EVALUATION OF THE USE OF SEMANTIC WEB TECHNOLOGY IN A COLLABORATIVE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT

Andrew LumpeDavid WicksSeattle Pacific University

OBJECTIVES

• Describe the application of a semantic web application in a collaborative learning environment.

• Report the results on student learning.• Provide recommendations for future research

and applications of semantic web technologies in educational environments.

Overall Goal of Education

• The overall goal of education is to develop expertise• Expert learners vs. Novice learners

– Have greater access to content– Are more skilled at retrieving content– Are better at adapting, changing, and recognizing when

to apply knowledge

Semantic technologies MAY be one way to help develop expertise

(Bransford et al, 1999)

dullhunk

Collaborative Learning ResearchThen Now

Unit of Analysis: Individual group member Unit of Analysis: The group

Is collaborative learning more effective than learning alone?

How can we make collaborative learning more effective?

Establish and Control Independent Variables

Understand role of independent variables in mediating interaction

Product-oriented analysis Process-oriented analysis

Cooperative learning: Division of labor Collaborative learning – Mutual engagement

(Dillonbourg et al, 1996)

Personal Learning Networks

Using Web 2.0 tools to create connects with

others which: •Extends learning environment•Encourages reflection•Increase opportunities to ask questions and receive help compared to normal face-to-face interactions

Building PLNs allows students to:

•Make connections with followed users (Twitter) •Participate in collaborative communities (Twine, Delicious) •Follow and search feeds from Web 2.0 sites (Pageflakes, Google Reader)

Holotescu&Grosseck, 2009

TWINE

How is [Twine] different than other social bookmarking tools like Delicious?

“The difference between {the system} and most bookmarking services is that {the system} attempts to identify the resource the page is describing, rather than just recording the location of the page itself. “ (Clarke & Greig, 2009)

Context• Online graduate education course with weekly, interactive modules –

Blackboard 9• N=60• Module 1

– General overview of course topics– Data used as preTest– TWINE not used

• Modules 2-6– Specific Topics = Advance Organizers, Collaborative Learning,

Inquiry/Induction, Conceptual Understanding, Multiple Intelligences– TWINE used throughout– Data used at postTest

Methods• Quasi Experimental Design• Experimental group used TWINE • Data sources = All text posts - discussion posts, blog entries, research

papers, TWINE comments• WordStat 5.1 – “a text mining tool for fast extraction of themes and

trends”– Build Dictionaries

• Related Words and Phrases• Word exclusion list• Key Word in Context (KWIC)

• MANCOVA– IV = group assignment– DV = module posts by five categories– Covariate = pretest posts

Results

• Incoming GPAs not different (F = .22, p = .64)• Students posted many resources and comments in

their twines• These resources were regularly used in students’ posts• Others outside the course joined and contributed to

the twines• 356,322 total words used in posts• 8,612 related words/phrases included in analyses• Equal variances on all DVs (Levene's Test)

COLLABORATION

SourceDependent Variable

Type III Sum of Squares df

Mean Square F Sig.

Partial Eta Squared

Corrected Model

postADVANCE ORGANIZER

2470.859a 17 145.345

1.222 .290 .331

postCOLLABORATION

12038.862b 17 708.168

2.116 .025 .461

postCONCEPT UNDER

20538.358c 17 1208.139

2.113 .025 .461

postINQUIRY 16993.833d 17 999.637

1.579 .114 .390

postINTELLIGENCE

24017.727e 17 1412.807

6.288 .000 .718

a. R Squared = .331 (Adjusted R Squared = .060)b. R Squared = .461 (Adjusted R Squared = .243)c. R Squared = .461 (Adjusted R Squared = .243)d. R Squared = .390 (Adjusted R Squared = .143)e. R Squared = .718 (Adjusted R Squared = .604)

Conclusions

• Use of a Personal Learning Network (TWINE) helped students develop richer, more coherent expertise in 3 out of 5 content categories.

• TWINE served as a collaborative repository of resources, ideas, and connections.

• The impact of the semantic nature of TWINE was not apparent.

Next Steps

• Further explore the qualitative differences in the students’ postings (latent semantic analysis)

• Extended use may be needed in order for semantic technologies to learn interests and provide recommendations

• Continue to explore the use of collaborative, semantic technologies to enhance learning– Twine T2?– http://www.opencalais.com/– http://www.puffinwarellc.com/ (iMetaSearch)– http://www.stumpedia.com/ – http://imindi.com/

Questions?