Perspectives on Collaboration Scripts
  • Frank Fischer
  • Ingo Kollar
  • Jörg M. Haake
  • Heinz Mandl
Part of the Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning book series (CULS, volume 6)


Collaborative learning is widely regarded as an effective instructional approach. It has been shown that by having learners collaborate with peers, they may come to externalize their knowledge, monitor each others’ learning, and jointly negotiate meaning. These activities may trigger significant individual cognitive processes that ultimately lead to individual knowledge construction (see Webb & Palincsar, 1996). On a theoretical level, the benefits of collaborative learning are often described in Piagetian and Vygotskyan terms: in collaborative learning, it is argued, that “socio-cognitive conflicts” (Doise & Mugny, 1984) may arise. When learners then try to resolve these conflicts, individual learning is stimulated. In addition, researchers claim that collaborators can provide one another with a “zone of proximal development” (Vygotsky, 1978). This is achieved by mutually scaffolding their activity such that they can perform slightly above their current level of competence.


Collaborative Learning Computer Support Collaborative Learn Collaboration Script Online Counseling CSCL Script 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bromme, R., Hesse, F. W., & Spada, H. (Eds.) (2005). Barriers and biases in computer-mediated knowledge communication — and how they may be overcome. New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  2. Chinn, C. A., & Brewer, W. F. (1993). The role of anomalous data in knowledge acquisition: A theoretical framework and implications for science instruction. Review of Educational Research, 63, 1–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 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
  4. Doise, W., & Mugny, G. (1984). The social development of the intellect. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  5. Dowson M, & Fernström, C. (1994). Towards Requirements for Enactment Mechanisms. In B. Warboys (Ed.), Software Process Technology. Third European Workshop, EWSPT’ 94, Villard de Lans, France, February 1994. LNCS 772. Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  6. Gräsel, C, Fischer, F., Bruhn, J., & Mandl, H. (2001). Let me tell you something you do know. A pilot study on discourse in cooperative learning with computer networks. In H. Jonassen, S. Dijkstra, & D. Sembill (Eds.), Learning with multimedia-results and perspectives (pp. 111–137). Frankfurt a. M.: Lang.Google Scholar
  7. Haake, J. M., & Schümmer, T. (2003). Supporting collaborative exercises for distance learning. In B. Wasson, S. Ludvigsen, & U. Hoppe (Eds.), Designing for Change in Networked Learning Environments (pp. 125–134). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  8. Hewitt, J. (2005). Toward an understanding of how threads die in asynchronous computer conferences. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(4), 567–589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hoppe, H. U., Gassner, K., Mühlenbrock, M., & Tewissen, F. (2000). Distributed visual language environments for cooperation and learning-applications and intelligent support. Group Decision & Negotiation, 9, 205–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hron, A., Hesse, F. W., Cress, U., & Giovis, C. (2000). Implicit and explicit dialogue structuring in virtual learning groups. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 53–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. King, A. (1998). Transactive peer tutoring: distributing cognition and metacognition. Educational Psychology Review, 10, 57–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kollar, I., Fischer, F., & Hesse, F. W. (in press). Collaboration scripts-a conceptual analysis. Educational Psychology Review.Google Scholar
  13. Kollar, I., Fischer, F., & Slotta, J. D. (2005). Internal and external collaboration scripts in web-based science learning at schools. In T. Koschman, D. Suthers, & T.W. Chan (Eds.), Computer Supported Collaborative Learning 2005: The Next 10 Years! (pp. 331–340). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  14. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambrigde, UK: Cambrige University Press.Google Scholar
  15. 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
  16. Perkins, D. N. (1993). Person-plus: a distributed view of thinking and learning. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions: psychological and educational considerations (pp. 88–110). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Sandoval, W. A., & Millwood, K. A. (2005). The quality of students’ use of evidence in written scientific explanations. Cognition and Instruction, 23(1), 23–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Schank, R. C. (1999). Dynamic Memory Revisited. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Schank, R. C, & Abelson, R. P. (1977). Scripts, plans, goals and understanding. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  20. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  21. 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, NY: Simon and Schuster MacMillan.Google Scholar
  22. Weinberger, A. (2003). Scripts for computer-supported collaborative learning. Effects of social and epistemic cooperation scripts on collaborative construction. Doctoral dissertation, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany. Available at: http://edoc. Scholar
  23. Wessner, M., & Pfister, H.-R. (in press). Points of cooperation: Integrating cooperative learning into web-based courses. In H. U. Hoppe, M. Ikeda, & H. Ogata (Eds.), New technologies for collaborative learning. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Frank Fischer
    • 1
  • Ingo Kollar
    • 1
  • Jörg M. Haake
    • 2
  • Heinz Mandl
    • 3
  1. 1.Knowledge Media Research CenterTübingen
  2. 2.FernUniversitätHagen
  3. 3.Ludwig-Maximilians-UniversitätMunich

Personalised recommendations