Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
76
0
10

Year Published

2010
2010
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 130 publications
(90 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
4
76
0
10
Order By: Relevance
“…Brühwiler & Blatchford 2011) were particularly helpful for reducing off-task discussions in the 3D game, developing a shared understanding of the inter-professional nature of the task, and explaining one's own activities in a meaningful way as a part of solving inter-professional tasks. As demonstrated in Example 2, problem solving in settings with teacher's real-time orchestration can be called productive knowledge construction, as members develop processes of shared knowledge construction built on others' ideas and thoughts (see also Arvaja et al 2007). In contrast, despite the support of the scripted environment, students were not able to develop ways of explaining their own situation to lead to productive knowledge construction processes without the teacher's assistance (see Example 1).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Brühwiler & Blatchford 2011) were particularly helpful for reducing off-task discussions in the 3D game, developing a shared understanding of the inter-professional nature of the task, and explaining one's own activities in a meaningful way as a part of solving inter-professional tasks. As demonstrated in Example 2, problem solving in settings with teacher's real-time orchestration can be called productive knowledge construction, as members develop processes of shared knowledge construction built on others' ideas and thoughts (see also Arvaja et al 2007). In contrast, despite the support of the scripted environment, students were not able to develop ways of explaining their own situation to lead to productive knowledge construction processes without the teacher's assistance (see Example 1).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This study is one attempt to fill in this knowledge gap; our approach is in line with De Wever and others (2006) who highlight the importance of shared knowledge construction in the analysis of collaborative learning. The analysis is based on the interpretation of Arvaja, Salovaara, Häkkinen and Järvelä (2007), according to whom collaboration is defined as a shared knowledge construction in which participants' cumulative sharing of knowledge is not sufficient (Mercer 1996), but the knowledge construction needs to be built on others' ideas and thoughts. Added to this, knowledge and understanding have to be jointly created (Mercer 2011).…”
Section: Participants Context and Data Collectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Peer learning provides a platform for students to vocalize their views in a more intimate and less threatening setting with a small group of students compared to sharing ideas in front of the entire class (Boud, Cohen, & Sampson, 2014). Without the authoritative figure of the instructor leading the discussion, students become more comfortable asking questions to their peers (Arvaja, Salovaara, Häkkinen, & Järvelä, 2007) and are more likely to engage in critical reflection and reassessment of views on concepts than from an instructor led discussion (Smith & Hatton, 1993). An additional benefit to peer learning is the gradual development of communication skills, a skill employers have stated graduates have lacked over the past decade (Hart Research Association, 2013;Vedder, Denhart, & Robe, 2013;White, 2013).…”
Section: Obvious Role: Collaborative Learning In Groupsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Students (more direct interaction through conversation):  are externally motivated by other groups to continue building on ideas (Lowyck & Poysa, 2001) by looking at other students' screens  build on what other students are doing (Hew & Cheng, 2012)  feel environment is non-threatening and are open to sharing thoughts (Hew & Cheng, 2012;Volet, Summers, & Thurman, 2009)  ask questions to build understanding (Arvaja, et al, 2007;Topping, 2005)  co-construct knowledge (Van Note Chism, 2006) Step 3: Assign theme name peer motivation or peer learning Survey on students' perspectives (N = 28). Students' perspectives of the role peers outside their group had on their understanding of the discussed topic was examined using a brief survey (see Table 2).…”
Section: Students (More Indirect Interactions)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, we can see that problem solving with real-time teacher instruction can be called productive knowledge construction, as members develop processes and ways to explain their own situation in inter-professional task solving that lead to the shared knowledge built on others' ideas and thoughts (see also Arvaja et al 2007). …”
Section: Teachers' Instructional Activitymentioning
confidence: 99%