Collaborative Learning in Geographically Distributed and In-person Groups

Open online courses attract a diverse global audience of learners, many of whom might not be self-directed autodidacts with the necessary web competencies to reap the full benefits of such courses. Most of these learners would benefit from increased guidance on how to use MOOCs to enhance their learning. One potential area for guidance is in group collaboration where learners form teams to collaboratively work on assignments. Despite the global scope of these courses, a large proportion of learners live within relatively close proximity of each other, such that in-person collaboration is a feasible option. However, geographically distributed groups of learners are more likely to bring diverse viewpoints to the discussion than learners who live close to each other. Research suggests that the diversity of viewpoints in a group positively affects the quality of collaboration and outcomes. This paper reviews the literature on the feasibility of assigning local groups for collaboration and proposes concrete research directions.

[1]  M. McPherson,et al.  Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks , 2001 .

[2]  C. Nemeth Differential contributions of majority and minority influence , 1986 .

[3]  Pierre Dillenbourg,et al.  Virtual Learning Environments , 2020, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Higher Education.

[4]  Scott R. Klemmer,et al.  When is collaborating with friends a good idea? insights from design education , 2009, CSCL.

[5]  Gayle J. Yaverbaum,et al.  Asynchronous Computer-mediated Communication versus Face-to-face Collaboration: Results on Student Learning, Quality and Satisfaction , 1999 .

[6]  D. Meyer,et al.  Supporting Online Material Materials and Methods Som Text Figs. S1 to S6 References Evidence for a Collective Intelligence Factor in the Performance of Human Groups , 2022 .

[7]  Jane E. Klobas,et al.  Evaluation of the efficacy of collaborative learning in face-to-face and computer-supported university contexts , 2006, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[8]  C. Lévi-Strauss,et al.  The Savage Mind. , 1967 .

[9]  Brigid Barron When Smart Groups Fail , 2003 .

[10]  N. Webb Task-Related Verbal Interaction and Mathematics Learning in Small Groups. , 1991 .

[11]  Nikol Rummel,et al.  A rating scheme for assessing the quality of computer-supported collaboration processes , 2007, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[12]  W. Heath The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies , 2008 .

[13]  S. Derry,et al.  Video Research in the Learning Sciences , 2007 .

[14]  Richard L. Daft,et al.  Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design , 1986 .