Regulative processes in individual, 3D and computer supported cooperative learning contexts

Jong, Frank de; Kollöffel, Bas Jan; Meijden, Henny van der; Staarman, Judith Kleine; Janssen, José

doi:10.1016/j.chb.2004.10.023

Cited by 43 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We can conclude that in a learning environment where students are working together synchronically and from a distance the regulation of the collaborative process seems important. This is corroborated by a study by De Jong et al (2005) and by a study by Erkens et al (2005). De Jong and colleagues (2005) investigated student regulation of learning while students communicated through text-based CMC (computer-mediated communication).…”

Section: Conclusion and Discussionsupporting

confidence: 55%

Support of the collaborative inquiry learning process: influence of support on task and team regulation

Saab

Joolingen

Hout-Wolters

2011

Metacognition Learning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Regulation of the learning process is an important condition for efficient and effective learning. In collaborative learning, students have to regulate their collaborative activities (team regulation) next to the regulation of their own learning process focused on the task at hand (task regulation). In this study, we investigate how support of collaborative inquiry learning can influence the use of regulative activities of students. Furthermore, we explore the possible relations between task regulation, team regulation and learning results. This study involves tenth-grade students who worked in pairs in a collaborative inquiry learning environment that was based on a computer simulation, Collisions, developed in the program SimQuest. Students of the same team worked on two different computers and communicated through chat. Chat logs of students from three different conditions are compared. Students in the first condition did not receive any support at all (Control condition). In the second condition, students received an instruction in effective communication, the RIDE rules (RIDE condition). In the third condition, students were, in addition to receiving the RIDE rules instruction, supported by the Collaborative Hypothesis Tool (CHT), which helped the students with formulating hypotheses together (CHT condition). The results show that students overall used more team regulation than task regulation. In the RIDE condition and the CHT condition, students regulated their team activities most often. Moreover, in the CHT condition the regulation of team activities was positively related to the learning results. We can conclude that different measures of support can enhance the use of team regulative activities, which in turn can lead to better learning results.

show abstract

Section: Conclusion and Discussionsupporting

confidence: 55%

Support of the collaborative inquiry learning process: influence of support on task and team regulation

Saab

Joolingen

Hout-Wolters

2011

Metacognition Learning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For instance, De Jong et al (2005) found that middle-school students working in a CSCL environment helped each other to engage in learning not primarily by planning or monitoring, but by maintaining common ground and using cognitive strategies. A similar pattern was reported by Volet et al (2009).…”

Section: Metacognitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reflective assessment in knowledge building by students with low academic achievement

Yang

Aalst

Chan

et al. 2016

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

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated whether and how students with low prior achievement can carry out and benefit from reflective assessment supported by the Knowledge Connections Analyzer (KCA) to collaboratively improve their knowledge-building discourse. Participants were a class of 20 Grade 11 students with low achievement taking visual art from an experienced teacher. We used multiple methods to analyze the students' online discourse at several levels of granularity. Results indicated that students with low achievement were able to take responsibility for advancing collective knowledge, as they generated theories and questions, built on each others' ideas, and synthesized and rose above their community's ideas. Analysis of qualitative data such as the KCA prompt sheets, student interviews and classroom observations indicated that students were capable of carrying out reflective assessment using the KCA in a knowledge building environment, and that the use of reflective assessment may have helped students to focus on goals of knowledge building. Implications for how students with low achievement collaboratively improve their knowledge-building discourse facilitated by reflective assessment are discussed.

show abstract

“…Metacognitive activities that regulate task performance (e.g., making plans, monitoring task progress, and evaluating plans or ideas) are considered important for online collaboration (De Jong et al 2005). …”

Section: Research Question 4: Online Collaborationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of representational guidance during computer-supported collaborative learning

et al. 2008

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research investigates the role of representational guidance by comparing the effects of two different representational tools. We used a design with two different groups defined by the type of argumentative diagram students co-constructed while working in a computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) environment. The Graphical Debate-tool offered different representational guidance than the Textual Debatetool. The results show that groups that worked with the Graphical Debate-tool constructed representations of higher quality and wrote essays that were better in terms of grounds quality. Furthermore, working with the Graphical Debate-tool was found to have a positive effect on students' learning as measured by a knowledge post-test. In contrast to our expectations however, there was little difference between the two conditions regarding the online collaboration process. It can be concluded that representational guidance has an impact on group and individual performance and should therefore be taken into account during instructional design.Keywords Computer-supported collaborative learning Á Representational tools Á Argumentative tasks Á Visualizations Á Secondary education External representations (ERs) are graphical or diagrammatic representations that represent information about a topic (Van Bruggen et al. 2002;Zhang 1997). A growing number of researchers advocates not only the use, but also the construction of ERs by students. The active construction of ERs, is thought to stimulate deeper and more

show abstract

Regulative processes in individual, 3D and computer supported cooperative learning contexts

Cited by 43 publications

References 21 publications

Support of the collaborative inquiry learning process: influence of support on task and team regulation

Support of the collaborative inquiry learning process: influence of support on task and team regulation

Reflective assessment in knowledge building by students with low academic achievement

Effects of representational guidance during computer-supported collaborative learning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About