Advertisement

Discussion

Roles of Computational Scripts
  • Daniel D. Suthers
Chapter
Part of the Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning book series (CULS, volume 6)

Abstract

This chapter, which was solicited as a commentary upon the chapters of the computer science perspectives on scripting in the present volume, analyzes different roles that computational scripts are expected to play in collaborative learning. Three roles of computational scripts are identified and discussed: offloading some of the work of managing a collaborative interaction so that learners can focus on the learning task, guiding learners into types of interactions that are expected to be productive for learning, and communicating instructional designs. Several problems for further research are identified, including exploration of the synergy between scripting and representational aids, and investigation of the conditions under which spontaneity of patterns of behavior is a factor in the association of these patterns of behavior with learning. Given issues of learner control and the situated nature of learning, a synthesis of the roles of scripting is suggested that views a script as a proxy by which an instructional expert can participate, along with learners who draw upon the script as a resource, in the accomplishment of a successful collaborative learning episode.

Keywords

Unify Modeling Language Instructional Design Collaborative Learning Finite State Automaton Knowledge Element 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Andriessen, J., Baker, M., & Suthers, D. (Eds.) (2003). Arguing to learn: Confronting Cognitions in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Environments. Kluwer book series on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, Pierre Dillenbourg (Series Editor). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  2. Baker, M., & K. Lund (1997). Promoting reflective interactions in a CSCL environment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 13, 175–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Carell, A., Herrmann, T., Kienle, A., & Mcnold, N. (2005). Improving the coordination of collaborative learning with process models. In T. Koschmann, D. Suthers, & T.-W. Chan (Eds.), Computer Supported Collaborative Learning 2005: The Next 10 Years! (pp. 18–27). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  4. Clark, H. H., & Brennan, S. E. (1991). Grounding in communication. In L. B. Resnick, J. M. Levine, & S. D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition. (pp. 127–149). Hyattsville, MD: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Constantino-Gonzales, M. A., Suthers, D., & Escamilla, J. (2003). Coaching web-based collaborative learning based on problem solution differences and participation. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 13(2–4), 263–299.Google Scholar
  6. 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
  7. Flores, F., Graves, M., Hartfield, B., & Winograd, T. (1988) Computer systems and the design of organizational interaction. ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems, 6(2), 153–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hollan, J., & Stornetta, S., (1992). Beyond being there. In Proceedings of CHI’92 (pp. 119–125). ACM Press.Google Scholar
  9. Ikeda, M., Go, S., & Mizoguchi, R. (1997). Opportunistic group formation — a theory for intelligent support in collaborative learning. In Proceedings of AIED-97 (pp. 167–174). Kobe, Japan.Google Scholar
  10. 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. Kluwer book series on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, Pierre Dillenbourg (Series Editor). (pp. 205–226). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  11. Koschmann, T., Zemel, A., Conlee-Stevens, M Young, N., Robbs, J., & Barnhart, A. (2005). How do people learn? In R. Bromme, F. Hesse, & H. Spada (Eds.), Barriers and Biases in Computer-mediated Knowledge Communication (and how they may be overcome) (pp. 265–294). Amsterdam: Kluwer Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Murray, T. (1999). Authoring intelligent tutoring systems: Analysis of the state of the art. International. Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Education, 10(1), 98–129.Google Scholar
  13. Robertson, J., Good, J., & Pain, H. (1998). BetterBlether: The design and evaluation of discussion tool for education. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 9, 219–236.Google Scholar
  14. Slavin, R. E. (1995). Cooperative Learning: Theory, Research and Practice. (2nd ed.) Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  15. Stahl, G. (2006). Group Cognition: Computer Support for Collaborative Knowledge Building. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  16. Steiner, I. D. (1972). Group Process and Productivity. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  17. Suthers, D. (2001). Collaborative representations: Supporting face-to-face and online knowledge-building discourse. Proceedings of the 34th Hawai’i International Conference on the System Sciences (HICSS-34)[CD-ROM]. Maui, Hawai’i: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. (IEEE).Google Scholar
  18. Suthers, D. (2005). Technology affordances for intersubjective learning: A thematic agenda for CSCL. In T. Koschmann, D. Suthers, & T.-W. Chan (Eds.), Computer Supported Collaborative Learning 2005: The Next 10 Years! (pp. 662–671). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  19. Suthers, D. (2006). Technology affordances for intersubjective meaning-making: A research agenda for CSCL. International Journal of Computers Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(3).Google Scholar
  20. Sweller, J., van Merrienboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. G. W. C. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10(3), 251–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Toth, E., Suthers, D., & Lesgold, A, (2002). Mapping to know: The effects of evidence maps and reflective assessment on scientific inquiry skills. Science Education, 86(2), 264–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Van Bruggen, J., Kirschner, P., & Jochems, W. (2002). External representation of argumentation in CSCL and the management of cognitive load. Learning and Instruction, 12(1), 121–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978), Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Weinberger, A., Reiserer, M., Ertl, B., Fischer, F., & Mandl, H. (2005). Facilitating computer-supported collaborative learning with cooperation scripts. In R. Bromme, F. W. Hesse, & H. Spada (Eds.), Barriers and Biases in Computer-mediated Knowledge Communication (and how they may be overcome) (pp. 15–37). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Whitworth, B., Gallupe, B., McQueen, R, (2000). A cognitive three-process model of computer-mediated group interaction. Group Decision and Negotiation, 9, 431–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Daniel D. Suthers
    • 1
  1. 1.University of HawaiiUSA

Personalised recommendations