54,418 research outputs found

    Socially shared metacognitive regulation during collaborative learning processes in student dyads and small groups

    Get PDF
    Traditionally metacognition has been theorised, methodologically studied and empirically tested from the standpoint mainly of individuals and their learning contexts. In this dissertation the emergence of metacognition is analysed more broadly. The aim of the dissertation was to explore socially shared metacognitive regulation (SSMR) as part of collaborative learning processes taking place in student dyads and small learning groups. The specific aims were to extend the concept of individual metacognition to SSMR, to develop methods to capture and analyse SSMR and to validate the usefulness of the concept of SSMR in two different learning contexts; in face-to-face student dyads solving mathematical word problems and also in small groups taking part in inquiry-based science learning in an asynchronous computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) environment. This dissertation is comprised of four studies. In Study I, the main aim was to explore if and how metacognition emerges during problem solving in student dyads and then to develop a method for analysing the social level of awareness, monitoring, and regulatory processes emerging during the problem solving. Two dyads comprised of 10-year-old students who were high-achieving especially in mathematical word problem solving and reading comprehension were involved in the study. An in-depth case analysis was conducted. Data consisted of over 16 (30–45 minutes) videotaped and transcribed face-to-face sessions. The dyads solved altogether 151 mathematical word problems of different difficulty levels in a game-format learning environment. The interaction flowchart was used in the analysis to uncover socially shared metacognition. Interviews (also stimulated recall interviews) were conducted in order to obtain further information about socially shared metacognition. The findings showed the emergence of metacognition in a collaborative learning context in a way that cannot solely be explained by individual conception. The concept of socially-shared metacognition (SSMR) was proposed. The results highlighted the emergence of socially shared metacognition specifically in problems where dyads encountered challenges. Small verbal and nonverbal signals between students also triggered the emergence of socially shared metacognition. Additionally, one dyad implemented a system whereby they shared metacognitive regulation based on their strengths in learning. Overall, the findings suggested that in order to discover patterns of socially shared metacognition, it is important to investigate metacognition over time. However, it was concluded that more research on socially shared metacognition, from larger data sets, is needed. These findings formed the basis of the second study. In Study II, the specific aim was to investigate whether socially shared metacognition can be reliably identified from a large dataset of collaborative face-to-face mathematical word problem solving sessions by student dyads. We specifically examined different difficulty levels of tasks as well as the function and focus of socially shared metacognition. Furthermore, the presence of observable metacognitive experiences at the beginning of socially shared metacognition was explored. Four dyads participated in the study. Each dyad was comprised of high-achieving 10-year-old students, ranked in the top 11% of their fourth grade peers (n=393). Dyads were from the same data set as in Study I. The dyads worked face-to-face in a computer-supported, game-format learning environment. Problem-solving processes for 251 tasks at three difficulty levels taking place during 56 (30–45 minutes) lessons were video-taped and analysed. Baseline data for this study were 14 675 turns of transcribed verbal and nonverbal behaviours observed in four study dyads. The micro-level analysis illustrated how participants moved between different channels of communication (individual and interpersonal). The unit of analysis was a set of turns, referred to as an ‘episode’. The results indicated that socially shared metacognition and its function and focus, as well as the appearance of metacognitive experiences can be defined in a reliable way from a larger data set by independent coders. A comparison of the different difficulty levels of the problems suggested that in order to trigger socially shared metacognition in small groups, the problems should be more difficult, as opposed to moderately difficult or easy. Although socially shared metacognition was found in collaborative face-to-face problem solving among high-achieving student dyads, more research is needed in different contexts. This consideration created the basis of the research on socially shared metacognition in Studies III and IV. In Study III, the aim was to expand the research on SSMR from face-to-face mathematical problem solving in student dyads to inquiry-based science learning among small groups in an asynchronous computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) environment. The specific aims were to investigate SSMR’s evolvement and functions in a CSCL environment and to explore how SSMR emerges at different phases of the inquiry process. Finally, individual student participation in SSMR during the process was studied. An in-depth explanatory case study of one small group of four girls aged 12 years was carried out. The girls attended a class that has an entrance examination and conducts a language-enriched curriculum. The small group solved complex science problems in an asynchronous CSCL environment, participating in research-like processes of inquiry during 22 lessons (á 45–minute). Students’ network discussion were recorded in written notes (N=640) which were used as study data. A set of notes, referred to here as a ‘thread’, was used as the unit of analysis. The inter-coder agreement was regarded as substantial. The results indicated that SSMR emerges in a small group’s asynchronous CSCL inquiry process in the science domain. Hence, the results of Study III were in line with the previous Study I and Study II and revealed that metacognition cannot be reduced to the individual level alone. The findings also confirm that SSMR should be examined as a process, since SSMR can evolve during different phases and that different SSMR threads overlapped and intertwined. Although the classification of SSMR’s functions was applicable in the context of CSCL in a small group, the dominant function was different in the asynchronous CSCL inquiry in the small group in a science activity than in mathematical word problem solving among student dyads (Study II). Further, the use of different analytical methods provided complementary findings about students’ participation in SSMR. The findings suggest that it is not enough to code just a single written note or simply to examine who has the largest number of notes in the SSMR thread but also to examine the connections between the notes. As the findings of the present study are based on an in-depth analysis of a single small group, further cases were examined in Study IV, as well as looking at the SSMR’s focus, which was also studied in a face-to-face context. In Study IV, the general aim was to investigate the emergence of SSMR with a larger data set from an asynchronous CSCL inquiry process in small student groups carrying out science activities. The specific aims were to study the emergence of SSMR in the different phases of the process, students’ participation in SSMR, and the relation of SSMR’s focus to the quality of outcomes, which was not explored in previous studies. The participants were 12-year-old students from the same class as in Study III. Five small groups consisting of four students and one of five students (N=25) were involved in the study. The small groups solved ill-defined science problems in an asynchronous CSCL environment, participating in research-like processes of inquiry over a total period of 22 hours. Written notes (N=4088) detailed the network discussions of the small groups and these constituted the study data. With these notes, SSMR threads were explored. As in Study III, the thread was used as the unit of analysis. In total, 332 notes were classified as forming 41 SSMR threads. Inter-coder agreement was assessed by three coders in the different phases of the analysis and found to be reliable. Multiple methods of analysis were used. Results showed that SSMR emerged in all the asynchronous CSCL inquiry processes in the small groups. However, the findings did not reveal any significantly changing trend in the emergence of SSMR during the process. As a main trend, the number of notes included in SSMR threads differed significantly in different phases of the process and small groups differed from each other. Although student participation was seen as highly dispersed between the students, there were differences between students and small groups. Furthermore, the findings indicated that the amount of SSMR during the process or participation structure did not explain the differences in the quality of outcomes for the groups. Rather, when SSMRs were focused on understanding and procedural matters, it was associated with achieving high quality learning outcomes. In turn, when SSMRs were focused on incidental and procedural matters, it was associated with low level learning outcomes. Hence, the findings imply that the focus of any emerging SSMR is crucial to the quality of the learning outcomes. Moreover, the findings encourage the use of multiple research methods for studying SSMR. In total, the four studies convincingly indicate that a phenomenon of socially shared metacognitive regulation also exists. This means that it was possible to define the concept of SSMR theoretically, to investigate it methodologically and to validate it empirically in two different learning contexts across dyads and small groups. In-depth micro-level case analysis in Studies I and III showed the possibility to capture and analyse in detail SSMR during the collaborative process, while in Studies II and IV, the analysis validated the emergence of SSMR in larger data sets. Hence, validation was tested both between two environments and within the same environments with further cases. As a part of this dissertation, SSMR’s detailed functions and foci were revealed. Moreover, the findings showed the important role of observable metacognitive experiences as the starting point of SSMRs. It was apparent that problems dealt with by the groups should be rather difficult if SSMR is to be made clearly visible. Further, individual students’ participation was found to differ between students and groups. The multiple research methods employed revealed supplementary findings regarding SSMR. Finally, when SSMR was focused on understanding and procedural matters, this was seen to lead to higher quality learning outcomes. Socially shared metacognition regulation should therefore be taken into consideration in students’ collaborative learning at school similarly to how an individual’s metacognition is taken into account in individual learning.Siirretty Doriast

    Examining deliberative interactions for socially shared regulation in collaborative learning

    Get PDF
    Abstract. Socially shared regulation in learning (SSRL) is essential for collaborative problem-solving and innovation that are required in today’s intricated and interconnected world. Recent advancements in learning analytics (LA) and artificial intelligence (AI) have shown promising potential for delivering a more comprehensive understanding of the temporal and cyclical processes of SSRL. It remains lacking, however, a validated standard for integrating theoretical constructs, methodological assumptions, and data structure in the field, which leads to a misalignment between the theoretical and technical aspects. This thus sparks a pressing need for interdisciplinary efforts to revise and devise theoretical and methodological frameworks that take these factors into consideration. In line with this call, the thesis presents a novel approach to applying AI to advance the field of SSRL. It comprises two empirical studies that employed AI-enabled techniques to (1) record and retain qualitative information from video data of group collaboration and (2) analyse their interaction. In particular, the studies examined the sequences of group-level interactions from the theoretical perspective of SSRL and a more micro-lens of deliberative negotiation. The theoretical framework of these studies is based on the recent conceptualisation of regulation triggering events as specific events (often negative incidents or obstacles) that stimulate regulatory responses and aid in locating them. The pattern of group interactions in response to different triggering events was then examined using processing mining and unsupervised AI machine learning clustering, agglomerative hierarchical clustering (AHC). The findings suggest that regulation triggering events prompt an immediate shift in group interaction responses, in which they engage in more metacognitive and socioemotional interaction. Two types of deliberation sequences were identified through AHC analysis, with differing regulation and collaboration practices: the plan and implementation approach (PIA) and the trials and failures approach (TFA). A key observation of this study is that the shift in group interaction sequence in response to the regulatory trigger is only temporary. The majority of groups soon revert to or maintain the initial type of deliberation sequence they developed at the beginning and do not adopt it in response to regulatory demands. Theoretically, the thesis makes contributions to understanding SSRL in collaborative learning, particularly the role played by regulation triggering events and deliberation processes in finding, capturing, and modelling SSRL traces. Methodologically, this thesis demonstrates a novel human-AI collaboration approach to examine regulatory responses to triggering events through group-level deliberation to study SSRL in collaboration. Practically, the findings of this thesis suggest that educators, facilitators, and AIED tool designers need to evaluate the regulatory needs of learners and offer appropriate guidance and support in order to ensure effective collaboration

    Theoretical and Conceptual Approaches to Co-Regulation: A Theoretical Review

    Get PDF
    During the last two decades, interpersonal regulation in natural and digital learning environments has gained importance. Ever since the first conceptual and methodological precisions regarding collaborative learning were made, educational psychology has focused its interest on analyzing collective regulation of motivation, cognition, and behavior. Despite the fact that the body of research on co-regulation has grown, emerging epistemological frameworks evidence a lack of conceptual and theoretical clarity. In response to this situation, the authors propose a conceptual approach in order to address interpersonal regulation in four aspects: first, they describe three learning theories which have been used to study co-regulation. Second, the authors recommend a conceptual delimitation of terms regarding the learning theories on social regulation. Third, they highlight diffuse boundaries between theoretical approaches and terms used in the literature on co-regulation. Finally, the authors suggest some challenges the researchers in this field face

    Socially Shared Metacognitive Regulation in Asynchronous CSCL in Science: Functions, Evolution and Participation

    Get PDF
    The significance of socially shared metacognitive regulation (SSMR) in collaborative learning is gaining momentum. To date, however, there is still a paucity of research of how SSMR is manifested in asynchronous computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL), and hardly any systematic investigation of SSMR’s functions and evolution across different phases of complex collaborative learning activities. Furthermore, how individual students influence group regulatory effort is not well known and even less how they participate in SSMR over the entire collaborative learning process. The multi-method, in-depth case study presented in this article addresses these gaps by scrutinizing the participation of a small group of students in SSMR in asynchronous computer supported collaborative inquiry learning. The networked discussion, consisting of 640 notes, was used as baseline data. The sets of notes, which formed nine SSMR threads, were identified and their functions analyzed. Several analytical methods, including social network analysis, were used to investigate various aspects of individual participation. The findings show that some SSMR threads lasted over an extended period, and they sometimes intertwined or overlapped. Furthermore, SSMR threads were found to play different functions, mainly inhibiting the perceived inappropriate direction of the ongoing cognitive process. Finally, SSMR was found in all phases of the process – but with some variation. The use of different analytical methods was critical as this provided a variety of complementary insights into students’ participation in SSMR. The value of using multiple, rigorous analytical methods to understand SSMR’s significance over the entire course of an asynchronous CSCL activity is discussed

    Exploring sequences of challenges and regulation in collaborative learning with process mining methodology

    Get PDF
    Abstract. The present study investigated the sequential interplay between cognitive and emotional/motivational challenges and regulation in collaborative learning groups of two profiles, high and low performing groups. The 77 participants were students of higher education institution, who collaboratively worked on a computer-based simulation in groups of three. The video data of approximately 34 hours was coded on a fine-grained level. Sequential analysis was applied by means of process mining methodology. The results show that in both groups cognitive regulation (i.e., planning, monitoring, and controlling) has a strong sequential relationship with emotional/motivational regulation than cognitive challenges. Unlike low performing groups (LPGs), high performing groups (HPGs) triggered a strong sequential relationship between cognitive regulation and emotional/motivational regulation to tackle cognitive challenges. Moreover, the results reveal that both groups initiated a regulatory process of monitoring. However, for LPGs monitoring manifested more sequences of emotional/motivational challenges which deterred them to run a regulatory process of controlling. Whereas HPGs were active enough to not only monitor but also control their learning by applying different strategies to progress in the task. Regarding statistical analysis, no difference was observed between HPGs and LPGs in terms of duration and frequency of each coding category. In addition, the process models of both groups also demonstrate that one regulatory process (i.e., cognitive) could have more and stronger sequential relationship with other regulatory processes (i.e., emotion/motivation) than cognitive and emotional/motivational challenges. The current study establishes theoretical grounding to advance understanding about the sequential relationship between challenges and regulation in low and high performing collaborative groups. On the practical implication’s front, it also provides empirical insights to develop pedagogical methodologies and designed tailored support to help collaborative groups deal with challenges by initiating regulatory processes to proceed in learning task

    How does the Type of Task Influence the Performance and Social Regulation of Collaborative Learning?

    Full text link
    In this paper we analyze the effects of the type of collaborative task (elaboration of concept map vs elaboration of expository summary) on the performance and on the level of collaboration achieved by Mexican university students in the multimedia learning of a social sciences content (Communication Psychology). Likewise, the processes of social regulation that are put into play in these collaborative tasks are described. Forty-five students (17 women and 28 men) grouped in 15 triads participated in the study. Each triad was assigned to one of the two collaborative conditions: elaboration of concept map (8 groups) and elaboration of an expository summary (7 groups). It was monitored that there were no significant previous differences between two conditions regarding: reading comprehension, reading comprehension regulation strategies and domain-specific prior knowledge. To evaluate the performance in learning, the quality of the proposals made in concept maps and summaries were taken adapting the procedure proposed by Haugwitz, Nesbit and Sandmann (2010), and also the results obtained by the students in a multiple-choice questionnaire about the knowledge area. Likewise, the level of collaboration perceived by each member of the teams was examined using a Collaboration questionnaire developed by Chan and Chan (2011). The identification and characterization of the processes of social regulation was carried out through a qualitative analysis of the exchanges registered during the collaborative activity, considering the type (co-regulation and shared regulation) and the regulation orientation (directed to the task or to the management of collaboration). The quantitative results analysis showed the existence of significant effects working with collaborative concept maps in the knowledge acquired during the collaborative task and in some of the indicators of perceived collaboration. Although no significant statistical differences were found, in the teams that elaborated expository summaries, a predominance of episodes of regulation directed towards the cognitive activity of the collaborative task was observed, being scarce, in both conditions, the episodes of social regulation directed towards collaboration within the triadsThis work integrates a series of studies in progress on collaboration and digital technologies that were carried out within the framework of the research project called "Communicative innovation and management in organizations" of the Thematic Network of Academic Collaboration "Management, Culture and Communication in Organizations", which was supported by PRODEP-SEP (México) DSA/103.5/15/11048 (UASLP-CA-232), in which the first author participate
    • …
    corecore