Social Presence Visualizer: Development of the Collaboration Facilitation Module on CSCL

  • Masanori YamadaEmail author
  • Kosuke Kaneko
  • Yoshiko Goda
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 647)


This study aims to develop and evaluate a visualization function of CSCL that is based on social presence. This function automatically categorizes the postings from learners and visually presents social interaction following a social presence indicator. Furthermore, this function seems to enhance social presence and encourage learning behavior, such as active discussion. In order to investigate the validity of auto-categorization, the inter-rater agreement rate and the ability to predict the quality of the discussion were analyzed and compared to the human-categorized data. The results demonstrated that there are several social presence indicators that have high and low inter-rater agreement, but the categorization of the function developed in this study had more prediction power than the human-conducted categorization.


Community of inquiry Social interaction Social presence Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) Visualization 



This research is financially supported by Grant-in-Aids for Young Scientist A (25702008) and for Scientific Research (B) (16H03080)


  1. 1.
    Nishimori, T., Kato, H., Mochizuki, T., Yaegashi, K., Hisamatsu, S., Ozawa, S.: Development and trial of project-based learning support system in higher education. J. Jpn. Soc. Educ. Technol. 29(3), 289–297 (2005)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Scardamalia, M., Bereiter, C.: Technologies for knowledge-building discourse. Commun. ACM 36(5), 37–41 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Garrison, D.R., Anderson, T.: E-learning in the 21st Century: A Framework for Research and Practice. Routledge Falmer, London (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Shea, P., Bidjerano, T.: Community of inquiry as a theoretical framework to faster epistemic engagement and cognitive presence in online education. Comput. Educ. 52(3), 543–553 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Garrison, D.R., Anderson, T., Archer, W.: Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: computer conferencing in higher education. Internet High. Educ. 2(2–3), 87–105 (2000)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gunawardena, C.N., Zittle, F.J.: Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer-mediated conferencing environment. Am. J. Distance Educ. 11(3), 8–26 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Shea, P., Hayes, S., Vickers, J., Gozza-Cohen, M., Uzuner, S., Mehta, R., Valchova, A., Rangan, P.: A re-examination of the community of inquiry framework: social network and content analysis. Internet High. Educ. 13, 10–21 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Akyol, Z., Garrison, D.R.: Assessing metacognition in an online community of inquiry. Internet High. Educ. 14, 183–190 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Goda, Y., Yamada, M.: Application of CoI to design CSCL for EFL online asynchronous discussion. In: Akyol, Z., Garrison, D.R. (eds.) Educational Community of Inquiry: Theoretical Framework, Research and Practice, pp. 295–316. IGI Global (2012)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yamada, M.: The role of social presence in learner-centered communicative language learning using synchronous computer-mediated communication: experimental study. Comp. Educ. 52, 820–833 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yamada, M., Goda, Y.: Application of social presence principles to CSCL design for quality interactions. In: Jia, J.: (ed.) Educational Stages and Interactive Learning: From Kindergarten to Workplace Training, pp. 31–48. IGI Global (2012)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yamada, M.: Development and Evaluation of CSCL Based on Social Presence. In: Sanchez, J., Zhang, K. (eds.) Proceedings of the World Conference on E-learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, pp. 2304–2309. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (2010).
  13. 13.
    Short, J., Williams, E., Christie, B.: The Social Psychology of Telecommunications. Wiley, London (1976)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Phielix, C., Prins, F.J., Kirschner, P.A.: Group awareness of social and cognitive behavior in a CSCL environment. In: ICLS 2010 Proceedings of the 9th International Conference of the Learning Sciences, vol. 1, pp. 230–237 (2010)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Janssen, J., Erkens, G., Kanselaar, G.: Visualization of agreement and discussion processes during computer-supported collaborative learning. Comput. Hum. Behav. 23, 1105–1125 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mochizuki, T., Kato, H., Yaegashi, K., Nishimori, T., Nagamori, Y., Fujita, S.: ProBoPortable: does the cellular phone software promote emergent division of labor in project-based learning? In: CSCL 2007 Proceedings in the 8th International Conference on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, pp. 516–518 (2007)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yamada, M., Goda, Y., Matsukawa, H., Hata, K., Yasunami, S.: A computer-supported collaborative learning design for quality interaction. IEEE Multimedia 23, 48–59 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hoppe, U.H., Gaßner, K.: Integrating collaborative concept mapping tools with group memory and retrieval functions. In: CSCL 2002 Proceedings of the Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning, pp. 716–725 (2002)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Manning, C.D., Surdeanu, M., Bauer, J., Finkel, J., Bethard, S.J., McClosky, D.: The stanford CoreNLP natural language processing toolkit. In: Proceedings of the 52nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: System Demonstrations, pp. 55–60 (2014)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Miller, G.A.: WordNet: a lexical database for English. Commun. ACM 38(11), 39–41 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Fellbaum, C.: WordNet: An Electronic Lexical Database. MIT Press, Cambridge (1998)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Strapparava, C., Valitutti, A.: WordNet-affect: an affective extension of WordNet. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2004), Lisbon, pp. 1083–1086, May 2004Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    de Marneffe, M.C., Manning, C.D.: Stanford typed dependencies manual, September 2008 (Revised for the Stanford Parser v. 3.5.2 in April 2015).
  24. 24.
    Landis, J.R., Koch, G.G.: The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33(1), 159–174 (1977)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Singapore 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Arts and ScienceKyushu UniversityFukuokaJapan
  2. 2.Cyber Security CenterKyushu UniversityFukuokaJapan
  3. 3.Graduate School of Instructional SystemsKumamoto UniversityKumamotoJapan

Personalised recommendations