Advertisement

Cognitive learning performance assessment and analysis with CSCL applied on the NetGuru platform and CSPL applied on the TAoD platform for the network experiment class

  • Yung-Hui Chen
  • Wei-Chun Lee
  • Chun-Hsiung TsengEmail author
  • Lawrence Y. Deng
  • Chuan-Yu Chang
  • Long-He Lee
Article
  • 17 Downloads

Abstract

How to find the best learning performance in the network experimental course is an important research topic. Therefore, collaborative learning and personalized learning have been applied in traditional classes for a similar significance regardless of how times change and advancements develop. We used the computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) pedagogy with NetGuru network experimental platform and the computer-supported personalized learning (CSPL) pedagogy with the teaching assistant on demand (TAoD) network experimental platform, respectively, in the “Network Engineering Lab (1)” course to assess the distinctions in impacts for the two methods. The objective students were four junior classes of ordinary students in the department of Computer Information and Network Engineering. As a rule, one should think about that CSCL pedagogy is better than CSPL pedagogy because of discussion and collaborative learning between students for learning performances. Nonetheless, the fact that the missing and late rates of students in technical and vocational college are a lot higher that makes adopting CSCL pedagogy difficult. Therefore, we designed and made some assistant materials of “graphical-based teaching powerpoint slides,” “animations of packet transmission process for network protocol theories,” and “Customized IP-oriented template-based assignments (simplified as CIPOTA or template-based assignment)” to be applied to compare and analyze the network practices of CSCL-based on NetGuru platform and CSPL-based on TAoD platform. We also design “satisfaction scale of learning performance” to analyze the students’ satisfaction degrees of learning performance with the pedagogy (CSCL or CSPL), the assignment form (normal assignment or template-based assignment), and the learning satisfaction (CSCL or CSPL combines the normal assignment or template-based assignment). They were for the most part being utilized to demonstrate that TAoD platform-based CSPL pedagogy is truly appropriate for network experiment courses. And the CSPL pedagogy is not more terrible than the CSCL pedagogy and may even bring about optimizing learning results for the learning of network experiment course.

Keywords

Computer-supported collaborative learning Teaching assistant on demand Computer-supported personalized learning Customized IP-oriented template-based assignment Best learning performance Scale questionnaire 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Ministry of Science and Technology, R.O.C., under Grant MOST 107-2511-H-262-001-.

References

  1. 1.
    Johnson DW, Johnson RT, Holubec EJ (1994) The new circles of learning cooperation in the classroom and school. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD), AlexandriaGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Johnson DW, Johnson RT (1994) Learning together and alone: cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning, 4th edn. Allyn and Bacon, Needham HeightsGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sharan S, Shachar H (1988) Language and learning in the cooperative classroom. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Johnson DW, Johnson RT (1987) Learning together and alone: cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning. Prentice-Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hiltz SR (1994) The virtual classroom: learning without limits via computer networks. Ablex Publishing Corporation, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sun CT, Lin SSJ (2001) Learning through collaborative design: a learning strategy on the internet. In: Frontiers in Education Conference, Reno, Oct 2001Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Butler D, Winne P (1995) Feedback and self-regulated learning: a theoretical synthesis. Rev Educ Res 65(3):245–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zurita G, Nussbaum M (2007) A conceptual framework based on Activity Theory for mobile CSCL. Br J Educ Technol 38(2):211–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Infante C, Weitz J, Reyes T, Nussbaum M, Gomez F, Radovic D (2010) Co-located collaborative learning video game with single display groupware. Interact Learn Environ 18(2):177–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chang KE, Sung YT, Lee CL (2003) Web-based collaborative inquiry learning. J Comput Assist Learn 19(1):56–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zurita G, Nussbaum M (2004) Computer supported collaborative learning using wirelessly interconnected handheld computers. Comput Educ 42(3):289–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hwang G-J, Yin P-Y, Hwang C-W, Tsai C-C (2008) An enhanced genetic approach to composing cooperative learning groups for multiple grouping criteria. Educ Technol Soc 11(1):148–167Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Parkhurst H, Bassett R, Eades J (1987) Education on the Dalton plan. B. P. Button & Company, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Semel SF (1999) The Dalton school: The transformation of a progressive school. In: Semel SF, Sadovnik AR (eds) Schools of tomorrow, schools of today. Peter Lang, New York, pp 171–212Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Corcoran T (1927) The Winnetka school plan. Ir Mon 55(644):63–67Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Washburne C (1941) A living philosophy of education. The University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kilpatrick WH (1926) Foundations of method informal: talks on teaching. MACMILLAN, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kilpatrick WH (1929) The project method: the use of the purposeful act in the educative process. Teachers College, Columbia University, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bloom BS (1968) Learning for mastery. Eval Comment 1(2):1–12Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bloom BS (1984) The search for methods of group instruction as effective as one-to-one tutoring. Educ Leadersh 41(8):4–17Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Keller FS (1968) Good-bye teacher. J Appl Behav Anal 1(1):79–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    El-Bishouty MM, Ogata H, Yano Y (2007) PERKAM: personalized knowledge awareness map for computer supported ubiquitous learning. J Educ Technol Soc 10(3):122–134Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rani M, Nayak R, Vyas OP (2015) An ontology-based adaptive personalized e-learning system, assisted by software agents on cloud storage. Knowl Based Syst 90:33–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hwang G-J, Kuo F-R, Yin P-Y, Chuang K-H (2010) A Heuristic Algorithm for planning personalized learning paths for context-aware ubiquitous learning. Comput Educ 54(2):404–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lilia CB (2016) Personalized feedback for self assessment in lifelong learning environments based on semantic web. Comput Hum Behav 55(Part A):562–570Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Johnson DW, Johnson RT (1988) Cirles of learning. Associaition for Supervision and Curriculum Development, AlexandriaGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sharan S, Shaulov A (1990) Cooperative learning, motivation to learn and academic achievement. In: Sharan S (ed) Cooperative learning: theory and research. Praeger, New York, pp 173–202Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Slavin RE (1990) Cooperative learning. Celin Rogers: the social psychology of the primary school. KKY, NYGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wierwille WW, Eggemeier FT (1993) Recommendations for mental workload measurement in a test and evaluation environment. Hum Fact 35(2):263–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Chen J-C (2012) A study on the influence of cooperative learning into comprehension teaching method on the learning performances and motivations of the difficulty of different motor skills. NCYU J Phys Educ Health Recreat 11(2):166–176Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Willliams AM, Hodges JN (2005) Practice, instruction, and skill acquisition in soccer: challenging tradition. J Sports Sci 23(6):637–650CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wulf G, Shea CH (2002) Principles derived from the study of simple skills do not generalize to complex skill learning. Psychon Bull Rev 9(2):185–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yung-Hui Chen
    • 1
  • Wei-Chun Lee
    • 2
  • Chun-Hsiung Tseng
    • 3
    Email author
  • Lawrence Y. Deng
    • 4
  • Chuan-Yu Chang
    • 5
  • Long-He Lee
    • 6
  1. 1.Department of Computer Information and Network EngineeringLunghwa University of Science and TechnologyTaoyuan CityTaiwan
  2. 2.Department of Business AdministrationLunghwa University of Science and TechnologyTaoyuan CityTaiwan
  3. 3.Department of Electrical EngineeringYuan Ze UniversityTaoyuan CityTaiwan
  4. 4.Department of Computer Science and Information EngineeringSt. John’s UniversityNew Taipei CityTaiwan
  5. 5.Department of Computer Science and Information EngineeringNational Yunlin University of Science and TechnologyYunlin CountyTaiwan
  6. 6.Department of Electrical Engineering Information Network GroupLunghwa Univerisity of Science and TechnologyTaoyuan CityTaiwan

Personalised recommendations