Skip to main content

Specifying computer-supported collaboration scripts

Abstract

Collaboration scripts facilitate social and cognitive processes of collaborative learning by shaping the way learners interact with each other. Computer-supported collaboration scripts generally suffer from the problem of being restrained to a specific learning platform. A standardization of collaboration scripts first requires a specification of collaboration scripts that integrates multiple perspectives from computer science, education and psychology. So far, only few and limited attempts at such specifications have been made. This paper aims to consolidate and expand these approaches in light of recent findings and to propose a generic framework for the specification of collaboration scripts. The framework enables a description of collaboration scripts using a small number of components (participants, activities, roles, resources and groups) and mechanisms (task distribution, group formation and sequencing).

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  • Aronson, E., Blaney, N., Stephan, C., Sikes, J., & Snapp, M. (1978). The jigsaw classroom. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, M. (2003). Computer-mediated argumentative interactions for the co-elaboration of scientific notions. In: J. Andriessen, M. Baker, & D. Suthers (eds.), Arguing to learn: confronting cognitions in computer-supported collaborative learning environments. (Vol. 1) (pp. 1–25). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bargh, J. A., & Schul, Y. (1980). On the cognitive benefits of teaching. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 593–604.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barron, B. (2003). When smart groups fail. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(3), 307–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, E. G. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups. Review of Educational Research, 64(1), 1–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dansereau, D. F., Collins, K. W., McDonald, B. A., Holley, C. D., Garland, J. C., Diekhoff, G., et al. (1979). Development and evaluation of a learning strategy program. Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 64–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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, NL: Open Universiteit Nederland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dillenbourg, P., & Jermann, P. (2006). Designing integrative scripts. In: F. Fischer, I. Kollar, H. Mandl, & J. Haake (Eds.), Scripting computer-supported collaborative learning: Cognitive, computational and educational perspectives. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, F., Kollar, I., Mandl, H., & Haake, J. (eds.). (2007). Scripting computer-supported collaborative learning: Cognitive, computational and educational perspectives. New York: Springer.

  • Haake, J. & Pfister, H. R. (2007). Flexible scripting in net-based learning groups. In: F. Fischer, I. Kollar, H. Mandl, & J. Haake (eds.), Scripting computer-supported collaborative learning: Cognitive, computational and educational perspectives. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, R. J. (1997). Effects of three types of elaboration on learning concepts from text. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 22(3), 299–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrer, A., & Malzahn, N. (2006). Bridging the gap—towards a graphical modelling language for learning designs and collaboration scripts of various granularities. In: Kinshuk, R. Koper, P. Kommers, P. Kirschner, D. Sampson, & W. Didderen (eds.), Advanced learning technologies ICALT 2006 (pp. 296–300). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herring, S. C. (1999). Interactional coherence in CMC. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 4(4).

  • King, A. (1990). Enhancing peer interaction and learning in the classroom through reciprocal questioning. American Educational Research Journal, 27(4), 664–687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, A. (1994). Guiding knowledge construction in the classroom: Effects of teaching children how to question and how to explain. American Educational Research Journal, 30, 338–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, A. (2006). 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. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kollar, I., Fischer, F., & Hesse, F. (2006). Computer-supported cooperation scripts—A conceptual analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 18(2), 159–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leitão, S. (2000). The potential of argument in knowledge building. Human Development (Karger), 43, 332–360.

    Google Scholar 

  • MOSIL (2004). Framework for integrated learning. Retrieved January 13th, 2006, from http://www.iwm-kmrc.de/cossicle/resources/D23-05-01-F.pdf

  • O’Donnell, A. M. (1999). Structuring dyadic interaction through scripted cooperation. In: A. M. O’Donnell, & A. King (eds.), Cognitive perspectives on peer learning. (pp. 179–196). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Donnell, A. M., & 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.), Interaction in cooperative groups: The theoretical anatomy of group learning. (pp. 120–141). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1994). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1(2), 117–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pea, R. D. (2004). The social and technological dimensions of scaffolding and related theoretical concepts for learning, education, and human activity. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 423–451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenshine, B., Meister, C., & Chapman, S. (1996). Teaching students to generate questions: A review of the intervention studies. Review of Educational Research, 66(2), 181–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, D. L. (1995). The emergence of abstract representations in dyad problem solving. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4(3), 321–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Boxtel, C., van der Linden, J., & Kanselaar, G. (2000). Collaborative learning tasks and the elaboration of conceptual knowledge. Learning and Instruction, 10, 311–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webb, N. (1989). Peer interaction and learning in small groups. International Journal of Educational Research, 13(1), 21–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webb, N. M., Troper, J. D. & Fall, R. (1995). Constructive activity and learning in collaborative small groups. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(3), 406–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webb, N. M., & Palincsar, A. S. (1996). Group processes in the classroom. In: D. C. Berliner, & R. C. Calfee (eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 841–873). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weinberger, A., Ertl, B., Fischer, F., & Mandl, H. (2005). Epistemic and social scripts in computer-supported collaborative learning. Instructional Science, 33(1), 1–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, B. Y., & Frederiksen, J. R. (1998). Inquiry, modelling, and metacognition: Making science accessible to all students. Cognition and Instruction, 16(1), 3–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lars Kobbe.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kobbe, L., Weinberger, A., Dillenbourg, P. et al. Specifying computer-supported collaboration scripts. Computer Supported Learning 2, 211–224 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-007-9014-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-007-9014-4

Keywords

  • Activities
  • Collaborative learning
  • Collaboration scripts
  • CSCL scripts
  • Group formation
  • Roles
  • Sequencing
  • Task distribution