Effects of Feeding Back the Motivation of a Collaboratively Learning Group

Schoor, Cornelia; Kownatzki, Salome; Narciss, Susanne; Körndle, Hermann

doi:10.14204/ejrep.32.13077

Cited by 4 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Recent researches have emphasized the importance of providing different kinds of supports that favor the implementation of social regulatory processes in collaborative learning (Hadwin et al, 2011, Jä rvelä and Hadwin, 2013, Jä rvenoja et al, 2105. For example, aid has been developed through different types of prompts, feedbacks or scaffoldings, either directed to motivational processes (Schoor, Kownatzki, Narciss, & Kö rndle, 2014) or to metacognitive processes (Molenaar et al, 2014;Molenaar, Roda, van Boxtel, & Sleegers, 2012) involved in collaborative regulation. Another way to support the regulation of collaborative learning is to provide students with a series of external scripts that allow them to structure their collaborative actions, for example, inducing certain activities, prescribing certain sequences for the realization of each activity and also distributing the specific roles that students must play when they are involved in the collaborative task (Fischer, Kollar, Stegmann, Wecker, & Zottmann, 2013).…”

Section: Discussion Of Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

How does the Type of Task Influence the Performance and Social Regulation of Collaborative Learning?

Acuña¹,

Lopez-Aymes²,

Acuna-Castillo³

2018

IJHE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper we analyze the effects of the type of collaborative task (elaboration of concept map vs elaboration of expository summary) on the performance and on the level of collaboration achieved by Mexican university students in the multimedia learning of a social sciences content (Communication Psychology). Likewise, the processes of social regulation that are put into play in these collaborative tasks are described. Forty-five students (17 women and 28 men) grouped in 15 triads participated in the study. Each triad was assigned to one of the two collaborative conditions: elaboration of concept map (8 groups) and elaboration of an expository summary (7 groups). It was monitored that there were no significant previous differences between two conditions regarding: reading comprehension, reading comprehension regulation strategies and domain-specific prior knowledge. To evaluate the performance in learning, the quality of the proposals made in concept maps and summaries were taken adapting the procedure proposed by Haugwitz, Nesbit and Sandmann (2010), and also the results obtained by the students in a multiple-choice questionnaire about the knowledge area. Likewise, the level of collaboration perceived by each member of the teams was examined using a Collaboration questionnaire developed by Chan and Chan (2011). The identification and characterization of the processes of social regulation was carried out through a qualitative analysis of the exchanges registered during the collaborative activity, considering the type (co-regulation and shared regulation) and the regulation orientation (directed to the task or to the management of collaboration). The quantitative results analysis showed the existence of significant effects working with collaborative concept maps in the knowledge acquired during the collaborative task and in some of the indicators of perceived collaboration. Although no significant statistical differences were found, in the teams that elaborated expository summaries, a predominance of episodes of regulation directed towards the cognitive activity of the collaborative task was observed, being scarce, in both conditions, the episodes of social regulation directed towards collaboration within the triads.

show abstract

Section: Discussion Of Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

How does the Type of Task Influence the Performance and Social Regulation of Collaborative Learning?

Acuña¹,

Lopez-Aymes²,

Acuna-Castillo³

2018

IJHE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Dos ejemplos del primer tipo de trabajos son las publicaciones de McCormick (2013) y Mora et al (2016), que mencionan, sin detallar, algunos componentes teóricos de una visión general del aprendizaje a partir de la cual proceden a seleccionar los aspectos de la actividad sobre los que informan a los estudiantes. Con respecto a los trabajos que cuentan con un marco teórico concreto sobre el aprendizaje colaborativo, dos ejemplos representativos son las propuestas de Fessakis et al (2013) y Schoor et al (2014), si bien el abordaje empírico que realizan se centra en una sola dimensión. Mientras que en el primero de los trabajos, el foco se centra en la participación de los estudiantes, en el segundo se destaca la importancia de la motivación grupal para el desarrollo de los procesos colaborativos.…”

Section: Dimensiones Sobre Las Que Se Informa Y Marco Teórico Subyacenteunclassified

“…En el primer caso, los registros de actividad son procesados para proporcionar información a los estudiantes sobre su participación y nivel de implicación; la mayoría de los trabajos revisados proceden de esta manera (Bravo et al, 2008;Fessakis et al, 2013;Kimmerle y Cress, 2008;Kuosa et al, 2016;Marzouk et al, 2016;McCormick, 2013;Mora et al, 2016;Park y Jo, 2015;Pifarré et al, 2014;Silius et al, 2013;Wise et al, 2016;Xia, 2015;Zorrilla et al, 2015). En el segundo, utilizado en pocos trabajos, la información se obtiene directamente de los estudiantes, ya sea administrando un pre-test para evaluar los conocimientos previos del grupo (Sangin et al, 2011), o bien cuestionarios para valorar su motivación o implicación en la tarea académica (Kwon et al, 2013;Schoor et al, 2014).…”

Section: Recolección De Datos Y Formatos De Visualizaciónunclassified

“…En relación con la forma de entrega, la gran mayoría de los trabajos opta por proporcionar la información a los estudiantes individuales. Algunos les proporcionan información tanto de su propia actividad como de la actividad de otro(s) estudiante(s), ya sea que trabajen en díadas o tríos (Bodemer, 2011;Sangin et al, 2011;Schoor et al, 2014) o en grupos más amplios (Fessakis et al, 2013;Kimmerle y Cress, 2008;Kuosa et al, 2016;Kwon et al, 2013;Mora et al, 2016;Park y Jo, 2015;Zorrilla et al, 2015). Otros trabajos, en cambio, ofrecen a cada estudiante solo la información de su propia actividad (Bravo et al, 2008;Marzouk et al, 2016).…”

Section: Recolección De Datos Y Formatos De Visualizaciónunclassified

See 1 more Smart Citation

Uso de los registros de actividad para mejorar la colaboración en línea

Coll

Rocamora²,

Encinas

2018

RIED

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Se presenta una revisión de trabajos que centran su interés en la explotación de los datos que registran las plataformas de eLearning sobre la actividad de los participantes. Son propuestas que, mediante el análisis de estos datos, generan información que es ofrecida a los estudiantes, en tiempo real, para ayudarles a colaborar y aprender conjuntamente en la plataforma. En esta línea de investigación convergen trabajos de diferentes ámbitos de estudio como las analíticas del aprendizaje, la minería de datos, las herramientas de conciencia de grupo o las herramientas de análisis de la interacción. La revisión adopta una doble perspectiva: i) identificar y analizar los indicadores extraídos de los registros de actividad, su procesamiento, la información generada y las formas de comunicarla; y ii) explorar el modelo y los instrumentos utilizados para valorar el impacto que la información proporcionada tiene sobre los procesos colaborativos en línea y/o los resultados de aprendizaje. Las conclusiones subrayan que, en general, no se explicitan los modelos de aprendizaje colaborativo que fundamentan la selección de los indicadores ni la información comunicada a los estudiantes. También se detectan sesgos importantes como consecuencia de no tener en cuenta la naturaleza multidimensional de los procesos de aprendizaje colaborativo. Además, son pocos los trabajos que analizan las relaciones entre los usos que los estudiantes hacen de la información que reciben y la calidad de los procesos y los resultados del aprendizaje colaborativo, y cuando lo hacen no profundizan en los cambios que la información provoca en las dinámicas grupales.

show abstract

“…Thereon, a first group of support consists on providing different types of prompts, feedbacks or scaffoldings, whether directed to the motivational processes (Schoor, Kownatzki, Narciss, & Körndle, 2014) or to the metacognitive (Molenaar et al, 2014;Molenaar, Roda, van Boxtel, & Sleegers, 2012) implied in the the collaborative regulation. These supports can be provided by a technological tool which is included in the collaborative learning environment (Järvelä, Kirschner, Panadero, Malmberg, Phielix, Jaspers, Koivuniemi, & Järvenoja, 2015;Molenaar et al, 2012Molenaar et al, , 2014.…”

Section: Supports For the Social Regulation In The Collaborative Learmentioning

confidence: 99%

Collaborative Multimedia Learning: Influence of a Social Regulatory Support on Learning Performance and on Collaboration

Acuña

Aymes

2016

JCT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper analyzes the effects of a support aimed at favoring the social regulatory processes in a computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) environment, specifically in a comprehension task of a multimedia text about Psychology of Communication. This support, named RIDE (Saab, van Joolingen, & van Hout-Wolters, 2007;2012), consists in the instruction, prior to the learning task, from a series of communication rules extracted from literature about effective collaboration. The study was carried out with 60 college students, grouped in 20 triads. Each triad was assigned to one of two conditions: with social regulatory support or without support. The students did a face-to-face collaborative task of reading comprehension, using the strategy of collaborative construction of concept maps from the information presented in the multimedia material. The performance was valued according to the quality of the concept maps, and the level of collaboration perceived by each member of the teams was tested. We found that the condition with social regulatory support promoted higher quality concept maps; however, the social regulatory support had significant effect on the levels of collaboration perceived by the team members. In the conclusions are pointed the reach of these results for the design and implementation of collaborative interventions, based on the use of multimedia materials.

show abstract

Effects of Feeding Back the Motivation of a Collaboratively Learning Group

Cited by 4 publications

References 20 publications

How does the Type of Task Influence the Performance and Social Regulation of Collaborative Learning?

How does the Type of Task Influence the Performance and Social Regulation of Collaborative Learning?

Uso de los registros de actividad para mejorar la colaboración en línea

Collaborative Multimedia Learning: Influence of a Social Regulatory Support on Learning Performance and on Collaboration

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About