Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Exploring Factors that Influence Collaborative Problem Solving Awareness in Science Education

  • Original research
  • Published:
Technology, Knowledge and Learning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study designed a science course following collaborative problem solving (CPS) processes, and examined the effect on students’ CPS awareness. The Limnic Eruption CPS course was implemented using a Moodle system in a tenth-grade class. Considering the complex and coordinated nature of CPS, in order to improve CPS skills, it is important to identify what are related with the development of all sub-skills of CPS. Thus this study aimed to determine potential factors that affect the use of CPS skills in students’ motivational and behavioral dimensions. Multiple data sources including learning tests, questionnaire feedback, and learning logs were collected and examined by learning analytics approach. The relationships between students’ CPS awareness with their learning motivation and learning behaviors were explored. The research findings indicated a significant positive correlation between CPS awareness and certain learning motivation factors and learning behavior factors. Considering the students’ individual differences in learning abilities, we also compared the results of high and low performance groups. As a result, low performers’ learning motivation and learning behaviors were correlated with the social domain of CPS awareness, while those of high performers were correlated with their cognitive awareness.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of Data and Material

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article.

Abbreviations

CPS:

Collaborative problem solving

ICT:

Information communications technologies

LA:

Learning analytics

M2B:

Moodle, Mahara, and BookRoll

References

  • 1st International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge. (2011). Banff, Alberta. https://tekri.athabascau.ca/analytics.

  • Aktamis, H., & Ergin, O. (2008). The effect of scientific process skills education on students’ scientific creativity. Science Attitudes and Academic Achievements. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching,9(1), 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Artino, R., Jr., & Jones, K. D., II. (2012). Exploring the complex relations between achievement emotions and self-regulated learning behaviors in online learning. The Internet and Higher Education,15(3), 170–175.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Care, E., Scoular, C., & Griffin, P. (2016). Assessment of collaborative problem solving in education environments. Applied Measurement in Education,29(4), 250–264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlgren, T. (2013). Communication, critical thinking, problem solving: A suggested course for all high school students in the 21st century. Interchange,44, 63–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chan, M. C. E., & Clarke, D. (2017). Structured affordances in the use of open-ended tasks to facilitate collaborative problem solving. ZDM Mathematics Education,49(6), 951–963.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang, C. J., Chang, M. H., Liu, C. C., Chiu, B. C., Fan Chiang, S. H., Wen, C. T., et al. (2017). An analysis of collaborative problem-solving activities mediated by individual-based and collaborative computer simulations. Journal of Computer Assisted learning,33, 649–662.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, L., Uemura, H., Hao, H., Goda, Y., Okubo, F., Taniguchi, Y., et al. (2018). Relationships between collaborative problem solving, learning performance and learning behavior in science education. In Proceedings of 2018 IEEE international conference on teaching, assessment, and learning for engineering (TALE) (pp. 17–24). Wollongong, NSW, Australia.

  • De Barba, P. G., Kennedy, G. E., & Ainley, M. D. (2016). The role of students’ motivation and participation in predicting performance in a MOOC. Journal of Computer Assisted learning,32(3), 218–231.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeWitt, D., & Siraj, S. (2010). Design and development of a collaborative mlearning module for secondary school science in Malaysia: Addressing learners’ needs of the use and perceptions of technology. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences,2(2), 471–475.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dinsmore, D. L., Baggetta, P., Doyle, S., & Loughlin, S. M. (2014). The role of initial learning, problem features, prior knowledge, and pattern recognition on transfer success. The Journal of Experimental Education,82, 121–141.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunbar, R. L., Dingel, M. J., & Prat-Resina, X. (2014). Connecting analytics and curriculum design: Process and outcomes of building a tool to browse data relevant to course designers. Journal of Learning Analytics,1(3), 223–243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gašević, D., Jovanović, J., Pardo, A., & Dawson, S. (2017). Detecting learning strategies with analytics: Links with self-reported measures and academic performance. Journal of Learning Analytics,4(2), 113–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greiff, S., Holt, D., & Funke, J. (2013). Perspectives on problem solving in educational assessment: Analytical, interactive, and collaborative problem solving. The Journal of Problem Solving,5, 71–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gu, X., Chen, S., Zhu, W., & Lin, L. (2015). An intervention framework designed to develop the collaborative problem-solving skills of primary school students. Educational Technology Research and Development,63(1), 143–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunzelmann, G., & Anderson, J. R. (2003). Problem solving: Increased planning with practice. Cognitive Systems Research,4, 57–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hesse, F., Care, E., Buder, J., Sassenberg, K., & Griffin, P. (2015). A framework for teachable collaborative problem solving skills. In P. Griffin, B. McGaw, & E. Care (Eds.), Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills (pp. 37–56). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogan, K. (1999). Thinking aloud together: A test of an intervention to foster students’ collaborative scientific reasoning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,36(10), 1085–1109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huitt, W. (1992). Problem solving and decision making: Consideration of individual differences using the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Journal of Psychological Type,24, 33–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ifenthaler, D., & Widanapathirana, C. (2014). Development and validation of a Learning Analytics framework: Two case studies using support vector machines. Technology, Knowledge and Learning,19(1–2), 221–240.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many hands make light work: The causes and consequences of social loafing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,37, 822–832.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, P. C., Hou, H. T., Wu, S. Y., & Chang, K. E. (2014). Exploring college students’ cognitive processing patterns during a collaborative problem-solving teaching activity integrating Facebook discussion and simulation tools. The Internet and Higher Education,22, 51–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monroy, C., Rangel, V. S., & Whitaker, R. (2014). A strategy for incorporating learning analytics into the design and evaluation of a K-12 science curriculum. Journal of Learning Analytics,1(2), 94–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ogata, H., Taniguchi, Y., Suehiro, D., Shimada, A., Oi, M., Okubo, F., et al. (2017). M2B system: A digital learning platform for traditional classrooms in university. In Practitioner track proceedings of the seventh international learning analytics & knowledge conference (LAK 2017), paper presented at Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, Canada (pp. 155–162).

  • Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. (2010). PISA 2012 Field Trial Problem Solving Framework. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/8/42/46962005.pdf.

  • Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. (2017). PISA 2015: Collaborative Problem-Solving Framework. https://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/Draft%20PISA%202015%20Collaborative%20Problem%20Solving%20Framework%20.pdf.

  • Oshima, J., Oshima, R., & Fujita, W. (2018). A mixed-methods approach to analyze shared epistemic agency in Jigsaw instruction at multiple scales of temporality. Journal of Learning Analytics,5(1), 10–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pechenizkiy, M., & Gašević, D. (2014). Introduction into sparks of the learning analytics future. Journal of Learning Analytics,1(3), 145–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pursel, B. K., Zhang, L., Jablokow, K. W., Choi, G. W., & Velegol, D. (2016). Understanding MOOC students: Motivations and behaviours indicative of MOOC completion. Journal of Computer Assisted learning,32(3), 202–217.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riel, J., Lawless, K. A., & Brown, S. W. (2018). Timing matters: Approaches for measuring and visualizing behaviours of timing and spacing of work in self-paced online teacher professional development courses. Journal of Learning Analytics,5(1), 25–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sakurai, S., & Takano, S. (1985). A new self-report scale of intrinsic versus extrinsic motivation toward: Learning for children. Tsukuba Psychological Research,7, 43–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • San Pedro, M. O. Z., Baker, R. S., & Heffernan, N. T. (2017). An integrated look at middle school engagement and learning in digital environments as precursors to college attendance. Technology, Knowledge, and Learning,22(3), 243–270.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, R., & Tiemann, R. (2012). Factors of problem-solving competency in a virtual chemistry environment: The role of metacognitive knowledge about strategies. Computers & Education,59(4), 1199–1214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumacher, C., & Ifenthaler, D. (2018). The importance of students’ motivational dispositions for designing learning analytics. Journal of Computing in Higher Education,30(3), 599–619.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schunk, D. H. (1991). Self-efficacy and academic Motivation. Educational Psychologist,26(3–4), 207–231.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stein, M. K., Engle, R. A., Smith, M. S., & Hughes, E. K. (2008). Orchestrating productive mathematical discussions: Helping teachers learn to better incorporate student thinking. Mathematical Thinking and Learning,10, 313–340.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sun, J. C. Y., Lin, C. T., & Chou, C. (2018). Applying learning analytics to explore the effects of motivation on online students’ reading behavioral patterns. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning,19(2), 210–227.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sun, D., & Looi, C. K. (2013). Designing a web-based science learning environment for model-based collaborative inquiry. Journal of Science Education and Technology,22(1), 73–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Horne, S., Russell, J., & Schuh, K. L. (2016). The adoption of mark-up tools in an interactive e-textbook reader. Educational Technology Research and Development,64(3), 407–433.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Leeuwen, A. (2015). Learning analytics to support teachers during synchronous CSCL: Balancing between overview and overload. Journal of Learning Analytics,2(2), 138–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Merriënboer, J. (2013). Perspectives on problem solving and instruction. Computers & Education,64, 153–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vieira, C., Goldstein, M. H., Purzer, Ş., & Magana, A. J. (2016). Using learning analytics to characterize student experimentation strategies in the context of engineering design. Journal of Learning Analytics,3(3), 291–317.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wendt, J. L., & Rockinson-Szapkiw, A. J. (2015). The effect of online collaboration on adolescent sense of community in eighth-grade physical science. Journal of Science Education and Technology,24, 671–683.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yamada, M., Shimada, A., Okubo, F., Oi, M., Kojima, K., & Ogata, H. (2017). Learning analytics of the relationships among self-regulated learning, learning behaviors, and learning performance. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning,12, 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yue, C. L., Storm, B. C., Kornell, N., & Bjork, E. L. (2015). Highlighting and its relation to distributed study and students’ metacognitive beliefs. Educational Psychology Review,27, 69–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (2008). An essential dimension of self-regulated learning. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was partially supported by Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) Grant Number: JP19H01716, 16H06304, JST AIP Grant No. JPMJCR19U1.

Funding

This study is funded by Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) Grant Number: JP19H01716, 16H06304, JST AIP Grant No. JPMJCR19U1.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Gradute School of Human–Environment Studies, Kyushu University, 744 Motooka, Nishiku, Fukuoka, 819-0395, Japan

    Li Chen

  2. Fukuoka Prefectural Itoshima High School, Fukuoka, Japan

    Koichi Inoue

  3. Research Center for Instructional Systems, Kumamoto University, Kumamoto, Japan

    Yoshiko Goda

  4. Faculty of Business Administration, Takachiho Univerisity, Tokyo, Japan

    Fumiya Okubo

  5. Faculty of Information Science and Electrical Engineering, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan

    Yuta Taniguchi

  6. Innovation Center for Educational Resources, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan

    Misato Oi

  7. Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan

    Shin’ichi Konomi & Masanori Yamada

  8. Academic Center for Computing and Media Studies, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan

    Hiroaki Ogata

Authors
  1. Li Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Koichi Inoue
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yoshiko Goda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Fumiya Okubo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yuta Taniguchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Misato Oi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Shin’ichi Konomi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Hiroaki Ogata
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Masanori Yamada
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Li Chen.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Drs. Ogata and Yamada received research grants from JSPS for this research project. Drs. Goda, Okubo, Taniguchi, Oi, Konomi, Yamada received research grants from JSPS for other research project. Drs. Ogata received research grants from Cross-Ministerial Strategic Innovation Promotion Program from Cabinet Office. Ms. Li Chen and Mr. Inoue do not have any conflict on this research.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Appendix

Appendix

See Tables 10 and 11.

Table 10 Items of collaborative problem solving questionnaire
Full size table
Table 11 Items of learning motivation questionnaire
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chen, L., Inoue, K., Goda, Y. et al. Exploring Factors that Influence Collaborative Problem Solving Awareness in Science Education. Tech Know Learn 25, 337–366 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-020-09436-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-020-09436-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation