Comparing the visual affordances of discrete time Markov chains and epistemic network analysis for analysing discourse connections

IF 1.9 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Daniela Vasco, Kate Thompson, Sakinah S. J. Alhadad, M. Z. Juri
{"title":"Comparing the visual affordances of discrete time Markov chains and epistemic network analysis for analysing discourse connections","authors":"Daniela Vasco, Kate Thompson, Sakinah S. J. Alhadad, M. Z. Juri","doi":"10.3389/feduc.2024.1401996","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Researchers in the learning sciences have been considering methods of analysing and representing group-level temporal data, particularly discourse analysis, in Computed Supported Collaborative Learning for many years.This paper compares two methods used to analyse and represent connections in discourse, Discrete Time Markov Chains and Epistemic Network Analysis. We illustrate both methods by comparing group-level discourse using the same coded dataset of 15 high school students who engaged in group work. The groups were based on the tools they used namely the computer, iPad, or Interactive Whiteboard group. The aim here is not to advocate for a particular method but to investigate each method’s affordances.The results indicate that both methods are relevant in evaluating the code connection within each group. In both cases, the techniques have supported the analysis of cognitive connections by representing frequent co-occurrences of concepts in a given segment of discourse.As the affordances of both methods vary, practitioners may consider both to gain insight into what each technique can allow them to conclude about the group dynamics and collaborative learning processes to close the loop for learners.","PeriodicalId":52290,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1401996","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Researchers in the learning sciences have been considering methods of analysing and representing group-level temporal data, particularly discourse analysis, in Computed Supported Collaborative Learning for many years.This paper compares two methods used to analyse and represent connections in discourse, Discrete Time Markov Chains and Epistemic Network Analysis. We illustrate both methods by comparing group-level discourse using the same coded dataset of 15 high school students who engaged in group work. The groups were based on the tools they used namely the computer, iPad, or Interactive Whiteboard group. The aim here is not to advocate for a particular method but to investigate each method’s affordances.The results indicate that both methods are relevant in evaluating the code connection within each group. In both cases, the techniques have supported the analysis of cognitive connections by representing frequent co-occurrences of concepts in a given segment of discourse.As the affordances of both methods vary, practitioners may consider both to gain insight into what each technique can allow them to conclude about the group dynamics and collaborative learning processes to close the loop for learners.
比较离散时间马尔可夫链和认识论网络分析在分析话语联系方面的可视化能力
多年来,学习科学领域的研究人员一直在考虑在计算机辅助协作学习中分析和表示小组级时间数据的方法,特别是话语分析。本文比较了两种用于分析和表示话语联系的方法,即离散时间马尔可夫链和认识论网络分析。我们使用 15 名参与小组合作的高中生的相同编码数据集,通过比较小组层面的话语来说明这两种方法。小组是根据他们使用的工具划分的,即电脑、iPad 或交互式白板小组。结果表明,这两种方法在评估每个小组内的代码连接方面都有相关性。在这两种情况下,这两种技术都通过表示特定语段中概念的频繁共现来支持对认知联系的分析。由于这两种方法的可承受性各不相同,实践者可以同时考虑这两种方法,以深入了解每种技术都能让他们得出关于小组动态和协作学习过程的结论,从而为学习者提供闭环。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Frontiers in Education
Frontiers in Education Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
8.70%
发文量
887
审稿时长
14 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信