Analysing Graphic-Based Electronic Discussions: Evaluation of Students’ Activity on Digalo

  • Einat Lotan Kochan
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4227)


Digalo is a graphic based electronic discussion tool developed for educational purposes. These purposes are varied: learning to argue and discuss, learning through argumentation and discussion, and creating shared knowledge, are only some of them. This diversity, together with the unique graphic activity that Digalo requires, makes the analysis of Digalo e-discussions more complex compared to the analysis of other types of e-discussions (e.g. discussion forums). Models developed by educational researchers for analyzing electronic discussions, turn out to be insufficient for the analysis of Digalo activities, as they neglect some of the distinctive learning aspects Digalo activities contain. We therefore decided to develop a new method of analysis. This paper describes our considerations at the beginning of the development process, while focusing on the problems and challenges identified so far.


Collaborative Learn None None Discussion Forum Social Presence Computer Conference 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Baker, M.J.: The Function of Argumentation Dialogue in Cooperative Problem Solving. In: van Eemeren, F.H., Grootendorst, R., Blair, J.A., Willard, C.A. (eds.) Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Argumentation (ISSA 1998), pp. 27–33. SIC SAT Publications, Amsterdam (1998)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    De Laat, M.F., Lally, V.: Complexity, Theory and Praxis: Researching Collaborative Learning and Tutoring Processes in a Networked Learning Community. Instructional Science 31, 7–39 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    van Diggelen, W., Overdijk, M., Andriessen, J.: Constructing an Argumentative Map Together: Organizing Principles and Their Application. In: The ORD 2004 Symposium, Utrecht University, the Netherlands, June 9-11 (2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    van Diggelen, W., Overdijk, M., De Groot, R.: Say it Out Loud in Writing’: A Dialectical Inquiry into the Potentials and Pitfalls of Computer Supported Argumentative Discussion. In: CSCL 2005, Taipei, Taiwan, May 30-June 4 (2005)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dillenbourg, P.: Introduction: What Do You Mean by Collaborative Learning. In: Dillenbourg, P. (ed.) Collaborative Learning: Cognitive and Computational Approaches, pp. 1–19. Pergamon, Oxford (1999)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Garrison, D.R., Anderson, T., Archer, W.: Critical Thinking, Cognitive Presence, and Computer Conferencing in Distance Education. American Journal of Distance Education 15(1), 7–23 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Glassner, A., Schwarz, B.B.: The Role of Floor Control and of Ontology in Argumentative Activities with Discussion-Based Tools. In: CSCL 2005, Taipei, Taiwan, May 30-June 4 (2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gunawardena, C.N., Lowe, C.A., Anderson, T.: Transcript Analysis of a Computer-Mediated Conferences as a Tool for Testing Constructivist and Social-Constructivist Learning Theories. In: Proceedings of the Annual Conference on Distance Teaching & Learning, Madison, Wisconsin, August 5-7 (1998)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Häkkinen, P., Järvelä, S., Mäkitalo, K.: Sharing Perspectives in Virtual Interaction: Review of Methods of Analysis. In: Wasson, B., Ludvigsen, S., Hoppe, U. (eds.) Designing for Change in Networked Learning Environments, Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer-Support for Collaborative Learning 2003, pp. 395–404. Kluwer Academic Publisher, Dordrecht (2003)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Henri, F.: Computer Conferencing and Content Analysis. In: Kaye, A. (ed.) Collaborative Learning Through Computer Conferencing: The Najaden Papers, pp. 117–136. Springer, London (1992)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Keefer, M.W., Zeitz, C.M., Resnick, L.B.: Judging the Quality of Peer-Led Student Dialogue. Cognition & Instruction 18(1), 53–81 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kuhn, D.: The Skills of Argument. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1991)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lotan-Kochan, E.: The Effect of Teacher Intervention on the Quality of Students’ Discussion using Digalo: Developing and Testing an Evaluation Tool. Unpublished Masters Dissertation, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Means, M.L., Voss, J.F.: Who Reasons Well? Two Studies of Informal Reasoning among Children of Different Grade, Ability and Knowledge Levels. Cognition and Instruction 14(2), 139–179 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Scardamalia, M., Bereiter, C.: Knowledge Building: Theory, Pedagogy, and Technology. In: Sawyer, K. (ed.) Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences, Cambridge University Press, New York (in press),
  16. 16.
    Scardamalia, M., Bereiter, C., Lamon, M.: The CSILE Project: Trying to Bring the Classroom into World 3. In: McGilly, K. (ed.) Classroom Lessons: Integrating Cognitive Theory and Classroom Practice, pp. 201–228. MIT Press, Cambridge (1994)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Veerman, A.L., Andriessen, J.E.B., Kanselaar, G.: Learning through Synchronous Electronic Discussion. Computers & Education 34(2-3), 1–22 (2000)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Voss, J.F., Van Dyke, J.A.: Argumentation in Psychology: Background Comments. Discourse Processes 32(2&3), 89–111 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Einat Lotan Kochan
    • 1
  1. 1.School of EducationHebrew University of JerusalemJerusalemIsrael

Personalised recommendations