Tool use in computer-based learning environments: towards a research framework

Clarebout, Geraldine; Elen, Jan

doi:10.1016/j.chb.2004.09.007

Cited by 105 publications

(84 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Other studies (Clarebout & Elen, 2006;Jiang et al, 2009) and the current study demonstrate that students' use of a tool affects the impact of the tool on their collaboration process. It is therefore important that future research takes this into account.…”

Section: Conclusion and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…For example, the PT can motivate students to participate more, because they are unable to hide in the crowd and they may be evaluated negatively when they are seen as free riders (2008). Zumbach et al (Clarebout & Elen, 2006;Jiang, Elen, & Clarebout, 2009) (2008) however, found no effect of their group awareness tool on group member participation.…”

Section: Effects Of Using Group Awareness Tools On Online Collaborationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Group awareness tools: It’s what you do with it that matters

Janssen

Erkens

Kirschner

2011

Computers in Human Behavior

116

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined the effect of using a group awareness tool on online collaboration. Furthermore, we examined whether the effect of using a group awareness tool on online collaboration is mediated by group awareness (i.e., students' awareness of their group members' levels of participation). To answer these questions, we determined how often and how long 107 secondary education students used the Participation-tool (PT), a group awareness tool designed to visualize group members' relative contribution to the online collaborative process. Our analyses show that duration of PT use (how long students displayed the tool on their screens) significantly predicted group members' participation in the online dialogue, their participation when writing collaborative texts, equality of participation within the group, and coordination and regulation of activities in the relational space (i.e., discussing the collaboration process with group members). No effect of using the PT on group performance was found. Mediation analyses showed that the effect of using the PT is only partially mediated by group awareness: an indirect effect of using the PT, via enhanced group awareness, on student participation during chat discussions and the collaborative writing process was found.

show abstract

Section: Conclusion and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Effects Of Using Group Awareness Tools On Online Collaborationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Group awareness tools: It’s what you do with it that matters

Janssen

Erkens

Kirschner

2011

Computers in Human Behavior

116

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Yet other studies have shown that these text-based supports can also be neglected during task performance (Aleven et al 2003;Clarebout and Elen 2006), and become ineffective or even counterproductive when students gain experience (Kalyuga 2007). A potentially fruitful alternative might be to adapt task complexity to the students' increasing levels of domain understanding by structuring the task content according to a simple-tocomplex sequence.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validating and Optimizing the Effects of Model Progression in Simulation-Based Inquiry Learning

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Model progression denotes the organization of the inquiry learning process in successive phases of increasing complexity. This study investigated the effectiveness of model progression in general, and explored the added value of either broadening or narrowing students' possibilities to change model progression phases. Results showed that high-school students in the 'standard' model progression condition (n = 19), who could enter subsequent phases at will, outperformed students from a control condition (n = 30) without model progression. The unrestricted condition (n = 22) had the additional option of returning to previous phases, whereas the restricted condition (n = 20) disallowed such downward progressions as well as upward progressions in case insufficient knowledge was acquired. Both variants were found to be more effective in terms of performance than the 'standard' form of model progression. However, as performance in all three model progression conditions was still rather weak, additional support is needed for students to reach full understanding of the learning content.

show abstract

“…For instance, recurrent findings are that students struggle with testing hypotheses, connecting procedural skills with conceptual knowledge and transferring acquired conceptual understandings or inquiry skills from one setting to another (van Joolingen et al 2007;Renken and Nunez 2013). Furthermore, studies focusing on computer-supported help-seeking across various knowledge domains have indicated that students often do not take full advantage of support tools aimed at supporting their conceptual reflection (Aleven et al 2003;Clarebout and Elen 2006;Furberg 2009).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Teacher support in computer-supported lab work: bridging the gap between lab experiments and students’ conceptual understanding

Furberg

2016

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

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reports on a study of teacher support in a setting where students engaged with computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) in science. The empirical basis is an intervention study where secondary school students and their teacher performed a lab experiment in genetics supported by a digital learning environment. The analytical focus is on student-teacher interactions taking place in help-seeking settings during group-based activities where students analysed and reported their findings from the lab experiment. A combination of quantitative methods in the form of frequency counts of students' help requests and detailed micro-analyses of student-teacher interactions are used. The findings are that the majority of challenges faced by students concerned conceptually oriented issues and procedural challenges in the sense of how to practically solve the assignments provided to them in the digital learning environment. Most importantly, the analyses of student-teacher interactions provide insight into the considerable amount of support that is needed from the teacher to bridge the conceptual gap between the lab experiment and the students' understanding of the underlying scientific principles and procedures. The findings are discussed according to possible implications for the design of digital support tools and instruction.

show abstract

Tool use in computer-based learning environments: towards a research framework

Cited by 105 publications

References 33 publications

Group awareness tools: It’s what you do with it that matters

Group awareness tools: It’s what you do with it that matters

Validating and Optimizing the Effects of Model Progression in Simulation-Based Inquiry Learning

Teacher support in computer-supported lab work: bridging the gap between lab experiments and students’ conceptual understanding

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About