Acknowledgments This work was partially supported by Colombian Colciencias Projects No. 4128-14-18008 and No. 030-2005, and Cicyt Project TEN2004-08000-C03. References Adams, D., & Hamm, M. (1996). Cooperative Learning: Critical Thinking and Collaboration across The Curriculum (2 nd Ed.), Springfield, IL: Charles Thomas Publisher. Baeza-Yates, R., & Pino, J.A. (2006). Towards Formal Evaluation of Collaborative Work. Information Research, 11(4), Retrieved June 7, <strong>2007</strong>, from http://informationr.net/ir/11-4/paper271.html. Baeza-Yates, R., & Pino, J.A. (1997). A First Step to Formally Evaluate Collaborative Work. Paper presented at the ACM International Conference on Supporting Group Work, November 16-19, 1997, Phoenix, AZ, USA. Barros, B., & Verdejo, M. F. (1999). An Approach to Analyse Collaboration when Shared Structured Workspaces are used for Carrying out Group Learning Processes. Paper presented at the International Conference in Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED’99), <strong>July</strong> 18-23, 1999, Le Mans, France. Barros, M., Mizoguchi, R., & Verdejo, M. F. (2001). A platform for collaboration analysis in CSCL. An ontological approach. Paper presented at the Artificial Intelligence in Education Conference, <strong>July</strong> 9-13, 2001, Los Angeles, USA. Bravo, C., Redondo, M. A., Ortega, M., & Verdejo, M.F. (2006a) Collaborative Distributed Environments for Learning Design Tasks by Means of Modelling and Simulation. Journal of Networks and Computer Applications, 29(4), 321-342. Bravo, C., Redondo, M. A., Ortega, M., & Verdejo, M. F. (2006b). Collaborative environments for the learning of design: A model and a case study in Domotics. Computers and Education, 46(2), 152-173. Brna P., & Burton M. (1997). Roles, Goals and Effective Collaboration. In Okamoto, T. and Dillenbourg, P. (Eds.), Proceedings of Workshop on Collaborative Learning/Working Support Systems, pp3-<strong>10</strong>, Kobe, Japan. Collazos C., Guerrero, L. A., & Vergara, A. (2001). Aprendizaje Colaborativo: un cambio en el rol del profesor. Memorias del III Congreso de Educación Superior en Computación, Jornadas Chilenas de Ciencias de la Computación, pp. <strong>10</strong>-20, Punta Arenas, Chile (in Spanish). Collazos, C., Guerrero, L. A., Pino, J., & Ochoa, S. (2002). Evaluating Collaborative Learning Processes. Lectures Notes in Computer Science, 2440, 203-221. Collazos, C., Guerrero, L. A., Pino, J., & Ochoa, S. (2003a). Collaborative Scenarios to promote positive interdependence among group members. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2806, 356-370. Collazos, C., Guerrero, L. A., Pino, J., & Ochoa, S. (2003b). Improving the use of strategies in Computer-Supported Collaborative Processes. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2806, 247-260. Collazos, C., Guerrero, L. A., & Pino, J. A. (2004a). Computational Design Principles to Support the Monitoring of Collaborative Learning Processes. Journal of Advanced <strong>Technology</strong> for Learning, 1(3), 174-180. Collazos, C., Guerrero, L. A., Pino, J., & Ochoa, S. (2004b). A Method for Evaluating Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Processes. International Journal of Computer Applications in <strong>Technology</strong> 19(3/4), 151-161. 271
Collazos, C., Ortega, M., Bravo, C., & Redondo, M. (<strong>2007</strong>). Experiences in Tracing CSCL Processes. In Nedjah, N.; Mourelle, L.d.M.; Borges, M.N.; de Almeida, N.N. (Eds.), Intelligent <strong>Educational</strong> Machines: Methodologies and experiences (Chapter 5), Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer. Constantino-González, M., & Suthers, D. (2000). A Coached Collaborative Learning Environment for Entity- Relationship Modeling. Lecture Notes In Computer Science, 1839, 325-333. Constantino-González M., & Suthers, D. (2001). Coaching Web-based Collaborative Learning based on Problem Solution Differences and Participation. In J.D. Moore, C.L. Redfield & W. L. Johnson (Eds.), Proceedings AI-ED 2001, Amsterdam: IOS Press, 176-187. Dillenbourg, P., Baker, M., Blake, A., & O’Malley, C. (1995). The Evolution of Research on Collaborative Learning. In E. Spada & P. Reiman (Eds.), Learning in Humans and Machine: Towards an interdisciplinary learning science, Oxford: Elsevier, 189-211. Dillenbourg, P. (1999). What do you mean by collaborative learning? In P. Dillenbourg (Ed.), Collaborative- Learning: Cognitive and Computational Approaches, Oxford: Elsevier, 1-19. Drury, J., Damianos, L., Fanderclai, T., Kurtz, J.,Hirschman, L., & Linton, F. (1999). Methodology for Evaluation of Collaborative Systems, Retrieved June 7, <strong>2007</strong>, from http://zing.ncsl.nist.gov/nist-icv/documents/methodv4.htm. Francescato, D., Porcelli, R., Mebane, M., Cudetta, M., Klobas, J., & Renzi, P. (2006). Evaluation of the efficacy of collaborative learning in face to face and computer supported university contexts. Computers in Human Behavior, 22(2), 163-176. Fussell, S., Kraut, R., Lerch, F., Scherlis, W., McNally, M., & Cadiz, J. (1998). Coordination, Overload and Team Performance: Effects of Team Communication Strategies. Paper presented at the CSCW'98 conference, November 14-18, 1998, Seattle, Washington, USA. Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in Ethnomethodology, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Guerrero, L. A., Alarcón, R., Collazos, C., Pino, J., & Fuller, D. (2000). Evaluating Cooperation in Group Work. Paper presented at the 6 th International Workshop on Groupware, October 18-20, 2000, Madeira, Portugal. Guerrero, L. A., Mejias, B., Collazos, C., Pino, J. A., & Ochoa, S. (2003). Collaborative Learning and Creative Writing. Paper presented at the First Latin American Web Congress, November <strong>10</strong>-12, 2003, Santiago, Chile. Hruska-Riechmann, S., & Grasha, A. F. (1982). The Grasha-Riechmann student learning style scales. In J. Keefe (Ed.), Student learning styles and brain behavior, Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary School Principals, 81-86. ICALTS (2004). State of the Art: Interaction Analysis Indicators. Retrieved on June 7, <strong>2007</strong>, from http://www.rhodes.aegean.gr/LTEE/KALEIDOSCOPE-ICALTS/Publications/D1%20State%20of%20the%20Art %20Version_1_3%20ICALTS_Kal%20NoE.pdf. Inaba, A., & Okamoto, T. (1997). The Intelligent Discussion Coordinating System for Effective Collaborative Learning. Proceedings of the IV Collaborative Learning Workshop in the 8th World Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, Kobe, Japan, 175-182. Jermann, P., Soller, A., & Muhlenbrock, M. (2001). From Mirroring to Guiding: A Review os State of the Art <strong>Technology</strong> for Supporting Collaborative Learning. Paper presented at the Euro Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, March 22-24, 2001, Maastricht, NL. Johnson, D., & Johnson, R. (1975). Learning Together and Alone, Cooperation, Competition and Individualization, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. 272
- Page 1 and 2:
July 2007 Volume 10 Number 3
- Page 3 and 4:
Advertisements Educational Technolo
- Page 5 and 6:
Distinguishing between games and si
- Page 7 and 8:
“sometimes” is less demanding t
- Page 9 and 10:
Figure 2. From generic skill to lea
- Page 11 and 12:
The large window on the left presen
- Page 13 and 14:
define competencies of individual a
- Page 15 and 16:
competency is composed of a single
- Page 17 and 18:
Generic Skills Classes 1 2 3 Receiv
- Page 19 and 20:
Figure 6. Extension of the competen
- Page 21 and 22:
Competency scale By combining the g
- Page 23 and 24:
activities, and resources present i
- Page 25 and 26:
Conclusion The importance given to
- Page 27 and 28:
Ainsworth, S. (2007). Using a Singl
- Page 29 and 30:
different instruction. For example,
- Page 31 and 32:
Author-focused studies Studies 1 an
- Page 33 and 34:
egression showed that students were
- Page 35 and 36:
REDEEM is now a senior citizen in t
- Page 37 and 38:
Chieu, V. M. (2007). An Operational
- Page 39 and 40:
When students discuss with peers, t
- Page 41 and 42:
COFALE as a learning environment an
- Page 43 and 44:
COFALE supports a set of predefined
- Page 45 and 46:
Tom is asked to prepare a list of g
- Page 47 and 48:
45-minute-long lecture and 2-hour-l
- Page 49 and 50:
as an easy-to-use technological mea
- Page 51 and 52:
Spiro, R. J., & Jehng, J. C. (1990)
- Page 53 and 54:
learning settings. However, such a
- Page 55 and 56:
introduced in the LOCO-Cite ontolog
- Page 57 and 58:
‘virtual subsection’) of the LO
- Page 59 and 60:
Accordingly, TANGRAM provides stude
- Page 61 and 62:
learning environment is to define t
- Page 63 and 64:
Acknowledgment This work is support
- Page 65 and 66:
Dron, J. (2007). Designing the Unde
- Page 67 and 68:
wikis and blogs (or at least, colle
- Page 69 and 70:
The darker side of social software
- Page 71 and 72:
for the beetles, whose guts act as
- Page 73 and 74:
The principle of sociability The pr
- Page 75 and 76:
Bonabeau, E., Dorigo, M., & Theraul
- Page 77 and 78:
Klamma, R., Chatti, M. A., Duval, E
- Page 79 and 80:
We perceive adaptivity and personal
- Page 81 and 82:
Mixed-method evaluation approach tr
- Page 83 and 84:
Garden of Knowledge - with a commun
- Page 85 and 86:
equirements for collaborative adapt
- Page 87 and 88:
Law, E. L.-C., & Hvannberg, E. T. (
- Page 89 and 90:
Wang, T. I., Tsai, K. H., Lee, M. C
- Page 91 and 92:
2.3 Recommendation Model Survey In
- Page 93 and 94:
Figure 1. The portion of the concep
- Page 95 and 96:
STEP4: Associated with concepts in
- Page 97 and 98:
A modified TF-IDF approach is used
- Page 99 and 100:
P(CK j x LOM ) = k NW max ∀ T∈
- Page 101 and 102:
4.2.2 Correlation-based algorithm I
- Page 103 and 104:
content feedback, it can be intuiti
- Page 105 and 106:
66% improvement in average, and, wh
- Page 107 and 108:
(a) (b) (c) Figure 10. Comparisons
- Page 109 and 110:
index.aspx. ADL-2 (2001). Advanced
- Page 111 and 112:
Wolpers, M., Najjar, J., Verbert, K
- Page 113 and 114:
activity is taking place. For examp
- Page 115 and 116:
Figure 2: The CAM schema elements (
- Page 117 and 118:
• Context: the context element ca
- Page 119 and 120:
4.1 Generation of Attention Metadat
- Page 121 and 122:
addition, such keywords can be extr
- Page 123 and 124:
Action related data, data about sea
- Page 125 and 126:
Braun, S., & Schmidt, A. (2006). Do
- Page 127 and 128:
El-Bishouty, M. M., Ogata, H., & Ya
- Page 129 and 130:
collaboration (Ogata, et al., 1999)
- Page 131 and 132:
In case of LOI value is equal or cl
- Page 133 and 134:
Also, the learner can click on an e
- Page 135 and 136:
System Evaluation An experiment was
- Page 137 and 138:
In the fifth phase, 89% of the stud
- Page 139 and 140:
Fischer, G., & Konomi, S. (2005). I
- Page 141 and 142:
application for specific needs, whi
- Page 143 and 144:
(4) Multimedia: The truth is that e
- Page 145 and 146:
Program Company Price OS 6 eZediaMX
- Page 147 and 148:
Program Text editor Text import for
- Page 149 and 150:
Program Sound Formats Image Formats
- Page 151 and 152:
Program Image Painting Export Scrip
- Page 153 and 154:
Program Effects Needs player 5 Easy
- Page 155 and 156:
Program WYSIWYG Design Interactivit
- Page 157 and 158:
the grades awarded to the programs
- Page 159 and 160:
Grade Image formats Sound formats V
- Page 161 and 162:
Figure 3. Adequacy of image formats
- Page 163 and 164:
Animating objects, pictures, etc.,
- Page 165 and 166:
Educational overview Having taken m
- Page 167 and 168:
In summary, the final outcome is th
- Page 169 and 170:
Developing the Interactivity Survey
- Page 171 and 172:
technique. be treated as a desired
- Page 173 and 174:
55. A lecture in which student lear
- Page 175 and 176:
specific conclusions that researche
- Page 177 and 178:
Discussion and conclusion Although
- Page 179 and 180:
Juwah, C. (2003). Using peer assess
- Page 181 and 182:
Publish results Set a few goals for
- Page 183 and 184:
familiarity with computer terms, ex
- Page 185 and 186:
provide a framework for the integra
- Page 187 and 188:
tool themselves, and then gauge its
- Page 189 and 190:
associated with the effective use o
- Page 191 and 192:
portrayed as even more time-consumi
- Page 193 and 194:
Clarke, B. (2001). Corporate curric
- Page 195 and 196:
Neal, E. (1998). Using technology i
- Page 197 and 198:
Yearwood, J., & Stranieri, A. (2007
- Page 199 and 200:
entertaining (Neuhauser 1993). The
- Page 201 and 202:
in being addressed with the sequent
- Page 203 and 204:
The GAAM represents reasoning to a
- Page 205 and 206:
Other situations have more serious
- Page 207 and 208:
Figure 6. NARRATE phase screen afte
- Page 209 and 210:
The narration at Step 10 informs th
- Page 211 and 212:
very large degree of free-will has
- Page 213 and 214:
Rumelhart, D. E. (1975). Notes on a
- Page 215 and 216:
The School of Business at Universit
- Page 217 and 218:
Authentic assessment and OBOW exams
- Page 219 and 220:
iii. The assessment asks the studen
- Page 221 and 222:
world problems in relation to the s
- Page 223 and 224:
Herrington, J., & Herrington, A. (1
- Page 225 and 226: services required by most clients i
- Page 227 and 228: Wisdom. J. P., White, N., Goldsmith
- Page 229 and 230: Work outside the U.S. has also prom
- Page 231 and 232: of the Telecommunication Act, and t
- Page 233 and 234: Parent-advocate respondents also re
- Page 235 and 236: school administrators may be persua
- Page 237 and 238: of legal requirements for accessibl
- Page 239 and 240: Thus, while we have reason to belie
- Page 241 and 242: underlying structure of the two pri
- Page 243 and 244: still not familiar with its use; in
- Page 245 and 246: Table 3: An Analysis of Different V
- Page 247 and 248: of males. Secondly, as far as age w
- Page 249 and 250: Conclusion This study examined the
- Page 251 and 252: Sandholtz, J. H., Ringstaff, C., &
- Page 253 and 254: The design and validation of a text
- Page 255 and 256: Predetermined goal of a game The pr
- Page 257 and 258: A true, precise and valid model “
- Page 259 and 260: Bain, C., & Newton, C. (2003). Art
- Page 261 and 262: Prensky, M. (2005). Adopt and Adapt
- Page 263 and 264: opportunities based on studying dif
- Page 265 and 266: The game -called Chase the Cheese-
- Page 267 and 268: another token. Other tokens further
- Page 269 and 270: The system is organized in differen
- Page 271 and 272: “to produce a single product or p
- Page 273 and 274: (e.g., cheese) or loses the game (a
- Page 275: collaboration is not an easy task.
- Page 279 and 280: Soller, A., & Lesgold, A. (2000). K
- Page 281 and 282: Is the usual hierarchical organizat
- Page 283 and 284: The final step 7 in the procedure i
- Page 285 and 286: This methodology is summarised in F
- Page 287 and 288: ‘IsBasisOf’, ‘HasConstraint
- Page 289 and 290: The presented results are a reflect
- Page 291 and 292: ‘HasExample’, and ‘HasFurther
- Page 293 and 294: DCMI (2003). DCMI Metadata Terms, R
- Page 295 and 296: Literature review Astronomy educati
- Page 297 and 298: Systems of type I provide different
- Page 299 and 300: night. To prevent students from get
- Page 301 and 302: Figures 2-5 display screenshots of
- Page 303 and 304: Results of the study reveal the imp
- Page 305 and 306: vertical axis leads to the disappea
- Page 307 and 308: Dede, C., Salzman, M., Loftin, R. B
- Page 309 and 310: Trumper, R. (2000). University stud
- Page 311 and 312: ased on pre-defined adaptation rule
- Page 313 and 314: Therefore, the higher-level items o
- Page 315 and 316: common prefix with the existing pa
- Page 317 and 318: later should be omitted (presented
- Page 319 and 320: 5.1 The Average Length of each Sequ
- Page 321 and 322: Recall 6. Discussion 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.
- Page 323 and 324: easily take lessons in a good learn
- Page 325 and 326: Laborda, J. G., & Royo, T. M. (2007
- Page 327 and 328:
Chapter 8, Online reference tools,
- Page 329 and 330:
Kenyon, D. M., & Malabonga, V. (200
- Page 331 and 332:
and concise manner (e.g. Weeding =
- Page 333:
stream are chapters 7 and 8 which f