Beyond sharing: Engaging students in cooperative and competitive active learning

Educational Technology and Society

Volumn 11, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 82-96

  Kao, Gloria Yi Ming ^a   Lin, Sunny S J ^a   Sun, Chuen Tsai ^a  

^a NATIONAL CHIAO TUNG UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

Active learning; Competition; Cooperation; CSCL environment; Distributed sharing construction

Indexed keywords

EID: 54149094311     PISSN: 11763647     EISSN: 14364522     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Baker, M., Hansen, T., Joiner, R., & Traum, D. (1999). The role of grounding in collaborative learning tasks. In Dillenbourg, P. (Ed.), Collaborative learning: Cognitive and computational approaches, Amsterdam: Elsevier, 31-63.
2. Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Kulick, C. L. C., Kulick, J. A., & Morgan, M. T. (1991). The instructional effect of feedback in test-like events. Review of Educational Research, 61, 213-238.
3. Barron, R. S., Kerr, N. L., & Miller, N. (1992). Group process, group decision, group action. Bristol, PA: Open University Press.
4. Beers, P. J., Boshuizen, H. P. A., Kirschner, P. A., & Gijselaers, W. H. (2005). Computer support for knowledge construction in collaborative learning environments. Computers in Human Behavior, 21, 623-643.
5. Canas, A. J., Ford, K. M., Novak, J. D., Hayes, P., Reichherzer, T., & Suri, N. (2001). Online concept maps: Enhancing collaborative learning by using technology with concept maps. The Science Teacher, 68(2), 49-51.
6. Conn, S. R., & Rieke, M. L. (Eds.) (1994). 16PF (5th ed.): Technical manual. Champaign, IL: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing, Inc.
7. Crooks, T. J. (1988). The impact of classroom evaluation practices on students. Review of Educational Research, 58, 45-56.
8. Edmonds, G. S., & Pusch, R. (2002). Creating shared knowledge: Instructional knowledge management systems. Educational Technology & Society, 5(1), 100-104.
9. Falchikov, N. (1995). Peer feedback marking: Developing peer assessment. Innovations in Education & Training International, 32, 175-187.
10. Falchikov, N., & Magin, D. (1997). Detecting gender bias in peer marking of students' group process work. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 22, 385-396.
11. Freeman, M. (1995). Peer assessment by groups of group work. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 20, 289-300.
12. Greenberg, S., & Marwood, D. (1994). Real time groupware as a distributed system: Concurrency control and its effect on the interface. In Furuta, R. & Neuwirth, C. (Eds.), Proceedings of the ACM CSCW'94 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, New York: ACM Press, 207-217.
13. Häkkinen, P., Järvelä, S., & Mäkitalo, K. (2003). Sharing perspectives in virtual interaction: Review of methods of analysis. In Wasson, B., Ludvigsen, S. & Hoppe, U. (Eds.), Designing for change in networked learning environments, Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer-Support for Collaborative Learning, Dortrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 395-404.
14. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (1998). Active learning: Cooperation in the college classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction Book.
15. Johnson, D. W., Maruyama, G., Johnson, R., Nelson, D., & Skon, L. (1981). Effects of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic goal structures on achievement: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 89, 47-62.
16. Katz, Y. J. (2002). Attitudes affecting college students' preferences for distance learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18(1), 2-9.
17. Komis, V., Avouris, N., & Fidas, C. (2002). Computer-supported collaborative concept mapping: Study of interaction. Education and Information Technologies, 7(2), 169-188.
18. Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P. A., & Jochems, W. (2002). Sociability in computer-supported collaborative learning environments. Educational Technology & Society, 5(1), 8-22.
19. Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C. L. C. (1988). Timing of feedback and verbal learning. Review of Educational Research, 58, 79-97.
20. Lin, S. S. J., Liu, E. Z. F., & Yuan, S. M. (2002). Student attitudes toward networked peer assessment: Case studies of undergraduate students and senior high school students. International Journal of Instructional Media, 29(2), 241-254.
21. Lin, S. S. J., Sun, C. T., & Kao, G. Y. M. (2002). Designing a networked-sharing construction environment. British Journal of Educational Technology, 33(4), 489-492.
22. Liu, E. Z. F., Lin, S. S. J., & Yuan, S. M. (2002). Alternatives to instructor assessment: A case study of comparing self and peer assessment with instructor assessment under networked innovative assessment procedures. International Journal of Instructional Media, 29(4), 1-10.
23. Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2000). Engaging students in active learning: The case for personalized multimedia messages. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(4), 724-733.
24. McCarthy, C., Bligh, J., Jennings, K., & Tangney, B. (2005). Virtual collaborative learning environments for music: Networked drumsteps. Computers & Education, 44(2), 173-195.
25. Mulder, I., & Swaak, J. (2002). Assessing group learning and shared understanding in technology-mediated interaction. Educational Technology & Society, 5(1), 35-47.
26. Mulder, I., Swaak, J., & Kessels, J. (2004). In search of reflective behavior and shared understanding in ad hoc expert teams. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 7(2), 141-154.
27. Novak, J. D., & Gowin, D. B. (1984). Learning how to learn. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
28. O'Reilly, T. (2005). What is Web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. Retrieved October 30, 2006, from http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web20.html
29. Rada, R. (1998). Efficiency and effectiveness in computer-supported peer-peer learning. Computers and Education, 30(/44), 137-146.
30. Resnick, M. (1996). Distributed constructionism. Proceedings of the International Conference on Learning Science, Northwestern University. Retrieved May 20, 2004, from http://llk.media.mit.edu/papers/archive/ DistribConstruc.html
31. Resnick, M. (2002). Rethinking learning in the digital age. In Kirkman, G. (Ed.), The global information technology report: Readiness for the networked word, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 32-37.
32. Roschelle, J., & Teasley, S. (1995). The construction of shared knowledge in collaborative problem solving. In O'Malley, C. E. (Ed.), Computer supported collaborative learning, Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, 69-97.
33. Roth W. M., & Roychoudhury, A. (1992). The social construction of scientific concepts or the concept map as a conscription device and tool for social thinking in high school science. Science Education, 76,531-557.
34. Ruiz-Primo, M. A., & Shavelson, R. J. (1996). Problems and issues in the use of concept maps in science assessment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(6), 569-600.
35. Saulsman, L. M., & Page, A. C. (2004). The five-factor model and personality disorder empirical literature: A metaanalytic review. Clinical Psychology Review, 23, 1055-1085.
36. Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1991). Higher levels of agency for children in knowledge building: A challenge for the design of new knowledge media. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 1(1), 37-68.
37. Stahl, G. (2005). Group cognition in computer-assisted collaborative learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21, 79-90.
38. Strachan, I. B., & Wilcox, S. (1996). Peer and self assessment of group work: Developing an effective response to increased enrollment in a third year course in microclimatology. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 20(3), 343-353.
39. Suthers, D. (2005). Technology affordances for intersubjective learning: A thematic agenda for CSCL. Paper presented at the International Conference of Computer Support for Collaborative Learning, May 30-June 4, 2005, Taipei, Taiwan.
40. Tauer, J. M., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2004). The effects of cooperation and competition on intrinsic motivation and performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(6), 849-861.
41. Topping, K. J. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research, 68, 249-276.
42. Turner, J. C., Meyer, D. K., Cox, K. E., Logan, C., DiCintio, M., & Thomas, C. (1998). Creating contexts for involvement in mathematics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(4), 730-745.
43. Van Lehn, K. A., Chi, M. T. H., Baggett, W., & Murray, R. C. (1995). Progress report: Towards a theory of learning during tutoring. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Learning Research and Development Center.
44. Yang, S. J. H., Chen, I. Y. L., & Shao, N. W. Y. (2004). Ontology enabled annotation and knowledge management for collaborative learning in virtual learning community. Educational Technology & Society, 7(4), 70-81.