A new method to assess the quality of collaborative process in CSCL

In CSCL research, the collaborative process - the way people collaborate while working on tasks and learning -- is of central importance. Instructional measures are being developed to improve the quality of the collaboration which itself determines to a great extent the results of working and learning in groups. However, assessing collaborative process is not easy. We have developed a new assessment method by quantitatively rating nine qualitatively defined characteristic dimensions of collaboration. In this paper, we first describe how these dimensions were extracted from video-recordings of dyads collaborating to solve interdisciplinary tasks. Then we explain how the resulting rating system was applied to and tested on another sample. Based on positive findings from this application, we argue that the new method can be recommended for different areas of CSCL research.

[1]  Verlin B. Hinsz,et al.  The emerging conceptualization of groups as information processors. , 1997, Psychological bulletin.

[2]  Herbert H. Clark,et al.  Grounding in communication , 1991, Perspectives on socially shared cognition.

[3]  N. Webb.  Peer interaction and learning in small groups , 1989 .

[4]  Steve Whittaker,et al.  The role of vision in face-to-face and mediated communication. , 1997 .

[5]  Stephanie D. Teasley,et al.  The Construction of Shared Knowledge in Collaborative Problem Solving , 1995 .

[6]  Philipp Mayring.  Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse : Grundlagen und Techniken , 2003 .

[7]  Nikol Rummel,et al.  Solving the Case Together : The Challenge of Net-based Interdisciplinary Collaboration , 2001 .

[8]  Barbara Wasson,et al.  The Organisation of Interaction in Distributed Collaborative Learning , 2003, CSCL.

[9]  César A. Collazos,et al.  A method for evaluating computer-supported collaborative learning processes , 2004, Int. J. Comput. Appl. Technol..

[10]  N. Rummel,et al.  Learning to Collaborate: An Instructional Approach to Promoting Collaborative Problem Solving in Computer-Mediated Settings , 2005 .

[11]  Hans Spada,et al.  Barriers and Biases in Computer-Mediated Knowledge Communication , 2010 .

[12]  F. Fischer,et al.  Being there or being where? Videoconferencing and cooperative learning , 2000 .

[13]  Nikol Rummel,et al.  Cracking the nut: but which nutcracker to use? diversity in approaches to analyzing collaborative processes in technology-supported settings , 2004 .

[14]  P. Dillenbourg,et al.  The evolution of research on collaborative learning , 1996 .

[15]  S. Ludvigsen,et al.  Sharing Perspectives in Virtual Interaction: Review of Methods of Analysis , 2003, CSCL.

[16]  Brigid Barron.  Achieving Coordination in Collaborative Problem-Solving Groups , 2000 .

[17]  G. Stasser,et al.  Pooling of Unshared Information in Group Decision Making: Biased Information Sampling During Discussion , 1985 .

[18]  S JOURARD.  HOW DO PEOPLE LEARN? , 1964, The Canadian nurse.

[19]  Erno Lehtinen,et al.  Developing Tools for Analyzing CSCL Process , 2003, CSCL.

[20]  Kevin Crowston,et al.  The interdisciplinary study of coordination , 1994, CSUR.

[21]  R. Ploetzner,et al.  Collaboration on the Basis of Complementary Domain Knowledge: Observed Dialogue Structures and Their Relation to Learning Success. , 2001 .

[22]  Rachel M. Pilkington,et al.  Interacting with computer-based simulation: The role of dialogue , 1996, Comput. Educ..