Supporting collaborative learning and problem-solving in a constraint-based CSCL environment for UML class diagrams

  • Nilufar Baghaei
  • Antonija Mitrovic
  • Warwick Irwin


We present COLLECT-UML, a constraint-based intelligent tutoring system (ITS) that teaches object-oriented analysis and design using Unified Modelling Language (UML). UML is easily the most popular object-oriented modelling technology in current practice. While teaching how to design UML class diagrams, COLLECT-UML also provides feedback on collaboration. Being one of constraint-based tutors, COLLECT-UML represents the domain knowledge as a set of constraints. However, it is the first system to also represent a higher-level skill such as collaboration using the same formalism. We started by developing a single-user ITS that supported students in learning UML class diagrams. The system was evaluated in a real classroom, and the results showed that students’ performance increased significantly. In this paper, we present our experiences in extending the system to provide support for collaboration as well as domain-level support. We describe the architecture, interface and support for collaboration in the new, multi-user system. The effectiveness of the system has been evaluated in two studies. In addition to improved problem-solving skills, the participants both acquired declarative knowledge about effective collaboration and did collaborate more effectively. The participants have enjoyed working with the system and found it a valuable asset to their learning.


Collaboration support Computer supported collaborative learning Constraint-based modelling Evaluation Intelligent tutoring system Problem-solving support UML class diagrams 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. AllegroServe—a Web application server. Retrieved 21.8.2006 from
  2. Baghaei, N., & Mitrovic, A. (2005). COLLECT-UML: Supporting individual and collaborative learning of UML class diagrams in a constraint-based tutor. In R. Khosla, R. Hewlett & L. Jain (Eds.) Proc. KES 2005 (pp. 458–464). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  3. Baghaei, N., & Mitrovic, A. (2006). A constraint-based collaborative environment for learning UML class diagrams. In M. Ikeda, K. Ashley & T. W. Chan (eds.) Proc. ITS 2006 (pp. 176–186).Google Scholar
  4. Baghaei, N., Mitrovic, A., & Irwin, W. (2005). A constraint-based tutor for learning object-oriented analysis and design using UML. In C. Looi, D. Jonassen, & M. Ikeda (Eds.) Proc. ICCE 2005(pp. 11–18).Google Scholar
  5. Baghaei, N., Mitrovic, A., & Irwin, W. (2006). Problem-solving support in a constraint-based intelligent tutoring system for UML. Technology, Instruction, Cognition and Learning Journal, 4(2), 113–137.Google Scholar
  6. Baker, M., de Vries, E., Lund, K., & Quignard, M. (2001). Computer-mediated epistemic interactions for co-constructing scientific notions: Lessons learned form a five-year research program. In P. Dillenbourg, A. Eurelings, & K. Hakkarainnen (Eds.), European Perspectives on CSCL (CSCL 2001). Maastricht, Netherlands, 2001.Google Scholar
  7. Barros, B., & Verdejo, M. F. (2000). Analysing student interaction processes in order to improve collaboration: The DEGREE approach. Artificial Intelligence in Education, 11, 221–241.Google Scholar
  8. Bloom, B. S. (1984). The 2-sigma problem: The search for methods of group instruction as effective as one-to-one tutoring. Educational Researcher, 13, 4–16.Google Scholar
  9. Booch, G., Rumbaugh, J., & Jacobson, I. (1999) The unified modelling language user guide. Reading: Addison-Wesley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brusilovsky, P., & Peylo, C. (2003). Adaptive and intelligent Web-based educational systems. Artificial Intelligence in Education, 13, 159–172.Google Scholar
  11. Constantino-Gonzalez, M., & Suthers, D. (2002). Coaching collaboration in a computer mediated learning environment. In G. Stahl (Ed.), Computer support for collaborative learning: Foundations for a CSCL Community. Proceedings of CSCL 2002 (pp. 583–584). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  12. Constantino-Gonzalez, M. A., Suthers, D., & Escamilla de los Santos, J. (2003). Coaching web-based collaborative learning based on problem solution differences and participation. Artificial Intelligence in Education, 13(2–4), 263–299.Google Scholar
  13. Dillenbourg, P. (2003). Over-scripting CSCL: The risks of blending collaborative learning with instructional design. In A. P. Kirschner (Ed), Three worlds of CSCL. Can we support CSCL (pp. 61–91). Heerlen: Open Universiteit Nederland.Google Scholar
  14. Dimitracopoulou, A. (2005). Designing collaborative learning systems: Current trends & future research agenda. In T. Koschmann, D. D. Suthers, & T. W. Chan (Eds.), Proceedings of CSCL 2005. Computer support for collaborative learning: The Next 10 Years! (pp. 115–124). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  15. Doise, W., & Mugny, G. (1984). The social development of the intellect. International Series in Experimental Social Psychology, 10. London: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  16. Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1984). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  17. Feidas, C., Komis, V., & Avouris, N. (2001). Design of collaboration-support tools for group problem solving. In N. Avouris & N. Fakotakis (Eds.), Advances in Human–Computer Interaction (pp. 263–268). Patras, Greece.Google Scholar
  18. Fowler, M. (2004). UML distilled: A brief guide to the standard object modelling language. Reading: Addison-Wesley, 3rd edition.Google Scholar
  19. Gogoulou, A., Gouli, E., Grigoriadou, M., & Samarakou, M. (2005). ACT: A Web-based adaptive communication tool. In T. Koschmann, D. D. Suthers, & T. W. Chan (Eds.), Proceedings of CSCL 2005. Computer support for collaborative learning: The Next 10 Years! (pp. 180–189). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  20. Hermann, F., Rummel, N., & Spada, H. (2001). Solving the case together: The challenge of net-based interdisciplinary collaboration. In P. Dillenbourg, A. Eurelings & K. Hakkarainnen (Eds.), First European Conference on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (pp. 293–300). Maastricht, Netherlands.Google Scholar
  21. Inaba, A., & Mizoguchi, R. (2004). Learners’ roles and predictable educational benefits in collaborative learning; An ontological approach to support design and analysis of CSCL. In J. Lester, R. M. Vicari & F. Paraguacu (Eds.) ITS 2004 (pp. 285–294).Google Scholar
  22. Jarboe, S. (1996). Procedures for enhancing group decision making. In B. Hirokawa & M. Poole (Eds.), Communication and Group Decision Making (pp. 345–383). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  23. Jerman, P., Soller, A., & Muhlenbrock, M. (2001). From mirroring to guiding: A review of state of the art technology for supporting collaborative learning. In P. Dillenbourg, A. Eurelings & K. Hakkarainen (Eds.) European Perspectives on CSCL (CSCL 2001) (pp. 324–331).Google Scholar
  24. Katz, S., Aronis, J. & Creitz, C. (1999) Modeling pedagogical interactions with machine learning. Proc. 9th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (pp. 543–550.). LeMans, France.Google Scholar
  25. Martin, B., & Mitrovic, A. (2002) Authoring Web-based tutoring systems with WETAS. In Kinshuk, R. Lewis, K. Akahori, R. Kemp, T. Okamoto, L. Henderson & C.-H. Lee (Eds.) ICCE 2002 (pp. 183–187).Google Scholar
  26. Martin, B., & Mitrovic, A. (2003). Domain modeling: art or science? In U. Hoppe, F. Verdejo & J. Kay (Eds.) Proc. 11th Int. Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (pp. 183–190). Amsterdam: IOS Press.Google Scholar
  27. Mayo, M., & Mitrovic, A. (2001). Optimising ITS behaviour with Bayesian networks and decision theory. Artificial Intelligence in Education, 12(2), 124–153.Google Scholar
  28. McManus, M., & Aiken, R. (1995). Monitoring computer-based problem solving. Int. Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 6(4), 307–336.Google Scholar
  29. Mitrovic, A. (1998). Learning SQL with a Computerised Tutor. 29th ACM SIGCSE Technical Symposium (pp. 307–311).Google Scholar
  30. Mitrovic, A. (2002). NORMIT, a Web-enabled tutor for database normalization. In Kinshuk, R. Lewis, K. Akahori, R. Kemp, T. Okamoto, L. Henderson, & C.-H. Lee (Eds.) Proc. International Conference on Computers in Education (pp. 1276–1280). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society.Google Scholar
  31. Mitrovic, A. (2003). An intelligent SQL tutor on the Web. Artificial Intelligence in Education, 13(2–4), 173–197.Google Scholar
  32. Mitrovic, A. (2005). The effect of explaining on learning: A case study with a data normalization tutor. In C.-K. Looi, G. McCalla, B. Bredeweg, & J. Breuker (Eds.) Proc. 12th Int. Conf. Artificial Intelligence in Education (pp. 499–506). Amsterdam: IOS Press.Google Scholar
  33. Mitrovic, A., & Ohlsson, S. (1999). Evaluation of a constraint-based tutor for a database language. Artificial Intelligence in Education, 10(3–4), 238–256.Google Scholar
  34. Mitrovic, A., Suraweera, P., Martin, B., & Weerasinghe, A. (2004). DB-suite: Experiences with three intelligent, Web-based database tutor. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 15(4), 409–432.Google Scholar
  35. Nielsen, J. (1993). Usability engineering. San Diego, CA: Academic.Google Scholar
  36. Ogata, H., Matsuura, K., & Yano, Y. (2000). Active knowledge awareness map: Visualizing learners activities in a Web based CSCL environment. Int. Workshop on New Technologies in Collaborative Learning (pp. 89–97).Google Scholar
  37. Ohlsson, S. (1994). Constraint-based student modelling. In J. Greer & G. McCalla (Eds.) Student modelling: the key to individualized knowledge-based instruction (pp. 167–189), Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  38. Plaisant, C., Rose, A., Rubloff, G., Salter, R., & Shneiderman, B. The design ofhistory mechanisms and their use in collaborative educational simulations. 3rd International Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning (CSCL 1999) (pp. 348–359).Google Scholar
  39. Rosatelli, M., Self, J., & Thirty, M. (2000). LeCS: A collaborative case study system. Proc. 5th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITS 2000) (pp. 242–251).Google Scholar
  40. Rummel, N., & Spada, H. (2005). Learning to collaborate: An instructional approach to promoting collaborative problem-solving in computer-mediated settings. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(2), 201–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Soller, A. (2001). Supporting social interaction in an intelligent collaborative learning system. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 12, 40–62.Google Scholar
  42. Soller, A., & Lesgold, A. (2000). Knowledge acquisition for adaptive collaborative learning environments. AAAI Fall Symposium: Learning How to Do Things, Cape Cod, MA.Google Scholar
  43. Sommerville, I. (2004) Software engineering. Pearson/Addison-Wesley, 7th ed.Google Scholar
  44. Suraweera, P., & Mitrovic, A. (2002). KERMIT: A Constraint-based tutor for database modeling. In S. Cerri, G. Gouarderes & F. Paraguacu (Eds.) ITS 2002 (pp. 377–387).Google Scholar
  45. Suraweera, P., & Mitrovic, A. (2004). An intelligent tutoring system for entity relationship modelling. Artificial Intelligent in Education, 14(3–4), 375–417.Google Scholar
  46. Vizcaino, A. (2005). A simulated student can improve collaborative learning. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 15, 3–40.Google Scholar
  47. Webb, N. M., Troper, J. D., & Fall, R. (1995). Constructive activity and learning in collaborative small groups. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 406–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Society of the Learning Sciences, Inc.; Springer Science+ Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nilufar Baghaei
    • 1
  • Antonija Mitrovic
    • 1
  • Warwick Irwin
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and Software EngineeringUniversity of CanterburyChristchurchNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations