Towards the convergence of CSCL and inquiry learning: Scripting collaborative inquiry learning

Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Conference, CSCL

Volumn 8, Issue PART 2, 2007, Pages 829-830

  Stegmann, Karsten ^a   Kollar, Ingo ^b   Zottmann, Jan ^b   Gijlers, Hannie ^b   De Jong, Ton ^a   Dillenbourg, Pierre ^c   Slotta, James D ^d   Fischer, Frank ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE   (Netherlands)

^c EPFL   (Switzerland)

^d UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84858431871     PISSN: 15734552     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (12)

1. Dillenbourg, P. (2002). Over-scripting CSCL: The risks of blending collaborative learning with instructional design. In P. A. Kirschner (Ed.), Three worlds of CSCL. Can we support CSCL (pp. 61-91). Heerlen: Open Universiteit Nederland.
2. Kollar, I., Fischer, F., & Slotta, J. D. (2005). Internal and external collaboration scripts in webbased science learning at schools. In T. Koschmann, D. Suthers, & T. -W. Chan (Eds.), Computer SupportedCollaborative Learning 2005: The Next 10 Years (pp. 331-340). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
3. Nussbaum, E. M., Hartley, K., Sinatra, G. M., Reynolds, R. E., & Bendixen, L. D. (2002, April). Enhancing thequality of on-line discussions. Paper presented at the Annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
4. O'Donnell, A. M. (1999). Structuring dyadic interaction through scripted cooperation. In A. M. O'Donnell & A. King (Eds.), Cognitive perspectives on peer learning (pp. 179-196). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
5. Pea, R. (2004). The social and technological dimensions of scaffolding and related theoretical concepts for learning, education, and human activity. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 423-451.
6. Quintana, C., Reiser, B. J., Davis, E. A., Krajcik, J., Fretz, E., Duncan, R. G., Kyza, E., Edelson, D., & Soloway, E. (2004). A scaffolding design framework for software to support science inquiry. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 337-387.
7. Reiser, B. J., Tabak, I., Sandoval, W. A., Smith, B. K., Steinmuller, F., & Leone, A. J. (2001). BGuiLE: Strategic and conceptual scaffolds for scientific inquiry in biology classrooms. In S. M. Carver & D. Klahr (Eds.), Cognition and instruction: Twenty-five years of progress (pp. 263-305). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
8. van Joolingen, W. R., de Jong, T., Lazonder, A. W., Savelsbergh, E., & Manlove, S. (2005). Co-Lab: Research and development of an on-line learning environment for collaborative scientific discovery learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 21, 671-688.
9. Schwartz, D. L., Lin, X., Brophy, S., & Bransford, J. D. (1999). Towards the development of flexibly adaptive instructional design. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A newparadigm of instructional theory (Vol. 2, pp. 183-213). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
10. Slotta, J. D. (2004). Web-Based Inquiry Science Environment. In M. C. Linn, E. A. Davis & P. Bell (Eds.). InternetEnvironments for Science Education (pp. 203-231). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
11. Stahl, G. (2006). Group Cognition. Cambridge: MIT Press.
12. Weinberger, A. (2003). Scripts for computer-supported collaborative learning. Effects of social and epistemiccooperation scripts on collaborative knowledge construction. Ludwig-Maximilian University, Munich. Available at: http://edoc.ub.uni-muenchen.de/archive/00001120/01/Weinberger-Armin.pdf.