in design and use• can represent problems more realistically• can display each step of a difficult problem
solving task• can afford group discussion and
collaboration across distances• can provide immediate feedback for
monitoring and evaluating student progress
Social Software:
Baker E. L., O’Neil HF. Measuring problem solving in computer environments: Current and future states. Computers in Human Behavior. 2002;18:609-622
8
Prob
lem
stat
emen
t
Scope
CL
SS
CSCL
Scop
e
Web 2.0Sc
ope
Social software
Publish
Share
Discuss
Social networks
Microblogs
Livestream
Livecast
Virtual worlds
Social games
MMO
General research question
To what extent do collaborative learning activities supported by social software improve the effectiveness of
the teaching and learning process in Cuban higher education?
Research design overview
5 studies within 3 phases
Phase Diagnostic Integration-Validation ValidationStudy 1 2 3 4 5
FocusCurrent use and perceptions of social software
Wiki-supported collaborative
learning
Using SNA to analyse OTD
SS-supported scaffolding in
CL
Wikis/online discussions
effectiveness & perceived
importance to support CL
Participants28 teachers
+79 students
20 students 21 students 60 students 60 students
Methodology QUAL+quan QUANqual QUAN+QUAL QUAN+qual Quantitative
Main instruments and methods
InstrumentsDiagnostic
Focus groups & interviews
Collaborative preferences
Survey on Social software use, importance &
acceptance
Interventions
Sociometry
Queries to social software’s DBs
Self-efficacy on courses’ topics
Social software content
Students’ score sheets
Validation
Self-efficacy on using social
software
Social software effectiveness
Social software importance
Mixed methodology
Quantitative data
Qualitative data
Diagnostic-main RQs (1st study)
• What are teachers’ and students’ perceptions of the use of collaborative approaches in teaching and learning?
• What are their views about using social software? • What are the requirements to effectively integrate social
software?
Collaboration perceptions
comfort1%
motivational perspective3%
feedback5%
community9%
cognitive elaboration perspective
9%
communication11%
facilitation11%
developmental perspective
14%
social cohesion perspective
18%
knowledge sharing19%
Other62%
Open question: Student's perceptions of collaborative learning
Recommended requirements to integrate social software
Recommended requirement supported by data from
Motivate teachers and students to integrate social software to support collaborative learning.Focus groups
CP questionnaireWell-planned integration of social software, aligned with teaching and learning characteristics. Focus groups
Ensure students’/teachers’ workload is reasonable when integrating social software. Focus groups
Limitations concerning the Cuban Internet gap should be reduced. Focus groupsSocial software environments should be monitored by teachers to prevent undesired behaviours. Focus groups
Provide support for students to ask about questions for their academic performance. Focus groups
Use online social software as a tool to encourage shy students to engage in collaboration and communication. Focus groups
Offering alternative ways (online) to share resources among teachers and students. Focus groups
Prioritising the integration of social software for courses taught by more than one teacher. Focus groups
Defining the ideal number of students for group collaboration. CP questionnaireEncouraging the use of various social software tools in order to benefit more from the potential of social software for teaching and learning. SS.U.I.A questionnaire
Didactic model
Foundations
Theoretical framework
• Social spaces• Didactics• ZPD• Stigmergic
collaboration
Characteristics
• Classroom social space
• ZDP Scaffolding• Scaffolding + SS
Teaching strategy
SS integration (phases)
Promotion
Introduction
Intensification
Innovation
Recommended requirements
Motivation
Well-planned integration
Internet limitations
SS monitoring
Soft- scaffolding
Student engagement
Resource sharing
Use of various SS
Support collab. teaching
Ideal membership
Encouraging mashups
Integration phases
PromotionSocial tags (5.65)Videocast (5.28)
Microblogs (5.08)
IntroductionWikis (7.09)
Social networks (6.68)
Blogs (6.18)Online discussions (5.98)
Syndication (5.86)
Intensive use Innovation
. . .
Intervention-main RQs (2nd to 4th
studies)
• How do student peer relationships differ during social software learning context from the relationships before starting the social software learning activities?
• How do students interact with each other at the content level when learning through social software?
• How does social software-supported scaffolding influence student relationships in collaborative learning?
• Does social software-supported scaffolding influence the effectiveness of student collaborative learning?
Social Network Analysis-GephiSt
udie
s2,
3 &
4
Case A-relationships
before after
Stud
y4
Case B-relationships
before after
Stud
y4
Case C-relationships
before after
Stud
y4
SNA-metrics (before-after)St
udy
4
Before After Before After Before After
A B CAverage degree Graph density Number of communities
Content analysisSt
udy
3
Task oriented35%
Irrelevant3%
Technical6%
Planning19%
Social13%
Sharing and comparing information
12%
Assessment9%
Peer-assessment3%
Comments coded
Self-efficacy on courses’ topicsSt
udy
4
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
F2F Social soft. F2F Social soft. F2F Social soft. F2F Social soft.
A B C All
Mean
Validation-main RQs (5th study)
• Does students’ self-efficacy on using social software increase when using it to support collaborative learning activities?
• What is the students’ perceived effectiveness of wikis and online discussions when used to support collaborative learning?
• What is the students’ perceived importance of wikis and online discussions when these are used to support collaborative learning?
Self-efficacy on social software use
00.5
11.5
22.5
33.5
pre-test post-test pre-test post-test pre-test post-test
online discussions wikis social software
Effectivenes & importance of social software to support CL
effectiveness of social software
importance of social software
2.9
3
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
social software effectiveness
Online discussions wikis both
2.9
3
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
social software importance
Online discussions wikis both
General Conclusions
social software-supportedcollaborative learning
Positivelyinfluences
on SN dynamics
Positively influences SE• On courses’
topics• On SS use
Positively influences scaffolding
Positivelyinfluenceslearning
effectiveness
General Conclusions
Didactic modelSupported byDiagnostic• Recommended
requirements
Theorethicallysupported• Social spaces• Didactics• Socio-cultural
development theory• Stigmergy
collaboration
Interventionstudies
+Supported by
validation phase
Limitations
Sample
• Cuban highereducation
No control groups
• Pre-test + post-test• Triangulation
Possible researcher/teacher
biasHawthorne effect
Future research
Generalise in Cuban HE• Blogs• Syndication• Microblogs• Videocast
CL + SS+ Gephi + SNA + content analysis• Learning
analytics on SS• Machine
learning
Thank you very much…
Name Roberto Carlos Rodríguez Hidalgo
email [email protected] Assistant Teacher
Company
Department of Educational TechnologyCentre of Informatics' StudiesUniversidad Central “Marta Abreu” de Las VillasCarretera a Camajuaní Km. 5 ½ Santa Clara, Cuba
