Enhancing student knowledge acquisition from online learning conversations

International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning

Volumn 8, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 113-144

  Eryilmaz, Evren ^a   van der Pol, Jakko ^b   Ryan, Terry ^a   Clark, Philip Martin ^c   Mary, Justin ^a  

^a CLAREMONT GRADUATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b AMSTERDAM UNIVERSITY OF APPLIED SCIENCES   (Netherlands)

^c YEDITEPE UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

Author keywords

Anchored discussion; Annotation functionality; Coordination; Individual learning outcomes; Interaction cost; Knowledge construction; Online social interaction

Indexed keywords

EID: 84874433288     PISSN: 15561607     EISSN: 15561615     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11412-012-9163-y     Document Type: Article

References (98)

1. Ackerman, M. S., & Halverson, C. (2004). Sharing expertise: The next step for knowledge management. In V. Wulf & M. H. Huysman (Eds.), Social capital and information technology (pp. 273-299). Cambridge: MIT.
2. Alamargot, D., & Andriessen, J. (2002). The "power" of text production activity in collaborative modelling: Nine recommendations to make a computer supported situation work. In M. Baker, P. Brna, K. Stenning, & A. Tiberghien (Eds.), The role of communication in learning to model (pp. 275-302). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
3. Amadieu, F., Tricot, A., & Mariné, C. (2009). Prior knowledge in learning from a non-linear electronic document: Disorientation and coherence of the reading sequences. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), 381-388.
4. Andriessen, J., & Sandberg, J. (1999). Where is education heading and how about AI. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 10, 130-150.
5. Ayres, P. (2006). Using subjective measures to detect variations of intrinsic cognitive load within problems. Learning and Instruction, 16(5), 389-400.
6. Baker, M., Hansen, T., Joiner, R., & Traum, D. (1999). The role of grounding in collaborative learning tasks. In P. Dillenbourg (Ed.), Collaborative learning: Cognitive and computational approaches (pp. 31-63). Elsevier Science Publishers.
7. Baltes, B. B., Dickson, M., Sherman, M. P., Bauer, C. C., & LaGanke, J. (2002). Computer-mediated communication and group decision making: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 87(1), 156-179.
8. Boekaerts, M. & Simons, P. R. J. (1995). Leren en instructie: Psychologie van de leerling en het leerproces [Learning and instruction: Psychology of the learner and his learning process]. Assen: Dekker & van de Vegt.
9. Brush, B. A. J., Bargeron, D., Grudin, J., Borning, A., & Gupta, A. (2002). Supporting interaction outside of class: Anchored discussion vs. discussion boards. In G. Stahl (Ed.), Computer support for collaborative learning: Foundations for a CSCL community. Proceedings of CSCL 2002 (pp. 425-434). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
10. Cakir, M. P., Zemel, A., & Stahl, G. (2009). The joint organization of interaction within a multimodal CSCL medium. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(2), 115-149.
11. Carlon, S., Woods, D. B., Berg, B., Claywell, L., LeDuc, K., Marcisz, N., et al. (2012). The community of inquiry instrument: Validation and results in online health care disciplines. Computers in Education, 59(2), 215-221.
12. Cierniak, G., Scheiter, K., & Gerjects, P. (2009). Explaining the split-attention effect: Is the reduction of extraneous cognitive load accompanied by an increase in germane cognitive load. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), 315-324.
13. Clark, H. H., & Wilkes-Gibbs, D. (1986). Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22(1), 1-39.
14. Clark, J. (2001). Stimulation collaboration and discussion in online learning environments. Internet and Higher Education, 4(2), 119-124.
15. Cobos, R., & Pifarré, M. (2008). Collaborative knowledge construction in the web supported by the KnowCat system. Computers in Education, 50(3), 962-978.
16. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
17. Cress, U., & Kimmerle, J. (2008). A systemic and cognitive view on collaborative knowledge building with wikis. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3(2), 105-122.
18. De Jong, F., Kollöffel, B., van der Meijden, H., Staarman, J. K., & Janssen, J. (2005). Regulative processes in individual, 3D and computer supported cooperative learning contexts. Computers in Human Behavior, 21(4), 645-670.
19. Dennen, V. (2008). Looking for evidence of learning: Assessment and analysis methods for online discourse. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(2), 205-219.
20. 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.
21. Dillenbourg, P., & Bétrancourt, M. (2006). Collaboration load. In J. Elen & R. E. Clark (Eds.), Handling complexity in learning environments: Research and theory (pp. 141-165). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
22. Ding, N. (2009). Visualizing the sequential process of knowledge elaboration in computer-supported collaborative problem solving. Computers in Education, 52(2), 509-519.
23. Engelmann, T., Dehler, J., Bodemer, D., & Buder, J. (2009). Knowledge awareness in CSCL: A psychological perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(4), 949-960.
24. Erkens, G., Jaspers, J., Prangsma, M., & Kanselaar, G. (2005). Coordination processes in computer supported collaborative writing. Computers in Human Behavior, 21(3), 463-486.
25. Eryilmaz, E., Alrushiedat, N., Kasemvilas, S., Mary, J., & van der Pol, J. (2009). The effect of anchoring online discussion on collaboration and cognitive load. In: Proceedings of 15th Americas Conference on Information Systems, San Francisco, California.
26. Eryilmaz, E., Ryan, T., van der Pol, J., Kasemvilas, S., & Mary, J. (2013). Fostering quality and flow of online learning conversations by artifact-centered discourse systems. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 14(1).
27. Fiedler, K., Schott, M., & Meiser, T. (2011). What mediation analysis can (not) do. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(6), 1231-1236.
28. Garrison, D. R., & Arbaugh, J. B. (2007). Researching the community of inquiry framework: Review, issues and future directions. The Internet and Higher Education, 10(3), 157-172.
29. Garrison, D. R., Innes, M. C., & Fung, T. S. (2010). Exploring causal relationships among teaching, cognitive and social presence: Student perceptions of the community of inquiry framework. Internet and Higher Education, 13(1-2), 31-36.
30. Gunawardena, C. N. (1995). Social presence theory and implications for interaction and collaborative learning in computer conferences. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 1(2), 147-166.
31. Guzdial, M., & Turns, J. (2000). Effective discussion through a computer-mediated anchored forum. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(4), 437-469.
32. Häkkinen, P., & Järvelä, S. (2006). Sharing and constructing perspectives in web-based conferencing. Computers in Education, 47(4), 433-447.
33. Harasim, L. (2000). Shift happens online education as a new paradigm in learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 3(1-2), 41-61.
34. Hayes, A. F. (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling. Manuscript submitted for publication. http://www. afhayes. com/public/process2012. pdf.
35. Hayes, A. F. (2009). Beyond baron and kenny: Statistical mediation analysis in the new millennium. Communication Monographs, 76(4), 408-420.
36. 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.
37. Herrmann, T., & Kienle, A. (2008). Context-oriented communication and the design of computer-supported discursive learning. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3(3), 273-299.
38. Hewitt, J. (2003). How habitual online practices affect the development of asynchronous discussion threads. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 28(1), 31-45.
39. Hewitt, J. (2005). Toward an understanding of how threads die in asynchronous computer conferences. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(4), 567-589.
40. Hiltz, S. R., Coppola, N., Rotter, N., & Turoff, M. (2000). Measuring the importance of collaborative learning for the effectiveness of ALN: A multi-measure, multi-method approach. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 4(2), 103-125.
41. Jamaludin, A., Chee, Y., & Mei Lin Ho, C. (2009). Fostering argumentative knowledge construction through enactive role play in Second Life. Computers in Education, 53(2), 317-329.
42. Janssen, J., Erkens, G., & Kanselaar, G. (2007). Visualization of agreement and discussion processes during computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(3), 1105-1125.
43. Janssen, J., Kirschner, F., Erkens, G., Kirschner, P. A., & Paas, F. (2010). Making the black box of collaborative learning transparent: Combining process-oriented and cognitive load approaches. Educational Psychology Review, 22(2), 139-154.
44. Jeong, A., & Frazier, S. (2008). How day of posting affects level of critical discourse in asynchronous discussions and computer supported collaborative argumentation. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 875-887.
45. Kapur, M. (2011). Temporality matters: Advancing a method for analyzing problem-solving processes in a computer-supported collaborative environment. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6(1), 39-56.
46. Kapur, M., & Kinzer, C. K. (2007). Examining the effect of problem type in a synchronous computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) environment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(5), 439-459.
47. King, A. (2007). Scripting collaborative learning processes: A cognitive perspective. Scripting computer-supported collaborative learning, 13-37. doi: 10. 1007/978-0-387-36949-5_2.
48. King, A. (2002). Structuring peer interaction to promote high-level cognitive processing. Theory into Practice, 41(1), 33-39.
49. Kirschner, P. A., Martens, R. L., & Strijbos, J. W. (2004). CSCL in higher education? A framework for designing multiple collaborative environments (pp. 3-30) Kluwer Academic Publishers.
50. Kirschner, F., Paas, F., & Kirschner, P. A. (2009a). A cognitive load approach to collaborative learning: United brains for complex tasks. Educational Psychology Review, 21(1), 31-42.
51. Kirschner, F., Paas, F., & Kirschner, P. A. (2009b). Individual and group-based learning from complex cognitive tasks: Effects on retention and transfer efficiency. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), 306-314.
52. Kobbe, L., Weinberger, A., Dillenbourg, P., Harrer, A., Hämäläinen, R., Häkkinen, P., et al. (2007). Specifying computer-supported collaboration scripts. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2(2), 211-224.
53. Mäkitalo, K., Salo, P., Häkkinen, P., & Järvelä, S. 2001. Analysing the mechanisms of common ground in collaborative web-based interaction. In P. Dillenbourg, A. Eurelings & K. Hakkarainen (Eds.), European perspectives on computer-supported collaborative learning. Proceedings of the First European Conference on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (pp. 445-453). Maastricht, The Netherlands: University of Maastricht.
54. Mayer, R. H. (1999). Designing instruction for constructivist learning. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory, Volume II (pp. 141-160). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
55. Meier, A., Spada, H., & Rummel, N. (2007). A rating scheme for assessing the quality of computer-supported collaboration processes. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2(1), 63-86.
56. Morgan, R., Whorton, J., & Gunsalus, C. (2000). A comparison of short-term and long-term retention: Lecture combined with discussion versus cooperative learning. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 27(1), 53-58.
57. Mühlpfordt, M., & Wessner, M. (2005). Explicit referencing in chat supports collaborative learning. In T. Kosschmann, D. Suthers, & T. W. Chan (Eds.), Computer supported collaborative learning: The next 10 years (pp. 460-469). Mahwah: Lawrance Erlbaum.
58. Murphy, E., & Manzanares, R. M. A. (2005). Reading between the lines: Understanding the role of latent content in the analysis of online asynchronous discussions. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(6), 23-32.
59. Murray, B. (2000). Reinventing class discussion online. Monitor on Psychology, 31(4), 54-56.
60. Onrubia, J., & Engel, A. (2009). Strategies for collaborative writing and phases of knowledge construction in CSCL environments. Computers in Education, 53(4), 1256-1265.
61. Paas, F. G. W. C., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (1994). Variability of worked examples and transfer of geometrical problem-solving skills: A cognitive-load approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(1), 122-133.
62. Pena-Shaff, J., & Nicholls, C. (2004). Analyzing student interactions and meaning construction in computer bulletin board discussions. Computers in Education, 42(3), 243-265.
63. Pfister, H. R., & Mühlpfordt, M. (2002). Supporting discourse in a synchronous learning environment: The learning protocol approach. In G. Stahl (Ed.), Proceedings of the Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (pp. 581-582). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.
64. Phillips, D. C. (1995). The good, the bad, and the ugly: The many faces of constructivism. Educational researcher, 24(7), 5-12.
65. Poesio, M., & Muskens, R. (1997). The dynamics of discourse situations. In P. Dekker, M. Stokhof (Eds.), Proceedings of the 11th Amsterdam Colloquium, (pp. 247-252). University of Amsterdam, ILLC, December.
66. Ponnusawmy, H., & Santally, M. I. (2008). Promoting (quality) participation in online forums: A study of the use of forums in two online modules at the University of Mauritius. International Journal of Instructional Technology & Distance Learning, 5(4), 1550-6908.
67. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879-891.
68. Preacher, K. J., & Kelley, K. (2011). Effect size measures for mediation models: Quantitative strategies for communicating indirect effects. Psychological methods, 16(2), 93.
69. Riffe, D., Lacy, S., & Fico, F. (1998). Analyzing media messages: Using quantitative content analysis in research. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
70. Roschelle, J. (1992). Learning by collaborating: Convergent conceptual change. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(3), 235-276.
71. Rothkopf, E. Z. (1970). The concept of mathemagenic activities. Review of Educational Research, 40(3), 325-336.
72. Schnotz, W., & Kürschner, C. (2007). A reconsideration of cognitive load theory. Educational Psychology Review, 19(4), 469-508.
73. Schwartz, D. L., & Lin, X. D. (2000). Computers, productive agency, and the effort after shared meaning. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 12(2), 3-33.
74. Shea, P., & Bidjerano, T. (2009). Community of inquiry as a theoretical framework to foster epistemic engagement and cognitive presence in online education. Computers in Education, 52(3), 543-553.
75. Simons, P. R. J. (2000). Towards a constructivistic theory of self-directed learning. Self-learning, 1-12. http://igitur-archive. library. uu. nl/ivlos/2005-0622-190617/5701. pdf.
76. Slof, B., Erkens, G., Kirschner, P. A., Jaspers, J., & Janssen, J. (2010). Guiding students' online complex learning-task behavior through representational scripting. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(5), 927-939.
77. Slof, B., Erkens, G., Kirschner, P. A., Janssen, J., & Phielix, C. (2010). Fostering complex learning-task performance through scripting student use of computer supported representational tools. Computers in Education, 55(4), 1707-1720.
78. Stahl, G. (2000). A model of collaborative knowledge building. Proc. Fourth International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS 2000) (pp. 70-77). Ann Arbor, MI.
79. Strijbos, J. W., Martens, R. L., Prins, F. J., & Jochems, W. M. G. (2006). Content analysis: What are they talking about? Computers in Education, 46(1), 29-48.
80. Suthers, D. (2001). Collaborative representations: Supporting face-to-face and online knowledge-building discourse. Paper presented at the 34th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii, USA.
81. Suthers, D. (2006). Technology affordances for intersubjective meaning making: A research agenda for CSCL. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(3), 315-337.
82. Suthers, D., & Xu, J. (2002). Kukakuka: An online environment for artifact-centered discourse. Paper presented at the Eleventh World Wide Web Conference (WWW 2002). Honolulu, Hawaii, USA.
83. Suthers, D., Girardeau, L., & Hundhausen, C. (2003). Deictic roles of external representations in face-to-face and online collaboration. In B. Wasson, S. Ludvigsen, & U. Hoppe (Eds.), Designing for change in networked learning environments, Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning (pp. 173-182). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
84. Suthers, D., Vatrapu, R., Medina, R., Joseph, S., & Dwyer, N. (2008). Beyond threaded discussion: Representational guidance in asynchronous collaborative learning environments. Computers in Education, 50(4), 1103-1127.
85. Suthers, D. D., Dwyer, N., Medina, R., & Vatrapu, R. (2010). A framework for conceptualizing, representing, and analyzing distributed interaction. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 5(1), 5-42.
86. Sweller, J., & Chandler, P. (1994). Why some material is difficult to learn. Cognition and Instruction, 12(3), 185-233.
87. Takeda, T., & Suthers, D. (2002). Online workspaces for annotation and discussion of documents. Poster presented at the International Conference on Computers in Education, 2002.
88. Timmers, C., & Veldkamp, B. (2011). Attention paid to feedback provided by a computer-based assessment for learning on information literacy. Computers in Education, 56(3), 923-930.
89. Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
90. Uren, V., Buckingham, S., Li, G., Domingue, J., & Motta, E. (2003). Scholarly publishing and argument in hyperspace. Presented at the 12th International World Wide Web Conference. Budapest, Hungary.
91. van der Pol, J., Admiraal, W. F., & Simons, P. R. J. (2006a). The affordance of anchored discussion for the collaborative processing of academic texts. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(3), 339-357.
92. van der Pol, J., Admiraal, W., & Simons, P. R. J. (2006b). Context enhancement for co-intentionality and co-reference in asynchronous CMC. AI & Society, 20(3), 301-313.
93. van Merriënboer, J. P., Kirschner, P. A., & Loesbeth, K. (2003). Taking the load off a learners mind: Instructional design for complex learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 5-13.
94. Veerman, A., Andriessen, J., & Kanselaar, G. (1999). Collaborative learning through computer-mediated argumentation. International Society of the Learning Sciences, 31(4), 77-86.
95. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind and society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
96. Whitworth, B., Gallupe, B., & McQueen, R. (2000). A cognitive three-process model of computer-mediated group interaction. Group Decision and Negotiation, 9(5), 431-456.
97. Wolfe, J. (2008). Annotations and the collaborative digital library: Effects of an aligned annotation interface on student argumentation and reading strategies. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3(2), 141-164.
98. Yang, Y., Newby, T., & Robert, B. (2008). Facilitating interactions through structured web-based bulletin boards: A quasi-experimental study on promoting learners' critical thinking skills. Computers in Education, 50(4), 1572-1585.