Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Multivocal Process Analysis of Social Positioning in Study Groups

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Productive Multivocality in the Analysis of Group Interactions

Part of the book series: Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Series ((CULS,volume 15))

Abstract

This chapter compares two multidimensional analyses of the PLTL Chemistry dataset, which each include a cognitive, relational, and motivational dimension. These multidimensional analyses serve to highlight the ways in which the complementary perspectives on collaborative processes offered by each dimension can be integrated in a way that offers deep insights into social positioning within collaborative groups. Differences revealed particularly along the relational and motivational dimensions raise important questions regarding the operationalization of interaction style as displayed through language and highlight the value of multivocality for the purpose of refining important constructs in ways that work towards theory building through integration of findings across research groups that employ different analytic frameworks coming from a common theoretical foundation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Ai, H., Sionti, M., Wang, Y. C., & Rosé, C. P. (2010). Finding transactive contributions in whole group classroom discussions. In K. Gomez, L. Lyons, & J. Radinsky (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference of the Learning Sciences (pp. 976–983). Chicago, IL: International Society of the Learning Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berkowitz, M.W., & Gibbs, J.C., (1979). A Preliminary Manual for Coding Transactive Features of Dyadic Discussion. Unpublished Manuscript. Marquette University, Milwaukee, WI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boekaerts, M., & Minnaert, A. (2006). Affective and motivational outcomes of working in collaborative groups. Educational Psychology, 26(2), 187–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boekaerts, M., & Niemivirta, M. (2000). Self-regulated learning: Finding a balance between learning goals and ego protective goals. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 417–450). New York, NY: Academic.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Dillenbourg, P., Järvelä, S., & Fischer, F. (2009). The evolution of research on computer-supported collaborative leaning: From design to orchestration. In N. Balacheff, S. Ludvigsen, T. de Jong, A. Lazonder, & S. Barnes (Eds.), Technology-enhanced learning: Principles and products (pp. 3–20). New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillies, R. M. (2007). Cooperative learning: Integrating theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gweon, G., Jain, M., McDonogh, J., Raj, B., & Rosé, C. P. (2012). Predicting idea co-construction in speech data using insights from sociolinguistics. In M. Jacobson & P. Reimann (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference of the Learning Sciences. International Society of the Learning Sciences: Sydney, Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hijzen, D., Boekaerts, M., & Vedder, P. (2007). Exploring the links between students’ engagement in cooperative learning, their goal preferences and appraisals of instruction conditions in the classroom. Learning and Instruction, 17(6), 673–687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howley, I., Adamson, D., Dyke, G., Mayfield, E., Beuth, J., & Rosé, C. P. (2012). Group composition and intelligent dialogue tutors for impacting students’ self-efficacy. In S. Cerri, W. Clancey, G. Papadourakis, & K.-K. Panourgia (Eds.), Intelligent tutoring systems: 11th International Conference, ITS 2012. Crete, Greece: IOS Publisher.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howley, I., Mayfield, E., & Rosé, C. P. (2013). Linguistic analysis methods for studying small groups. In C. Hmelo-Silver, A. O’Donnell, C. Chan, & C. Chin (Eds.), International handbook of collaborative learning. New York, NY: Taylor and Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Järvelä, S., Volet, S., & Järvenoja, H. (2010). Research on motivation in collaborative learning: Moving beyond the cognitive-situative divide and combining individual and social processes. Educational Psychologist, 45(1), 15–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1994). Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive and individualistic learning (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joshi, M., & Rosé, C. P. (2007). Using transactivity in conversation summarization in educational dialog (Proceedings of the SLaTE Workshop on Speech and Language Technology in Education). Farmington, PA: ISCA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krapp, A. (2005). Basic needs and the development of interest and intrinsic motivational orientations. Learning and Instruction, 15(5), 381–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P. A., & Jochems, W. M. G. (2003). Identifying the pitfalls for social interaction in computer-supported collaborative learning: A review of the research. Computers in Human Behavior, 19(3), 335–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kulhavy, R. W., & Stock, W. A. (1989). Feedback in written instruction: The place of response certitude. Educational Psychology Review, 1(4), 279–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, R., & Rosé, C. P. (2011). Architecture for building conversational agents that support collaborative learning. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 4(1), 21–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumpulainen, K., & Mutanen, M. (1999). The situated dynamics of peer group interaction: An introduction to an analytic framework. Learning and Instruction, 9(5), 449–473.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, J. R., & Rose, D. (2003). Working with discourse: Meaning beyond the clause. London: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, J. R., & White, P. R. R. (2005). The language of evaluation: Appraisal in English. London: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayfield, E., & Rosé, C. P. (2011). Recognizing authority in dialogue with an integer linear programming constrained model. In Y. Matsumoto & R. Mihalcea (Eds.), Proceedings of the 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies. Portland, OR: Association for Computational Linguistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Narciss, S. (2008). Feedback strategies for interactive learning tasks. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. J. G. Van Merriënboer, & M. P. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (3rd ed., pp. 125–143). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosé, C. P., Wang, Y. C., Cui, Y., Arguello, J., Stegmann, K., Weinberger, A., et al. (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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarmiento, J. W., & Shumar, W. (2010). Boundaries and roles: Positioning and social location in the Virtual Math Teams (VMT) online community. Computers in Human Behavior, 16(4), 524–532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sawyer, Frey, & Brown. (this volume). Peer led team learning in general chemistry. In Suthers, D., Lund, K., Rosé, C. P., Teplovs, C., Law, N. (Eds.), Productive multivocality in the analysis of group interactions, Chapter 9. New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharan, Y., & Sharan, S. (1992). Expanding cooperative learning through group investigation. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slavin, R. E. (1996). Research on cooperative learning and achievement: What we know, what we need to know. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21(1), 43–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strijbos, J. W. (2011). Assessment of (computer-supported) collaborative learning. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 4(1), 59–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strijbos, J. W., & Stahl, G. (2007). Methodological issues in developing a multi-dimensional coding procedure for small group chat communication. Learning and Instruction, 17(4), 394–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strijbos, J. W., Van Goozen, B., & Prins, F. (2012, August). Developing a coding scheme for analysing peer feedback messages. Paper presented at the EARLI-SIG 1 Assessment and Evaluation Conference, Brussels, Belgium.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tolmie, Andrew Kenneth, Keith J. Topping, Donald Christie, Caroline Donaldson, Christine Howe, Emma Jessiman, Kay Livingston, and Allen Thurston. (2010). Social effects of collaborative learning in primary schools. Learning and Instruction, 20(3), 177–191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weinberger, A., & Fischer, F. (2006). A framework to analyze argumentative knowledge construction in computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers and Education, 46(1), 71–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported in part by NSF grant SBE 0836012 to the Pittsburgh Science of Learning Center.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    Iris Howley, Elijah Mayfield & Carolyn Penstein Rosé

  2. Ludwig-Maximilians-Univerity Munich, Munich, Germany

    Jan-Willem Strijbos

Authors
  1. Iris Howley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Elijah Mayfield
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Carolyn Penstein Rosé
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jan-Willem Strijbos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Iris Howley .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dept. of Information & Computer Sciences, University of Hawai'i at Manoa, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA

    Daniel D. Suthers

  2. ICAR Research Lab, CNRS — University of Lyon, LYON, France

    Kristine Lund

  3. Language Technologies Inst. & HCI Inst., Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA

    Carolyn Penstein Rosé

  4. Problemshift, Inc., Windsor, Ontario, Canada

    Chris Teplovs

  5. University of Hong Kong Centre for Info. Technology in Education, Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR

    Nancy Law

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Howley, I., Mayfield, E., Rosé, C.P., Strijbos, JW. (2013). A Multivocal Process Analysis of Social Positioning in Study Groups. In: Suthers, D., Lund, K., Rosé, C., Teplovs, C., Law, N. (eds) Productive Multivocality in the Analysis of Group Interactions. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Series, vol 15. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-8960-3_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation