Quantifying qualities of collaborative learning processes

International Handbook of the Learning Sciences

Volumn , Issue , 2018, Pages 500-510

  Vogel, Freydis ^a   Weinberger, Armin ^b  

^a TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

^b SAARLAND UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85049294375     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9781315617572     Document Type: Chapter

References (55)

1. Andriessen, J., Baker, M., & Suthers, D. (2003). Arguing to learn: Confronting cognitions in computer-supported col-laborative learning environments. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
2. Asterhan, C. S. C., & Schwarz, B. B. (2009). Argumentation and explanation in conceptual change: Indications from protocol analyses of peer to peer dialog. Cognitive Science, 33(3), 374-400. doi: 10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01017.x
3. Cen, L., Ruta, D., & Powell, L (2016). Quantitative approach to collaborative learning: Performance predic-tion, individual assessment, and group composition. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 11(2), 187-225. doi: 10.1007/s11412-016-9234-6
4. Chi, M. (1997). Quantifying qualitative analyses of verbal data: A practical guide. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6, 271-315. doi: 10.1207/s15327809jls0603_1
5. Chi, M. T. H., & Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 219-243. doi: 10.1080/00461520.2014.965823
6. Chiu, M. M. (2008). Flowing toward correct contributions during groups’ mathematics problem solving: A statistical discourse analysis. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 17(3), 415-463. doi: 10.1080/10508400802224830
7. Cohen, G. C. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups. Review of Educational Research, 64(1), 1-35. doi: 10.3102/00346543064001001
8. Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 37-46. doi: 10.1177/001316446002000104
9. Cress, U. (2008). The need for considering multi-level analysis in CSCL research-An appeal for the use of more advanced statistical methods. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3, 69-84. doi: 10.1007/s11412-007-9032-2
10. de Laat, M., Lally, V., Lipponen, L., & Simons, R.-J. (2007). Investigating patterns of interaction in networked learning and computer-supported collaborative learning: A role for social network analysis. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2(1), 87-103. doi: 10.1007/s11412-007-9006-4
11. 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(1), 6-28. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2005.04.005
12. De Wever, B., & Van Keer, H. (2018). Selecting statistical methods for the learning sciences and reporting their results. In F. Fischer, C. E. Hmelo-Silver, S. R. Goldman, & P. Reimann (Eds.), International handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 532-541). New York: Routledge.
13. Dillenbourg, P., Baker, M., Blaye, A., & O’Malley, C. (1995). The evolution of research on collaborative learn-ing. In P. Reimann & H. Spada (Eds.), Learning in humans and machines: Towards an interdisciplinary learning science (pp. 189-211). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
14. Dingyloudi, F., & Strijbos, J. W. (2018). Mixed methods research as a pragmatic toolkit: Understanding ver-sus fixing complexity in the Learning Sciences. In F. Fischer, C. E. Hmelo-Silver, S. R. Goldman, & P. Reimann (Eds.), International handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 444-454). New York: Routledge.
15. Dyke, G., Lund, K., & Girardot, J.-J. (2009). Tatiana: an environment to support the CSCL analysis process. In C. O’Malley, D. D. Suthers, P. Reimann, & A. Dimitracopoulou (Eds.), Computer supported collaborative learning practices: CSCL 2009 Conference Proceedings (pp. 58-67). Rhodes: International Society of the Learning Sciences.
16. Fischer, F., Kollar, I., Stegmann, K., & Wecker, C. (2013). Toward a script theory of guidance in com-puter-supported collaborative learning. Educational Psychologist, 48(1), 56-66. doi: 10.1080/00461520.2012.748005
17. Fleiss, J. L. (1971), Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychological Bulletin, 76, 378-382. doi: 10.1037/h0031619
18. Gelmini-Hornsby, G., Ainsworth, S., & O’Malley, C. (2011). Guided reciprocal questioning to support chil-dren’s collaborative storytelling. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6(4), 577-600. doi: 10.1007/s11412-011-9129-5
19. Green, J. L., & Bridges, S.M. (2018) Interactional ethnography. In F. Fischer, C. E. Hmelo-Silver, S. R. Goldman, & P. Reimann (Eds.), International handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 475-488). New York: Routledge.
20. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2009). An educational psychology success story: Social interdependence theory and cooperative learning. Educational Researcher, 38(5), 365-379. doi: 10.3102/0013189X09339057
21. King, A. (1998). Transactive peer tutoring: Distributing cognition and metacognition. Educational Psychology Review, 10(1), 57-74. doi: 10.1023/A: 1022858115001
22. King, A. (2007). Scripting collaborative learning processes: A cognitive perspective. In F. Fischer, I. Kollar, H. Mandl, & J. M. Haake (Eds.), Scripting computer-supported collaborative learning-Cognitive, computational, and educational perspectives (pp. 13-37). New York: Springer.
23. Kollar, I., Ufer, S., Reichersdorfer, E., Vogel, F., Fischer, F., & Reiss, K. (2014). Effects of collaboration scripts and heuristic worked examples on the acquisition of mathematical argumentation skills of teacher students with dif-ferent levels of prior achievement. Learning and Instruction, 32(1), 22-36. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.01.003
24. Koschmann, T. (2018). Ethnomethodology: Studying the practical achievement of intersubjectivity. In F. Fischer, C. E. Hmelo-Silver, S. R. Goldman, & P. Reimann (Eds.), International handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 465-474). New York: Routledge.
25. Kuhn, D., & Crowell, A. (2011). Dialogic argumentation as a vehicle for developing young adolescents’ think-ing. Psychological Science, 22(4), 545-552. doi: 10.1177/0956797611402512
26. Leitão, S. (2000). The potential of argument in knowledge building. Human Development, 43(6), 332-360. doi: 10.1159/000022695
27. Lombard, M., Snyder-Duch, J., & Bracken, C. C. (2002). Content analysis in mass communica-tion: Assessment and reporting of intercoder reliability. Human Communication Research, 28, 587-604. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2958.2002.tb00826.x
28. Lund, K., Rosé, C. P., Suthers, D. D., & Baker, M. (2013). Epistemological encounters in multivocal settings. In D. D. Suthers, K. Lund, C. P. Rosé, C. Teplovs, & N. Law (Eds.), Productive multivocality in the analysis of group interactions (pp. 659-682). New York: Springer.
29. Mayfield, E., & Rosé, C. P. (2013). LightSIDE: Open source machine learning for text accessible to non-experts. In M. D. Shermis & J. Burstein (Eds.), Handbook of automated essay evaluation: Current applications and new directions (pp. 124-135). New York: Routledge.
30. Mugny, G., & Doise, W. (1978). Socio-cognitive conflict and structure of individual and collective perfor-mances. European Journal of Social Psychology, 8, 181-192. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.2420080204
31. Murphy, P. K., Wilkinson, I. A., Soter, A. O., Hennessey, M. N., & Alexander, J. F. (2009). Examining the effects of classroom discussion on students’ comprehension of text: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(3), 740-764. doi: 10.1037/a0015576
32. Noroozi, O., Teasley, S. D., Biemans, H. J. A., Weinberger, A., & Mulder, M. (2013). Facilitating learning in multidisciplinary groups with transactive CSCL scripts. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 8(2), 189-223. doi: 10.1007/s11412-012-9162-z
33. Noroozi, O., Weinberger, A., Biemans, H. J. A., Mulder, M., & Chizari, M. (2012). Argumentation-based computer-supported collaborative learning (ABCSCL). A systematic review and synthesis of fifteen years of research. Educational Research Review, 7(2), 79-106. doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2011.11.006
34. Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1(2), 117-175. doi: 10.1207/s1532690xci0102_1
35. Piaget, J. (1969). The psychology of the child. New York: Basic Books.
36. Roschelle, J. (1992). Learning by collaborating: Convergent conceptual change. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(3), 235-276. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1466609
37. Roschelle, J. (2013). Discussion [Special Issue on CSCL]. Educational Psychologist, 48(1), 67-70. doi: 10.1080/00461520.2012.749445
38. Rosé, C. P., Wang, Y.-C., Cui, Y., Arguello, J., Stegmann, K., Weinberger, A., & Fischer, F. (2008). Analyzing collaborative learning processes automatically: Exploiting the advances of computational linguistics in computer-supported collaborative learning. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3(3), 237-271. doi: 10.1007/s11412-007-9034-0
39. Rosen, Y., & Foltz, P. W. (2014). Assessing collaborative problem solving through automated technologies. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 9(3), 389-410. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-33261-1_5
40. Rummel, N., Spada, H., & Hauser, S. (2009). Learning to collaborate while being scripted or by observ-ing a model. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(1), 69-92. doi: 10.1007/s11412-008-9054-4
41. Schwarz, B. B., & Baker, M. J. (2016). Dialogue, argumentation and education: History, theory and practice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
42. Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979) Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 420-428.
43. Slavin, R. E. (2010). Co-operative learning: What makes groupwork work? In H. Dumont, D. Istance, & F. Benavides (Eds.), The nature of learning: Using research to inspire practice (pp. 161-178). Paris: OECD.
44. Stegmann, K., Wecker, C., Weinberger, A., & Fischer, F. (2012). Collaborative argumentation and cogni-tive elaboration in a computer-supported collaborative learning environment. Instructional Science, 40(2), 297-323. doi: 10.1007/s11251-011-9174-5
45. Strijbos, J. W., Martens, R. L., Prins, F. J., & Jochems, W. M. G. (2006). Content analysis: What are they talk-ing about? Computers & Education, 46(1), 29-48. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2005.04.002
46. Strijbos, J. W., & Stahl, G. (2007). Methodological issues in developing a multi-dimensional coding procedure for small group chat communication. Learning & Instruction, 17, 394-404. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.03.005
47. Suthers, D. D., Lund, K., Rosé, C. P., Teplovs, C., & Law, N. (2013). Productive multivocality in the analysis of group interactions. New York: Springer.
48. Vogel, F., Kollar, I., Ufer, S., Reichersdorfer, E., Reiss, K., & Fischer, F. (2016). Developing argumenta-tion skills in mathematics through computer-supported collaborative learning: The role of transactivity. Instructional Science, 44(5), 477-500. doi: 10.1007/s11251-016-9380-2
49. Vogel, F., Wecker, C., Kollar, I., & Fischer, F. (2017). Socio-cognitive scaffolding with collaboration scripts: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review 29(3), 477-511. doi: 10.1007/s10648-016-9361-7
50. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind and society: The development of higher mental processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
51. Walker, E., Rummel, N., & Koedinger, K. R. (2011). Designing automated adaptive support to improve student helping behaviors in a peer tutoring activity. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6, 279-306. doi: 10.1007/s11412-011-9111-2
52. Webb, N. M., Franke, M. L., De, T., Chan, A. G., Freund, D., Shein, P., & Melkonian, D. K. (2009). “Explain to your partner”: Teachers’ instructional practices and students’ dialogue in small groups. Cambridge Journal of Education, 39(1), 49-70. doi: 10.1080/03057640802701986
53. Weinberger, A., & Fischer, F. (2006). A framework to analyze argumentative knowledge construction in computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers and Education, 46(1), 71-95. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2005.04.003
54. 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
55. Zottmann, J. M., Stegmann, K., Strijbos, J.-W., Vogel, F., Wecker, C., & Fischer, F. (2013). Computer-supported collaborative learning with digital video cases in teacher education: The impact of teaching experience on knowledge convergence. Computers in Human Behaviour, 29(5), 2100-2108. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2013.04.014