Virtual Collaborative Space to Support Active Learning

Virtual Collaborative Space to Support Active Learning Gerardo J Alanis-Funes, Luis Neri, and Julieta Noguez T nol o on y C mp C x o gerardo.alanisf@itesm.mx, neri@itesm.mx, jnoguez@itesm.mx Abstract Active learning is an educational strategy that promotes the development of the students critical and creative thinking through carefully designed activities. Collaborative learning techniques such as Problem- Based Learning (PBL) and Project- Oriented Learning (POL) are useful tools to achieve effective active learning. However, teachers often face important challenges promoting, monitoring and ensuring a wellbalanced collaboration so both - workload and learning are significant and also as equitable as possible among team members. With the advent of new social software, virtual collaborative environments have become an important part of our lives. Nevertheless file sharing and e-mail communication alone do not necessarily promote learning. It is necessary to combine the learning methodologies with the appropriate software tools to create a virtual collaborative space that promotes active learning. The paper reviews related work on active learning, problem based learning (PBL), project oriented learning (POL), social software tools, and collaborative virtual environments. Hence, a virtual collaborative space that integrates distributed web interactivity tools with learning methodologies is the focus of this paper. A virtual collaborative space using the collaborative elements in Blackboard 9.1 applied to PBL and POL is also presented. Index Terms active learning, collaborative learning, problem based learning, project oriented learning, virtual collaborative space. INTRODUCTION Collaborative learning techniques such as Problem-Based Learning (PBL) and Project-Oriented Learning (POL) have proven to be powerful tools for achieving effective active learning [1]. Active learning is an educational strategy that promotes the development of the students critical and creative thinking through carefully designed activities [2] [3]. It is however crucial to maintain a well-balanced collaboration among the students. This means that workload should be strategically and evenly divided and that progress is carefully monitored [4]. If this process succeeds it is thought that students working those activities on a collaborative learning format would enrich their knowledge even more [5]. A common scenario these days has on one side students that do not easily find the appropriate space or time to work collaboratively on a face-to-face basis to discuss their projects/problems, additionally, h y on w n o different tools to communicate that the ones they are used to (Facebook, Twitter) [6]. On the other side, the effort and time teachers have to dedicate to monitor effective teamwork is often too big. Hence a virtual collaborative space (VCS) that allows students to work collaboratively in a remote way but at the same time help teachers to monitor student work is sought. In this paper, we propose an architecture to develop a VCS that allows students distant collaboration and also monitors and registers student work. The VCS also allows instructors to track student work as well as student participation, and is able to send warnings when student work is either delayed or not appropriate. In the VCS teams collaborate online in a synchronous way using chat and video conferencing for instance, but also asynchronously using e-mail, wikis, blogs, etc. The combination of active learning techniques with collaborative software tools, allows us to create a virtual space that promotes the generation of knowledge. COLLABORATIVE SPACES FOR ACTIVE LEARNING Active learning promotes the use of didactic techniques developed to motivate students to actively participate in building their own knowledge [4]. For instance, students in an active learning environment perform key tasks that include discovery, processing and application of new information. On the other hand, collaborative learning refers to an educational method in which there is a common goal and the students work together in small groups with one purpose: achieving that objective. Within each team students exchange information and work together on specific tasks therefore learning through collaboration. In other words, students are responsible of their own learning as well as the learning of each member of the team. Collaborative learning creates an environment "that involves students in doing things and thinking about the things they are doing" [5]. For the work presented in this paper, two active collaborative learning techniques were considered: Problem Based Learning (PBL) and Project Oriented Learning (POL) both described next [7]. F3C-1

PBL is a learning-centered education method that challenges students to "learn how to learn", working collectively in teams to find solutions to real world problems [8] [9]. It poses contextualized and authentic situations, provides resources, guidance, and instruction to learners as they develop domain knowledge and problemsolving skills [10].The problems are used to stimulate in students the curiosity and motivation to learn the subject matter. PBL prepares students to think critically and analytically, and find and use appropriate learning resources. POL seeks to train students for situations that lead them to not only understand and apply what they have learned in terms of tools to solve problems but also to be able propose improvements applicable to the communities where they operate [7]. This teaching strategy is an authentic instructional model in which students plan, implement and evaluate projects that have application in the real world beyond the classroom [11]. PBL and POL are collaborative in essence where teamwork motivates discussion converging to a well supported and more meaningful learning experience among students. It may not be straightforward to implement PBL/POL in distributed groups as opposed to groups in the same location. There is one more variable to consider and that is learning within a VCS. Challenges include communication, interaction, construction or customization of learning environments to enable effective collaboration [12]. Cognitive activities are at risk if communication channels are weak to fulfill the requirements for making time laps as transparent as possible enhancing knowledge built even in virtual environments. The research presented in this paper describes the implementation of the VCS using the collaborative elements in Blackboard 9.1applied to these two active learning techniques: PBL and POL. COLLABORATIVE TOOLS The set of collaborative tools are software applications that are also called collaborative virtual environments and they permit to create a virtual collaborative space to work. These are information systems that integrate the work into a single project with many concurrent users at various workstations, connected through a network (Internet or Intranet) [13]. Collaborative tools that have been applied to distance education could be classified into three groups: 1. Software applications for web conference. Web conferencing applications are useful for live meetings and presentations over the Internet with tools that facilitate the exchange of information, discussion and knowledge in an interactive (synchronous collaboration). 2. Learning content management systems (LCMS).These systems offer a set of functions that support the teaching activities. However, they are limited, as they do not offer full interaction like social networks or virtual rooms do. 3. Generic collaborative environments. These are electronic communication tools used to send messages, files, data and documents between team members and facilitate the information sharing (asynchronous collaboration). Collaborative environments are organized into workspaces that activate the tools for collaboration mode according to specific needs. Among the most common tools we can find calendars, folders for storing documents, discussion forums and task management. COLLABORATIVE ASPECTS FEATURES IN LEARNING CONTENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS The same collaborative tools of the groups previously mentioned can be useful for collaborative work but these do not provide a comprehensive VCS that promotes teaching and learning. Hence, several LCMS manufacturers are integrating collaborative features with their tools to facilitate group interaction for users of the systems. Some representative works of these efforts are shown below. Moodle has several features considered typical of an e- learning platform [14]. Moodle is very similar to a learning management system. It can be used in many types of environments such as in education, training and development, and business settings. Some typical features of Moodle are: assignment submission, discussion forum, files download, grading, Moodle instant messages, online calendar, online news and announcement (college and course level), online quiz, wiki. The Sakai software includes many of the features common to course management systems, including document distribution, a grade book, discussion, live chat, assignment uploads, and online testing [15]. In addition to the course management features, Sakai is intended as a collaborative tool for research and group projects. To support this function, Sakai includes the ability to change the settings of all the tools based on roles, changing what the system permits different users to do with each tool. It also includes a wiki, mailing list distribution and archiving, and an RSS reader. The core tools can be augmented with tools designed for a particular application of Sakai. The Blackboard Learning System is a Web-based server software platform [16]. Features include course management, a customizable open architecture, and a scalable design that allows for integration with student information systems and authentication protocols. The main purposes are to add online elements to courses traditionally delivered face-to-face and to develop mainly online courses with few or none face-to-face meetings. Blackboard has created a collection of tools to help students enhance their learning. Blackboard has provided tools to communicate professor with his students; for students communicate with each other; to share information; and to have real-time conversations outside the classroom. Blackboard does this through the Discussion Board, E-mail, Groups, Assignment F3C-2

Manager, Digital Drop Box, Lightweight Chat, Virtual Classroom, Blogs, Journals and Wikis. PROBLEM Group meetings are meant to share research progress, to discuss work that needs to be done and to assign new or continuing tasks for each team member. It is no different when active learning techniques are used, even more important for those based on collaborative work. However, in-person meetings are not always plausible either due to conflicted agendas or far away location with time differences. Therefore, having a VCS architecture where students interact continuously minimizing time and location effects and providing also a document repository would open a great deal of opportunities for both academia and industry. Under this scenario, the professor would have access to the system monitoring student work, communicating and participating just as everyone else in the team providing, where necessary, guidelines for the proper development of the project or problem depending on the case. Even though there are several options for VCS, as we have reviewed, there are not many if at all, suitable for active learning techniques such as PBL and POL. The architecture proposed in this paper aims at facilitating the implementation of these teaching techniques. USING BLACKBOARD 9.1 TO MONITOR COLLABORATIVE WORK As seen in the collaborative learning architectures section several LCMS are integrating new collaborative features. Due to the availability of access to Blackboard 9.1 (BB9) at Tecnológico de Monterrey Campus Mexico City, and because the courses chosen must use this tool for regulation, we decided to use to develop the VCS. There is no specific preference for BB9 tool; we believe the collaborative virtual environment can be implemented in other tools that were mentioned. BB9 has integrated new tools and added functionality to other tools for collaborative teamwork. Among the collaborative tools provided we consider as relevant the creation of groups, tasks, blogs, discussion board, journals and wikis. There are however, other collaborative tools for team interaction (chat and virtual meetings) that we do not consider for the proposed VCS. In Figure1 we present a conceptual map that shows the selected collaborative tools and their application to collaborative work. FIGURE 1 BLACKBOARD 9.1 COLLABORATIVE TOOLS CONCEPTUAL MAP Groups usually consist of a smaller team of students in a given course such as study team or project team. From a group page, students can e-mail, exchange files, open new discussion forums and collaboration sessions or participate in already existing ones. Tasks allow organize activities and / or projects by priority. Each user can add their personal tasks. Blogs are an open communication tool with which students can share their ideas and experiences on the course. A discussion board allows communication between students and the instructor about a specific topic. A journal is a tool to registry team activity and self reflection for the student. The journals can only be commented by the professor, but can be made public to allow other students access to the entries. Entries can include text, images, links, and public attachment by students individually. Wiki is a collaborative tool that allows students to contribute and edit one or more pages of material related to the course. Using these collaborative tools the monitoring process consists of the following: Definition of the active learning process by the teacher (PBL-Scenario; POL-Project) using tasks. Team organization by teacher using groups. Development of collaborative activity by students using tasks, blogs, discussion board, journal and wiki. Activity tracking by teacher using blogs, discussion board, journals and wiki. Report results by the students using journal and wiki. Figure 2 shows a use case diagram h how the activities proposed in the VSC. F3C-3

FIGURE 2 USE CASE DIAGRAM The proposed architecture is intended to provide the necessary services for remote collaboration among members during active learning work and monitoring tools to help teachers. As shown in Figure 3, this architecture allows the implementation of a system that integrates collaborative, teaching, learning and monitoring activities. two POL teams labeled Blue (5 students) and Magenta (6 students) were used for analysis. To apply the chosen active learning techniques the VSC architecture was implemented with collaborative facilities in BB9. Teachers presented PBL problem scenarios and POL project through the tasks tool. Introducing the activity, the teachers gave recommendations to students on how to use collaborative tools in their practice. In order to motivate students in the use of blogging tools and discussion board, extra-credit points were offered. Journals were mandatory tools to report team activities and the wiki tool was also mandatory to report final results. During the development of active learning processes, teachers followed the team activities through the monitoring of records within the collaborative tools. Due to the nature of PBL team interaction is more intense in a shorter period of time. In POL, on the other hand, the project development is throughout the semester and more intense interaction occurs at the end of the process [4]. At the end of the activities teachers asses m interaction by counting the number of contributions to blogs and discussion forums. The final result was evaluated by presenting the final report through the wiki and registration activities through the journals. Based on the quality of the final result and comparing with the contributions made in each case, a simple scale was developed to assess the use of collaborative tools. Through the total count of contributions in blogs, forums, journals, and wikis, was given the low participation score to 0 to 10 inputs, sufficient participation from 11 to 20 contributions and outstanding participation at 21 and older. This is an arbitrary scale created from the experience of implementing teachers with previous collaborative work using BB9. The result of the classification of PBL teams is shown in Figure 4 and POL teams in Figure 5. FIGURE 3 VSC ARCHITECTURE EVALUATION PROCESS To evaluate the proposed VSC, two PBL practices were applied with students taking an undergraduate Physics 1 course and one POL practice with students taking a course in Project Management of Information Technologies and Electronics. Both courses taught at T nol o Monterrey, Campus México City. Data collected from five PBL teams (labeled A, B, C, D, E) each with 5students and FIGURE 4 PBL TEAMS NUMBER OF CONTRIBUTIONS According to the scale we have defined above the degree of interaction in PBL teams was as follows: teama=low, F3C-4

team B=Sufficient team C =Sufficient team D=Sufficient, team E=Sufficient. The survey results are shown in Table 1.The quantities in bold represent the preferred choices. TABLE 1 COLLABORATIVE TOOLS ACCEPTANCE SURVEY # SA A I D SD QUESTION 1 11.1% 50.0% 16.7% 11.1% 11.1% 2 22.2% 27.8% 22.2% 11.1% 16.7% 3 5.6% 27.8% 33.3% 16.7% 16.7% 4 0.0% 33.3% 50.0% 5.6% 11.1% 5 11.1% 44.4% 11.1% 11.1% 22.2% 6 5.6% 27.8% 33.3% 16.7% 16.7% 7 44.4% 27.8% 11.1% 5.6% 11.1% 8 11.1% 27.8% 22.2% 11.1% 27.8% FIGURE 5 POL TEAMS NUMBER OF CONTRIBUTIONS In the same way, the degree of interaction in POL teams was as follows: team BLUE = low, team MAGENTA = low. It is noteworthy that at the time of collecting the data the POL practice was not yet finalized and thus the maximum interaction expected at the end of the semester was not yet registered. One of the goals of the study presented here is to determine the degree of acceptance in the use of collaborative tools within PBL and POL activities. To do so, we used an online survey system. The questions asked were: 1. Do you think that the blackboard 9.1 collaborative tools will facilitate collaborative work with your teammates? 2. Do you consider the order of presentation of the collaborative tools in Blackboard9.1 was correct? 3. Would you say that collaborative tools allow you to maintain better communication with your teammates? 4. Was there a greater integration and trust with your teammates? 5. Does the tool "Blogs" help you share ideas with your colleagues and keep track of the contributions of others? 6. Did the tool "Forums" help you to discuss concepts with classmates and answer questions about them? 7. Did the tool "Journal" help your team to keep track of your activities? 8. Do you consider the tool "Wiki" adequate and complete for the final report of the activity? To answer the questions a scale from 1 to 5 was given where 1 equals "strongly agree" (SA), 2 equals "agree" (A), 3 equals "indifferent" (I), 4 equals "disagree" (D) and 5 equals "strongly disagree" (SD). RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Based on contributions count (Figures 4 and 5) we observed an interaction just sufficient and in some cases low to perform the work. We believe that a possible reason is that the teams had the facility to interact face to face in the classroom and to use the communication tools they are accustomed (e-mail, chat, file exchange). Interesting results were obtained from the survey. For instance, we can see that although most students feel that the collaborative tools facilitate their activities, the following answers show this does not apply to all tools. Students in Physics 1 found journals particularly useful tools, however, discussion forums did not seem relevant to most and the POL teams did not use blogs. Regarding the wikis we see a situation that requires further work, while many students did not like the tool others considered simply appropriate. Here, we believe that answers in this case were influenced by the actual blackboard platform performance. During the development of practices we received many failure reports about using the wiki. Finally, the answers to questions 3 and 4 indicate that there is no perceived improvement in communication and integration between team members. Professors reported problems trying to monitor team activities. We believe this might be due to the recent implementation of collaborative tools in BB9; they are at an early stage and still lack of friendly navigation and sufficient support for the evaluation of collaborative interaction. Nevertheless, it is important to remark that according to h assessments the final result meaning solving the problem was achieved. Implementation of VCS to education has not yet achieved a sufficient penetration in the learning process. One possible explanation for this fact could be that VSC tools are still not used at their fullest capability in terms of substituting a classroom teaching, as opposed to as an endorsement of such education. If properly applied as a support for classroom teaching, as well as with active learning activities, we believe that learning outcomes can be improved. We also consider that due to the nature of active learning techniques, they can be well adapted for the implementation of the proposed architecture. F3C-5

The current acceptance of new technologies like social software opens a great opportunity for the use of virtual collaborative systems in education. The younger generations use in their daily lives the new tools of communication transmitting and sharing data and information. This new form of interaction creates opportunities for improving the generation of knowledge in today's students. At the same time it creates new challenges for the teachers and students to make the most of these tools in the learning process. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK We believe the proposed architecture not only facilitates virtual interaction among students but also aims at developing their collaborative learning activities. Even though it can also help the teacher to develop and monitor the activities of active learning, it remains a challenge to assess student contribution. In this aspect, it is important to point out that adopting the system is more natural for students used to social network interaction than it is for teachers. Hence, we intend to integrate collaborative tools within a VCS that is as attractive as social networks for students and at the same time a useful teaching tool for educators. We concluded the first stage of the proposal using collaborative features from existing tools such as BB9. Further work includes the developing of a new architecture based on web portals, Web 2.0 concepts and business process management. A key feature of this new architecture is that in can be adapted to the growing expectations of students, new tools available and variations of learning activities providing at all times support for work evaluation and project progress. Future research involves a system to assess implications and impact on the actual student learning. REFERENCES [1] Derby, C. The Impact of Problem Based Learning, Blended-Problem Based Learning, and Traditional Lecture on Student's Academic Achievement in Education.Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 50-55. Retrieved March 3, 2011, from http://www.editlib.org/p/35509 [2] Paulson D., Faust J. Active Learning for the College Classroom. California Sate University, Los Angeles, USA. 2006. Retrieved March 5, 2011, fromhttp://www.calstatela.edu/dept/chem2/active/index.htm. [3] Silberman, M. Active Learning: 101 Strategies To Teach Any Subject. Prentice-Hall. 1996. [4] Vicerrectoría Académica del Instituto Tecnológico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey, Mexico. Retrieved March 5, 2011, fromhttp://www.sistema.itesm.mx/va/dide2/tecnicas_didacticas/ [5] Bonwell, C., & Eison, J. Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom (ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 1). Washington, DC: George Washington University, 1991, p. 2. [6] L. Col zzo A. ol n n N. V ll Coll bo on v. P p on: Th Rol of V l Comm n n W b 2.0 Wo l 2009 International Conference on Education Technology and Computer, 2009, pp. 321-325. [7] Vicerrectoría Académica del Instituto Tecnológico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey, Mexico. Retrieved March 10, 2011, from http://www.sistema.itesm.mx/va/dide2/tecnicas_didacticas/abp/qes.ht m [8] Sola Ay p C lo (D.) Ap n z j b o n p obl m : l o í l p á. México, Editorial Trillas, 2005, 221 pp. [9] Problem Based Learning at University of Delaware: http://www.udel.edu/inst/. Accessed April 4 2011. [10] yo P. Donn lly. B. N h P.P. n S hw z R. W. S n Perceptions of Tutor Effectiveness in problem based surgery l k h p T h n n L n n n n. 5 4 pp. 227-233, 1993. [11] Noguez J., Espinosa E.: Improving Learning and Soft Skill using Project Oriented Learning in Software Engineering Courses. Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Designing Computational Models of Collaborative Learning Interaction at ITS2004. August, 30th-September, 3th. Maceio, Brasil. (2004) [12] Y. Miao and J.M. Haake, Supporting problem based learning by a collaborative virtual environment: a cooperative hypermedia approach,proceedings of the 34th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, p. 10. [13] Ecmware. Collaborative Software. Competitiveness & Innovation. 2006.Retrieved April10, 2011, from http://www.ecmware.com/respuestas/glosario/software_colaborativo. html. [14] http://moodle.org/. Accessed March, 2011. [15] http://sakaiproject.org/. Accessed March, 2011. [16] http://www.blackboard.com/. Accessed March, 2011. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This work was supported by a grant provided by Tecnológico de Monterrey, Campus Ciudad de México, through elearning research group, and scholarship tuition by the Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnologia (CONACyT-MEXICO). AUTHOR INFORMATION Gerardo J. Alanis-Funes. PhD Student, Engineering and Architecture Graduate School. Tecnológico de Monterrey, Campus Ciudad de México. gerardo.alanisf@itesm.mx. Luis Neri, Professor, Physics and Mathematics Department, Engineering and Architecture School, Tecnológico de Monterrey, Campus Ciudad de México. neri@itesm.mx Julieta Noguez, Researcher-Professor, Computer Science Department, Engineering and Architecture School, Tecnológico de Monterrey, Campus Ciudad de México. jnoguez@itesm.mx F3C-6