Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Fixed group and opportunistic collaboration in a CSCL environment

  • Published:
International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study investigated synchronous discourses involving student collaboration in fixed groups during an introductory research methods course’s first 8-week phase, and opportunistic collaboration during its second 8-week phase. Twenty-seven Chinese undergraduates participated in online discourse on Knowledge Forum as part of the course. A multi-faceted analysis was performed to examine different aspects of collaboration – interaction patterns, knowledge characteristics distributed over inquiry, discourse patterns, and knowledge advances that emerged from discourse threads. The results show little variation in social interactions, but substantial differences in knowledge distribution between fixed groups. Groups that were productive in constructive discourse tended to generate higher-level questions and ideas. When engaged in opportunistic collaboration, the students were capable of engaging in a large range of interactions and of contributing higher-level questions and ideas; however, they were constrained by making little use of metacognition and having scattered interactions. Additionally, this study tested the relationship between online discourse and individual performance in the end-of-course assessment tasks. The results indicate that actively participating and contributing high-level ideas were positively correlated with students’ domain knowledge. The study’s implications for understanding online discourse dynamics within and across fixed groups and opportunistic collaboration in a computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) environment are discussed.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  • Arvaja, M., Salovaara, H., Häkkinen, P., & Järvela, S. (2007). Combining individual and group-level perspectives for studying collaborative knowledge construction in context. Learning and Instruction, 17(4), 448–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aviv, R., Erlich, Z., Ravid, G., & Geva, A. (2003). Network analysis of knowledge construction in asynchronous learning networks. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(3), 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barron, B. (2003). When smart groups fail. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(3), 307–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bereiter, C. (2002). Education and mind in the knowledge age. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beuchot, A., & Bullen, M. (2005). Interaction and interpersonality in online discussion forums. Distance Education, 26(1), 67–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bielaczyc, K., & Collins, A. (1999). Learning communities in classrooms: A reconceptualization of educational practice. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models (Vol. II, pp. 269–292). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blatchford, P., Kutnick, P., Baines, E., & Galton, M. (2003). Toward a social pedagogy of classroom group work. International Journal of Educational Research, 39, 153–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caswell, B., & Bielaczyc, K. (2001). Knowledge Forum: altering the relationship between students and scientific knowledge. Education, Communication and Information, 1(3), 181–305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M. T. H. (1997). Quantifying qualitative analyses of verbal data: a practical guide. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(3), 271–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cornelius, L. L., Herrenkohl, L. R., & Wolfstone-Hay, J. (2013). Organizing collaborative learning experiences around subject matter domains: The importance of aligning social and intellectual structures in instruction. In C. E. Hmelo-Silver, C. A. Chinn, C. K. K. Chan, & A. M. O’Donnell (Eds.), The international handbook of collaborative learning (pp. 333–350). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cress, U. (2008). The need for considering multilevel analysis in CSCL research—an appeal for the use of more advanced statistical methods. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3, 69–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Jong, T. (2006). Scaffolds for scientific discovery learning. In J. Elen & D. Clark (Eds.), Handling complexity in learning environments: Theory and research (pp. 107–128). Boston: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Laat, M., Lally, V., & Lipponen, L. (2007). Investigating patterns of interaction in networked learning and computer-supported collaborative learning: a role for social network analysis. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2, 87–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Simone, C. (2008). Problem-based learning: a framework for prospective teachers’ pedagogical problem solving. Teacher Development: An International Journal of Teachers Professional Development, 12(3), 179–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Wever, B., Schellens, T., Valcke, M., & Van Keer, H. (2006). Content analysis schemes to analyze transcripts of online asynchronous discussion groups: a review. Computers & Education, 46(1), 6–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Wever, B., Van Keer, H., Schellens, T., & Valcke, M. (2007). Applying multilevel modelling to content analysis data: methodological issues in the study of role assignment in asynchronous discussion groups. Learning and Instruction, 17(4), 436–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dillenbourg, P. (2002). Over-scripting CSCL: The risks of blending collaborative learning with instructional design. In P. A. Kirschner (Ed.), Three worlds of CSCL. Can we support CSCL? (pp. 61–91). Heerlen: Open Universiteit Nederland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dillenbourg, P., Baker, M., Blaye, A., & O’Malley, C. (1996). The evolution of research on collaborative learning. In E. Spada & P. Reiman (Eds.), Learning in humans and machine: Towards an interdisciplinary learning science. Oxford: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunawardena, C. N., Lowe, C. A., & Anderson, T. (1997). Analysis of a global online debate and the development of an interaction analysis model for examining social construction of knowledge in computer conferencing. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 17(4), 397–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hadwin, A., & Oshige, M. (2011). Self-regulation, coregulation, and socially shared regulation: exploring perspectives of social in self-regulated learning theory. Teachers College Record, 113(2), 240–264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hakkarainen, K. (2003). Emergence of progressive-inquiry culture in computer-supported collaborative learning. Learning Environments Research, 6(2), 199–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hakkarainen, K., Lipponen, L., & Jarvela, S. (2002). Epistemology of inquiry and computer-supported collaborative learning. In T. Koschmann, R. Hall, & N. Miyake (Eds.), CSCL 2: Carrying forward the conversation (pp. 11–41). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haythornthwaite, C. (1996). Social network analysis: an approach and technique for the study of information exchange. Library and Information Science Research, 18(4), 323–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haythornthwaite, C. (2002). Strong, weak, and latent ties and the impact of New Media. The Information Society, 18, 305–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hewitt, J., & Brett, C. (2007). The relationship between class size and online activity patterns in asynchronous computer conferencing environments. Computers & Education, 49(4), 1258–1271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2003). Analyzing collaborative knowledge construction: multiple methods for integrated understanding. Computers & Education, 41(4), 397–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. A. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: a response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 99–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jahng, N., Nielsen, W. S., & Chan, E. K. H. (2010). Collaborative learning in an online course: a comparison of communication patterns in small and whole group activities. Journal of Distance Education, 24(3), 39–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1994). Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, J. (2013). Influence of group size on students’ participation in online discussion forums. Computers & Education, 63, 123–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: an analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumpulainena, K., & Mutanenb, M. (1999). The situated dynamics of peer group interaction: an introduction to an analytic framework. Learning and Instruction, 9(5), 449–473.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lam, I. C. K., & Chan, C. K. K. (2008). Fostering epistemological and conceptual change in chemistry using knowledge building. In P. A. Kirschner, F. Prins, V. Jonker, & G. Kanselaar (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference of the Learning Sciences 2008 (Vol. 1, pp. 461–468). Netherlands: Utrecht University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, E. Y. C., Chan, C. K. K., & Aalst, J. V. (2006). Students assessing their own collaborative knowledge building. International Journal of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(1), 57–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, X. (2001). Designing metacognitive activities. Educational Technology Research & Development, 49(1), 23–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lipponen, L., Rahikainen, M., Lallimo, J., & Hakkarainen, K. (2003). Patterns of participation and discourse in elementary students’ computer-supported collaborative learning. Learning and Instruction, 13, 487–509.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muukkonen, H., & Lakkala, M. (2009). Exploring metaskills of knowledge-creating inquiry in higher education. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(2), 187–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muukkonen, H., Lakkala, M., & Hakkarainen, K. (2005). Technology-mediation and tutoring: how do they shape progressive inquiry discourse? The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(4), 527–565.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2008). Innovating to learn, learning to innovate. Paris: OECD Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paavola, S., Lipponen, L., & Hakkarainen, K. (2004). Models of innovative knowledge communities and three metaphors of learning. Review of Educational Research, 74(4), 557–576.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puntambekar, S., & Kolodner, J. L. (2005). Toward implementing distributed scaffolding: helping students learn science from design. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(2), 185–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qiu, M., Hewitt, J., & Brett, C. (2012). Online class size, note reading, note writing and collaborative discourse. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 7(3), 423–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reffay, C., & Martínez-Monés, A. (2013). Seeing to understand: Using visualizations to understand learning in technology-rich learning environments. In R. Luckin, S. Puntambekar, P. Goodyear, B. Grabowski, J. Underwood, & N. Winters (Eds.), Handbook of design in educational technology (pp. 457–471). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rourke, L., & Kanuka, H. (2007). Barriers to online critical discourse. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2(1), 105–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sawyer, R. K. (2003). Emergence in creativity and development. In R. K. Sawyer, V. John-Steiner, S. Moran, R. J. Sternberg, D. H. Feldman, J. Nakamura, M. Csikszentmihalyi (Eds.), Creativity and development (pp. 12–60). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

  • Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2003). Knowledge building environments: Extending the limits of the possible in education and knowledge work. In A. DiStefano, K. E. Rudestam, & R. Silverman (Eds.), Encyclopedia of distributed learning. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2006). Knowledge building: Theory, pedagogy, and technology. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 97–118). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schrire, S. (2006). Knowledge building in asynchronous discussion groups: going beyond quantitative analysis. Computers & Education, 46(1), 49–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, J. (1991). Social network analysis: A handbook. London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, J. (2000). Social network analysis: A handbook (2nd ed.). Newberry Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, G. (2006). Group cognition: Computer support for building collaborative knowledge. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, G. (2013a). Learning across levels. International Journal of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, 8, 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, G. (2013b). Theories of cognition in collaborative learning. In C. Hmelo-Silver, C. Chinn, C. K. K. Chan, & A. O’Donnell (Eds.), The international handbook of collaborative learning (pp. 74–90). New York: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strijbos, J. W., Martens, R. L., & Jochems, W. M. G. (2004). Designing for interaction: six steps to designing computer-supported group-based learning. Computers & Education, 42, 403–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suthers, D. D., Vatrapu, R., Medina, R., Joseph, S., & Dwyer, N. (2008). Beyond threaded discussion: representational guidance in asynchronous collaborative learning environments. Computers & Education, 50(4), 1103–1127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szewkis, E., Nussbaum, M., Rosen, T., Abalos, J., Denardin, F., Caballero, D., Tagle, A., & Alcoholado, C. (2011). Collaboration within large groups in the classroom. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6(4), 561–575.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tabak, I. (2004). Synergy: a complement to emerging patterns of distributed scaffolding. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 305–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tabak, I., & Reiser, B. J. (1997). Complementary roles of sotware-based scaffolding and teacher-student interactions in inquiry learning. Paper presented at the CSCL: the Second International Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning, Mahwah, NJ.

  • van Aalst, J. (2009). Distinguishing knowledge-sharing, knowledge construction, and knowledge-creation discourses. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(3), 259–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Aalst, J., & Chan, C. K. K. (2007). Student-directed assessment of knowledge building using electronic portfolios. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16, 175–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Aalst, J., & Chan, C. K. K. (2012). Empowering students as knowledge builders. In L. Rowan & C. Bigum (Eds.), Future proofing education: Transformative approaches to new technologies and student diversity in future oriented classrooms (pp. 85–103). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Veerman, A. L., Andriessen, J. E. B., & Kanselaar, G. (2000). Learning through synchronous electronic discussion. Computers & Education, 34, 269–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1999). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb, N. M., Nemer, K. M., Chizhik, A. W., & Sugrue, B. (1998). Equity issues in collaborative group assessment: group composition and performance. American Educational Research Journal, 35, 607–651.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webb, N., Nemer, K., & Zuniga, S. (2002). Short circuits of superconductors? Effects of group composition on high-achieving students’ science assessment performance. American Educational Research Journal, 39(4), 943–989.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wise, A. F., & Chiu, M. M. (2011). Analyzing temporal patterns of knowledge construction in a role-based online discussion. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6(3), 445–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodruff, E., & Meyer, K. (1997). Explanations from intra- and inter-group discourse: students building knowledge in the science classroom. Research in Science Education, 27(1), 25–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yap, K. C., & Chia, K. P. (2010). Knowledge construction and misconstruction: a case study approach in asynchronous discussion using Knowledge Construction – Message Map (KCMM) and Knowledge Construction – Message Graph (KCMG). Computers & Education, 55(4), 1589–1613.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, J., Scardamalia, M., Lamon, M., Messina, R., & Reeve, R. (2007). Socio-cognitive dynamics of knowledge building in the work of 9- and 10-year-olds. Education Technology Research and Development, 55(2), 117–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, J., Scardamalia, M., Reeve, R., & Messina, R. (2009). Designs for collective cogniitve responsibility in knowledge-building communities. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 18, 7–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Education Department, Chifeng University, Hong Shan District, Chifeng, China

    Tuya Siqin

  2. Faculty of Education, University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong, China

    Jan van Aalst & Samuel Kai Wah Chu

Authors
  1. Tuya Siqin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jan van Aalst
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Samuel Kai Wah Chu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tuya Siqin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Siqin, T., van Aalst, J. & Chu, S.K.W. Fixed group and opportunistic collaboration in a CSCL environment. Intern. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn 10, 161–181 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-014-9206-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-014-9206-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation