This article presents an outline of a script theory of guidance for computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL). With its 4 types of components of internal and external scripts (play, scene, role, and scriptlet) and 7 principles, this theory addresses the question of how CSCL practices are shaped by dynamically reconfigured internal collaboration scripts of the participating learners. Furthermore, it explains how internal collaboration scripts develop through participation in CSCL practices. It emphasizes the importance of active application of subject matter knowledge in CSCL practices, and it prioritizes transactive over nontransactive forms of knowledge application in order to facilitate learning. Further, the theory explains how external collaboration scripts modify CSCL practices and how they influence the development of internal collaboration scripts. The principles specify an optimal scaffolding level for external collaboration scripts and allow for the formulation of hypotheses about the fading of external collaboration scripts. Finally, the article points toward conceptual challenges and future research questions.

This article presents a conceptual analysis of collaboration scripts used in face-to-face and computer-mediated collaborative learning. Collaboration scripts are scaffolds that aim to improve collaboration through structuring the interactive processes between two or more learning partners. Collaboration scripts consist of at least five components: (a) learning objectives, (b) type of activities, (c) sequencing, (d) role distribution, and (e) type of representation. These components serve as a basis for comparing prototypical collaboration script approaches for face-to-face vs. computer-mediated learning. As our analysis reveals, collaboration scripts for face-to-face learning often focus on supporting collaborators in engaging in activities that are specifically related to individual knowledge acquisition. Scripts for computer-mediated collaboration are typically concerned with facilitating communicativecoordinative processes that occur among group members. The two lines of research can be consolidated to facilitate the design of collaboration scripts, which both support participation and coordination, as well as induce learning activities closely related to individual knowledge acquisition and metacognition. In addition, research on collaboration scripts needs to consider the learners' internal collaboration scripts as a further determinant of collaboration behavior. The article closes with the presentation of a conceptual framework incorporating both external and internal collaboration scripts.

We investigated how differently structured external scripts interact with learners' internal scripts concerning individual knowledge acquisition in a Web-based collaborative inquiry learning environment. 90 students from two secondary schools participated. Two versions of an external collaboration script (high vs. low structured) supporting collaborative argumentation were embedded within a Web-based collaborative inquiry learning environment. Students' internal scripts were classified as either high or low structured, establishing a 2x2-factorial design. Results suggest that the high structured external collaboration script supported the acquisition of domain-general knowledge of all learners regardless of their internal scripts. Learners' internal scripts influenced the acquisition of domain-specific knowledge. Results are discussed concerning their theoretical relevance and practical implications for Web-based inquiry learning with collaboration scripts.Keywords: Collaboration scripts, internal scripts, computer-supported collaborative learning, inquiry learning, science education, learning environments. Internal and External Scripts 4 4 Internal and External Scripts in Computer-Supported Collaborative Inquiry LearningOver the last years, several studies have shed light on the way learners benefit from collaboration when learning science (Kaartinen & Kumpulainen, 2002;Kneser & Ploetzner, 2001;Howe, Tolmie, Duchak-Tanner, & Rattray, 2000). There is considerable evidence, however, that students often have difficulty engaging in fruitful collaborative argumentation.For example, they rarely relate scientific evidence to theoretical explanations (e.g., Bell, 2004;Sandoval, 2003). Also, arguments raised by one student often remain unaddressed by the student's learning partner(s), and obvious disagreements are often left unresolved. If not explicitly scaffolded, learners may fail to show substantive argumentation, leading to little acquisition of domain-general knowledge about argumentation. Even more, low-level argumentation might be reflected in poor elaboration of learning content and result in a limited acquisition of domain-specific knowledge.Several instructional approaches have been used by researchers to address these challenges in learning through argumentation (e.g., Bell, 1997;van Bruggen, Kirschner, & Jochems, 2002;Baker, 2003;Munneke, van Amelsvoort, & Andriessen, 2003;Suthers, Toth, & Weiner, 1997). Suthers et al. (1997), for example, developed Belvedere, a graphical argumentation tool by aid of which learners enter hypotheses and evidence into text boxes and specify the relationships between boxes using graphical arrows. This results in a network of nodes and links representing the various pieces of evidence that support or contradict a particular hypothesis. A similar approach has been taken by Bell (1997) in developing the "SenseMaker"-tool to help scaffold students' use of evidence within arguments in Web-based inquiry projects.Another promising approach to structure collaborative argumenta...

Peer assessment is an important component of a more participatory culture of learning. The articles collected in this special issue constitute a representative kaleidoscope of current research on peer assessment. In this commentary, we argue that research on peer assessment is currently in a stage of adolescence, grappling with the developmental tasks of identity formation and affiliation. Identity formation may be achieved by efforts towards a shared terminology and joint theory building, whereas affiliation may be reached by a more systematic consideration of research in related fields. To reach identity formation and affiliation, preliminary ideas for a cognitively toned, process-related model of peer assessment and links to related research fields, especially to research on collaborative learning, are presented.

Scripts for computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) offer socio-cognitive scaffolding for learners to engage in collaborative activities that are considered beneficial for learning. Yet, CSCL scripts are often criticized for hampering naturally emerging collaboration. Research on the effectiveness of CSCL scripts has shown divergent results. This article reports a meta-analysis about the effects of CSCL scripts on domain-specific knowledge and collaboration skills. Results indicate that CSCL scripts as a kind of socio-cognitive scaffolding can enhance learning outcomes substantially. Learning with CSCL scripts leads to a small positive effect on domain-specific knowledge (d = 0.20) and a large positive effect on collaboration skills (d = 0.95) compared to unstructured CSCL. Further analyses reveal that CSCL scripts are particularly effective for domain-specific learning when they prompt transactive activities (i.e., activities in which a learner's reasoning builds on the contribution of a learning partner) and when they are combined with additional content-specific scaffolding (worked examples, concept maps, etc.). Future research on CSCL scripts should include measures of learners' internal scripts (i.e., prior collaboration skills) and the transactivity of the actual learning process.Keywords Collaboration scripts . Collaboration skills . Computer-supported collaborative learning . Domain-specific knowledge . Socio-cognitive scaffolding . TransactivityResearch on computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) deals with the question how digital technologies can be used to help groups of learners collaborate on a high level Educ Psychol Rev (2017) University of Augsburg, Universitätsstr. 10, 86159 Augsburg, Germany (Koschmann 1996). A high level of collaboration is reached when groups of learners engage in certain socio-cognitive activities such as explaining (Webb et al. 2009), questioning (King 1998), or arguing (Andriessen, Baker, andSuthers 2003). Through an engagement in such activities, students are assumed to acquire both domain-specific knowledge (i.e., knowledge about the topic that is discussed within the group) and cross-domain skills such as collaboration skills or argumentation skills. In short, collaborative learning is credited for its high potential to facilitate learners' cognitive development (Mugny and Doise 1978;Schwarz and Linchevski 2007). However, as prior research on collaborative learning-both in face-to-face and in computer-mediated settings-has shown, learners often have difficulties engaging spontaneously in beneficial collaborative learning activities (Cohen 1994;Kuhn, Shaw, and Felton 1997). In this article, the term Bunstructured collaboration^is used to refer to such situations in which learners are not supported with respect to their collaborative learning activities.To overcome these problems, learners can be supported by means of socio-cognitive scaffolding that guides them through collaborative activities that enhance learning. In computer-supported lea...

Research on computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) is often concerned with the question of how scaffolds or other characteristics of learning may affect learners' social and cognitive engagement. Such engagement in socio-cognitive activities frequently materializes in discourse. In quantitative analyses of discourse, utterances are typically coded, and differences in the frequency of codes are compared between conditions. However, such traditional coding-and-counting-based strategies neglect the temporal nature of verbal data, and therefore provide limited and potentially misleading information about CSCL activities. Instead, we argue that analyses of the temporal proximity, specifically temporal co-occurrences of codes, provide a more appropriate way to characterize socio-cognitive activities of learning in CSCL settings. We investigate this claim by comparing and contrasting a traditional coding-andcounting analysis with epistemic network analysis (ENA), a discourse analysis technique that models temporal co-occurrences of codes in discourse. We apply both methods to data from a study that compared the effects of individual vs. collaborative problem solving. The results suggest that compared to a traditional coding-and-counting approach, ENA provides more insight into the socio-cognitive learning activities of students.

Abstract. Collaboration scripts can help learners to engage in argumentation and knowledge acquisition. However, they might have differential effects for learners holding differently structured knowledge (internal scripts) on argumentation. We investigated how external scripts interact with learners' internal scripts concerning collaborative argumentation. 98 students from two secondary schools participated. Two versions of an external collaboration script (high vs. low structured) supporting argumentation were embedded within a web-based collaborative inquiry curriculum. Students' internal scripts were classified as either high or low structured, establishing a 2x2-factorial design. Results suggest that the high structured external script supported all learners, regardless of their internal scripts, concerning the acquisition of domain-general knowledge. Learners' internal scripts influenced the acquisition of domain-specific knowledge. Results from two case studies reveal differences in argumentation processes attributable to the learners' internal scripts. Results are discussed in terms of their theoretical relevance and practical implications for learning with collaboration scripts.

No abstract