An infrastructure to support the development of ... - CiteSeerX

An Infrastructure to Support the Development of Collaborative Project-Based Learning Environments Fl6via Maria Santoro, Marcos R. S. Borges Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro [email protected], [email protected] Neide dos Santos Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro neide @ime.uerj .br

mention that proposed by Osuina and Dimitriadis [ 161. They presented an educational-telematic framework for the development of collaborative educational applications, aiming at decreasiing the distance between technologists and educators. Most groupware frameworks or toolkits are very generic. They are not concerned with specific domains such as education, and therefore do not provide specific mechanisms to address issues such as theory of learning, culture, evaluation and those related specifically to teaching-learning collaborative processes. It is necessary to provide support to the design of the educational activity and to dispose the appropriated elements for the construction of the educational poupware tools. Our work aims at addressing this lack of support to the development of CSCL environments. We present an infrastructure to support the development of environments in the domain of collaborative project-based learning. Our hypotheses are two: the developer of applications knows neither the education domain, nor the nuances of the collaborative strategies applied to the teaching-learning process. On the other hand, the teacher needs a flexible environment, to support him in, the use of the computing technology, and where he can configure different collaborative projects in agreement with particular group characteristics. The infrastructure offers a collaborative work environment and a tool framework. Within the collaborative environment, the teacher can define collaborative educational processes, and students can carry out group activities with the support of especially designed tools. The framework also allows new collaborative tools to be developed and integrated within the environment without much difficulty. In this article, the infrastructure for the domain of the collaborative project-based learning is presented and its

Abstract The area of CSCL is short of toolkits to support the construction of educational environments, since the developer of applications knows neither the education domain, nor the collaborative strategies applied to the teaching-learning process. The teacher needs a flexible environment supported by computing technology, and where he can configure different collaborative projects. In this paper, we present a conceptual and computational infrastructure for the domain of collaborative learning based on development of projects, whose first stage was the definition of a collaboration model in the format of conceptual patterns. The requirements and the conceptual patterns gave support for the development of this infrastructure, composed by a collaborative environment, a tool framework, U database ofprojects, and a library of references.

1. Introduction The area of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) studies how computer science can support learning processes promoted by the collaborative efforts of students working on a given task. The analysis of the area reveals the existence of an expressive number of CSCL environments, but few are the references to toolkits that support the development of this kind of environment. Frameworks and toolkits for the development of groupware applications, such as Habanero [ 131, TOP [SI and GroupKit [7], demonstrate the usefulness of technological scaffolding to increase productivity and quality. Among the few specific works for CSCL, we can

78

0-7695-0828-6/00 $10.000 2000 IEEE

initial design stage is the definition of a conceptual model of collaboration. In Section 2, the problems related to the development and use of collaborative learning environments are described. In Section 3, a conceptual model, which presents solutions for these problems, is presented. In Section 4, the infrastructure is presented; its components and architecture are detailed, as well as its relationship with the conceptual model. Finally, the conclusions of the paper and its current stage of development are presented in Section 5.

following reasons to the problem of low collaboration level within CSCL environments [18]: 1. Culture - people are not used to working in groups and the teacher is not used to designing collaborative educational situations [22]; 2. Stimulus - people are not induced to the collaborative work within the environment; 3. Context - the environments are not part of the educational practice; 4. Technology - there is almost no integration of tools and the interfaces hardly explore specific mechanisms for collaboration. To promote learning in a real collaborative way, an environment should address all aspects related to the described problems. So, the development of collaborative learning environments should be based on a conceptual model that suggests solutions for these problems, allowing the description of explicit collaboration processes. In the next section, a brief description of the conceptual model developed for the case of collaborative project-based learning will be made.

2. Educational Groupware Design Problems Frequently, the learning process is assumed as a natural product of projects carried out by groups. It is also presumed the availability of collaborative tools in a CSCL environment is enough to motivate the collaboration among the participants of the project. However, in many situations collaboration does not occur naturally and needs to be articulated by the responsible tutor. Some authors reported several problems with the use of CSCL environments: Guzial [9] points out that, in the case of the CaMILE environment, the mere creation of a space and the definition of a theme do not necessarily encourage students to a lively discussion. The support to collaboration should be designed to encourage the discussion. O’Neill 1143 maintains that if real positive interdependencies are not present in the tasks proposed, the challenge of stimulating collaboration will just be an upset. Besides, teachers usually plan their activities with certain antecedence, then, it becomes extremely important that the purposes of the environment be very clear. Analyzing results obtained with experiments using the NICE environment, Roussos et al. [I71 observes that the expected collaboration process did not happen. Aspects such as the selection and the number of members in a group should be taken well into consideration for a collaborative effort succeeds. Teachers who tried the CSILE reported the importance of an earlier groundwork for the cooperative skills, where they modeled group process in the context of the environment activity [15]. In this case, the teacher’s role to build and stimulate the collaborative process became clear. Pilot studies with Belvedere indicated that there was a need to structure the roles and activities of the students work 1201. We also found- in- the CSCL literature many other environments, which have not been tried yet. Most do not present an explicit model of the collaborative process or how they should operate in practice. We identify the

3. A Conceptual Model for CSCL Domain Based on a System of Patterns Understanding the theoretical nature of the collaborative process in learning environments is the key to the definition of a conceptual model. The analysis of the state of the art in collaboration models and in problems found in the use of CSCL environments are also key points to design solutions. In this work, these steps have already been developed and a conceptual model was defined and described by means of patterns [ 191. Collaboration enhancement in learning environments is related to many factors [18]. The modeling of collaborating activities involves representation of the collaborative traits like conflicts and resolutions, the roles of the collaborating peers and the depth of the modeling process [ 121. Brna [2] points out four different meanings referring to the expression “collaboration”, which are related to quite different educational goals: 0 Splitting tasks into subtasks to be carried out by individual peers, or conjoining efforts to solve the tasks without splitting the work; Collaboration is seen as a state or as a process; 0 Collaboration is an instrument. but the goal is to learn about a specific domain; or it is an end in itself; 0 The peers are either aware of the existence of a formal contractual relationship, or not. The collaboration modeling seems to be an important component for the successful use CSCL environments, but there are a small number of available environments where collaboration is modeled.

79

Becker and Zanella's Collaboration Model for Teaching/Learning of Modeling Courses is oriented by data modeling concepts domain, using the development of tests, critics and modeling alternative discussions [I]. The model provides a framework, where three components are defined: (i) a process, that helps teachers to define and structure class activities; (ii) the roles to be performed by students and teacher; and (iii) objects to be shared during the process. CLARE (Collaborative Learning and Research Environment) aims to improve learning through the collaborative knowledge construction. It is based on a process model called SECAI and provides a semi-formal language for knowledge representation called RESRA [23]. SECAI (Summarization, Evaluation, Comparison, Argumentation, and Integration) defines a process explicit model for collaborative learning of scientific text discussion. It metaphorically moves the learners from the isolated and individual position to an integrated and collaborative perspective, while they proceed in the discussion. Based on the findings of these environments and on our belief about the reasons for low cooperation level in CSCL environments already described in Section 2, we developed a collaboration model for CSCL environments. Santoro et al.[ 191 describe the model in detail. A general view of the model is reproduced in Figure 1.

4. The Infrastructure to Support the Development of Collaborative Projectbased Learning Environments In order to support the devellopment of collaborative project-based learning environments, we are implementing a basic infrastructure that addresses the following requirements: 9 Possibility of defining processes for collaborative projects - the teacher should have support in the definition of the collaborative tasks, their interdependencies, the flow of work, and how to select appropriated computational tools to support them. P Possibility of implementing tools - each collaborative project can be composed of different activities, which will probably need different tools to support them. The infrastructure should provide mechanisms to facilitate the development of new tools. 9 Possibility of storing and accessing information about completed projects - the instructors and student groups should be able to access accomplished projects in order to explore: their ideas and not repeat the same activities. 9 Accessibility through the Internet to guarantee flexibility, to facilitate distribution, and to be used in several situations (including distance). Given these requirements, the components of the infrastructure can be defined: a collaborative environment, a data model, a database of projects, a library of references and a tool framework. The infrastructure proposal was based on the COPSE environment (Dias & Borges, 11999), in which adaptations have been made both in conception and implementation. Besides, additional software components were developed to fulfill the requirements and the conceptual model. The components of the infrastructure are described at the following sub-sections.

w OBJECTIVE

c

PROCESS

I

4.1. Architecture Environment

of

the

Collaborative

The collaborative environment is the place for the students and teachers to work, being the starting point for planning and executing the activities of the project. The environment is based on a client-server architecture, which accesses two centralized databases. The server side is composed hy the Project Server, which is the main server, and activates the secondary servers. The Project Server is also responsible for the maintenance of the project database, formed by the documents related to the projects, and the reference library.

Figure I.Collaboration Model for Project-Based Learning Domain All the issues addressed by the model (Figure 1) are divided into deeper levels of granularity, which are described through a system of patterns. The system of patterns provides useful requirements to the development of an infrastructure for collaborative learning domain based on projects. From the infrastructure instantiation, different CSCL environments, developed with the collaborating model components, can be built, presenting better performance than reported environments.

80

The secondary servers are responsible for the services available within the infrastructure, according to the data model, presented in this section. Process Server - It is one of the key components of the infrastructure, because it is responsible for the execution of the process, working as a kind of workflow machine. An editing tool is necessary to design the collaboration processes. Once a process is defined, it should be associated to a specific project. The tool adopts symbols and conventions that might represent all-important components of the process: activities, roles, agents, flow, rules, descriptions, and the relationships among them. The process server interprets the symbols, deploys the execution of the process in the beginning of the project, and maintains the relevant information about its activities. Document Servers - They establish connections between the tools that make use of a document (reading, writing, consulting, or revising), and deal with the multiple events generated within the environment, according to a client request. Agent Server - It manages the registration of people and teams participating in the project and maintains instant information on the active user sessions. It also controls users‘ access to the collaborative environment. Tool Server - It maintains the registration of the tools and of the active servers within the environment. Evaluation Server - It disposes services of gathering information on the work process, and features for building evaluation mechanisms of learning. Thus, it is made a kind of tracing of the interactions among the group members, which should be manipulated by appropriated instruments. Search Server - It accomplishes the connection with the Library of References, offering search services to the documents requested by the users. The client side presents the interface of the collaborative environment to the user. The user “gets into” the environment and starts working on a project through the client application. The client provides features related to the admission of users within the environment and engaging them to the group activities. It is represented by a set of applications ‘User Session Managers’ that have the following functions [ 5 ] : it connects the user to the main server and the secondary servers; it provides status of the project; it manages personal information; and it activates tools, according to the process that is being executed. There are also groupware tools available to support the accomplishment of activities defined in the process. The tools establish connections with document servers related to the activities through which they were invoked. A general architecture of the environment is depicted in Figure 2.

User 1

User m

r I

I I I I I I I

I

/I

I

I

I

I

I

I

Project Server I

I

I I I I

Environment The data model is the basis for the group memory support [ 5 ] . It defines the information that will be maintained by the environment, through the persistence of the instantiated objects, for each project developed in the context of the collaborative environment. We present in Figure 3 a simplified view of the data model as a collection of logical packages. These packages contain all the information modeled. Table 1 describes the components of the model and the main services provided by them.

I

/

I

\

Figure 3. Simplified Data Model The Database of Projects stores the information about the process on the projects, according to the structure of the data model. By now, a system of files implements this database, but in a further version it will be substituted by a SGBDOO. The Library of References is a multimedia database that stores documents of any type (texts, images, HTML pages, finished projects), which can be used by the groups, for consulting, during the accomplishment of a project. These documents are references that can be recommended by the teacher or by any member of he group, and can be associated to a project or to a specific stage or task of a project. They are retrieved through the Search Server and can be viewed in standard browsers.

81

of tools and document types, association of

Evaluation

Recording interactions workgroups.

in

tool features and roles Gathering of data concemed to the collaboration process, association of teacher's reports to group documents, and events related to the process activities, presenting evaluationresults.

4.2. Tools Framework Several types of projects can be developed in the context of the collaborative environment, indicating the need of different tools to support their activities. Thus, the infrastructure should be flexible enough to allow the increment of new services (servers) and groupware tools. A framework is a reusable design of all or part of a system that is represented by a set of abstract classes and the way their instances interact [IO]. The Tools Framework in our environment is provided to allow the development of groupware tools to be added to the infrastructure context. It is also possible to use it to extend secondary servers in order to provide new resources for the environment [5].

Message Activity

I

User

I

I communication ....... ................. ......! C.."

I

Roles

The infrastructure should provide means to implement mechanisms of qualitative and quantitative evaluation of learning along the development of the project. Thus, templates, which use services offered by the Evaluation Server, are disposed. These services could be seen as the organization of information about the collaboration process. As discussed in Section 3, we developed a model of collaboration for learning, which is composed by a system of patterns. One of the issues treated by this model is the Evaluation, and according to our model, three patterns describe solutions for the problems pointed out in this area: Process of Educational Evaluation, Individual Results Evaluation and Group Results Evaluation. The patterns Individual Results Evaluation and Group Results Evaluation indicate the need for the types of evaluation mechanisms described in Table 2.

I

Server o11aboration Handles

~

4.3. Evaluation Mechanisms

Sewer j .connection ...........r... ...i

FTI

Scratchpad

I

Figure 3. Application Server Structure [5]

82

Table 2 - E aluation Mechanisms Quantitative Evaluation

Qualitative Evaluation

Memory refers to the storage of the collaborative process. The infrastructure allows keeping any type of information on the process in its Project Database. Coordination is related with control and observation of the process, which is done by the Process Server of the infrastructure. The coordination also addresses the help to the apprentice along the process, through Guides or Agents, which might trace actions, provide help, and indicate procedures. In this version of the infrastructure, automatic guides are not supplied, but the teacher, through the evaluation mechanisms, can infer the process, giving suggestions and helps to the students. Evaluation is composed by important mechanisms, used to measure whether or not the objectives are being achieved. The infrastructure counts with a special server to provide services related to gathering of information for evaluation, and also templates for the main mechanisms defined by the conceptual patterns. Awareness is the key element of the process, which guarantees that people can fully understand the process and the interactions among participants within the environment. There is a set of software components for awareness to be incorporated to the tools. The fourth area identified as problematic in CSCL is Technology. The participants have a starting environment, where they can obtain information about the project, about the tasks already executed, the workplace of the members and future achievements. Then, to accomplish the tasks, they use tools that have similar interfaces (once they were built from the same framework), minimizing the integration problem.

Individual Exams, which verify the student progress, according to its personal characteristics. Ouestionnaires and interviews. Questionnaires of self-evaluations, where the assessor or the student can be responsible for the creation of the structure of topics to be appraised. Group Exams. Observations about the interactions during the work process. Annotations or structured comments (having some kind of punctuation) on the students’development. Possibility for the group members to evaluate the accomplished work and to evaluate the other members.

4.4. Relationships between the Infrastructure and the Conceptual Model In accordance to Figure 1, three related areas Context; Culture and Stimulus - were pointed as the critical components for the development of a CSCL environment. The problems related to these areas are described through a system of conceptual patterns. Therefore, each one of the areas is detailed, and the patterns that describe it serve as a basis for the design of the infrastructure. The Previous Knowledge component represents the background knowledge of group members. The infrastructure has evaluation mechanisms, which can also be used for applying pre-tests. The theoretical basis for a learning environment should be a Theory of Learning, which explains the processes of acquiring knowledge. Several Cultural Factors determine the context in which the group is inserted, and will influence the objective of the collaborative proposal. The patterns defined in these sub-areas do not constitute direct implementations, but they supply guidelines for the work modeling within the environment, and for the design of the tools. Activities are tasks or actions performed by the group. These tasks are modeled using the process edition tool, where the teacher has the necessary support to define positive interdependencies, which will produce the collaborative processes. Collaborative tools are available to support the execution of the activities. They can be implemented according to the demand of the project, using the tools framework. Roles are the functions assumed by the group members, which can be different in each stage of the process. In the infrastructure roles are associated with activities, tools and participants. Thus, when using a supporting tool to execute a task, a participant, who already has its role defined for that activity, will have specific functionalities and accesses available.

Examples of the Relationship between Conceptual Patterns and the Infrastructure Implementation a) As an indirect implementation This kind of pattern is used to present a set of requirements used to extend the Tools Framework in order to implement new educational groupware tools (Figure 5). The Tools Framework provides basic services and the pattern indicates what kind of features a specific tool must have. b) As a direct implementation: The Solution part of the pattern suggests the way workspace awareness should be implemented in a CSCL environment. This solution is based on observations of how most systems work, as described in the Know Uses part of the pattern. It is possible to build a set of software awareness components specified by the pattern, and use them to develop educational groupware (Figure 6).

a3

Pattern name: Work space awareness in CSCL Problem: Which elements should be made available in a ComputerSupported Cooperative Learning environment to guarantee the work space awareness? Context: In a CSCL environment, the awareness that group members have of each other is one of the key dements to promote effective interactions. When a group member becomes aware of what another member is doing, this can make him establish contact and exchange ideas. The access to information aboui: contributions and completed tasks is also an important factor. It can approach group members with common interests, even if they are not working at the same task. Forces: The working space awareness reduces the intrinsic overhead of group work, bringing about spontaneous and effective interactions. It facilitates students to engage in practices, which promote the cooperative learning. Solution: The environment should ponray each group member in the working space, so the group can see where he is, what he is doing and what he has done. This representation can be graphical, iconic, a virtual reality element, or through identified windows. Related patterns: Awareness in CSCL Environments Known uses: The CSlLE environmenr [15] uses structured messages to implement working space awarenlss. The initials of its author identify them and therefore, other groulp members can perceive what is he doing or has done. Following the same approach, both the Collaboratory Notebook [ 141 and the CaMILE environments [9] also use structure messages. The authorship in this case is identified by the author's name. In the NICE environment [17], avatars represent participants of a working session and all group members can follow their activities within the working space. The CLARE environment [21] provides a specific window where all tasks performed by group members can be observed.

Pattern name: Cooperative Editing Tool Problem: What are the requirements for the development of a cooperative editing tool to support learning? Context: The cooperative editing of documents is a common activity in project development performed by groups. Therefore, a CSCL environment should provide a tool to support this activity. The requirements specification is the goal here. Forces: Cooperative activities in a learning environment require certain characteristics, which should be supported by software tools. The requirements specification should express these characteristics to assure the software will implement them. The requirements should be directly related with the description of the task to be supported (Pattem: Cooperative construction of documents). Solution: The solution is a list of requirements, which should influence and instruct the software implementation. The implementation could either start from scratch or add functionality to existent cooperative editors. The requirements are classified into the following issues: Editing, Awareness, Coordination, Interaction and Persistence. 1. Editing: The editing activity should be asynchronous. That is, each user can work independently, both in time and space, of other members; The document should be structured or divided into fragments of any size and type, as defined by the group; Each fragment should be "owned by a group member, who will be responsible for its edition: There should exist annotation mechanisms available to all participants and assigned to any fragment. The annotation should be identified and time stamped; There should be the possibility to reference other works; It should support text and graphs. General file operation functions should be provided: new, open, save and restore previous version 2. Awareness All members of the group should be able to visualize the entire document: All should access the information about roles and its relationship to fragments; The tool should provide a notification mechanism to inform members of the group of any change in the document; There should be a mechanism, which presents the most recent annotations of a fragment, so a member can be aware of suggestions of other group members. This should instigate the cooperation among group members. 3. Coordination The tool should support the definition and the coordination of roles, with different rights over each document fragment. The initial set of roles are: Editors, Writers, Revisers The tool should allow change of roles, even during the execution of the task: All should have the opportunity to contribute to the activity. 4. Interaction The group members should be able to exchange messages to discuss ideas about the document; The tool should log the interaction. 5. Persistence The software should support document versions; The user should save the document after concluding the editing activity: The user should be able to access orevious versions of the documents. Related patterns: Pattem Cooperative Construction of Documents Known uses: The requirements specified in this pattem were extracted from the main works about cooperative editing found in the literature:

Figure 6. Pattern Example (b) In this Section, we diocussed how the issues compounding the model of collaboration are contemplated in the implementation of the infrastructure. We gave examples of two types of the model patterns: the first one shows the requirements for implementation of a specific tool; and the second one leads to a direct software implementation, this means that there is a software component in the infrastructure that implements the solution described in the pattern. All parts of the infrastructure were designed according to their corresponding patterns.

5. Conclusions In this paper, an infrastruclxre is proposed to support the development of collaborative learning based on project environments. The infrastructure goal is to create a set of facilities for implementing CSCL environments, providing more efficient support for the definition and realization of collaborative learning process. A comprehensive study of CSCL field showed that CSCL environments often present low levels of peer collaboration. Identified the nature of the problems, the infrastructure can address practical solutions both to environment designers, that do not know about the educational domain, and to teachers that need special help to manage technology and to configure the collaborating projects.

Figure 5. Pattern Example (a)

84

Requirements and characteristics of the infrastructure design were based o n a conceptual model expressed as a system of patterns, which addresses the main problems found in CSCL area. T h e model c a n generate consistent environments, built from the infrastructure or a n y other framework developed based on it, since all solutions are based on real cases o r on well-established theories. W e are now defining, with the help of a teacher a t the university, an experimental study with g r o u p s of students in o r d e r to prove the use of the infrastructure. T h e study includes the definition of a collaborative learning project, the instantiation of the collaborative environment and the necessary tools to support the process. B y d o i n g this, we can evaluate efficiency of the environment and the behavior of an application of the conceptual model.

[lo] Johnson, R.E. “Components, Frameworks, Pattems”. ACM 0-8979 1-945-9/97/0005, 1997. [ I 11 Koch, M., Koch, J. “Using Component Technology for Group Editors- The Iris Group Environment”. Proceedings of ECSCW’97, OOGP Workshop, 1997. [ 121 Kumar, V.S. “Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning: Issues for Research”. 8th Annual Graduate Symp. on Computer Science, University of Saskatchewan, 1996. [ 131 NCSA Habanero:

http://www.ncsa.uiuc.edu/SDG/Software/Habanero/ [14] O’Neill, K., Gomez, L.M. “The Collaboratory Notebook: a Networked Knowledge-Building Environment for Project Leaming”. Proceedings of Educational Mulimedia and Telecommunications- ED-Media’94. 1994.

Acknowledgements

1151 Oshima, J. “Students’ Construction of Scientific Explanations in a Collaborative Hyper-Media Leaming Environment”. Proceedings of Computer Supported on Collaborative Learning. Toronto, Canada, 1997.

T h i s work w a s partially supported by grants from the Brazilian Research Council (CAPES and C N P q )

[16] Osuna, C.A., Dimitriadis, Y.A. “A Framework for Development of Educacional-Collaborative Applications Based on Social Constructivism”. IEEE Press Proc of International Workshop on Groupware - CRIWG’99. Cancdn, Mexico, 1999.

References [ I ] Becker, K.; Zanella, A.N. “A Cooperation Model for TeachinglLeaming Modeling Disciplines”. Proceedings of CRIWG’98, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 1998.

[17] Roussos, M., Johnson, A.E., Leigh, J., Bames, C.R., Vasilakis, C.A., Moher, T.G. “The NICE Project: Narrative, Immersive, ConstructionistKollaborative Environments for Leaming in Virtual Reality”. Proceedings of Educational Mulimedia and Telecommunications- ED-Media, 1997.

[2] Bma, P. “Modelos de Colaboraqlo”. Rev. Bras. de Informhtica e EducaqBo, No.3,9-15, 1998. [3] Decouchant, D., Salcedo, M.R., Serrano, M. “Requirements and Design Issues of a Cooperative Authoring Application”. Proceedings of International Workshop on Groupware CRIWG, 1997

[I81 Santoro, F.M., Borges, M.R.S., Santos, N. “Towards a Model for Developing a Cooperative Learning Environment”. Proceedings of TISE’99. Santiago, Chile, 1999.

[4] Decouchant, D., Martinez-Enriquez, A.M., Gonzhlez, E.M. ‘‘Allianceweb: Cooperative Authoring on the WWW”. IEEE Press Proceedings of International Workshop on Groupware CRIWG’99 Cancdn, Mexico, 1999.

[ 191 Santoro, F.M., Borges. M.R.S., Santos, N. “Cooperation Model for Learning: A System of Pattems”. Proceedings of the ED-MEDIA’2000. Montreal, CanadB, 2000.

[5] Dias, M.S.; Borges, M.R.S. “Development of Groupware Systems with COPSE Infrastructure”. IEEE Press Proceedings of International Workshop on Groupware CRIWG.99 Canclin, Mexico. 1999.

[20] Suthers, D., Toth, E.E., Weiner, A. “An Integrated Approach to Implementing Collaborative Inquiry in the Classroom”. Proceedings of Computer Supported for Collaborative Learning. Toronto, Canads, 1997.

[6] Dias, M.S. “COPSE - Um Ambientes de Suporte ao Projeto Cooperativo de Software”. Master Dissertation in Portuguese. COPPE/Sistemas, UFRJ, 1998.

[21] Tanikawa, Y., Suzuki, M., Kato, H. “A Syncronous Collaborative Editing System for Leaming to Write”. Proceedings of Computer Supported on Collaborative Learning. Stanford, EUA, 1999. [7] Groupkit: htt~://~~~.~~~~.ucalgary.ca/pro~ects/grouplab/~rou~k~~ [22] Tiessen, E.L., Ward, D.R.” Developing a Technology of Use for Collaborative Project-Based Leaming”. Proceedings of [8] Guerrero, L.A., Fuller, D.A. “Objects for Fast Prototyping of Computer Supported on Collaborative Leaming. Stanford, EUA, Collaborative Applications”. Proceedings of 4‘h.Intemational 1999. Workshop on Groupware, Bdzios, RJ, Brasil, 1998. [23] Wan, D.; Johnson, P.M. “Computer Supported Collaborative Learning Using CLARE: the Approach and Experimental Findings”. Proceedings of ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, 1994.

[9] Guzdial, M. “Information Ecology of Collaborations in Educational Settings: Influence of Tool”. Proceedings of Computer Supported on Collaborative Leaming’97, Toronto, Canada. 1997.

85