DCLM framework: understanding collaboration in open-ended tabletop learning environments

Tissenbaum, Michael Benjamin; Berland, Matthew; Lyons, Leilah

doi:10.1007/s11412-017-9249-7

Cited by 42 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Researchers from a number of different disciplines have innovated ways to assess science inquiry skills in electronic learning environments, although most of these have been used in school settings (e.g., see review by Timms et al., ); these include data mining of students’ log files to assess their skill at designing and conducting experiments (Gobert et al., ). In a museum setting, visitors’ interactions with a tabletop circuit activity were automatically logged, and these data were used along with video data to study collaborative behaviors (Tissenbaum, Berland, & Lyons, ).…”

Section: Implications For the Futurementioning

confidence: 99%

Direct and Unobtrusive Measures of Informal STEM Education Outcomes

Fu¹,

Kannan

Shavelson

2019

New Drctns Evaluation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The free‐choice nature of informal STEM education (ISE) makes rigorous and contextually appropriate evaluation of outcomes challenging. Traditional measures such as surveys and interviews have been widely used in ISE evaluations, but they have limitations: They are typically self‐reports that are susceptible to the reactive effects of measurement, and they tend to intrude upon the participant's learning experience. The ISE field needs measures that capture outcomes in more direct and less obtrusive ways, permitting triangulation with multiple measures on outcomes. In this chapter, we define what we mean by direct and unobtrusive measures, and we discuss the feasibility and future of using such measures in ISE evaluations by drawing on examples from the field. We include a case study in which we adapt a school‐based performance assessment to embed into the informal learning experiences of participants at a STEM tinkering workshop; and we highlight successes, challenges, and implications for the future.

show abstract

Section: Implications For the Futurementioning

confidence: 99%

Direct and Unobtrusive Measures of Informal STEM Education Outcomes

Fu¹,

Kannan

Shavelson

2019

New Drctns Evaluation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Adding to an existing foundation of research in the journal investigating collaboration in connection with interactive surfaces (Tissenbaum et al 2017), and, building on a foundation in Activity Theory (Nardi 1996;Engeström 1999;Kaptelinin 2005), IG models the joint evolution of artifacts with their uses within specific collaborative environments. An important concept is how artifacts mediate joint activity.…”

Section: Instrumental Genesis In the Design Studiomentioning

confidence: 99%

Highlighting tools and technologies for collaborative learning

Rosé

Law

Creß

et al. 2019

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

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In line with our vision, we bring four articles to this issue, first one that offers a backwards glance of a sort, specifically a meta-analysis of research in the area of script-based collaboration, reconsidering questions that have often been pondered, now with evidence to substantiate specific claims, some of which are contrary to expectation. We then transition to a more forward glance with three papers highlighting recent work continuing the trend to bring collaborative learning out of the screen and into the face-to-face world (Tissenbaum et al 2017). Specifically, these three papers represent the emerging area of the embodied experience in CSCL, offering theoretical foundations, new measurement technology, and innovative experiences for students.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%