Skip to main content

Examining the Dynamic of Participation Level on Group Contribution in a Global, STEM-Focused Digital Makerspace Community

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Advances in Quantitative Ethnography (ICQE 2019)

Part of the book series: Communications in Computer and Information Science ((CCIS,volume 1112))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Passive behavior in collaborative group settings is often associated with negative or no contributions to the group (social loafing). This paper examines low and high participation levels of students in a virtual collaborative group setting within a global, STEM-focused digital makerspace community. The results of using epistemic network analysis show that both high and low participation levels contributed to the overall balance of the group discourse, overcoming social loafing behavior. High participation level students provided social aspects that contributed to the development of a safe social space for sharing, while low level participation provided content focused dialogue for the group.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Caspi, A., Gorsky, P., Chajut, E.: The influence of group size on nonmandatory asynchronous instructional discussion groups. Internet High. Educ. 6(3), 227–240 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Cohen, E.G.: Restructuring the classroom: conditions for productive small groups. Rev. Educ. Res. 64(1), 1–35 (1994)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. Espino, D.P., Lee, S.B., Eagan, B., Hamilton, E.R.: An initial look at the developing culture of online global meet-ups in establishing a collaborative, STEM media-making community. In: Proceedings of the International Conference for Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL2019). Lyon, France, International Society for Learning Sciences (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Frederiksen, J.R., Sipusic, M., Sherin, M., Wolfe, E.W.: Video portfolio assessment: creating a framework for viewing the functions of teaching. Educ. Assess. 5(4), 225–297 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Herrenkohl, L.R., Cornelius, L.: Investigating elementary students’ scientific and historical argumentation. J. Learn. Sci. 22(3), 413–461 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2013.799475

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Hudson, J.M., Bruckman, A.S.: The bystander effect: a lens for understanding patterns of participation. J. Learn. Sci. 13(2), 165–195 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1302_2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Karau, S., Williams, K.: Social loafing: a meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 65(4), 681–706 (1993)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Kwon, K., Hong, R.-Y., Laffey, J.M.: The educational impact of metacognitive group coordination in computer-supported collaborative learning. Comput. Hum. Behav. 29(4), 1271–1281 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P.A., Vermeulen, M.: Social aspects of CSCL environments: a research framework. Educ. Psychol. 48(4), 229–242 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Latané, B., Williams, K., Harkins, S.: Many hands make light the work: the causes and consequences of social loafing. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 37(6), 822–832 (1979). https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.37.6.822

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Liden, R., Wayne, S., Jaworski, R., Bennett, N.: Social loafing: a field investigation. J. Manage. 30(2), 285–304 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jm.2003.02.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Marquart, C.L., Hinojosa, C., Swiecki, Z., Eagan, B., Shaffer, D.W.: Epistemic Network Analysis (Version 1.5.2) (2018). http://app.epistemicnetwork.org

  13. Piezon, S.L., Donaldson, R.L.: Online groups and social loafing: understanding student-group interactions. Online J. Distance Learn. Adm. 8(4), 1–11 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Preece, J.: Online Communities: Designing Usability, Supporting Sociability. Wiley, New York (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Rehm, M., Gijselaers, W., Segers, M.: The impact of hierarchical positions on communities of learning. Int. J. Comput.-Support. Collaborative Learn. 10(2), 117–138 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge funding support from the US National Science Foundation for the work this paper reports. Views appearing in this paper do not reflect those of the funding agency.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Danielle P. Espino .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Espino, D.P., Lee, S.B., Van Tress, L., Hamilton, E.R. (2019). Examining the Dynamic of Participation Level on Group Contribution in a Global, STEM-Focused Digital Makerspace Community. In: Eagan, B., Misfeldt, M., Siebert-Evenstone, A. (eds) Advances in Quantitative Ethnography. ICQE 2019. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 1112. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33232-7_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33232-7_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-33231-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-33232-7

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics