Advertisement

Facilitating socio-cognitive and socio-emotional monitoring in collaborative learning with a regulation macro script – an exploratory study

  • Piia Näykki
  • Jaana Isohätälä
  • Sanna Järvelä
  • Johanna Pöysä-Tarhonen
  • Päivi Häkkinen
Article
First Online:

Abstract

This study examines student teachers’ collaborative learning by focusing on socio-cognitive and socio-emotional monitoring processes during more and less active script discussions as well as the near transfer of monitoring activities in the subsequent task work. The participants of this study were teacher education students whose collaborative learning was supported with a designed regulation macro script during a six weeks environmental science course. The script divided the group work into three phases, namely: the orientation phase, intermediate phase, and reflection phase. The script was put in use by prompting questions that were delivered to the students on tablets. Question prompts instructed groups to plan their collaborative processes, and to stop and reflect on the efficiency of their strategies and outcomes of their learning process. The data were collected by videotaping the groups’ face-to-face work and analysed by focusing on verbalised monitoring interactions. More active and less active script discussions were differentiated in terms of the length and the quality of discussion. The results show that the macro script was used more thoroughly at the beginning of the group activities for orientation than for coordinating the progress or reflecting on the performance. Active script discussions involved more monitoring activities, especially providing socio-emotional support. Once socio-emotional support was stimulated in the more active script discussion, it tended to follow-up during the task work. It can be concluded, that the groups appropriated the script differently in different situations and with varied success. The implications of facilitating socio-cognitive and socio-emotional monitoring in collaborative learning are discussed.

Keywords

Macro-script Socio-cognitive monitoring Socio-emotional monitoring Regulation Script appropriation Video analysis 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by the Academy of Finland (Grant number 273970).

References

  1. Adey, P., & Shayer, M. (1993). An exploration of long-term far-transfer effects following an extended intervention program in the high school science curriculum. Cognition and Instruction, 11(1), 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andriessen, J., Pardijs, M., & Baker, M. (2013). Getting on and getting along. In M. Baker, M. Andriessen, & S. Järvelä (Eds.), Affective learning together: Social and emotional dimensions of collaborative learning (pp. 205–230). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Baker, M., Andriessen, J., & Järvelä, S. (2013). Introduction: Visions of learning together. In M. Baker, M. Andriessen, & S. Järvelä (Eds.), Affective learning together: Social and emotional dimensions of collaborative learning (pp. 1–30). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  4. Barron, B. (2003). When smart groups fail. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(3), 307–359.  https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327809JLS1203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Belland, B. R., Kim, C. M., & Hannafin, M. J. (2013). A framework for designing scaffolds that improve motivation and cognition. Educational Psychologist, 48(4), 243–270.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2013.838920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berry, D. (1983). Metacognitive experience and transfer of logical reasoning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 35, 39–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boekaerts, M. (2011). What have we learned about the social context-student engagement link? Teachers College Record, 113(2), 375–393.Google Scholar
  8. Chi, M. T. H. (1997). Quantifying qualitative analyses of verbal data: A practical guide. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(3), 271–315.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0603_1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cleary, T., & Zimmerman, B. (2012). A cyclical self-regulatory account of student engagement: Theoretical foundations and applications. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 237–257). US: Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. De Backer, L., Van Keer, H., & Valcke, M. (2014). Socially shared metacognitive regulation during reciprocal peer tutoring: Identifying its relationship with students’ content processing and transactive discussions. Instructional Science, 43(3), 323–344.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-014-9335-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. DiDonato, N. C. (2013). Effective self- and co-regulation in collaborative learning groups: An analysis of how students regulate problem solving of authentic interdisciplinary tasks. Instructional Science, 41(1), 25–47.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-012-9206-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dillenbourg, P. (2002). Over-scripting CSCL: The risks of blending collaborative learning with instructional design. In P. A. Kirschner, W. Jochems, F. Catherine, & R. Magliozzi (Eds.), Three worlds of CSCL. Can we support CSCL? (pp. 61–91). Heerlen: Open Universiteit Nederland.Google Scholar
  13. Dillenbourg, P., & Hong, F. (2008). The mechanics of CSCL macro scripts. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3(1), 5–23.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-007-9033-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dillenbourg, P., & Tchounikine, P. (2007). Flexibility in macro-scripts for computer-supported collaborative learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23(1), 1–13.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2007.00191.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Eby, L. T., & Dobbins, G. H. (1997). Collectivistic orientation in teams: An individual and group-level analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18(3), 275–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ellis, H. C., & Ashbrook, P. W. (1988). Resource allocation model of the effect of depressed mood states on memory. In K. Fiedler & J. Forgas (Eds.), Affect, cognition, and social behavior (pp. 25–43). Toronto: Hogrefe International.Google Scholar
  17. Fischer, F., Kollar, I., Stegmann, K., & Wecker, C. (2013). Toward a script theory of guidance in computer-supported collaborative learning. Educational Psychologist, 48(1), 56–66.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2012.748005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Frijda, N. H. (1986). The emotions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Ge, X., & Land, S. M. (2004). A conceptual framework for scaffolding III-structured problem-solving processes using question prompts and peer interactions. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(2), 5–22.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504836.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Georghiades, P. (2000). Beyond conceptual change learning in science education: Focusing on transfer, durability and metacognition. Educational Research, 42(2), 119–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Goos, M., Galbraith, P., & Renshaw, P. (2002). Socially mediated metacognition: Creating collaborative zones of proximal development in small group problem solving. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 49(2), 193–223.  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016209010120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hadwin, A. F., Järvelä, S., & Miller, M. (2011). Self-regulated, co-regulated, and socially shared regulation of learning. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 65–86). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  23. Halpern, D. F. (1998). Teaching critical thinking for transfer across domains: Dispositions, skills, structure training, and metacognitive monitoring. American Psychologist, 53, 449–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hämäläinen, R., & Häkkinen, P. (2010). Teachers' instructional planning for computer-supported collaborative learning: Macro-scripts as a pedagogical method to facilitate collaborative learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(4), 871–877.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.10.025.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hillyard, C., Gillespie, D., & Littig, P. (2010). University students’ attitudes about learning in small groups after frequent participation. Active Learning in Higher Education, 11(1), 9–20.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787409355867.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hurme, T.-R., Palonen, 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 and Learning, 1(2), 181–200.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-006-9792-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Iiskala, T., Vauras, M., Lehtinen, E., & Salonen, P. (2011). Socially shared metacognition of dyads of pupils in collaborative mathematical problem-solving processes. Learning and Instruction, 21(3), 379–393.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2010.05.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jacobs, S., & Gross, J. J. (2014). Emotion regulation in education: Conceptual foundations, current applications, and future directions. In R. Pekrun & L. Linnenbrink-Garcia (Eds.), Handbook of emotions in education (pp. 183–201). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  29. Janssen, J., Erkens, G., Kirschner, P. A., & Kanselaar, G. (2012). Task-related and social regulation during online collaborative learning. Metacognition and Learning, 7(1), 25–43.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-010-9061-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Järvelä, S., & Hadwin, A. F. (2013). New Frontiers: Regulating learning in CSCL. Educational Psychologist, 48(1), 25–39.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2012.748006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 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.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520903433539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Järvelä, S., Järvenoja, H., & Näykki, P. (2013). Analyzing regulation of motivation as an individual and social process e a situated approach. In M. Vauras & S. Volet (Eds.), EARLI series: New perspectives on learning and instruction Interpersonal regulation of learning and Motivation: Methodological advances (pp. 170–187). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  33. Järvelä, S., Kirschner, P. A., Panadero, E., Malmberg, J., Phielix, C., Jaspers, J., Koivuniemi, M., & Järvenoja, H. (2014). Enhancing socially shared regulation in collaborative learning groups: Designing for CSCL regulation tools. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63(1), 125–142.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-014-9358-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Järvelä, S., Kirschner, P. A., Hadwin, A., Järvenoja, H., Malmberg, J., Miller, M., & Laru, J. (2016a). Socially shared regulation of learning in CSCL: Understanding and prompting individual- and group-level shared regulatory activities. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 11(3), 263–280.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-016-9238-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Järvelä, S., Järvenoja, H., Malmberg, J., Isohätälä, J., & Sobocinski, M. (2016b). How do types of interaction and phases of self-regulated learning set a stage for collaborative engagement? Learning and Instruction, 43, 39–51.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2017.01.009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Järvenoja, H., & Järvelä, S. (2009). Emotion control in collaborative learning situations: Do students regulate emotions evoked by social challenges? British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(3), 463–481.  https://doi.org/10.1348/000709909X402811.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Järvenoja, H., Järvelä, S., & Malmberg, J. (2015). Understanding regulated learning in Situative and contextual frameworks. Educational Psychologist, 50(3), 204–219.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2015.1075400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Jermann, P., & Dillenbourg, P. (2003). Elaborating new arguments through a CSCL script. In J. Andriessen, M. Baker, & D. Suthers (Eds.), Arguing to learn: Confronting cognitions in computer-supported collaborative learning environments (pp. 205–226). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kalyuga, S. (2009). Instructional designs for the development of transferable knowledge and skills: A cognitive load perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 25, 332–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Khosa, D. K., & Volet, S. E. (2014). Productive group engagement in cognitive activity and metacognitive regulation during collaborative learning: Can it explain differences in students’ conceptual understanding? Metacognition and Learning, 9(3), 287–307.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-014-9117-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. King, A. (1992). Facilitating elaborative learning through guided student-generated questioning. Educational Psychologist, 27(1), 111–126.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2701_8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. King, A. (2007). Scripting collaborative learning processes: A cognitive perspective. In F. Fischer, I. Kollar, H. Mandl, & J. Haake (Eds.), Scripting computer-supported collaborative learning: Cognitive, computational and educational perspectives (pp. 13–37). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kobbe, L., Weinberger, A., Dillenbourg, P., Harrer, A., Hämäläinen, R., Häkkinen, P., & Fischer, F. (2007). Specifying computer-supported collaboration scripts. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2(2–3), 211–224.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-007-9014-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Kollar, I., Fischer, F., & Hesse, F. W. (2006). Collaboration scripts - a conceptual analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 18(2), 159–185.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-006-9007-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P. A., & Jochems, W. (2003). Identifying the pitfalls for social interaction in computer-supported collaborative learning environments: A review of the research. Computers in Human Behavior, 19(3), 335–353.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0747-5632(02)00057-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Kwon, K., Liu, Y.-H., & Johnson, L. P. (2014). Group regulation and social-emotional interactions observed in computer supported collaborative learning: Comparison between good vs. poor collaborators. Computers and Education, 78, 185–200.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.06.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Lajoie, S. P., Lee, L., Poitras, E., Bassiri, M., Kazemitabar, M., Cruz-Panesso, I., Hmelo-Silver, C., Wiseman, J., Chan, L. K., & Lu, J. (2015). The role of regulation in medical student learning in small groups: Regulating oneself and others' learning and emotions. Computers in Human Behavior, 52, 601–616.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.073.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Cognition and motivation in emotion. American Psychologist, 46(4), 352–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Lee, A., O’Donnell, A. M., & Rogat, T. K. (2015). Exploration of the cognitive regulatory sub-processes employed by groups characterized by socially shared and other-regulation in a CSCL context. Computers in Human Behavior, 52, 617–627.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.072.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Linnenbrink-Garcia, L., Rogat, T. K., & Koskey, K. L. K. (2011). Affect and engagement during small group instruction. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(1), 13–24.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.09.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Ludvigsen, S. (2016). CSCL: Connecting the social, emotional and cognitive dimensions. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 11(2), 115–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Meinhardt, J., & Pekrun, R. (2003). Attentional resource allocation to emotional events: An ERP study. Cognition and Emotion, 17, 477–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  55. Miller, M., & Hadwin, A. (2015). Scripting and awareness tools for regulating collaborative learning: Changing the landscape of support in CSCL. Computer in Human Behavior, 52, 573–588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Mullins, D., Deiglmayr, A., & Spada, H. (2013). Motivation and emotion shaping knowledge co-construction. In M. J. Baker, J. Andriessen, & S. Järvelä (Eds.), Affective learning together: Social and emotional dimensions of collaborative learning (pp. 139–161). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  57. Näykki, P., & Järvelä, S. (2008). How pictorial knowledge representations mediate collaborative knowledge construction in groups. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 40(3), 359–387.  https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2008.10782512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Näykki, P., Järvelä, S., Kirschner, P. A., & Järvenoja, H. (2014). Socio-emotional conflict in collaborative learning-a process-oriented case study in a higher education context. International Journal of Educational Research, 68, 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Näykki, P., Järvenoja, H., Järvelä, S., & Kirschner, P. (2017). Monitoring makes a difference: Quality and temporal variation in teacher education students’ collaborative learning. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 61(1), 31–46.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2015.1066440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Noroozi, O., Kirschner, P. A., Biemans, H. J. A., & Mulder, M. (2017). Promoting argumentation competence: Extending from first- to second-order scaffolding through adaptive fading. Educational Psychology Review, 1–24.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-017-9400-z.
  61. O'Donnell, A. N., & Dansereau, D. F. (1992). Scripted cooperation in student dyads: A method for analyzing and enhancing academic learning and performance. In R. Hertz-Lazarowitz & N. Miller (Eds.), Interactions in cooperative groups. The theoretical anatomy of group learning (pp. 120–141). Cambridge: University Press.Google Scholar
  62. O'Donnell, A. M., & King, A. (Eds.). (1999). Cognitive perspectives on peer learning. Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  63. Osman, M. (2008). Positive transfer and negative transfer/antilearning of problem-solving skills. Journal of Experimental Psychology General, 137(1), 97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Titz, W., & Perry, R. P. (2002). Academic emotions in students’ self-regulated learning and achievement: A program of qualitative and quantitative research. Educational Psychologist, 37(2), 91–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Polo, C., Lund, K., Plantin, C., & Niccolai, G. (2016). Group emotions: The social and cognitive functions. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 11(2).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-016-9232-8.
  66. Rogat, T. K., & Adams-Wiggins, K. R. (2014). Other-regulation in collaborative groups: Implications for regulation quality. Instructional Science, 42(6), 879–904.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Rogat, T. K., & Adams-Wiggins, K. R. (2015). Interrelation between regulatory and socioemotional processes within collaborative groups characterized by facilitative and directive other-regulation. Computers in Human Behavior, 52(3165), 589–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Rogat, T. K., & Linnenbrink-Garcia, L. (2011). Socially shared regulation in collaborative groups: An analysis of the interplay between quality of social regulation and group processes. Cognition and Instruction, 29(4), 375–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Rogat, T. K., & Linnenbrink-Garcia, L. (2013). Understanding quality variation in socially shared regulation: A focus on methodology. In S. Volet & M. Vauras (Eds.), Interpersonal regulation of learning and motivation (pp. 102–124). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  70. Roscoe, R. D., & Chi, M. T. H. (2008). Tutor learning: The role of explaining and responding to questions. Instructional Science, 36(4), 321–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Ryu, S., & Lombardi, D. (2015). Coding classroom interactions for collective and individual engagement. Educational Psychologist, 50(1), 70–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Saab, N. (2012). Team regulation, regulation of social activities or co-regulation: Different labels for effective regulation of learning in CSCL. Metacognition and Learning, 7(1), 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Salas, E., Sims, D. E., & Shawn Burke, C. (2005). Is there a “big five” in teamwork? Small Group Research, 36(5), 555–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (Eds.). (1998). Self-regulated learning: From teaching to self-reflective practice. New York: Guildford Press.Google Scholar
  75. Schutz, P. A., & Davis, H. A. (2000). Emotions and self-regulation during test taking. Educational Psychologist, 35(4), 243–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Sinha, S., Kempler Rogat, T., Adams-Wiggins, K. R., & Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2015). Collaborative group engagement in a CSCL environment. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 10, 273–307.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-015-9218-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Stegmann, K., Kollar, I., Weinberger, A., & Fischer, R. (2016). Appropriation from a script theory of guidance perspective: A response to Pierre Tchounikine. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 11(3), 371–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Strijbos, J.-W., Martens, R. L., Prins, F. J., & Jochems, W. M. G. (2006). Content analysis: What are they talking about? Computers and Education, 46(1), 29–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Summers, M., & Volet, S. (2010). Group work does not necessarily equal collaborative learning: Evidence from observations and self-reports. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 25(4), 473–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Tchounikine, P. (2016). Contribution to a theory of CSCL scripts: Taking into account the appropriation of scripts by learners. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 11(3), 349–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 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 (pp. 361–384). Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Thompson, S. D., Martin, L., Richards, L., & Branson, D. (2003). Assessing critical thinking and problem solving using a web-based curriculum for students. Internet and Higher Education, 6(2), 185–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Ucan, S., & Webb, M. (2015). Social regulation of learning during collaborative inquiry learning in science: How does it emerge and what are its functions? International Journal of Science Education, 37(15), 2503–2532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Van Den Bossche, P., Gijselaers, W. H., Segers, M., & Kirschner, P. A. (2006). Social and cognitive factors driving teamwork in collaborative learning environments: Team learning beliefs and behaviors. Small Group Research, 37(5), 490–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Vogel, F., Wecker, C., Kollar, I., & Fischer, F. (2016). Socio-cognitive scaffolding with computer-supported collaboration scripts: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 1–35.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-016-9361-7.
  86. Volet, S., & Mansfield, C. (2006). Group work at university: Significance of personal goals in the regulation strategies of students with positive and negative appraisals. Higher Education Research & Development, 25(4), 341–356.  https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360600947301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Wang, Q. (2009). Design and evaluation of a collaborative learning environment. Computers and Education, 53(4), 1138–1146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Weinberger, A., Ertl, B., Fischer, F., & Mandl, H. (2005). Epistemic and social scripts in computer-supported collaborative learning. Instructional Science, 33(1), 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Weinberger, A., Stegmann, K., & Fischer, F. (2007). Knowledge convergence in collaborative learning: Concepts and assessment. Learning and Instruction, 17(4), 416–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Wolters, C. A. (2003). Regulation of motivation: Evaluating an underemphasized aspect of self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(4), 189–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 17(2), 89–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Zimmerman, B. J. (1989). A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(3), 329–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Society of the Learning Sciences, Inc. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of EducationUniversity of OuluOuluFinland
  2. 2.Finnish Institute for Educational ResearchUniversity of JyväskyläJyväskyläFinland

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options