Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Temporality matters: Advancing a method for analyzing problem-solving processes in a computer-supported collaborative environment

  • Published:
International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper argues for a need to develop methods for examining temporal patterns in computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) groups. It advances one such quantitative method—Lag-sequential Analysis (LsA)—and instantiates it in a study of problem-solving interactions of collaborative groups in an online, synchronous environment. LsA revealed significant temporal patterns in CSCL group discussions that the commonly used “coding and counting” method could not reveal. More importantly, analysis demonstrated how variation in temporal patterns was significantly related to variation in group performance, thereby bolstering the case for developing and testing temporal methods and measures in CSCL research. Findings are discussed, including issues of reliability, validity, and limitations of the proposed method.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. My focus on quantitative methods should not be mistaken for a singular commitment to or reliance on such methods, nor is it something that I suggest others should do. Indeed, I have advocated and used qualitative methods in my earlier work as part of a larger mixed-method analytical commitment.

  2. Reimann (2009) provides an excellent description of the how temporal events in group processes mediate between input factors and outcome variables.

  3. MEPA was developed by Dr Gijsbert Erkens. For more information, see http://edugate.fss.uu.nl/mepa/index.htm.

References

  • Adami, C., Ofria, C., & Collier, T. C. (2000). Evolution of biological complexity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 97, 4463–4468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akhras, F. N., & Self, J. A. (2000). Modeling the process, not the product, of learning. In S. P. Lajoie (Ed.), Computers as cognitive tools, volume two: No more walls (pp. 3–28). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J. R. (2000). Cognitive psychology and its implications. New York: Worth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arrow, H., McGrath, J. E., & Berdahl, J. L. (2000). Small groups as complex systems: Formation, coordination, development, and adaptation. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakeman, R., & Gottman, J. M. (1997). Observing interaction: An introduction to sequential analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bar-Yam, Y. (2003). Dynamics of complex systems. Reading: Addison Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bransford, J. D., & Nitsch, K. E. (1978). Coming to understand things we could not previously understand. In J. F. Kavanaugh & W. Strange (Eds.), Speech and language in the laboratory, school, and clinic. Harvard: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burtsev, M. S. (2003). Measuring the dynamics of artificial evolution. In: W. Banzhaf, T. Christaller, P. Dittrich, J. T. Kim, & J. Ziegler (Eds.), Advances in artificial life. Proceedings of the 7th European Conference on Artificial Life, Dortmund, Germany, September 14–17.

  • Chi, M. T. H. (1997). Quantifying qualitative analyses of verbal data: A practical guide. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(3), 271–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M. T. H., Bassok, M., Lewis, M., Reimann, P., & Glaser, R. (1989). Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 5, 145–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M. T. H., de Leeuw, N., Chiu, M. H., & Lavancher, C. (1994). Eliciting self-explanations improves understanding. Cognitive Science, 18, 439–477.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clifford, M. M. (1984). Thoughts on a theory of constructive failure. Educational Psychologist, 19(2), 108–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1977). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, E. G., Lotan, R. A., Abram, P. L., Scarloss, B. A., & Schultz, S. E. (2002). Can groups learn? Teachers College Record, 104(6), 1045–1068.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collazos, C., Guerrero, L., Pino, J., & Ochoa, S. (2002). Evaluating collaborative learning processes. Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Groupware (CRIWG’2002). Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.

  • 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 

  • Erkens, G., Kanselaar, G., Prangsma, M., & Jaspers, J. (2003). Computer support for collaborative and argumentative writing. In E. De Corte, L. Verschaffel, N. Entwistle, & J. van Merrienboer (Eds.), Powerful learning environments: Unravelling basic components and dimensions (pp. 157–176). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gall, M., Borg, W., & Gall, J. (1996). Education research: An introduction. White Plains: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holland, J. H. (1995). Hidden order: How adaptation builds complexity. New York: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeong, A. (2005). A guide to analyzing message-response sequences and group interaction patterns in computer-mediated communication. Distance Education, 26(3), 367–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Towards a design theory of problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(4), 63–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D. H., & Kwon, H. I. (2001). Communication patterns in computer-mediated vs. face-to-face group problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(1), 35–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kapur, M. (2008). Productive failure. Cognition and Instruction, 26(3), 379–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kapur, M. (2009). Productive failure in mathematical problem solving. Instructional Science. DOI: 10.1007/s11251-009-9093-x.

  • Kapur, M. (2010). A further study of productive failure in mathematical problem solving: Unpacking the design components. Instructional Science. DOI: 10.1007/s11251-010-9144-3.

  • Kapur, M., & Kinzer, C. (2007). The effect of problem type on interactional activity, inequity, and group performance in a synchronous computer-supported collaborative environment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(5), 439–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kapur, M., & Kinzer, C. (2009). Productive failure in CSCL groups. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(1), 21–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kapur, M., Voiklis, J., & Kinzer, C. (2005). Problem solving as a complex, evolutionary activity: A methodological framework for analyzing problem-solving processes in a computer-supported collaborative environment. Proceedings the Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) Conference. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

  • Kapur, M., Voiklis, J., Kinzer, C., & Black, J. (2006). Insights into the emergence of convergence in group discussions. In S. Barab, K. Hay, & D. Hickey (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference on the Learning Sciences (pp. 300–306). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kapur, M., Hung, D., Jacobson, M., Voiklis, J., Kinzer, C., & Chen, D.-T. (2007). Emergence of learning in computer-supported, large-scale collective dynamics: A research agenda. In C. A. Clark, G. Erkens, & S. Puntambekar (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference of Computer-supported Collaborative Learning (pp. 323–332). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kapur, M., Voiklis, J., & Kinzer, C. (2008). Sensitivities to early exchange in synchronous computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) groups. Computers & Education, 51, 54–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kauffman, S. (1995). At home in the universe. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, E. Y. C., Chan, C. K. K., & van Aalst, J. (2006). Student assessment of collaborative learning in a CSCL environment. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(1), 57–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGrath, J. E., & Tschan, F. (2004). Temporal matters in social psychology: Examining the role of time in the lives of groups and individuals. Washington: American Psychological Association.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Muukkonen, H., Hakkarainen, K., Konsonen, K., Jalonen, S., Heikkil, A., Lonka, K., et al. (2007). Process-and context-sensitive research on academic knowledge practices: Developing CASS-tools and methods. In C. Chinn, G. Erkens, & S. Puntambekar (Eds.), Minds, mind, and society. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Computer-supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL 2007) (pp. 541–543). New Brunswick: International Society of the Learning Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, G. M., Herbsleb, J. D., & Rueter, H. H. (1994). Characterizing the sequential structure of interactive behaviors through statistical and grammatical techniques. Human-Computer Interaction, 9, 427–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poole, M. S., & Holmes, M. E. (1995). Decision development in computer-assisted group decision making. Human Communication Research, 22(1), 90–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rabiner, L. (1989). A tutorial on Hidden Markov Models and selected applications in speech recognition. Proceedings of the IEEE, 77(2), 257–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reimann, P. (2009). Time is precious: Variable- and event-centred approaches to process analysis in CSCL research. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(3), 239–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rourke, L., & Anderson, T. (2004). Validity in quantitative content analysis. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(1), 5–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross, S. M. (1996). Stochastic processes. New York: John Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanderson, P., & Fisher, C. (1994). Exploratory sequential data analysis: Foundations. Human-Computer Interaction, 9, 251–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scardamalia, M. (1989). Computer-supported intentional learning environments. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 5(1), 51–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scardamalia, M. (1992). Educational applications of a networked communal database. Interactive Learning Environments, 2(1), 45–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schellens, T., & Valcke, M. (2006). Fostering knowledge construction in university students through asynchronous discussion groups. Computers & Education, 46, 349–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, R. A., & Bjork, R. A. (1992). New conceptualizations of practice: Common principles in three paradigms suggest new concepts for training. Psychological Science, 3(4), 207–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, D. L., & Bransford, J. D. (1998). A time for telling. Cognition and Instruction, 16(4), 475–522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soller, A., Wiebe, J., & Lesgold, A. (2002). A machine learning approach to assessing knowledge sharing during collaborative learning activities. In G. Stahl (Ed.), Proceedings of Computer Support for Collaborative Learning (pp. 128–137). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spada, H., Meier, A., Rummel, N., & Hauser, S. (2005). A new method to assess the quality of collaborative process in CSCL. Proceedings of the Computer-supported Collaborative Learning conference 2005, Taipei, Taiwan.

  • Stahl, G. (2005). Group cognition in computer-assisted collaborative learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21, 79–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strijbos, J. W., Martens, R. L., Prins, F. J., & Jochems, W. M. G. (2006). Content analysis: What are they talking about? Computers & Education, 46, 29–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suthers, D. D. (2006). Technology affordances for intersubjective meaning making: A research agenda for CSCL. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(3), 315–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suthers, D. D., Dwyer, N., Medina, R., & Vatrapu, R. (2007). A framework for eclectic analysis of collaborative interaction. In C. Chinn, G. Erkens, & S. Puntambekar (Eds.), Minds, mice, and society. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Computer-supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL 2007) (pp. 694–703). New Brunswick: International Society of the Learning Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Lehn, K., Siler, S., Murray, C., Yamauchi, T., & Baggett, W. B. (2003). Why do only some events cause learning during human tutoring? Cognition and Instruction, 21(3), 209–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Voiklis, J., Kapur, M., Kinzer, C., & Black, J. (2006). An emergentist account of collective cognition in collaborative problem solving. In R. Sun (Ed.), Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 858–863). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wampold, B. E. (1992). The intensive examination of social interaction. In T. R. Kratochwill & J. R. Levin (Eds.), Single-case research design and analysis: New directions for psychology and education (pp. 93–131). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zumbach, J., Schonemann, J., & Reimann, P. (2005). Analyzing and supporting collaboration in cooperative computer-mediated communication. Proceedings of the Computer-supported Collaborative Learning Conference 2005, Taipei, Taiwan.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, 1 Nanyang Walk, Singapore, 637616, Singapore

    Manu Kapur

Authors
  1. Manu Kapur
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Manu Kapur.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kapur, M. Temporality matters: Advancing a method for analyzing problem-solving processes in a computer-supported collaborative environment. Computer Supported Learning 6, 39–56 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-011-9109-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-011-9109-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation