ArticlePDF Available

Abstract and Figures

Computer-supported collaborative learning often means that locally distant learners discuss a task via text-based discussion boards or videoconferencing. Collaborative learning, however, is often suboptimal with respect to how learners work on the concepts that are supposed to be learned and how learners interact with each other. Collaborative learning environments may be improved by scripts that structure epistemic activities and social interactions of learners. Two studies are being reported that investigated the effects of epistemic and social scripts in a text-based and a videoconferencing computer supported learning environment. In each study the factors "epistemic script" and "social script" have been independently varied in a 2×2-factorial design. 182 university students of Educational Science participated in the two studies. Results show that social scripts can be substantially beneficial with respect to knowledge acquisition, whereas epistemic scripts apparently do not to lead to the expected effects or even hinder learning.
Content may be subject to copyright.
EARLI SIM 2004 in Tuebingen
Abstract. Computer-supported collaborative learning often means that locally distant learners discuss a
task via text-based discussion boards or videoconferencing. Collaborative learning, however, is often sub-
optimal with respect to how learners work on the concepts that are supposed to be learned and how
learners interact with each other. Collaborative learning environments may be improved by scripts that
structure epistemic activities and social interactions of learners. Two studies are being reported that
investigated the effects of epistemic and social scripts in a text-based and a videoconferencing computer-
supported learning environment. In each study the factors "epistemic script" and "social script" have been
independently varied in a 2×2-factorial design. 182 university students of Educational Science
participated in the two studies. Results show that social scripts can be substantially beneficial with respect
to knowledge acquisition, whereas epistemic scripts apparently do not to lead to the expected effects or
even hinder learning.
Collaborative learning builds on the idea that all learners of a group elaborate
learning material together without direct or immediate intervention of the teacher
(Cohen, 1994). For instance, learners may contribute and discuss divergent
perspectives upon a theory that is supposed to be learned or discuss problem cases
together. The collaborative learners may acquire knowledge as a consequence of
being exposed to various perspectives and the need to refine or restructure their own
point of view (Webb & Farivar, 1999). Individual group members contribute to joint
task solutions, which in turn may change knowledge leading to modified
contributions of individual learners (Salomon & Perkins, 1998). At least two
dimensions of collaborative learning need to be analyzed: epistemic activity and
social mode of co-construction (Fischer, Bruhn, Gräsel, & Mandl, 2002). Epistemic
activities describe how learners deal with the knowledge construction task, e.g., how
they categorize or define new concepts with the goal to (re-)construct knowledge.
Learners verbalizing their ideas on how to solve the task may re-structure their
knowledge and refer to specific new concepts in order to produce more detailed
solutions (Webb, Jonathan, Fall, & Fall, 1995). The social mode of co-construction
indicates how learners interact with each other, e.g., how they relate their
contributions to contributions of their learning partners in performing the epistemic
activities. Learners may, for instance, ask each other questions or critically negotiate
deviating perspectives and become aware of contradictions within their individual
understanding. Learners may resolve contradictions which arise in discourse by
hal-00197405, version 1 - 14 Dec 2007
Author manuscript, published in "first joint meeting of the EARLI SIGs Instructional Design and Learning and Instruction with
Computers., Germany (2004)"
constructing new knowledge (Piaget, 1932/1965; Nastasi & Clement, 1992). Studies
to date point out that specific epistemic activities and social interactions are
predictive to outcomes of collaborative learning (Cohen, 1994; Fischer et al., 2002;
Teasley, 1997).
There are indications, however, that normally, learners do not spontaneously
engage in productive epistemic activities and social interactions and consequently,
fail to achieve the desired learning outcome (e.g., Cohen, 1994; Mandl, Gruber, &
Renkl, 1996). Recent approaches have therefore aimed to facilitate these epistemic
activities and social interactions (Ertl, 2003; Weinberger, 2003).2. Theoretical
Facilitating collaborative learning can be approached in numerous ways.
Whereas some approaches, e.g., moderation of collaborative processes, may require
complex skills and highly depend on the quality of the individual facilitator, scripts
have been regarded as a qualitatively consistent possibility to facilitate collaborative
learning activities (O’Donnell, 1999). Scripts are activity programs that aim to
facilitate collaborative learning by specifying activities in collaborative settings,
sequencing these activities and assigning the activities to individual learners.
Scripts may aim to support specific epistemic and social collaborative learning
activities that have proven to be positively related to learning outcome in the
respective collaborative tasks. Epistemic scripts, for instance, can guide the attention
of learners towards specific aspects of the task and towards specific task-oriented
activities while collaboratively discussing and constructing knowledge. Social
scripts can specify and sequence interactions of learners, such as eliciting
information from each other by asking critical questions. It is unclear, however,
what the different contributions of epistemic and social components of scripts to
facilitating collaborative learning really are, because thus far epistemic and social
script components have not been systematically compared.
In the context of computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL), scripts can
have different characteristics altogether depending on the type of computer
application, which mediates the communication of learners (e.g., e-mail, chat, and
videoconferencing). This variety of applications complicates theoretical foundation,
systematic research, and design of educational support in the context of CSCL. In
the following sections we will present two empirical studies on epistemic and social
scripts implemented by prompts into CSCL environments. We analyze the effects of
epistemic and social scripts in CSCL environments that are based on two different
media types (web-based discussion boards and videoconferencing technologies).
hal-00197405, version 1 - 14 Dec 2007
We arranged and investigated two different CSCL environments with epistemic
and social scripts: (1) a problem-oriented peer discussion environment based on
discussion boards (Weinberger, Fischer, & Mandl, 2003) and (2) a
videoconferencing-based peer-tutoring environment (Reiserer, Ertl & Mandl, 2002).
In both of these studies we focused on the question, to what extent epistemic and
social scripts affect the individual knowledge acquisition of collaborative learning.
The research question of the studies was: What are the effects of an epistemic script
and a social script and their combination on the individual acquisition of knowledge
as the outcome of collaborative learning in the computer-supported learning
environments? We expected that both scripts would enhance individual knowledge
acquisition in comparison with an unscripted CSCL environment. However, the
interaction of both epistemic and social scripts would lead to the best learning
outcomes, fostering a discourse of productive interactions on a high quality level as
regards the contents.
3.1. Study 1: Scripts in Problem-Oriented Collaborative Learning Environments
with Web-Based Discussion Boards
Text-based computer-mediated communication in web-based discussion boards
enables new, asynchronous collaborative learning scenarios, in which learners are
supposed to engage in more active, reflective, and socially supported knowledge
construction (Clark, Weinberger, Jucks, Spitulnik, & Wallace, 2003; Scardamalia &
Bereiter, 1996). Students rarely, however, make use of that potential. Ninety-six
students in their first semester of Educational Science at the University of Munich
participated in this study. The students participated in an online learning session
about attribution theory (Weiner, 1985), a standard part of the curriculum, in a text-
based online learning environment with an integrated discussion board as
communication tool. Participation was required for receiving course credit at the end
of the semester. Students were invited individually – each student to one of three
different laboratory rooms. Each group was randomly assigned to one of the four
experimental conditions in a 2×2-factorial design. Learning partners did not know
each other before the experimental session. We varied the factors “epistemic script“
(with vs. without) and “social script“ (with vs. without). We measured individual
knowledge acquisition based on a propositional analysis of written problem case
solution of the learners.
Learning Environment of Study 1. Students in all conditions had to work together
in applying theoretical concepts to three case problems that were presented as a text
in the specifically designed online learning environment, and jointly prepare an ana-
lysis for each case by communicating via web-based discussion boards that were
integrated in the online learning environment (see figure 1). They were asked to
hal-00197405, version 1 - 14 Dec 2007
discuss the three cases using the attribution theory and to jointly compose at least
one final analysis for each case.
All groups collaborated in three web-based discussion boards – one for each
case. The bulletin boards provided a main page with an overview of all message
headers. In this overview, answers to original messages appeared in outline form.
The learners could read the full text of all messages, reply to the messages, or
compose and post new messages. In the replies, the original messages were quoted
out with “>” as in standard newsreaders and e-mail programs.
Figure 1. The CSCL environment of study 1 with a web-based discussion board.
Results of Study 1. The post-test analysis shows two main effects of both types of
scripts on individual acquisition of knowledge. First of all, ANOVA revealed a large
negative effect of the epistemic script. The means of both of the epistemic-script
conditions are remarkably lower than the mean of the control condition. Second,
there was a medium-sized positive effect of the social script. The learners in the
combined scripts condition learned even less than the learners in the control
condition. An interaction effect, however, could not be found. These results indicate
that the individual acquisition of knowledge could be facilitated with the social
script, whereas the epistemic script led to lower gains than the control group. Both
Task information and
Learning environment
orientation map
Case information
hal-00197405, version 1 - 14 Dec 2007
script components did not interact. Thus the results were only partially coherent with
our assumption with respect to the negative contribution of the epistemic script.
3.2. Study 2: Scripts in a Videoconferencing Environment
In the second study, we investigated effects of scripts in a videoconferencing-
based peer teaching environment. Videoconferencing enables synchronous forms of
collaborative distance learning, which are required when learners need to interact at
high frequency. Eighty-six students in their first semester of Educational Sciences at
the Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich took part in this experiment. The
students participated in an online learning session within the videoconferencing-
based peer teaching environment about the theory of genotype environment effects
(Scarr & McCartney, 1983), a standard part of the curriculum of Educational
Sciences in Munich. Dyads were set up and randomly assigned to one of four
conditions in a 2×2-factorial design. We varied the factors “epistemic script“(with
vs. without) and “social script“(with vs. without). After the learning session the
individual knowledge acquisition was assessed with a combination of a short open
answer and a multiple-choice test.
Learning Environment of Study 2. An online learning environment based on a
desktop videoconferencing system including audio and video connections and a
shared text editor to support the dyads’ knowledge construction allowed participants
to verbally communicate and jointly create text material at the same time (see figure
Figure 2. The experimental setup of the videoconferencing setting of study 2 with a learning
group of two participants in separate rooms.
The shared application was accomplished with Microsoft Netmeeting 3.01. As
text editor we applied MS-Word 2000, an application that we expected to be well
known among our participants and therefore easy to handle. This setting enabled the
learners to alternately type or edit notes in the text-editor.
Results of Study 2. Concerning learning outcome in study 2, a 2×2-factorial
ANOVA was used for analyzing learners’ post-test scores. The social script
produced a medium-sized positive, but statistically marginal effect. Learners
supported by the epistemic script did not differ substantially with respect to
Laboratory room 2
Laboratory room 1
hal-00197405, version 1 - 14 Dec 2007
individual knowledge acquisition from learners without the epistemic script. The
two scripts did not interact with respect to the post-test scores.
The results of the two studies indicate that unsupported collaborative online
learning may result in bad performance (Cohen, 1994), but scripts may facilitate the
individual acquisition of knowledge. In particular, it was found that in both CSCL
environments the social scripts were able to enhance the individual acquisition of
knowledge, as was hypothesized. We assume that social scripts may support
interactions, which in turn facilitate individual knowledge acquisition (Weinberger
et al., 2003). Thus, social scripts may enable learners to actually exploit the
aforementioned advantages of collaborative learning and support the elaboration and
refinement of individual knowledge in social situations (O’Donnell, 1999; Teasley,
1997). Whereas collaborative learners without support from a social script often
build a minimal consensus in order to hastily complete collaborative tasks, social
scripts may motivate learners to inquire about the contributions of the learning
partners more critically and thereby acquire more knowledge individually than
learners without additional support.
In contrast, the epistemic scripts of both studies did not show the expected
outcomes. In study 1 the epistemic script actually hampered the individual
acquisition of knowledge in comparison to the other experimental groups. As a
consequence, epistemic scripts may not be generally recommendable for facilitating
collaborative learning. Epistemic support can make specific aspects of the learning
task salient and suggest specific knowledge-building activities (Ertl, 2003; Fischer et
al., 2002; Reiserer et al., 2002). Therefore, it is of utter importance, to take note of
the aspects of collaborative tasks at which epistemic scripts aim, which epistemic
activities are suggested by the scripts and the extent to which learners are supported
by the scripts to elaborate the learning material. In order to improve epistemic
scripts, we need to investigate what specific epistemic activities should be fostered
that are related to elaboration of learning material and with what kind of script
design this may be achieved in various computer-supported learning environments.
Authors’ affiliation:
Armin Weinberger, Knowledge Media Research Center, Tuebingen
Bernhard Ertl, Ludwig-Maximillians-University, Munich
Frank Fischer, Knowledge Media Research Center, Tuebingen
Heinz Mandl, Ludwig-Maximillians-University, Munich
The studies have been funded by the DFG.
hal-00197405, version 1 - 14 Dec 2007
Clark, D., Weinberger A., Jucks, I., Spitulnik M., & Wallace, R. (2003). Designing Effective Science
Inquiry in Text-Based Computer Supported Collaborative Learning Environments. International
Journal of Educational Policy, Research & Practice, 4(1), 55-82.
Cohen, E. G. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups. Review of
Educational Research, 64, 1-35.
Ertl, B. (2003). Kooperatives Lernen in Videokonferenzen. Förderung individuellen und gemeinsamen
Lernerfolgs durch external repräsentierte Strukturangebote. [Cooperative learning in
videoconferencing. Fostering individual and cooperative learning outcome with external structural
support]. [Dissertation, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität]. Verfügbar unter: http://edoc.ub.uni-
Fischer, F., Bruhn, J., Gräsel, C., & Mandl, H. (2002). Fostering collaborative knowledge construction
with visualization tools. Learning and Instruction, 12, 213-232.
Mandl, H., Gruber, H., & Renkl, A. (1996). Communities of practice toward expertise: Social foundation
of university instruction. In P. B. Baltes & U. Staudinger (Eds.), Interactive minds. Life-span
perspectives on the social foundation of cognition (pp. 394-411). Cambridge: Cambridge University
Nastasi, B. K., & Clements, D. H. (1992). Social-cognitive behaviors and higher-order thinking in
educational computer environments. Learning and Instruction, 2, 215-238.
O’Donnell, A. M. (1999). Structuring dyadic interaction through scripted cooperation. In A. M.
O’Donnell & A. King (Eds.), Cognitive perspectives on peer learning (pp. 179-196). Mahwah, NJ:
Piaget, J. (1932/1965). Moral judgment of the child. New York: Free Press.
Reiserer, M., Ertl, B., & Mandl, H. (2002). Fostering Collaborative Knowledge Construction in Desktop
Videconferencing. Effects of Content Schemes and Cooperation Scripts in Peer-Teaching Settings. In
G. Stahl (Ed.), Proceedings of the Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning
(CSCL) 2002, Boulder, USA (pp. 379-388). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Salomon, G., & Perkins, D. N. (1998). Individual and social aspects of learning. Review of Research in
Education, 23, 1-24.
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1996). Computer support for knowledge-building communities. In T.
Koschmann (Ed.), CSCL: Theory and practice of an emerging paradigm (pp. 249-268). Mahwah, NJ:
Scarr, S., & McCartney, K. (1983). How people make their own environments: A theory of genotype-
environment effects. Child Development, 54, 424 - 435.
Teasley, S. (1997). Talking about reasoning: How important is the peer in peer collaboration? In L. B.
Resnick & R. Säljö & C. Pontecorvo & B. Burge (Eds.), Discourse, tools and reasoning: Essays on
situated cognition (pp. 361-384). Berlin: Springer.
Webb, N. M., & Farivar, S. (1999). Developing productive group interaction in middle school. In A. M.
O’Donnell & A. King (Eds.), Cognitive Perspectives on peer learning (pp. 117-149). Mahwah:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Webb, N. M., Jonathan, D., Fall, T., & Fall, R. (1995). Constructive activity and learning in collaborative
small groups. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 406-423.
Weinberger, A. (2003). Scripts for computer-supported collaborative learning. Effects of social and
epistemic cooperation scripts on collaborative knowledge construction. [Dissertation, Ludwig-
Verfügbar unter:
Weinberger, A., Fischer, F., & Mandl, H. (2003). Gemeinsame Wissenskonstruktion in
computervermittelter Kommunikation: Wirkungen von Kooperationsskripts auf den Erwerb
anwendungsorientierten Wissens? [Collaborative knowledge construction in computer-mediated
communication: Effects of cooperation scripts on acquisition of application-oriented knowledge].
Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 211(2), 86-97.
Weiner, B. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychological
Review, 92, 548-573.
hal-00197405, version 1 - 14 Dec 2007
... In other words, the approaches were not responsive to what was happening in the collaboration. This non-adaptive approach can lead to over scripting [7] or interference between different types of scripts [8]. With these things in mind, and considering that ideally we would like students to internalize the principles encoded in the script based support, a more dynamic and potentially more desirable approach would be to trigger support based on observed need and to fade scaffolding over time as students acquire the skills needed to collaborate productively in a learning context. ...
... (7) In order to assess what students learned from the exploratory exercise, they then took a post-test (15 minutes). (8) In the Pairs conditions only, the students then took the questionnaire. ...
Conference Paper
Full-text available
In this paper we investigate the role of reflection in simulation based learning by manipulating two independent factors that each separately lead to significant learning effects, namely whether students worked alone or in pairs, and what type of support students were provided with. Our finding is that in our simulation based learning task, students learned significantly more when they worked in pairs than when they worked alone. Furthermore, dynamic support implemented with tutorial dialogue agents lead to significantly more learning than no support, while static support was not statistically distinguishable from either of the other two conditions. The largest effect size in comparison with the control condition was Pairs+Dynamic support, with an effect size of 1.24 standard deviations, where the control condition is individuals working alone with no support. Because the effect size achieved by combining the two treatments is greater than the effect achieved by either of the two treatments alone, we conjecture that each of these factors are contributing something different to student learning rather than being potential replacements for one another.
... (Persico, Pozzi & Sarti, 2009b). Alcuni ricercatori parlano di "script" (Dillenbourg & Hong, 2008;Dillenbourg & Jerman, 2007;Kollar, Fischer, & Hesse, 2006;Weinberger, Ertl, Fischer, & Mandl, 2004;Fischer, Kollar, Mandl, & Haake, 2007) anziché di tecniche, per riferirsi ad un insieme di istruzioni fornite agli studenti per mezzo di 'prompt', al fine di guidarli durante lo svolgimento dell'attività. Al di là delle differenze terminologiche, queste tecniche forniscono un sostegno 1 agli studenti nello svolgimento di un'attività collaborativa; talvolta possono essere combinate le une con le altre, sempre con l'obiettivo di rendere più ricca ed efficace l'interazione e più costruttiva la collaborazione online. ...
Full-text available
Questo articolo si colloca al crocevia tra il settore del Learning Design (LD) e quello del Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) in quanto propone un metodo per supportare la progettazione di attività di apprendimento online di tipo collaborativo. Nel settore del CSCL, le ‘tecniche collaborative’ e gli ‘script’ sono considerati concetti fondamentali per progettare attività di apprendimento collaborativo online e le proposte di strumenti tecnologici basati su tali concetti sono numerose. Tuttavia, la maggior parte di questi strumenti nasce con l’obiettivo di rappresentare il progetto educativo, al fine di favorire la comunicazione attorno ad esso, partendo dal presupposto, talvolta implicito, che questo sia già chiaro nella mente del docente progettista, mentre più rari sono gli strumenti tesi a supportare il docente nella fase di ideazione e concettualizzazione di un’attività collaborativa. Il metodo presentato in questo articolo appartiene a questa seconda categoria ed è basato su un modello per la progettazione di attività collaborative e su un gioco ad esso ispirato. Il modello è uno strumento concettuale che supporta la fase di ideazione di un’attività collaborativa definendola in termini di quattro componenti (le 4T): il Task (Compito), il Team/s (Gruppo/i), il Time (Tempo), e la Technology (Tecnologia). Il gioco costituisce uno strumento tangibile costruito sulla base del modello, comprendente delle carte e un tabellone che vengono usati dai progettisti per dare corpo al proprio progetto. Il metodo proposto è stato sperimentato con successo da 44 insegnanti e costituirà la base per lo sviluppo di uno strumento digitale ispirato al metodo stesso.
... The CSCL literature is quite rich of contributions reporting on experiences where one or more techniques have been adopted (Pozzi & Persico, 2011). Other researchers (Dillenbourg & Hong, 2008; Dillenbourg & Jerman, 2007; Kollar, Fischer & Hesse, 2006; Weinberger et al., 2004) have oriented the issue of providing a structure to online collaboration towards the definition and use of " scripts " , that is a set of direct instructions (often provided through interaction prompts) guiding learners in the online activity. Finally, another research thread has been explored (Ertl, Kopp & Mandl, 2007), focusing on the concept of " content schemes " , seen as tools to scaffold the structure of the output of a collaborative learning process. ...
Full-text available
The workshop intended to bring together researchers who had been working on the general issue of "structuring online collaboration" with different approaches, be they collaboration techniques, strategies, scripts, content schemes, or any other type of structuring technique. The need for this workshop had emerged from the current intense debate, in the literature, around how it is possible to support students' online collaboration. As a matter of fact, such debate has been focusing on whether, to what extent and under what circumstances structuring the interactions among students enhances the effectiveness of collaborative processes. While some studies support the claim that an excess of freedom in the way collaborative tasks are proposed may fail to engage all team members in productive interactions, others maintain that there is a danger in over-scripting collaborative learning activities, in that too much guidance, due to an excess of structure of the task, may hinder learners creativity, flexibility and ability to self-regulate, therefore jeopardizing the co-construction of knowledge and ultimately causing a loss of effectiveness of the learning process.
... Più recentemente alcuni ricercatori, più fortemente legati al contesto specifico del CSCL (Dillenbourg, 2002;Dillenbourg & Hong, 2008;Dillenbourg & Jerman, 2007;Kollar, Fischer & Hesse, 2006;Weinberger, Ertl, Fischer & Mandl, 2004;Fischer, Kollar, Mandl & Haake, 2007), hanno introdotto e si sono occupati del concetto di "CSCL script", ossia di indicazioni più specifiche, generalmente definite a livello di micro-progettazione, circa il modo in cui gli studenti si devono muovere nell'ambito dell'attività. Mentre le tecniche di Kanuka e Anderson vengono generalmente proposte dai tutor, gli script si concretizzano in prompts forniti agli studenti, spesso automaticamente, al fine di guidarli passo passo nelle varie fasi dell'attività e/o migliorarne la qualità delle argomentazioni. ...
Full-text available
Questo articolo affronta il tema delle tecniche che consentono di strutturare la collaborazione online, al fine di incoraggiare la partecipazione e renderla più efficace in un’ottica di apprendimento individuale e di costruzione di nuova conoscenza collettiva. Gli autori propongono di considerare la struttura delle attività online come una grandezza basata su tre dimensioni: il Compito, i Gruppi e il Tempo. L’articolo analizza quindi cinque tecniche collaborative (il Jigsaw, la Peer Review, il Gioco di Ruolo, lo Studio di Caso e la Discussione) per illustrare come le tre dimensioni, interagendo tra loro, consentono di strutturare e supportare il processo di collaborazione durante le attività online
... Other researchers (e.g. Dillenbourg & Hong, 2008;Dillenbourg & Jermann, 2007;Kollar, Fischer, & Hesse, 2006;Weinberger, Ertl, Fischer, & Mandl, 2004), have oriented the issue of providing a structure for online collaboration towards the definition and use of 'scripts', that is, a set of direct instructions (often provided through interaction prompts) guiding learners in their online activity. Palincsar and Brown's (1984) 'Reciprocal Teaching' is another form of scripted collaboration designed to enhance text comprehension. ...
A number of researchers argue that cooperative learning can promote greater productivity and more caring, supportive and committed relationships between students, active learning, critical thinking, the achievement of long-term learning objectives, conceptual understanding, long-term retention of information and high levels of student satisfaction. However, to obtain these potential advantages something more than forming and assigning them a common goal is needed: cooperation has to occur. This paper presents guidelines for designing group activities to foster cooperation by focusing on three elements of cooperative learning: (1) positive interdependence, (2) equal participation and (3) individual accountability in both individual and group learning scenarios. The authors also describe a software tool designed according to the model proposed in which some design guidelines have been implemented in order to support cooperative learning activities and allow the cooperative process to be monitored. The preliminary results show that the participants who have interacted with this software tool have obtained good cooperation scores and cooperative abilities have been fostered: participation, engagement and communication during learning activities.
... We hypothesize that prompts offered only when deemed necessary will have more of an influence on the conversation over time. For example, several studies have evaluated the impact of providing a social script that encourages productive consensus building behavior such as transactivity, which is a measure of the extent to which student contributions directly address the contributions of the other students in the group [20,21]. Such conversational behavior is accomplished by assigning students to roles (i.e., case analyst or constructive critic) and providing prompts that target particular ways in which contributions may relate to each other, for example "We have not reached consensus concerning the following points:". ...
Conference Paper
Full-text available
This paper describes results from a series of experimental studies to explore issues related to structuring productive group dynamics for collaborative learning using an adaptive support mechanism. The first study provides evidence in favor of the feasibility of the endeavor by demonstrating with a tightly controlled study that even without adaptive support, problem solving in pairs is significantly more effective for learning than problem solving alone. The results from a second study offer guidelines for strategic matching of students with learning partners. Furthermore, the results reveal specific areas for needed support. Based on the results from the second study, we present the design of an adaptive support mechanism, which we evaluate in a third study. The results from the third study provide evidence that certain aspects of our design for adaptive support in the form of strategic prompts are effective for manipulating student behavior in productive ways and for supporting learning. These results also motivate specific modifications to the original design.
Conference Paper
Business Process Management (BPM) becomes more and more relevant also for small- and medium-sized companies (SME’s). Today’s strategies and approaches for the implementation of BPM rely on methods and tools mainly developed by and focused on large enterprises but less on the needs of small- and mid-sized organisations. With the BPM@KMU project the Institute of Information Systems of a Bavarian university conducts together with the Virtual University of Bavaria (VHB) and a set of SMEs a project which aims on an efficient implementation of BPM in such organisations. Considering e-Learning as an enabler or tool which matches existing barriers for the implementation of Business Process Management, this paper offers a case study report on the observations when designing and implementing the BPM@KMU e-Learning program guided by the Cybernetic e-Learning Management Model. The paper considers first project results and shows, that e-Learning can address the heterogeneous maturity and previous knowledge about BPM by an adequate set of instructional as well as technological strategies and concepts.
Full-text available
In this chapter a theory of motivation and emotion developed from an attributional perspective is presented. Before undertaking this central task, it might be beneficial to review the progression of the book. In Chapter 1 it was suggested that causal attributions have been prevalent throughout history and in disparate cultures. Studies reviewed in Chapter 2 revealed a large number of causal ascriptions within motivational domains, and different ascriptions in disparate domains. Yet some attributions, particularly ability and effort in the achievement area, dominate causal thinking. To compare and contrast causes such as ability and effort, their common denominators or shared properties were identified. Three causal dimensions, examined in Chapter 3, are locus, stability, and controllability, with intentionality and globality as other possible causal properties. As documented in Chapter 4, the perceived stability of a cause influences the subjective probability of success following a previous success or failure; causes perceived as enduring increase the certainty that the prior outcome will be repeated in the future. And all the causal dimensions, as well as the outcome of an activity and specific causes, influence the emotions experienced after attainment or nonattainment of a goal. The affects linked to causal dimensions include pride (with locus), hopelessness and resignation (with stability), and anger, gratitude, guilt, pity, and shame (with controllability).
Full-text available
This study identified student behaviors that best predicted mathematics learning in peer-directed small groups among students who needed help. Two behaviors were hypothesized to predict achievement: receiving explanations instead of only the right answer and subsequently carrying out constructive activity (solving or explaining how to solve problems using concepts stated or implied in the explanations received). Six classes of 7th graders participated in 2 sequential instructional units. Students in 4 classes worked in heterogeneous small groups throughout a 3-wk unit on operations with decimal numbers (Unit 1); students in all 6 classes worked in groups throughout a 4-wk unit on operations with fractions (Unit 2). Analyses of the transcripts of tape recordings of students' verbal interaction confirmed the hypotheses. Level of constructive activity was the strongest predictor of achievement. The level of help that students received predicted level of constructive activity but did not predict achievement directly. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Using data from two studies of scientific reasoning, this chapter explores whether transactive discussion is the basis of productive peer collaborations and questions what role the partner plays in the apparent effectiveness of this type of discussion. In the first study, dyads who engaged in transactive discussion showed more improvement than dyads who did not have transactive discussions. In the second study, both dyads and children working alone showed improvement related to talk in general. However, dyads produced more transactive types of talk and showed a more complex understanding of the problem that they generated more quickly. Having a partner was not a necessary or sufficient condition for producing transactive talk but increased likelihood that it would occur. The data from these studies suggest that the value of peer collaborations may be that the presence of a partner provides a natural context for elaborating one’s own reasoning.
We examined group differences in social-cognitive behaviors exhibited by 48 3rd graders in Logo or computer-based writing environments and the role of these behaviors in accounting for posttreatment differences in higher-order thinking. Logo children exhibited more work-related and off-task behavior, information seeking from partner and cognitively-based resolution of cognitive conflicts and less typing and social negotiation of cognitive conflict. Support was provided for the mediational role of information seeking, social negotiation of social conflict and especially cognitively-based resolution of cognitive conflict. Thus, Logo may foster cognitive growth by engendering cognitively-based resolution of cognitive conflicts.
This paper offers a synthesis of research on cooperative learning in small groups. The main challenge for teachers who utilize cooperative learning is to stimulate the type of interaction desired according to their teaching objective. A generalization regarding student interactions is that if students are not taught differently, they will tend to operate at the most concrete level. Student participation in a task group that is structured to foster resource- or goal-interdependence appears to increase student motivation and performance. The effectiveness of the group structure depends on the task's complexity and uncertainty and on the extent to which the instructions attempt to micromanage the interaction process. Information is also offered on ensuring equity in interaction, managing the interaction, and unsettled issues, such as special curricula and assessment. Successful implementation of cooperative learning also requires staff development and principals who demonstrate effective managerial skills and instructional leadership. (LMI)
Explores the link between helping behavior and learning in students participating in small groups and the effects of a cooperative learning program, designed to increase students' ability to work in small groups, on student behavior. Four groups of 184 7th grade mathematics students were observed over the course of a cooperative learning program. Special attention was on the explanations that students working in the cooperative groups gave each other, the activity that students engaged in after they received help, and the relations between these kinds of peer interactions and learning. The results of this study confirmed 2 major conditions that need to be met for help that students receive to be effective: (1) the help received must be elaborated explanations and (2) the student receiving the help must actively use the explanation to try to solve problems for himself or herself. Implications of the findings for classroom practice, research, and theory are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)