Sat. Apr. 15, 2012
Symposium: A Framework to Understand the Impact of Technology on
Collaborative Learning
 Div. C, Section 7: Technology Research
This symposium (Chaired by Emma Mercier) came out of a paper by Roy Pea &
Jeremy Roschelle (2002)
Shelley Goldman: Family Math Project
 Presenting paper co-authored with Roy Pea on “Wireless and Interactive
Learning Processes” (WILE)
 Mobile technology for math in informal contexts
 RECIPROCAL RESEARCH: (reminds me of participatory design, and design
research)
 How and when do families collaborate on math? Why?
 Math not an individual activity
 23 families
 interview families ’develop tech environments to support families in their
collaborative math
 findings:
o home improvement, leisure time
o math is organized by the problems people need to solve, no the other
way around (i.e. best value)
o use tools that are hand for mathematical work
o family math isn’t school math
 our environments need to
o be driven by situations
o promote math enjoyment
o …
 hypothesis: family interactions + mobile apps = collaborations around math?
 Mobiles: short activity bursts (downtime play), build on mobile affordances
(anytime, anywhere)
 Math could be situation driven and context dependent in the family, didn’t
seem like work, often social
 “Go Roadtrip” (their game)
o suite of 5 games: Traffic Lights, Victory Van, Estimation Station, R We
There Yet?, Number Racers
 road around in car with families and videotaped them to see what math
activities happened in the car
 Study tensions & findings
o Takes a long time, no data yet
o Families eager to join study, but don’t always have the time
o “hold-back” of cell phone by adults from their kids
o kids think math is solitary activity
o kids mostly playing 1 game in the suite
Carmen Petrick Smith (supervisor: Taylor Martin)
iRobot
 RQ: how does physical embodiment affect students’ computer programming
skills?
 Seymour Papert: kids program turtle movements in Logo
o “syntenicity”  students’ using physical movements to help them
figure out their code
 iPro
o 2 key design principles of iPro (mobile app): mobile & social
o program your own robot
o data sources: still video camera, roaming video camera, data log files
o Analysis
Lee Martin: What do young ppl make of the encounters across math contexts?
 Want to bridge gap
 Young ppl need to be central agents
 35 Grade 6 students
 student tasks:
o photo sort task (definitely/probably/probably not/definitely not
math)
o math photo hunt (take photos with disposable camera of what they
think involves math), then write description for each photo, then view
classmates’ photos and comment about what counts as math, then
repeat math photo hunt
 findings:
o their math beliefs buried in their math experiences
o expansive vs. narrow stance of what counts as math
 stages of math activity….
o capturing and collecting
o communication an collaborating
o viewing and analyzing
o representing and creating
Emma Mercier: multi-touch classroom
 students can send things from tables to other tables and to IWB
 teacher orchestration table at front, could send materials from it to other
student tables or IWB (teachers don’t like having to walk to front to of
classroom), student table right by this orchestration didn’t get any teacher
attention across all classes
o so in later runs, made teacher orchestration iPad (but teacher didn’t
like holding it)
 how does multi-touch table support collaborative learning?
 How does collaborative learning fit with this technology?
 4 possible building blocks for a CSCL framework:
1. Technology
2. Teams
3. Tasks
4. Teacher
 all these interact (triangle/tetrahedron, with “tasks” in the middle)
 Want to come up with a framework for CSCL?
 3 studies, participants ages 9-11
o study 1: does collaboration look different around a MTT than around
paper-based activity?
 MTT condition: groups had more focus on the tasks
 Paper condition: took turns reading
 MTT was faster collaboration
o Study 2: room orientation
 2 conditions: centred room, tradition front-facing room
 More talk in centred room
 More correct answers in traditional room
 No different in off-topic talk
teams & tasks
 Different emergent roles in the same groups as the topic changes
Teachnology, teams & tasks
 NumberNet: within & between math learning
 History task:
Summary
 MT supports joint attention
 Room orientation changes interaction
 Content area influences emergent roles
 Access to teacher controls an issue
 Within and Between group Learning
Mike Tissenbaum: KCI-S3 Epistemological Framework…
 New: 6 design principles of KCI
 Students work in parallel to collect data/materials that are added to a
collective knowledge base that will be used in a subsequent scaffolded
inquiry activity
Discussant: Roy Pea (Stanford)
Lee’s project
 Interested by Lee’s finding that students had narrow vs. expansive view of
math/numeracy/literacy…
 Following up collection of materials with online “commenting” and f2f
discussion
Mike’s KCI design principles
 Impressive is the architectural, thinking about being a teacher
 Will it be a teacher who orchestrates all this, will it be a different person with
deep pedagogical understanding of constructivism that will work with
teacher to orchestrate?
o T-PCK  what would be sufficient preparation for such a person?
Emma
 “classroom level of cognition”
Mon. Apr. 16, 2012
When Systems Collide: Challenges and Opportunities in Learning Technology
Mash-Ups

Div. C, Section 7: Technology Research
NetTango
Mike Horn & Uri Wilensky (Northwestern)
NetLogo
 allow kids to create computer programs by connecting wooden blocks
 Robot Park (ended up as aen exhibit at the Boston Museum of Science)
NetTango
 Under the hood is NetLogo
 Runs on tabletop surface
 Pinch to see agents, track agents, rewind the simulation (see Horn &
Wilensky, 2012)
Autotutor + Emotion Sensing Technologies
Graesser & Menphis
AutoTutor Conversationa Agents + Affect Sensing Tehcnologies = Emotion-Sensitive
AutoTutor
See Graesser, A.C. (2011) to read about all this!
 Latent semantic analysis, conversational analysis

Conversation, speech recognition
Found that jus reading a textbook  will only learn superficially. To learn more
deeply, need interaction
Emotions during learning
 Boredom and confusion most associated with learning
Affect Sensors & Channels
 Posture (posture-sensing chair) – boredom not detected in the face, but
posture
 Face
 Conversational (dialogue) cues (for timing and interactivity of emotions)
The emotion matrix
 Patent pending
 Given learner’s emotion, how will the autotutor respond?



1st 30 minutes, don’t’ want emotional
low ability ppl want supportive tutor thereafter
high ability ppl want the rude tutor in the 2nd hour
Ken Perlin (NYU) & Winslow Burleson (MIT?)
“Your brain is like a muscle, it grows stronger when challenged” (Dweck, 1999)
 40% trait beliefs (these ppl believe it’s not possible to grow your intellect, so
will quit a task if challenged b/c they think they can’t succeed)
 40% incremental beliefs (these ppl believe can grow your own intellect, so
like to be challeneged)
if you give affect, you should mirror
if you don’t give affect, you shouldn’t mirror
see Ken Perlin’s NYU website for his web-based affect app!
affective leanring companion
 humanoid agend
 peer companion
 broad expressive range
 scriptable behavioural repertoire
 real-time serendipitous interactivity
they worked with IDEO and made sensors
video & skin sensor (of learner); character agent doesn’t mirror but does head tilts
and nods
they’ve raised money/grants
Ken Perlin has new gaming institute
Inventors workshop (newly developed)
 mashup, anyone can get teamed up with mentors form all different
disciplines
Jim Slotta & Tom Moher
Jim:
 intro on OISE + UIC (EP) = collaboration
 Knowledge Communities in the classroom
 Model for “Collective Inquiry”
 KCI
 “Scripting” complex pedagogical designs
 “Smart” learning spaces
 integrate devieces, location, ppl
 gestural and tangible interfaces
 multi-touch surfaces
 intelligent agents (software)
 SAIL (scalable architecture for interactive learning)
 Scripting curricular “flow”
 Smart classroom curriculum (needs to be supported by the smart room)
Tom: Embedded Phenomena
 Karl von Frisch (discovered the bee dance, spent 40 years on this) – is Tom’s
inspiration, and shows this to kids
 EP is representational framework for science phenomena
o Imagine classroom sharing space with a scientific imaginary
phenomena
o Location-dependant portholes that are spatially distributed
 What occurs in 1 porthole is different from another porthole
o But taxing to teachers, everything done on paper
Jim: WallCology (video)
 Tom: deep dev’t of technology AND pedagogy
Discussant: Chris Quintana
What’s a “Mashup”? (Wikipedia)
 An application that uses and combines data, presentation, or functionality
from 2 or more sources to create new services
 “the term implies easy, fast integration” - Chris disagress, getting the tech to
work is a lot of work!


How do you find the ppl you want to mashup with? (match.com, eharmony)
“mashup” isn’t really the right metaphor
Chris’ questions for the panel:
1. What’s your big “now what”? What new opportunities, learning activities,
etc. might have emerged now you’ve built your system?
2. Lessons learned? What didn’t work so well? Bumps in the road, things that
didn’t work, biggest challenges, etc.?
Graesser, re: pain points
 Merging the code
 Coordinating time between the different labs
o Better when you meet, to co-create  the most progress on
integrating the process
Mike Horn, re: “now what” question
 Interested to see a modeller’s workbench or modeller’s workspace in the
classroom
Win Burleson, re: “now what” question
 Ppl who discover something learn it better (Froible?), combine with Mitch
Resnick’s idea of tinkering
 Inventor’s workshops, next generation addressing “wicked problems” in
society
Jim, re: pain points
 Ownership
 Don’t meet to review, meet to create
Win Burleson
 Getting credit for the work, need to expand the scope of who/what gets
credit
Audience questions/comments
 Don’t want mush-ups!
 Maybe e-harmony is a better metaphor?
 Graesser: tensions when you work with a new person/team; 2nd cycle will go
better
 Uri Wilensky: what new question can you understand with mashups that
you couldn’t without doing a mashup?
 Jim: don’t just do it b/c you can
 Win: discovery learning
`
Emma Mercier (side chat)
 Her lab (James, developer) now using X-Box kinnect to track the room;
teacher can manipulate materials from table-table, table-wall just through
body gestures
 Doing a run in early May 2012
 Previously, teachers didn’t like controlling the room from a MTT
(inconvenient to walk over to it), or subsequently from a tablet (didn’t want
to hold it)
Technological Applications in Science Learning and Instruction (Mike’s
Roundtable)
Yen-Ling Lee
 Mixture of salt and fresh water, teachers using 3D (Google Earth/Maps?) to
confirm their hypotheses about these water interactions in the brakish(?)
water areas
Jodi Davenport (Wested)
Chemvlab.org


virtual chemistry lab, aligned with high school chemistry learning goals, has
embedded assessment
Jim Hewitt: best teacher practices for use of this?
o Assumes that students have had prior exposure to the content
material
o Teachers need to be comfortable with the “uncertainties of
technologies” – just restart to fix it!
o Since there’s embedded assessment, teachers could wander around
the room and interact with students
 But teachers were observed leaving the room
o Sometimes 1 student per computer, sometimes students working in
pairs/trios/quads; but system was designed with 1:1 in mind
Cheryl: design process? Teacher pre- post-interviews?
 1 pre-test teacher question: “How would you feel if the day of the run, it
doesn’t work? What would you do?”
 co-design with teachers, iterative
o phase 1: can change the code
o phase 2: can change the text but not the code
 summers: think-alouds with teachers as they walk through the system (user
testing)
 also do user testing think-alouds with students
Mike Tissenbaum
 want students to understand the collectiveness of their contributions

can be collective and individual (in parallel with other students in the class)
that feeds into the collective knowledge base
PLACEweb
 socially negotiated tagging > contribute examples > student capture video
and explain their problem solving
Jim Hewitt: is the aggregate superficial? It seems to define the knowledge for
them…
Another man: when agents tell students where to go (or what to do) do the high
achieving AP physics students feel manipulated?
Sean’s mantra during smart room run: “words not equations” > to get students to
get into the “meat” of their solutions
6 KCI Design Principles
 krajik, nancy songer, Marcia linn  how they think of “Inquiry”
o KCI takes the way they think of inquiry and combines this with
knowledge communities, and some knowledge building “for flavour”
(says Jim)
Tues. Apr. 17, 2012
Science Artifacts as Boundary Objects: Designs that Cross Social Settings

SIG-Cultural Historical Research
Chair’s intro
How can the personal intersect with the academic?
Artifacts are symbolic objects that mediate activities (Cole, 1996)
 We use artifacts to manage thining and identiication
Boundary Objects (Star & Greisemer, 1989)
 Plastic enough to adapt to local needs
 Robust enough to maintain a common identity across settings
 Act as a nexus of perspectives between communities that use them (Wenger,
1998)
Tara O’Neil
Research Questions
1. What is the nature of girls’ ID work in the context of informal science
learning env.?
2. How do the critical ID artifacts produce….
ID Artifacts and ID Work
 ID become reified within and across communities through material artifacts
and semiotic signals that mediate the process of authoring selve(s)….
 What do I think of my work, what do I think others think of my work
Case studies
 Green Club
 Girls in Science
Findings
 Shifts in the science ID’s of the case study girls could be traced to specific
“critical science ID artifacts” (CSIA)
 CSIA’s are transformative b/c
o Hop to re-position youth with epistemic authority and relationship
authority
o Carry and transform meaning over time and space
Science ID as Watershed Moments
Personally relevant science news stories as boundary objects
Joseph Polman, Jennifer Hope
SciJourn
 Scijourner.org
 Hybrid science journalism (written by students); teachers involved in project
 Authentic science new publication
 Goals: science literacy, engagement
 Editor: Alan Newman
How to make use of science 15 yrs after highschool?
 Internet research, community discussion about
 Understand relevancy, what’s important, up to dat
 Ask good questions
5 SciJourner writing standards
engagement framework: (each drives the other)
 actions
 interests
 identifications
4 student case studies, they all crossed boundaries
 some become brokers of boundaries for their peers
e-Textile Artifacts: Laminates of personal, peer, and academic values
Deborah Fields (+ …….., Yasmin Kafai)
Deborah is a post-doc
Wearing a jacket with lily pad, sewed with conductive thread
e-textiles as a bricolage of domains
 circuits
 Craft
 code (is scratch-like, arduino)
there are historically gendered areas that create tensions for kids
Research Questions
1. what different kinds of traces are present in students’ e-textile artifacts and
how do they interact?
2. What kinds of tensions and contradictions are embodied…
Method
 3 workshops in 2009
 4-6 weeks, 2 hrs/week
 15-16 students that volunteered to join the club
School show  kids display their e-textiles projects, cool factor
Looked at 3 students, 3 summary dimensions for each student: personal, techie,
social
 Marcela: DNA belt
 Jackson: school mascot rocket
 Tameika: flower
Brokering into school (by researchers) and into home (by students)
Melissa Cook, UCLA
 Ss take positions relative to the collective shared understanding of what it
means to be a good science S in their particular classroom
Research Questions
1. How are Ss’ performances shaped as “good” and “scientific” by the
parameters of these artifacts?
2. What roles/positions did Ss take during work on these artifacts?
3. How did these roles confirm scientific, personal, academic identity?
Did biology (essay), chemistry (worksheets), physics (roller coaster) projects with 3
different student groups
 Compared opportunities for positive positions for each of the 3 projects,
along 3 dimensions:
o Scientific norms (biology essay most aligned)
o Academic norms (chemistry worksheet most aligned)
o Personal values/habits (physics roller coaster most aligned)
 Chem worksheet overlapped (Sci. & Aca. Norms)

Discussant: Science Artifacts as Boundary Objects (Jay Lemke)
 To comment on the affect and esthetic effects of boundary objects
 See his paper on “Boundary Objects”
Features & Functions
 Visual analysis
 Local identification, e.g.:
o Local Strawberry poster: “o” in “Local” drawn as strawberry, peope in
poster are of colour saying ‘yum”  reflects that type of person the
creator is?
 Crossing contexts
o ..
o how does it move us from the immediate context to the larger society?
o What kinds of dramatic imagery and how does it…
o E-textile projects
 Intersectional artifact between art and science
 Popular culture crossing



Link across domains science/art, academic/personal , local/public?
Travers places, contexts across time?
Support and document changes in feelings, meanng, know-how?
Joshua Danish (2nd discussant)
Wants to synthesize all the papers presented
Labeling/defining the artifact”?
Joshua tries to tie all 3 papers, looks for common themes of definition
 Boundary objects (Cook & Polman et al.)
 Laminated boundary objects (Fields et al.)
 Critical science ID artifacts (CSIA) (O’Neil et al.)
 “a product that builds upon/reveals multiple IDs/interests”
Buiding on Vygotsky (1978), Cole (1996), Engestrom (1987),
artifact
Focus of analysis….
Before
Cook
Fields
O’Neil, Polman
1
Creating
1
1
1
Artifact
After
1
1
1
1
Driving questions for Joshua
1. talking in different ways about the same thing, OR
2. talking about different things in the same way?
Joshua’s 4 emergent themes from this session:
1. labeling/defining the artifact
2. a meditational take
3. the boundary crossing process
4. the role of school
Audience question: “identity” seems like a term that is inherently ….
Jay’s response:
think of the self as a boundary object