THE COLLABORATION IN E-LEARNING PROJECT
(AUTUMN 2005 CS376 PROJECT MILESTONE #1)
Deepak Kumar  David Tu
ABSTRACT
In 2002, Curtis J. Bonk, PhD, wrote to Chief Learning Officer (a Web-based magazine) a brief piece on
Collaboration Tools as the future of E-Learning (Bonk 2002). There is a marked enthusiasm about the
potential that such Collaboration Tools bring to E-Learning. Indeed, the future of E-Learning must
include elements of Collaboration Tools.
However, in this project, we suggest something more. We suggest that although Collaboration Tools
should be integrated into E-Learning interfaces, current Collaboration Tools research is focused on a
set of specifications that are different than E-Learning interface specifications. Thus, we are calling for
research specific for E-Learning interfaces, beyond the simple integration of existing Collaboration
Tools into E-Learning.
TASK ANALYSIS
The interface goal on the surface level is to create an interface that enables E-Learning on an Adobe
Photoshop curriculum. But on a deeper level, the interface goal is to examine the degree in which
Collaboration Tools can be integrated into E-Learning, and the degree in which the focus of current
Collaboration Tools research is insufficient for E-Learning applications. Further, given the insufficiency,
the question of what tools must be developed for E-Learning will be analyzed.
The audience of intent is any adult learner who is interested in learning about how to use Adobe
Photoshop, through some form of E-Learning coursework. It is assumed that these learners will have
sufficient knowledge on computers, including the ability to go on the Internet, activate the program,
click on links, and to familiarize themselves with new software interfaces. Normally, typical of any ELearning coursework, the tasks for the learners are 1) read the content provided, 2) practice using
Adobe Photoshop, 3) ask questions to the tutor or peers when needed, and 4) answer the assessment
questions. As for the environment, normally the coursework will be self-paced and accessed from
anywhere with an Internet connection. However, oftentimes there is also a synchronous component,
such as class chat sessions. Lastly, specific for the use of Collaboration Tools in E-Learning, current ELearning curricula are often without any type of Collaboration Tools. Further, those that do have
Collaboration Tools are often only using e-mail/discussion forums as the form of Collaboration. In
those instances, the relationship between the learner and the person that they are collaborating with
is usually one of teacher-student.
IDEATION
We started with the general premise that by simply incorporating Collaboration Tools into E-Learning
applications will not be sufficient in enhancing E-Learning experiences. Even though current
Collaboration Tools is a good starting point, there must be research on how to adopt the tools for the
specifics of E-Learning. That is, there is something different, in terms of tools for E-Learning vs. tools
for Collaboration. It is the focus of this research to identify these differences.
Thus, in the beginning we began by brainstorming what are the E-Learning requirements and what are
the foci of Collaboration Tools. This discussion is summarized as follows:
E-Learning Requirements:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Sequence of lessons
Content provider– learner relationship
Mostly asynchronous (expectation by the learners) with some synchronous activities
Need assessment tools
Built-in practice
Asynchronous start date
Motivation to engage in the material
Tutor support/discussion forums/chat room
Pushing of resources
Communication over long distances
Collaboration Tools provide:
1. Synchronous communication over long distances
2. Arrangements of schedule
3. Provides context (the environment each other is operating in)
4. Ability to work on the same piece of material
5. Instantaneous feedback from peer
6. Sharing of resources
7. Multimodal communication
In overview, from this discussion we feel that there is somewhat a mismatch between E-Learning
requirements and what Collaboration Tools provide. Although indeed there is a heavy overlap between
the two, and that Collaboration Tools can be tweaked to accommodate E-Learning, but we feel that
such is not the focus of Collaboration Tools. This led us to sketch Diagram 1.
Particularly, it seems like Collaboration Tools are focused on the synchronous-distributed area, with
the focus on peer-peer relationship. What is meant by peer-peer relationship is equal power by both
parties, where each party provides resources and feedback in the interaction. But, unique to ELearning is the focus on the asynchronous-distributed area, where synchronous-distributed
mechanism are supplemental. Additionally, the focus is on content-provider-learner relationship. In
this type of relationship, resources and feedbacks are more directional. This is depicted in sketch
Diagram 2.
This make us think in terms of symmetry and asymmetry. For Collaboration Tools, there is definitely
some sort of symmetry. Tools for one party are applied to all parties. But for E-Learning, although
collaboration still exists, the collaboration mechanism is a little different. The collaboration mechanism
for E-Learning is asymmetric. So what does this mean in terms of interfaces and what the systems
should do? This is depicted in Diagram 3.
Diagram 1 – Differences in E-Learning and Collaboration Tools
Diagram 2 – Differences in Relationships Between People
Diagram 3 – Role Differences for Systems
As Diagram 3 depicts, there are differences in the roles that the systems play. In Collaboration Tools,
the role of the system is to organize the inputs from each party and to transmit such inputs to the
other party. The main objective of the system is to control collaboration processes, such that each
party know when to talk and when to listen, a kind of flow control. However, in E-Learning, inputs are
asymmetric, in that the tutor provides answers and the learners provide questions. The system in this
case only needs to organize the learner questions, while the tutor will organize her answers by herself.
So, the main objective of the system is to provide organization of questions (ie. formation of a queue),
on top of controlling collaboration processes (stop sign).
Armed with a general notion of differences between the focus of E-Learning interfaces and
Collaboration Tools, we begin to draft the ideal E-Learning interface. We do this by beginning with a
simple picture of a Collaboration Tool, and think about what is missing. The steps of the thought
process are given in Diagram 4.
Diagram 4 – Progression From Collaboration Tool to E-Learning
From this progression, we noticed further differences between E-Learning interfaces and Collaboration
Tools. For one, Collaboration Tools is primarily focused on doing something together. Thus, there is a
shared window between parties, which is the primary focus. But, for E-Learning, there are multiple
elements to work with. There is the main presentation of the content. Then, there is the practice,
which is the actual interaction with Adobe Photoshop, in order to practice what has just been learned.
Lastly, there is the Chat Session/Discussion Board/etc., which is more similar to Collaboration Tools.
This then leads to the question “how to help the learners manage the different processes involved in
E-Learning.” This is fundamentally a different question than what one might ask in Collaboration Tools,
because Collaboration Tools usually deals with only one major process: multiple parties dealing with a
single content. For E-Learning, the learner must interact with the content, interact with the practice,
and interact with the tutor/peers. There are multiple asymmetric relationships here, which make it
complex to manage. Thus then, we chose to focus on this area of the interface, as something that
Collaboration Tools research does not really address, but is highly relevant for E-Learning.
As for the actual layout of the interface, we discussed several different ways, each with pros and cons:
1. As depicted in Diagram 4 – The standard layout is to create multiple standalone windows
(Content, Practice, and Chat). This is usually what researchers mean today by incorporating
Collaboration Tools into E-Learning. That is, by simply including a Chat Session/Discussion
Forum, the hope is that learners will communicate with each other more and therefore learn.
However, there is very little integration with the content or the practice, which may be a
problem.
2. As depicted in Diagram 4, but with integration – The idea is to integrate Content, Practice, and
Chat. So, in the Chat window, a learner can include a screen capture as an object, which then
can be attached to their message. This way, the tutor or other learners can see what the
learner who is raising the question is talking about. Further, there is the possibility that any
response to the question can be translated into actions on the Content or the Practice
windows. For example, someone might provide a procedure for filling in a box with a certain
color. The learner who raised the question then can drag that procedure from the chat screen
to the practice screen, on a box. The systems then will display a tutorial, according to the
procedure-answer given, on how to make that box a certain color.
3. Overlay – The idea is to overlay Content, Practice, and Chat, although the problem is with
clutter.
4. Tabs – The idea is to use tabs, which will make one of the windows the active focus and the
others background focus. This way, a full screen can be used per window.
This is the extent of our discussions so far. Much of the ideas presented above can be expanded upon
or lead to other ideas, which is the next step of this research.
EVIDENCE
There are a number of Collaboration Tools available in the market today. The tools have various
features, which may or may not support e-learning. On the basis of our study of some Collaboration
Tools and E-Learning environments, we can say that Collaborative Tools do not support the most
important features of e-learning, which are content (in any form, such as text, graphics, animations,
and simulations), practice and assessment tools, and motivation.
Collaboration Tools focus on learning only by interacting with peers or an instructor, assuming that the
learner already possesses the domain knowledge. These tools usually provide options such as chats,
discussion forums, and online sharing of documents. However, they do not provide for the learning
content, which is required by the learner who does not have the domain expertise and wants to learn
the subject.
Further, Collaboration Tools do not offer the learner an opportunity to practice her skills or an
assessment tool to test her newly acquired knowledge. In addition, the tools do not engage the
learners by motivating them. The most important components of motivation are attention, relevance,
confidence, and satisfaction, which can be somewhat provided by giving the learners an opportunity
for practice and assessment.
Even if they are using online collaboration, they do not have an opportunity to share pieces of
information, such as graphics, animations, or simulations with their collaborators. They do not have an
opportunity to practice what they have learned. In addition, they do not have any assessment to test
what they have learned. Lastly, collaboration does not motivate them too.
The researchers working in this area point out the shortcomings of these tools despite promising
prospects. Information available for these tools also reflects the features on which these tools are
focused on. These tools also do not have an option to seamlessly and effortlessly switch between
windows depending on the learner’s focus or interest.
FURTHER EVIDENCE
We plan to collect more evidence by interviewing learners and using paper prototyping method to
assess the usefulness of our design.
Consultation
We will consult a subject matter expert in E-Learning technologies. Through this consultation, we
hope to solidify the list of similarities and differences between Collaboration Tools and E-Learning. We
will also solicit information about recent trends in E-Learning technologies, particularly the integration
of Collaboration Tools. Lastly, we will receive feedback from the expert in regarding our interface
design, whether it meets the requirements of E-Learning or not.
Interview
We will interview five adult learners about their needs when learning a new software application by
themselves, through some E-Learning curriculum; for example, Adobe Photoshop. When they
encounter a problem in their learning, they have two options – explore the solution by themselves or
ask for help from someone, who could be either a peer or a tutor. The latter require built-in
Collaboration Tools. They can use a synchronous medium, such as online chat or an asynchronous
medium, such as discussion groups or tutor support.
We will also ask them about their need to simultaneously have an E-Learning shared content window,
a window for practicing what they are learning, and a chat window along with photographs of their
collaborators (see Diagram 4). We will also ask them about their preferences for switching between
these three windows and the ease of switching.
Observation
We will create a lo-fi/paper prototype of the suggested interface and test it on the five learners. We
will ask the learners to try to learn an application (for example, Adobe Photoshop), and observe their
practices and patterns of learning and switching between the windows. We will ask them to use the
collaboration tool built in to the prototype to ask for help and collaborate with peers or an instructor
while learning Photoshop.
We will also ask them to “Think Aloud” as they are progressing through their task. Our observation will
provide us with clues to ask the learners more questions about their preferences, habits, satisfaction
or frustration with the prototype and learning.
Evaluation
We will evaluate the effectiveness of the solution by studying the learners’ answers to our questions.
The questions will ask the learners to rate the various features of the system and the effect of these
features on their learning, on a scale of 1 to 5.
The learners will be asked to transfer their newly acquired skills on Photoshop to the actual work
setting. They will use Photoshop to create or modify graphics. The amount and depth of knowledge
transferred on the job will further give an indication of the impact and effectiveness of the solution on
their learning.
REFERENCE
(Bonk 2002) Bonk, Curtis J.
http://www.clomedia.com/content/templates/clo_feature.asp?articleid=41&zoneid=30
Kaplan, Soren 2002
http://www.learningcircuits.org/2002/aug2002/kaplan.html
Leung, Peggy 2005
http://192.73.61.155/communities/downloads/0206IAO84829.ppt#264,1,Collaboration