Collaborative drawing on a shared digital canvas in elementary science education: The effects of script and task awareness support

International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning

Volumn 8, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 427-453

  Gijlers, Hannie ^a   Weinberger, Armin ^b   van Dijk, Alieke Mattia ^a   Bollen, Lars ^a   van Joolingen, Wouter ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE   (Netherlands)

^b SAARLAND UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

Awareness; Collaborative drawing; Scripting

Indexed keywords

EID: 84888018671     PISSN: 15561607     EISSN: 15561615     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11412-013-9180-5     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Ainsworth, S., Prain, V., & Tytler, R. (2011). Drawing to learn in science. Science, 333, 1096-1097. doi: 10. 1126/science. 1204153.
2. Anjewierden, A., Gijlers, H., Kolloffel, B., Saab, N., & de Hoog, R. (2011). Examining the relation between domain-related communication and collaborative inquiry learning. Computers & Education, 57, 1741-1748. doi: 10. 1016/j. compedu. 2011. 03. 010.
3. Brooks, M. (2009). Drawing, visualisation and young children's exploration of "big ideas". International Journal of Science Education, 31, 319-341. doi: 10. 1080/09500690802595771.
4. Buder, J., & Bodemer, D. (2008). Supporting controversial cscl discussions with augmented group awareness tools. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3, 123-139. doi: 10. 1007/s11412-008-9037-5.
5. de Vries, E., Lund, K., & Baker, M. (2002). Computer-mediated epistemic dialogue: Explanation and argumentation as vehicles for understanding scientific notations. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11, 63-103. doi: 10. 1207/S15327809JLS1101_3.
6. Dillenbourg, P. (2002). Over-scripting cscl: The risks of blending collaborative learning with instructional design. Three worlds of CSCL. Can we support CSCL, 61-91. doi: citeulike-article-id: 8271598.
7. Dourish, P., & Bellotti, V. (1992). Awareness and coordination in shared workspaces. Paper presented at the ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW 1992), Toronto.
8. Edelson, D. C. (2001). Learning-for-use: A framework for the design of technology-supported inquiry activities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 355-385. doi: 10. 1002/1098-2736(200103)38: 3<355:: aid-tea1010>3. 0. co;2-m.
9. Fransen, J., Kirschner, P. A., & Erkens, G. (2011). Mediating team effectiveness in the context of collaborative learning: The importance of team and task awareness. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 1103-1113. doi: 10. 1016/j. chb. 2010. 05. 017.
10. Giemza, A., Weinbrenner, S., Engler, H., Hoppe, H. U. (2007). Tuple spaces as a flexible integration platform for distributed learning environments. Paper presented at the 15th International Conference on Computers in Education Hiroshima, Japan.
11. Gijlers, H., & de Jong, T. (2013). Using concept maps to facilitate collaborative simulation-based inquiry learning. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 22, 340-374.
12. Gijlers, H., Saab, N., van Joolingen, W. R., de Jong, T., & van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M. (2009). Interaction between tool and talk: How instruction and tools support consensus building in collaborative inquiry-learning environments. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25, 252-267. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1365-2729. 2008. 00302. x.
13. Gutwin, C., & Greenberg, S. (1995). Support for group awareness in real-time desktop conferencing. Paper presented at the 2nd New Zealand Computer Science Research Student's Conference, Hamilton, New Zealand.
14. Hythecker, V. I., Dansereau, D. F., & Rocklin, T. R. (1988). An analysis of the processes influencing the structured dyadic learning environment. Educational Psychologist, 23, 23.
15. Kollar, I., Fischer, F., & Slotta, J. D. (2007). Internal and external scripts in computer-supported collaborative inquiry learning. Learning and Instruction, 17, 708-721. doi: 10. 1016/j. learninstruc. 2007. 09. 021.
16. Leopold, C., & Leutner, D. (2012). Science text comprehension: Drawing, main idea selection, and summarizing as learning strategies. Learning and Instruction, 22, 16-26. doi: 10. 1016/j. learninstruc. 2011. 05. 005.
17. O'Donnell, A. M., & Dansereau, D. F. (1992). Scripted collaborations 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). New Yourk, NY, US: Cambridge University Press.
18. Oortwijn, M. B., Boekaerts, M., Vedder, P., & Strijbos, J.-W. (2008). Helping behaviour during cooperative learning and learning gains: The role of the teacher and of pupils' prior knowledge and ethnic background. Learning and Instruction, 18, 146-159. doi: 10. 1016/j. learninstruc. 2007. 01. 014.
19. Roth, W.-M., & Roychoudhury, A. (1993). The concept map as a tool for the collaborative construction of knowledge: A microanalysis of high school physics students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 503-534. doi: 10. 1002/tea. 3660300508.
20. Rummel, N., & Spada, H. (2005). Learning to collaborate: An instructional approach to promoting collaborative problem solving in computer-mediated settings. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14, 201-241. doi: 10. 1207/s15327809jls1402_2.
21. Saab, N., van Joolingen, W. R., & Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M. (2007). Supporting communication in a collaborative discovery learning environment: The effect of instruction. Instructional Science, 35, 73-98. doi: 10. 1007/s11251-006-9003-4.
22. Scanlon, E., Anastopoulou, S., Kerawalla, L., & Mulholland, P. (2011). How technology resources can be used to represent personal inquiry and support students' understanding of it across contexts. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27, 516-529. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1365-2729. 2011. 00414. x.
23. 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, 704-745. doi: 10. 1177/1046496405281771.
24. SchoolTV. (2010). Fotosynthese Retrieved 13 mai, 2011, from http://www. schooltv. nl/beeldbank/clip/20100402_fotosynthese01.
25. Schwamborn, A., Mayer, R. E., Thillmann, H., Leopold, C., & Leutner, D. (2010). Drawing as a generative activity and drawing as a prognostic activity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 872-879.
26. SLO. (2009). Tussendoelen en leerlijnen (tule) Retrieved June 7, 2010, from http://tule. slo. nl/.
27. Suthers, D. D., & Hundhausen, C. D. (2003). An experimental study of the effects of representational guidance on collaborative learning processes. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12, 183-218. doi: 10. 1207/S15327809JLS1202_2.
28. Teasley, S. D. (1997). Talking about reasoning: How important is the peer in peer collaboration? In L. B. Resnick, R. Säljö, C. Pontecorvo, & B. Burge (Eds.), Discourse, tools and reasoning: Essays on situated cognition (pp. 361-384). Berlin: Springer.
29. Tolmie, A. K., Topping, K. J., Christie, D., Donaldson, C., Howe, C., Jessiman, E.,Thurston, A. (2010). Social effects of collaborative learning in primary schools. Learning and Instruction, 20, 177-191. doi: 10. 1016/j. learninstruc. 2009. 01. 005.
30. van Dijk, A. M., Gijlers, H., Weinberger, A. (in press). Scripted collaborative drawing in elementary science education. Instructional Science. doi: 10. 1007/s11251-013-9286-1.
31. van Joolingen, W. R., Bollen, L., & Leenaars, F. A. J. (2010). Using drawings in knowledge modeling and simulation for science teaching. In R. Nkambou, J. Bourdeau, & R. Mizoguchi (Eds.), Advances in intelligent tutoring systems (pp. 266-282). New York: Springer.
32. van Meter, P. (2001). Drawing construction as a strategy for learning from text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 129-140.
33. van Meter, P., & Garner, J. (2005). The promise and practice of learner-generated drawing: Literature review and synthesis. Educational Psychology Review, 17, 285-325. doi: 10. 1007/s10648-005-8136-3.
34. van Meter, P., Aleksic, M., Schwartz, A., & Garner, J. (2006). Learner-generated drawing as a strategy for learning from content area text. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 31, 142-166. doi: 10. 1016/j. cedpsych. 2005. 04. 001.
35. Vollmeyer, R., & Rheinberg, F. (2006). Motivational effects of self-regulated learning with different tasks. Educational Psychology Review, 18, 239-253. doi: 10. 1007/s10648-006-9017-0.
36. Webb, N. M., & Mastergeorge, A. (2003). Promoting effective helping behavior in peer-directed groups. International Journal of Educational Research, 39, 73-97. doi: 10. 1016/s0883-0355(03)00074-0.
37. Weinberger, A. (2011). Principles of transactive computer-supported collaboration scripts. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 6, 189-202.
38. Weinberger, A., & Fischer, F. (2006). A framework to analyze argumentative knowledge construction in computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers & Education, 46, 71-95. doi: 10. 1016/j. compedu. 2005. 04. 003.
39. Weinberger, A., Fischer, F., & Mandl, H. (2001). Scripts and scaffolds in problem-based computer supported learning environments; fostering partcipation and transfer. Munich: Ludwig-Maximilians-University.
40. Weinberger, A., Ertl, B., Fischer, F., & Mandl, H. (2005). Epistemic and social scripts in computer-supported collaborative learning. Instructional Science, 33, 1-30. doi: 10. 1007/s11251-004-2322-4.
41. Weinberger, A., Stegmann, K., & Fischer, F. (2007). Knowledge convergence in collaborative learning: Concepts and assessment. Learning and Instruction, 17(4), 416-426. doi: 10. 1016/j. learninstruc. 2007. 03. 007.
42. Weinberger, A., Stegmann, K., & Fischer, F. (2010). Learning to argue online: Scripted groups surpass individuals (unscripted groups do not). Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 506-515. doi: 10. 1016/j. chb. 2009. 08. 007.