Toward a dialectic relation between the results in CSCL: Three critical methodological aspects of content analysis schemes

International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning

Volumn 5, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 117-136

  Clarà, Marc ^a   Mauri, Teresa ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BARCELONA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Content analysis; Critical methodological decisions; CSCL; Dialectics

Indexed keywords

EID: 76649139133     PISSN: 15561607     EISSN: 15561615     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11412-009-9078-4     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Arnseth, H. C., & Ludvigsen, S. (2006). Approaching institutional contexts: Systemic versus dialogic research in CSCL. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1, 167-185.
2. Arvaja, M., Salovaara, H., Häkkinen, P., & Järvelä, S. (2007). Combining individual and group-level perspectives for studying collaborative knowledge construction in context. Learning and Instruction, 17, 448-459.
3. 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.
4. Beers, P. J., Kirschner, P. A., Boshizen, H. P. A., & Gijselaers, W. H. (2007a). ICT-support for grounding in the classroom. Instructional Science, 35, 535-556.
5. Beers, P. J., Boshuizen, H. P. A., Kirschner, P. A., & Gijselaers, W. H. (2007b). The analysis of negotiation of common ground in CSCL. Learning and Instruction, 17, 427-435.
6. Biggs, J. B., & Collis, K. F. (1982). Evaluating the quality of learning: The SOLO Taxonomy. New York: Academic.
7. Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives-the classification of educational goals, handbook 1 cognitive domain. London: Longman Group.
8. Chi, M. T. H. (1996). Constructing self-explanations and scaffolded explanations in tutoring. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 10, 33-49.
9. Cole, M. (1996). Cultural psychology. A once and future discipline. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
10. Coll, C., Colomina, R., Onrubia, J., & Rochera, M. J. (1995). Actividad conjunta y habla: Una aproximación a los mecanismos de influencia educativa [Joint activity and speech: An approach to the mechanisms of educational influence]. In P. Fernández Berrocal, & M. A. Melero (Comps.), La interacción social en contextos educativos (pp. 193-326). Madrid: Siglo XXI.
11. De Laat, M., Lally, V., Lipponen, L., & Simons, R.-J. (2007). Online teaching in networked learning communities: A multi-method approach to studying the role of the teacher. Instructional Science, 35, 257-286.
12. De Smet, M., van Keer, H., & Valcke, M. (2008). Blending asynchronous discussion groups and peer tutoring in higher education: An exploratory study of online peer tutoring behaviour. Computers & Education, 50, 207-223.
13. De Wever, B., Schellens, T., Valcke, M., & van Keer, H. (2006). Content analysis schemes to analyze transcripts of online asynchronous discussion groups: A review. Computers & Education, 46, 6-28.
14. De Wever, B., van Keer, H., Schellens, T., & Valcke, M. (2007). Applying multilevel modelling to content analysis data: Methodological issues in the study of role assignment in asynchronous discussion groups. Learning and Instruction, 17, 436-447.
15. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105.
16. Garrison, D. R., & Arbaugh, J. B. (2007). Researching the community of inquiry framework: Review, issues, and future directions. Internet and Higher Education, 10, 157-172.
17. Gerbic, P., & Stacey, E. (2005). A purposive approach to content analysis: Designing analytical frameworks. Internet and Higher Education, 8, 45-59.
18. Gunawardena, Ch 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), 397-431.
19. Häkkinen, P., & Järvelä, S. (2006). Sharing and constructing perspectives in web-based conferencing. Computers & Education, 47, 433-447.
20. Ho, C.-H., & Swan, K. (2007). Evaluating online conversation in an asynchronous learning environment: An application of Grice's cooperative principle. Internet and Higher Education, 10, 3-14.
21. Järvelä, S., & Häkkinen, P. (2002). Web-based cases in teaching and learning-the quality of discussions and a stage of perspective taking in asynchronous communication. Interactive Learning Environments, 10, 1-22.
22. Järvenoja, H., & Järvelä, S. (2009). Emotion control in collaborative learning situations: Do students regulate emotions evoked by social challenges? British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 463-481.
23. Jeong, A., & Joung, S. (2007). Scaffolding collaborative argumentation in asynchronous discussions with message constraints and message labels. Computers & Education, 48, 427-445.
24. Krippendorff, K. (1980). Content analysis. An introduction to its methodology. Beverly Hills: Sage.
25. Lai, M., & Law, N. (2006). Peer scaffolding of knowledge building through collaborative groups with differential learning experiences. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 35(2), 123-144.
26. Linell, P. (1998). Approaching dialogue. Talk, interaction and contexts in dialogical perspectives. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
27. Mazzolini, M., & Maddison, S. (2007). When to jump in: The role for the instructor in online discussion forums. Computers & Education, 49, 193-213.
28. Naidu, S., & Järvelä, S. (2006). Analysing CMC content for what? Computers & Education, 46, 96-103.
29. Pata, K., Sarapuu, T., & Lehtinen, E. (2005). Tutor scaffolding styles of dilemma solving in network-based role-play. Learning and Instruction, 15, 571-587.
30. Puntambekar, S. (2006). Analysing collaborative interactions: Divergence, shared understanding and construction of knowledge. Computers & Education, 47, 332-351.
31. Redmond, P., & Lock, J. V. (2006). A flexible framework for online collaborative learning. Internet and Higher Education, 9, 267-276.
32. Resta, P. E., & Laferrière, T. (2007). Technology in support of collaborative learning. Educational Psychology Review, 19, 65-83.
33. Rourke, L., & Anderson, T. (2004). Validity in quantitative content analysis. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52, 5-18.
34. Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (1999). Assessing social presence in asynchronous text-based computer conferencing. Journal of Distance Education, 14(2), 50-71.
35. 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(1), 8-22.
36. Salmon, G. (2000). A model for CMC in education and training. E-moderating. The key to teaching and learning online. London: Kogan Page.
37. Schellens, T., & Valcke, M. (2006). Fostering knowledge construction in university students through asynchronous discussion groups. Computers & Education, 46, 349-370.
38. Schrire, S. (2004). Interaction and cognition in asynchronous computer conferencing. Instructional Science, 32, 475-502.
39. Schrire, S. (2006). Knowledge building in asynchronous discussion groups: Going beyond quantitative analysis. Computers & Education, 46, 49-70.
40. Sparatiu, A., Hartley, K., Schraw, G., Bendixen, L. D., & Quinn, L. F. (2007). The influence of the discussion leader procedure on the quality of arguments in online discussions. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 37(1), 83-103.
41. Stahl, G. (2005). Group cognition in computer-assisted collaborative learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21, 79-90.
42. Stahl, G., Koschmann, T., & Suthers, D. D. (2006). Computer-supported collaborative learning. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 409-425). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
43. Stein, D. S., Wanstreet, C. E., Glazer, H. R., Engle, C. L., Harris, R. A., Johnston, S. M., et al. (2007). Creating shared understanding through chats in a community of inquiry. Internet and Higher Education, 10, 103-115.
44. Strijbos, J. W., & Stahl, G. (2007). Methodological issues in developing a multi-dimensional coding procedure for small-group chat communication. Learning and Instruction, 17, 394-404.
45. Strijbos, J. W., Martens, R. L., Prins, F. J., & Jochems, W. M. G. (2006). Content analysis: What are they talking about? Computers & Education, 46, 29-48.
46. Strijbos, J. W., Martens, R. L., Jochems, W. M. G., & Broers, N. J. (2007). The effect of functional roles on perceived group efficiency during computer-supported collaborative learning: A matter of triangulation. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 353-380.
47. Suthers, D. D. (2006). Technology affordances for intersubjective meaning making: A research agenda for CSCL. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1, 315-337.
48. Tolman, C. (1981). The metaphysic of relations in Klaus Riegel's "Dialectics" of human development. Human Development, 24, 33-51.
49. Tseng, S.-C., & Tsai, C.-C. (2007). On-line peer assessment and the role of the peer feedback: A study of high school computer course. Computers & Education, 49, 1161-1174.
50. Vaughan, N., & Garrison, D. R. (2005). Creating cognitive presence in a blended faculty development community. Internet and Higher Education, 8, 1-12.
51. 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: McLuhan Institute, University of Maastricht.
52. Vygotsky, L. S. (1997). The historical meaning of the crisis on psychology: A methodological investigation. In R. W. Rieber & J. Wollock (Eds.), The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky. Volume 3. Problems of the theory and history of psychology (pp. 233-343). New York: Plenum.
53. Weinberger, A., & Fischer, F. (2006). A framework to analyze argumentative knowledge construction in computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers & Education, 46, 71-95.
54. Weinberger, A., Fischer, F., & Stegmann, K. (2005). Computer-supported collaborative learning in higher education: Scripts for argumentative knowledge construction in distributed groups. Proceedings of the 2005 conference on computer support for collaborative learning (pp. 717-726).
55. Wells, G. (1999). Dialogic inquiry: Towards a sociocultural practice and theory of education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
56. Woo, Y., & Reeves, T. C. (2007). Meaningful interaction in web-based learning: A social constructivist interpretation. Internet and Higher Education, 10, 15-25.
57. Woodrum, E. (1984). "Mainstreaming" content analysis in social science: Methodological advantages, obstacles, and solutions. Social Science Research, 13, 1-19.
58. Zemel, A., Xhafa, F., & Cakir, M. (2007). What's in the mix? Combining coding and conversation analysis to investigate chat-based problem solving. Learning and Instruction, 17, 405-415.
59. Zumbach, J., Reimann, P., & Koch, S. C. (2006). Monitoring students' collaboration in computer-mediated collaborative problem-solving: Applied feedback approaches. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 35(4), 399-424.