The role of scaffolding and motivation in CSCL

Recent findings from research into Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) have indicated that not all learners are able to successfully learn in online collaborative settings. Given that most online settings are characterised by minimal guidance, which require learners to be more autonomous and self-directed, CSCL may provide conditions more conducive to learners comfortable with greater autonomy. Using quasi-experimental research, this paper examines the impact of a redesign of an authentic CSCL environment, based upon principles of Problem-Based Learning, which aimed to provide a more explicit scaffolding of the learning phases for students. It was hypothesised that learners in a redesigned 'Optima' environment would reach higher levels of knowledge construction due to clearer scaffolding. Furthermore, it was expected that the redesign would produce a more equal spread in contributions to discourse for learners with different motivational profiles. In a quasi-experimental setting, 143 participants collaborated in an online setting aimed at enhancing their understanding of economics. Using a multi-method approach (Content Analysis, Social Network Analysis, measurement of Academic Motivation), the research results reveal the redesign triggered more equal levels of activity of autonomous and control-oriented learners, but also a decrease in input from the autonomous learners. The main conclusion from this study is that getting the balance between guidance and support right to facilitate both autonomous and control-oriented learners is a delicate complex issue.

[1]  D. Sadler.  Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems , 1989 .

[2]  Dirk T. Tempelaar,et al.  The role of academic motivation in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning , 2009, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[3]  Dirk T. Tempelaar,et al.  Why Increased Social Presence through Web Videoconferencing Does Not Automatically Lead to Improved Learning , 2014 .

[4]  Amy L. Baylor,et al.  The design of motivational agents and avatars , 2011 .

[5]  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 .

[6]  Tammy Schellens,et al.  Content analysis schemes to analyze transcripts of online asynchronous discussion groups: A review , 2006, Comput. Educ..

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

[8]  P. Kirschner,et al.  Optimizing the number of steps in learning tasks for complex skills. , 2005, The British journal of educational psychology.

[9]  K. Ann Renninger,et al.  Motivation and learning in an online, unmoderated, mathematics workshop for teachers , 2011 .

[10]  Hanna Järvenoja,et al.  Research on Motivation in Collaborative Learning: Moving Beyond the Cognitive–Situative Divide and Combining Individual and Social Processes , 2010 .

[11]  Dirk T. Tempelaar,et al.  Effectiviteit van facultatief aansluitonderwijs wiskunde in de transitie van voortgezet naar hoger onderwijs , 2011 .

[12]  Thérèse Laferrière,et al.  Technology in Support of Collaborative Learning , 2007 .

[13]  Hans Spada,et al.  Barriers and Biases in Computer-Mediated Knowledge Communication , 2005 .

[14]  R. Luppicini.  Review of computer mediated communication research for education , 2007 .

[15]  Sofie M. M. Loyens,et al.  Problem-Based Learning is Compatible with Human Cognitive Architecture: Commentary on Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006) , 2007 .

[16]  Jan-Willem Strijbos,et al.  Developing the role concept for computer-supported collaborative learning: An explorative synthesis , 2010, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[17]  A. Artino.  Online or face-to-face learning? Exploring the personal factors that predict students' choice of instructional format , 2010, Internet High. Educ..

[18]  Min Liu,et al.  A study of learning and motivation in a new media enriched environment for middle school science , 2011 .

[19]  Selma Vonderwell,et al.  Asynchronous Discussions and Assessment in Online Learning , 2007 .

[20]  Pieter J. Beers,et al.  Computer support for knowledge construction in collaborative learning environments , 2005, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[21]  Dirk T. Tempelaar,et al.  Investigating the relations between motivation, tool use, participation, and performance in an e-learning course using web-videoconferencing , 2013, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[22]  A. P. Rovai.  In search of higher persistence rates in distance education online programs , 2003, Internet High. Educ..

[23]  E. Deci,et al.  Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions. , 2000, Contemporary educational psychology.

[24]  D. Jonassen,et al.  Communication patterns in computer mediated versus face-to-face group problem solving , 2001 .

[25]  Evelyne F. Vallières,et al.  The Academic Motivation Scale: A Measure of Intrinsic, Extrinsic, and Amotivation in Education , 1992 .

[26]  Dirk T. Tempelaar,et al.  How achievement emotions impact students' decisions for online learning, and what precedes those emotions , 2012, Internet High. Educ..

[27]  Michael Hammond,et al.  Communication within on-line forums: the opportunities, the constraints and the value of a communicative approach , 2000, Comput. Educ..

[28]  Alejandra Martínez-Monés,et al.  Combining qualitative evaluation and social network analysis for the study of classroom social interactions , 2003, Comput. Educ..

[29]  Kuan-Chung Chen,et al.  Motivation in online learning: Testing a model of self-determination theory , 2010, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[30]  Heinz Mandl,et al.  Facilitating Collaborative Knowledge Construction in Computer-Mediated Learning Environments with Cooperation Scripts , 2005 .

[31]  Dirk T. Tempelaar,et al.  Social Presence, Web Videoconferencing and Learning in Virtual Teams , 2009 .

[32]  E. Deci,et al.  The effects of instructors' autonomy support and students' autonomous motivation on learning organic chemistry: A self-determination theory perspective , 2000 .

[33]  Dirk T. Tempelaar,et al.  Remedial Online Teaching on a Summer Course , 2006 .

[34]  Vic Lally,et al.  Online teaching in networked learning communities: A multi-method approach to studying the role of the teacher , 2007 .

[35]  Eugenia Y. Huang,et al.  What type of learning style leads to online participation in the mixed-mode e-learning environment? A study of software usage instruction , 2012, Comput. Educ..

[36]  Rob Koper,et al.  From pattern to practice: Evaluation of a design pattern fostering trust in virtual teams , 2009, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[37]  Joseph Krajcik,et al.  A Scaffolding Design Framework for Software to Support Science Inquiry , 2004, The Journal of the Learning Sciences.

[38]  Lih-Shyang Chen,et al.  A Computer-Based Clinical Teaching-Case System with Emulation of Time Sequence for Medical Education , 2005, IEICE Trans. Inf. Syst..

[39]  Paul A. Kirschner,et al.  The analysis of negotiation of common ground in CSCL , 2007 .

[40]  Robert Maribe Branch,et al.  Autonomy, Affiliation, and Ability: Relative Salience of Factors that Influence Online Learner Motivation and Learning Outcomes , 2010 .

[41]  T. Goetz,et al.  Academic Emotions in Students' Self-Regulated Learning and Achievement: A Program of Qualitative and Quantitative Research , 2002 .

[42]  Stanley Wasserman,et al.  Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications , 1994, Structural analysis in the social sciences.

[43]  A. E. Veldhuis-Diermanse,et al.  Collaborative learning through computer-mediated communication in academic education , 2001 .

[44]  Margaret Mazzolini,et al.  When to jump in: The role of the instructor in online discussion forums , 2007, Comput. Educ..

[45]  E. Deci,et al.  Engaging students in learning activities: It is not autonomy support or structure but autonomy support and structure. , 2010 .

[46]  H. Schmidt,et al.  Constructivist, Problem-Based Learning Does Work: A Meta-Analysis of Curricular Comparisons Involving a Single Medical School , 2009 .

[47]  Tammy Schellens,et al.  Collaborative learning in asynchronous discussion groups: What about the impact on cognitive processing? , 2005, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[48]  Pieter J. Beers,et al.  Coercing shared knowledge in collaborative learning environments , 2006, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[49]  Avner Caspi,et al.  The influence of group size on nonmandatory asynchronous instructional discussion groups , 2003, Internet High. Educ..

[50]  Mien Segers,et al.  Evaluating the effects of redesigning a problem-based learning environment , 2003 .

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

[52]  Naomi Miyake,et al.  Explorations of Scaffolding in Complex Classroom Systems , 2004, The Journal of the Learning Sciences.

[53]  Edward L. Deci,et al.  Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior , 1975, Perspectives in Social Psychology.

[54]  Michael Potter.  Facts , 2014, The Rise of Analytic Philosophy 1879–1930.

[55]  Theo J. Bastiaens,et al.  The impact of intrinsic motivation on e-learning in authentic computer tasks , 2004, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[56]  P. Robert-Jan Simons,et al.  The affordance of anchored discussion for the collaborative processing of academic texts , 2006, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[57]  Stefan Hrastinski,et al.  Design exemplars for synchronous e-learning: A design theory approach , 2010, Comput. Educ..

[58]  Stanley Wasserman,et al.  Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications , 1994 .

[59]  M. Boekaerts,et al.  Affective and Motivational Outcomes of Working in Collaborative Groups , 2006 .

[60]  Sarah Schrire,et al.  Knowledge building in asynchronous discussion groups: Going beyond quantitative analysis , 2006, Comput. Educ..

[61]  Jan-Willem Strijbos,et al.  Content analysis: What are they talking about? , 2006, Comput. Educ..