Skip to main content

It is not either or: An initial investigation into combining collaborative and individual learning using an ITS

Abstract

Research on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) has provided significant insights into why collaborative learning is effective and how we can effectively provide support for it. Building on this knowledge, we can investigate when collaboration is beneficial to support learning. Specifically, collaborative and individual learning are often combined in the classroom, and it is important for the CSCL community to understand when a combination is beneficial compared to individual or collaborative learning alone. Before investing significant work into discovering these details, an initial investigation is needed to determine if there may be any value in a combination. In this study, we compared a combined condition to individual or collaborative-only learning conditions using an intelligent tutoring system for fractions. The study was conducted with 382 4th and 5th grade students. Students across all three conditions had significant learning gains, but the combined condition had higher learning gains than the other conditions. However, this difference was restricted to the 4th grade students. By analyzing the hints and errors of students over time from process data, we found that students in the combined condition tended to make fewer errors both when working collaboratively and individually, and asked for fewer hints than the students in the other conditions. Students who collaborated (collaborative and combined conditions) also reported having higher situational interest in the activity. By finding support for the effectiveness of combining collaborative and individual learning, this paper opens a broader line of inquiry into how they can effectively be combined to support learning.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

References

  • Aleven, V., & Koedinger, K. R. (2001). Investigations into help seeking and learning with a cognitive tutor. In Papers of the AIED-2001 workshop on help provision and help seeking in interactive learning environments, 47-58.

  • Aleven, V., Sewall, J., Popescu, O., van Velsen, M., Demi, S., & Leber, B. (2015). Reflecting on twelve years of ITS authoring tools research with CTAT. Design Recommendations for Adaptive Intelligent Tutoring Systems, 3, 263–283.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J. R. (1983). A spreading activation theory of memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22(3), 261–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J. R., Boyle, C. F., Corbett, A. T., & Lewis, M. W. (1990). Cognitive modeling and intelligent tutoring. Artificial Intelligence, 42, 7–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aronson, E. (1978). The jigsaw classroom. Sage.

  • Atkinson, R. K., Derry, S. J., Renkl, A., & Wortham, D. (2000). Learning from examples: Instructional principles from the worked examples research. Review of Educational Research, 70(2), 181–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baghaei, N., & Mitrovic, A. (2005). COLLECT-UML: supporting individual and collaborative learning of UML class diagrams in a constraint-based intelligent tutoring system. In International Conference on Knowledge-Based and Intelligent Information and Engineering Systems (pp. 458–464). Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Celepkolu, M., Wiggins, J.B., Boyer, K.E., McMullen, K. (2017). Think First: Fostering Substantive Contributions in Collaborative Problem-Solving Dialogues. In Proceedings of the 12 thInternational Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning. (pp. 295-302).

  • Chen, J., Wang, M., Kirschner, P. A., & Tsai, C. C. (2018). The role of collaboration, computer use, learning environments, and supporting strategies in CSCL: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 88(6), 799–843.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M. T., & Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 219–243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cress, U. (2008). The need for considering multilevel analysis in CSCL researchAn appeal for the use of more advanced statistical methods. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3(1), 69–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dehler, J., Bodemer, D., Buder, J., & Hesse, F. W. (2011). Guiding knowledge communication in CSCL via group knowledge awareness. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(3), 1068–1078.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dillenbourg, P. (2002). Over-scripting CSCL: The risks of blending collaborative learning with instructional design. Three worlds of CSCL. Can we support CSCL? 61-91.

  • Dillenbourg, P. (2004). Framework for integrated learning. Kaleidoscope Network of Excellence Deliverable D23.5.1.

  • Dillenbourg, P., & Tchounikine, P. (2007). Flexibility in macro-scripts for computer-supported collaborative learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23(1), 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diziol, D., Rummel, N., Spada, H., & McLaren, B.M. (2007). Promoting learning in mathematics: Script support for collaborative problem solving with the Cognitive Tutor Algebra. In C.A. Chinn, G. Erkens & S. Puntambekar (Eds.) Mice, minds and society. Proceedings of the Computer Supported Collaborative Learning Conference (pp. 39-41). International Society of the Learning Sciences, Inc.

  • Diziol, D., Walker, E., Rummel, N., & Koedinger, K. R. (2010). Using intelligent tutor technology to implement adaptive support for student collaboration. Educational Psychology Review, 22(1), 89–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, F., Kollar, I., Stegmann, K., & Wecker, C. (2013b). Toward a script theory of guidance in computer-supported collaborative learning. Educational Psychologist, 48(1), 56–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, F., Kollar, I., Stegmann, K., Wecker, C., Zottmann, J., & Weinberger, A. (2013a). Collaboration scripts in computer-supported collaborative learning. The International Handbook of Collaborative Learning, 403-419.

  • Frank, M. C., & Gibson, E. (2011). Overcoming memory limitations in rule learning. Language, Learning, & Development, 7, 130–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, B. J., Walberg, H. J., Welch, W. W., & Hattie, J. A. (1987). Syntheses of educational productivity research. International Journal of Educational Research, 11(2), 147–252.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hausmann, R. G., Chi, M. T., & Roy, M. (2004) Learning from collaborative problem solving: An analysis of three hypothesized mechanisms. In 26nd annual conference of the Cognitive Science society, 547-552.

  • Hausmann, R. G., Nokes, T. J., VanLehn, K., & van de Sande, B. (2009). Collaborative Dialog While Studying Worked-out Examples. In International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education. (pp. 596-598).

  • Hausmann, R. G. M., Van de Sande, B., & VanLehn, K. (2008a). Are self-explaining and coached problem solving more effective when done by pairs of students than alone? In B. C. Love, K. McRae, & V. M. Sloutsky (Eds.), Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 2369–2374). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hausmann, R. G., van de Sande, B., & VanLehn, K. (2008b). Trialog: How Peer Collaboration Helps Remediate Errors in an ITS. In Proceedings of the 21st International Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Society Conference (pp. 415–420). Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 111–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Isotani, S., Adams, D., Mayer, R. E., Durkin, K., Rittle-Johnson, B., & McLaren, B. M. (2011). Can erroneous examples help middle-school students learn decimals? In Towards Ubiquitous Learning (pp. 181–195). Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janssen, J., & Bodemer, D. (2013). Coordinated computer-supported collaborative learning: Awareness and awareness tools. Educational Psychologist, 48(1), 40–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeong, H., Hmelo-Silver, C. E., & Jo, K. (2019). Ten Years of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning: A meta-analysis of CSCL in STEM education during 2005-2014. Educational Research Review, 100284.

  • Kapur, M. (2010). Productive failure in mathematical problem solving. Instructional Science, 38(6), 523–550.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kapur, M. (2014). Comparing learning from productive failure and vicarious failure. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 23(4), 651–677.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koedinger, K. R., Corbett, A. C., & Perfetti, C. (2012). The Knowledge-Learning-Instruction (KLI) framework: Bridging the science-practice chasm to enhance robust student learning. Cognitive Science, 36(5), 757–798.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kollar, I., Fischer, F., & Hesse, F. W. (2006). Collaboration scripts–a conceptual analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 18(2), 159–185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kulik, J. A., & Fletcher, J. D. (2015). Effectiveness of Intelligent Tutoring Systems: A Meta-Analytic Review. Review of Educational Research. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315581420.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lester, J. C., Converse, S. A., Kahler, S. E., Barlow, S. T., Stone, B. A., & Bhogal, R. S. (1997). The persona effect: affective impact of animated pedagogical agents. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 359-366). ACM.

  • Ling, L. M., & Marton, F. (2012). Towards a science of the art of teaching. International journal for lesson and learning studies.

  • Linnenbrink-Garcia, L., Durik, A. M., Conley, A. M., Barron, K. E., Tauer, J. M., Karabenick, S. A., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2010). Measuring situational interest in academic domains. Educational and Psychological Measurement.

  • Lou, Y., Abrami, P. C., & d’Apollonia, S. (2001). Small group and individual learning with technology: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 71(3), 449–521.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lou, Y., Abrami, P. C., Spence, J. C., Poulsen, C., Chambers, B., & d’Apollonia, S. (1996). Within-class grouping: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 66(4), 423–458.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ma, W., Adesope, O. O., Nesbit, J. C., & Liu, Q. (2014). Intelligent tutoring systems and learning outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(4), 901.

    Google Scholar 

  • Magnisalis, I., Demetriadis, S., & Karakostas, A. (2011). Adaptive and intelligent systems for collaborative learning support: A review of the field. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 4(1), 5–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mazziotti, C., Loibl, K., & Rummel, N. (2015). Collaborative or Individual Learning within Productive Failure: Does the Social Form of Learning Make a Difference? In O. Lindwall et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 11 thInternational Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, (570-575). Gothenberg, Sweden.

  • McLaren, B. M., Adams, D., Durkin, K., Goguadze, G., Mayer, R. E., Rittle-Johnson, B., Sosnovsky, S., Isotani, S., & Van Velsen, M. (2012). To err is human, to explain and correct is divine: A study of interactive erroneous examples with middle school math students. In 21st Century Learning for 21st Century Skills (pp. 222–235). Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, M. (1993). Situational interest: Its multifaceted structure in the secondary school mathematics classroom. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 424–436.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mullins, D., Rummel, N., & Spada, H. (2011). Are two heads always better than one? Differential effects of collaboration on students’ computer-supported learning in mathematics. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6(3), 421–443.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, J. K., Aleven, V., & Rummel, N. (2017). Exploring Dual Eye Tracking as a Tool to Assess Collaboration. In Innovative Assessment of Collaboration (pp. 157–172). Cham: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, J. K., Belenky, D. M., Aleven, A., & Rummel, N. (2014b). Using an intelligent tutoring system to support collaborative as well as individual learning. In S. Trausan-Matu, K. E. Boyer, M. Crosby, & K. Panourgia (Eds.), Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems (pp. 134–143). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, J. K., Belenky, D. M., Aleven, A., Rummel, N., Sewall, J., & Ringenberg, M. (2014a). Authoring tools for collaborative intelligent tutoring system environments. In S. Trausan-Matu, K. E. Boyer, M. Crosby, & K. Panourgia (Eds.), Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems (pp. 523–528). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, J.K., Rummel, N., & Aleven, V. (2016). Investigating effects of embedding collaboration in an intelligent tutoring system for elementary school students. In the International Conference of the Learning Sciences.

  • Olsen, J. K., Rummel, N., & Aleven, V. (2018a). Co-designing orchestration support for social plane transitions with teachers: Balancing automation and teacher autonomy. In J. Kay, R. Luckin, & R. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 13th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (pp. 1541–1542). London: International Society of the Learning Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, J. K., Sharma, K., Aleven, V., & Rummel, N. (2018b). Combining gaze, dialogue, and action from a collaborative intelligent tutoring system to inform student learning processes. In J. Kay, R. Luckin, & R. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 13th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (pp. 689–696). London: International Society of the Learning Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renkl, A. (2005). The worked-out example principle in multimedia learning. In R. Mayer (Ed.), Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning (pp. 229–246). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renkl, A., & Atkinson, R. K. (2003). Structuring the transition from example study to problem solving in cognitive skill acquisition: A cognitive load perspective. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 15–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rittle-Johnson, B., Siegler, R. S., & Alibali, M. W. (2001). Developing conceptual understanding and procedural skill in mathematics: An iterative process. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(2), 346–362.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogat, T. K., Linnenbrink-Garcia, L., & DiDonato, N. (2013). Motivation in collaborative groups. In C. E. Hmelo-Silver, C. A. Chinn, C. K. K. Chan, & A. M. O’Donnell (Eds.), The international handbook of collaborative learning (pp. 250–267). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, J. L., Howard, K. I., & Vessey, J. T. (1993). Using significance tests to evaluate equivalence between two experimental groups. Psychological Bulletin, 113(3), 553.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rummel, N. (2018). One framework to rule them all? Carrying forward the conversation started by Wise and Schwarz. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 13(1), 123–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rummel, N., Weinberger, A., Wecker, C., Fischer, F., Meier, A., Voyiatzaki, E., … & Koedinger, K. R. (2008). New challenges in CSCL: Towards adaptive script support. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference for the Learning Sciences, 3, (pp. 338-345). International Society of the Learning Sciences.

  • Schraw, G., & Lehman, S. (2001). Situational interest: A review of the literature and directions for future research. Educational Psychology Review, 13(1), 23–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz, B. B., Neuman, Y., & Biezuner, S. (2000). Two wrongs may make a right... If they argue together! Cognition and Instruction, 18(4), 461–494.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siegler, R. S. (1995). How does change occur: A microgenetic study of number conservation. Cognitive Psychology, 28(3), 225–273.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slavin, R. E. (1989). Cooperative learning and student achievement: Six theoretical perspectives. In Advances in Motivation and Achievement, 6, 161-177. Greenwich: JAI Press, Inc..

    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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Springer, L., Stanne, M. E., & Donovan, S. S. (1999). Effects of small-group learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 69(1), 21–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teasley, S. D. (1995). The role of talk in children's peer collaborations. Developmental Psychology, 31(2), 207–220.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsovaltzi, D., Melis, E., Mclaren, B. M., Dietrich, M., Goguadze, G., & Meyer, A. K. (2009). Erroneous examples: A preliminary investigation into learning benefits. In Learning in the Synergy of Multiple Disciplines (pp. 688–693). Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsovaltzi, D., Melis, E., McLaren, B. M., Meyer, A.-K., Dietrich, M., & Goguadze, G. (2010). Learning from erroneous examples: When and how do students benefit from them? In M. Wolpers, P. A. Kirschner, M. Scheffel, S. Lindstaedt, & V. Dimitrova (Eds.), Proceedings of the 5th European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning, Sustaining TEL: From Innovation to Learning and Practice, Barcelona, Spain (pp. 357–373). Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Gog, T., Rummel, N., & Renkl, A. (2019). Learning how to solve problems by studying examples. In J. Dunlosky & K. Rawson (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Cognition and Education. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • VanLehn, K. (2006). The behavior of tutoring systems. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 16(3), 227–265.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vogel, F., Wecker, C., Kollar, I., & Fischer, F. (2017). Socio-cognitive scaffolding with computer-supported collaboration scripts: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 29(3), 477–511.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, E., Rummel, N., & Koedinger, K. R. (2011). Designing automated adaptive support to improve student helping behaviors in a peer tutoring activity. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6(2), 279–306.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, H. C., Rosé, C. P., & Chang, C. Y. (2011). Agent-based dynamic support for learning from collaborative brainstorming in scientific inquiry. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6(3), 371.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wise, A. F., & Schwarz, B. B. (2017). Visions of CSCL: Eight provocations for the future of the field. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 12(4), 423–467.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jennifer K. Olsen.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Olsen, J.K., Rummel, N. & Aleven, V. It is not either or: An initial investigation into combining collaborative and individual learning using an ITS. Intern. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn 14, 353–381 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-019-09307-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-019-09307-0

Keywords

  • Collaboration
  • Problem-solving
  • Erroneous examples