Promoting metacognitive skills through peer scaffolding in a CSCL environment

  • Manoli Pifarre
  • Ruth Cobos


This paper aims to better understand the development of students’ metacognitive learning processes when participating actively in a CSCL system called KnowCat. To this end, a longitudinal case study was designed, in which 18 university students took part in a 12-month (two semesters) learning project. The students followed an instructional process, using specific features of the KnowCat design to support and improve their interaction processes, especially peer-learning processes. Our research involved both supervising the students’ collaborative learning processes throughout the learning project and focusing our analysis on the qualitative evolution of their interaction processes and of their metacognitive learning processes. The results of the current research suggest that the pedagogical use of the KnowCat system may favour and improve the development of the students’ metacognitive learning processes. In addition, the implications of the design of CSCL networks and related pedagogical issues are discussed.


Metacognitive learning Self-regulated learning Peer interaction Peer scaffolding Qualitative research 



This research was partly funded by the Spanish National Plan of R+D, project numbers, SEJ2006-12110, EDU2009-11656, and TIN2008-06596-C02-01; and by the AECID (Spanish Agency of International Cooperation for the Development) project number A/017436/08.


  1. Alamán, X., & Cobos, R. (1999). KnowCat: A web application for knowledge organization. In P. P. Chen et al. (Eds.), Lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 1727, pp. 348–359). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  2. Arvaja, M., Häkkinen, P., Eteläpelto, A., & Rasku-Puttone, N. (2000). Collaborative processes during report writing of a science learning project: The nature of discourse as a function of task requirements. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 15(4), 455–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arvaja, M., Salovaara, H., Häkkinen, P., & Järvela, S. (2007). Combining individual and group-level perspectives for studying collaborative knowledge construction in context. Learning & Instruction, 17, 448–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Azevedo, R., & Jacobson, M. (2008). Advances in scaffolding learning with hypertext and hypermedia: A summary and critical analysis. Education, Technology, Research and Development, 56, 93–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Azevedo, R. (2007). Understanding the complex nature of self-regulatory processes in learning with computer-based learning environments: An introduction. Metacognition Learning, 2, 57–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Azevedo, R., Cromley, J., & Seibert, D. (2004). Does adaptive scaffolding facilitate students’ ability to regulate their learning with hypermedia? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 344–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brown, A. L. (1987). Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation and other mysterious mechanisms. In F. Weinert & R. Kluve (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation and understanding (pp. 65–116). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  8. Brown, A. L., Bransford, J., Ferrara, R., & Campione, J. (1983). Learning, remembering and understanding. In P. Mussen, J. H. Flavell, & E. M. Markman (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology (Vol. 3, pp. 77–166). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  9. Chi, M. T. H. (1997). Quantifying qualitative analyses of verbal data: A practical guide. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6, 271–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cobos, R. (2003). Mecanismos para la cristalización del conocimiento, una propuesta mediante un sistema de trabajo colaborativo (Mechanisms for the Crystallisation of Knowledge, a proposal using a collaborative system). Doctoral dissertation, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, 2003.Google Scholar
  11. Cobos, R., & Alamán, X. (2002). Creating e-books in a distributed and collaborative way. Journal of Electronic Library on Electronic Book for Education, 20(4), 288–295.Google Scholar
  12. Cobos, R., & Pifarré, M. (2008). Collaborative knowledge construction in the web supported by the KnowCat system. Computers & Education, 50, 962–978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Creswell, J. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  14. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Diez, F., & Cobos, R. (2007). A case study of a cooperative learning experience in artificial intelligence. Journal Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 15(4), 308–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dillenbourg, P. (2002). Over-scripting CSCL: The risks of blending collaborative learning with instructional design. In P. A. Kirschner (Ed.), Three worlds of CSCL. Can we support CSCL (pp. 61–91). Heerlen: Open Universiteit Nederland.Google Scholar
  18. Flavell, J. H. (1992). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. In T. O. Nelson (Ed.), Metacognition. Core readings (pp. 3–8). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  19. Gallimore, R., & Tharpe, R. (1990). Teaching mind in society: Teaching schooling and literate discourse. In L. C. Moll (Ed.), Vygotsky and education: Instructional implications and application of sociohistorical psychology (pp. 175–205). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Goos, M., Galbraith, P., & Renshaw, P. (2002). Socially mediated metacognition. Creating collaborative zones of proximal development in small group problem solving. Education Studies in Mathematics, 49(2), 193–223.Google Scholar
  21. Gross, T., Stary, C., & Totter, A. (2005). User-centered awareness in computer-supported cooperative work-systems: Structured embedding of findings from social sciences. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 18(3), 323–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hadwin, A. F., Wozney, L., & Pontin, O. (2005). Scaffolding the appropriation of self-regulatory activity: A socio-cultural analysis of changes in teacher-student discourse about a graduate research portfolio. Instructional Science, 33, 413–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hakkarainen, K., Lipponen, L., & Järvelä, S. (2002). Epistemology of inquiry and computer-supported collaborative learning. In T. Koshman, R. Hall, & N. Miyake (Eds.), CSCL2: Carrying forward the conversation (pp. 129–156). Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  24. Häkkinen, P., Arvaja, M., & Mäkitalo, K. (2004). Prerequisites for CSCL: Research approaches, methodological challenges and pedagogical development. In K. Littleton, D. Faulkner, & D. Miell (Eds.), Learning to collaborate, collaborating to learn (pp. 161–175). New York: Nova Science Publishers, Inc.Google Scholar
  25. Hurme, T., & Järvelä, S. (2005). Students’ activity in computer-supported collaborative problem solving in mathematics. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 10, 49–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hurme, T., Palone, T., & Järvelä, S. (2006). Metacognition in joint discussions: An analysis of the patterns of interaction and the metacognitive content of the networked discussions in mathematics. Metacognition Learning, 1, 181–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Järvelä, S., & Niemivirta, M. (2001). Motivation in context: Challenges and possibilities in studying the role of motivation in new pedagogical cultures. In S. Volet & S. Järvelä (Eds.), Motivation in learning contexts (pp. 105–127). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  28. Jerman, P., & Dillenbourg, P. (2008). Group mirrors to support interaction regulation in collaborative problem solving. Computers & Education, 51, 279–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. King, A. (1999). Discourse patterns for mediating peer learning. Cognitive perspectives on peer learning. Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  30. Koschmann, T., Hall, R., & Miyake, N. (Eds.). (2001). CSCL2: Carrying forward the conversation. Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  31. Kramarski, B., & Gutman, M. (2005). How can self-regulated learning be supported in mathematical elearning environments? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22(1), 24–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kramarski, B., & Mizrachi, N. (2006). Online discussion and self-regulated learning: Effects of instructional methods on mathematical literacy. Journal of Educational Research, 99(4), 218–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P. A., & Jochems, W. (2003). Identifying the pitfalls for social interaction in computer-supported collaborative learning environments: A review of research. Computers in Human Behavior, 19, 335–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P. A., & Jochems, W. (2004). Determining sociability, social space, and social presence in (a)synchronous collaborative groups. Cyberpsychology & behavior: The impact of the Internet, multimedia and virtual reality on behavior and society, 7(2), 155–172.Google Scholar
  35. Laat, M., & Lally, V. (2003). Complexity, theory and praxis: Researching collaborative learning and tutoring processes in a networked learning community. Instructional Science, 31, 7–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lombard, M., Snyder-Duch, J., & Campanella, Ch. (2005). Practical resources for assessing and reporting intercoder reliability in content analysis research projects.
  37. Mercer, N., & Fisher, E. (1998). How do teachers help children to learn? An analysis of teachers’ interventions in computer-based activities. In D. Faulkner, K. Littleton, & M. Woodhead (Eds.), Learning relationships in the classroom (pp. 111–130). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  38. Minna, L., Sami, P., Kari, K., & Hanni, M. (2009). Main functionalities of the Knowledge Practices Environment (KPE) affording knowledge creation practices in education. In Proceedings of International Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Conference (pp. 297–306). Rhodes, Greece.Google Scholar
  39. Moos, D., & Azevedo, R. (2008). Monitoring, planning and self-efficacy during learning with hypermedia: The impact of conceptual tools. Computer in Human Behavior, 24, 1686–1706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Moos, D. C., & Azevedo, R. (2006). The role of goal structure in undergraduates’ use of self-regulatory processes in two hypermedia learning tasks. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 15(2), 49–86.Google Scholar
  41. Naidu, S., & Järvelä, S. (2006). Analyzing CMC content for what? Computers & Education, 46, 96–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Paris, S. G., & Paris, A. H. (2001). Classroom applications of research on self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 36, 89–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Person, N. K., & Graesser, A. G. (1999). Evolution of discourse during cross-age tutoring. In A. M. O’Donnell (Ed.), Cognitive perspectives on peer learning (pp. 69–86). Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  44. Pifarré, M., & Cobos, C. (2009). Evaluation of the development of metacognitive knowledge supported by the KnowCat system. Journal of Education, Technology, Research and Development, 57(6), 787–799.Google Scholar
  45. Pintrich, P. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 452–506). San Diego: Academic.Google Scholar
  46. Pintrich, P. R., & García, T. (1994). Self-regulated learning in college students: Knowledge, strategies and motivation. In P. Pintrich, D. Brown, & C. Weinstein (Eds.), Student motivation, cognition and learning (pp. 113–133). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  47. Ploetzer, R., Dillenbourg, P., Preier, M., & Traum, D. (1999). Learning by explaining to oneself and to others. In P. Dillenbourg (Ed.), Collaborative learning: Cognitive and computational approaches (pp. 103–121). Amsterdam: Pergamon.Google Scholar
  48. Qualitative Solutions and Research (2002). QSR NUD*IST Vivo (NVivo) (Version 2.0). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  49. Reiser, B., Tabak, I., Sandoval, W. A., Smith, B. K., Steinmuller, F., & Leone, A. J. (2001). BGuILE: Strategic and conceptual scaffolds for scientific inquiry in biology classrooms. In S. M. Carver & D. Klahr (Eds.), Cognition and instruction: Twenty-five years of progress (pp. 263–305). Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  50. Resnick, L. B., Lenive, J. M., & Teasley, S. D. (1993). Perspectives on socially shared cognition. Washington: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  51. Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking. Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Salovaara, H. (2005). An exploration of students’ strategy use in inquiry-based computer-supported collaborative learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(1), 39–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Schellens, T., & Valcke, M. (2005). Collaborative learning in asynchronous discussion groups: What about the impact on cognitive processing? Computers in Human Behavior, 21, 957–975.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Schraw, G. (1989). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. Instructional Science, 26(1–2), 113–125.Google Scholar
  55. Stahl, E., Pieschl, S., & Bromme, R. (2006). Task complexity, epistemological beliefs, and metacognitive calibration: An exploratory study. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 35(4), 319–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Stahl, G. (2001). Rediscovering CSCL. In T. Koshman, N. Miyake, & R. Hall (Eds.), CSCL2: Carrying forward the conversation. Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  57. Stahl, G. (2003). Building collaborative knowing: Elements of a social theory of learning. In J. W. Strijbos, P. Kirschner, & R. Martens (Eds.), What we know about CSCL in higher education. Kluwer: London.Google Scholar
  58. Van den Boom, G., Paas, F., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & van Gog, T. (2004). Reflection prompts and tutor feedback in a web-based learning environment: Effects on students’ self-regulated learning competence. Computers in Human Behavior, 20(4), 551–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Van Joolingen, W. R., de Jong, T., & Dimitrakopoulou, A. (2007). Issues in computer supported inquiry learning in science. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23, 111–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Veldhuis-Diermanse, A. E. (2002). CSCLearning? Participation, learning activities and knowledge construction in computer-supported collaborative learning in higher education. Doctoral dissertation, Wageringen University, 1993.Google Scholar
  61. Weinberger, A., & Fischer, F. (2006). A framework to analyze argumentative knowledge construction in computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers & Education, 46(1), 71–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Wersch, J., Minick, N., & Arms, F. (1984). The creation of context in joint problem solving. In B. Rogoff & J. Lave (Eds.), Everyday cognition: Its development in social context (pp. 151–171). Boston: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  63. Winter, F. I., Greene, J. A., & Costich, C. M. (2008). Self-regulation of learning within computer-based learning environments: A critical analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 20(4), 369–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Woodruff, E. (2001). CSCL communities in post-secondary education and cross-cultural settings. In T. Koshman, N. Miyake, & R. Hall (Eds.), CSCL2: Carrying forward the conversation. Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  65. Zimmerman, B. (2000). Attaining self-regulation. A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekarts, P. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation. San Diego: Academic.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Society of the Learning Sciences, Inc.; Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Pedagogy and PsychologyUniversitat de LleidaLleidaSpain
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceUniversidad Autónoma de MadridMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations