Measuring perceived sociability of computer-supported collaborative learning environments

Abstract

Most asynchronous computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) environments can be characterized as functional environments because they focus on functional, task-specific support, often disregarding explicit support for the social (emotional) aspects of learning in groups which are acknowledged by many educational researchers to be essential for effective collaborative learning. In contrast, sociable CSCL environments emphasize the social (emotional) aspects of group learning. We define sociability as the extent to which a CSCL environment is perceived to be able to facilitate the emergence of a sound social space with attributes as trust and belonging, a strong sense of community, and good working relationships. Specific environmental characteristics, which we have designated social affordances, determine sociability.This explorative study deals with the construction and preliminary validation of a self-reporting (Dutch language) Sociability Scale for determining the perceived degree of sociability of CSCL environments. It is one-dimensional Scale consisting of 10 items and has an internal consistency of 0.92. It was further validated on the basis of a well-developed nomological network. The results of the explorative study are promising and show that the sociability scale has the potential to be useful as a measure for perceived sociability.

Measuring perceived social presence in distributed learning groups

“…Like the Social Space Scale, this Sociability Scale has a high internal validity (Cronbach"s alpha = .92). A moderate correlation between the aggregates scores of the items of the Sociability Scale and that of the Social Presence Scale was expected because sociability is concerned with aspects of person-to-person and group awareness (for awareness see, Kreijns, Kirschner, & Jochems, 2002) which directly affects the degree of social presence experienced. used a 17-item, 5-point bipolar scale questionnaire to assess a range of feelings students have towards CMC, all of which she equates to perceived social presence.…”

“…Social Space Scale (Kreijns, Kirschner, Jochems, & Van Buuren, 2004) 2. Sociability Scale (Kreijns, Kirschner, Jochems, & Van Buuren, 2007) 3. Social Presence Indicators 4.…”

“…2004) produced an instrument for determining social space and the second (Kreijns, Kirschner, Jochems, & Van Buuren, 2007) one for determining sociability. This study has resulted in an instrument for determining social presence.…”

Game feature and expertise effects on experienced richness, control and engagement in game play

“…Sociality and engagement have been researched in interaction design (Gaver 1996), learning environments (Kreijns et al 2007) and virtual environments (Ludvigsen 2006). Here, the authors emphasize the social interactions that interactive systems can mediate through social affordances (Hodges and Baron 2007).…”

ICT-support for grounding in the classroom

“…With regard to the additional measures, research has shown that achieving common ground is also influenced by social factors. For instance, while designers of ICT-tools typically facilitate task content communication, they may be limited in the extent to which they afford (see Norman 1993) social communication aspects (Kreijns et al 2002). The question then arises as to whether such ICT-tools have sufficient social affordances to allow for a good team atmosphere to emerge.…”