Comparing the effects of a collaboration script and collaborative reflection on promoting knowledge about good collaboration and effective interaction

IF 4.2 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Sebastian Strauß, Isis Tunnigkeit, Julia Eberle, Arlind Avdullahu, Nikol Rummel
{"title":"Comparing the effects of a collaboration script and collaborative reflection on promoting knowledge about good collaboration and effective interaction","authors":"Sebastian Strauß, Isis Tunnigkeit, Julia Eberle, Arlind Avdullahu, Nikol Rummel","doi":"10.1007/s11412-024-09430-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>A key challenge in CSCL research is to find ways to support learners in becoming effective collaborators. While the effectiveness of external collaboration scripts is well established, there is a need for research into support that acknowledges learners’ autonomy during collaboration. In the present study, we compare an external collaboration script and a reflection scaffold to a control condition and examine their effects on learners’ knowledge about effective collaboration and on their groups’ interaction quality. In an experimental study that employed a 1× three-factorial design, 150 university students collaborated in groups of three to solve two information pooling problems. These groups either received an external collaboration script during collaboration, no support during collaboration but a reflection scaffold before beginning to collaborate on the second problem, or no support for their collaboration. Multilevel modeling suggests that learners in the reflection condition gained more knowledge about effective collaboration than learners who collaborated guided by an external collaboration script or learners who did not receive any support. However, we found no effect of the script or the reflection scaffold on the quality of interaction in the subsequent collaboration. Explorative analyses suggest that learners acquired knowledge particularly about those interactions that are required for solving information pooling tasks (e.g., sharing information). We discuss our findings by contrasting the design of the external collaboration script and the reflection scaffold to identify potential mechanisms behind scripting and collaborative reflection and to what extent these forms of support foster collaboration skills and engagement in productive interaction.</p>","PeriodicalId":47189,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-024-09430-7","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A key challenge in CSCL research is to find ways to support learners in becoming effective collaborators. While the effectiveness of external collaboration scripts is well established, there is a need for research into support that acknowledges learners’ autonomy during collaboration. In the present study, we compare an external collaboration script and a reflection scaffold to a control condition and examine their effects on learners’ knowledge about effective collaboration and on their groups’ interaction quality. In an experimental study that employed a 1× three-factorial design, 150 university students collaborated in groups of three to solve two information pooling problems. These groups either received an external collaboration script during collaboration, no support during collaboration but a reflection scaffold before beginning to collaborate on the second problem, or no support for their collaboration. Multilevel modeling suggests that learners in the reflection condition gained more knowledge about effective collaboration than learners who collaborated guided by an external collaboration script or learners who did not receive any support. However, we found no effect of the script or the reflection scaffold on the quality of interaction in the subsequent collaboration. Explorative analyses suggest that learners acquired knowledge particularly about those interactions that are required for solving information pooling tasks (e.g., sharing information). We discuss our findings by contrasting the design of the external collaboration script and the reflection scaffold to identify potential mechanisms behind scripting and collaborative reflection and to what extent these forms of support foster collaboration skills and engagement in productive interaction.

Abstract Image

比较协作脚本和协作反思对促进良好协作和有效互动知识的影响
CSCL 研究的一个主要挑战是找到支持学习者成为有效合作者的方法。虽然外部协作脚本的有效性已得到公认,但仍有必要研究如何支持学习者在协作过程中发挥自主性。在本研究中,我们将外部协作脚本和反思支架与对照条件进行了比较,并考察了它们对学习者有效协作知识和小组互动质量的影响。在一项采用 1× 三因子设计的实验研究中,150 名大学生每三人一组合作解决了两个信息汇集问题。这些小组要么在协作过程中接受外部协作脚本,要么在协作过程中不接受任何支持,但在开始协作解决第二个问题之前接受反思支架,要么在协作过程中不接受任何支持。多层次建模表明,与在外部协作脚本指导下进行协作的学习者或未获得任何支持的学习者相比,反思条件下的学习者获得了更多关于有效协作的知识。然而,我们发现脚本或反思支架对后续合作中的互动质量没有影响。探索性分析表明,学习者获得的知识尤其与解决信息汇集任务(如共享信息)所需的互动有关。我们通过对比外部协作脚本和反思支架的设计来讨论我们的研究结果,以确定脚本和协作反思背后的潜在机制,以及这些支持形式在多大程度上促进了协作技能和参与富有成效的互动。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
18.60%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: An official publication of the International Society of the Learning Sciences, the International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (IJCSCL) fosters a deep understanding of the nature, theory, and practice of computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL). The journal serves as a forum for experts from such disciplines as education, computer science, information technology, psychology, communications, linguistics, anthropology, sociology, and business. Articles investigate how to design the technological settings for collaboration and how people learn in the context of collaborative activity.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信