Advertisement

Challenges in online collaboration: effects of scripting shared task perceptions

  • Allyson F. Hadwin
  • Aishah Bakhtiar
  • Mariel Miller
Article

Abstract

Difficulties with planning, such as negotiating task understandings and goals, can have a profound effect on regulation and task performance when students work collaboratively (Miller and Hadwin, Computers in Human Behaviour, 52, 573-588, 2015a). Despite planning being a common challenge, teams often fail to identify strategies for addressing those challenges successfully. The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of team planning support in the form of awareness visualizations (quantified, nominal, and no visualization of individual planning perceptions summarized across group members) on the challenges students face during collaboration, and the ways they report regulating in the face of those challenges. Findings revealed differences across conditions. Individuals in the no visualization condition (a) rated planning as more problematic, and (b) were likely to encounter doing the task, checking progress, and group work challenges when they encounter planning challenges, (c) reported more time and planning main challenges compared to doing the task and group work challenges, and (d) reported that planning strategies (adopted as a team) were most effective for addressing planning challenges, followed by teamwork strategies which were less effective. In contrast, individuals belonging to groups who received one of the two visualizations (a) reported that both planning and teamwork strategies to be equally effective for addressing planning challenges, and (b) reported higher levels of success with their strategies than groups without a visualization support. Findings attest to the importance of supporting group planning with planning visualizations.

Keywords

Computer-supported collaborative learning Metacognition Planning Regulation Collaborative learning Scripting Group awareness tools Decision contingencies 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Support for this research was provided by an Insight Grant for research to Hadwin, A.F., & Winne P.H. from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (435–2012-0529).

References

  1. Bakhtiar, A., Webster, E. A., & Hadwin, A. F. (2017). Regulation and socio-emotional interactions in a positive and a negative group climate. Metacognition and Learning, 1–34.Google Scholar
  2. Bannert, M., & Reimann, P. (2012). Supporting self-regulated hypermedia learning through prompts. Instructional Science, 40(1), 193–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barron, B. (2003). When smart groups fail. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(3), 307–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R. W., Soloway, E., & Krajcik, J. (1996). Learning with peers: From small group cooperation to collaborative communities. Educational Researcher, 25(8), 37–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Buder, J., & Bodemer, D. (2008). Supporting controversial CSCL discussions with augmented group awareness tools. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3(2), 123–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Butler, D. L., & Winne, P. H. (1995). Feedback and self-regulated learning: A theoretical synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 65(3), 245–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Catone, J. (2008). GitHub: A Social Network for Programmers. Retrieved from https://readwrite.com/2008/04/11/github_a_social_network_for_programmers/. Accessed 8 June 2018.
  8. Chiu, M. M., & Khoo, L. (2003). Rudeness and status effects during group problem solving: Do they bias evaluations and reduce the likelihood of correct solutions? Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(3), 506–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. De Dreu, C. K. W., & Weingart, L. R. (2003). Task versus relationship conflict, team performance, and team member satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(4), 741–749.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Edmondson, A. C., & Roloff, K. S. (2009). Overcoming barriers to collaboration: Psychological safety and learning in diverse teams. Team Effectiveness in Complex Organizations: Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives and Approaches, 34, 183–208.Google Scholar
  11. Fischer, F., Kollar, I. N. G. O., Stegmann, K. A. R. S. T. E. N., Wecker, C. H. R. I. S. T. O. F., Zottmann, J., & Weinberger, A. (2013). Collaboration scripts in computer-supported collaborative learning. The international handbook of collaborative learning, 403–419.Google Scholar
  12. Fransen, J., Kirschner, P. A., & Erkens, G. (2011). Mediating team effectiveness in the context of collaborative learning: The importance of team and task awareness. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(3), 1103–1113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Greene, J. A., Hutchison, L. A., Costa, L. J., & Crompton, H. (2012). Investigating how college students’ task definitions and plans relate to self-regulated learning processing and understanding of a complex science topic. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 37(4), 307–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gunawardena, C., Carabajal, K., & Lowe, C. A. (2001). Critical analysis of models and methods used to evaluate online learning networks. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED456159.Google Scholar
  15. Hadwin, A. F., & Winne, P. H. (2012). Promoting learning skills in undergraduate students. In Enhancing the quality of learning: Dispositions, instruction, and mental structures (pp. 201–227).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hadwin, A. F., Malmberg, J., Järvelä, S., Jarvenoja, H., & Vainiopää, M. V. (2010). Exploring socially-shared metacognition in the context of shared task perceptions and goals. Paper presented at the 4th Biennial Meeting of the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction SIG-16 Metacognition, Muenster, Germany.Google Scholar
  17. 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. 65–84). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  18. Hadwin, A.F., Webster, E., Bakhtiar, A., & Caird, H. (2015). Challenges in Teamwork: Examining the effects of 4 different planning scripts. Paper presented at the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction, Limassol, Cyprus.Google Scholar
  19. Hadwin, A. F., Järvelä, S., & Miller, M. (2017). Self-regulation, co-regulation, and shared regulation in collaborative learning environments. In D. H. Schunk & J. A. Greene (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. Holm, S. (1979). A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics., 6(2), 65–70.Google Scholar
  21. Hommes, J., Van den Bossche, P., de Grave, W., Bos, G., Schuwirth, L., & Scherpbier, A. J. J. A. (2013). Understanding the effects of time on collaborative learning processes in problem based learning: A mixed methods study. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 19(4), 541–563.Google Scholar
  22. Hox, J. J., Moerbeek, M., & van de Schoot, R. (2010). Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications. Routledge.Google Scholar
  23. Isohätälä, J., Järvenoja, H., & Järvelä, S. (2017). Socially shared regulation of learning and participation in social interaction in collaborative learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 81, 11–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Järvelä, S., & Hadwin, A. F. (2013). New frontiers: Regulating learning in CSCL. Educational Psychologist, 48(1), 25–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Järvelä, S., Kirschner, P. A., Panadero, E., Malmberg, J., Phielix, C., Jaspers, J., et al. (2015). Enhancing socially shared regulation in collaborative learning groups: Designing for CSCL regulation tools. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63(1), 125–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Järvenoja, H., & Järvelä, S. (2009). Emotion control in collaborative learning situations: Do students regulate emotions evoked by social challenges? The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 463–481.  https://doi.org/10.1348/000709909X402811.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Järvenoja, H., Volet, S., & Järvelä, S. (2013). Regulation of emotions in socially challenging learning situations: An instrument to measure the adaptive and social nature of the regulation process. Educational Psychology, 33(1), 31–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kempler, T. M., & Linnenbrink, E. A. (2006). Helping behaviors in collaborative groups in math: A descriptive analysis. Help seeking in academic settings: Goals, groups and contexts, 89–115.Google Scholar
  31. Kirschner, P. A., Beers, P. J., Boshuizen, H. P., & Gijselaers, W. H. (2008). Coercing shared knowledge in collaborative learning environments. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(2), 403–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kirschner, P. A., Kreijns, K., Phielix, C., & Fransen, J. (2015). Awareness of cognitive and social behaviour in a CSCL environment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 31(1), 59–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Koivuniemi, M., Panadero, E., Malmberg, J., & Järvelä, S. (2017). Higher education students’ learning challenges and regulatory skills in different learning situations/Desafíos de aprendizaje y habilidades de regulación en distintas situaciones de aprendizaje en estudiantes de educación superior. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 40(1), 19–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Leinonen, P., Järvelä, S., & Häkkinen, P. (2005). Conceptualizing the awareness of collaboration: A qualitative study of a global virtual team. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 14(4), 301–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Luyten, L., Lowyck, J., & Tuerlinckx, F. (2001). Task perception as a mediating variable: A contribution to the validation of instructional knowledge. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71(2), 203–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. McCardle, L., Helm, S., Hadwin, A.F., Shaw, K., & Wild, P. (2011). Regulation of learning in the context of collaborative challenges. Poster presented at the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction, Exeter, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
  38. Miller M., Hadwin, A. (2013). Negotiating task perceptions during computer-supported collaborative problem-solving. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Canadian Society for the Study of Education Victoria, BC.Google Scholar
  39. Miller, M., & Hadwin, A. F. (2015a). Scripting and awareness tools for regulating collaborative learning: Changing the landscape of support in CSCL. Computers in zHuman Behaviour, 52, 573–588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Miller, M., & Hadwin, A. F (2015b). Investigating CSCL supports for shared task perceptions in socially shared regulation of collaborative learning. Manuscript in submission. Google Scholar
  41. Miller, M., Malmberg, J, Hadwin, A, Jarvela, S. (2013). Tracing shared task perceptions in online collaboration. Paper presented at the annual conference of the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction, University of Munich, Germany.Google Scholar
  42. Mulryan, C. M. (1992). Student passivity during cooperative small groups in mathematics. The Journal of Educational Research, 85(5), 261–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2010). Mplus: Statistical analysis with latent variables: User's guide. Los Angeles.Google Scholar
  44. 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
  45. Näykki, P., Isohätälä, J., Järvelä, S., Pöysä-Tarhonen, J., & Häkkinen, P. (2017). Facilitating socio-cognitive and socio-emotional monitoring in collaborative learning with a regulation macro script–an exploratory study. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 12(3), 251–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (Vol. 1). Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar
  47. Reimann, P., & Bannert, M. (2017). Self-regulation of learning and performance in computer-supported collaborative learning environments. In D. H. Schunk & J. A. Greene (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  48. 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
  49. Romano, D. M., & Brna, P. (2001). Presence and reflection in training: Support for learning to improve quality decision-making skills under time limitations. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 4(2), 265–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Rummel, N., Spada, H., & Hauser, S. (2009). Learning to collaborate while being scripted or by observing a model. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(1), 69–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Schellings, G. L., & Broekkamp, H. (2011). Signaling task awareness in think-aloud protocols from students selecting relevant information from text. Metacognition and Learning, 6(1), 65–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Sobocinski, M., Malmberg, J., & Järvelä, S. (2017). Exploring temporal sequences of regulatory phases and associated interactions in low- and high-challenge collaborative learning sessions. Metacognition and Learning, 12(2), 275–294.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-016-9167-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Strijbos, J. W., Kirschner, P. A., & Martens, R. L. (2004). What we know about CSCL: And implementing it in higher education. Computer-supported collaborative learning series (Vol. 3). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 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
  55. Van den Bossche, P., Gijselaers, H. W., 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
  56. Van Ginkel, W. P., & Van Knippenberg, D. (2008). Group information elaboration and group decision making: The role of shared task representations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 105(1), 82–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Walker, A. (2001). British psychology students’ perceptions of group-work and peer assessment. Psychology Learning and Teaching, 1(1), 28–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Winne, P. H., & Hadwin, A. F. (1998). Studying as self-regulated engagement in learning. In D. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 277–304). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  59. Winne, P. H., & Hadwin, A. F. (2008). The weave of motivation and self-regulated learning. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Motivation and Self-regulated learning: Theory, Research and Applications (pp. 298–314). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  60. Zarnoth, P., & Sniezek, J. A. (1997). The social influence of confidence in group decision making. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33(4), 345–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Zimmerman, B. J. (1990). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview. Educational Psychologist, 25(1), 3–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Society of the Learning Sciences, Inc. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Allyson F. Hadwin
    • 1
  • Aishah Bakhtiar
    • 1
  • Mariel Miller
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Educational Psychology and Leadership StudiesUniversity of VictoriaVictoriaCanada
  2. 2.Technology Integrated LearningUniversity of VictoriaVictoriaCanada

Personalised recommendations