Scaffolding information problem solving in web-based collaborative inquiry learning

Computers and Education

Volumn 59, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 82-94

  Raes, Annelies ^a   Schellens, Tammy ^a   De Wever, Bram ^a   Vanderhoven, Ellen ^a  

^a GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Individual differences; Information problem solving; Scaffolding; Secondary science education; Web based inquiry

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER AIDED INSTRUCTION; E-LEARNING; EDUCATION; SCAFFOLDS; STUDENTS; TEACHING; WEB CRAWLER; WEBSITES;

INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES; INFORMATION PROBLEM SOLVING; SCAFFOLDING; SECONDARY SCIENCE; WEB BASED;

PROBLEM SOLVING;

EID: 84865662940     PISSN: 03601315     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.11.010     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (61)

1. Aleven, V., Stahl, E., Schworm, S., Fischer, F., & Wallace, R. (2003). Help seeking and help design in interactive learning environments. Review of Educational Research, 73(3), 277-320. (Pubitemid 37239927)
2. Azevedo, R., Cromley, J. G., & Seibert, D. (2004). Does adaptive scaffolding facilitate students' ability to regulate their learning with hypermedia? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29(3), 344-370. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2003.09.002. (Pubitemid 38939264)
3. Azevedo, R., & Hadwin, A. F. (2005). Scaffolding self-regulated learning and metacognition - implications for the design of computer-based scaffolds. Instructional Science, 33, 367-379. doi:10.1007/s11251-005-1272-9. (Pubitemid 41455843)
4. Azevedo, R., Moos, D. C., Greene, J. A., Winters, F. I., & Crornley, J. G. (2008). Why is externally-facilitated regulated learning more effective than self-regulated learning with hypermedia? Etr&D-Educational Technology Research and Development, 56(1), 45-72. doi:10.1007/s11423-007-9067-0.
5. Bannert, M. (2009). Promoting self-regulated learning through prompts. Zeitschrift Fur Padagogische Psychologie, 23(2), 139-145. doi:10.1024/1010-0652. 23.2.139.
6. Brand-Gruwel, S., Wopereis, I., & Walraven, A. (2009). A descriptive model of information problem solving while using internet. Computers & Education, 53(4), 1207-1217. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.06.004.
7. Chen, S. Y., & Macredie, R. (2010). Web-based interaction: A review of three important human factors. International Journal of Information Management, 30(5), 379-387. doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2010.02.009.
8. Crawford, B. A. (2000). Embracing the essence of inquiry: New roles for science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(9), 916-937.
9. Davis, E. A., & Miyake, N. (2004). Explorations of scaffolding in complex classroom systems. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 265-272.
10. Demetriadis, S. N., Papadopoulos, P. M., Stamelos, I. G., & Fischer, F. (2008). The effect of scaffolding students' context-generating cognitive activity in technology-enhanced case-based learning. Computers & Education, 51(2), 939-954. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2007.09.012. (Pubitemid 351697637)
11. Dillenbourg, P. (2002). Over-scripting CSCL. In P. A. Kirschner (Ed.), Three worlds of CSCL: Can we support CSCL?. Heerlen: Open University of the Netherlands.
12. Eisenberg, M. B., & Berkowitz, R. (1990). Information problem-solving: The big six skills approach to library and information skills instruction. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
13. Fidel, R., Davies, R. K., Douglass, M. H., Holder, J. K., Hopkins, C. J., Kushner, E. J., et al. (1999). A visit to the information mall: Web searching behavior of high school students. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50(1), 24-37.
14. Flavell, J. H. (1976). Metacognitive aspects of problem solving. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), The nature of intelligence. Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum.
15. Ford, N., Miller, D., & Moss, N. (2001). The role of individual differences in Internet searching: An empirical study. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 52(12), 1049-1066. (Pubitemid 32936225)
16. Hayes, A. F., & Krippendorff, K. (2007). Answering the call for a standard reliability measure for coding data. Communication Methods and Measures, 1(1), 77-89.
17. Hogan, K., & Pressley, M. (1997). Scaffolding student learning: Instructional approaches and issues. Cambridge MA: Brookline Books.
18. Kim, M. C., & Hannafin, M. J. (2011). Scaffolding problem solving in technology-enhanced learning environments (TELEs): Bridging research and theory with practice. Computers & Education, 56(2), 403-417. doi:10.1016/j.compedu. 2010.08.024.
19. Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75-86. (Pubitemid 43837408)
20. Koohang, A., & Durante, A. (2003). Learners' perceptions toward the web-based distance learning activities/assignments portion of an undergraduate hybrid instruction model. Journal of Information Technology Education, 2, 105-113.
21. Kuhlthau, C. (2004). Seeking meaning: A process approach to library and information services (2nd ed.). Westport: Libraries Unlimited.
22. Kuiper, E., Volman, M., & Terwel, J. (2009). Developing Web literacy in collaborative inquiry activities. Computers & Education, 52(3), 668-680. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2008.11.010.
23. Large, A., Beheshti, J., & Rahman, T. (2002). Gender differences in collaborative Web searching behavior: An elementary school study. Information Processing & Management, 38(3), 427-443. (Pubitemid 34040562)
24. Lazonder, A. W. (2000). Exploring novice users' training needs in searching information on the WWW. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 16, 326-335.
25. Lazonder, A. W. (2001). Minimalist instruction for learning to search the world wide web. Education and Information Technologies, 6(3), 161-176.
26. Lazonder, A. W. (2005). Do two heads search better than one? Effects of student collaboration on web search behaviour and search outcomes. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(3), 465-475. (Pubitemid 43906797)
27. Lazonder, A. W., & Rouet, J. F. (2008). Information problem solving instruction: Some cognitive and metacognitive issues. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(3), 753-765. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2007.01.025. (Pubitemid 351305129)
28. Linn, M. C., Clark, D., & Slotta, J. D. (2003). WISE design for knowledge integration. Science Education, 87(4), 517-538. doi:10.1002/sce.10086.
29. Liu, Z. M., & Huang, X. B. (2008). Gender differences in the online reading environment. Journal of Documentation, 64(4), 616-626. doi:10.1108/00220410810884101.
30. Luckin, R., Looi, C. K., Chen, W., Puntambekar, S., & Stanton Fraser, D. (2011). Contextualizing the changing face of scaffoding research: Are we driving pedagogical theory development or avoiding it? In H. Spada, G. Stahl, N. Miyake, & N. Law (Eds.), Community Events Proceedings. Connecting computer-supported collaborative learning to policy and practice: CSCL2011 conference proceedings, Vol. III International Society of the Learning Sciences.
31. McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. (2009). Synergy between teacher practices and curricular scaffolds to support students in using domain-specific and domain-general knowledge in writing arguments to explain phenomena. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 18(3), 416-460. doi:10.1080/10508400903013488.
32. Morris, R., Hadwin, A. F., Gress, C. L. Z., Miller, M., Fior, M., Church, H., et al. (2010). Designing roles, scripts, and prompts to support CSCL in Study. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(5), 815-824.
33. Nüssli, M.-A., Jermann, P., Sangin, M., & Dillenbourg, P. (2009). Collaboration and abstract representations: Towards predictive models based on raw speech and eye-tracking data. In C. O'Malley, D. Suthers, P. Reimann, & A. Dimitracopoulou (Eds.), Computer supported collaborative learning practices: CSCL conference proceedings, Rhodes, Greece.
34. Pea, R. D. (2004). The social and technological dimensions of scaffolding and related theoretical concepts for learning, education, and human activity. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 423-451. (Pubitemid 39057721)
35. Perry, N. E., & Winne, P. H. (2006). Learning from learning kits: Study traces of students' self-regulated engagements with computerized content. Educational Psychology Review, 18(3), 211-228. doi:10.1007/s10648-006-9014-3. (Pubitemid 44825042)
36. Puntambekar, S., & Hubscher, R. (2005). Tools for scaffolding students in a complex learning environment: What have we gained and what have we missed? Educational Psychologist, 40(1), 1-12. (Pubitemid 40447988)
37. Puntambekar, S., & Kolodner, J. L. (2005). Toward implementing distributed scaffolding: Helping students learn science from design. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(2), 185-217. doi:10.1002/Tea.20048. (Pubitemid 40320322)
38. Raes, A., Schellens, T., & De Wever, B. (2010). Web-based collaborative inquiry in secondary science education: The influence on students' knowledge construction and attitudes toward science. In K. Gomez, L. Lyons, & J. Radinsky (Eds.), Learning in the disciplines: Proceedings of the 9th international conference of the learning sciences (ICLS), Vol. 1. Chicago IL: International Society of the Learning Sciences, Full Papers.
39. Reiser, B. J. (2004). Scaffolding complex learning: The mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 273-304. (Pubitemid 39063558)
40. Roschelle, J. M., Pea, R. D., Hoadley, C. M., Gordin, D. N., & Means, B. M. (2000). Changing how and what children learn in school with computer-based technologies. Future of Children, 10(2), 76-101.
41. Roy, M., Taylor, R., & Chi, M. T. H. (2003). Gender differences in patterns of searching the web. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 29, 335-348. (Pubitemid 38483809)
42. Rummel, N., & Spada, H. (2005). Learning to collaborate: An instructional approach to promoting collaborative problem solving in computer-mediated settings. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(2), 201-241. (Pubitemid 40551445)
43. Ryan, A. M., Pintrich, P. R., & Midgley, C. (2001). Avoiding seeking help in the classroom: Who and why? Educational Psychology Review, 13(2), 93-114.
44. Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19(4), 460-475.
45. Schraw, G., & Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitive theories. Educational Psychology Review, 7(4), 351-371.
46. Schwarz, B., & Asterhan, C. (2010). Adaptive human guidance of computer-mediated group work. In K. Gomez, L. Lyons, & J. Radinsky (Eds.), Learning in the disciplines: Proceedings of the 9th international conference of the learning sciences (ICLS), Vol. 2. Chicago IL: International Society of the Learning Sciences, Short Papers, Symposia, and Selected Abstracts.
47. van Schooten, N. M. (2008). Ondersteunen van planningsactiviteiten tijdens het zoeken van informatie op het web. [Supporting planning activities during information search on the web] (Unpublished master thesis) University of Twente, the Netherlands.
48. Slotta, J. D., & Linn, M. C. (2009). WISE science, web-based inquiry in the classroom. New York: Teachers College Press.
49. Stadtler, M., & Bromme, R. (2007). Dealing with multiple documents on the WWW: The role of metacognition in the formation of documents models. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2, 190-210.
50. Stegmann, K., Mu, J., Gehlen-Baum, V., & Fischer, F. (2011). The myth of over-scripting: Can novices be supported too much? In H. Spada, G. Stahl, N. Miyake, & N. Law (Eds.), Connecting computer-supported collaborative learning to policy and practice: CSCL conference proceedings, Vol. I International Society of the Learning Sciences, Long Papers.
51. Tabak, I. (2004). Synergy: A complement to emerging patterns of distributed scaffolding. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 305-335. (Pubitemid 39057718)
52. Tabatabai, D., & Shore, B. M. (2005). How experts and novices search the Web. Library & Information Science Research, 27(2), 222-248. doi:10.1016/j.lisr.2005.01.005. (Pubitemid 40829334)
53. TELS. (2010). Sample scoring rubric using the knowledge integration framework. Retrieved from. http://telscenter.org/projects/tels/assessments/ rubric.
54. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society. London: Harvard University Press.
55. Walraven, A., Brand-Gruwel, S., & Boshuizen, H. P. A. (2009). How students evaluate information and sources when searching theWorld WideWeb for information. Computers & Education, 52(1), 234-246. doi:10.1016/j.compedu. 2008.08.003.
56. Wang, X., Kollar, I., Stegmann, K., & Fischer, F. (2011). Adaptable scripting in computer-supported collaborative learning to foster knowledge and skill acquisition. In H. Spada, G. Stahl, N. Miyake, & N. Law (Eds.), Connecting computer-supported collaborative learning to policy and practice: CSCL conference proceedings, Vol. I. International Society of the Learning Sciences, Long Papers.
57. Wecker, C., & Fischer, F. (2010). Fading instructional scripts: Preventing relapses into novice strategies by distributed monitoring. In K. Gomez, L. Lyons, & J. Radinsky (Eds.), Learning in the disciplines: Proceedings of the 9th international conference of the learning sciences (ICLS), Vol. 1. Chicago IL: International Society of the Learning Sciences, Full Papers.
58. Wecker, C., Kohnlet, C., & Fischer, F. (2007). Computer literacy and inquiry learning: When geeks learn less. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23(2), 133-144. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2006.00218.x.
59. White, R. W., Dumais, S.Teevan, J. (2009). Characterizing the influence of domain expertise on web search behavior. In: Proceedings of the Second ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining, Barcelona, Spain, 132-141. doi: 10.1145/1498759.1498819
60. Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). Role of tutoring in problem-solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 17(2), 89-100.
61. Zohar, A., & Peled, B. (2008). The effects of explicit teaching of metastrategic knowledge on low- and high-achieving students. Learning and Instruction, 18(4), 337-353. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.07.001.