December 2012, Volume 7, Issue 4, pp 543-566
Date: 16 Nov 2012
Participatory learning through behavioral and cognitive engagements in an online collective information searching activity
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
This study aimed to investigate the relationships between college students’ behavioral and cognitive engagements while performing an online collective information searching (CIS) activity. The activity aimed to assist the students in utilizing a social bookmarking application to exploit the Internet in a collective manner. A group of 101 college students in Taiwan participated in the research procedure, and performed the CIS activity to glean quality online resources for the given search assignment. The actions taken and annotations and comments made during the activity were recorded as log data, and used as the main resource for later analyses of behavioral and cognitive engagements in the activity. Through cluster analysis of the students’ contributions to the CIS activity, four categories of behavioral engagement were identified, namely “Hitchhiker,” “Individualist,” “Active” and “Commentator,” to represent the students’ investments in performing the activity. Furthermore, to explore the students’ cognitive engagement in the activity, content analysis of the verbal transcripts of their annotations and comments was conducted based on the refined coding framework of the present study. The results of further cluster analysis revealed that the students’ cognitive engagement levels could be identified as “Deep” and “Surface.” Through comparison of their behavioral and cognitive engagements, the findings revealed that the students with “Active” behavioral engagement tended to exhibit a “Deep” level of cognitive engagement. It is therefore suggested that both behavioral and cognitive engagements are critical to participatory learning with practice in CIS activities.
Balamuralithara, B., & Woods, P. C. (2009). Virtual laboratories in engineering education: The simulation lab and remote lab. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 17(1), 108–118.CrossRef
Blumenfeld, P. C., Kempler, T. M., Krajcik, J. S., & Blumenfeld, P. (2006). Motivation and cognitive engagement in learning environments. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 475–488). New York: Cambridge.
Bourne, J., Harris, D., & Mayadas, F. (2005). Online engineering education: Learning anywhere, anytime. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 131–146.
Butler, K. A., & Lumpe, A. (2008). Student use of scaffolding software: Relationships with motivation and conceptual understanding. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17(5), 427–436.CrossRef
Carroll, N. L., Markauskaite, L., & Calvo, R. A. (2007). E-portfolios for developing transferable skills in a freshman engineering course. IEEE Transactions on Education, 50(4), 360–366.CrossRef
Chan, C. K. K., & Chan, Y. Y. (2011). Students’ views of collaboration and online participation in knowledge forum. Computers & Education, 57(1), 1445–1457.CrossRef
Chou, S. W., & Min, H. T. (2009). The impact of media on collaborative learning in virtual settings: The perspective of social construction. Computers & Education, 52(2), 417–431.CrossRef
Cobern, W. W. (1993). Contextual constructivism: The impact of culture on the learning and teaching of science. In K. G. Tobin (Ed.), The practice of constructivism in science education (pp. 51–69). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Davies, J., & Graff, M. (2005). Performance in e-learning: Online participation and student grades. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(4), 657–663.CrossRef
de Vries, B., van der Meij, H., & Lazonder, A. W. (2008). Supporting reflective in elementary web searching schools. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(3), 649–665.CrossRef
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.CrossRef
Fang, N., Stewardson, G. A., & Lubke, M. M. (2008). Enhancing student learning of an undergraduate manufacturing course with computer simulations. International Journal of Engineering Education, 24(3), 558–566.
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, P. C. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109.CrossRef
Greene, B. A., & Miller, R. B. (1996). Influences on achievement: Goals, perceived ability, and cognitive engagement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21(2), 181–192.CrossRef
Greene, B. A., Miller, R. B., Crowson, H. M., Duke, B. L., & Akey, K. L. (2004). Predicting high school students’ cognitive engagement and achievement: Contributions of classroom perceptions and motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29(4), 462–482.CrossRef
Greenhow, C., Robelia, B., & Hughes, J. E. (2009). Learning, teaching, and scholarship in a digital age Web 2.0 and classroom research: What path should we take now? Educational Researcher, 38(4), 246–259.CrossRef
Greeno, J. G. (2006). Learning in activity. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 79–96). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Grosseck, G. (2009). To use or not to use web 2.0 in higher education? Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1(1), 478–482.CrossRef
Guan, Y. H., Tsai, C. C., & Hwang, F. K. (2006). Content analysis of online discussion on a senior-high-school discussion forum of a virtual physics laboratory. Instructional Science, 34(4), 279–311.CrossRef
Hansen, P., & Jarvelin, K. (2005). Collaborative information retrieval in an information-intensive domain. Information Processing and Management, 41(5), 1101–1119.CrossRef
Hoffman, J. L., Wu, H. K., Krajcik, J. S., & Soloway, E. (2003). The nature of middle school learners’ science content understandings with the use of on-line resources. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(3), 323–346.CrossRef
Hou, H. T., Chang, K. E., & Sung, Y. T. (2009). Using blogs as a professional development tool for teachers: Analysis of interaction behavioral patterns. Interactive Learning Environments, 17(4), 325–340.CrossRef
Hrastinski, S. (2008). What is online learner participation? A literature review. Computers & Education, 51(4), 1755–1765.CrossRef
Hrastinski, S. (2009). A theory of online learning as online participation. Computers & Education, 52(1), 78–82.CrossRef
Huang, Y. M., Yang, S. J. H., & Tsai, C. C. (2009). Web 2.0 for interactive e-learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 17(4), 257–259.CrossRef
Jin, X. L., Cheung, C. M. K., Lee, M. K. O., & Chen, H. P. (2009). How to keep members using the information in a computer-supported social network. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(5), 1172–1181.CrossRef
Jonassen, D. H. (2002). Learning as activity. Educational Technology, 42(2), 45–51.
Jonassen, D. H., Howlan, J., Moore, J., & Marra, R. M. (2003). Learning to solve problems with technology: A constructivist perspective (2nd ed.). (Ed.) Columbus, OH: Merrill/Prentice-Hall.
Kerawalla, L., Minocha, S., Kirkup, G., & Conolea, G. (2008). Characterising the different blogging behaviours of students on an online distance learning course. Learning, Media and Technology, 33(1), 21–33.CrossRef
Kuiper, E., Volman, M., & Terwel, J. (2009). Developing web literacy in collaborative inquiry activities. Computers & Education, 52(3), 668–680.CrossRef
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Lin, C.-C., & Tsai, C.-C. (2011). Applying social bookmarking to collective information searching (CIS): An analysis of behavioral pattern and peer interaction for co-exploring quality online resources. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(3), 1249–1257.CrossRef
Lou, Y., Abrami, P. C., Spence, J. C., & d’ Apollonia, S. (2001). Small group and individual learning with technology: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 71(3), 449–521.CrossRef
Mendenhall, A., & Johnson, T. E. (2010). Fostering the development of critical thinking skills, and reading comprehension of undergraduates using a Web 2.0 tool coupled with a learning system. Interactive Learning Environments, 18(3), 263–276.CrossRef
Merchant, G. (2009). Web 2.0, new literacies, and the idea of learning through participation. English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 8(3), 107–122.
Meyer, K. (2004). Evaluating online discussions: Four different frames of analysis. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 8(2), 101–114.
Michinov, N., Brunot, S., Le Bohec, O., Juhel, J., & Delaval, M. (2011). Procrastination, participation, and performance in online learning environments. Computers & Education, 56(1), 243–252.CrossRef
Milligan, G. W. (1985). An algorithm for generating artificial test clusters. Psychometrika, 50(1), 123–127.CrossRef
Morrison, P. J. (2008). Tagging of and searching: Search retrieval effectiveness folksonomies on the World Wide Web. Information Processing and Management, 44(4), 1562–1579.CrossRef
Palmer, S., & Hall, W. (2008). Application of podcasting in online engineering education. International Journal of Engineering Education, 24(1), 101–106.
Palmer, S., Holt, D., & Bray, S. (2008). Does the discussion help? The impact of a formally assessed online discussion on final student results. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 847–858.CrossRef
Pena-Shaff, J. B., & Nicholls, C. (2004). Analyzing student interactions and meaning construction in computer bulletin board discussions. Computers & Education, 42(3), 243–265.CrossRef
Picciano, A. G. (2002). Beyond student perceptions: Issues of interaction, presence, and performance in an online course. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 6(1), 21–40.
Punj, G., & Stewart, D. W. (1983). Cluster analysis in marketing research: Review and suggestions for application. Journal of Marketing Research, 20(2), 134–148.CrossRef
Richardson, W. (2006). Blogs, wikis, podcasts, and other powerful web tools for classrooms. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.
Rovai, A. P., & Barnum, K. T. (2003). On-line course effectiveness: An analysis of student interactions and perceptions of learning. Journal of Distance Education, 18(1), 57–73.
Ryan, A. M., & Patrick, H. (2001). The classroom social environment and changes in adolescents’ motivation and engagement during middle school. American Educational Research Journal, 38(2), 437–460.CrossRef
Solomon, J. (1987). Social influences on the construction of pupil’s understanding of science. Studies in Science Education, 14(1), 63–82.CrossRef
Stahl, G., Koschmann, T., & Suthers, D. (2006). Computer-supported collaborative learning: An historical perspective. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 409–425). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tsai, C. C. (2001). A review and discussion of epistemological commitments, metacognition, and critical thinking with suggestions on their enhancement in Internet-assisted chemistry classrooms. Journal of Chemical Education, 78(7), 970–974.CrossRef
von Glasersfeld, E. (1989). Constructivism in education. In T. Husen & T. N. Postlethwaite (Eds.), The International encyclopedia of education: Research and studies (Supplementary Vol. 1, pp. 162–163). Oxford, England: Pergamon Press.
von Glasersfeld, E. (1993). Questions and answers about radical constructivism. In K. Tobin (Ed.), The practice of constructivism in science education (pp. 23–38). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Xie, Y., Ke, F. F., & Sharma, P. (2008). The effect of peer feedback for blogging on college students’ reflective learning processes. Internet and Higher Education, 11(1), 18–25.CrossRef
Xie, Y., Ke, F. F., & Sharma, P. (2010). The effects of peer-interaction styles in team blogs on students’ cognitive thinking and blog participation. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 42(4), 459–479.CrossRef
Zhu, E. P. (2006). Interaction and cognitive engagement: An analysis of four asynchronous online discussions. Instructional Science, 34(6), 451–480.CrossRef
Zhu, X. H., Chen, A., Ennis, C., Sun, H. C., Hopple, C., Bonello, M., et al. (2009). Situational interest, cognitive engagement, and achievement in physical education. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34(3), 221–229.CrossRef
- Participatory learning through behavioral and cognitive engagements in an online collective information searching activity
International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning
Volume 7, Issue 4 , pp 543-566
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer US
- Additional Links
- Cognitive engagement
- Online information searching
- Participatory learning
- Social bookmarking
- Web 2.0
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Graduate Institute of Network Learning Technology, National Central University, No. 300, Jhongda Rd., Jhongli City, Taoyuan County, 32001, Taiwan
- 2. Graduate Institute of Digital Learning and Education, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, #43, Sec. 4, Keelung Rd., Taipei 106, Taiwan