Analyzing temporal patterns of knowledge construction in a role-based online discussion

International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning

Volumn 6, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 445-470

  Wise, Alyssa Friend ^a   Chiu, Ming Ming ^b  

^a SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY AT BUFFALO   (United States)

Author keywords

Asynchronous discussion groups; Computer mediated communication; Content analysis; Multilevel modeling; Quantitative analysis of CSCL; Role taking; Scripting; Temporal analysis

Indexed keywords

EID: 80052612354     PISSN: 15561607     EISSN: 15561615     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11412-011-9120-1     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Benjamini, Y., Krieger, A. M., & Yekutieli, D. (2006). Adaptive linear step-up procedures that control the false discovery rate. Biometrika, 93, 491-507.
2. Bryk, A. S., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1992). Hierarchical linear models. London: Sage.
3. Chiu, M. M. (2008a). Flowing toward correct contributions during groups' mathematics problem solving: A statistical discourse analysis. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 17(3), 415-463.
4. Chiu, M. M. (2008b). Creating new ideas during argumentation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 383-402.
5. Chiu, M. M., & Khoo, L. (2003). Rudeness and status effects during group problem solving. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 506-523.
6. Chiu, M. M., & Khoo, L. (2005). A new method for analyzing sequential processes: Dynamic multi-level analysis. Small Group Research, 36, 600-631.
7. Cohen, J., West, S. G., Aiken, L., & Cohen, P. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
8. Cress, U. (2008). The need for considering multilevel analysis in CSCL research: An appeal for the use of more advanced statistical methods. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3(1), 69-84.
9. Dansereau, D. F. (1988). Cooperative learning strategies. In C. E. Weinstein, E. T. Goetz, & P. A. Alexander (Eds.), Learning and study strategies: Issues in assessment, instruction, and evaluation (pp. 103-120). Orlando: Academic.
10. 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.
11. De Wever, B., van Keer, H., Schellens, T., & Valcke, M. (2007). Applying multilevel modeling to content analysis data: Methodological issues in the study of role assignment in asynchronous discussion groups. Learning and Instruction, 17(4), 436-447.
12. De Wever, B., Schellens, T., van Keer, H., & Valcke, M. (2008). Structuring asynchronous discussion groups by introducing roles: Do students act up to the assigned roles? Small Group Research, 39, 770-794.
13. De Wever, B., van Keer, H., Schellens, T., & Valcke, M. (2010). Roles as structuring tool in online discussion groups: The differential impact of different roles on social knowledge construction. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(4), 516-523.
14. Dillenbourg, P. (1999). What do you mean by collaborative learning? In P. Dillenbourg (Ed.), Collaborative-learning: Cognitive and computational approaches (pp. 1-19). Oxford: Elsevier.
15. Dillenbourg, P., & Jermann, P. (2007). Designing integrative scripts. In F. Fischer, H. Mandl, J. Haake, & I. Kollar (Eds.), Scripting computer-supported collaborative learning: Cognitive, computational, and educational perspectives (pp. 275-295). New York: Springer.
16. Goldstein, H. (1995). Multilevel statistical models. Sydney: Edward Arnold.
17. 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), 397-431.
18. Guzdial, M., & Turns, J. (2000). Effective discussion through a computer-mediated anchored forum. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(4), 437-469.
19. Haake, J. M., & Pfister, H. R. (2007). Flexible scripting in net-based learning groups. In F. Fischer, I. Kollar, H. Mandl, & J. M. Haake (Eds.), Scripting computer-supported cooperative learning: Cognitive, computational, and educational perspectives (pp. 155-175). New York: Springer.
20. Hara, N., Bonk, C. J., & Angeli, C. (2000). Content analyses of on-line discussion in an applied educational psychology course. Instructional Science, 28(2), 115-152.
21. Herring, S. (1999). Interactional coherence in CMC. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 4(4). doi: 10. 1111/j. 1083-6101. 1999. tb00106. x.
22. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1992). Positive interdependence: Key to effective cooperation. In R. Hertz-Lazarowitz & N. Miller (Eds.), Interaction in cooperative groups: The theoretical anatomy of group learning (pp. 174-199). New York: Cambridge University Press.
23. Kauffeld, S., & Meyers, R. A. (2009). Complaint and solution-oriented circles: Interaction patterns in work group discussions. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 18, 267-294.
24. Kennedy, P. (2004). A guide to econometrics. Cambridge: Blackwell.
25. King, A. (1997). ASK to THINK - TEL WHY®©: A model of transactive peer tutoring for scaffolding higher level complex learning. Educational Psychologist, 32(4), 221-235.
26. King, A. (2007). Scripting collaborative learning processes: A cognitive perspective. In F. Fischer, I. Kollar, H. Mandl, & J. Haake (Eds.), Scripting computer supported communication of knowledge: Cognitive, computational and educational perspectives (pp. 13-37). New York: Springer.
27. Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
28. Krull, J. L., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2001). Multilevel modeling of individual and group level mediated effects. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 36, 249-277.
29. Lally, V. (2001). Analysing teaching and learning interactions in a networked collaborative learning environment: Issues and work in progress. In Euro CSCL 2001 (pp. 397-405). Maastricht McLuhan Institute.
30. Lemke, J. L. (2000). Across the scales of time: Artifacts, activities, and meanings in ecosocial systems. Mind Culture and Activity, 7(4), 273-290.
31. Lund, K., Law, N., Rosé, C., Suthers, D., & Teplovs, C. (2009). Pinpointing pivotal moments in collaboration. Workshop held at the STELLARnet Alpine Rendez-Vous, Garmisch-Partenkirchen Germany.
32. Marra, R. M., Moore, J. L., & Klimczak, A. K. (2004). Content analysis of online discussion forums: A comparative analysis of protocols. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52, 23-40.
33. Mercer, N. (2008). The seeds of time. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 17, 33-59.
34. O'Donnell, A. M., & 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.), Interaction in cooperative groups: The theoretical anatomy of group learning (pp. 120-141). London: Cambridge University Press.
35. Paavola, S., Lipponen, L., & Hakkarainen, K. (2004). Models of innovative knowledge communities and three metaphors of learning. Review of Educational Research, 74, 557-576.
36. Palinscar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1(2), 117-175.
37. Pena-Shaff, J. B., & Nicholls, C. (2004). Analyzing student interactions and meaning construction in computer bulletin board discussions. Computers & Education, 42, 243-265.
38. Persell, C. H. (2004). Using focused web-based discussion to enhance student engagement and deep understanding. Teaching Sociology, 32, 61-78.
39. Piaget, J. (1985). Equilibration of cognitive structures: The central problem of cognitive development. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
40. Reimann, P. (2009). Time is precious: Variable- and event-centered approaches to process analysis in CSCL research. International Journal of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(3), 239-257.
41. Reyes P., & Tchounikine, P. (2003). Supporting emergence of threaded learning conversations through augmenting interactional and sequential coherence. Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, CSCL'2003, Bergen (Norway), 83-92.
42. Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing social presence in asynchronous text-based computer conferencing. Journal of Distance Education, 14(3), 51-70.
43. Schellens, T., van Keer, H., & Valcke, M. (2005). The impact of role assignment on knowledge construction in asynchronous discussion groups: A multilevel analysis. Small Group Research, 36(6), 704-745.
44. Schellens, T., van Keer, H., De Wever, B., & Valcke, M. (2007). Scripting by assigning roles: Does it improve knowledge construction in asynchronous discussion groups? International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2(2/3), 225-246.
45. Seo, K. K. (2007). Utilizing peer moderating in online discussions: Addressing the controversy between teacher moderation and nonmoderation. American Journal of Distance Education, 21(1), 21-36.
46. Sheskin, D. J. (1997). Parametric and nonparametric statistical procedures. CRC Press.
47. Stahl, G., & Rosé, C. P. (2011). Group cognition in online groups. In: E. Salas & S. M. Fiore (Eds.), Theories of team cognition: Cross-disciplinary perspectives. Routledge/Taylor & Francis.
48. Strijbos, J. W., Martens, R. L., Jochems, W. M. G., & Broers, N. J. (2004). The effect of functional roles on group efficiency: Using multilevel modeling and content analysis to investigate computer-supported collaboration in small groups. Small Group Research, 35, 195-229.
49. Tagg, A. C. (1994). Leadership from within: Student moderation of computer conferences. American Journal of Distance Education, 8(3), 40-50.
50. Thomas, M. J. W. (2002). Learning within incoherent structures: The space of online discussion forums. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18, 351-366.
51. Veerman, A., & Veldhuis-Diermanse, E. (2001). Collaborative learning through computer-mediated communication in academic education. In Euro CSCL 2001 (pp. 625-632). Maastricht: McLuhan institute, University of Maastricht.
52. Wee, J. D., & Looi, C. K. (2007). Model for analysing collaborative knowledge construction in a quasi-synchronous chat environment. Paper presented at the International Conference on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, Chat Analysis Workshop, New Brunswick, NJ.
53. Weinberger, A., & Fischer, F. (2006). A framework to analyze argumentative knowledge construction in computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers & Education, 46, 71-95.
54. Wise, A. F., Padmanabhan, P., & Saghafian, M. (2010a). Exploring learners' enactment experiences of functionally-specific assigned roles in online discussions. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Education Research Association, Denver, CO.
55. Wise, A. F., Saghafian, M., & Padmanabhan, P. (2010b). ASIMeC-F: A content analysis scheme for assessing the presence of conversational functions in asynchronous discussions. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Education Research Association, Denver, CO.
56. Wise, A. F., Saghafian, M., & Padmanabhan, P. (2011). Towards more precise design guidance. Specifying and testing the functions of assigned student roles in online discussions. Submitted for publication.
57. Xin, M. C., Glass, G., Feenberg, A., Bures, E. M., & Abrami, P. (2011). From active reading to active dialogue. In F. Pozzi & D. Persico (Eds.), Techniques for fostering collaboration in online learning communities: Theoretical and practical perspectives (pp. 300-318). Hershey: IGI Global Publishing.
58. Yang, Y., Newby, T. J., & Bill, R. L. (2005). Using Socratic questioning to promote critical thinking skills through asynchronous discussion forums in distance learning environments. American Journal of Distance Education., 19(3), 163-181.
59. Zhu, P. (1998). Learning and mentoring: Electronic discussion in a distance learning course. In C. J. Bonk & K. S. King (Eds.), Electronic collaborators: Learner-centered technologies for literacy, apprenticeship, and discourse (pp. 233-259). Mahwah: Erlbaum.