A decade of CSCL

Stahl, Gerry

doi:10.1007/s11412-015-9222-2

Cited by 48 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The study of dialogue is one of the most frequent approaches employed to understand participants' actions in CSCL settings (Stahl 2015). Dialogues can be examined in different ways, including conversation analysis, interaction analysis, and positioning theory (Arnseth and Krange 2016;Stahl 2015;Harré et al 2009).…”

Section: Dialogues In Museums: New Methods That Support Talk In Open-mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Dialogues can be examined in different ways, including conversation analysis, interaction analysis, and positioning theory (Arnseth and Krange 2016;Stahl 2015;Harré et al 2009). In their paper, Jessica Roberts and Leilah Lyons present a new method called Scoring Qualitative Informal Learning Dialogues (SQuILD), which aims to measure informal talk and learning in open-ended museum settings.…”

Section: Dialogues In Museums: New Methods That Support Talk In Open-mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Future direction for the CSCL field: Methodologies and eight controversies

Ludvigsen

Creß

Law

et al. 2017

Intern. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Dialogues In Museums: New Methods That Support Talk In Open-mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Dialogues In Museums: New Methods That Support Talk In Open-mentioning

confidence: 99%

Future direction for the CSCL field: Methodologies and eight controversies

Ludvigsen

Creß

Law

et al. 2017

Intern. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The paper is part of an important approach in CSCL. Based on either a socio-cultural or situated stance towards collaboration, one tries to describe and analyze how interaction and learning takes place turn by turn over time in terms of learning trajectories (Stahl et al 2014;Stahl 2015;Furberg 2016;Enyedy et al 2015). This study follows a new line of research that involves teachers as part of the activities.…”

Section: Unit Of Analysis Microanalysis In Science Settingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Collaboration scripts and scaffolding

Ludvigsen

Creß²,

Law

et al. 2016

Intern. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This issue contains papers from two different genres of CSCL research. First, we have chosen to present two papers that address important issues related to group formation, cognitive group awareness, and the automatization of approaches for improving students' learning processes and outcomes. These studies show clearly how learning can become more productive with computational support. The two other studies are part of the tradition that describes, categorizes, and analyzes important interactional details supported in or by computational tools. All four studies offer new insights into the genesis of specific design features for productive student learning. In some of the papers, the role of teachers is discussed. The teacher's role is important in CSCL studies as an interactional partner scaffolding students in their efforts to become more productive in their academic work. Classroom discourse and automatic feedbackThe focus of the paper by Melanie Erkens, Daniel Bodemer, and Ulrich Hoppe is on how to scaffold teachers and students through automatic analysis and feedback. This paper grows out of the school of thought that the CSCL environment can enhance and regulate teaching and learning activities through orchestration and scaffolding (Dillenbourg and Jermann 2007;Fischer et al. 2013;Stegmann et al. 2016;Tchounikine 2016). In this paper, the authors analyze teachers' work, investigating how teachers need to appropriate new computational tools into their classroom routine. Classrooms are of course not fixed environments; the Intern. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn (2016) 11:381-385

show abstract

“…Los resultados de numerosas investigaciones en CSCL (Computer Supported Collaborative E-learning) muestran que la calidad de las contribuciones en la mayoría de los casos no es suficiente para lograr un aprendizaje profundo por parte de los participantes (Barrera, Montaño, Chavez y Marín, 2017;Lipponen, Rahikainen, Lallimo & Hakkarainen, 2003;Ma, 2009;Stahl, 2015;Jeong, Hmelo-silver & Yu, 2014) lo que hace que este tema tenga un potencial de investigación del uso de estos entornos para lograr un impacto positivo en el aprendizaje.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Una intervención interactiva por medio de foros en el aprendizaje colaborativo

Capot¹,

Espinoza²,

Álvarez³

2018

Edutec-e

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

RESUMENEste estudio analiza el efecto de un entorno colaborativo en el aprendizaje de estudiantes de primer año de enseñanza superior. Se elaboraron foros colaborativos, donde el estudiante participa en forma continua durante el periodo de duración de la asignatura. Cada foro considera aspectos relacionados al tipo de información del mensaje y el nivel de profundidad del aporte dado. Los resultados del foro al triangularlos con las notas finales obtenidas por los estudiantes, muestran que el efecto es positivo, además se observa que se produce una mayor profundidad en los mensajes, en aquellos estudiantes que han participado activamente en los foros, es decir, entre más foros participe el estudiante mayor es la profundidad que alcanza.

show abstract

A decade of CSCL

Cited by 48 publications

References 35 publications

Future direction for the CSCL field: Methodologies and eight controversies

Future direction for the CSCL field: Methodologies and eight controversies

Collaboration scripts and scaffolding

Una intervención interactiva por medio de foros en el aprendizaje colaborativo

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About