Advertisement

Computer-unterstützte kooperative Lernszenarien

  • Armin WeinbergerEmail author
  • Christian Hartmann
  • Lara Johanna Schmitt
  • Nikol Rummel
Living reference work entry
Part of the Springer Reference Psychologie book series (SRP)

Zusammenfassung

Computer-unterstütztes kooperatives Lernen (CSCL) bedeutet, dass mehrere Lernende gemeinsam Lernaufgaben bearbeiten und dabei von Computern unterstützt werden. Basierend auf Merkmalen von Lernaufgaben sowie verschiedenen technischen Unterstützungsmöglichkeiten wird hier ein Modell von CSCL-Szenarien vorgestellt. Das Modell ermöglicht es Wirkzusammenhänge von Unterstützungsmaßnahmen für CSCL-Szenarien einschätzen und überdauernde Gestaltungsmerkmale für CSCL-Szenarien entwickeln zu können.

Schlüsselwörter

Computer-unterstütztes kooperatives Lernen CSCL Peer-Tutoring Kooperatives Lernen Kollaboratives Lernen 

Literatur

  1. Abrahamson, D. (2017). Embodiment and mathematics learning. In K. Peppler (Hrsg.), The SAGE encyclopedia of out-of-school learning (S. 247–252). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  2. Aronson, E., Blaney, N., Stepan, C., Sikes, J., & Snapp, N. (1978). The jigsaw classroom. Beverley Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  3. August, S. E., Hammers, M. L., Murphy, D. B., Neyer, A., Gueye, P., & Thames, R. Q. (2016). Virtual engineering sciences learning lab: Giving STEM education a second life. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 9(1), 18–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York: David McKay Company.Google Scholar
  5. Chen, J. C. (2016). The crossroads of English language learners, task-based instruction, and 3D multi-user virtual learning in Second Life. Computers & Education, 102, 152–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Clark, D., Weinberger, A., Jucks, I., Spitulnik, M., & Wallace, R. (2003). Designing effective science inquiry in text-based computer supported collaborative learning environments. International Journal of Educational Policy, Research & Practice, 4(1), 55–82.Google Scholar
  7. Damon, W., & Phelps, E. (1989). Critical distinctions among three approaches to peer education. International Journal of Educational Research, 13(1), 9–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Danish, J. A., Enyedy, N., Saleh, A., Lee, C., & Andrade, A. (2015). Science through technology enhanced play: Designing to support reflection through play and embodiment. In O. Lindwall, P. Häkkinen, T. Koschman, P. Tchounikine & S. Ludvigsen (Hrsg.), Exploring the material conditions of learning: The computer supported collaborative learning (CSCL) conference 2015 (Bd. 1, S. 332–339). Gothenburg: The International Society of the Learning Sciences.Google Scholar
  9. Dillenbourg, P. (Hrsg.). (1999). What do you mean by „collaborative learning“? In Collaborative learning. Cognitive and computational approaches. Amsterdam/Boston: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  10. Dillenbourg, P., & Evans, M. (2011). Interactive tabletops in education. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6, 491–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ertl, B., Fischer, F., & Mandl, H. (2006). Conceptual and socio-cognitive support for collaborative learning in videoconferencing environments. Computers & Education, 47(3), 298–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fischer, F., Kollar, I., Stegmann, K., Wecker, C., Zottmann, J., & Weinberger, A. (2013). Collaboration scripts in computer-supported collaborative learning. In C. E. Hmelo-Silver, A. Chinn, C. K. K. Chan & A. M. O’Donnel (Hrsg.), The international handbook of collaborative learning (S. 403–419). New York/London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  13. Gijlers, H., Weinberger, A., van Dijk, A. M., Bollen, L., & van Joolingen, W. (2013). Collaborative drawing on a shared digital canvas in elementary science education: The effects of script and task awareness support. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 8(4), 427–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hsiao, I. Y. T., Yang, S. J. H., & Chu, C. J. (2015). The effects of collaborative models in second life on French learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63(5), 645–670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jeong, H., & Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2016). Seven affordances of computer-supported collaborative learning: How to support collaborative learning? How can technologies help? Educational Psychologist, 51(2), 247–265.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2016.1158654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2009). An educational success story. Social interdependence theory and cooperative learning. Educational Researcher, 38(5), 365–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P. A., & Vermeulen, M. (2013). Social aspects of CSCL environments: A research framework. Educational Psychologist, 48(4), 229–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Leuders, T. (2015). Aufgaben in Forschung und Praxis. In R. Bruder, L. Hefendehl-Hebeker, B. Schmidt-Thieme & H.-G. Weigand (Hrsg.), Handbuch der Mathematikdidaktik (S. 435–460). Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  19. Ligorio, M. B., & Van der Meijden, H. (2008). Teacher guidelines for cross-national virtual communities in primary education. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(1), 11–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Linn, M. C., Clark, D., & Slotta, J. D. (2003). WISE design for knowledge integration. Science Education, 87(4), 517–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mager, R. F. (1965). Lernziele und Programmierter Unterricht. Weinheim: Beltz.Google Scholar
  22. Maier, U., Kleinknecht, M., Metz, K., & Bohl, T. (2010). Ein allgemeindidaktisches Kategoriensystem zur Analyse des kognitiven Potentials von Aufgaben. Beiträge zur Lehrerbildung, 28, 84–96.Google Scholar
  23. Manlove, S., Lazonder, A. W., & de Jong, T. (2009). Trends and issues of regulative support use during inquiry learning: Patterns from three studies. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(4), 795–803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. McKeown, J., Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Jeong, H., Hartley, K., Faulkner, R., & Emmanuel, N. (2017). A meta-synthesis of CSCL literature in STEM education. In Proceedings 12th CSCL 2017 conference (S. 439–446). Philadelphia: International Society of the Learning Sciences.Google Scholar
  25. Meier, A., Spada, H., & Rummel, N. (2007). A rating scheme for assessing the quality of computer-supported collaboration processes. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2(1), 63–86.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-006-9005-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mercier, E. M., Higgins, S. E., & da Costa, L. (2014). Different leaders: Emergent organizational and intellectual leadership in children’s collaborative learning groups. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 9(4), 397–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Moed, A., Otto, O., Pal, J., Singh, U. P., Kam, M., & Toyama, K. (2009). Reducing dominance in multiple-mouse learning activities. CSCL, 2009, 360–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human Problem Solving. Engelwood Cliffs, NJ: Prentce-Hall.Google Scholar
  29. Raes, A., Schellens, T., De Wever, B., & Benoit, D. F. (2016). Promoting metacognitive regulation through collaborative problem solving on the web: When scripting does not work. Computers in Human Behavior, 58, 325–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Renkl (2007). Kooperatives Lernen. In W. Schneider & Hasselhorn (Hrsg.), Handbuch für Psychologie, Bd. Pädagogische Psychologie (S. 84–94). Göttingen: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
  31. Rick, J., Kopp, D., Schmitt, L., & Weinberger, A. (2015). Tarzan and Jane Share an iPad. In O. Lindwall, P. Häkkinen, T. Koschman, P. Tchounikine & S. Ludvigsen (Hrsg.), Exploring the material conditions of learning: The computer supported collaborative learning (CSCL) conference 2015 (Bd. 1, S. 356–363). Gothenburg: The International Society of the Learning Sciences.Google Scholar
  32. Roschelle, J., & Teasley, S. D. (1995). The construction of shared knowledge in collaborative problem solving. In C. O’Malley (Hrsg.), Computer supported collaborative learning (S. 69–97). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Roschelle, J., Rafanan, K., Bhanot, R., Estrella, G., Penuel, B., Nussbaum, M., & Claro, S. (2010). Scaffolding group explanation and feedback with handheld technology: Impact on students’ mathematics learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(4), 399–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Schneps, M. H., Ruel, J., Sonnert, G., Dussault, M., Griffin, M., & Sadler, P. M. (2014). Conceptualizing astronomical scale: Virtual simulations on handheld tablet computers reverse misconceptions. Computers & Education, 70, 269–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Stahl, G. (2006). Supporting group cognition in an online math community: A cognitive tool for small-group referencing in text chat. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 35(2), 103–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Stahl, G., Koschmann, T., & Suthers, D. (2006). Computer-supported collaborative learning: An historical perspective. In R. K. Sawyer (Hrsg.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (S. 409–426). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Stanton, D., Neale, H., & Bayon, V. (2002). Interfaces to support children’s co-present collaboration: multiple mice and tangible technologies. In G. Stahl (Hrsg.), Computer support for collaborative learning: Foundations for a CSCL community (S. 583–584). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  38. Steiner, I. D. (1972). Group process and productivity. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  39. Szewkis, E., Nussbaum, M., Rosen, T., Abalos, J., Denardin, F., Caballero, D. & Alcoholado, C. et al. (2011). Collaboration within large groups in the classroom. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6(4), 561–575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Teasley, S. D. (1997). Talking about reasoning: How important is the peer in peer collaboration. In L. B. Resnick, R. Säliö, C. Pontevorvo & B. Burge (Hrsg.), Discourse, tools, and reasoning. Essays on situated cognition (S. 361–384). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Topping, K. J. (1996). The effectiveness of peer tutoring in further and higher education: A typology and review of the literature. The international Journal of Higher Education, 32(3), 321–345.Google Scholar
  42. Toth, E. E., Suthers, D. D., & Lesgold, A. M. (2002). „Mapping to know“: The effects of representational guidance and reflective assessment on scientific inquiry. Science Education, 86(2), 264–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tsovaltzi, D., Judele, R., Puhl, T., & Weinberger, A. (2015). Scripts, individual preparation and group awareness support in the service of learning in Facebook: How does CSCL compare to social networking sites? Computers in Human Behavior, 53, 577–592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Van Bruggen, J. M., Kirschner, P. A., & Jochems, W. (2002). External representation of argumentation in CSCL and the management of cognitive load. Learning and Instruction, 12(1), 121–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Van Drie, J., Van Boxtel, C., Jaspers, J., & Kanselaar, G. (2005). Effects of representational guidance on domain specific reasoning in CSCL. Computers in Human Behavior, 21(4), 575–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Van Joolingen, W. R., De Jong, T., Lazonder, A. W., Savelsbergh, E. R., & Manlove, S. (2005). Co-Lab: Research and development of an online learning environment for collaborative scientific discovery learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 21(4), 671–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 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.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-011-9111-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Webb, N. W. (2013). Information processing approaches to collaborative learning. In C. E. Hmelo-Silver, A. Chinn, C. K. K. Chan & A. M. O’Donnel (Hrsg.), The international handbook of collaborative learning (S. 19–40). New York/London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  49. Weinberger, A. (2017). Orchestrierungsmodelle und -szenarien technologie-unterstützten Lernens. In S. Ladel, J. Knopf & A. Weinberger (Hrsg.), Digitalisierung und Bildung (S. 117–139). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien.Google Scholar
  50. Weinberger, A., & Mandl, H. (2003). Computer-mediated knowledge communication. Studies in Communication Sciences, 3(3), 81–105.Google Scholar
  51. Weinberger, A., Ertl, B., Fischer, F., & Mandl, H. (2005). Epistemic and social scripts in computer-supported collaborative learning. Instructional Science, 33(1), 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Deutschland, ein Teil von Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Armin Weinberger
    • 1
    Email author
  • Christian Hartmann
    • 2
  • Lara Johanna Schmitt
    • 1
  • Nikol Rummel
    • 2
  1. 1.Universität des SaarlandesSaarbrückenDeutschland
  2. 2.Ruhr-Universität BochumBochumDeutschland

Personalised recommendations