The impact of role assignment on knowledge construction in asynchronous discussion groups: A multilevel analysis

Small Group Research

Volumn 36, Issue 6, 2005, Pages 704-745

  Schellens, Tammy ^a   Van Keer, Hilde ^a   Valcke, Martin ^a,b  

^a GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

^b Ghent University ^*

Author keywords

Asynchronous discussion group; Computer supported collaborative learning; Higher education; Role assignment; Scripting

Indexed keywords

EID: 28444439909     PISSN: 10464964     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1046496405281771     Document Type: Review

References (96)

1. Abramson, G. W. (1989). Developing effective computer based instruction: Essential issues for alpha test consideration. Journal of Interactive Instruction Development, 1, 163-169.
2. Amabile, T. (1988). A Model of creativity and innovation in organizations. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 10, 123-167). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
3. Amabile, T. (1997). Entrepreneurial creativity through motivational synergy. Journal of Creative Behavior, 31, 18-26.
4. Amabile, T. (1998). How to kill creativity. Harvard Business Review, September-October, 77-87.
5. Aviv, R. (2000). Educational performance of ALN via content analysis. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 4(2), 53-72.
6. Baker, M. (1996). Argumentation and cognitive change in collaborative problem solving dialogues (Rep. No. CR-13/96). Lyon, France: CNRS.
7. Barab, S., & Duffy, T. (2000). From practice fields to communities of practice. In D. H. Jonassen & S. M. Land (Eds.), Theoretical foundations of learning environments (pp. 25-55). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
8. Beatty, K., & Nunan, D. (2004). Computer-mediated collaborative learning. System, 32(2), 165-183.
9. Bereiter, C. (1990). Aspects of an educational learning theory. Journal of Educational Research, 60, 603-624.
10. Brandon, D. P., & Hollingshead, A. B. (2004). Transactive memory systems in organizations: Matching tasks, expertise, and people. Organization Science, 15, 633-644.
11. Brown, J. S. (1985). Process versus product: A prospective on tools for communicational and informal electronic learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 1, 179-201.
12. Bryk, A., & Raudenbush, S. W. ( 1992). Hierarchical linear models for social and behavioral research: Applications and data analysis methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
13. Capozzoli, M., McSweeney, L., & Sinha, D. (1999). Beyond kappa: A review of interrater agreement measures. The Canadian Journal of Statistics, 27(1), 3-23.
14. Choi, J.-I., & Hannifin, M. (1995). Situated cognition and learning environments: Roles, structures, and implications for design. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 43(2), 53-69.
15. Cifuentes, L., Murphy, K., Segur, R., & Kodali, S. (1997). Design considerations for computer conferences. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 30(2), 177-201.
16. Clark, D., Weinberger, A., Jucks, I., Spitulnik, M., & Wallace, R. (2003). Designing effective science inquiry in text-based computer supported collaborative learning environments. International Journal of Educational Policy, Research & Practice, 4(1), 55-82.
17. Cohen, E. G. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups. Review of Educational Research, 64(1), 1-35.
18. Coleman, E. B. (1995). Learning by explaining: Fostering collaborative progressive discourse in science. In R. J. Beun, M. Baker, & M. Reiner (Eds.), Dialogue and instruction: Modeling interaction in intelligent tutoring systems (pp. 123-135). Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
19. Collins, M. A., & Amabile, T. M. (1999). Motivation and creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), The handbook of creativity (pp. 297-312). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
20. Cooper, J., Prescott, S., Cook, L., Smith, L., Mueck, R., & Cuseo, J. (1990). Cooperative learning and college instruction: Effective use of student learning teams. Long Beach: California State University Foundation.
21. Czikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: HarperCollins.
22. Deci, E. L., Cascio, W. F., & Krusell, J. (1975). Cognitive evaluation theory and some comments on the Calder and Staw critique. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 31, 81-85.
23. Dennis, A. R., Aronson, J. E., Heninger, W. G., & Walker, E. D. (1999). Structuring time and task in electronic brainstorming. MIS Quarterly, 23, 95-108.
24. Dennis, A. R., & Williams, M. L. (2005). A meta analysis of groupsize effects in electronic brainstorming: More heads are better than one. International Journal of e-Collaboration, 1, 24-42.
25. De Wever, B., Schellens, T., Valcke, M., & Van Keer, H. (in press). Content analysis schemes to analyze transcripts of online asynchronous discussion groups: A review. Computers and Education.
26. De Wever, B., Valcke, M., Van Winckel, M., & Kerkhof, J. (2002). De invloed van "structuur" in CSCL-omgevingen: Een onderzoek met online-discussiegroepen bij medische studenten [The influence of structuring CSCL environments: A study of online discussion groups with medical students]. Pedagogisch Tijdschrift, 27(2/3), 105-128.
27. Dillenbourg, P. (2002). Over-scripting CSCL: The risks of blending collaborative learning with instructional design. In P. A. Kirschner (Ed.), Three worlds of CSCL: Can we support CSCL? (pp. 61-91). Heerlen, the Netherlands: Open Universiteit Nederland.
28. Dillenbourg, P., Baker, M., Blaye, A., & O'Malley, C. (1995). The evolution of research on collaborative learning. In P. Reimann & H. Spada (Eds.), Learning in humans and machines: Towards an interdisciplinary learning science (pp. 189-211). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
29. Doise, W., & Mugny, G. (1984). The social development of the intellect. Oxford, UK: Pergamon.
30. Entwistle, N., Tait, H., & McCune, V. (2000). Patterns of response to an approaches to studying inventory across contrasting groups and contexts. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 15, 33-48.
31. Erkens, G. (1997). Cooperatief probleemoplossen met computer in het onderwijs: Het modelleren van cooperatieve dialogen voor de ontwikkeling van intelligente onderwijssystemen [Cooperative problem solving through computers: Modeling cooperative dialogues to develop intelligent educational systems]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Universiteit Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
32. Felder, R. M., Felder, G. N., Mauney, M., Hamrin, C. E., Jr., & Dietz, E. J. (1995). A longitudinal study of engineering student performance and retention. III. Gender Differences in student performance and attitudes. Journal of Engineering Education, 84(2), 151.
33. Friend, C. L., & Cole, C. L. (1990). Learner control in CBI. Journal of Educational Technology, 20, 47-49.
34. Gunawardena, C. N., Lowe, C. A., & Anderson, T. (1997). Analysis of a global online debate and the development of an interaction analysis model for examining social construction of knowledge in computer conferencing. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 17, 397-431.
35. Hackman, J., & Oldham, G. (1976). Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 6, 250-279.
36. Hakkarainen, K., Lipponen, L., & Järvelä, S. (2002). Epistemology of inquiry and computer-supported collaborative learning. In T. Koschmann, R. Hall, & N. Miyake (Eds.), CSCL 2: Carrying forward the conversation (pp. 129-156). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
37. Hakkarainen, K., & Palonen, T. (2003). Patterns of female and male students' participation in peer interaction in computer-supported learning. Computers and Education, 40, 327-342.
38. Harasim, L., Hiltz, S., Teles, L., & Turoff, M. (1998). Learning networks: A field guide to teaching and learning online. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
39. Hare, A. P. (1994). Types of roles in small groups: A bit of history and a current perspective. Small Group Research, 25, 443-448.
40. Harper, B., Squires, D., & McDougall, A. (2000). Constructivist simulations: A new design paradigm. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 9(2), 115-130.
41. Holsti, O. (1969). Content analysis for the social sciences and humanities. Boston: Don Mills/Addison-Wesley.
42. Hox, J. J. (1994). Hierarchical regression models for interviewer and respondent effects. Sociological Methods and Research, 22, 300-318.
43. Hox, J. J., & Kreft, I. G. (1994). Multilevel analysis methods. Sociological Methods and Research, 22, 283-299.
44. Illera, J. (2001). Collaborative environments and task design in the university. Computers in Human Behavior, 17, 481-493.
45. James, V., Lederman Gerard, R., & Vagt-Traore, B. (2004). Enhancing creativity in the classroom. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved July 14, 2004, from http://www.coe.uga.edu/epltt/creativity.htm
46. Jeong, H., & Chi, M. T. H. (1997). Construction of shared knowledge during collaborative learning. In R. Hall, N. Miyake, & N. Enyede (Eds.), Proceedings of computer-supported collaborative learning' 97 (pp. 124-128). Toronto, Canada.
47. Johnson, D., Johnson, R., & Holubec. E. (1998). Cooperation in the classroom. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
48. Johnson, D., Johnson, R., & Johnson-Holubec, E. (1992). Advanced cooperative learning. Edina, MN: Interaction.
49. Jones, M. G. (1998). Creating engagement in computer-based learning environments (ITForum Paper No. 30). Retrieved, July 14, 2004, from http://itechl.coe.uga.edu/ itforum/paper30/disc30.html
50. Kagan, S. (1994). Cooperative learning. San Juan Capistrano, CA: Kagan Cooperative Learning.
51. Kollar, I., Fischer, F., & Hesse, F. W. (2003). Cooperation scripts for computer-supported collaborative learning. In B. Wasson, R. Baggetun, U. Hoppe, & S. Ludvigsen (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning-CSCL 2003, Community events-Communication and interaction (pp. 59-61). Bergen, Norway: InterMedia.
52. Kozma. R. B. ( 1991 ). Learning with media. Review of Educational Research, 61, 179-211.
53. Kreijns, K., & Bitter-Rijkema, M. (2002). An exploration of the virtual business team concept: Constructivism and the support for social negotiation. Retrieved July 22, 2002, from http://www.ouh.nl/info-alg-vb/docs/ defEuroCSCL%20KreijnsBitter.doc
54. Krippendorff, K. ( 1980). Content analysis, an introduction to its methodology. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
55. Kumar, V. S. (1996). Computer-supported collaborative learning: Issues for research. Retrieved August 16, 2004, from http://www.cs.usask.ca/grads/ vsk719/academic/890/ project2/project2.html
56. Linn, M., & Burbules, N. C. (1993). Construction of knowledge and group learning. In K. Tobin (Ed.), The practice of constructivism in science education (pp. 91-119). Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
57. Lockhorst, D., Admiraal, W. F., Pilot, A., & Veen, W. (2002). Design elements for a CSCL environment in a teacher training programme. Education and Information Technologies, 7, 377-384.
58. Lynch, R. (1991). Teaching in the 21 st century. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1, 144-186.
59. Mäkitalo, K., Weinberger, A., Häkkinen, P., & Fischer, F. (2004). Uncertainty-reducing cooperation scripts in online learning environments. Retrieved July 14, 2004, from http:/ /www.iwm-kmrc.de/workshops/ sim2004/pdf_files/Makitalo_etal.pdf
60. Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
61. Nurrenbern, S. (1995). Experiences in cooperative learning: A collection for chemistry teachers. Madison: Institute for Chemical Education, University of Wisconsin Board of Regents.
62. O'Donnell, A. N., & Dansereau, D. F. (1992). Scripted cooperation in student dyads: A method for analyzing and enhancing academic learning and performance. In R. Hertz-Lazarowitz & N. Miller (Eds.), Interactions in cooperative groups. The theoretical anatomy of group learning (pp. 120-141). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
63. Palloff, R., & Pratt, K. (1999). Promoting collaborative learning. Building learning communities in cyberspace: Effective strategies for the online classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
64. Petraglia, J. (1997). The rhetoric and technology of authenticity in education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
65. Quinn, C. N. (1997). Engaging learning (ITForum Paper No. 18). Retrieved July 12, 2004, from http://itech1.coe.uga.edu/itforum/paper18/paper18.html
66. Rasbash, J., Browne, W., Goldstein, H., Yang, M., Plewis, I., Healy, M., et al. (1999). A user's guide to MLwiN. London: Institute of Education.
67. Reio, T. G., & Wiswell, A. (2000). Field investigation of the relationship among adult curiosity, workplace learning, and job performance. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 11, 5-30.
68. Ren, Y. (2001 ). Simulating the role of transactive memory in group performance. In Proceedings of the 4th International Organizational Learning and Knowledge Management Conference. London: University of Western Ontario, Canada.
69. Roschelle, J. (1992). Learning by collaborating: Convergent conceptual change. Journal of the Learning Science, 2, 235-276.
70. Roschelle, J., & Pea, R. (1999). Trajectories from today's WWW to a powerful educational infrastructure. Educational Researcher, 28(5), 22-25.
71. Rose, M. A. (2002). Cognitive dialogue, interaction patterns, and perceptions of graduate students in an online conference environment under collaborative and cooperative structures. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
72. Rosser, S. V. (1997). Re-engineering female friendly science. New York: Teachers College Press.
73. Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2001). Methodological issues in the content analysis of computer conference transcripts. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 12, 8-22.
74. Salomon, G., & Globerson, T. (1989). When teams do not function the way they ought to. International Journal of Educational Research, 13(1), 89-99.
75. Sandier, B. R., Silverberg, L. A., & Hall, R. M. (1996). The chilly classroom climate: A guide to improve the education of women. Washington, DC: National Association for Women in Education.
76. Savery, J., & Duffy, T. M. (1996). Problem based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework. In B. Wilson (Ed.), Constructivist learning environments: Case studies in instructional design (pp. 135-148). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology.
77. Schellens, T., & Valcke, M. (2000). Re-engineering conventional university education: Implications for students' learning styles. Distance Education, 21, 361-384.
78. Schellens, T., & Valcke, M. (2002). Asynchrone discussiegroepen: Een onderzoek naar de invloed op cognitieve kennisverwerving [Asynchronous discussion groups: Investigat ing the influence on cognitive knowledge construction], Pedagogische Studien, 79, 451-468.
79. Schellens, T., & Valcke, M. (2005). Collaborative learning in asynchronous discussion groups: What about the impact on cognitive processing? Computers in Human Behavior, 21, 957-975.
80. Schellens, T., & Valcke, M. (in press). Fostering knowledge construction in university students through asynchronous discussion groups. Computers and Education.
81. Schellens, T., Van Keer, H., & Valcke, M. (in press). Learning in asynchronous discussion groups: A multilevel approach to study the influence of student, group, and task characteristics. Behaviour & Information Technology.
82. Slavin, R. E. (1995). Cooperative learning: Theory, research and practice, Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
83. Snijders, T. A. B., & Bosker, R. J. (1999). Multilevel analysis. London: Sage.
84. Spiro, R., Feltovich, P., Jacobson, M., & Coulson, R. (1988). Cognitive flexibility, constructivism, and hypertext: Random access instruction for advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domains. Retrieved September 20, 2002, from http:// www.ilt.columbia.edu/ilt/papers/Spiro.html
85. Sternberg, R. J. (1980). Sketch of a componential sub-theory of human intelligence. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3, 568-585.
86. Sternberg, R. J. (1997). Thinking styles. New York: Cambridge University Press.
87. Strijbos, J. W., Martens, R. L., Jochems, W. M. G., & Broers, N. J. (2004). The effect of functional roles on group efficiency: Using multilevel modelling and content analysis to investigate computer-supported collaboration in small groups. Small Group Research, 55, 195-229.
88. Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 2, 257-285.
89. Sweller, J. (1994). Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty and instructional design. Learning and Instruction, 4, 295-312.
90. Veerman, A., & Veldhuis-Diermanse, E. (2001). Collaborative learning through computer-mediated communication in academic education. In P. Dillenbourg, A. Eurelings, & K. Hakkarainen (Eds.), European perspectives on computer-supported collaborative learning. Proceedings of the First European Conference on CSCL (pp. 625-632). Maastricht, the Netherlands: University of Maastricht Press.
91. Wegner, D. M. (1987). Transactive memory: A contemporary analysis of the group mind. In B. Mullen & G. R. Goethals (Eds.), Theories of group behavior(pp. 185-208). New York: Springer-Verlag.
92. Weinberger, A. (2003). Scripts for computer-supported collaborative learning. Effects of social and epistemic cooperation scripts on collaborative knowledge construction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ludwig-Maximilians- Universität, Munich, Germany.
93. Weinberger, A., Reiserer, M., Ertl, B., Fischer, F., & Mandl, H. (2003). Facilitating collaborative knowledge construction in computer-mediated learning with structuring tools. In R. Bromme, F. Hesse, & H. Spada (Eds.), Barriers and biases in net based communication. Norwell, MA: Kluwer.
94. Westrom, M. (2001 ). Constructivist strategies for e-learning. Retrieved July 12, 2004, from http://www.cust.educ.ubc.ca/westrom/CSeL.htm
95. Workman, M. (2004). Performance and perceived effectiveness in computer-based and computer-aided education: Do cognitive styles make a difference? Computers in Human Behavior, 20, 517-534.
96. Wynder, M. (2005, February). Motivating creativity in the classroom. Paper presented at the International Conference on Innovation in Accounting Teaching & Learning, Tasmania, Australia.