Effects of cueing and collaboration on the acquisition of complex legal skills

British Journal of Educational Psychology

Volumn 76, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 613-631

  Hummel, Hans G K ^a,b   Paas, Fred ^a   Koper, Rob ^a  

^a OPEN UNIVERSITY OF THE NETHERLANDS   (Netherlands)

^b Ctr for Educ Technol/Expertise   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACHIEVEMENT; APTITUDE; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; COGNITION; HUMAN; JURISPRUDENCE; LEARNING; MOTIVATION; QUESTIONNAIRE; TIME;

ACHIEVEMENT; APTITUDE; COGNITION; CUES; HUMANS; JURISPRUDENCE; LEARNING; MOTIVATION; QUESTIONNAIRES; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 33749347846     PISSN: 00070998     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1348/000709905X85629     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Barlow, C., Phelan, A., Harasym, P., & Myrick, F. (2004). Peer collaboration as a model for workplace learning in health care: Possibilities and challenges. Retrieved November 23, 2004, from http://www.wln.ualberta.ca/ papers/pdf/03.pdf
2. Beers, P. J., Boshuizen, H. P. A., & Kirschner, P. A. (2003). Agreeing to disagree: Perspective, negotiation and common ground. In P.A., Kirschner (Chair), The social psychological dimension of social interaction and the effects of cultural backgrounds in CSCL. Symposium conducted at the 10th EARLI Conference, Padova, Italy.
3. Bolger, N., Davis, A., & Rafaeli, E. (2003). Diary methods: Capturing life as it is lived. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 579-616.
4. Carletta, J., Isard, A., Kowto, J. C., Doherty-Sneddon, G., & Anderson, A. H. (1997). The reliability of dialogue structure coding scheme. Computational Linguistics, 23, 13-31.
5. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
6. Garafalo, J., & Lester, F. K. (1985). Metacognition, cognitive monitoring, and mathematical performance. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 16, 163-176.
7. Gunawardena, C. N., Carabajal, K., & Lowe, C. A. (2001). Critical analysis of models and methods used to evaluate online learning networks. Seattle: AERA.
8. 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(4), 395-429.
9. Henri, F. (1992). Computer-conferencing and content analysis. In A. R. Kaye (Ed.), Collaborative learning through computer conferencing: The Najaden papers (pp. 117-136). London: Springer-Verlag.
10. Henri, F. (1994). Distance learning and computer-mediated communication: Interactive, quasiinteractive or monologue? In C. O'Malley (Ed.), Computer supported collaborative learning (pp. 145-161). London: Springer-Verlag.
11. Heuvelmans, A. P. J. M., & Sanders, P. F. (1993). Beoordelaarsovereenstemming [Inter-rater reliability]. In T. Eggen & P. Sanders (Eds.), Psychometric in de praktijk [Psychonometry in practice] (pp. 443-471). Arnhem, The Netherlands: CITO.
12. Hummel, H. G. K., & Nadolski, R. J. (2002). Cueing for schema construction: Designing problem-solving multimedia practicals. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27(2), 229-249.
13. Hummel, H. G. K., Paas, F., & Koper, E. J. R. (2004). Cueing for transfer in multimedia programs: Process-worksheets vs. worked-out examples. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20(5), 387-397.
14. Hummel, H. G. K., Paas, F., & Koper, E. J. R. (2006). Timing of cueing in complex problem-solving tasks: Learner versus system control. Computers in Human Behavior, 22(2), 191-205.
15. Jeong, H., & Chi, M. T. H. (2000). Does collaborative learning lead to the construction of common knowledge? Retrieved July 9, 2004, from http://www.ircs.upenn.edu.edu/cogsci2000/PRCDNGS/SPRCDNGS/posters/jeo_chi.pdf
16. Land, S. M. (2000). Cognitive requirements for learning with open-ended learning Environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48, 61-78.
17. Mevarech, Z. R., & Kramarski, B. (2003). The effects of metacognitive training versus worked-out examples on students' mathematical reasoning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 449-471.
18. Nadolski, R. J., Kirschner, P. A., & Van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2005). Optimizing the number of steps in learning tasks for complex skills. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 223-237.
19. Nelson, L. M. (1999). Collaborative problem solving. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (pp. 241-267). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
20. Owen, M. (2000). Structure and discourse in a telematic learning environment. Educational technology & society, 3.3. Retrieved December 2, 2003, from http://ifets.ieee.otg/periodical/vol_3_2000/b04.html
21. Paas, F. (1992). Training strategies for attaining transfer of problem-solving skill in statistics: A cognitive load approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 429-434.
22. Paas, F., Tuovinen, J. E., & Van Gerven, P. W. M. (2003). Cognitive load measurement as a means to advance cognitive load theory. Educational Psychologist, 38, 63-71.
23. Pawar, K. S., & Sharifi, S. (1997). Physical or virtual team collocation: Does it matter? International Journal of Production Economics, 52(3), 283-290.
24. Pearce, J. A. I., & Ravlin, E. C. (1987). The design and activation of self regulating work groups. Human Relations, 40(11), 751-760.
25. Renkl, A. (2002). Worked-out examples: Instructional explanations support learning by self-explanations. Learning and Instruction, 12, 529-556.
26. Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979). Intra class correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86(2), 420-428.
27. Strijbos, J. W., & Martens, R. L. (2001). Coördinatieprocessen tijdens computerondersteund samenwerkend leren [Coordination processes during CSCL]. In P. A. Kirschner (Ed.), Factoren die collaboratief leren beinvloeden [Factors to influence collaborative learning]. Heerlen, The Netherlands: Open University of the Netherlands.
28. Taylor, K. L., & Dionne, J. -P. (2000). Accessing problem-solving strategy knowledge: The complementary use of concurrent verbal protocols and retrospective debriefing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(3), 413-425.
29. Van Bruggen, J., Kirschner, P. A., & Jochems, W. (2002). Representation of argumentation in CSCL and management of cognitive load. Learning and Instruction, 12(1), 121-138.
30. Van Gog, T., Paas, F., Van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Witte, P. (2005). Uncovering the problem-solving process: Cued retrospective reporting versus concurrent and retrospective reporting. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 11, 237-244.
31. Veldhuis-Diermanse, A. E. (2002). CSC learning?: Participation, learning activities and knowledge construction in computer-supported collaborative learning in higher education. Unpublished thesis, Wageningen University, The Netherlands.
32. Wever, B., de, Valcke, M., & Winckel, M. van. (2003) The impact of structure in CSCL environments: A study with medical students. Paper presented at CSCL 2003 Doctoral Consortium. Retrieved July 14, 2004, from http://www.interrnedia.uib.no/cscl/dic/files/dewever.pdf
33. Wiley, D. A., & Edwards, E. K. (2003). Online self-organizing social systems: The decentralized future of online learning. Retrieved March 12, 2004, from http://wiley.ed.usu.edu/docs/ososs.pdf
34. Wöretshofer, J., Nadolski, R. J., Starren-Weijenberg, A. M. A. G., Quanjel-Schreurs, R. A. M., Aretz, C. C. W. M., Van der Meer, N. H. W., Martyn, G., Van den Brink, H. J., Slootmaker, A., & Berkhout, J. (2000). Pleit voorbereid [Preparing a plea] (Version 1.0) [computer software]. Heerlen, The Netherlands: CIHO.
35. Yaffee, R. A. (1998). Enhancement of reliability analysis: Application of intra class correlations with SPSS. Retrieved March 11, 2003, from http://www.nyu.edu/acf/socsci/Docs/intracls.html