Changing Tools Changing Attitudes: Effects of introducing a computer system to promote learning at work

The use of computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) tools to manage and support learning at work offers a lot of advantages, such as the increase in the availability and access to knowledge. However, computer systems also introduce new ways of doing things, which may impact on their acceptability and usage in an organisation. The study considers the issue of re-mediating human activity through the introduction of a CSCL system to support collaborative organisational learning (COL) activities as a way of promoting learning at work. A comparative study into the effects of remediating work practices in an organisation was conducted 'before' and 'after' the introduction of a CSCL system using three selected constitutive elements of COL namely: collaboration, knowledge sharing and interactivity. The study used activity theory as a framework for examining the support mechanisms for the selected elements of COL from a social and cultural perspective in terms of how they occur, and how they are supported in context. Findings highlighted the importance of accounting for social and cultural issues relating to the tool user, prior to the introduction of a CSCL system to support learning at work, as these could impact on the usage and acceptability of such a tool

Designing electronic collaborative learning environments

Electronic collaborative learning environments for learning and working are in vogue. Designers design them according to their own constructivist interpretations of what collaborative learning is and what it should achieve. Educators employ them with different educational approaches and in diverse situations to achieve different ends. Students use them, sometimes very enthusiastically, but often in a perfunctory way. Finally, researchers study them and—as is usually the case when apples and oranges are compared—find no conclusive evidence as to whether or not they work, where they do or do not work, when they do or do not work and, most importantly, why, they do or do not work. This contribution presents an affordance framework for such collaborative learning environments; an interaction design procedure for designing, developing, and implementing them; and an educational affordance approach to the use of tasks in those environments. It also presents the results of three projects dealing with these three issues

Formative peer assessment in a CSCL environment

In this case study our aim was to gain more insight in the possibilities of qualitative formative peer assessment in a computer supported collaborative learning (CSCL) environment. An approach was chosen in which peer assessment was operationalised in assessment assignments and assessment tools that were embedded in the course material. The course concerned a higher education case-based virtual seminar, in which students were asked to conduct research and write a report in small multidisciplinary teams. The assessment assignments contained the discussion of assessment criteria, the assessment of a group report of a fellow group, and writing an assessment report. A list of feedback rules was one of the assessment tools. A qualitative oriented study was conducted, focussing on the attitude of students towards peer assessment and practical use of peer assessment assignments and tools. Results showed that students’ attitude towards peer assessment was positive and that assessment assignments had added value. However, not all students fulfilled all assessment assignments. Recommendations for implementation of peer assessment in CSCL environments as well as suggestions for future research are discussed

Collaborative trails in e-learning environments

This deliverable focuses on collaboration within groups of learners, and hence collaborative trails. We begin by reviewing the theoretical background to collaborative learning and looking at the kinds of support that computers can give to groups of learners working collaboratively, and then look more deeply at some of the issues in designing environments to support collaborative learning trails and at tools and techniques, including collaborative filtering, that can be used for analysing collaborative trails. We then review the state-of-the-art in supporting collaborative learning in three different areas – experimental academic systems, systems using mobile technology (which are also generally academic), and commercially available systems. The final part of the deliverable presents three scenarios that show where technology that supports groups working collaboratively and producing collaborative trails may be heading in the near future

The effect of functional roles on group efficiency

The usefulness of ‘roles’ as a pedagogical approach to support small group performance can be often read, however, their effect is rarely empirically assessed. Roles promote cohesion and responsibility and decrease so-called ‘process losses’ caused by coordination demands. In addition, roles can increase awareness of intra-group interaction. In this article, the effect of functional roles on group performance, efficiency and collaboration during computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) was investigated with questionnaires and quantitative content analysis of e-mail communication. A comparison of thirty-three questionnaire observations, distributed over ten groups in two research conditions: role (n = 5, N = 14) and non-role (n = 5, N = 19), revealed no main effect for performance (grade). A latent variable was interpreted as ‘perceived group efficiency’ (PGE). Multilevel modelling (MLM) yielded a positive marginal effect of PGE. Groups in the role condition appear to be more aware of their efficiency, compared to groups in the ‘non-role’ condition, regardless whether the group performs well or poor. Content analysis reveals that students in the role condition contribute more ‘task content’ focussed statements. This is, however, not as hypothesised due to the premise that roles decrease coordination and thus increase content focused statements; in fact, roles appear to stimulate coordination and simultaneously the amount of ‘task content’ focussed statements increases

From multiple perspectives to shared understanding

The aim of this study was to explore how learners operating in a small group reach shared understanding as they work out joint research questions and build a theoretical framework and to identify the resources and tools they used in the process. The learners’ own interpretations of their group activities and learning were also taken into account. The data, consisting of group discussions and the documents produced by the group, were subjected to a qualitative content analysis. The group members employed a variety of resources and tools to exchange their individual perspectives and achieve shared understanding. Summaries of relevant literature laid a foundation for the group’s theoretical discussions. Reflective comparisons between their book knowledge and their personal experiences of online interaction and collaboration were frequent, suggesting that such juxtapositions may have enhanced their learning by intertwining the content to be mastered and the activities entailed by this particular content

A framework to analyze argumentative knowledge construction in computer-supported collaborative learning

Computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) is often based on written argumentative discourse of learners, who discuss their perspectives on a problem with the goal to acquire knowledge. Lately, CSCL research focuses on the facilitation of specific processes of argumentative knowledge construction, e.g., with computer-supported collaboration scripts. In order to refine process-oriented instructional support, such as scripts, we need to measure the influence of scripts on specific processes of argumentative knowledge construction. In this article, we propose a multi-dimensional approach to analyze argumentative knowledge construction in CSCL from sampling and segmentation of the discourse corpora to the analysis of four process dimensions (participation, epistemic, argumentative, social mode)