You are here:

A Diagnostic Mechanism and Tool for Analyzing Group Collaboration Problems with Online Group Work
PROCEEDINGS

, , Department of Computer Science, University of Warwick, United Kingdom

E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, in Honolulu, Hawaii, USA ISBN 978-1-880094-90-7 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), San Diego, CA

Full Text

Abstract

Analyzing group collaboration problems for online group work has become a complex task for a teacher who is responsible for checking the progress of the group work that is examined. This is because various methods are desirable for ascertaining the existence of different collaboration problems. Along with the increasing use of online collaboration, there is a growing need to improve the delivery methods and to simplify how teachers monitor collaborative activities. In this paper a novel diagnostic mechanism and tool are presented for supporting the analysis of major types of group collaboration problems. This research has further implications for extending existing collaborative learning environments in order to automatically monitor collaborative processes for online group work.

Citation

Liu, S. & Joy, M. (2011). A Diagnostic Mechanism and Tool for Analyzing Group Collaboration Problems with Online Group Work. In C. Ho & M. Lin (Eds.), Proceedings of E-Learn 2011--World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 2613-2618). Honolulu, Hawaii, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved April 14, 2021 from .

© 2011 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Al-Shalchi, O.N. (2009). The effectiveness and development of online discussions. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 5 (1), 104-108.
  2. An, H., Kim, S. And Kim, B. (2008). Teacher perspectives on online collaborative learning: factors perceived as facilitating and impeding successful online groupwork. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 8 (1), 65-83.
  3. Automattic Inc. (2009). After http://afterthedeadline.com/.
  4. Chang, C.-C. (2008). A case study on the relationships between participation in online discussion and achievement of project work. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 17 (4), 477-509.
  5. Chatterjee, S. And Hadi, A.S. (2006). Regression analysis by example. Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley-Interscience.
  6. Herrick, M., Lin, M.-F.G. And Huei-Wen, C. (2011). Online discussions: The effect of having two deadlines. Proceedings of Society for Information Technology& Teacher Education International Conference 2011, Nashville, Tennessee, USA, 344-351.
  7. Hew, K.F. And Cheung, W.S. (2008). Attracting student participation in asynchronous online discussions: A case study of peer facilitation. Computers& Education, 51 (3), 1111-1124.
  8. Jun, N., Shinichi, H., Kazaru, Y. And Yuhei, Y. (2005). ITree: Does the mobile phone encourage learners to be more involved in collaborative learning? Proceedings of th 2005 conference on Computer support for collaborative learning: learning 2005: the next 10 years!, Taipei, Taiwan, 470-478.
  9. Liu, S., Joy, M. And Griffiths, N. (2010). Students' perceptions of the factors leading to unsuccessful group collaboration. Proceedings of the 10th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT 2010), 565-569.
  10. Roberts, T.S. And McInnerney, J.M. (2007). Seven problems of online group learning (and their solutions). Educational Technology& Society, 10 (4), 257-268.
  11. Talavera, L. And Caudioso, E. (2004). Mining student data to characterize similar behavior groups in unstructured collaboration spaces. Proceedings of the Workshop on AI in CSCL, 17-23.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Also Read