Advertisement

Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning: Mediated and Co-Present Forms of Learning Together

  • Lara Johanna Schmitt
  • Armin Weinberger
Living reference work entry
Part of the Springer International Handbooks of Education book series (SIHE)

Abstract

Computer support offers versatile opportunities for learning together at a distance as well as for colocated scenarios of collaborative learning, in which learners construct arguments, share knowledge, and jointly produce task solutions themselves. In this chapter, we explore different computer-mediated and co-present forms of computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL). We will discuss both the potential and the problems of CSCL. Finally, we will show how current instructional approaches aim to overcome CSCL problems to realize its full potential.

Keywords

CSCL Computer-supported collaborative learning Co-Present Computer-mediated 

References

  1. Abrahamson, D. (2017). Embodiment and mathematics learning. In K. Peppler (Ed.), The SAGE encyclopedia of out-of-school learning (pp. 247–252). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  2. Bechky, B. A. (2003). Sharing meaning across occupational communities: The transformation of understanding on a production floor. Organization Science, 14(3), 312–330.  https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.14.3.312.15162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beers, P. J., Boshuizen, H. P. A., Kirschner, P. A., & Gijselaers, W. H. (2006). Common ground, complex problems and decision making. Group Decision and Negotiation, 15(6), 529–556.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-006-9030-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chen, C. H., & Law, V. (2016). Scaffolding individual and collaborative game-based learning in learning performance and intrinsic motivation. Computers in Human Behavior, 55, 1201–1212.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.03.010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cohen, E. G., & Lotan, R. A. (1995). Producing equal-status interaction in the heterogeneous classroom. American Educational Research Journal, 32(1), 99–120.  https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312032001099.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Crook, C. (1998). Children as computer users: The case of collaborative learning. Computers & Education, 30(3/4), 237–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 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 (Eds.), Exploring the material conditions of learning: The Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) Conference 2015 (Vol. 1, pp. 332–339). Gothenburg: The International Society of the Learning Sciences.Google Scholar
  8. Deater-Deckard, K., El Mallah, S., Chang, M., Evans, M. A., & Norton, A. (2014). Student behavioral engagement during mathematics educational video game instruction with 11–14 year olds. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 2(3), 101–108.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2014.08.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 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
  10. Dillenbourg, P., & Evans, M. (2011). Interactive tabletops in education. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6, 491–514.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-011-9127-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dillenbourg, P., Järvelä, S., & Fischer, F. (2009). The evolution of research on computer-supported collaborative learning: From design to orchestration. In N. Balacheff, S. Ludvigsen, T. de Jong, A. Lazonder, & S. Barnes (Eds.), Technology-enhanced learning: Principles and products (pp. 3–19). New York: Springer Netherlands.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 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
  13. Fischer, F., Kollar, I., Stegmann, K., & Wecker, C. (2013). Toward a script theory of guidance in computer-supported collaborative learning. Educational Psychologist, 48(1), 56–66.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2012.748005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gelmini-Hornsby, G., Ainsworth, S., & O’Malley, C. (2011). Guided reciprocal questioning to support children’s collaborative storytelling. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6(4), 577–600.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-011-9129-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 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.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-013-9180-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hornecker, E., Marshall, P., Dalton, N., & Rogers, Y. (2008). Collaboration and interference: Awareness with mice or touch input. In Proceedings of the conference on computer supported cooperative work. San Diego: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  17. 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.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-015-9379-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Janssen, J., Erkens, G., Kanselaar, G., & Jaspers, J. (2007). Visualization of participation: Does it contribute to successful computer-supported collaborative learning? Computers & Education, 49(4), 1037–1065.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.01.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Janssen, J., Erkens, G., Kirschner, P. A., & Kanselaar, G. (2010). Effects of representational guidance during computer-supported collaborative learning. Instructional Science, 38(1), 59–88.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-008-9078-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Janssen, J., Erkens, G., & Kirschner, P. A. (2011). Group awareness tools: It’s what you do with it that matters. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(3), 1046–1058.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.06.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jordan, K. (2015). Massive open online course completion rates revisited: Assessment, length and attrition. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 16(3), 341–358.  https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v16i3.2112.Google Scholar
  22. Kerr, N., & Bruun, S. (1983). Dispensability of member effort and group motivation losses: Free-rider effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44(1), 78–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P. A., & Vermeulen, M. (2013). Social aspects of CSCL environments: A research framework. Educational Psychologist, 48(4), 229–242.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2012.750225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lampe, C., Vitak, J., Gray, R., & Ellison, N. (2012). Perceptions of Facebook’s value as an information source. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 3195–3204). ACM.  https://doi.org/10.1145/2207676.2208739.
  25. 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
  26. 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.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.07.010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 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.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-014-9201-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Moed, A., Otto, O., Pal, J., Singh, U. P., Kam, M., & Toyama, K. (2009). Reducing dominance in multiple-mouse learning activities. In C. O’Malley, D. Suthers, P. Reimann, & A. Dimitracopoulou (Eds.), Proceedings of the 9th international conference on Computer supported collaborative learning (Vol.1, pp. 360–364). Rhodes, Greece: International Society of the Learning Sciences.Google Scholar
  29. Nihalani, P. K., Wilson, H. E., Thomas, G., & Robinson, D. H. (2010). What determines high-and low-performing groups? The superstar effect. Journal of Advanced Academics, 21(3), 500–529.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X1002100306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Nistor, N., & Neubauer, K. (2010). From participation to dropout: Quantitative participation patterns in online university courses. Computers & Education, 55(2), 663–672.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.02.026.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Noroozi, O., Weinberger, A., Biemans, H. J. A., Mulder, M., & Chizari, M. (2013). Facilitating argumentative knowledge construction through a transactive discussion script in CSCL. Computers & Education, 61, 59–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Park, J. H., & Choi, H. J. (2009). Factors influencing adult learners’ decision to drop out or persist in online learning. Educational Technology & Society, 12(4), 207–217.Google Scholar
  33. Phielix, C., Prins, F. J., & Kirschner, P. A. (2010). Awareness of group performance in a CSCL-environment: Effects of peer feedback and reflection. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(2), 151–161.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2009.10.011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Prieto, L. P., Dimitriadis, Y., Asensio-Pérez, J. I., & Looi, C.-K. (2015). Orchestration in learning technology research: Evaluation of a conceptual framework. Research in Learning Technology, 23(1), 28019.Google Scholar
  35. Puhl, T., Tsovaltzi, D., & Weinberger, A. (2015). A long-term view on learning to argue in Facebook: The effects of group awareness tools and argumentation scripts. In O. Lindwall, P. Häkkinen, T. Koschman, P. Tchounikine, & S. Ludvigsen (Eds.), Exploring the material conditions of learning: The computer supported collaborative learning (CSCL) conference 2015 (Vol. 1, pp. 110–117). Gothenburg: The International Society of the Learning Sciences.Google Scholar
  36. 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.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.12.064.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Reiser, B. J. (2004). Scaffolding complex learning: The mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 273–304.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 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 (Eds.), Exploring the material conditions of learning: The computer supported collaborative learning (CSCL) conference 2015 (Vol. 1, pp. 356–363). Gothenburg: The International Society of the Learning Sciences.Google Scholar
  39. Roschelle, J., & Teasley, S. D. (1995). The construction of shared knowledge in collaborative problem solving. In C. O’Malley (Ed.), Computer supported collaborative learning (pp. 69–97). Berlin: Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1145/130893.952914.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 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.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-009-9142-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Scheuer, O., Loll, F., Pinkwart, N., & McLaren, B. M. (2010). Computer-supported argumentation: A review of the state of the art. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 5(1), 43–102.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-009-9080-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Schmitt, L., & Weinberger, A. (2017). Collaborative learning on multi-touch interfaces: Scaffolding elementary school students. In B. K. Smith, M. Borge, E. Mercier, & K. Y. Lim (Eds.), Making a difference: Prioritizing equity and access in CSCL: The 12th international conference on computer supported collaborative learning (Vol. 1, pp. 9–16). Philadelphia: The International Society of the Learning Sciences.Google Scholar
  43. 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
  44. Selwyn, N. (2009). Faceworking: Exploring students’ education-related use of Facebook. Learning, Media and Technology, 34(2), 157–174.  https://doi.org/10.1080/17439880902923622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sitzmann, T., Ely, K., Bell, B. S., & Bauer, K. N. (2010). The effects of technical difficulties on learning and attrition during online training. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 16(3), 281–292.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019968.Google Scholar
  46. 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.  https://doi.org/10.2190/Q435-7611-2561-720P.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Stahl, G. (2013). Transactive discourse in CSCL. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 8(2), 145–147.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-013-9171-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Stanton, D., Neale, H., & Bayon, V. (2002). Interfaces to support children’s co-present collaboration: Multiple mice and tangible technologies. In G. Stahl (Ed.), Computer support for collaborative learning: Foundations for a CSCL community (pp. 583–584). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  49. 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.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.04.067.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Van Der Meijden, H., & Veenman, S. (2005). Face-to-face versus computer-mediated communication in a primary school setting. Computers in Human Behavior, 21(5), 831–859.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2003.10.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Vanderlinde, R., Aesaert, K., & Van Braak, J. (2014). Institutionalised ICT use in primary education: A multilevel analysis. Computers & Education, 72, 1–10.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.10.00.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23(1), 3–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Walther, J. B. (2011). Theories of computer-mediated communication and interpersonal relations. In M. L. Knapp & J. A. Daly (Eds.), The handbook of interpersonal communication (pp. 443–479). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  54. Weinberger, A., & Fischer, F. (2006). A framework to analyze argumentative knowledge construction in computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers & Education, 46(1), 71–95.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2005.04.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Weinberger, A., Stegmann, K., & Fischer, F. (2007). Knowledge convergence in collaborative learning: Concepts and assessment. Learning and Instruction, 17(4), 416–426.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.03.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Wodzicki, K., Schwämmlein, E., & Moskaliuk, J. (2012). “Actually, I wanted to learn”: Study-related knowledge exchange on social networking sites. The Internet and Higher Education, 15(1), 9–14.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.05.008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Zahn, C., Krauskopf, K., Hesse, F. W., & Pea, R. (2012). How to improve collaborative learning with video tools in the classroom? Social vs. cognitive guidance for student teams. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 7(2), 259–284.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-012-9145-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Saarland UniversitySaarbrückenGermany

Section editors and affiliations

  • Kwok-Wing Lai
    • 1
  • Keryn Pratt
    • 2
  1. 1.University of Otago College of EducationDunedinNew Zealand
  2. 2.University of Otago College of EducationNorth DunedinNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations