nach oben

International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning

Erschienen in:

01.12.2013

Collaborative drawing on a shared digital canvas in elementary science education: The effects of script and task awareness support

verfasst von: Hannie Gijlers, Armin Weinberger, Alieke Mattia van Dijk, Lars Bollen, Wouter van Joolingen

Erschienen in: International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning | Ausgabe 4/2013

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Creating shared representations can foster knowledge acquisition by elementary school students by promoting active integration and translation of new information. In this study, we investigate to what extent awareness support and scripting facilitate knowledge construction and discourse quality of elementary school students (n = 94) in a computer-supported collaborative drawing scenario. Students in the awareness condition received feedback prompts based on the characteristics of their drawing. The script foresaw a sequence of creating, comparing, discussing, and merging individual drawings to arrive at a shared representation of the subject matter, which was photosynthesis. Both forms of support, (awareness and scripting) facilitated the learning processes and outcomes. Discourse analysis revealed that awareness and scripting increased (the share of) integrative and conflict-oriented consensus-building activities as well as (the share of) off-task and coordination-related activities in comparison to the control group. Awareness and scripting facilitated deeper understanding of the processes and relations of domain concepts. The scripted students acquired significantly more conceptual knowledge than the unscripted students.

Vorheriger Artikel Social argumentation in online synchronous communication

Nächster Artikel Capturing and analyzing verbal and physical collaborative learning interactions at an enriched interactive tabletop

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Ainsworth, S., Prain, V., & Tytler, R. (2011). Drawing to learn in science. Science, 333, 1096–1097. doi:10.1126/science.1204153.CrossRef

Anjewierden, A., Gijlers, H., Kolloffel, B., Saab, N., & de Hoog, R. (2011). Examining the relation between domain-related communication and collaborative inquiry learning. Computers & Education, 57, 1741–1748. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.03.010.CrossRef

Brooks, M. (2009). Drawing, visualisation and young children’s exploration of “big ideas”. International Journal of Science Education, 31, 319–341. doi:10.1080/09500690802595771.CrossRef

Buder, J., & Bodemer, D. (2008). Supporting controversial cscl discussions with augmented group awareness tools. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3, 123–139. doi:10.1007/s11412-008-9037-5.CrossRef

de Vries, E., Lund, K., & Baker, M. (2002). Computer-mediated epistemic dialogue: Explanation and argumentation as vehicles for understanding scientific notations. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11, 63–103. doi:10.1207/S15327809JLS1101_3.CrossRef

Dillenbourg, P. (2002). Over-scripting cscl: The risks of blending collaborative learning with instructional design. Three worlds of CSCL. Can we support CSCL, 61–91. doi:citeulike-article-id:8271598.

Dourish, P., & Bellotti, V. (1992). Awareness and coordination in shared workspaces. Paper presented at the ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW 1992), Toronto.

Edelson, D. C. (2001). Learning-for-use: A framework for the design of technology-supported inquiry activities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 355–385. doi:10.1002/1098-2736(200103)38:3<355::aid-tea1010>3.0.co;2-m.CrossRef

Fransen, J., Kirschner, P. A., & Erkens, G. (2011). Mediating team effectiveness in the context of collaborative learning: The importance of team and task awareness. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 1103–1113. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.05.017.CrossRef

Giemza, A., Weinbrenner, S., Engler, H., Hoppe, H. U. (2007). Tuple spaces as a flexible integration platform for distributed learning environments. Paper presented at the 15th International Conference on Computers in Education Hiroshima, Japan.

Gijlers, H., & de Jong, T. (2013). Using concept maps to facilitate collaborative simulation-based inquiry learning. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 22, 340–374.CrossRef

Gijlers, H., Saab, N., van Joolingen, W. R., de Jong, T., & van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M. (2009). Interaction between tool and talk: How instruction and tools support consensus building in collaborative inquiry-learning environments. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25, 252–267. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2008.00302.x.CrossRef

Gutwin, C., & Greenberg, S. (1995). Support for group awareness in real-time desktop conferencing. Paper presented at the 2nd New Zealand Computer Science Research Student’s Conference, Hamilton, New Zealand.

Hythecker, V. I., Dansereau, D. F., & Rocklin, T. R. (1988). An analysis of the processes influencing the structured dyadic learning environment. Educational Psychologist, 23, 23.CrossRef

Kollar, I., Fischer, F., & Slotta, J. D. (2007). Internal and external scripts in computer-supported collaborative inquiry learning. Learning and Instruction, 17, 708–721. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.09.021.CrossRef

Leopold, C., & Leutner, D. (2012). Science text comprehension: Drawing, main idea selection, and summarizing as learning strategies. Learning and Instruction, 22, 16–26. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2011.05.005.CrossRef

O'Donnell, A. M., & Dansereau, D. F. (1992). Scripted collaborations in student dyads: A method for analyzing and enhancing academic learning and performance. In R. Hertz-Lazarowitz & N. Miller (Eds.), Interaction in cooperative groups: The theoretical anatomy of group learning (pp. 120–141). New Yourk, NY, US: Cambridge University Press.

Oortwijn, M. B., Boekaerts, M., Vedder, P., & Strijbos, J.-W. (2008). Helping behaviour during cooperative learning and learning gains: The role of the teacher and of pupils’ prior knowledge and ethnic background. Learning and Instruction, 18, 146–159. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.01.014.CrossRef

Roth, W.-M., & Roychoudhury, A. (1993). The concept map as a tool for the collaborative construction of knowledge: A microanalysis of high school physics students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 503–534. doi:10.1002/tea.3660300508.CrossRef

Rummel, N., & Spada, H. (2005). Learning to collaborate: An instructional approach to promoting collaborative problem solving in computer-mediated settings. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14, 201–241. doi:10.1207/s15327809jls1402_2.CrossRef

Saab, N., van Joolingen, W. R., & Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M. (2007). Supporting communication in a collaborative discovery learning environment: The effect of instruction. Instructional Science, 35, 73–98. doi:10.1007/s11251-006-9003-4.CrossRef

Scanlon, E., Anastopoulou, S., Kerawalla, L., & Mulholland, P. (2011). How technology resources can be used to represent personal inquiry and support students’ understanding of it across contexts. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27, 516–529. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00414.x.CrossRef

Schellens, T., Van Keer, H., & Valcke, M. (2005). The impact of role assignment on knowledge construction in asynchronous discussion groups: A multilevel analysis. Small Group Research, 36, 704–745. doi:10.1177/1046496405281771.CrossRef

SchoolTV. (2010). Fotosynthese Retrieved 13 mai, 2011, from http://www.schooltv.nl/beeldbank/clip/20100402_fotosynthese01.

Schwamborn, A., Mayer, R. E., Thillmann, H., Leopold, C., & Leutner, D. (2010). Drawing as a generative activity and drawing as a prognostic activity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 872–879.CrossRef

SLO. (2009). Tussendoelen en leerlijnen (tule) Retrieved June 7, 2010, from http://tule.slo.nl/.

Suthers, D. D., & Hundhausen, C. D. (2003). An experimental study of the effects of representational guidance on collaborative learning processes. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12, 183–218. doi:10.1207/S15327809JLS1202_2.CrossRef

Teasley, S. D. (1997). Talking about reasoning: How important is the peer in peer collaboration? In L. B. Resnick, R. Säljö, C. Pontecorvo, & B. Burge (Eds.), Discourse, tools and reasoning: Essays on situated cognition (pp. 361–384). Berlin: Springer.CrossRef

Tolmie, A. K., Topping, K. J., Christie, D., Donaldson, C., Howe, C., Jessiman, E., . . . Thurston, A. (2010). Social effects of collaborative learning in primary schools. Learning and Instruction, 20, 177–191. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.01.005.

van Dijk, A. M., Gijlers, H., Weinberger, A. (in press). Scripted collaborative drawing in elementary science education. Instructional Science. doi:10.1007/s11251-013-9286-1.

van Joolingen, W. R., Bollen, L., & Leenaars, F. A. J. (2010). Using drawings in knowledge modeling and simulation for science teaching. In R. Nkambou, J. Bourdeau, & R. Mizoguchi (Eds.), Advances in intelligent tutoring systems (pp. 266–282). New York: Springer.

van Meter, P. (2001). Drawing construction as a strategy for learning from text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 129–140.CrossRef

van Meter, P., & Garner, J. (2005). The promise and practice of learner-generated drawing: Literature review and synthesis. Educational Psychology Review, 17, 285–325. doi:10.1007/s10648-005-8136-3.CrossRef

van Meter, P., Aleksic, M., Schwartz, A., & Garner, J. (2006). Learner-generated drawing as a strategy for learning from content area text. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 31, 142–166. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2005.04.001.CrossRef

Vollmeyer, R., & Rheinberg, F. (2006). Motivational effects of self-regulated learning with different tasks. Educational Psychology Review, 18, 239–253. doi:10.1007/s10648-006-9017-0.CrossRef

Webb, N. M., & Mastergeorge, A. (2003). Promoting effective helping behavior in peer-directed groups. International Journal of Educational Research, 39, 73–97. doi:10.1016/s0883-0355(03)00074-0.CrossRef

Weinberger, A. (2011). Principles of transactive computer-supported collaboration scripts. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 6, 189–202.

Weinberger, A., & Fischer, F. (2006). A framework to analyze argumentative knowledge construction in computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers & Education, 46, 71–95. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2005.04.003.CrossRef

Weinberger, A., Fischer, F., & Mandl, H. (2001). Scripts and scaffolds in problem-based computer supported learning environments; fostering partcipation and transfer. Munich: Ludwig-Maximilians-University.

Weinberger, A., Ertl, B., Fischer, F., & Mandl, H. (2005). Epistemic and social scripts in computer–supported collaborative learning. Instructional Science, 33, 1–30. doi:10.1007/s11251-004-2322-4.CrossRef

Weinberger, A., Stegmann, K., & Fischer, F. (2007). Knowledge convergence in collaborative learning: Concepts and assessment. Learning and Instruction, 17(4), 416–426. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.03.007.CrossRef

Weinberger, A., Stegmann, K., & Fischer, F. (2010). Learning to argue online: Scripted groups surpass individuals (unscripted groups do not). Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 506–515. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2009.08.007.CrossRef

Titel: Collaborative drawing on a shared digital canvas in elementary science education: The effects of script and task awareness support
verfasst von: Hannie Gijlers
Armin Weinberger
Alieke Mattia van Dijk
Lars Bollen
Wouter van Joolingen
Publikationsdatum: 01.12.2013
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning / Ausgabe 4/2013
Print ISSN: 1556-1607
Elektronische ISSN: 1556-1615
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-013-9180-5

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2013

Real-time mutual gaze perception enhances collaborative learning and collaboration quality

Social argumentation in online synchronous communication

Reigniting CSCL flash themes

Capturing and analyzing verbal and physical collaborative learning interactions at an enriched interactive tabletop