The effects of inspecting and constructing part-task-specific visualizations on team and individual learning

This study examined whether inspecting and constructing different part-task-specific visualizations differentially affects learning. To this end, a complex business-economics problem was structured into three phase-related part-tasks: (1) determining core concepts, (2) proposing multiple solutions, and (3) coming to a single solution. Each phase was foreseen with a part-task-specific representational tool facilitating visualization of the domain-content (i.e., a conceptual, causal and simulation tool respectively for the subsequent phases). Whereas all teams of learners (N = 17) were scripted to carry out the part-tasks in the predefined order, teams were instructed to (1) inspect expert visualizations (n = 8) or (2) construct their own domain-specific visualizations (n = 9). Results indicate that constructing visualizations, in comparison to inspecting them, evokes more meaningful discussion of the domain-content beneficially affecting team complex learning-task performance and individual learning gains (i.e., higher post-test score).

[1]  Youngmin Lee,et al.  Viewing or visualising - which concept map strategy works best on problem-solving performance? , 2005, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[2]  Wolfgang Schnotz,et al.  External and internal representations in the acquisition and use of knowledge: visualization effects on mental model construction , 2008 .

[3]  Richard Catrambone,et al.  Making the abstract concrete: Visualizing mathematical solution procedures , 2006, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[4]  J. Mergendoller,et al.  The Effectiveness of Problem-Based Instruction: A Comparative Study of Instructional Methods and Student Characteristics. , 2006 .

[5]  Gijsbert Erkens,et al.  The effects of constructing domain-specific representations on coordination processes and learning in a CSCL-environment , 2012, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[6]  Hermann G. Ebner,et al.  Improving cross-content transfer in text processing by means of active graphical representation , 2003 .

[7]  S. Ainsworth.  DeFT: A Conceptual Framework for Considering Learning with Multiple Representations. , 2006 .

[8]  Olusola O. Adesope,et al.  Learning With Concept and Knowledge Maps: A Meta-Analysis , 2006 .

[9]  P. V. Meter,et al.  The Promise and Practice of Learner-Generated Drawing: Literature Review and Synthesis , 2005 .

[10]  Frank Fischer,et al.  Internal and external scripts in computer-supported collaborative inquiry learning , 2007, Learning and Instruction.

[11]  David W. Johnson,et al.  An Educational Psychology Success Story: Social Interdependence Theory and Cooperative Learning , 2009 .

[12]  Michelene T. H. Chi,et al.  Expertise in Problem Solving. , 1981 .

[13]  N. Mercer,et al.  Methods for studying the processes of interaction and collaborative activity in computer-based educational activities , 2004 .

[14]  Ton de Jong,et al.  The influence of learner-generated domain representations on learning combinatorics and probability theory , 2010, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[15]  Hans Spada,et al.  Learning to Relate Qualitative and Quantitative Problem Representations in a Model-Based Setting for Collaborative Problem Solving , 1999 .

[16]  Benjamin S. Bloom,et al.  A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives , 2000 .

[17]  Daniel D. Suthers,et al.  Towards a Systematic Study of Representational Guidance for Collaborative Learing Discourse , 2001, J. Univers. Comput. Sci..

[18]  Fred Paas,et al.  The effects of constructivist learning environments: a commentary , 2008 .

[19]  R. Cox.  Representation construction, externalised cognition and individual differences , 1999 .

[20]  Andrew T. Stull,et al.  Three Experimental Comparisons of Learner-generated versus Author-provided Graphic Organizers , 2007 .

[21]  Yvonne Kammerer,et al.  The effects of realism in learning with dynamic visualizations , 2009 .

[22]  Neff Walker,et al.  A classification of visual representations , 1994, CACM.

[23]  Marian Petre,et al.  Why looking isn't always seeing: readership skills and graphical programming , 1995, CACM.

[24]  Ruey-Shiang Shaw,et al.  A study of learning performance of e-learning materials design with knowledge maps , 2010, Comput. Educ..

[25]  Richard E. Clark,et al.  Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching , 2006 .

[26]  D. Cicchetti,et al.  A Computer Program for Assessing Specific Category Rater Agreement for Qualitative Data , 1978 .

[27]  Yohsuke Ohtsubo,et al.  Should information be redundantly distributed among group members? Effective use of group memory in collaborative problem solving , 2005 .

[28]  J. Sweller.  Implications of Cognitive Load Theory for Multimedia Learning , 2005, The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning.

[29]  Brian J. Reiser,et al.  Scaffolding Complex Learning: The Mechanisms of Structuring and Problematizing Student Work , 2004, The Journal of the Learning Sciences.

[30]  Jeroen Janssen,et al.  Successfully carrying out complex learning-tasks through guiding teams’ qualitative and quantitative reasoning , 2011, Instructional Science.

[31]  Tina Seufert.  Supporting Coherence Formation in Learning from Multiple Representations , 2003 .

[32]  J. Michael Spector.  Cognition and learning in the digital age: Promising research and practice , 2008, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[33]  Fred Paas,et al.  Task complexity as a driver for collaborative learning efficiency: The collective working-memory effect , 2011 .

[34]  Jeroen Janssen,et al.  Automatic coding of online collaboration protocols , 2006 .

[35]  T. S. Hilbert,et al.  Concept mapping as a follow-up strategy to learning from texts: what characterizes good and poor mappers? , 2008 .

[36]  Nasser Mansour,et al.  Exploring creative thinking in graphically mediated synchronous dialogues , 2010, Comput. Educ..

[37]  Heinz Mandl,et al.  Supporting learning using external representations , 2008, Comput. Educ..

[38]  C. Hmelo‐Silver,et al.  Scaffolding and Achievement in Problem-Based and Inquiry Learning: A Response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006) , 2007 .

[39]  J. Merriënboer,et al.  Selecting learning tasks: Effects of adaptation and shared control on learning efficiency and task involvement☆ , 2008 .

[40]  Daniel D. Suthers,et al.  Comparing the roles of representations in face-to-face and online computer supported collaborative learning , 2003, Comput. Educ..

[41]  Tammy Schellens,et al.  Fostering knowledge construction in university students through asynchronous discussion groups , 2006, Comput. Educ..

[42]  Detlev Leutner,et al.  Cognitive load and science text comprehension: Effects of drawing and mentally imagining text content , 2009, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[43]  David H. Jonassen,et al.  Using Cognitive Tools to Represent Problems , 2003 .

[44]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  Dyadic Data Analysis , 2006 .

[45]  Vanessa Paz Dennen,et al.  Looking for evidence of learning: Assessment and analysis methods for online discourse , 2008, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[46]  D. Schiffrin.  Discourse markers: Temporal adverbs: now and then , 1987 .

[47]  David H. Jonassen,et al.  Designing effective supports for causal reasoning , 2008 .

[48]  Ioanna Vekiri.  What Is the Value of Graphical Displays in Learning? , 2002 .

[49]  Paul A. Kirschner,et al.  Ten Steps to Complex Learning: A Systematic Approach to Four-Component Instructional Design , 2007 .

[50]  Richard F. Schmid,et al.  Supporting the Learning Process with Collaborative Concept Mapping Using Computer-Based Communication Tools and Processes , 2001 .

[51]  John D. Bigelow,et al.  Using Problem-Based Learning to Develop Skills in Solving Unstructured Problems , 2004 .

[52]  Jiajie Zhang,et al.  The Nature of External Representations in Problem Solving , 1997, Cogn. Sci..

[53]  F. Fischer,et al.  Fostering collaborative knowledge construction with visualization tools , 2002 .

[54]  Jeroen Janssen,et al.  Automatic coding of dialogue acts in collaboration protocols , 2008, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[55]  Michelle Cook.  Visual representations in science education: The influence of prior knowledge and cognitive load theory on instructional design principles , 2006 .

[56]  Jerry Andriessen,et al.  Representational Tools in Computer-Supported Collaborative Argumentation-Based Learning: How Dyads Work With Constructed and Inspected Argumentative Diagrams , 2007 .

[57]  Patrick R. Laughlin,et al.  Group-to-Individual Problem-Solving Transfer , 2008 .

[58]  Geraldine Clarebout,et al.  Supporting learners: Increasing complexity? , 2007, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[59]  Sofie M. M. Loyens,et al.  Understanding the effects of constructivist learning environments: introducing a multi-directional approach , 2008 .

[60]  Robert J. Dufresne,et al.  Constraining Novices to Perform Expertlike Problem Analyses: Effects on Schema Acquisition , 1992 .

[61]  T. Jong,et al.  Comparing two types of model progression in an inquiry learning environment with modelling facilities , 2011 .

[62]  N. Ding,et al.  Visualizing the sequential process of knowledge elaboration in computer-supported collaborative problem solving , 2009, Comput. Educ..

[63]  C. Boxtel.  Studying Peer Interaction from Three Perspectives , 2004 .