Article

Interrelation between regulatory and socioemotional processes within collaborative groups characterized by facilitative and directive other-regulation

Authors:
To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the authors.

No full-text available

Request Full-text Paper PDF

To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.

... Social learning theory [12] postulates that learning takes place among and through other people and requires active participation in a social world. Social learning is an interpersonal and collaborative endeavour requiring significant social interaction [13]. The processes of participation and interaction are of significance because they provide, condition and sustain the context of knowledge generation and learning for the virtual community [14,15]. ...
... Limited research has been conducted on the four social collaboration preferences postulated by Coetzee [18]. Social regulation theory [13] suggests that facilitative and directive forms of other-regulation influence the process of collaboration and quality of socioemotional interaction between group members within the community of collaborative learning. The activeinitiator and independent-evaluator preferences represent characteristics of a directive otherregulation orientation (i.e. ...
... The activeinitiator and independent-evaluator preferences represent characteristics of a directive otherregulation orientation (i.e. taking an instructive role in guiding the joint activity and others and controlling and/or dominating others' attempts at making task contribution [13]), while the reflective-evaluator represents characteristics of a facilitative other-regulation orientation (i.e. high-level content processing via monitoring for content understanding and improved task and content quality [13]). ...
... Existen distintas metodologías para analizar interacciones, tales como el método IPA (Interaction Proccess Analysis) propuesto por (Bales, 1950) que permite detectar problemas de comunicación, integración, tensión, decisión, control y evaluación. Incluso existen metodologías específicas que analizan los tipos de interacciones que se esperan que ocurran en situaciones de ACSC y que están relacionadas con la tarea y los planos afectivoemocional (Janssen, Erkens, Kirschner, & Kanselaar, 2012;Järvelä, Malmberg, & Koivuniemi, 2016;Kwon, Liu, & Johnson, 2014;Meier et al., 2007;Näykki et al., 2014;Rogat & Adams-Wiggins, 2015;Soller, 2001;Zheng & Huang, 2016). Sin embargo, estas técnicas exigen un trabajo de etiquetado manual de datos lo cual implica mucho trabajo para un docente más aún si la cantidad de alumnos involucrados es elevada. ...
... En el caso particular de que el docente necesite reconocer conflictos en las interacciones debería revisar cada una de ellas siguiendo algún tipo de protocolo para poder identificarlos, tal como, la propuesta de Millar (Millar, Rogers, & Bavelas, 1984) que sostiene que tres intentos consecutivos de ganar el control en una conversación es síntoma de conflicto. Para un docente reconocer y diferenciar los conflictos es importante, por un lado, es conveniente que las actividades que proponga a los grupos tengan la capacidad de generar conflictos sociocognitivos o conflictos de tarea (Buchs, Butera, Mugny, & Darnon, 2004), pero debería también identificar casos en los que se produzcan los conflictos de relaciones porque son síntomas (entre otras causas) de carencia de habilidades interpersonales (Lee et al., 2015;Slof, Nijdam, & Janssen, 2016) y aplicación de estilos de interacción sociocognitivos negativos (Rogat & Adams-Wiggins, 2015;Zheng & Huang, 2016) a los cuales el docente podría responder proporcionando retroalimentación que permita al alumno aprender estilos de interacción adecuados para el trabajo en grupo (Pauli et al., 2008). ...
... Motiva esta idea los estudios en el campo del ACSC los cuales reconocen la vinculación existente entre conflictos y emociones (Dreu & Weingart, 2003;K. a Jehn, 1997;Jiang et al., 2013;Lee et al., 2015) y la importancia de considerar el plano afectivo a fin de asegurar interacciones apropiadas para el proceso de aprendizaje en grupo (Baker, Andriessen, & Järvelä, 2013;Rogat & Adams-Wiggins, 2015;Zheng & Huang, 2016). ...
Article
Full-text available
El Aprendizaje Colaborativo Soportado por Computadora (ACSC) es una situación de aprendizaje donde dos o más estudiantes trabajan juntos con el objetivo de aprender. La comunicación mantenida por los grupos para llevar a cabo su trabajo puede ser sincrónica o asincrónica. La comunicación de tipo sincrónica demanda que los miembros concuerden en un horario para poder interactuar. Un ejemplo de aplicación que puede soportar este tipo de comunicación es el chat. En la comunicación asincrónica no es necesario que los miembros del grupo concuerden en un horario para poder interactuar. En ambos tipos de comunicaciones, los miembros pueden participar en el dialogo colaborativo estando en distintos lugares. Un ejemplo de aplicación que soporta la comunicación asíncrona es el foro. La interacción entre los estudiantes influye positivamente en los procesos cognitivos de los participantes cuando la colaboración es exitosa. Muchos factores pueden incidir en el éxito de un proceso de aprendizaje colaborativo. Uno de estos factores es la estabilidad emocional del grupo. Sin embargo, esta estabilidad emocional puede verse afectada por la ocurrencia de una diversidad de eventos, entre ellos, los conflictos. Los conflictos son desacuerdos entre dos o más miembros de un grupo causado por disposiciones individuales y la diversidad de objetivos, puntos de vista y experiencias previas. Cuando el conflicto se manifiesta en el seno del grupo hay una tendencia a que el sistema cognitivo se vea resentido. Esto ocurre debido a un incremento en la carga cognitiva que genera el conflicto. A su vez, este fenómeno conduce a que la capacidad de procesamiento del grupo se bloquee. Si bien existe una connotación negativa en los conflictos, es importante reconocer que existen distintos tipos de ellos. Se pueden identificar los conflictos cognitivos o de tarea, los conflictos de proceso y los conflictos de relaciones. De estos tipos de conflictos, se reconoce que los conflictos cognitivos pueden contribuir positivamente en el aprendizaje. Sin embargo, los otros dos tipos de conflictos también influyen en el rendimiento del grupo, tal es el caso de los conflictos de relaciones que impactan negativamente. A pesar de la negatividad de ciertos tipos de conflictos, la ocurrencia de conflictos abre la oportunidad a que los estudiantes aprendan a trabajar en grupo, una competencia demandada por el mercado laboral actual. Sin embargo, para que esto ocurra el docente debe guiar a los estudiantes hacia la resolución de los conflictos cuando aquellos no puedan hacerlo por sí mismos. Esto significa que el docente necesita poder responder en tiempo real a las situaciones de conflicto para ofrecer recomendaciones en cuanto al intercambio de roles, la compartición del liderazgo, realizar cambios en la carga de trabajo, promover la reflexión, entre otros. Para lograr esta función, el docente necesita realizar un seguimiento de las situaciones de conflicto. Sin embargo, realizar este seguimiento es una tarea que insume tiempo y mucho trabajo. Lo analizado anteriormente pone de manifiesto la necesidad de proveer a los entornos de ACSC, que emplean herramientas de comunicación síncronas basadas en texto para promover los procesos de aprendizaje en grupo, la funcionalidad de reconocimiento de conflictos para facilitar el monitoreo por parte del docente y propiciar su oportuna intervención. En esta tesis se planteó la hipótesis de que en las situaciones de ACSC síncronas basadas en texto, los mensajes de texto intercambiados entre los miembros del grupo pueden tener la suficiente información para detectar conflictos. Particularmente, se idearon dos técnicas que permiten reconocer conflictos teniendo en cuenta el intercambio de información socio-afectiva. La primera técnica implementada modela un diálogo colaborativo como un grafo dirigido donde los nodos representan a los estudiantes y las aristas indican la transferencia de sentimientos negativos durante las interacciones. Luego, aplicando conceptos de la teoría de grafos se emplea una matriz de commute time escalada para detectar miembros del grupo en conflicto. La segunda técnica se basa en la aplicación de aprendizaje máquina supervisado. Particularmente, se realiza la aplicación de algoritmos de aprendizaje ensamblados, formalizando el proceso de extracción de características y definiendo el concepto de valencia de interacciones atómicas como principal característica empleada para entrenar el clasificador supervisado. Para evaluar las técnicas propuestas se llevó a cabo una validación experimental que demandó la recolección de interacciones de estudiantes en situaciones de ACSC. Estas interacciones fueron analizadas aplicando una técnica de análisis de contenido y sirvieron de base para el posterior entrenamiento y validación de los clasificadores. Los resultados de las técnicas propuestas resultaron satisfactorios, obteniéndose un valor de F1 de 0.72 para la primera técnica, y un F1 de 0.81 para la segunda. Estos resultados muestran que es posible reconocer conflictos teniendo en cuenta el intercambio de emociones negativas. Esta tesis proporciona importantes contribuciones al campo del ACSC al permitir reconocer conflictos mediante la aplicación de técnicas de Aprendizaje Máquina (AM), Análisis de Redes Sociales (ARS) y Análisis de Sentimiento (AS).
... Prior research demonstrates socio-emotional interactions are interconnected with other regulatory processes and play a role in regulation of emotions. For example, positive socio-emotional interactions have been linked to higher quality and facilitative forms of social regulation (Rogat and Adams-Wiggins 2015;Rogat and Linnenbrink-Garcia 2011), co-regulatory acts that activate discussion and metacognitive acts of evaluation (Lajoie et al. 2015), and conflict resolution and improvement in emotions and motivation (Ayoko et al. 2012;Linnenbrink-Garcia et al. 2011;Näykki et al. 2014). In contrast, negative socio-emotional interactions have been connected to less effective and more directive forms of social regulation (Rogat and Adams-Wiggins 2015;Rogat and Linnenbrink-Garcia 2011) as well as negative emotions and lowered motivation (Näykki et al. 2014). ...
... For example, positive socio-emotional interactions have been linked to higher quality and facilitative forms of social regulation (Rogat and Adams-Wiggins 2015;Rogat and Linnenbrink-Garcia 2011), co-regulatory acts that activate discussion and metacognitive acts of evaluation (Lajoie et al. 2015), and conflict resolution and improvement in emotions and motivation (Ayoko et al. 2012;Linnenbrink-Garcia et al. 2011;Näykki et al. 2014). In contrast, negative socio-emotional interactions have been connected to less effective and more directive forms of social regulation (Rogat and Adams-Wiggins 2015;Rogat and Linnenbrink-Garcia 2011) as well as negative emotions and lowered motivation (Näykki et al. 2014). ...
... We agree that chat-based interactions may facilitate self-control over one's emotional expressions, but it may also be the case that a lack of traditional non-verbal cues may impede co-and shared regulation of emotions because of the difficulty in noticing others' emotions. To our knowledge, research examining socio-emotional processes in the context of regulation has mainly relied on observations of these processes during video-taped face-to-face collaborative sessions (e.g., Lajoie et al. 2015;Näykki et al. 2014;Rogat and Adams-Wiggins 2015;Rogat and Linnenbrink-Garcia 2011), although investigations within online settings are beginning to emerge (e.g., Janssen et al. 2010;Kwon et al. 2014). ...
Article
Full-text available
Collaboration in an online environment can be a socially and emotionally demanding task. It requires group members to engage in a great deal of regulation, where favourable emotions need to be sustained for the group’s productive functioning. The purpose of this cross-case analysis was to examine the interplay of two groups’ regulatory processes, regulatory modes, and socio-emotional interactions that contribute to or are influenced by emotions and socio-emotional climate perceived in the group. Specifically, this study compared a group of 4 students unanimously reporting a positive climate to a group of 4 students unanimously reporting a negative climate after completing a 90-min online text-based collaborative assignment. By drawing on two data channels (i.e., observed regulatory actions and socio-emotional interactions during collaboration and self-reported data about emotional beliefs and perceptions), four contrasting group features emerged: (a) incoming conditions served as a foundation for creating a positive collaborative experience, (b) regulation of emotions during initial planning, (c) negative emotions served as a constraint for shared adaptation in the face of a challenge, and (d) encouragement and motivational statements served as effective strategies for creating a positive climate. Implications for researching and supporting emotion regulation in collaborative learning are discussed.
... The studies mentioned above also indicate that episodes of shared regulation are equitable in terms of participation patterns. Further, the few studies investigating associations between interpersonal regulation and social dynamics have shown that episodes of shared regulation are more likely to emerge in the context of positive socioemotional interactions (Rogat & Adams-Wiggins, 2015). Combined, this evidence showcases the significance of social dynamics in productive collaboration. ...
... Ladd and colleagues (2014a, b), for example, identified four dimensions that primary-aged children recognized as impacting positively on productive group functioning, namely, staying on task, communicating and listening, cooperating, and providing support. Consistently, recent work by Rogat and Adams-Wiggins (2015) identified in their analysis of seventh graders' group work the following positive socioemotional interactions: active listening and respect; encouraging participation and inclusion; fostering cohesion; discouraging marginalization; using mistakes as informational gaps; and appealing to disciplinary norms. On the flip side, negative socioemotional behaviors such as hostility, rudeness, and absence of responsiveness have been identified as hindering group functioning and productivity (Chiu & Khoo, 2003). ...
... Given the multidimensional and labor-intensive nature of our analysiswhich required several rounds of observation, qualitative description, and discussion among coders-a decision was made to investigate a subset of the original data. This approach has been widely used in similar-published and authoritative work in this field (e.g., Iiskala et al., 2011;Rogat & Adams Wiggins, 2015;Volet, Summers, & Thurman, 2009). The target triads were selected on the basis of two criteria: (a) participants in these triads achieved different degrees of improvement as measured in pre-and post-assessments of metacognition and teachers' ratings of SRL, and (b) they remained as intact triads during the intervention. ...
This qualitative study explored the interactions of six triads of Year One students in the United Kingdom (n = 18; mean age = 5 years, 7 months; 9 female) investigating interpersonal regulation of learning, social dynamics, and group dialogue, evident in instances of productive collaboration during problem‐solving activities. Group activity was captured through video (total footage = 8 hours) and subjected to two sequential phases of qualitative analysis, undertaken by three researchers: (1) comprehensive qualitative descriptions of group activity, and (2) multidimensional analysis of group interaction with a focus on interpersonal regulation of learning, social dynamics, and group dialogue. Consistent with prior research, the findings show that productive collaboration, though prevalent only in some groups, was characterized by (a) distributed forms of co‐regulation where all members took turns in taking regulatory roles; (b) positive social dynamics marked by equitable patterns of participation, playful interludes, uptake of contributions, and use of persuasive language in the event of disagreements; and (c) use of exploratory forms of talk (e.g., asking questions and volunteering reasons) directed toward the achievement of task goals. Different positional preferences were identified among the most regulated students, who consistently assumed leading roles in their groups.
... In contrast, the directive other-regulation group is always related to imbalanced participation (Rogat & Adams-Wiggins, 2014), which is due to that the directive other-regulator offers few opportunities for other group members to participate by constantly ignoring or rejecting their contributions (Eilam & Aharon, 2003;Kumpulainen & Mutanen, 1999;Rogat & Adams-Wiggins, 2014;Volet & Mansfield, 2006). Another study conducted by Rogat and Adams-Wiggins (2015) investigated how the socio-emotional process differ for groups characterized by facilitative or directive other-regulation. Their results indicated that members in directive other-regulation groups tended to engage in highly critical and socially comparative discourse, which enabled negative socio-emotional interactions dominant in the group. ...
... This finding is consistent with the idea that the emergence of critical cognitive processes necessitates a favourable group climate where group members feel safe to provide counter ideas (Baker, 1999;King, 2002). Previous research pointed out that groups characterized by facilitative other-regulation tend to employ positive socio-emotional interactions to foster a favourable group climate (Rogat & Adams-Wiggins, 2015). ...
... Previous studies have indicated that cognitive conflicts can play a positive role in joint activities when group members negotiate these divergent views in informational ways (De Dreu & Weingart, 2003;Jehn & Mannix, 2001). The appeal of this sequential pattern may be due to the respect and inclusion of the alternative opinions (Rogat & Adams-Wiggins, 2015), which promotes the further explanation or clarification of different views. Besides, the facilitative other-regulation groups presented the significant sequence of modifying the proposed product to discovering contradictions or reaching agreement (SKC4-SKC2, SKC4-SKC5). ...
Article
Full-text available
Many studies have explored the role of regulation of learning in supporting social knowledge construction. Other-regulation is a common regulation type in collaborative learning. However, few studies have examined learners` social knowledge construction in other-regulation groups. This study attempts to provide a new lens to understand the role of regulation of learning in supporting social knowledge construction and broaden our knowledge about two forms of other-regulation within groups. Toward that end, this study compares social knowledge construction in groups characterized by facilitative and directive other-regulation. The two case groups of four in this study were selected from a larger sample (N=22). Content analysis and sequential analysis were used to analyze the online chat log collected from two groups. The comparison was made in terms of the frequency and behaviour pattern of social knowledge construction between the two groups. Qualitative analysis was adopted to explore the interrelation between social knowledge construction and two forms of other-regulation. Results indicate that the facilitative other-regulation group engaged in more high-level social knowledge construction and demonstrated more continuous and systematic behaviour patterns. Further qualitative analysis reveals that facilitative other-regulation occurred concurrently with social knowledge construction and played a promoting role in this process. In contrast, directive other-regulation followed social knowledge construction but failed to guide the subsequent knowledge construction moves, ending in impeding the ongoing of social knowledge construction smoothly.
... Within QT S , evidence of promoting positive socioemotional interactions and SoRL is perhaps most prominent in the rules for participating in the intervention (see Table 1; . Specifically, rules 2, 3, 5, and 6, as well as the use of the phrase "we talk" (i.e., fostering cohesion through the use of a plural pronoun; Rogat & Adams-Wiggins, 2015) throughout, are directly comparable to literature on positive socioemotional interactions (Lajoie et al., 2015;Rogat & Adams-Wiggins, 2015;Rogat & Linnenbrink-Garcia, 2011). The rules also promote the use of SoRL processes during the group discussions. ...
... Accordingly, we implemented episodic coding to capture the inherently interactive nature of individual and group regulation, defining an episode as a continued pattern in content and collaboration, ending with a clear shift in either content or collaboration. For each episode, we assigned codes based on a revised version of the SoRL coding scheme developed by Rogat and colleagues (e.g., Rogat & Linnenbrink-Garcia, 2011;Rogat & Adams-Wiggins, 2015). First, we identified the mode of regulation (i.e., SRL, CoRL, SSRL, or External). ...
... Shelia from Group 2, on the other hand, was more facilitative in her efforts to help the group, which was met with respect and higher group cohesion. Thus, we posit that as individuals within groups adopt informal leadership roles, the type of regulatory behaviors that they exhibit can have implications for the socioemotional patterns of the entire group, which aligns with similar findings from the SoRL literature (Rogat & Adams-Wiggins, 2015). This extends previous work in the field that highlights a "more knowledgeable other" (Panadero & Järvelä, 2015, p. 191), suggesting instead the importance of a "more regulated other" to a group's regulatory patterns and subsequent socioemotional patterns during collaborative learning tasks. ...
Article
Full-text available
Argumentation and scientific discourse are essential aspects of science education and inquiry in the 21st century. Student groups often struggle to enact these critical science skills, particularly with challenging content or tasks. Social regulation of learning research addresses the ways groups attempt to navigate such struggles by collectively planning, monitoring, controlling, and reflecting upon their learning in collaborative settings. Such regulation and argumentation can also elicit socioemotional responses and interactions. However, little is known regarding how regulation processes and socioemotional interactions manifest among students involved in small-group discourse about scientific phenomena. As such, in this qualitative study, we explored social regulation of learning, scientific argumentation discourse, and socioemotional interactions in the discussions of two groups of high school physics students (n = 7, n = 6). We found key qualitative distinctions between the two groups, including how they enacted planning activities, their emphasis on challenging other’s ideas versus building shared understanding, and how socioemotional interactions drove discourse. Commonalities across groups included how regulation initiation related to discourse, as well as how the difficulty of the content hindered, and teacher support augmented, the enactment of social regulation. Finally, we found overlapping regulation and discourse codes that provide a foundation for future work.
... Research has shown a positive relationship between students' regulatory behaviors and collaborative learning performance (e.g., Lee et al. 2015;Malmberg et al. 2015;Zheng et al. 2019). For example, Rogat and Adams-Wiggins (2015) examined 7th grade students' regulatory processes and their socioemotional interactions as they worked on three inquirybased science tasks in small groups and found that recognizing the key role of the social aspects of group collaborative learning and the successful regulation of these challenges both exhibited positive effects on group performance. In line with their findings, an examination of 144 students' sequential patterns of self-and socially shared regulation of STEM learning in a collaborative learning environment identified a positive relationship among students' regulatory activities -SRL monitoring, SRL elaborating, and SSRL task analysis -as well as the collaborative learning performance (Zheng et al. 2019). ...
... Previous research has investigated the regulation of learning in collaborative tasks, mainly in face-to-face learning settings (e.g., Näykki et al. 2017a;Rogat and Adams-Wiggins 2015). Online collaborative learning settings, especially those supported by social media tools, being different from the traditional face-to-face collaborative learning settings, may affect students' regulation of learning (e.g., Su et al. 2018;Wu 2015). ...
... Student teachers' content monitoring behavior enabled group members to complete learning tasks through division of labor, choose appropriate teaching methods, and achieve a deep understanding of integrating information and communication technology into curriculum (Røkenes and Krumsvik 2016). This finding is consistent with the findings by Rogat and Adams-Wiggins (2015) and Su et al. (2018). ...
Article
Interest in understanding regulation in the context of collaborative learning has increased in the past decade. Existing studies have investigated how regulated learning evolves in collaborative learning by focusing on external behaviors, and how different types and strategies of regulation are effective in promoting collaborative learning. Due to the cyclical and dynamic characteristics of regulation, there is a need for new methods that can trace the dynamic emergence of regulatory processes in diver collaborative learning contexts, so as to provide some insight into effective learning design. In the context of 45 student teachers participating in multi-layered online collaborative activities, this study investigated their regulatory patterns during various stages of online collaborative learning activities over an eight-week semester via content analysis and epistemic network analysis (ENA). Quantitative analyses indicated that student teachers demonstrated active social aspects of regulation and had many regulatory behaviors in content monitoring in the designed online collaborative learning activities. Through identifying and comparing the regulatory patterns of the high-performing group and the low-performing group across the stages of learning activities, the results showed that the group demonstrating ample regulatory patterns in “content monitoring”, “evaluating”, and “social emotional regulatory behavior” performed better on the collective score of group product. Furthermore, the analysis elucidated how groups regulated their collaboration variously in different stages of online learning activities. Suggestions about regulated learning at both cognitive and social emotional aspects are provided to teachers and learning designers for designing and implementing online collaborative learning activities.
... Socio-emotional interactions refer to the purposeful interchanges between group members to express and shape the perceptions of emotions and the socio-emotional climate (Bakhtiar et al., 2018;Kreijns, Kirschner, & Jochems, 2003;. Overall, groups' positive socio-emotional interactions have been linked to positive outcomes in groups' engagement, motivation and regulated learning processes (Lajoie et al., 2015;Rogat & Adams-Wiggins, 2015). At best, groups' positive socio-emotional interactions can boost the learning of the individual group members, but also the group as an entity, if all group members' goals are aligned and if they are motivated and contribute to the learning process (Bakhtiar et al., 2018;Volet, Summers, & Thurman, 2009;Zschocke et al., 2015). ...
... In the previous research literature, negative socio-emotional interactions have been seen as the ones that often challenge a group's learning process, affecting the quality of learning activities (Rogat & Adams-Wiggins, 2015; and the emotional and motivational reactions of group members . Negative interactions can derive from various sources, such as cognitive challenges (Andriessen et al., 2013;Järvenoja & Järvelä, 2009), motivational issues or interpersonal dynamics (Blumenfeld, Marx, Soloway, & Krajcik, 1996;. ...
... It is evident that a group's ability to appropriately regulate, in particular, negative socio-emotional interactions is important with respect to the interactions turning into more beneficial ones in terms of learning activities (Lajoie et al., 2015;Rogat & Adams-Wiggins, 2015;. However, the reason for regulation failure may be, for example, the application of inadequate or inappropriate regulation strategies for that situation (Bembenutty, 2011;Cleary, Velardi, & Schnaidman, 2017;Järvenoja et al., 2019;Kurki et al., 2017). ...
Article
Full-text available
This study explores how groups’ negative socio-emotional interactions and related emotion regulation during a collaborative physics task are interconnected with 12-year-old primary school students’ (N = 37) situated individual emotional experiences. To accomplish this, the study relates group-level video data analysis with students’ self-reported emotional experiences. The results indicate that students’ negative emotional experiences related to the task prior to collaborative working increase the group’s emotion regulation during the collaboration and that negative group interactions negatively affect students’ emotional experiences after the task. The study also shows that even though group-level regulation is more likely to change the valence of the group’s interaction from negative to positive, regulation does not always succeed in making a difference to the students’ overall emotional experiences.
... In the positive episodes, group affective states remained positive throughout. Previous research has indicated that positive affect and positive socio-emotional interactions can facilitate group level regulation (Linnenbrink-Garcia et al., 2011;Rogat & Adams-Wiggins, 2015). Interestingly, stable positive learning conditions did not seem to invite regulation of learning in the present study, but this is not necessarily at odds with previous findings, as the focus here was on in-situ regulation within short episodes rather than, for example, at learningsession level. ...
... Theoretically, these socio-emotionally critical situations would invite regulation to restore more positive conditions for collaboration (Linnenbrink-Garcia et al., 2011;Mänty et al., 2020). However, previous studies have also shown that when negative interactions are recurring, they can hinder the group's ability to engage in regulation (Bakhtiar et al., 2018;Rogat & Adams-Wiggins, 2015), which might have been the case in this study. In sum, these findings may indicate that socio-emotional interaction can be enough to maintain positive affective states, but strategic regulation of learning may be needed to address socio-emotional challenges before the negative states start accumulating (Bakhtiar et al., 2018;Näykki et al., 2014). ...
Article
Full-text available
Background: Group affective states for learning are constantly formed through socio-emotional interactions. However, it remains unclear how the affective states vary during collaboration and how they occur with regulation of learning. Appropriate methods are needed to track both group affective states and these interaction processes. Aims: The present study identifies different socio-emotional interaction episodes during groups' collaborative learning and examines how group affective states fluctuate with regulation of learning during these episodes. Sample: The participants were 54 secondary school students working in groups across four science learning sessions. Methods: Multichannel process data (video, electrodermal activity [EDA]) were collected in an authentic classroom. Groups' affective states were measured with emotional valence captured from video data, and activation captured as sympathetic arousal from EDA data. Regulation of learning was observed from the videotaped interactions. Results: The study disclosed four clusters of socio-emotional interaction episodes (positive, negative, occasional regulation, frequent regulation), which differed in terms of fluctuation of affective states and activated regulation of learning. These clustered episodes confirm how affective states are constantly reset by socio-emotional interactions and regulation of learning. The results also show that states requiring regulation do not automatically lead to its activation. Conclusions: By advancing existing understanding of how group level socio-emotional processes contribute to regulation of learning, the study has implications for educational design and psychological practice. Methodologically, it contributes to collaborative learning research by employing multiple data channels (including biophysiological measures) to explore the various dimensions of socio-emotional processes in groups.
... Overall, this area has received minimal uptake in the field. For the most part, research about regulation has examined it across full collaborative episodes (e.g., Grau & Whitebread, 2012;Rogat & Adams-Wiggins, 2015;Ucan & Webb, 2015), or at timed intervals (Iiskala et al., 2015;Molenaar & Chiu, 2012) over the course of collaboration, rather than using challenge episodes for segmenting and narrowing observations to periods in which a regulatory response is warranted. ...
... For example, other regulation has been used to refer to a regulatory act/action in a co-regulatory trajectory whereby regulation is directed or facilitated by others(e.g., peer, teacher, etc.). Recently,Rogat and Adams-Wiggins (2015) compared other regulation that controls (directive-other regulation) versus guides (facilitative-other regulation), finding facilitative other-regulation contributes to more balanced participation and regulatory contributions amongst group members. ...
Chapter
Full-text available
Research about social modes of regulation has burgeoned resulting in a proliferation of terms. This chapter revisits and updates earlier conceptualizations of social modes of regulation in collaboration with the aim of: (a) summarizing relevant theoretical ideas, (b) grounding constructs in educational psychology, (c) highlighting contemporary research evidence bearing on these ideas, (d) offering directions for future research and (e) discussing implications for practice. Drawing from educational psychology theory, five categories with definitions are offered to ameliorate confusions in terminology: (a) self-regulated learning, (b) [socially] shared regulation of learning, (c) co-regulated learning, (d) social-regulation, and (e) interaction and coordinated action.
... When working together toward a common goal, group members can experience shared enjoyment of learning (Anttila et al., 2018) or encounter different kinds of socio-emotional challenges (Näykki et al., 2014) creating unique affective experiences for group members. Affect is constantly present as a condition influencing group members' interactions and behaviors (Winne & Hadwin, 2008) and can foster processes beneficial for collaborative learning (Barron, 2003;Rogat & Adams-Wiggins, 2015) but if socio-emotional challenges are not successfully regulated, have detrimental effects on group members' collaboration (Bakhtiar et al., 2018). Understanding emotional variations in group members' shared affective space could be instrumental in studying the role of affect in the collaborative learning process and, for example, in locating emotionally relevant situations to study and support group level emotion regulation in various learning contexts. ...
... Zschocke et al. (2016) studied individual group work appraisals and emotions arising in the group work context and found that appraisals of the cognitive benefits of group work were a significant predictor of positive activating emotions, and experiences of negative activating and deactivating affect were mostly associated with task management and group assessment aspects. Positive socio-emotional interactions have been linked to positive affect , favorable socio-emotional atmosphere (Bakhtiar et al., 2018;Kwon et al., 2014), processes beneficial for collaborative learning such as high-level cognitive processes (Barron, 2003;Isohätälä et al., 2018;Järvelä et al., 2016a), and facilitative group level regulation (Rogat & Adams-Wiggins, 2015;. In turn, negative interaction has been linked to negative affect and, when persistent, shown to constrain groups' regulatory actions (Bakhtiar et al., 2018). ...
Article
Full-text available
During collaborative learning, affect is constantly present in groups’ interactions, influencing and shaping the learning process. The aim of this study was to understand what type of learning situations trigger affective states in collaborative groups, and how these affective states are related to group members’ physiological activation. The participants were 12-year-old primary school students (N = 31, 10 groups) performing a collaborative science task. In the analysis, video data observations were combined with data of group members’ physiological activation. The groups’ situational valence was identified based on the group members’ observed emotional expressions and their physiological activation levels were measured with electrodermal activity (EDA). Results revealed that situations with group members’ simultaneous physiological activation were rare compared with the observable emotional expressions. However, when group members indicated physiological activation simultaneously, they also showed visible emotional expressions more often than in deactivating situations. Moreover, the results showed that socially-related factors were more likely to trigger physiological activation with a mixed group level valence. In turn, task-related factors were more likely to trigger physiological activation with a neutral group level valence. The results of this study imply that by combining different process data modalities revealing the different components of affect, it might be possible to track emotionally meaningful situations that shape the course of the collaborative learning process.
... Within the relational space of learning, social challenges may arise (Rogat and Linnenbrink-Garcia 2011). Social challenges include a failure to get along, a lack of joint attention, being highly critical, using social comparisons, unbalanced levels of participation or contributions to the regulation of learning, and keeping one's own contributions central to the learning product (Järvenoja and Järvelä 2009;Rogat and Adams-Wiggins 2015). If children focus too narrowly on their own thoughts and contributions, this may leave little room for negotiating a different perspective (Barron 2003). ...
... Positive social interactions include activities such as attentive listening, respectful communication, and mutual participation (Ucan and Webb 2015). Additionally, new ideas and proposals are discussed or accepted (Barron 2003;Rogat and Adams-Wiggins 2015). As such, positive interactions appear to facilitate the occurrence of SSRL, as well as its quality (Rogat and Linnenbrink-Garcia 2011;Ucan and Webb 2015;Volet et al. 2009). ...
Article
Full-text available
The present study investigated the extent to which 18 dyads in 5th and 6th grade, who experienced low levels of social challenge, differed from 12 dyads who experience high levels of social challenge in terms of the quality of their written assignment, as well as the frequency and sequential pattern of their cognitive, metacognitive, relational, and off-task activities during a collaborative hypermedia assignment. Sequential analyses were performed by means of process mining with a fuzzy miner algorithm. Results showed that assignment quality was higher for low social challenge dyads. In addition, these more successful dyads showed more cognitive processing activities, more high-cognition, and fewer off-task activities. In terms of their process models, low and high challenge dyads showed marked differences. More specifically, high social challenge dyads showed a vicious cycle of social challenges and off-task behaviors, whereas low social challenge dyads engaged in high-cognition. In addition, for low challenge dyads, but not high challenge dyads, the various metacognitive activities were closely connected to each other. These findings indicate that social challenges not only affect assignment quality, but also fundamentally affect the overall learning process.
... Borge et al.'s (2018) findings were promising, but also highlighted the need for further research on the development of socio-metacognitive expertise. Similarly, the scarcity of research on the interplay between socio-metacognitive process and collaborative discussion necessitates further exploration of their dynamics in CSCL context (Kwon, Liu, & Johnson, 2014;Rogat & Adams-Wiggins, 2015). This paper builds upon this existing literature and aims to extend what is known about collective regulation by identifying critical socio-metacognitive sense-making patterns in process-related dialogue acts in real-world collaborative learning contexts. ...
... These findings add to the growing body of research that indicate that supporting collective regulation of group interactions may be the key to enhancing the quality of collaborative processes (Kwon, Liu, & Johnson, 2014;Rogat & Adams-Wiggins, 2015). Prior research has suggested that students do not have the ability to monitor and regulate individual and collaborative activities (Borge & White, 2016;Kwon, Liu, & Johnson, 2014;Gabelica et al., 2014;Winne & Nesbit, 2009), and if not provided with sufficient amount of guidance, they will likely to develop dysfunctional collaborative habits (Borge et al., 2018;Kozlowski & Ilgen, 2006;Webb & Palincsar, 1996). ...
Conference Paper
This study explores the dynamics between socio-metacognitive communication patterns and collaborative processes, as students engage in collaborative discussions about course concepts. Building upon a series of studies that aimed to design and validate an intervention to help students develop collaborative competencies at the group level, the study aims to map how socio-metacognitive sense-making patterns are associated with the collaboration quality, by comparing the patterns for low, medium, and high performing teams. Discussion and after-discussion reflection transcripts of 12 teams over five sessions were analyzed and assessed, using previously developed collaborative discourse rubric and sense-making coding construct. The results showed a significant correlation between frequency of sense-making acts and the quality of the collaborative discourse.
... En los procesos de autorregulación coexisten elementos cognitivos, motivacionales y sociales, los cuales se encuentran fuertemente enraizados en aspectos emocionales que pueden generar conflictos cuando se trabaja de manera conjunta que pueden determinar el éxito o fracaso de una tarea escolar realizada de manera colaborativa (Koivuniemi, Järvenoja & Järvelä, 2018;McCaslin & Murdock, 1991;Panadero, Kirschner, Järvelä & Järvenoja, 2015;Rogat & Linnenbrink-Garcia, 2011;Rogat & Adams-Wiggins, 2014;Rogat & Adams-Wiggins, 2015;Sobonciski, Järvelä, Malmberg & Muhterem, 2020 ;Zheng & Huang, 2015). ...
Article
Full-text available
Se presenta y analiza la adaptación al contexto colombiano de un instrumento para evaluar la naturaleza adaptativa de la regulación emocional en situaciones de aprendizaje colaborativo (AIRE), propuesto por Järvelä, Järvenoja & Veermans (2008). Participaron 67 estudiantes de grados 8º, 9º y 10º de una institución femenina del sector público de la ciudad de Manizales (Colombia) con edades entre 13 y 17 años (M=15,03 años DE=0,97 años). Los participantes, dispuestos en 12 grupos de trabajo permanentes, siguen una dinámica de aprendizaje colaborativa en todas la áreas y materias. Se examinaron estadísticos descriptivos y análisis de reducción de dimensiones a través de la técnica ACP para cada sección del instrumento. Los resultados mostraron que, mientras las secciones uno y tres parecen coincidir con lo planteado teóricamente en la consolidación del instrumento, la dimensionalidad encontrada difiere de la propuesta por sus autores en la sección dos. Los resultados mostraron que el instrumento contribuye al análisis y evaluación de objetivos personales, conflictos socio emocionales, formas de regulación y reflexión metacognitiva sobre la percepción individual y grupal del objetivo alcanzado. Se propone una nueva dimensionalidad en razón de la adaptación, los análisis y la congruencia conceptual de algunos de sus ítem
... More specifically, the members' participation roles during group work and the quality of interpersonal relationships in terms of perceived levels of emotional and academic support and the nature of friendships (or social ties) existing within each group seemed to shed light on some of the differences between and within groups A and B. Some of the extant literature supports these postulations by showing links between the quality of interpersonal relationships and interactions and group's regulatory processes. For instance, Rogat and Adams-Wiggins (2015) identified the presence of positive socio-emotional interactions among group members as facilitating their use of higher quality social regulation processes during small group mathematical tasks. Salonen, Vauras and, Efklides (2005) identified interpersonal relational control processes as being operative, which could facilitate or inhibit the effectiveness of co-regulatory cognitive processes between the interacting partners. ...
Article
This study investigated how the occurrence of self and social forms of regulation of learning processes changes over time across the sequence of collaborative inquiry tasks. Two groups of three primary school students (7th grade) were videotaped while working in collaborative inquiry activities in a regular science classroom during a 7-week period, and participated in stimulated-recall and semi-structured interviews. The results show evidence that the groups engaged increasingly in more socially shared regulation along the sequence of collaborative inquiry tasks, whereas no meaningful change was observed in the occurrence of co-regulation processes over time. Moreover, different patterns of temporal change were identified for each group and for each individual group member, and appeared to be associated with the individual and group level characteristics.
... Socio-emotional interaction consists of purposeful interchanges between students to express and shape perceptions of emotions and the group's socio-emotional atmosphere (Kreijns et al., 2003;Bakhtiar et al., 2018;Mänty et al., 2020). Positive socio-emotional interactions have been found to facilitate co-and socially shared regulation of learning Lajoie et al., 2015;Rogat and Adams-Wiggins, 2015). Meanwhile, negative socio-emotional interactions hinder the collaborative learning process by affecting the quality of group learning activities and have been linked to negative emotional experiences of collaboration among group members (Mänty et al., 2020). ...
Article
Full-text available
Emotions in collaborative learning both originate from and are externalized in students' socio-emotional interactions, and individual group members evidently contribute to these interactions to varying degrees. Research indicates that socio-emotional interactions within a group are related with the occurrence of co-and socially shared regulation of learning, which poses a need to study individual contributions to these interactions via a person-centered approach. This study implements multimodal data (video and electrodermal activity) and sequence mining methods to explore how secondary school students' (n = 54, 18 groups) participation in socio-emotional interactions evolved across a series of collaborative tasks. On this basis, it identifies subgroups of students with distinct longitudinal profiles. Furthermore, it investigates how students with different socio-emotional interaction profiles contributed to their groups' regulation of learning. Three profiles were identified: negative, neutral, and diverse. Each profile represents a particular socio-emotional interaction pattern with unique characteristics regarding the emotional valence of participation and physiological emotional activation. The profiles relate to students' contributions to group regulation of learning. Students with the diverse profile were more likely to contribute to regulation, whereas the neutral profile students were less likely to contribute. The results highlight the importance of person-centered methods to account for individual differences and participation dynamics in collaborative learning and consequently clarify how they relate to and influence group regulation of learning.
... Social regulation can range from other-regulation to socially shared regulation. The term other-regulation is applied to situations in which a 'momentary unequal situation' arises (Volet et al. 2009b): one student temporarily predominates the group's interactions and takes the guiding role in the joint activity, in a directive or facilitative way (Vauras et al. 2003;Volet et al. 2009b;Rogat and Adams-Wiggins 2014;Volet 2013, 2014;Schoor et al. 2015;Rogat and Adams-Wiggins 2015). The term socially shared regulation-it has been used interchangeably with the term socially shared metacognition, although the latter is more focused on the regulation of cognition-refers to those 'individuals' metacognitive processes that operate as a genuine social entity, aimed at a single objective, that is, the fully shared goal of the activity' (Iiskala 2011, p. 379). ...
Article
Full-text available
Background The debate around the regulation of learning has recently penetrated the domain of collaborative learning, introducing a social dimension to what was earlier seen, essentially, as a personal initiative. The present study aims at understanding the development of co-regulation episodes in the specific context of vocational education and training (VET), an under investigated domain. Methods This study involves 22 apprentice chefs who were asked to work in small groups on various learning activities related to their professional learning. Each group was videotaped while performing the activities; videos were then coded and analysed, through the nVivo software, on the basis of a coding scheme focussing on regulation and interaction. More specifically, we analysed the nature of the content discussed within the groups, the socio-regulatory processes and the types of interaction observed. ResultsResults showed that inquiries formulated as ‘how’ questions, efforts to give others explanations, as well as attempts to monitor the group’s work found in high-level content co-regulation episodes significantly more often than in the other types of episodes. None of the indicators of positive or negative socio-emotional interactions could be linked to the quality of group regulation, neither in terms of level of content nor with respected to the socio-regulatory processes engaged in. Conclusions Possible explanations for the results are provided in line with the specificity of the context in which this study was run (initial VET). Implications for further research on these issues are discussed.
... In contrast, negative group interaction emphasizes discouragement, disrespect of others and their ideas, ignorance or rejection, and social comparison (Kempler & Linnenbrink, 2006;Rogat & Adams-Wiggins, 2015;. In order for a group to collaborate effectively, social interaction must exist in the group. ...
Article
Full-text available
This study examined affect during high school students' face-to-face collaborative inquiry learning in science, supported by the web-based software Virtual Baltic Sea Explorer. Self-reported affective states during the inquiry process in peer groups were related to evaluations of a group's collaboration and performance in three phases of interdisciplinary science inquiry (biology and chemistry). Results indicate that despite high cognitive demands, positive affect prevailed whereas negative affect was infrequent. Structural equation modelling was used to analyse the significance of affect on collaboration and group performance. The relationship between affect, collaboration, and the groups' productive outcome revealed that self-assurance had a significant effect on collaboration and support, intertwined with scientific understanding and group performance. Furthermore, a cross-lagged analysis showed a reciprocal relation between positive affect, scientific understanding, collaboration, and support. These outcomes contribute to the scarce literature on the nature and importance of affect in the process of face-to-face computer-supported collaborative inquiry and learning in science.
... Theoretical and empirical advances have been made, for example, with respect to enhancing cognitive performance, stimulating knowledge construction, and scripting learning processes (Näykki, Isohätälä, Järvelä, Pöysä-Tarhonen, & Häkkinen, 2017;O'Donnell & Hmelo-Silver, 2013). In contrast, less successful research results have been obtained in terms of the problems relating to socio-emotional engagement (Rogat & Adams-Wiggins, 2015). These studies highlight the need to support awareness and the productive adaptation of motivational and emotional processes (Fransen, Weinberger, & Kirschner, 2013;Kwon, Liu, & Johnson, 2014;Rogat & Linnenbrink-Garcia, 2011). ...
Article
This study explores fluctuation in students’ emotional state and motivational goals during a learning project that requires self-regulation. The research asks the following questions: (1) How do students’ emotional state and motivational goal fluctuate between the gStudy learning sessions during a two-month project? (2) How do students with different situational motivation describe their use of motivation regulation strategies? and (3) How is students’ situational motivation associated with their learning outcomes? The students (N = 20) in one classroom evaluated their emotional state and motivational goals repeatedly with an emotion awareness tool during a two-month-long science project. At the end of the project, they completed a learning test and were interviewed about their regulation strategies. The results show that the students’ situational motivation fluctuated in the course of the learning project. The students with a trend of a low situational motivation reported particularly the use of performance and mastery self-talk strategies, the students with moderate situational motivation emphasised environmental structuring and self-consequating, while the students with high situational motivation reported the use of self-consequating and interest enhancement strategies. The students typically reporting high or moderate situational motivation gained significantly more inquiry learning skills compared to their peers with low situational motivation.
... Through the three claims and related examples presented in this paper, we described our research approach, which emphasises the role of motivation and emotion regulation in the regulated learning process (Ben-Eliyahu & Linnenbrink-Garcia, 2013;Duffy et al., 2015;Järvelä et al., 2016;Kwon, Liu, & Johnson, 2014;Rogat & Adams-Wiggins, 2015). The three claims highlighted a particular viewpoint to the approach: a requisite to study motivation and emotion regulation as situated in the learning context, a need to acknowledge both the process in which regulation is actualised as well as individuals' subjective beliefs and appraisals of these processes, and finally, a possibility to understand and capture motivation and emotion regulation by tracking related indicators from learning process. ...
Article
Full-text available
This paper describes our research approach in which we have focused on situational and contextual variations in motivation and emotion regulation to better understand its role, appearance and function in collaborative learning situations. We have used research designs that employ process-oriented measures combined with subjective interpretations to capture motivation and emotion regulation. Analysing on-line process data poses several challenges such as variation in the granularity of different data sources, problems that emerge due to the complexity of contextual and situational factors in ecologically-valid learning situations or, currently, challenges in the use of multiple data channels and their analyses. In this paper, we present three claims underlying our research, particularly the motivationand emotions and their regulation in learning. The claims are as follows: (1) motivation and emotion regulation is situation and context specific, (2) motivation and emotion regulation is influenced by multi-layered nature of motivationand(3) Motivation and emotion regulation is intertwined with other processes of learning and can be captured from their temporal manifestation. We present an example from our empirical study to discuss how these claims have led us to employ multiple process-oriented methods that include both subjective and objective data sources, including different combinations of situation-specific self-reports, video and physiological data. We then describe opportunities and challenges involved in the empirical studies.
... or ways of communicating that shape the socio-emotional climate of the group . Rogat and Adams-Wiggins (2015), and Kwon, Liu, and Johnson (2014) argue that participation in socio-emotional interactions manifests as positive ways of communicating, such as encouraging and conveying group cohesion, which support productive collaboration. Socio-emotional interactions can also be disruptive if they manifest as negative interactions, such as rudeness, overruling, undermining, exclusion, and insulting (Chiu & Khoo, 2003;Linnenbrink-Garcia, Rogat, & Koskey, 2011;Näykki, Järvelä, Kirschner, & Järvenoja, 2014). ...
Article
Collaborative learning involves fluctuations in how students participate in social interaction and how they engage in interactions that are cognitive (e.g., sharing knowledge, monitoring learning) and more socio-emotional (e.g., encouragement, positive appraisal) in nature. Few studies have investigated how participation in social interaction fluctuates in relation to these varying types of interaction. The aim of this process-oriented study was to explore how actively students participated in cognitive and socio-emotional interactions and what characterized the moments when participation changed during transitions between the types of interaction. The qualitative analysis focused on video-recorded collaborative learning of six groups of student teachers (N = 24). We found that socio-emotional interaction involved more active participation than cognitive interaction. Changes in participation during transitions between types of interaction were characterized by shifts between domain-focused and metacognitive activities. Implications for supporting and studying productive social interaction in collaborative learning are discussed.
... Therefore, coregulation of learning (CoRL) and socially shared regulation of learning (SSRL) ( Hadwin et al. 2018) are especially critical, as people need to continuously collaborate to solve today's and tomorrow's complex problems. Research has shown that groups do not recognize challenging learning situations and their need for regulation ( Järvelä et al. 2016b), which restricts group members' activation of strategic adaptation in those situations (Rogat and Adams- Wiggins 2015), and thus, they need to be alerted to this need. ...
Article
Full-text available
Self-regulation is critical for successful learning, and socially shared regulation contributes to productive collaborative learning. The problem is that the psychological processes at the foundation of regulation are invisible and, thus, very challenging to understand, support, and influence. The aim of this paper is to review the progress in socially shared regulation research data collection methods for trying to understand the complex process of regulation in the social learning context, for example, collaborative learning and computer-supported collaborative learning. We highlight the importance of tracing the sequential and temporal characteristics of regulation in learning by focusing on data for individual- and group-level shared regulatory activities that use technological research tools and by gathering in-situ data about students’ challenges that provoke regulation of learning. We explain how we understand regulation in a social context, argue why methodological progress is needed, and review the progress made in researching regulation of learning.
... Research has shown that groups do not recognize and react to challenging learning situations and, thus, cannot explicitly regulate their learning in such situations (Järvelä et al., 2016;Rogat & Adams-Wiggins, 2015). This means that there is a need for them to be alerted. ...
Article
Full-text available
Collaborative learning (CL) can be a powerful method for sharing understanding between learners. To this end, strategic regulation of processes, such as cognition and affect (including metacognition, emotion and motivation) is key. Decades of research on self‐regulated learning has advanced our understanding about the need for and complexity of those mediating processes in learning. Recent research has shown that it is not only the individual's but also the group's shared processes that matter and, thus, that regulation at the group level is critical for learning success. A problem here is that the “shared” processes in CL are invisible, which makes it almost impossible for researchers to study and understand them, for learners to recognize them and for teachers to support them. Traditionally, research has not been able to make these processes visible nor has it been able to collect data about them. With the aid of advanced technologies, signal processing and machine learning, we are on the verge of “seeing” these complex phenomena and understanding how they interact. We posit that technological solutions and digital tools available today and in the future will help advance the theory underlying the cognitive, metacognitive, emotional and social components of individual, peer and group learning when seen through a multidisciplinary lens. The aim of this paper is to discuss and demonstrate how multidisciplinary collaboration among the learning sciences, affective computing and machine learning is applied for understanding and facilitating CL.
... The curriculum also affords engagement in peer interactions and opportunities to engage in discipline-relevant discourse (Blumenfeld, Kempler, & Krajcik, 2006;Rogat, Witham, & Chinn, 2014). Nonetheless, previous findings suggest learners may engage in practices that lead to reduced participation by groupmates (Adams-Wiggins & Rogat, 2013;Cornelius & Herrenkohl, 2004;Rogat & Adams-Wiggins, 2015). ...
Article
(Free to download through January 2020): Recent research emphasizing disciplinary identities in the classroom indicates the importance of social interaction and inclusion in the classroom, yet only limited work focuses on how peer-initiated exclusion impacts learners. This study addresses that gap by examining the role of microexclusions, or affronts to sense of belonging and competence, in collaborative groups in 7th grade inquiry science classrooms. The qualitative analyses here involved videorecorded observations for 5 small groups of students participating in a semester-long series of inquiry life science units. A total of 19 observations were analyzed across the 5 groups. Five themes were identified across the groups: individualization or splitting of the group, adversarial interactions within the group, uneven access to regulatory roles within the group, lagging group members, and using diffuse status characteristics to redirect group activity. Results indicate that microexclusions redirect learners' behavior toward managing participation dynamics inside the group at the cost of inclusion and group functioning. Implications for equity and science education reform are provided considering findings.
... Il est également survenu dans les situations de conflit que l'une des personnes impliquées adopte une approche plus directive, par exemple, en tentant d'imposer sa position ou en rejetant la proposition de l'autre personne, comme il s'est produit dans le groupe Fournisseurs. Dans de telles situations, Rogat et al. (2015) avaient observé que, lorsque des participants tentent de réguler les autres participants de façon directive, qu'elles tentent de gérer et de contrôler les autres, elles peuvent manquer de respect envers les contributions des autres membres du groupe (renforcement de la motivation et de la confiance). De plus, l'ignorance et le désaccord avec un membre de l'équipe peuvent laisser entendre que leurs contributions ne sont pas valorisées (renforcement de la motivation et de la confiance). ...
... joy, enthusiasm) or negative affect (e.g. frustration, boredom) were found to set the group climate and influence the quality of learning [23]. ...
Article
This study explores the potential of emotional mimicry in identifying the leader and follower students in collaborative learning settings. Our data include video recorded interactions of 24 high school students who worked together in groups of three during a collaborative exam. A facial emotions recognition method was used to capture participants' facial emotions during the collaborative work. Cross-recurrence quantification analysis was applied on the detected facial emotions to see the level and direction of emotional mimicry among the dyads in the same groups. In order to validate the cross-recurrence quantification analysis results, student interactions in terms of leading or following the task were video coded. Our findings showed that the leaders and followers identified by cross-recurrence quantification analysis findings matched the leaders and followers identified by the video coding in 70% of the dyadic interactions across the collaborating groups. The current findings show that video-based facial emotions recognition as a method can add to collaborative learning research, especially explaining some social, and affective dynamics about it. The study further discusses the possible variables that might confound the relationship between emotional mimicry and leader-follower interactions during collaboration.
... These individual reactions are also meaningful on a group level since they shape the group's affective state and socio-emotional atmosphere (Bakhtiar et al., 2018). Earlier research has evidenced that students' emotions can foster processes beneficial for collaborative learning, such as high-level cognitive processes (Järvelä et al., 2016;Rogat & Adams-Wiggins, 2015); however, if not successfully regulated, emotions can lead to socio-emotional challenges and have detrimental effects on collaboration (Baker et al., 2013). ...
Article
Full-text available
This study explored the interplay between students' group-level emotion regulation behavior and affective conditions and products of regulation (emotional valence, activation, participation). The participants were 12-year-old students (N = 31, 10 groups) performing a collaborative science task. Conditions, emotion regulation behavior, and products of regulation were captured from video and electrodermal activity data. Results reveal that affective conditions were related to students' regulatory behavior. Students were more likely to initiate regulation when they indicated a personal need to restore affective grounds. Moreover, regulation was activated to restore participation by targeting regulation to non-participating students. While regulation did not always change conditions for collaboration, the results indicate that it was more influential for students who either initiated or were targets for regulation.
... It would consequently be interesting to include variables such as individual students' academic achievement, learning objectives, prior knowledge, self-efficacy, competence in self-regulation, or experienced cognitive load (Iiskala et al. 2015;Kirschner et al. 2009;Malmberg et al. 2015;Miller and Hadwin 2015) in future studies, to investigate whether and how these affect students' SSMR. Additionally, integrating variables such as positive/negative socio-emotional interactions within RPT-groups, their argumentative discussions, or collaborative learners' feeling of belongingness (Isohätälä et al. 2017;Rogat and Adam-Wiggins 2015) might shed light on the impact of group-related features on the adoption of SSMR and on students' performance. In this respect it would also be worthwhile investigating whether and how the content of peers' discussions is related to students' engagement in SSMR, for it could be that particularly qualitative discussions facilitate the exchange of multiple perspectives (Khosa and Volet 2014). ...
Article
Full-text available
This study investigates (1) the impact of structuring versus reflection-provoking support on university students’ adoption of socially shared metacognitive regulation (SSMR) during face-to-face peer tutoring (PT) and (2) the relation between SSMR and group performance. A quasi-experimental design was adopted, involving 72 educational sciences students who were randomly assigned to PT-groups of six. Each group was provided with either structuring (SS) or reflection-provoking (RS) support. The training and closing PT-session of six groups in each support condition were videotaped (48 h). SSMR was studied by means of systematic observation of video-recorded PT sessions, whereas PT groups’ score on the assignment during the last PT session served as performance measure. The results revealed only significant differences in SSMR between both support conditions, when the proportion of students actively involved in SSMR, was taken into consideration. More specifically, PT groups in the RS condition revealed significantly more SSMR in which (nearly) all students are engaged, as compared with PT groups in the SS condition. The correlational analyses further indicated that only SSMR representing a high participation degree of (nearly) all students is significantly positively related to PT groups’ performance.
Article
Students’ social knowledge construction and socio-emotional interactions in computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) are shaped by one another and work together to affect the group’s learning performance. However, few studies have combined both social knowledge construction and socio-emotional interactions and examined how they contribute to improved learning performance. This study examines the dynamics of students’ social knowledge construction and socio-emotional interactions in the context of computer-supported collaborative writing and compares six high- and six low-performing groups. Quantitative content analysis and sequential analysis were used to reveal the characteristics of groups’ behaviour frequencies and patterns. The high-performing groups demonstrated more systematic and meaningful social knowledge construction and socio-emotional interaction patterns, while the low-performing groups only engaged in single repeated behaviours. It is worth noting that memes played different roles in the two groups.
Article
This study examines student teachers’ collaborative learning by focusing on socio-cognitive and socio-emotional monitoring processes during more and less active script discussions as well as the near transfer of monitoring activities in the subsequent task work. The participants of this study were teacher education students whose collaborative learning was supported with a designed regulation macro script during a six weeks environmental science course. The script divided the group work into three phases, namely: the orientation phase, intermediate phase, and reflection phase. The script was put in use by prompting questions that were delivered to the students on tablets. Question prompts instructed groups to plan their collaborative processes, and to stop and reflect on the efficiency of their strategies and outcomes of their learning process. The data were collected by videotaping the groups’ face-to-face work and analysed by focusing on verbalised monitoring interactions. More active and less active script discussions were differentiated in terms of the length and the quality of discussion. The results show that the macro script was used more thoroughly at the beginning of the group activities for orientation than for coordinating the progress or reflecting on the performance. Active script discussions involved more monitoring activities, especially providing socio-emotional support. Once socio-emotional support was stimulated in the more active script discussion, it tended to follow-up during the task work. It can be concluded, that the groups appropriated the script differently in different situations and with varied success. The implications of facilitating socio-cognitive and socio-emotional monitoring in collaborative learning are discussed.
Article
Productive interaction in collaborative learning requires a balance of engaging in high-level cognitive processes while sustaining socio-emotional processes that are favorable to this, but researchers often neglect to study both these aspects, with the relations between the two. This study focused on cognitive processes—namely, knowledge-based argumentation—and socio-emotional processes in student teachers’ (N = 19) collaborative learning interaction during an environmental science course. Firstly, we broadly examined the quality of the socio-emotional processes and the frequency of argumentation in the video-recorded collaboration (22 h). Secondly, we conducted a micro-level analysis of the socio-emotional processes during argumentation in a case group. The findings showed that all groups sustained a favorable social climate, but, apart from the case group, mostly failed to engage in argumentation. However, the micro-level analysis illustrated how the members of the case group were able to reason together while sustaining a favorable socio-emotional climate. Their interaction was characterized by the tentativeness of argumentative claims, consideration of divergent claims, and moderate tension relaxation expressed through a wide set of communicative means. The findings highlight that the cognitive and socio-emotional processes are highly intertwined and neither one can be overlooked when studying and promoting argumentation in collaborative learning.
Article
Full-text available
The processes of socially shared regulation in small groups of students who perform collaborative tasks through forums involving asynchronous communication are explored in this article. The specific aim of the study is to identify profiles of shared regulation in groups of students who have different performance levels on the task, depending on the regulatory activities exercised by the groups and their distribution over time. For that purpose, a case study was developed; six small groups of university students collaboratively performed a complex task (for 29 days) in a virtual environment based on asynchronous discussion forums. The results revealed three different profiles: (i) a profile with stable and high regulation; (ii) a profile with partially stable and medium regulation; and (iii) a profile with unstable and low regulation. The first two profiles were observed in the groups with high performance levels on the task, while the third profile was observed in the low-performing groups. Therefore, some recommendations are suggested to support processes of shared regulation in asynchronous collaborative learning situations.
Article
Full-text available
Many studies attempt to effectively support student regulation of collaboration using CSCL tools to enrich learning outcomes. However, few studies are aimed at facilitating development of students’ internal scripts for regulation of collaboration. This study focuses on developing and evaluating a computer-mediated learning environment for project-based learning to facilitate student internal scripts for regulation by designing external scripts for effective reflection. Forty-eight first-year university students participated in this study as part of their curriculum. Our analyses of their internal scripts before and after PBL participation revealed that significantly more students who encountered an unfamiliar situation during collaboration constructed new regulation scripts. Moreover, in case studies, we found that students augmented their scripts for socially shared regulation when recognizing socio-cognitive challenges, whereas they augmented co-regulation and self-regulation scripts when recognizing socio-emotional challenges.
Article
Full-text available
In order to cultivate students to be able to participate in public affairs and make decisions about socioscientific issues (SSI), a web-based module was designed for students to collaboratively engage in the decision-making (DM) process. This study attempted to identify students’ discourse characteristics that might lead to formulating an evidence-based decision on SSI. Twenty-nine Grade 10 students were randomly divided into eight groups of three or four. The transcribed data of one case from each performance level were compared to investigate the interplay between groups’ DM performances and discourse characteristics. The results showed that the group that gained a high score on the DM group worksheet engaged in the metacognitive discussion for planning procedures of the module tools and in the conceptual exchanges to accomplish the tasks. The members of this group could initiate and extend ideas, provide prompts, and confirm or reject each other’s ideas, resulting in sustained interactive dialogs that allowed them to learn from one another. This indicated that students need to be encouraged to clarify the task goals, plan procedures, monitor their performance, and exchange their ideas actively. The implications of how collaborative discourse promote students’ SSI DM performance, and the better design and enactment of SSI modules are discussed.
Article
Despite an increase in research on social regulation of learning, studies on socially shared metacognition are still scarce. This has led to a lack of understanding concerning how groups co-construct metacognitive knowledge, skills, and experiences. In this comparative case study, we qualitatively analyzed video recordings from the meetings of six groups of pharmacy graduate students. For this, we developed a coding scheme that characterized the metacognitive processes of small groups in a project-based learning environment. Using log data collected from a collaboration app, we distinguished which groups rated themselves the highest and lowest overall for metacognitive experiences and then examined differences in the socially shared metacognition processes between these groups. We were able to map 100 strategy codes into four categories with various subcategories representing the cognitive and metacognitive processes used by both groups. We also found that the two groups did not differ on the proportions of different modes of regulation but did differ qualitatively, with the high self-rated group's strategy enactment being more deliberate, targeted, and cohesive than that of the lower self-rated group. Our findings expand understanding of socially shared metacognitive strategies, which has implications for those who aim to improve collaboration by promoting appropriate group-level processes.
Thesis
Full-text available
Collaborative learning in small groups is a societally relevant but challenging way of learning. It requires a rich understanding of how people think and co-elaborate knowledge together (cognitive processes) and how they feel and relate to each other (socio-emotional processes). The objective of this dissertation is to explore the interplay of cognitive and socio-emotional processes as it manifests in face-to-face social interaction during collaborative learning. The results were derived from qualitative, process-oriented analyses of video-recorded social interactions in two datasets pertaining to small groups of Finnish teacher education students (N=43) who collaborated on mathematics and environmental science tasks. The results are reported in four empirical articles. The results show that the cognitive and socio-emotional processes fluctuated in the social interactions over the course of collaborative learning. The socio-emotional processes became especially overt and thematic in the social interactions when groups regulated their learning. During such regulation, groups’ metacognitive planning, monitoring, and evaluating could intertwine expressions of emotion, talking about emotions, or giving socio-emotional support. These moments activated group members’ joint participation and allowed them to establish agreement, respond to challenges, and recognize strengths or weaknesses, which were important functions for collaborative learning. At times, the social interaction was more directed toward cognitive processes when group members concentrated on performing task activities. However, the socio-emotional processes were still intertwined with cognitive processes. This dissertation illustrates how a case episode of argumentation proceeded through a series of counterarguments, reformulations, and elaborations, but also involved subtle ways of expressing claims tentatively, showing consideration of divergent claims, and relaxing tension. This dissertation highlights that cognitive and socio-emotional processes of collaborative learning are continuously intertwined but fluctuate in social interaction. The intertwining gives rise to meaningful functions for collaborative learning. Attempts to support collaborative learning in education or work must acknowledge the interplay of cognitive and socio-emotional processes in social interaction.
Article
The aim of this study is to explore how students experience and describe socio-cognitive and socio-emotional challenges in collaborative learning. The participants (N = 20) were teacher education students whose collaborative learning was supported with a designed regulation macro script during a six-week mathematics course. The purpose of the script was to provide structured phases during the collaborative learning tasks for the group members to plan, monitor, and evaluate their workings. The video data of groups' face-to-face work was collected and analysed by focusing on the different types of challenges the groups experienced and the types of challenges they described during the scripted interaction. The results indicate that the groups experienced more socio-cognitive challenges than socio-emotional challenges. The script provided them a moment to verbalize their emotional experiences, name the emotions (i.e. frustration), and attribute the challenges and emotions more precisely than during their mathematical task. The intertwining characteristics of socio-cognitive and socio-emotional challenges were observable. Collaborative learning can be challenging for groups, and thus, the knowledge of and the ability to implement practices for becoming aware of challenges can provide a direction for students to progress towards more productive collaboration.
Article
Full-text available
La literatura reciente en el ámbito del aprendizaje colaborativo mediado por ordenador (Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning –CSCL–) destaca que un proceso colaborativo eficaz se asocia con la capacidad que tienen los alumnos para regular sus propias actividades. La noción de regulación compartida extiende su concepción del aprendizaje más allá de los procesos cognitivos y sus resultados; regular implica gestionar distintos componentes vinculados con la actividad y el funcionamiento del grupo (procesos vinculados con la estructura de la tarea, con la participación, y con componentes motivacionales). En este artículo se propone un conjunto de rasgos teóricos y empíricos que caracterizan a la regulación compartida como un ámbito de estudio emergente en el campo del CSCL. Dicha propuesta surge de la revisión de la literatura, en donde destacamos la diversidad de marcos teóricos y términos asociados con la regulación del aprendizaje, distinguimos distintos tipos de regulación social en el aprendizaje colaborativo, y distinguimos, desde el marco más amplio del proceso de aprendizaje colaborativo, entre regulación compartida y construcción compartida del conocimiento.
Article
Collaborative problem solving, as a key competency in the 21st century, includes both social and cognitive processes with interactive, interdependent, and periodic characteristics, so it is difficult to analyze collaborative problem solving by traditional coding and counting methods. There is a need for a new analysis approach that can capture the temporal and dynamic process of collaborative problem solving in diversity online collaborative learning context to provide some insights into online collaborative learning design. During an eight-week semester, a total of 42 student teachers participated in two online collaborative learning activities. Student teachers' discourse data were collected, and the data were coded based on a collaborative problem solving assessment model. This study used Epistemic Network Analysis (ENA) to explore the collaborative problem solving processes of student teachers in different online collaborative learning tasks. The results showed that both the high and low academic performance groups worked to maintain positive communication, but the students in the high academic performance groups negotiated on ideas while the students in the low academic performance groups focused on sharing resources/ideas. Moreover, fine-grained centroid analysis on a weekly basis showed that the high academic performance groups began by maintaining positive communication, and ended by negotiating ideas, while the low academic performance groups began by sharing resources/ideas and ended by regulating problem solving activities. Finally, the implications, limitations, and future research were discussed.
Thesis
Full-text available
(ENG) The aim of the study was to investigate self-regulation, co-regulation and socially-shared regulation behaviors of children during collaborative problem solving tasks of two difficulty levels and to reveal the interrelations among regulation behaviors and performance. 60-71 month-old 16 gender-heterogenous triads of kindergarteners from Beşiktaş district of Istanbul participated in the study. In order the investigate the regulation behaviours, the Shape Formation Task, adapted from the original 7-piece tangram game was used as a collaborative problem solving task. Collaborative problem solving process (lasting 51 minutes 35 seconds) was videotaped (32 recordings from 16 groups) and transcribed in terms of verbal and non-verbal behaviours using the Shape Formation Task Coding Chart which was designed for this study. In order to assess task performance, Shape Formation Task Performance Assessment Guide was designed based on the diagnostic tree branching-out design. The findings of the study showed that there was no significant difference between easy and difficult tasks in terms of the rates of self-regulation, co-regulation and socially shared regulation behaviors. Also, for both tasks, no statistically significant correlations was found between regulation behaviors and performance. However, the results showed that there were statistically significant differences among the rates of self-regulation, co-regulation and socially-shared regulation behaviours for both tasks according to the level of difficulty of the task in the process of solving problems collaboratively. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (TR) Bu çalışma; küçük çocukların ortaklaşa problem çözme sürecinde özdüzenleme, eşli düzenleme ve sosyal paylaşımlı düzenleme davranışlarını farklı güçlük düzeylerinde görevler yardımıyla keşfetmeyi ve düzenleme davranışlarının performansla ilişkisini ortaya çıkarmayı amaçlamaktadır. Çalışmaya, İstanbul ili Beşiktaş ilçesinde anaokula devam etmekte olan 60-71 aylık cinsiyet bakımından heterojen üçer kişilik toplam 16 grup katılmıştır. Düzenleme davranışlarını ortaya çıkarmak amacıyla, ortaklaşa problem çözme görevi olarak, orijinal 7 parçalı tangram oyunundan uyarlanan Şekil Oluşturma Görevi (ŞOG) kullanılmıştır. Ortaklaşa problem çözme süreci (toplam 51 dakika 35 saniye) kayıt altına (16 gruba ait 32 kayıt) alınmış, sözlü ve sözsüz ifadeler bu çalışma için geliştirilen ŞOG Kodlama Tablosu'na aktarılmıştır. Performans ölçümü için tanılayıcı dallanmış ağaç tekniği uyarlanan ŞOG Performans Değerlendirme Kılavuzu geliştirilmiştir. Çalışmanın sonucu, kolay ve zor görev arasında düzenleme davranışlarının ortaya çıkma oranları açısından istatistiki olarak fark olmadığını göstermiştir. Ayrıca, her iki görev için de, düzenleme davranışları ile performans arasında istatistiki olarak anlamlı ilişki bulunamamıştır. Ancak, her iki görev için de, özdüzenleme, eşli düzenleme ve sosyal paylaşılan düzenleme davranışları ortaya çıkma oranlarının birbirleri arasında istatistiki olarak anlamlı fark olduğu görülmüştür.
Article
Despite growing awareness of the importance of incorporating integrated science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) learning into K‐12 education, formal classroom implementation still faces obstacles. Teachers lack the knowledge and skills, especially design‐thinking competence, required to design an interdisciplinary STEM curriculum. The goal of this study was to investigate different scaffolding modes that may influence the design‐thinking competence development of STEM teachers. Twenty‐four preservice teachers participated in this study, which was carried out in an online STEM preservice teacher training environment. The participants were assigned to six groups of two cohorts. Each group designed a STEM learning module. To support their online design meetings, the three groups from the static scaffolding cohort (SSC) received pre‐defined guiding questions, while the other three groups from the adaptive scaffolding cohort (ASC) received contingent scaffolding from a human tutor. The Log data on the participants' conversations in the design meetings were collected and analysed using the epistemic network analysis (ENA) approach. The results revealed that the SSC and ASC had divergent design‐thinking development trajectories and established distinct design‐thinking patterns. Conversation analysis of the two cohorts confirmed the findings of the ENA analysis and provided evidence that the two scaffolding modes can help address challenges to collaborative STEM learning design and cultivate design‐thinking competence from different perspectives.
Article
Students working in small collaborative groups may experience conflicts due to emotional issues at the individual or group level. Students need to regulate these emotions to avoid or reduce negative socioemotional interactions that can interfere with group performance. In this article, we studied the socioemotional regulation strategies used by graduate pharmacy students as they worked together in a small-group project-based learning environment. For this, we video recorded groups of students working on a class project in an authentic learning context. We conducted a qualitative extreme case study of three groups who, over six weeks, collectively rated their emotions as low, medium, and high to determine how the groups regulated their emotions, as well as the similarities and differences between the groups. We conducted three analyses: code mapping, descriptive, and thematic. We found that the socioemotional regulation strategies fell into one of the following five themes: behavioral, interpersonal, cognitive, motivational, and a combination of motivational and cognitive. We found that the most commonly used strategies were interpersonal and that the strategies were used at varying interpersonal levels (i.e., self, peer, and group). We also found that some groups used more appropriate strategies and that the use of strategies may have been connected to individual differences and pre-existing relationships between group members. Understanding which strategies are useful in specific collaborative contexts can help educators guide groups of students to effectively regulate their emotions.
Article
Full-text available
Research indicates that to adjust a group’s emotional atmosphere for successful collaborative learning, group members need to engage in group-level emotion regulation. However, less is known about the whys and ways regulation is activated at a group level. This research explores what triggers 12-year-old primary school students’ (N = 37) negative socio-emotional interactions during a collaborative science task and whether the nature of the trigger makes a difference to group-level emotion regulation strategies and their sequential composition in these interactions. Groups’ collaborative working was videotaped, and triggers and strategies were analysed. The results reveal that the triggers of negative interactions are linked to the groups’ activated regulation strategies. Motivation control strategies were more represented in situations where negative interactions were triggered by task-related issues, whereas socially related triggers were associated with behavioural regulation strategies. Furthermore, the results illustrate that strategies are concatenated to a series of strategic actions, which mostly begin with sharing an awareness of the trigger. The results indicate a need to focus on the series of strategic actions activated in group interactions. This will help reveal how socially shared regulatory processes build a group’s emotional atmosphere.
Article
Collaboration is an important lifelong and career skill, and collaborative learning is a growing pedagogical practice. Students often struggle, however, to negotiate, manage conflict, and construct knowledge with other group members. These struggles can lead to negative interactions, resulting in negative emotions. Students in collaborative settings must be able to effectively regulate emotions at both the individual and group level. More research is needed on the emotions that develop in collaborative learning environments and how they relate to socioemotional regulation (i.e., the collective regulation of emotions in group settings) in order to provide a better conceptualization of emotions in small group learning. In this article, I explore ideas from traditional, social, developmental, and educational psychology, combining key elements from seminal theoretical models to introduce a new model for emotion formation and regulation in collaborative learning environments.
Research Proposal
Regulating challenges constitutes the ability to regulate cognitive, metacognitive, emotional, and motivational challenges and enact appropriate strategies to overcome challenges in CSCL environments. Regulating challenges is considered not only as essential aspect of students’ regulation skills but also as a core component of constructive, respectful, and cohesive collaboration. But if students aren’t aware of this need for regulation, groups’ activation of strategic adaption in challenge situation would be restricted. Moreover, among the challenges that need to be regulated timely in order to have constructive, respectful and cohesive collaboration is socioemotional challenges. Thus, there is a need to consider how students reason about observed classroom socioemotional challenges. Based on the literature, this reasoning ability involves three major aspects of description, explanation and prediction. This information would be essential to prompt specific regulation activities that can contribute to productive collaboration. To fulfill this aim, we need to investigate reasoning ability of students through video-based tool to identify conditions that are required to promote regulation skills and constructive, respectful, and cohesive collaboration in CSCL environments. This way, the role of video-based courses and intra-individual differences in promoting regulation skills and collaboration activities would be investigated to answer the following question: How is computer-supported collaborative learning to be designed such that to benefit socioemotional challenges toward constructive, respectful, and cohesive collaboration?
Article
The cognitive and social demands of collaboration can raise significant motivation challenges. Task progression relies on team members strategically taking control of the problems and adapting accordingly. Theory indicates that productive collaboration involves groups using three modes of regulation: self-regulation, co-regulation, and socially shared regulation. Despite research demonstrating the occurrence of all three modes in collaboration, it is unclear how these modes interact and how co-regulation supports the emergence of self-and shared-regulation of motivation. The study aimed to examine the role co-regulation played in dynamically stimulating the emergence of self-and shared-regulation of motivation. A cross-case comparison was conducted between two groups who experienced high levels of motivation challenges but achieved contrasting perceptions of the overall team learning productivity. During analysis, groups' dynamic regulatory processes within the online environment were visually represented using a tool called the Chronologically-ordered Representation for Tool-Related Activity (CORDTRA). Findings demonstrate that co-regulation of motivation may afford and thwart the emergence of self-and shared-regulation, and these processes interacted with the group's situational challenges and the regulatory skills group members possessed. Comparisons between the two groups indicated that groups' motivation regulation should (a) match the demands of the challenges at hand, (b) be positively supported by group members through co-regulation, and (b) involve a more varied strategic responses so that the group may continue to learn and co-construct knowledge effectively as a team.
Article
Naturally, every collaboration will bring conflicts that can affect the performance of a team. The earlier a conflict is detected and managed in a collaborative group, the better. Detecting and tracking conflicts in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) is laborious work. If the teacher does it, the intervention may be out of time. Although written dialogues in groups having a conflict reveal the increment of negative emotions in comparison to non-conflict dialogues, a classifier that only uses statistics of the valence of consecutive messages in a window of the talk shows poor performance. This paper proposes to use features based on the valence change between a message and its response. In this way the algorithm focuses in the kind of interaction. We study different implementations of the bootstrap aggregating technique to detect conflicts. Results obtained show the viability of the proposed approach.
Article
Full-text available
The current study examines variation in other-regulation, conceptualized as efforts by one student to regulate their group's work. This study extends research which has conceptualized other-regulation as temporarily guiding others' conceptual understanding and skill development by broadening the spectrum of other-regulation to include directive forms and considering their differential impact on regulation quality. Qualitative analyses were conducted based on videotaped observations of three groups of 7th graders working on three collaborative activities during an inquiry-based science unit. Findings suggest that directive other-regulation related to employed moderate-low and low quality regulation within the group. Facilitative forms yielded higher quality regulation given co-equal regulation and task contributions, the focus of the other-regulator on integrating ideas using behavioral and group process regulation, as well as sustaining a shared focus on developing the task product through the use of high-quality content and disciplinary regulation. In contrast, directive other-regulation related to an imbalance in participation and regulatory contributions, as well as the other-regulators' focus on controlling the task and ensuring their own contribution remained central to the task product. When group members do not have opportunities to make regulatory contributions, regulation and task quality suffer since the group cannot benefit from the full potential of their shared activity, with implications for learning.
Article
Full-text available
It is commonly observed that during classroom or group discussions some students have greater influence than may be justified by the normative quality of those students' contributions. We propose a 5-component theoretical framework in order to explain how undue influence unfolds. We build on literatures on persuasion, argumentation, discourse, and classroom discussions to develop a framework that models how each participant's level of influence in a discussion emerges out of the social negotiation of influence itself and the following 4 components that interact with it: (a) the negotiated merit of each participant's contributions; and each participant's (b) degree of intellectual authority, (c) access to the conversational floor, and (d) degree of spatial privilege. We then illustrate how the framework works by explaining how 1 student became unduly influential during a heated, student-led scientific debate. Finally, we close by outlining how our framework can be further developed to better understand and address differences in influence in classrooms and other learning contexts.
Article
Full-text available
This study extends prior research on both individual self-regulation and socially shared regulation during group learning to examine the range and quality of the cognitive and behavioral social regulatory sub-processes employed by six small collaborative groups of upper-elementary students (n = 24). Qualitative analyses were conducted based on videotaped observations of groups across a series of three mathematics tasks. Variation in the quality of social regulation as a function of group processes (positive and negative socioemotional interactions, collaborative and non-collaborative interactions) was also considered. Findings suggested that the synergy among the social regulatory processes of planning, monitoring, and behavioral engagement was important for differentiating quality variation between groups. Positive socioemotional interactions and collaboration also appeared to facilitate higher quality social regulation. Implications for comprehensively supporting high quality social regulation, alongside positive socioemotional interactions and collaboration, in small group contexts are discussed.
Article
Full-text available
Little attention has yet been focused on the social nature of metacognition and motivation in adult- or peer-mediated learning, although reciprocal or transactive interaction between individuals is emphasized as a road to learning, that is, in teaching and mediation of knowledge and skills. The present article presents a case analysis and focuses on (a) exploring if and how socially shared-regulation and (b) motivation and coping are manifested in high-ability, 4th grade students' peer-mediated learning in a technology-based game environment, specifically constructed to foster problem solving in mathematics. The case analysis supported the notion that peer-mediated learning can produce high-level learning and, also, transfer of learning. The key conditions for effective collaboration, task-orientation, and social and cognitive competencies, were met in the case of the peers. The analysis further suggested that the notion of shared-regulation could be helpful in understanding of multilevel interaction and regulatory activities in learning. The concept of share-dregulation best seemed to mirror egalitarian, complementary monitoring and regulation over the task, thus bringing the research closer to phenomena relevant to joint, peer-mediated learning. It seemed that regulation in true collaboration fluctuates among the three modes of regulation, self-, other-, and shared-regulation. We concluded, however, that collaborating peers do not regularly meet these ideal conditions, and that the more complete picture of joint problem solving and regulation is complex and variable. Understanding of these multilevel regulatory activities in learning, and their relationship to other, multilevel concepts like motivation, social competence, context, and learning, is a challenge for future research.
Article
Full-text available
This paper focuses on the processes involved in collaboration using a microanalysis of one dyad’s work with a computer-based environment (the Envisioning Machine). The interaction between participants is analysed with respect to a ‘Joint Problem Space’, which comprises an emergent, socially-negotiated set of knowledge elements, such as goals, problem state descriptions and problem solving actions. Our analysis shows how this shared conceptual space is constructed through the external mediational framework of shared language, situation and activity. This approach has particular implications for understanding how the benefits of collaboration are realised and serves to clarify the possible roles of the computers in supporting collaborative learning.
Article
Full-text available
In a longitudinal study, we found that higher group performance was associated with a particular pattern of conflict. Teams performing well were characterized by low but increasing levels of process conflict, low levels of relationship conflict, with a rise near project deadlines, and moderate levels of task conflict at the midpoint of group interaction. The members of teams with this ideal conflict profile had similar pre-established value systems, high levels of trust and respect, and open discussion norms around conflict during the middle stages of their interaction.
Article
Full-text available
This article brings to the fore the sociocognitive aspect of metacognition and processes involved in coregulation. We argue that coregulation in a learning situation that involves the interaction of teachers and students or peers is based on awareness of the partners'cognition, metacognition, affect, and motivation, as well as interpersonal perception processes and/or interpersonal relational control processes. One aspect of metacognition, particularly relevant to coregulation of learning, is metacognitive experience, i.e., how the interacting partners feel and what they think about the task at hand. Awareness of one's own and the other's cognition and of metacognitive experiences is necessary for metacommunication control processes. Evidence from two independent studies suggests that there can be misperception of the interacting partners' metacognitive experiences because of "theory-driven" conceptions of the other person or lack of metacognitive coregulation because of the prevalence of relational control processes. We suggest that this may lead to scaffolding mismatch in instruction, failure in coregulation, and negative feelings and behaviors of the interacting partners in certain learning situations. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Article
Full-text available
Background/Context Most of the earlier empirical findings deal with motivation regulation in individual learning situations. This study identifies higher education students’ socially constructed motivation regulation in collaborative learning and stresses that regulation of motivation is crucial in socially self-regulated learning because motivation is constantly shaped and reshaped as the activity unfolds. Purpose of Study The purpose of the study is to identity higher education students’ socially constructed motivation regulation in collaborative learning This was studied by collecting data about the students’ (N = 16) experiences of situation-specific social challenges in collaborative learning groups and observing what the students do to overcome these challenges. Research Design The study is a qualitative, multimethod study. Three methods—namely, adaptive instrument, video-tapings, and group interviews—were used to assess the individual- and group-level perspectives on those situations that the students felt were challenging and thus possibly activated joint regulation of motivation. Conclusions Motivation regulation can be identified as a socially constructed activity, and the importance of regulation of motivation in socially self-regulated learning is discussed.
Article
Full-text available
This experiment examined the effects of epistemic vs. relational conflicts on the relationship with a partner. Students participated to a fictitious computer-mediated interaction about a text with a bogus partner who introduced either an epistemic conflict (a conflict that referred to the content of the text), or a relational conflict (a conflict that questioned participants’ competence). Results indicated that compared to the epistemic conflict, the relational conflict enhanced threat and reduced the perceived contribution of the partner. Moreover, after a relational conflict, participants were more assertive in their answers, justified them to a lower extent, and expressed less doubt than after an epistemic conflict. Results also indicated that the intensity of disagreement predicted different modes of regulation depending on the conflict type. Finally, epistemic conflict elicited better learning than relational conflict. La présente expérience a examiné les effets de conflits épistémiques vs. relationnels avec un partenaire. Des étudiants étaient amenés à participer à une pseudo-interaction médiatisée par ordinateur avec un partenaire factice, à propos d’un texte. Ce partenaire factice introduisait soit un conflit épistémique (un conflit se référant au contenu du texte) soit un conflit relationnel (un conflit qui mettait en cause la compétence des participants). Les résultats ont indiqué que comparativement au conflit épistémique, le conflit relationnel a augmenté la menace et réduit la contribution perçue du partenaire. De plus, après un conflit relationnel, les participants se sont montrés plus assertifs dans leurs réponses, les ont moins justifiées et ont exprimé moins de doutes qu’après un conflit épistémique. Les résultats indiquent également que l’intensité des désaccords prédit différents modes de régulation en fonction du type de conflit. Enfin, le conflit épistémique a entrainé un meilleur apprentissage que le conflit relationnel.
Conference Paper
Full-text available
We report on a large study of how U.S. middle-school students learned to reason scientifically in a science curriculum centered around models and argumentation. We discuss the design of our curriculum, the method of the study, and present selected results related to overall curriculum effects and to methods of promoting growth in students' reasoning.
Article
Full-text available
This paper examines the mediating role of students' goals in group work at university. Research on cooperative and collaborative learning has provided empirical support for the cognitive, motivational and social benefits of group work but the antecedents of motivation and ongoing management of emerging motivational and socio-emotional issues have received less attention. A theory of self-regulation that incorporates students' personal goals and perceptions of context, combined with a sociocultural perspective on co-regulation of individuals and contexts, can help understand why and how some groups resolve their social challenges while others are less successful. An empirical study highlighted the mediating role of students' goals in their appraisals of group assignments, perceptions of various aspects of the contexts, and in turn regulation strategies to achieve their goals. Qualitative differences were found in the regulation strategies of students with positive and negative appraisals.
Article
Full-text available
A team is more than a group of people in the same space, physical or virtual. In recent years, increasing attention has been devoted to the social bases of cognition, taking into consideration how social processes in groups and teams affect performance. This article investigates when and how teams in collaborative learning environments engage in building and maintaining mutually shared cognition, leading to increased perceived performance. In doing so, this research looks for discourse practices managing the co-construction of mutually shared cognition and reveals conditions in the interpersonal context that contribute to engagement in these knowledge-building practices. A comprehensive theoretical framework was developed and tested. The constructs in the model were measured with the Team Learning Beliefs & Behaviors Questionnaire and analyzed using regression and path analysis methodology. Results showed that both interpersonal and sociocognitive processes have to be taken into account to understand the formation of mutually shared cognition, resulting in higher perceived team performance.
Article
Full-text available
Classroom discourse was examined as a predictor of changes in children's beliefs about their academic capabilities. Kindergarten, first-grade, and second-grade students (N = 106) participated in 2 waves of data collection, approximately 1 year apart. During the 1st year of the study, children's verbal interactions with their classmates were observed and recorded. Children rated their self-perceptions of academic competence during the 1st and 2nd years. Analyses revealed that changes over time in children's competence perceptions could be predicted from the types of statements that children made and had directed toward them by classmates. Examining sequences of child and classmate statements proved helpful in explaining the observed changes in children's perceptions of competence.
Article
This study examined the behaviors and experiences of students who needed assistance while working in peer-directed small groups on mathematics problems and the processes that helped or hindered their learning. Students in 4 seventh-grade classes worked in heterogeneous small groups throughout a 3-week unit on operations with decimal numbers. Analyses of the transcripts of audiotapes of students' verbal interaction and their posttest performance confirmed previous research showing that students who learned how to solve the problems received high-level help during group work and, subsequently, correctly solved group-work problems without further assistance. Extending previous findings, this study also showed that the following help-seeking behaviors were important determinants of successful posttest performance: asking for specific explanations instead of calculations or answers or general admissions of confusion, persistence in seeking explanations and modification of help-seeking strategies, and application of the help received to the problem at hand. Important help-giving behaviors included providing explanations with verbally labeled numbers and continued explaining instead of resorting to descriptions of numerical procedures. This article discusses possible reasons for the patterns of help seeking and help giving found here and makes suggestions for further research to improve the quality of helping behavior in collaborative groups.
Article
Research in traditional classrooms and laboratories has indicated that autonomy support by teachers is infrequent and focused on the narrow provision of choice. One explanation for the limited autonomy support in classrooms is that typical school resources and tasks limit the availability of experiences that are interesting, relevant, with meaningful choice. Accordingly, it is critical to extend observation to contexts that enhance the likelihood of detecting significant autonomy support. In this way, it will be possible to (a) determine whether existing conceptualizations map onto behaviors in real classrooms and (b) enrich our understanding of the variety of ways in which teachers provide autonomy when the curriculum is designed not to constrain it but to expand it.
Article
Background/Context: Models of self-regulated learning (SRL) have increasingly acknowledged aspects of social context influence in its process; however, great diversity exists in the theoretical positioning of "social" in these models. Purpose/Objective/Research Question/Focus of Study: The purpose of this review article is to introduce and contrast social aspects across three perspectives: self-regulated learning, coregulated learning, and socially shared regulation of learning. Research Design: The kind of research design taken in this review paper is an analytic essay. The article contrasts self-regulated, coregulated, and socially shared regulation of learning in terms of theory, operational definition, and research approaches. Data Collection and Analysis: Chapters and articles were collected through search engines (e.g., EBSCOhost, PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, ERIQ. Findings/Results: Three different perspectives are summarized: self-regulation, coregulation, and socially shared regulation of learning. Conclusions/Recommendations: In this article, we contrasted three different perspectives of social in each model, as well as research based on each model. In doing so, the article introduces a language for describing various bodies of work that strive to consider roles of individual and social context in the regulation of learning. We hope to provide a frame for considering multimethodological approaches to study SRL in future research.
Chapter
Emotions are ubiquitous in academic settings, and they profoundly affect students’ academic engagement and performance. In this chapter, we summarize the extant research on academic emotions and their linkages with students’ engagement. First, we outline relevant concepts of academic emotion, including mood as well as achievement, epistemic, topic, and social emotions. Second, we discuss the impact of these emotions on students’ cognitive, motivational, behavioral, cognitive-behavioral, and social-behavioral engagement and on their academic performance. Next, we examine the origins of students’ academic emotions in terms of individual and contextual variables. Finally, we highlight the complexity of students’ emotions, focusing on reciprocal causation as well as regulation and treatment of these emotions. In conclusion, we discuss directions for future research, with a special emphasis on the need for educational intervention research targeting emotions.
Article
A team is more than a group of people in the same space, physical or virtual. In recent years, increasing attention has been devoted to the social bases of cognition, taking into consideration how social processes in groups and teams affect performance. This article investigates when and how teams in collaborative learning environments engage in building and maintaining mutually shared cognition, leading to increased perceived performance. In doing so, this research looks for discourse practices managing the co-construction of mutually shared cognition and reveals conditions in the interpersonal context that contribute to engagement in these knowledge-building practices. A comprehensive theoretical framework was developed and tested. The constructs in the model were measured with the Team Learning Beliefs & Behaviors Questionnaire and analyzed using regression and path analysis methodology. Results showed that both interpersonal and sociocognitive processes have to be taken into account to understand the formation of mutually shared cognition, resulting in higher perceived team performance.
Article
In this study I investigated how collaborative interactions influence problem-solving outcomes. Conversations of twelve 6th-grade triads were analyzed utilizing quantitative and qualitative methods. Neither prior achievement of group members nor the generation of correct ideas for solution could account for between-triad differences in problem-solving outcomes. Instead, both characteristics of proposals and partner responsiveness were important correlates of the uptake and documentation of correct ideas by the group. Less successful groups ignored or rejected correct proposals, whereas more successful groups discussed or accepted them. Conversations in less successful groups were relatively incoherent as measured by the extent that proposals for solutions in these groups were connected with preceding discussions. Performance differences observed in triads extended to subsequent problem-solving sessions during which all students solved the same kinds of problems independently. These findings suggest that the quality of interaction had implications for teaming. Case study descriptions illustrate the interweaving of social and cognitive factors involved in establishing a joint problem-solving space. A dual-space model of what collaboration requires of participants is described to clarify how the content of the problem and the relational context are interdependent aspects of the collaborative situation. How participants manage these interacting spaces is critical to the outcome of their work and helps account for variability in collaborative outcomes. Directions for future research that may help teachers, students, and designers of educational environments learn to see and foster productive interactional practices are proposed. The properties of groups of minds in interaction with each other, or the properties of the interaction between individual minds and artifacts in the world, are frequently at the heart of intelligent human performance (Hutchins, 1993, p. 62).
Article
This study examined the behaviors and experiences of students who needed assis- tance while working in peer-directed small groups on mathematics problems and the processes that helped or hindered their learning. Students in 4 seventh-grade classes worked in heterogeneous small groups throughout a 3-week unit on operations with decimal numbers. Analyses of the transcripts of audiotapes of students' verbal inter- action and their posttest performance confirmed previous research showing that stu- dents who learned how to solve the problems received high-level help during group work and, subsequently, correctly solved group-work problems without further assis- tance. Extending previous findings, this study also showed that the following help-seeking behaviors were important determinants of successful posttest perfor- mance: asking for specific explanations instead of calculations or answers or general admissions of confusion, persistence in seeking explanations and modification of help-seeking strategies, and application of the help received to the problem at hand. Important help-giving behaviors included providing explanations with verbally la- beled numbers and continued explaining instead of resorting to descriptions of nu- merical procedures. This article discusses possible reasons for the patterns of help seeking and help giving found here and makes suggestions for further research to im- prove the quality of helping behavior in collaborative groups.
Article
This article outlines the rationale for an integrative perspective of self- and social regulation in learning contexts. The role of regulatory mechanisms in self- and social regulation models is examined, leading to the view that in real time collaborative learning, individuals and social entities should be conceptualized as self-regulating and coregulated systems at the same time. Living systems theory provides support for the claim that although all forms of regulation have an adaptive function, the distinct, regulatory processes occurring at different systemic levels (e.g. individual, social) are concurrent and interdependent. Challenges for future research from an integrative perspective are discussed.
Article
Two studies (Study 1: n = 137; Study 2: n = 192) were conducted to investigate how upper-elementary students’ affect during small group instruction related to their social-behavioral engagement during group work. A circumplex model of affect consisting of valence (positive, negative) and activation (high, low) was used to examine the relation of affect to social loafing and quality of group interactions. Across both studies, negative affect (feeling tired or tense) was associated with higher rates of social loafing. Neutral to deactivated positive affect, such as feeling happy or calm, was positively related to positive group interactions, while deactivated negative affect (tired) was negatively associated with positive group interactions. Follow-up cross-lagged analyses to examine reciprocal relations suggested that positive group interactions altered affect on subsequent group tasks, but affect was not related to changes in positive group interactions. These quantitative findings were supplemented with a qualitative analysis of six small groups from Study 2. The qualitative analyses highlighted the reciprocal and cyclical relations between affect and social-behavioral engagement in small groups.Research highlights► Negative affect (tense, tired) associated with social loafing. ► Positive affect (happy, calm) associated with positive group interactions. ► Negative affect (tired) negatively related to positive group interactions. ► Cross-lagged analyses suggested positive group interactions shaped affect. ► Cycles of affect and quality of group interaction observed during group work.
Article
This study investigated how metacognition appears as a socially shared phenomenon within collaborative mathematical word-problem solving processes of dyads of high-achieving pupils. Four dyads solved problems of different difficulty levels. The pupils were 10 years old. The problem-solving activities were videotaped and transcribed in terms of verbal and nonverbal behaviors as well as of turns taken in communication (N = 14675). Episodes of socially shared metacognition were identified and their function and focus analysed. There were significantly more and longer episodes of socially shared metacognition in difficult as compared to moderately difficult and easy problems. Their function was to facilitate or inhibit activities and their focus was on the situation model of the problem or on mathematical operations. Metacognitive experiences were found to trigger socially shared metacognition.
Article
La diversité culturelle des équipes de travail a d’abord été définie à partir des catégories dont relève chaque membre. La thèse centrale de cet article est que la diversité renvoie à une expérience subjective des catégories sociales auxquelle le membres ont le sentiment d’appartenir. Ces catégories (ou indentités sociales) deviennent plus ou moins prégnantes dan différents contextes et à différentes périodes. Nous proposons un modèle de la diversité culturelle dans les équipes qui montre à quelles conditions ces identitiés sociales deviennent prégnantes et de quelle façon elles peuvent influencer l’évaluation des résultats et des événements, ce qui peut entraîner des retombées sur les émotions et les conflits. Cette approche dynamique de la diversité nous procure une meilleure compréhension de la ‘boite noire’, des processus cognitifs et affectifs qui peuvent avoir un impact sur la performance de groupe. Diversity in teams has been previously defined in terms of the nominal categories into which team members “fall”. The core argument of this paper is that diversity is a subjective experience of social categories to which members “feel” they belong. These categories, or social identities, may become more or less salient in different contexts and at different times. We propose a model of diversity in teams that explains under what conditions these social identities become salient and how these social identities may influence appraisals of issues and events. These appraisals, in turn, can influence conflict and emotion. This dynamic view of diversity provides us with a better understanding of the “black box”—the cognitive and affective processes that may help to explain behavior and subsequently team performance.
Article
Genetics is the cornerstone of modern biology and understanding genetics is a critical aspect of scientific literacy. Research has shown, however, that many high school graduates lack fundamental understandings in genetics necessary to make informed decisions or to participate in public debates over emerging technologies in molecular genetics. Currently, much of genetics instruction occurs at the high school level. However, recent policy reports suggest that we may need to begin introducing aspects of core concepts in earlier grades and to successively develop students’ understandings of these concepts in subsequent grades. Given the paucity of research about genetics learning at the middle school level, we know very little about what students in earlier grades are capable of reasoning about in this domain. In this paper, we discuss a research study aimed at fostering deeper understandings of molecular genetics at the middle school level. As part of the research we designed a two-week model-based inquiry unit implemented in two 7th grade classrooms (N = 135). We describe our instructional design and report results based on analysis of pre/post assessments and written artifacts of the unit. Our findings suggest that middle school students can develop: (a) a view of genes as productive instructions for proteins, (b) an understanding of the role of proteins in mediating genetic effects, and (c) can use this knowledge to reason about a novel genetic phenomena. However, there were significant differences in the learning gains in both classrooms and we provide speculative explanations of what may have caused these differences. KeywordsBiology–Curriculum development–Genetics–Implementation–Middle school–Qualitative research
Article
Situative and sociocognitive analyses were combined to examine engagement in high-level collaborative learning and its relationship with individuals’ cognitions. Video footage of 53 science university students’ (nine groups) collaborative learning interactions as they worked through a case-based project was analysed in combination with students’ appraisals and reflections on the activity. Sizeable group differences in amount of high-level discussion of learning content were revealed. Individual high-level contributions were positively correlated with overall unit performance. Motivation at task onset predicted amount but not depth of content-related group discussion. Interviews with participants suggested that groups’ divergent patterns of engagement with content could be related to different perceptions of the notion of collaborative learning. Results are discussed in terms of implications for collaborative learning research and educational practice.
Article
This paper introduces a descriptive system of analysis of peer group interaction. The method takes a dynamic and process-oriented approach to interaction which is seen as socially and situationally developed in students' moment-by-moment interactions. By concentrating on individual and group functioning, the method aims at highlighting the situated dynamics of peer group interaction and learning. The method consists of a three-dimensional analysis of peer group interaction by focusing on the functions of verbal interaction, and the nature of cognitive processing and social processing. These are investigated with the help of micro-analytical maps drawn out from the data based on video recordings, transcriptions, observations, interviews, and questionnaires. In the first part of the paper the theoretical and methodological background of the analysis will be discussed. That is followed by an introduction to the analysis method highlighted with empirical examples. The paper ends with a reflective analysis of the method.
Article
This study sought to identify ninth grade students’ self-regulated learning (SRL) behaviors, enacted while engaged in a specially designed, long-term, group science inquiry task in an authentic classroom setting. To self-regulate planning and time management, students used yearly and daily planning reports. A high and medium achieving groups’ discourse and behavior were observed and videorecorded; qualitative analysis yielded several categories. Despite the unique learning context, results demonstrated many composites reported in the literature for general SRL models. Students evidenced SRL skill categories including the ability to set goals, plan activities, consider alternatives, monitor and reflect, perceive diverse cues from various sources, readjust plans to improve progress rates, and demonstrate accountability. High achieving students generally exhibited more SRL skills (were better planners and managers of time) than did average achieving students.
Article
This article examines the nature and process of collaborative learning in student-led group activities at university. A situative framework combining the constructs of social regulation and content processing was developed to identify instances of productive high-level co-regulation. Data involves video footage of groups of science students working on a case-based project. Striking group differences in types of interactions were revealed. Regularities in the emergence of high-level co-regulation and features of interactions that contributed to the maintenance of productive collaboration were also identified. The importance of fostering students' development as co-learners is highlighted.
Article
It can be assumed that academic learning is an active, generative and effortful process, that is — a mindful activity. Cooperative student teams are expected to increase participants' mindful engagement in learning and thus to improve its outcomes. Although this is sometimes the case, there are social-psychological effects that debilitate team performance. Two illustrations from recent studies are provided. It is argued that the study of team work cannot be limited to intrapersonal cognitions and to simple interactional processes. Teams are social systems in which cognitive, motivational and behavioral processes become increasingly interdependent and these processes need to be studied. Such interdependencies give rise to negative effects some of which are discussed in this article: the “free rider”, the “sucker”, the “status differential”, and the “ganging up” effects. The article concludes with a few speculations about possible mechanisms to overcome such effects when complex and exploratory tasks are given to student teams.
Article
In this article, interactive processes among group partners and the relationship of these processes to problem-solving outcomes are investigated in 2 contrasting groups. The case study groups were selected for robust differences in the quality of their written solutions to a problem and parallel differences in the quality of the group members' interaction. In 1 group correct proposals were generated, confirmed, docu- mented, and reflected upon. In the other, they were generated, rejected without ratio- nale, and for the most part left undocumented. The analyses identified 3 major contrastive dimensions in group interaction—the mutuality of exchanges, the achievement of joint attentional engagement, and the alignment of group members' goals for the problem solving process. A focus on group-level characteristics offers a distinctive strategy for examining small group learning and paves the way to under- standing reasons for variability of outcomes in collaborative ventures. These dimen- sions may usefully inform the design and assessment of collaborative learning envi- ronments.
Chapter
There are substantial similarities between deep learning and the processes by which knowledge advances in the disciplines. During the 1960s efforts to exploit these similarities gave rise to learning by discovery, guided discovery, inquiry learning, and Science: A Process Approach (American Association for the Advancement of Science, 1967). Since these initial reform efforts, scholars have lea