Investigating student engagement in computer-supported inquiry: A process-oriented analysis

Social Psychology of Education

Volumn 11, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 299-322

  Järvelä, Sanna ^a   Veermans, Marjaana ^b   Leinonen, Piritta ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OULU   (Finland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TURKU   (Finland)

Author keywords

Cognition; Computer supported learning; Engagement; Inquiry learning; Motivation; Process oriented analysis; Qualitative analysis

Indexed keywords

EID: 46349097519     PISSN: 13812890     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11218-007-9047-6     Document Type: Article

References (90)

1. Ainley M. (1993). Styles of engagement in learning: Multidimensional assessment of their relationship with strategy use and school achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology 85, 395-405
2. Ainley M., Hillman K., Hidi S. (2002). Gender and interest processes in response to literary texts: Situational and individual interest. Learning and Instruction 12, 411-428
3. Ames C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology 84, 261-271
4. Ames C., Archer J. (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology 80, 260-267
5. Barab S.A., Duffy T. (2000). From practice fields to communities of practice. In: Jonassen D., Land S.M. (eds). Theoretical foundations of learning environments. Mahwah, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc, pp. 25-56
6. Bazeley P., Richards L. (2000). The NVivo qualitative project book. London, Sage
7. Bereiter C., Scardamalia M. (1993). Surpassing ourselves. An inquiry into the nature and implications of expertise. Chicago, IL, Open Court
8. Blumenfeld P.C., Soloway E., Marx R.W., Krajcik J.S., Guzdial M., Palinscar A.S. (1991). Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational Psychologist 26, 369-398
9. Boekarts M., Pintrich P.R., Zeidner M. (eds). (2000). Handbook of self-regulation. San Diego, CA, Academic Press
10. Chi M. (1997). Quantifying qualitative analyses of verbal data: A practical guide. The Journal of the Learning Sciences 6(3): 271-315
11. Clarebout G., Elen J. (2001). The Parl EuNet-project: Problems with the validation of socio-constructivist design principles in ecological settings. Computers in Human Behavior 17, 453-464
12. Cobb P., Bowers J. (1999). Cognitive and situated learning perspectives in theory and practice. Educational Researcher 2, 4-15
13. Cobb P., Stephan M., Mc Clain K., Gravemeijer K. (2001). Participating in classroom mathematical practices. The Journal of the Learning Sciences 10(1 & 2): 113-163
14. Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1992). The Jasper series as an example of anchored instruction: Theory, program description, and assessment data. Educational Psychologist 27, 231-315.
15. Csikszentmihalyi M., Larson R. (1987). Validity and reliability of the experience-sampling method. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease 175(9): 526-536
16. Csikszentmihalyi M., Nakamura J. (1989). The dynamics of intrinsic motivation: A study of adolescents. In: Ames C., Ames R. (eds). Motivation in education: Vol 3. Goals and cognitions. San Diego, CA, Academic Press, pp. 45-71
17. De Corte E., Verschaffel L., Entwistle N., Van Merriëboer J. (eds). (2003). Unravelling basic components and dimensions of powerful learning environments. Oxford, Elsevier
18. Dowson M., McInerney D.M. (2001). Psychological parameters of students' social and work avoidance goals: A qualitative investigation. Journal of Educational Psychology 93, 35-42
19. Duda J.L. (1989). Goal perspectives and behavior in sport and exercise settings. In: Maehr M., Ames C. (eds). Advances in motivation and achievement. Greenwich, CT, JAI Press, pp. 81-116
20. Dweck C.S., Leggett E.L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review 95, 256-273
21. Edelson D.C., Gordin D.N., Pea R.D. (1999). Addressing the challenges of inquiry-based learning through technology and curriculum design. The Journal of the Learning Sciences 8, 391-450
22. Finn J.D., Pannozzo G.M., Voelkl K.E. (1995). Disruptive and inattentive withdrawn behaviour and achievement in fourth graders. Elementary School Journal 95, 421-454
23. Fredricks J.A., Blumenfeld P.C., Paris A.H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of evidence. Review of Educational research 74(1): 59-109
24. Goldman, S. R., Mayfield-Stewart, C., Bateman, H. V., Pellegrino, J. W., & The Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1998). Environments that support meaningful learning. In L. Hoffman, A. Krapp, & K. A. Renniger (Eds.), Interest and learning: Proceedings of the Seeon conference on interest and gender (pp. 181-196). Kiel, Germany: IPN.
25. Graham S., Golan S. (1991). Motivational influences on cognition: Task engagement, ego engagement, and depth of information processing. Journal of Educational Psychology 83, 187-194
26. Greeno J.G., the MSMTAPG (1998). The situativity of knowing, learning, and research. American Psychologist 53, 5-16
27. Guthrie, J. T., & Wigfield, A. (Eds.) (1997). Reading engagement: Motivating readers through integrated instruction. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
28. Hadwin A., Winne P., Stockley D., Nesbit J., Woszczyna C. (2001). Context moderates students' self-reports about how they study. Journal of Educational Psychology 93(3): 477-487
29. Hakkarainen K., Lipponen L., Järvelä S. (2002). Epistemology of inquiry and computer-supported collaborative learning. In: Koschmann T., Miyake N., Hall R. (eds). CSCL2: Carrying forward the conversation. Mahwah NJ, Erlbaum, pp.129-156
30. Hakkarainen K., Sintonen M. (2002). Interrogative approach on inquiry and computer-supported collaborative learning. Science & Education 11, 25-43
31. Hartley K., Bendixen L.D. (2001). Educational research in the Internet age: Examining the role of individual characteristics. Educational Researcher 30(9): 22-26
32. Helme S., Clarke D.J. (2001). Cognitive engagement in the mathematics classroom. In: Clarke D. (ed). Perspectives on practice and meaning in mathematics and science classrooms. Dordrecht, Kluwer, pp. 131-154
33. Hickey D.T., Moore A.L., Pellegrino J.W. (2001). The motivational and academic consequences of elementary mathematics environments: Do constructivist innovations and reforms make a difference?. American Educational Research Journal 38, 611-652
34. Hidi S. (2001). Interest, reading, and learning: Theoretical and practical considerations. Educational Psychology Review 13, 191-209
35. Hug B., Krajcik J., Marx R. (2005). Using innovative learning technologies to promote learning and engagement in an urban science classroom. Urban Education 40, 446-472
36. Järvelä S. (1998). Socioemotional aspects of students' learning in cognitive-apprenticeship environment. Instructional Science 26, 439-471
37. Järvelä S., Hakkarainen K., Lehtinen E., Lipponen L. (2001a). Creating computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) culture in Finnish schools: Research perspectives on sociocognitive effects. International Journal of Continuing Engineering Education and Life-Long Learning, 11, 365-374
38. Järvelä S., Lehtinen E., Salonen P. (2000). Socioemotional orientation as a mediating variable in teaching learning interaction: Implications for instructional design. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research 44(3): 293-306
39. Järvelä, S., Salonen, P., & Lepola, J. (2001b). Dynamic assessment as a key to understanding student motivation in a classroom context. In P. Pintrich & M. Maehr (Eds.), Advances in research on motivation: New directions in measures and methods (Vol. 12, pp. 217-240). Elsevier.
40. Järvelä S., Salovaara H. (2004). The interplay of motivational goals and cognitive strategies in a new pedagogical culture. European Psychologist 9, 232-244
41. Krajcik J., Blumenfeld P.C., Marx R.W., Bass K.M., Fredricks J., Soloway E. (1998). Inquiry in project-based science classrooms: Initial attempts by middle school students. The Journal of the Learning Sciences 7(3&4): 313-350
42. Krajcik J.S., Blumenfeld P.C., Marx R.W., Soloway E. (2000). Instructional, curricular and technological supports for inquiry in science classrooms. In: Minstrill J., van Zee E.H. (eds). Inquiring into inquiry learning and teaching in science. Washington, DC, American Association for the Advancement of Science, pp. 283-315
43. Kyza, E., Golan, R., Reiser, B. J., & Edelson, D. C. (2002). Reflective inquiry: Enabling group self-regulation in inquiry-based science using the Progress Portfolio tool. In G. Stahl (Ed.), Computer support for collaborative learning: Foundations for a CSCL community. Proceedings of CSCL 2002, Boulder, Colorado, 7-11, January 2002, (pp. 227-236). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
44. Land S.M. (2000). Cognitive requirements for learning with open-ended learning environments. Educational Technology 48(3): 61-75
45. Leinonen P., Järvelä S., Lipponen L. (2003). Individual students' interpretations of their contribution to the computer-mediated discussions. Journal of Interactive Learning Research 14(1): 99-122
46. Maehr M.L., Midgley C. (1991). Enhancing student motivation: A schoolwide approach. Educational Psychologist 26, 399-427
47. Mäkitalo K., Weinberger A., Häkkinen P., Järvelä S., Fischer F. (2005). Epistemic cooperation scripts in online learning environments: Fostering learning by reducing uncertainty in discourse?. Computers in Human Behavior 21(4): 603-622
48. Mayring, P. (2000). Qualitative content analysis. Forum Qualitative Social Research, 1, (2). http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs
49. Minstrell J. (2000). Implications for teaching and learning inquiry: A summary. In: Minstrell J., van Zee E.H. (eds). Inquiring into inquiry learning and teaching in science. Washington D.C., AAAS, pp. 471-496
50. Montgomery H., Sharafi P., Hedman L. (2004). Engaging in activities involving information technology: Dimensions, modes, and flow. Human Factors 46, 334-348
51. Muukkonen H., Lakkala M., Hakkarainen K. (2005). Technology-mediation and tutoring: How do they shape progressive inquiry discourse?. The Journal of the Learning Sciences 14(4): 527-565
52. Nicholls J., Cobb P., Wood T., Yackel E., Patashnick M. (1990). Goals and beliefs in mathematics: Individual differences and consequences of a constructivist curriculum. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 21, 109-122
53. Nicholls J. (1984). Achievement motivation: Conceptions of ability, subjective experience, task choice, and performance. Psychological Review 91, 328-346
54. Nicholls J. (1989). The competitive ethos and democratic education. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press
55. Niemivirta M. (1998). Individual differences in motivational and cognitive factors affecting self-regulated learning - A pattern-oriented approach. In: Nenninger P., Jäger R.S., Frey A., Wosnitza M. (eds). Advances in motivation. Landau Germany, Verlag Empirische Pädagogik, pp. 23-42
56. Nisbett R., Wilson T. (1977). Telling more than we know: Verbal reports on mental processes. Psychological Review 84(3): 231-259
57. Perry N. (2002). Using qualitative methods to enrich understanding of self-regulated learning. Introduction to the special issue. Educational Psychologist 37(1): 1-3
58. Peshkin A. (2000). The nature of interpretation in qualitative research. Educational Researcher 29(9): 5-9
59. Peterson P.L., Fennema E. (1985). Effective teaching, student engagement in classroom activities, and sex-related differences in learning mathematics. American Educational Research Journal 22(3): 309-335
60. Pintrich, P. (1989). The dynamic interplay of student motivation and cognition in the college classroom. In M. Maehr & C. Ames (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement, Vol.6: Motivation enhancing environments. Greenwich, Connecticut: JAI Press.
61. Pintrich P., De Groot E. (1990). Motivated and self-regulated learning components of academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology 82, 33-40
62. Reed J.L., Hagen A.S., Wicker F.W., Schallert D.L. (1996). Engagement as a temporal dynamic: Affective factors in studying for exams. Journal of Educational Psychology 88(1): 101-109
63. Reed J.H., Schallert D.L., Deithloff L.F. (2002). Investigating self-regulation and engagement processes. Educational Psychologist 37(1): 53-57
64. Renninger L.A., Hidi S. (2002). Student interest and achievement: Developmental issues raised by a case study. In: Wigfield A., Eccles J.S. (eds). Development of achievement motivation. San Diego, CA, Academic Press, pp. 173-195
65. Roth W.-M. (1999). Authentic school science: Intellectual traditions. In: McCormick R., Paechter C. (eds). Learning and knowledge. London, Paul Chapman Publishing, pp. 6-20
66. Säljö, R. (2001). Oppimiskäytännöt. Sosiokulttuurinen näkökulma (Learning in practice. A sociocultural perspective). Helsinki: WSOY. (Original work published in Swedish: Säljö, R. (2000). Lärande i praktiken. Ett sociokulturellt perspektiv. Stockholm: Prisma, 2000).
67. Säljö, R. (2001). Oppimiskäytännöt. Sosiokulttuurinen näkökulma (Learning in practice. A sociocultural perspective). Helsinki: WSOY. (Original work published in Swedish: Säljö, R. (2000). Lärande i praktiken. Ett sociokulturellt perspektiv. Stockholm: Prisma, 2000).
68. Salomon G. (ed). (1993). Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations. New York, NY, Cambridge University Press
69. Salonen P., Lepola J., Niemi P. (1998). The development of first graders' reading skill as a function of pre-school motivational orientation and phonemic awareness. European Journal of Psychology of Education 13(2): 155-174
70. Salonen, P., Lepola, J., Vauras, M., Rauhanummi, T, Lehtinen, E., & Kinnunen, R. (1994). Diagnostiset testit 3: Motivaatio, metakognitio ja matematiikka [Diagnostic tests 3: Motivation, metacognition and mathematics]. Turku: Centre for Learning Research, University of Turku, Painosalama.
71. Salovaara, H., & Järvelä, S. (2007). Longitudinal analysis of motivational goals - Contrasting self-reports and process-oriented interviews (Submitted).
72. Scardamalia M., Bereiter C. (1994). Computer support for knowledge building communities. The Journal of the Learning Sciences 1, 37-68
73. Shirouzu H., Miyake N., Masukawa H. (2002). Cognitively active externalization for situated reflection. Cognitive Science 26, 469-501
74. Silk J., Steinberg L., Morris A. (2003). Adolescents' emotion regulation in daily life: Links to depressive symptoms and problem behaviour. Child Development 74(6): 1896-1880
75. Singer J., Marx R., Krajick J., Chambers J. (2000). Constructing extended inquiry projects: Curriculum materials for science education reform. Educational Psychologist 35(3): 165-178
76. Skinner E.A., Belmont M.J. (1993). Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal effects of teacher behavior and student engagement across the school year. Journal of Educational Psychology 85, 571-581
77. Skinner E.A., Wellborn J.G., Connell J.P. (1990). What it takes to do well in school and whether I've got it: A process model of perceived control and children's engagement and achievement in school. Journal of Educational Psychology 82(1): 22-32
78. Snow R.E. (1989). Aptitude-treatment interactions as a framework of research in individual differences in learning. In: Ackerman P.L., Sternberg R.J., Glaser R. (eds). Learning and individual differences: Advances in theory and research. New York, Freeman, pp. 11-34
79. Strijbos J.-W., Kirschner P., Martens R. (eds). (2004) What we know about CSCL : And implementation it in higher education. Kluwer, Boston
80. Stone A.A., Schwartz J.E., Marco C.A, Cruise L.J., Shiffman S., Hickox M. (1998). A comparison of coping assessed by ecological momentary assessment and retrospective recall. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 74, 1670-1680
81. Tapola, A., Hakkarainen, K., Syri, J., Lipponen, L., Palonen, T., & Niemivirta, M. (2001). Motivation and participation in computer-supported collaborative learning. In P. Dillenbourg, A. Eurelings, & K. Hakkarainen (Eds.), European perspectives on computer-supported collaborative learning. Proceedings of the First European Conference on CSCL (pp. 585-592). McLuhan Maastricht, the Netherlands: Maastricht McLuhan Institute.
82. Turner J.C., Meyer D.K., Cox K.E., Logan C., DiCintio M., Thomas C.T. (1998). Creating context for engagement in mathematics. Journal of Educational Psychology 90(4): 730-745
83. Veermans M., Järvelä S. (2004). Generalized achievement goals and situational coping in inquiry learning. Instructional Science 32, 269-291
84. Veermans M., Tapola A. (2004). Primary school students' motivational profiles in longitudinal settings. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research 48, 373-395
85. Volet S., Järvelä S. (eds). (2001). Motivation in learning context. Theoretical advances and methodological implications. Amsterdam, Elsevier Science
86. Weinberger A., Ertl B., Fischer F., Mandl H. (2005). Epistemic and social scripts in computer-supported collaborative learning. Instructional Science 33(1): 1-30
87. Wentzel K.R. (2002). The contribution of social goal setting to children's school adjustment. In: Wigfield A., Eccles J.E. (eds). Development of achievement motivation. San Diego CA, Academic Press, pp. 221-246
88. Winters, F. I., Azevedo, R., & Levin, D. (2004). How do high-school students regulate their learning when using a computer-based environment for collaboratively engage in inquiry? A paper presented at the annual conference of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA, 12-16 April 2004.
89. Zimmerman B.J. (1989). Models of self-regulated learning and academic achievement. An overview and analysis. In: Zimmerman B.J., Schunk D.H. (eds). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical perspectives. Mahwah, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 1-38
90. Zimmerman B.J., Martinez-Pons M. (1989). Student differences in self-regulated learning: Relating grade, sex, and giftedness to self-efficacy and strategy use. Journal of Educational Psychology 82, 51-59