Jaana Suorajrvi Yi Tai and Jenna-Riina Ylimys Introduction
Computer-supported collaborative learning CSCL
Collaborative learning describes a variety of educational practices in which interactions amongst peers constitute quite possibly the most important factor in learning although devoid of excluding other elements this kind of because the discovering material and interactions with teachers. The term computer-supported refers not just to connecting remote college students but also to employing technologies to form face-to-face interactions Dillenbourg et al. 2008.
The usefulness from the facts and communication technological innovation ICT in education is based on the equipment- synchronous and asynchronous communication multimedia real-life simulations World wide web and its data sources and so forth. Scaffolding uk ICT has not merely altered the complete activity surroundings but additionally the theoretical approach on mastering and instruction. Lehtinen 2003 So the emergence of your computer-supported collaborative studying CSCL reflects technological revolution plus the evolution of discovering theories Dillenbourg et al. 2008.
Collaboration entails the mutual engagement of participants inside a coordinated effort to solve the problem together Lehtinen 2003. In collaborative understanding college students engage in creative social interaction exactly where they combine all their capabilities and knowledge in order to resolve complex difficulties which cant be solved independently. Collaboration also deepens the understanding of your difficulty. Nivala et al. 2008. Final results of your collaborative studying rely upon the extent of engagement and commitment from the group members Dillenbourg et al. 2008.
Computer-supported understanding atmosphere tends to make communication guidance and help simpler. It forces students to believe visibly externalize cognitive processes. In CSCL this substance is usually evaluated and elaborated by other people. Socio-cognitive load is shared in between learners and studying atmosphere. Nivala et al. 2008 In laptop environments the interaction plus the inquiry method are visible in addition to the choice making paths and argumentation structures Lehtinen 2003.
Understanding in CSCL demands cognitive motivational and socio-emotional capabilities. Self-regulated learner requires charge of mastering course of action chooses and sets objectives uses distinct strategies to monitor regulate management and assess discovering and every one of the aspects and actions affecting mastering course of action. Metacognition indicates the awareness of very own cognitive strengths and weaknesses expertise and capacity to regulate the studying process and engagement in tasks.Jrvel et al. 2007
Regulation and metacognition have also a social aspect. A single learner regulates or affects other folks or group-members cooperatively regulate others or themselves in shared regulation. Metacognition is an crucial part of collaboration and group-regulation. Jrvel et al. 2007.
Articles presented in this book
The primary theoretical concepts in CSCL are totally described in the first chapter by Laura Palmgren-Neuvonen William Burton Janne Hellsten Esther Perez Jake McMullen and Alberto Ramirez. They also make an articulate assessment for the future challenges in CSCL.
Within the second article Pia Wikholm Yang Kun Anna Pohjola Sanna Pokka and Anne Korhonen give a comprehensive clarification of motivation and regulation in CSCL situations exactly where the learners peers and teachers every single have an equally critical function within the studying practice and finding out outcome.
Also emotions are a important aspect in CSCL that is illustrated by Miki Kallio Nonamanut Pongsakdi Pete Santos and Maria Cerrato Lara. They analyze the progressive inquiry model designed on the University of Helsinki in an effort to demonstrate the essential position of scaffolding.
In their write-up Satu Salmela Tero Paakki Linda Pohorska and Melina Markatzinou concentrate on the regulation and scaffolding in computer-supported collaborative writing. In chapter 4 they give experimental information and facts of CSCW and introduce one particular example of CSCW tool Wikispaces.
In chapter authorsMariona CorcellesGerardo BaalesandJie Shen introduce the role in the note-taking in CSCW processes.Designing CSCL is really a tough activity as Pipsa Keski-Hakuni Elina Koskipahta and Juha-Matti Ristiharju brilliantly explain not forgetting the significance of collecting feedback to enhance courses.
Johanna Hnninen Heidi Hyytinen and Janne Niinivaara present the pedagogical framework of designing computer-supported collaborative understanding and consequently comprehensive the image of diverse and demanding CSCL.
The goal with the CSCL book
This book is actually a reflection of CSCL. The authors are students and teachers of CSCL-course organised by Universities of Barcelona Spain Helsinki Turku and Oulu Finland. There were also participants from University of Lapland Finland. Initial in individual phase college students explored the 4 themes- motivation and emotions in CSCL collaborative writing in CSCL designing of CSCL and state of art in CSCL by signifies of given learning material. The assignment was to write a manuscript on the basis of it for the blogs in WordPress.com. Students have been supposed to deepen their understanding about one of several the 4 themes above by selecting one particular to create a chapter towards the book about CSCL. During this phase college students in the similar group collaborated applying the chat-tool in Edomodo.com and also the writing platform in Wiki.helsinki.fi to send notes lins files alerts assignments and envents to each other discussing and informing others the progress of their perform and adding comments. The teachers also employed these tools to guide and monitor theirs perform and be sure all the progressgoing on well determined by the schedule.
Laura Palmgren-Neuvonen William Burton Janne Hellsten Esther Perez Jake McMullen andAlberto Ramirez 1. State in the Art in CSCL
1.one The emergence of Computer Supported Collaborative Finding out
Theories from the 1970s that influenced the birth of CSCL are broadly named sociocultural theories constructivist theories and early theories of child development. These theories assumed that the learner would be the immediate participant in hisher progress the teacher would be the data provider. The context of computer-supported collaborative discovering has been created drastically all through the last couple of decades. The rapid improvement of facts technologies has altered way that computers happen to be utilized in education. The roles of information and facts engineering and learner have changed crucially and group involvement is advocated. Even inside the early phases of computerized education computer systems have been made use of to assistance the discovering processes of a person learners by making use of behaviourist-based programs in an effort to practice particular knowledge in line with the learners cognitive degree. This system referred to as computer-aided instruction CAI was interested a lot more in obtaining individualized teaching procedures through computer systems so it did not consider the social interaction as a important element in learning. As a result there was tiny social interaction. Lehtinen 2003Usages of CSCL
CSCL emerges as an attempt to approximate methodologies of collaborative learning with details and communication technologies ICT the latter in action and speedy advancement in different social fields. The paradigm CSCL reacts towards the initially uses of ICT in education which had been focused mainly on supporting individual progresses as a way to practice some specific techniques in accordance with the learners cognitive level. Collaborative finding out is now much more focused around the interaction between peers and teachers and not exclusively around the function of technology. Not surprisingly engineering plays a significant part but investigation and practice concentrates much more around the cognitive and structural approaches to studying.The improved use of info technological innovation and internet primarily based applications let social interaction amongst teachers students and among students themselves. The matter isnt only the affordance of acquiring contact with remote teachers or peers but with getting the capacity to arrange such discovering environments in order that they facilitate social interaction amongst the understanding community and may for example automatically analyze collaboration. Lehtinen 2003
one.2 Main theoretical tips behind CSCL
Understanding CSCL
Collaboration may be defined because the practice of negotiation organizing questioning argumentation reasoning and exploration in discussion. Hyvnen 2008 Littleton Miell 2004. Further it is usually defined because the co-construction of shared understanding Dillenbourg et al. 2008- Rochelle Teasley 1995 but we can not neglect the fact that the understanding can never be completely shared by peers. Members of a collaborating group find out misunderstandings and differences of viewpoint to be negotiated. Conflicts due to divergence and obtaining the convergence may be the crucial mechanism for social studying not merely the final outcome. Dillenbourg et al. 2008. Collaboration and cooperation are made disticnt in this difficulty. Lehtinen refers to Roschelles1999function in which he considers that cooperative operate is carried out by function division among participants who operate independently – this is not wholly productive. Thus collaboration advocates the mutual engagement of participants inside a coordinated work to resolve the issue together. This means that cooperation is morean individual activity that affects work group whereas collaborationis ajoint activity. In education the definition of Kirkshner 2002 is relevant because he considers that collaborate is working collectively with other people mainly in an intellectual work.
Digressing from tradition
In virtual communication the traditional student-teacher roles change. The teachers roles are no longer purely expertise deliverers. In addition some with the college students were very centralized actors in the interaction acting as experts and taking a function of responsibility. These college students also helped to reach shared ambitions and contributed to the commenting on the work of other college students. When the activity on the course developed it became similar to project-like mastering in which the end product starts to dominate working procedures. Sometimes this may be harmful if the college students stop advancing their tips and solving challenges because they are just aiming for the end product. Lakkala Ilomki Palonen 2007 20-21. It is true that the function of teacher changes considerably in a CSCL environment and teacher becomes similar to a facilitator. So as to run a successful CSCL finding out setting it is vital to have these central students but inside a middle school context it might be difficult. This project-like mastering is useful skill in working life.Traditionally theories have stated that learning is individual cognitive process for example Vygoskian or Piagetian broadly known as constructivist approaches. These constructivist approaches fail to acknowledge the part of peer interaction collaboration and language use. This over-emphasis around the individual experience is largely problematic plus the befits of dialogue are often ignored or regarded as incidental. CSCL is innovative because it believes dialogue and communcation to be a crucial factor in cognitive progress McLoughlin Oliver 1998.The three metaphors of theoretical concepts
Lehtinen 2003 describes in his write-up the principle theoretical suggestions behind the CSCL- constructivism and its metaphors. According to Sfard 1998 within the acquisition metaphor understanding is explained as acquisition of something in a person mind and knowledge is seen as property or possession. The participation metaphor sees understanding via becoming a participant and understanding as an aspect of practice discourse and activity. The expertise creation metaphor proposed by Hakkarainen et al. 2002 explains learning as know-how creation where new expertise and knowledge are created in cultural practices the original idea brought out by Nonaka and Takeuchi. Hakkarainen et al. 2003 explains that the two basic aspects do not try to exceed former expertise like the third metaphor does. Hakkarainen et al want to highlight the interaction of tacit and explicit knowledge by the model of information creating organization by Nonaka ja Takeuchi 1995. They regard tacit expertise as a lot more crucial in creating innovations than explicit expertise that does not assistance understanding creating processes. Nonaka and Takeuchi critisize the explicit dimension of knowledge because as outlined by them know-how is social dynamic and changing by nature. Hakkarainen ym. 2003 6-8. The third metaphora sees the expertise as a creation method of new understanding as far as education instruction and profession of teacher are concerned. The third metaphor syntetizes the benefits and advantages of the two basic aspects and produces a new aspect for the expertise as a approach of individual and collaborative course of action of creating knowledge.
In accordance with many recent studies for example Kaptelin and Cole 2002 the role of social interaction is crucial for finding out. These authors consider that there are two ways not necessarily exclusive to seethe function of social interaction in discovering. Around the 1 hand discovering is a person approach but either facilitated or inhibited by several forms of social interaction. The interactions between the learner and the others are the mechanisms that makes studying occur. Kaptelin and Cole ibid referred to as these interactions as set of external modifiers. Around the other hand and related with the Vygotskyan strategy individual discovering and activity inside a social system are just two diverse dimensions of your exact same phenomenon- in line with his two steps advancement expertise is designed on a social level at to begin with and later internalised by the members as an individual. Lehtinen 2003. Social interaction helps students to get towards the zone of proximal improvement ZDP by creating support in collaboration the extra advancedstudents can help less advanced ones to reach a understanding degree that they could not reach alone.Numerous new forms of collaborative studying practices Barab et al. 2004 Strijbos et al. 2004 are depending on the recent tips of social cognition Jrvel et al. 2007- Higgins 2000 Thompson Fine 1999. Social discovering conditions may develop learning because cognitive conflicts emerging in groups of members with various cognitive techniques facilitate cognitive performances both in case of less or extra advanced students Piaget 1980.Synchronous and asynchronous communication and social interaction
The communication tools employed to facilitate interaction and joint expertise construction is usually based on synchronic media like chat voice mail one-line visualization tools and web-based conferencing systems for example Adobe Connect Pro or they can support asynchronous communication Lehtinen et al. 1999 Clark et al 2007. In asynchronous discovering environments this kind of as Know-how Forum Optima or wikis interaction is according to written messages. Based on Lehtinen video 2008 and Carter 2003 participants applying asynchronous discovering environments are able to study the background of your topic and to reflect before formulating their notes which helps them to deepen their understanding. Synchronous and asynchronous understanding environments could be equipped with a set of unique tools for collaboration and document sharing.
Lehtinen explains how the function of Crook 1994 quoted by Lehtinen 2003 has influenced the distinction amongst interacting by way of a personal computer and around a computer. Based on the distinction made by Crook interaction around computers includes the use of tools that facilitate communication between students when they are working with each other in face to face settings e.g. making use of a laptop equipped with several mice. Provided the characteristics of virtual enviroments that make it possible for combining various ways of presenting data this provide college students with what Crook known as points of shared reference from which college students can discuss clarify and negotiate meanings when they are working collectively. Around the other hand to work as a result of network-based enviroments facilitates the exchange of communication and documents of both synchronous and asynchronous manner so it does not matter if participants differ their actions in time and space. He further justifies this by explaining that resources in traditional classrooms are limited and prevent successful collaboration for example with engineering a teacherfacilator can easily gain the students attention by creating an interest towards a shared object or aim. These aims is usually divided into separate chunks and offered for the group then collaboration can take place this will be the concept of Distributed and Shared suggestions.
Concept of distributed and shared ideas
Lehtinen 2003 explains learning by distributed and shared activities. The distribution and sharing of finding out via activities helps bring about a better and broader understanding of a particular issue or matter. The distribution of a certain task can perform effectively for a number of reasons- i the group will feel confident that an challenge is being address ii organisation can function more efficiently and successfully iii all talents possessed by the college students are stretched. Therefore when the sharing of activities requires place college students are able to criticise contribute and connect tips and thus ultimately learn from a single another within the method. Contemporary theories advocate advance towards distributed cognition however it does have origins in Vygoskian and Piagetian theories.Theoretical benefits and critiques
There are still some aspects to discuss as far as CSCLs improvements on studying or assessment of a CSCL course are concerned. According to Lehtinen 2003 26 experiments on network-based CSCL finding out show some positive effects on discovering when CSCL studying and face-to-face studying circumstances have been combined or carried out with the identical time. However experiences only in virtual environments are a lot more problematic. In addition making assessments on CSCL mastering is difficult because many researches are limited in terms from the duration plus the number of participants. When we examine CSCL studying we have to realize some background facts about the participants. For example the essential thing is to know how long the selected group has been collaborating before the study. The results on the study may be very distinctive for the situation exactly where group is formed as a way to run the study or participate for a single course.
Another important dilemma is how to evaluate understanding final results how to measure the outcome of finding out. Lissa 2008 emphasizes that obtaining empirical evidence of effects on mastering is difficult and almost impossible. However it could be said that if there is often a goal for a course then the knowledgework will compare with the outcomes of CSCL and the face-to-face finding out. It must not be forgotten that kowledge construction is a person method and also the final internalisation happens in the head of an individual. Even if collaboration and expertise creation has been social the meaning of information depends on the requirement of context exactly where the knowledge is used- the group can not always keep collectively so discovering ought to be evaluated individually too. Lehtinen discussed the problematic nature of assessment and evaluation he said that if the taskin the course is really a social process butafter the course has finished person test or assessment procedures are utilised to evaluateindividual discovering but what the studentshave been doing is socialin nature. Lehtinen 2003
There are several studies done with both positive and negative results but much more study is still needed. Lissa defends his argumentation that ICT is just not just a tool to be adopted as such inside the prevailing situation but it has effects on several factors like teachers part teaching practice students collaboration and studying tasks Lissa 2008. This point of view queatios if CSCL discovering might be compared with traditional understanding- they are according to widely diverse pedagocial and theoretical approaches the nature of discovering the system of assessment and as far because the aims and goals of understanding are completely various. The research ofSalomon 1995 shows that ICT college students learned a lot more and faster than students in manage group but the great effects of CSCL can not come out if we only take it as a tool. The powerful effect happens while 1 is engaged intellectual partnership with peers or with a personal computer tool in a team or computer-enhanced collaboration teaches students to ask additional exact questions even when not using that system. Salomon 1995
Even though it is hardly possible to create a single coherent theory within the field of CSCL research that could adequately describe the many varying forms of mastering the advancement and investigation of educational engineering should be more coordinated. As Jrvel 2008 summarizes the challenges of CSCL investigation essentially the most critical dilemma is how to ensure the understanding accumulation when concepts and solutions are increasingly heterogeneous. These challenges make it difficult for practictioners to implement CSCL in classroom environments. It is therefore clear that these practictioners ought not to be too hasty rash quick or over-zealous to use CSCL in the exlcusion of other more traditional approaches.Assessment evaluation and perspectives on understanding
In looking at these critiques we can see how a a lot more overall assessment must be taken by the assessors so as to challenge assess and understand the level with the students participation. This would include the college students their peers evaluating their very own improvement and progress. This is very problematic because as Jefferies 2003 studied the effects that CSCL can harm improvement of college students. He found that the perceptions of your college students working with the conferencing surroundings did not really match with the usage statistics of your conferencing system. The study did demonstrate that this related towards the students lack of organisational and critical faculties Meaning- potential tocriticize and thus in-opportunity to learn effectively. It is worth noting that the system was not always completely accurate.Influence of theoretical concepts
It is obvious that the effects of ICT rely around the engineering employed but mostly the pedagogical implementation of technological innovation is much more vital than the technical features. By applying ICT we can create new environments equipped with a rich range of tools effectively supporting students attempts to handle the complex relationships of learning tasks that may offer much more complex predicament scenarios to be solved in collaboration than in face-to-face understanding. Lehtinen 2003 Facts technology may enable conditions in which effective group interactions are expected to happen. In addition to advancement of info technology the evolution of mastering theories has transformed the conception of CSCL- in line with Dillenbourg et al. 2008 situated and distributed cognition has proved to be the basis for pedagogical solutions which activate and motivate learners. Social interaction may be the magic word which has appeared to promote learning also at computer systems.Implications of CSCL
The use of CSCL in learning has allowed for much change and adaptation to lessons in which previous strategies could not be sought. Currently collaborative understanding is encouraged in schools in which children live a long distance away. An example of this is in Norrsi School in Turku Finland. The ICT staff have set up vast amounts of equiptment in order for the children living around the archipelago islands to have education from a skilled teacher who would otherwise be unavailable to them weekly sessions bring them together to discuss and learn their subject.As the content articles and other material from the universities in our CSCL mastering project have descibed us there are so many aspects in this field which have enhanced and will be enhanced very fast.Pedogocial investigation has come far in supplying new and enhanced learning tools including updated mastering models and artefacts improved discovering environments and a greater amount of web-based tools. These tools can simplify organisation and make studying far more effective for example many new world-wide-web browsers feature add-ons which can permit the user to quickly share details resources and references. There are many benefits in CSCL reported but in practice there can still be seen many kinds of challenges and troubles to overcome. McLoughlin Oliver 1998 state the quality of CSCL does not lie dependantly upon the interaction involving engineering and also the learners but instead on the classroom dynamics as well as the social climate as a complete. They further explain how the atmosphere must be adequately suited to meet the needs of every participant involved.Contentions of pedagogical procedures
Tensions between progressive inquiry pedagogy and school curriculum might be sometimes quite problematic. The course progression as well as the content from the virtual communication revealed some tensions amongst inquiry pedagogy along with the schools institutional practices. For example curriculum and assessment processes were problematic when groups have been working collaboratively in virtual atmosphere. In general the study showed that practices of this new kind of understanding and collaboration have been still something special differing from schools normal routines. Lakkala Ilomki Palonen 2007 This research certifies some in the common sense views. I was previously wondering how this system of distributed cognition works in classrooms and apparently there are some drawbacks or difficulties. In my opinion this new CSCL mastering needs much firstly from teacher and secondly from college students. one.3 Conclusions
In this age of accountability in education and society the emphasis is on personal growth exam results and ultimately on ones own future. This could largely be a reflection of western-cultures dominant individualistic philosophy in which group function is valued to a lesser extent than to personal ambitions. It could however be said that CSCL inspires people to become extra aware with the significance of group interaction and collaboration and thus we may be able to move further away from these self-centered values and adopt a far more communal approach to benefit education and hopefully society as a complete. This depends mainly on government willingness to take CSCL environments seriously.
The researchers should consider if the goal of their study is clear and reasonable. There are several aspects which need to be studied much more intensively-e.g. how studying in CSCL atmosphere influences on an individuals self-consciousness as a interlocutor or a group member and do studentshow do college students suffer from communication apprehension in computer-supportive discovering environments. In pedagogical technological practices the help scripts and scaffold must be studied further.
Nowadays in CSCL the significance on the situated perspective plus the community of practice as well as the new broad vision of activity theory are highlighted. Also the social web is improving CSCL in practice- the expansion of utilizing open applications of social web far more ousider participants areable to join the discussion and collaboration of learning networks. There are also numerous web-based collaborative databases for mastering materials to be shared and improved. Web two.0 tools permit for an a lot easier additional accessible use in the web. Mozilla Google and Microsoft have advanced progress in the development of tools which can make the user have everything at their finger tips with this in mind collaboration can become a lot more popular and useable.
Foreseeable future of CSCL
Lastly we will focus around the questions related to CSCLs foreseeable long term. Questions this kind of as- is it even possible to run a course in a purely virtual environment Can the outcomes obtained from these courses ever be completely verified and trustworthy Can CSCL survive within the can CSCL enviroments keep up with progress of web-based tools is this practical for schools to achieve As mentioned web-based organisations are continually creating tools to assistance the world-wide-web experience and also the capacity for CSCL to do likewise is questioned. Questions of assessment are of particular importance will there ever be a way of accurately testing student particpiation and levels of understanding Perhaps if CSCL had been to have the capability to keep on progressing which we sincerely hope it can then we need to ask the vital question will this enhance finding out per se i.e. do the theories and mechanisms of discovering stay exactly the same regardless in the tools utilized
Are governments able to take CSCL environments seriously in a society in which accountability in education is the dominant culture Will CSCL ever be more beneficial than face-to-face approaches to group learning After all we would like our pupils and students to learn essential social skills. Will teachers respond effectively towards the wider implementation of CSCL and is it beneficial to all college students involved
We cannot change the world inside a day. The cultures of social cognition and collaboration increase slowly step by step from the very beginning of education and instruction of new generations. We must keep on educating individuals who are able to get the job done fluently in groups because if group members do not understand 1 another there can not be good argumentation discussion and collaboration. When implementing CSCL teachers should recall that college students need much more support than they believe a proper scaffold helps the pioneer college students to get acquainted in this new discovering process and find the real benefits for their understanding.
Pia WikholmYang Kun Anna Pohjola Sanna Pokka and Anne Korhonen
2. Motivation in CSCL
two.1Introduction
Probably many of us would agree if we had been to say that one of several major challenges in CSCL could be the question about how to motivate students to function collaboratively with one another by means of computer networks We know that emotions immediate all kind of learning and that emotions has an great impact on determination. Researchers has emphazised that collaboration does not automatically take place when a group of students are brought together the participants actually need to be fully comitted for the given job and continuosly update and reflect upon both progress and achievement Jrvel Hurme Jrvenoja 2007. Participants need to regulate their emotions so that you can achieve a certain degree of motivation in where the group is expected to affect individuals in a positive way Jrvel et al. 2007.
In this chapter we write about certain elements of CSCL with the principle focus around the college students experiences concerning motivation. Since the college students experiences about motivation in CSCL seemed to have many similarities we found it essential to understand why precisely the same issues often seems to occur. So as to reach a deeper understanding towards motivational challenges in CSCL we will reflect on reasons answers and strategies for improvement. We found the motivational challenges to reach quite an broad area such as challenges of self-regulation challenges in preparing and scaffolding and challenges in social group dynamics as in how to reach a shared goal. We also found the question about motivational challenges in CSCL to be interesting since the motivational aspect often has been neglected Jrvel et al. 2007. Many definitions propose that the core of collaboration is something where cognitive social and emotional elements meet and intertwine without explaining the role of determination regulation in socially shared activities Jrvel et al. 2007. 2.2 Dimensions of determination in CSCL
Determination in CSCL context should be analyzed as a result of 4 dimensions which are defined as follows- cognitive processes self-regulation co-regulation and socially shared regulation. Since the 4 elements have great influence on CSCL we will assessment some related investigation in this field and give definitions as followed so as to reach a better understanding of all with the concerns. Cognitive processes
The discovering procedure in CSCL differs from the discovering approach inside a traditional classroom researchers have stated that the challenges could be rooted within the cognitive processes required in cognitive discovering Jrvel Volet Jrvenoja 2006.Within the traditional classroom the teacher is seen because the provider of knowledge where the college students are seen like passive receivers. In CSCL the many participants are seen as equal and active members with the group where understanding is shared and where the group members with each other aim for exactly the same goal. Self-regulation
Self-regulation signifies that the person aims to regulate her-himself Jrvel et al. 2006. In other words this suggests that the person can adjust her-himself to a certain situation and in a way direct feelings and feelings that will arise. Emotions are seen as the engine behind studying emotions immediate motivate and develop different kind of learners. Attending a class with lack of interest needs an enormous amount of determination from the learner it is often very demanding to sit still in the course of those 45 minutes when the only motivator would be the ticking clock or the upcominglunch break. College students and teachers often feel that CSCL calls for even additional determination from the participants. The person may easily feel helpless alone and lost when lacking the face-to-face communication and technical assistance. To be able to totally participate in CSCL we have to step out of our comfort zone trusting that we have something of value to provide to the group. Co-Regulation and socially shared regulation
In co-regulation the situation might be that only some on the group members co-operate or that all on the group members co-operate to regulate other individuals Jrvel et al. 2006. This particular phase seems to be very vital since it defines the group and its outcome. Just by being friendly or getting the skill to leave the right kind of comments to other participants can at its best encourage and inspire others. It often seems that the co-regulation is most difficult it is exactly where the communication somehow starts and in which the group builds a base and a strategy for the final result. When CSCL is successfull it is possible to reach a socially shared regulation where the group together as a complete consensually regulate themselves and collaborate and perform with one another towards the same ambitions Jrvel et al. 2006.
2.3 Challenges in CSCL
As a newly born form of studying and a novel pattern obviously CSCL brings diverse people together to diversify the way of interaction and help them effectively organize the data by taking advantage of laptop or computer engineering world wide web technologies and multimedia technologies. While CSCL can facilitate learners to achieve the collaborative understanding practice to a higher qulity and wider range it may also face some challenges. We will illustrate two main challenges as followchallenges of self-regulation and challenges of sociociltural challenges. Challenges of self-regulation in CSCL
Researchers define self-regulated finding out in a variety of ways. The widely accepted definition offered by Wikipedia defines the term self-regulated like this self-regulated is usually used to describe finding out that is guided by metacognition thinking about oness thinking strategic action planning monitoring and evaluating personal progress against a standard and motivation to learn Wikipedia 2008. As the net-studying is getting generalised the student needs to take more responsibility of his studying on his personal. Within the future the student who can regulate the studying and motivate himher-self will cope the best. The self-regulation of studying is that you can concentrate on the activity and you can do that and wont let some other thing take your attention from studying for example. There are many kinds of technological innovation utilised everywhere. Engineering can motivate to studying but around the other hand it will take extra self-regulation than ordinary classroom studying. When youre alone its less difficult to skip the tasks than inside a physical classroom exactly where you can easily get help and encouragement.
When studying inside the net there are lots of material and stimulation so the self-regulation gets emphasized in this also when you have to separate the critical from the unessential. There are many other temptations lurking in the net for example surfing inside the web Facebook e-mail etc. that can take your attention away from the critical. Self-regulation is vital because inside the net you usually have to set the targets of studying the studying is just not that guided as traditionally teacher will not be available that easily. This may set challenges towards the teacher when it comes for the netcourses how to motivate the student how and what kind of materials will be chosen. The teachers role as a motivator and encourager is remarkable especially when it comes for the outward funnelled ones. The learner should be committed to his targets take responsibility by himself of his discovering and to sustain his finding out this is the way to make good learning benefits. Maybe you could say that the skill of self-regulation is totally unconditional inside the netcourses. Otherwise you can really easily drop out on the course as well as the level of mastering remain weak.Self-regulation may be internal or external. When motivation is external student needs to have rewards to be able to achieve learning targets. In these cases studying is just not motivated by actual will to learn. Most important goal is just to get this course done. Challenges of sociocultural differences in CSCL
The social setting has a great effect on CSCL. As we know that the basic elements of CSCL contain groups group members tutoring teachers and Collaborative learning setting. Since every participator has their very own uniqueness— They have various educational levels they may come from distinct countries with distinct cultural backgrounds they have different personal characteristics and different communicative styles even the genders are distinct then comes the social challenges- Can the offered activity be truly carried out by this kind of group of people How can motivation be maintained so as to promote this kind of a complicated group structure of participants proceed conversations with a certain topic and finally complete a function successfully
It is usually a common phenomenon that the group members come from different social environments. The first impediment aspect may be the language differences. If the language a participant needs to use inside a discussion just isnt his or her mother tongue it will disturb the conversation or debating going smoothly to some extent and cause the feeling of frustration.
As for the educational level there are distinctive types of people with unique education backgrounds will be involved in this kind of kind of learning. Then the relationship among group members the relationship among teacher and group members plus the relationship between experts along with the group members should also be taken into considered. The pressure and less confidence from people with lower level of education will also become obstruction in CSCL.
Some important roles this kind of as guides group leaders and mediators are the vital elements contribute to the success of a complicated collaboration system. However person members mastering behaviors and communicative styles are entirely unique from each other. It may cause the disagreement in the method of collaboration understanding. The interaction in between crucial type and obstinate type of person will lead to generating small progress in the procedure of discussion. Likewise if there are too many members who easily compromise with others will induce the low quality of discussion final results. For example most with the group members dont express their opinion freely with echoing the sentiments of other folks. Consequently the discussion results are the adding of some simple suggestions. Compared with traditional classroom understanding CSCL needs far more active interaction between group members to achieve the setting objectives. There is an affinity in between the ways to method the info and the outcome of studying. For instance some people will actively promote the discussion some will guide other people to be involved in the discussion. These people will be considered as the leaders or organizers on the group and they always make a major contribution for the studying activity. Some members will discuss with others but their interaction is confined to a small number of people. While another kind of members are completely isolated from others-they act as lurkers and seldom participate inside the online understanding. Though it can not be denied that they also do the serious reading online and speculate on the topics such way of discovering is detrimental indeed towards the maintenance in the group dynamics. Furthermore the behavior of gaining without contributing is unfair to those who actively participate inside the online mastering.
Gender differences is another significant factor that cannot be ignored in CSCL. According to my personal experience people with the identical sex are easier to get familiar with one another and they feel at ease inside the conversation while a group of member with both sexes always have a less heat discussion because there is taboo in some instances. None the less the latter can focus far more on the topic instead of getting onto irrelevant topics.
Therefore the tutoring teachers have the responsibility to very well know the many members within the group by indicates of person interviewing group interviewing observing and questionnaires. They should also pay much attention towards the design with the CSCL activities and establish a bridge among the activists and those who always keep silence so as to inspire and motivate every group member. Then the many participants and learners can have an equal opportunity to take part inside the finding out approach especially those with less confidence and seldom take part inside the online study and discussions.
2.four Guidance and assistance – to join the forces
Collaborative efforts in CSCL enviroment might be stymied for instance by a group members nonchalance or because of several other reasons exactly where a person prevents the group functioning effectively. In traditional classroom situations you all are aware whether someone is far more passive but in CSCL context presence might be more hidden. Help and guidance are therefore essential but challenging ways to prevent the project failing. The responsibility of your collective projects succes is common but its important to have an objective view overlooking the completeness.
A single point is how to get rid of ones mental models- how to justify some new model of mastering and push yourself to try and activate in it And how it impacts determination if you are unaware with the styles how to take component within the enviroment – for instance people are taught in school to create total texts essays etc. so it might be a challenge to feel free to create just some glimpses of strategies via web.
Materials as a backup are also a component of support distinctive than comminucation. Also the accession to others comments inthe network can operate supportively. As mentioned there are many challenges what come to determination in CSCL – but what I found is motivating in it is that you often get to see far more clearly how other individuals have seen the issue and you can sometimes even feel the group better than in face-to-face groups that are sometimes unsocial. When able to see others texts and views its educative to reflect your personal thinking in relation to other individuals.
The question of decision-making and separation of powers is interesting since people interact with one another inside a virtual enviroment developed by e-learning instead of face to face discussion. When directing the practice guidanceis a critical elementbu is it enough just to set the ambitions The part of a director here should not how ever be too restrictive but to let the individuals form and reflect their thoughts by themselves. In what situation should a facilitator interfere then
Pointing to Maslows motivational theories andthe hierarchy of needsGrnfors 2002 shouldnt the learning processes needs be satisfied also all through the method- intermediate stopping points considering goals. Goals must be set properly otherwise it could be hard to regulate yourself on doing something abstract. So intermittent feedback is useful to contribute motivation. Themanner of giving feedback could be built into the practice being required. Tutoring pairs for instance could be told to give feedback and advices from time to time.
A person usually gets a lot of energy in face-to-face meetings when someone for example brings up a question which has exercised ones mind – usually its a question that other individuals have also wondered. So to further motivation in class those interactive moments are critical. Im trying to say that its needed to express oneselves freely in CSCL and also a facilitator has to pull things together to improve determination. Should there be much more coaching and tutorig all through CSCL-processes Tutoring pairs for instance could be told to give feedback and advices from time to time. It could be supportive during lack of self-regulation. In CSCL a student is forced toadvance by her-hisself what is often encumbering. Hence the function of a manual or acoach is needful for reducing the pressure plus the feeling of being alone. Coaching can gain self-confidence in relation towards the network andit can help to reveal ideas and help gain the targets faster.
Does CSCL-learning push you to reflect understanding additional and so promotes learning I have found that in CSCLthe feeling of obligationto do ones bit is interestingly strongerthan in typical studying circumstances – in CSCL we cansupport guideand facilitate every otherby participating actively and courageously. 2.5 Future challenges in CSCL
The feelings and experiences according to CSCL seems to vary quite much. All of us have probably heard both positive and negative opinions about CSCL. As a studying process CSCL is quite new and therefore the experiences from CSCL are not so broad. There are many college students in pedagogical contexts that never even heard of CSCL. As often in science there seems to be a gap among the CSCL practitoners plus the CSCL developers. These gaps could be minimized by generating CSCL something that is made use of in everyday school conxtexts. Only through experiences and feedback from the users it is possible for the researchers to further develop CSCL.
As mentioned many times before it seems that we can not adress the significance of support guidance design and scaffolding in CSCL enough this is a viewpoint that every student teacher developer and researcher seems to have in common. Clear instructions with guidelines explained tasks goals and timetables needs to be even a lot more structured since these directly affect the students individual motivation. If CSCL can manage to light the spark of interest within the college students the final result is very much depending on the social challenges inside the collaborative phase. It often feels that the teachers assistance within the collaborative phase is only provided to groups that are already succeeding by for example giving encouraging comments for the group. Encouragement is certainly of great significance in all groups but the teacher or instructor shouldnt be afraid to also actively comment and instruct the groups that might not be doing as well. In order to create a trustworthy atmosphere in CSCL the teachers should be provided the time they need to be active and present members within the CSCL-community.
The list of future motivational challenges in CSCL seems to be quite long but the core challenge seems to be in how students see CSCL CSCL is often seen inside a negative way by college students probably as a result of personal experiences from a less sucessfull CSCL-course. Almost as if CSCL directly suggests piles of much boring and hard get the job done. As students we need to overcome our negative feelings and try to look at CSCL as something positive and valuable that provides us great opportunities to develop as learners as something that offers us a different kind of finding out experiences and as something that enriches and broadens our world of experiences.
Miki Kallio Nonamanut Pongsakdi Pete Santos and Maria Cerrato Lara
3. Motivational and Emotional Challenges in CSCL
3.1 Introduction
Computer Supported Collaborative Discovering CSCL could be supported and facilitated in many ways. From literature on CSCL determination and emotion are considerable features to CSCL that can trigger this atmosphere negatively or positively in obtaining success. CSCL usually is often a combination of individuals and groups performing with each other around or by computers to total a process or a goal. Individuals and groups are driven by motivation and emotion causing challenges that affect the surroundings and with the exact same time this surroundings affects initial determination and feelings that college students bring towards the class. Learners cooperate and collaborate in CSCL according to determination and emotion. In other words motivation and emotion are important inside the learning procedure and this is very evident in CSCL taking into account that college students must be committed to collaboration. The tasks or objectives deemed necessary for success in CSCL are driven then by motivation and emotion. Figure 1. highlights by far the most significant and interesting topics dealing with CSCL and motivation and emotion.
Figure 1. By far the most significant and interesting topics and highlighted questions dealing with CSCL and determination and emotion.
Three important concepts dealing with motivation and emotion are self-regulation co-regulation and shared-regulation and are vital to understand emotional and motivational processes inside CSCL In fact the final two constructs have emerged from empirical work carried out in dynamic and collaborative studying environments. These three concepts stimulate studying processes and improvement and are vital to understand emotional and motivational processes inside CSCL. In fact the last two constructs have emerged from empirical perform carried out in dynamic and collaborative learning environments. Self-regulated mastering has been defined by Jrvel et al. 2007 cited from Boekaerts et al.2000 and Pintrich 2000 as -an active constructive process whereby learners set objectives for their studying and then try to plan keep track of regulate and handle their cognition determination behavior and context.- In other words on a person degree the learners construct their understanding with the educational environment for themselves and to figure out how they will engage it and to what degree.
Co-regulated studying is often defined as a extra knowledgeable actor supporting or scaffolding a less knowledgeable actor enabling the less knowledgeable actor to reach a higher potential of learning Turku CSCL class discussion 2008. Shared regulated mastering has been identified by Jrvel et al. 2007 cited from Jrvel et al. 2006 and Vauras et al. 2003 is in which -some or all on the group members simply cooperate to regulate other individuals or inside the best cases regulate themselves consensually.- Shared regulation offers group insight and strategies derived by the individuals for the group as a group helping or aiding the control from the group for the group development. Shared regulation is then an indicator that collaborative studying is working as it implies that college students self-regulate and co-regulate with expertise- if college students arent efficient in regulating themselves it is then difficult for them to co-regulate and even worse to share-regulate.
Understanding how to evaluate and deal with determination and emotions may prove vital towards the success of CSCL. The individuals intrinsic understanding and performanceof self-regulation co-regulation and shared-regulation will support the improvement with the group when working in CSCL and may possibly contribute to the personal advancement from the person outside of CSCL also. These central concepts will be discussed further in the next section on the chapter. 3.2 Central concepts
Part of determination and emotions in CSCL
Most of us realize that certain motivations and feelings are necessaryin order to make the process of collaborative studying successful. However the course of action of collaborative learning itself evokes learners to have desirable motivations and emotions. Collaborative studying comprises a diversity of shared processes where individuals aim to regulate the prerequisites for finding out together and an increasing amount of studies emphasise the meaning of determination and emotions for successful collaboration.Jrvel et al. 2007 in Crook 2002. In this portion the aim is to discuss about the primary aspects that support motivation and feelings in CSCL.
Self-regulation and metacognition
The theory of studying has been developed in an effort to improve extra effective discovering in the tough changing world of today. Discovering in postmodern society will not be a fixed set of information anymore but usually an open unstructured changing task for whichwe must construct information together with less familiar peers much more often by suggests of the technologies using world wide web. New finding out tools has been innovated and empirically examined. Self-regulated mastering expertise – how learners develop understanding techniques and use them effectively – have been found very considerable for learning. Lately it has been found out that their importance is important also in social practices- how learners engage and cope in cognitive and motivational elements among peers. Difficult social discovering scenarios require cognitive motivational and socio-emotional expertise especially as far as life-long mastering is concerned. These capabilities are called self-regulation and when college students are able to feel about them conscioulsy and with an intention we named it metacognition- the capacity to regulate cognition feelings and motivations.
Self-regulated learners take charge of their own discovering- they set goals for their discovering and then plan individual techniques for controlling and regulating their cognition determination behaviour and context. They can also evaluate their actions. Learners understanding and active management of their own motivational processing is an critical aspect of self-regulated understanding in addition to volition and self-efficacy. Based on many studies all these multiple elements affect use of methods and students understanding differently.
Social regulation
Recent strategies of social cognition Higgins 2000 Thompson Fine 1999 have established multiple new forms of social and collaborative understanding practices. In social collaborative studying situations learners share know-how and proceed coordinated social activities which demands cognitive motivational and socio-emotional abilities differing from those required in well-structured teacher-centered finding out scenarios. In self-regulated social discovering situation joint goal setting emphasizing collaboration and negotiation and scaffolding are provided by new student-centered studying approaches. This kind of finding out may be additional challenging but also intrinsically additional interesting for learners- posting questions explaining and analyzing their answer result in higher levels of regulation and metacognition higher order understanding three elements that walk hand in handand higher levels ofengagement.
In the social discovering setting some learners use social comments as a way to maintain motivation and a socio-emotionally secure atmosphere in the group. Several recent studies have shown that social understanding and collaboration for shared tasks enhance students adaptation of context certain motivational targets even if they have distinct socio-emotional orientation tendencies and even if their motivations to do the activity are distinctive.
Self-regulated studying is conventionally treated as an individual phenomena but in CSCL it is socially constructed and socially shared regulated. The aspects of person perspective have to be regarded also at a social level- within the case of many learners social regulation shared regulation and co-regulation have been researched in many studies. In self-regulation processes an individuals aim is to regulate herhimself but there are also other regulation types- other-regulation and shared regulation. In socially regulated finding out a learner should also affect other people and every one of the group members co-operate in order to regulate others or regulate themselves consensually. Jrvel et al. 2006. Group members know their own cognitive strengths and weaknesses but they are also aware of and can regulate the cognitive resources in the group for example by means of discussion forums or face to face discussions exactly where they externalize their thinking producing it visible. They reflect their cognitive processes misunderstandings and missing expertise with other folks.
3.3 Challenges
What does discovering implies in CSCL Finding out in CSCL implies negotiation arranging questioning conflicting reasoning exploratory talk and so on. Littleton Miell 2004. It will not be easy for college students nor is it easy for facilitators either. Recent research reveals that students face difficulties in engaging understanding and achieving their goals inside a wide variety of finding out contexts Jrvel et al. 2007 Volet Jrvel 2001. How these difficulties affect the learning processes and determination
The basic thing to notice is that collaboration is not spontaneous i.e. studying by way of collaboration just isnt something that just happens when college students come with each other. Around the contrary college students need to be committed to ongoing negotiation and continuously update and evaluation achievement Jrvenoja Jrvel 2008 and therefore multiple types of social challenges can be faced.
Secondly feelings are often aroused and therefore regulation is needed. Feelings generated in social online environments are not distinctive in nature from those generated in face-to-face finding out circumstances. What is distinctive in social online discovering will be the fact that feelings are expressed via engineering and that the disclosure of emotions is necessarily voluntary. The outcomes highlight the multiple directions feelings can take as well as the significance of students interpretations of their feelings around the learning approach Jrvel et al. 2007. But it is less difficult to cause misunderstandings and much more difficult to clarify thoughts via engineering and therefore the risk for lost determination is higher.
There are also many other causes of low determination or bad self-regulation in CSCL. Among the most common is probably the bystander Hudson Bruckman 2004 or free-rider effect Hkkinen Arvaja Mkitalo 2004. Students with a passive attitude in group activities can easily destroy the joy with the other students too.
Also too high workload or a too high looking workload can kill the determination for CSCL. It is difficult for students to start the function if they can only see a huge mountain of assignments. For teachers everything might look clear and easy but for college students the environment tools and the other group mates can all be totally new. Effectively organized schedules tasks and tools are a must for any successful CSCL course and one particular shouldnt forget scaffolding either. Asking college students to operate with each other is simply not enough.
Self-regulated learners must take charge of their own finding out by selecting and setting goals applying person tactics in an effort to keep track of regulate and management diverse aspects which influence the studying process and evaluating his or her actions Jrvel et al. 2007. That is usually seen as a possibility for deep mastering but also as a source of difficulties. Are all students really ready for self-regulation other-regulation shared regulation and in the best cases socially shared regulation
Many times students tend to underestimate available time or resources. If determination is already a bit low and there are simpler and additional interesting things to do maybe it just isnt so easy to carry out any time-consuming assignments in complex social and technological environments. One particular crucial feature is that especiallyat the beginning of the finding out project the self-driven feelings play an vital function in inhibiting or facilitating task-involvement Jrvel et al. 2007. 3.four Improving CSCL and supporting actors involved
Improving CSCL is imperative to the advancement of powerful learningenvironments. Many difficulties have been revealed in CSCL earlier within the chapter and these difficulties impair discovering and developing concepts. Help for the atmosphere and for the college students and teachers plays a significant function within the progression of CSCL.
The progressive inquiry model is quite impressive on paper and if employed correctly it could boost CSCL in a very positive manner. The model was made at the Univeristy of Helsinki and is applied to facilitate expertise creation practices in educational conditions. The model is similar to the scientific community models that create new knowledge deriving and answering questions Lakkala Helsinki Lecture Podcast 2008. This model retrains the students thinking from the traditional sense by allowing them to derive and answer their own challenges. The traditional setting of education places the teacher in a position to create the problems that the students will answer. In this progressive inquiry model the teacher becomes a facilitator in aiding or supporting the college students achieve their goals or tasks. The teachers facilitation must have a delicate balance so thatheshe does not interfere with the groups development. In an ideal situation based on this model critical evaluation develops independent thinking as a result of person and group reflection. The capitalization of reflection occurs throughout the process at various times by distinct individuals within the group. From hindsight this practice of evaluation and independent thinking continues also beyond the CSCL experience and occurs when college students have to face authentic studying challenges or when they arereintroduced to group function.
The progressive inquiry model builds fans because it can change the behavior of your student plus the teacher. The model builds confidence within the intelligence in the person and group. Individuals in a group have the opportunity for leadership in the advancement of concepts and strategies. In this case students are called to step out and create in circumstances exactly where they maybe the only one in the group constructing a particular idea or rationale. The model supports group thinking and individual thinking which in return the individual benefits. Teachers dictate less and can potentially learn from the groups.
Needless to say these are all positives about the progressive inquiry model and there could be some potential problems with it at the same time. College students can do the opposite and crawl into a shell throughout group function feel with-drawn or even lazy. A single should not focus on these drawbacks because they can occur in a tradition educational setting along with the point of your progressive inquiry model is to develop thinking but it requires time to re-adjust old thinking patterns. Eventually the model can and will prove successful.
When dealing with the progressive inquiry model it is often a must that we keep in mind an important argument that Vygotskian made. The collaborative studying setting causes individual mastering. Through the interactions of your individuals within the group understanding develops inside the group. As the group develops concepts and concepts the data is then reflected on later by the person. Lehtinen 2003 This amongst other components is what the model is trying to accomplish inside the CSCL educational surroundings.
As help is factored into CSCL facilitating the motivation perspective and also the social cohesion perspective becomes a very positive job. College students have various interests when joining CSCL and these interests should be maintained or transformed for the wished directionand guided toward the goal with the process. The question becomes should the teacher or the college students facilitate these perspectives or both The second question is who plays a much more essential part inside the facilitation of these perspectives and how do they impact the environment
Systematic training along with background facts as a base combined with scaffolding is usually a must for successful positive outcomes in CSCL. Lehtinen 2003 Nussbaum 2002 Marttunen 2001 Background data and scaffolding largely prepare the students for the process at hand.Something simple yet strategic like the group figuring out if they operate better cooperatively or collaboratively may play a huge part in the improvement of group work. Shared regulation in this situation can set the tone for the group if the instructions for the process are unclear or have not been established. This understanding alone can save expensive time stress and effort.
3.5 Conclusions
In this chapter we have discussed how determination and emotions are important features for the CSCL atmosphere that can inflict on this surroundings negatively or positively as students must be committed to collaboration. That could be the reason why the essential point is to studyhow students self-regulate co-regulate and socially shared regulate their emotional and motivational challenges concerning both finding out and well-being ambitions which deeply affect the quality oftheir learning for the duration of their collaboration in the teamwork studying procedure and at the end of it understanding benefits or product.
Another critical point from the previous a single will be to study how students can increase these three levels of regulation so as to learn more and better and how to assess teachers inside the achievement of this ambitious objective. As Jrvel et al. 2007 point out golden rules that permit members to feel safe take risks and share suggestions are needed for successful engagement in collaborative finding out. This actually requires not only motivational emotional and discovering regulation in the three levels mentioned but also metacognitive manage on them.
Taking into account the previous idea in this chapter we have also discussed how studying by means of collaboration is not something that just will take place whenever college students come collectively- in any joint project college students need to be committed to ongoing negotiation and continuously update and evaluate achievement and as it has been explained facemultiple types of social challenges. Therefore the support for the environment and for the students and teachers play a substantial role in CSCL.
Satu Salmela Tero Paakki Linda Pohorska and MelinaMarkatzinou four. Socially Shared Regulation of CSCwriting
4.1 Introduction
It is obvious that nowadays the society is changing quantitatively and qualitatively. The rhythm of our daily life is accelerating which can been seen both in schools and operate. Technological improvement is a single big element that changes our life but on the other hand it can offer us solutions to resolve troubles in our hectic surroundings. But side by side there is a need to think discovering teaching working and environments that all this is done through new angles too. As our ways of doing thing changes and the new technologies is around us we need to emphasize the collaboration amongst people as a way to reach understanding supported by the technological solutions.
One particular are of collaborative working is shared writing experience and this write-up concentrates on Computer system Supported Collaborative and regulated writing. The post is according to the material provided our group inside the international Laptop Supported Collaborative Understanding CSCL course autumn 2008. Moreover we will concentrate on the characteristics with the shared regulation in writing. The aim is to explane this new model by analysing the advantages along with the disadvantages of its use. The fact that our personal writing practice was socially shared writing gives because the possibility to explain based on our experience this new kind of working as well as the challenges in it.
We are dealing with the epistemic function of elaborative writing -note taking- contrasting person and collaborative teaching and mastering situations in which note-taking will take place plus the distinction between two kinds of writing- elaborative writing and communicative writing. We are going to give the definition on the crucial words like CSCL CSCW shared regulation writing because they are unknown for the majority of people. Furthermore we are going to discuss the challenges and also the issues people may have throughout the use of this new system and we will give some advises in order college students to enhance their writing. Finally we will summarise the benefits of our write-up.
It is critical to be mentioned that our post is supported by PowerPoint slides and vodcast by _Professor Anna Iesta which are determined by the paper Castell M. Gonzlez L. Iesta A. 2008. Approaching socially shared regulation of writing- The impact of peers suggestions in doctoral students writing. SIG Writing 2008. Program Abstracts . The 11th International Conference from the EARLI Special Interest Group on Writing Lund Sweden.
four.2 Key concepts
To understand our topic completely you need to understand some essential consepts releted to socially shared regulation of writing. These are CSCL CSCWriting diverse learning models but especially socially shared regulation and socially shared writing. Within the next paragraphs of this chapter will provide you an appropriate introduction of these concepts.
Laptop or computer Supported Collaborative studying CSCL is nowadays very developing topic in which there has been done a lot of researches. CSCL is determined by collaborative work provided throughout technologies especially computers. One particular essential aspect of collaborative finding out and working is colloborative writing. Written communication is crucial aspect of our daily life and even when we think that we create alone we still work with others. At least inside the sense that we communicate with other authors and readers and perhaps our lecturers and so forth. The interaction only goes deeper when we write totally collaboratively together with other writers colleagues or fellow students.
Laptop Supported Collaborative Writing CSCW is growing study field as extra and more of our function is done collaboratively the nature is distributed or done distantly. Collaborative writing is an event in which many writers prepare exactly the same document. The collaborative writing can be carried out very in different ways depending on objectives with the writing what is written in what kind of an setting is written who participates in the writing or how are the writers roles defined. Collaborative writing is very often visible in expert content articles which appear in specialized literature magazines for expert public etc. A small group of writers writes the document with a certain schedule in which the subject and contents are known in general from the beginning. The texts which have already been designed consequently from the collaborative writing have usually been estimated to be in a good quality. Far more writers have a lot more information and facts skills and points of view. Altough finally it is written like just 1 person wrote it. The writers also have to act because the readers on the text and give feedback to one another.
When combining a technology in towards the equation it should make collaboration even ritcher and give interaction new possibilities and opportunities. The definition of CSCWriting is that it can be a cognitive procedure which can be always dialogic and situated. Engineering can make possible the discussion amongst the members of your group in real time synchronously or asynchronously and it also provides an opportunity to collaborate with other writers from anywhere. For example Wikispace is one good alternative which provides many opportunities for the network writing. Collaborative writing develops cooperative techniques argumentation abilities and negotiation expertise. The writing expertise are developed by writing it indicates that in collaborative element of writing we are giving and getting a feedback which teach us develop our knowledge and can make us see in what style we write and if it is understandable for our readers. To know this is useful in competitive enviroment in which we all live nowadays. We need to know and also realize if other people understand us because otherwise we cannot succeed.
As always the way we try to build or guide teaching or mastering is or at least should be grounded around the way we see studying in general. Good discovering environments are constructed on studying conseptions as they define who we learn. Writing self-regulated or socially shared is not unique. To be able to understand how to help learners efforts in writing as a fellow student or teacher we need to understand how does the whole method function and what components are relevant. The four various discovering models behind self-regulation in writing thatCastell Gonzlez Iesta 2008 highlight are- Cognitive models Socio-cognitive models Socio-cultural models Socially-shared models
Exactly the same models are familiar from CSCL general theoretical background but here they are examined inwriting context. They distinctive variables we can see as a result of them tell us how we should design CSCL writing and motivate it together with how to study and what to study if we want to learn more. We can tabulate these four models andreview the differences in them in how they see writing what part they give towards the context what is their conception about writing regulation solutions utilized by models along with the units to analyse. SEE TABLE ATTACHED The study done by thatCastell Gonzlez Iesta 2008 is depending on the studying model of socially shared regulation so we need to understand this model better.Socially shared regulation is in this method seen as a writing which can be considered as a cognitive approach which can be always dialogic and situated. In socially shared processes its dyads regulate their joint activity of revision and their very own person writing Castell Gonzlez Iesta 2008.
Socially shared writing. In the socially shared writing there is very critical how the collaboration looks like. It is about complete group and about atmosphere which the group tends to make. There is always some perform which has to be done and all members should participate on it. In line with this all members should feel comfortable in their group. Moreover the group should be aware of troubles which may arise. For example the group members should motivate one another and should be active otherwise they will lose contact with the group and complete work can be damaged by this.
4.3 Challenges in CSCWriting
Castell Gonzlez andIesta 2008 implemented a study that concentrates on socially shared writing more closely on peers suggestions in doctoral studens writing. Their objective was to find out complications that doctoral college students identify in revising them collaboratively to analyze the changes in students texts after this and to explore if socially shared regulation has impact in revising methods implemented by the college students. Through the study Castell Gonzlez and Iesta defines main issues that students faced and divided those challenges into eight categories-
1. Unconnected information
two. Lack of structure
3. Unpersonalized information
4. Details taken for granted
5. Unspecified dilemma
6. Unjustified info
7. Unprecise terminology
8. Redundant information
For the duration of three sessions which they had studentsanalysed their difficulties and made changes in their writing. They improved precision in academic texts. Also they had to change degree offorcefulness within the writers position or arguments and at least they got know how to make structures for better understanding on the text and for less difficult reading. This structure markers led to guide function inside the writing. Due to all these changeswritten texts was improveda lot and it was all done by peer- and socially-shared revisions. It made college students to realize how to do their writing a lot more effective and easily readable. Another aspect of social shared writing is that not everyone understands what a writer wants to say. Not everyone can express their thougts exactly and everyone has his own style of writing so because of this there is proof of a need of conversation and feedback. It is very easy to occur misunderstandings so it is indispensable that there is actually a mechanism with which we can avoid these.It is impossiblethat students can built a fully shared understandinghoweverit is significant to tryfor the best result.All these things supports the name of this kind of writing – socially-shared regulation of writing. It is a combination of person writing that is under the manage of other members of the group and social communication among memebers. This handle takes the form of a dialoguewhere the socially shared regulation turns into both a collective and a social mastering experience among the members of a neighborhood which have already been bound collectively by the joint participation within the writing activity.
four.4 Scaffoldingstudents in writing and collaboration
In this part of our chapter we will focused on help which should be provided to students to improve their writing and collaboration. At to begin with it is critical that the common targets are set. The group have to reach an full understanding on the goal of the text. If the aims with the members with the group are not the identical it is positive that the entire approach will fail. It is indispensable that eachone on the members will put aside hisher personal objectives as a way to assume and act in a common spirit.
Itis true that when they are writing collaboratively in order to reachcommon targets the writing course of action becomes a relevant experience for every in the co-writers. This is usually linked for the idea that any kind of regulation includes the whole-person-in-context thatmeans each and every writer brings with himher a series of interests and targets within which we can find discovering targets aimed at mastering but also wellbeing targets aimed at keeping.Theimportanceof these two kinds of objectives has to do with the fact that the complexity with the writing method and especially in the CSCWriting may bring extra challenges towards the writers. These challenges may lead the writers to decide to focus on their wellbeing targets because it is a -safer- land for them and they feel better. But like this they decrease their efforts to reach the commonly set task goals. In this sense it is obvious thatin order to avoid the challenges and reach the deep expertise it is very important in CSCW producing negotiation and dialogue. They should think that the final results mustsatisfy everyone. Unfortunately there is just not a recipe which can ensure us the succed of this system.In a big element it depends on the attitudesof the participants.How open minded they are to here various opinions to share things to collaborate to dedicate time to search to forget what they want and emphasize what the team wants.
The group must design how to arrange the contents on the document. At the similar time the group must also make plans on the continuing of your entire practice and also the actual working. In the planning stage the group will define their intention and how they intends to reach them. Group collaborating is vital because the working is properly binding. Together the function of the writing group is usually organised based on different writing strategies- as divided next to each other or reciprocal writing. Lowry Curtis Lowry 2004.
The various roles can also be defined for the writers. For example it is usually a writer an editor an evaluator a critic etc. Mostly it is very obvious who plays which part. The interaction inside the relaxed and permissive atmosphere creates the opportunity for the dialogue and to collaborative writing. The thoughts that happen to be embeded in the plans get to be clear often in connection with the production on the actual text. For this reason members from the group who write separately may understand differently to the earlier planned things which are planned collectively. The strategies of your group must obviously correspond with provided instructions and plans must be checked so that the output might be created. For all those reasons it is really very significant for students participating in laptop or computer supported collaborative learning totally understand the entire scope of such project.They should participate in this process because they want willingness and moreover it is necessary that they aretotally concious about the reason for which they participate they find it interesting for the credits and so on.
Students should also know technologies they are working with. Those technologies have to be appropriate with the age of students or target group. Not simply age but also the educational level should be taken into consideration when deciding on it. In this element the teachers role is turning into the guid or tutor rather than a classical teacher. Teacher lose his previous duties and he must face to issues with their college students. So the technologies and other circumstances which arise with CSCL arent only students problems but additionally the teachers challenges. Students should feel comfortable with the CSCL enviroment and every doubts should be solved immediatelly to anticipate further bigger difficulties or failures and so forth. According to this it is clear that the function of a teachertutor is here undoubtable. Another thing which can help college students with collaborative writing is a previous experience. There is really a big difference whether someone has already had some experiences with the CSCW or not. This kind of a member should be active and initiative and make the get the job done for other members much easier by his help and his comments. Mostly they can become leader in the whole group and he can provide a structure in the complete work or at least a model by which other people might be led. But to be able to do so the teacher must be trained and prepared to teach CSCLCSCW. We cannot forget that this can be a new model of studying which cant be adopted in a day. The knowhow demanded from teachers covers good technology abilities also deep know-how and understanding of understanding and how to combine these two.
four.5 Conclusions
The suitable tools of CSCW happen to be created and are examined inside the cooperation with the researchers of internationally various disciplines. Pargman 2003 pp.737-757 In CSCW there isnt merely matter that is applied environments which make the collaborative writer but how promoted with their help interaction amongst the writers. The engineering helps make possible the discussion in between the members on the group in true time synchronously or asynchronically. For example Wikispace is one particular good alternative which provides many opportunities for the network writing. Wikispace is open available either to everybody or to a certain group as marked off get the job done premises. Inside the wikispace the writing has not been bound to time or place and the history from the writing can be flexibly tracked. The setting make it possible for also interaction and also the writers can negotiate collectively and can build the text. It also allows all of the writers equal participation when every writer has precisely the same rights for the production and handling in the text. This will form also the problem in the wiki space if for example the number from the notes of the writing history increases in order that it will become difficult to follow them. Furthermore you have to learn wiki space functions a little before its use is fluent. Wei Maust Barrick Cuddihy Spyridakis 2005 p.204-209
Collaborative writing inside the wikispace might be apromisingalternative when one particular is looking for a suitable tool for the network writing. When it is written within the network the cooperation will be a lot more flexible than the fact that documents would be traditionally changed with e-mail however. The availability and divident with the text in the network are also critical because at the sketching stage the members on the group typically will work their own shares separately other folks and also the assistance of your system for the asynchronic working is emphasised.
Today within the worklife it is natural that the common object is produced asynchronically which requires adaptable applications to that purposes. It is difficult to change something that exists exactly the same for decades and everybody know it the way it is like the education system. But since the engineering develops new needs arise which must be satisfied if we want tosurvive in todays society.This new model of education is very challenging but if there is really a good training and in combination with the traditional methods could be prooved very beneficial. It is in our hands to change the long term to move on and develop it so as to reach deep information and be able to give solution towards the challenges that emmerge everyday.
Mariona CorcellesGerardo BaalesandJie Shen
5. The Roles of Note-Taking in CSCW Processes
5.one Introduction
Almost every day most of people take notes in daily academic and non-academic contexts with various purposes Bosch Piolat 2005 Hartley 2002. They generally take notes to leave a message to express their feelings and feelings to others to make a shopping list to study to create a text to resolve complex complications to believe about themselves as well as the world that surrounds them and many other folks motives. Though it is possible that some people consider that they dont need to take notes maybe due in portion to their extraordinary memory in general the study point out that the notes taken by people in these activities help them not merely as tools to register to remember and to transmit information but also as epistemic tools to transform the data in expertise. Castell Monereo 2005
Within the school context the college students usually take notes in an individual way working with various note-taking methods and different usually means of registration of information and facts See Castell Monereo 2005 Piolat Olive Kellogg 2005 From a person point of view note-taking implies an elaborative writing method in which the writer writes to itself writer-based-prose and via which the writer reflect around the logged contents and regulates his finding out processes Castell Iesta Gonzales 2008.
Nevertheless in the present time with the use with the new paradigms of collaborative studying CL ODonnell et al. 1999 and Laptop Supported Collaborative Learning CSCL Dillenbourg et al. 2008 inside most of educational contexts it is necessary to recognize that notes-taking is no longer only an activity and tool of person use but rather it has also become a collaborative activity . Notes are utilized to share strategies with peoplein face-to-face collaborative learning activities Castell Monereo 2005 and also inside a online collaborative understanding activities for example the Laptop Supported Collaborative Writing CSCW Cerrato 2003 Lowry Curtis Lowry 2004.
In line with Lowry et al. 2004 we can define the collaborative writing as an iterative and social course of action that involves a group focused on a common objective that negotiates coordinates and communicates during the creation of a common document p.75. In this sense the term CSCW indicates thattwo o additional people working with each other trying to be coordinated by means of networked technology-based environments like synchronous communication media ex. chat videoconferences etc and asynchronous ex email forums wikis and so forth to construct a common text which could be complemented with face-to-face interactions between participants Dillenbourg Jrvel Fisher 2008. As outlined by Lowry et al 2004 and Cerrato 2003 note-taking is an activity frequently made use of by people when they work in Collaborative Writing and CSCW.
Despite of thisfrequent use its surprising thatto the date we have a tiny information about the functions of note-taking in CSCW processes. In this sense our objective in this post is to feel about this question- What could be the roles of note taking in CSCW
Basing us around the available facts in the present chapter we expose that note-taking is usually a tool that has two principal roles in CSCW processes- information-transmission and information construction.
5.two Roles of note-taking in CSCW processes
Traditionally note taking has been considered something very individual and personal made only for oneself and for private use. In concordance with this conception of notes taking initial research in 60s and 70 shas focused mainly on cognitive aspects or on the relationship betweenquality on the notes and studying within the 80s and 90s but always in a very individualistic perspective Castell et al. 2005
In contrast nowadays technologies provide news ways of communicating a lot more socially and collaboratively that make usto rethink the traditional conceptions of note-taking. At present its crucial to explore deeperthe relationship involving note-taking plus the social approach. Computer system Supported Collaborative writing CSCW is really a very complicated and certain composition process in which two or far more college students must write a common document applying computers Cerrato 2003. We have to differenciate CSCW processes from individual writing processesusing reciprocal writing processes Hayes Flower 1980. In this reciprocal writing processes two writers offer each other reciprocalllymutual support mainly to plan and assessment each and every textelaborated individually Castello Iesta Gonzales 2008. In this sense reciprocal writing process could not be considereda collaborative writing activity.
Otherwise as outlined by Lowry et al 2004 in CSCW conditions the students should generate their text jointly by the realization of diverse tasks thats means they have to negotiate and consensuate their text before writing throughout and after text production. For example before writing the students have to planificate collaboratively the objective along with the sense with the text theywant to produce. For the duration of the CSCW processes the students have to set common goals see section 4.3. for a discussion around the negotiation of private and common goals define their writing tactics to compose the document set their participation rolesand so on. Also as they are writing and after the writing they have to revise their textto be sure that they have achieve their ambitions.In this scenario CSCW processes usually involves a combination of phases of writing and communication periods of synchronous activity where the group works collectively in the same time and periods of person function where group members function asynchronically at unique times. The diverse range of activities involved and the distinct modes of interaction make CSCW a particularly complicated activity.
In this sense the complexity of CSCW processes usually generate diverse communication cognitive motivational social and technological challenges to co-writers See Lowry et al 2004 Dillenbourg et al. 2008 Nivala Lehtinen Hurme 2008. The note-taking is usually a tool that the college students can use to confront such challenges mainly those related with the communication knowledge construction and socially shared regulation processes implied in CSCW activities. Inside the next portion of chapter we exposethis two mainroles that note-taking has in CSCW processes.
The part of note taking as a tool for socially shared information-transmission
In the first place notes taking in CSCW is a tool for communicating andsocially sharing the details. But what could be considered notesIn which propose writers use notes And how are notes taken by co-writers in CSCW processes Which media are use by co-writers to take notes
Aswe have considerednotes taking cantbe asimple person data-collection becausein this CSCW contextareessentiallysocial and shared.Notes are not simply for oneself but they alwayshave an audience and this couldmakethe taskmore authentic interesting and motivating. In this sense as we have explained before note-taking could be considered as an elaborative writing because writing helps oneself to clarify suggestions concepts etc. but at the similar time they have to be considered asacommunicative writing because all our notes are posted in a social context with an audience that could read this notes.
In general terms notes may be considered as short condensations of information of a source that a person log usually from a lecture a book or another situation which needs to be remembered or applied later on to carry out some job Piolat Olive Kellogg 2005. Therefore in CSCW situations note-taking could be defined as an activity and a tool for stable registration of facts like an external memory that make it possible for the co-writers to store in diverse formats diverse types and quantities of information and facts for their later distribution amongst the rest from the team members Castello Monereo 2005 Piolat Olive Kellogg 2005.
In this sense notes takingallowsthe social sharing of the group memberss undersatandings and perceptions. Writing comments in posts could be considered as a privileged way of sharingthoughts with other individuals andpromotesreachinga groupsintersubjective usually means. In this senesein aCSCW everybody has thechance to shareand make publichisher opinions employing note- taking. In other sensenote-takingalso can embody relevant elements of classroom culture. Students words in notes can in some way reflect how is going on inside the classroom.
In a CSCW the co-writers usually use the notes for the duration of the whole process of CSCW as communication tools to be helped to set targets to socialize details to remember agreements to clarify interpretations to reflect around the followed method to suggest changes to recognize the achievements and even to claim the not carried out actions. In other words the co-writers use the taking of notes like an activity for pull with each other information Lowry et at 2004.
As we have said notes are a tool of registry and transmission of information but we would like to note that this approach is usually carried out in two various ways- singular-asynchronous and collaborative- synchronous.Inside the to begin with a single the team members take notes individually from one or additional sources at different moments. Even when the college students can take their notes within the notebook they usually transforms this notes into digital format working with diverse tools such as Microsoft Word or Microsoft OneNote that make it possible for them to register to search and to share information and facts inside a flexible way with the rest on the team. They can also create and to share their notes directly with their partners applying posts. Otherwise in collaborative- synchronous note-taking two or a lot more members with the group share a whiteboard in genuine time to take notes to fix to add to delete information and facts in a collaboration way supported in web-based programs like JotLive or Wiziq. This type of activities implies a true shared registration and transmission of details among the members with the team. Additionally in both situations the co-writers can use their produced notes inside a strategic and intentional way as tools to facilitate them a socially shared regulation of CSCW processes Jarvela et at 2007
Finally it is necessary to point out that in both conditions the co-writers can use several procedures or formats to take their notes which affect their learning processes as well as the co-construction of meanings and understanding in between co-writers Castello Monereo 2005 Piolat Olive Kellogg 2005. We will expose this aspect in the following section.
The function of note-taking as an epistemic tool for socially shared knowledge co-construction
In second place notes taking have an significant role within the co-construction of know-how in CSCW. As we have said before CSCW activities involve the students in a collaborative composition course of action that needs co-construction and transformation of knowledge Bereiter Scardamalia 1987.
Elaborating a common text implies taking decisions collaboratively to consensuate what to say and how to say it inside a appropriate way. In other words we must to recognize that CSCW processes require that two or extra people write collectively a text for a certain audience or discursive community taking account previous texts. This usually means that as outlined by Castell et al. 2008 the co-writers are participating inside a shared process that always is situated and dialogic.
This situated and dialogic process implies a challenge for the co-construction of meanings and know-how in the CSCW processes. As outlined by the literature in CSCW Dillenbourg Traum 1999 Roschelle Teasley 1995 this practice of co-construction in CSCW situations demand the externalization and negotiation with the participants positions via the dialogue so that you can reach intersubjectivity or a shared representation in the process.
Notes taking in CSCW have a public but also individual function that can make possiblethis co-construction of know-how because it makes visible the thinking plus the questions in the participants and it promotes the dialogue inside the group. From a Vygoskian perspective dialogue would be the important tool for understanding appropriation and interiorisation.In a dialoguedifferent voices could be reflected it enhances intertextuality and inter-thinking could be developed.
In this sense notes is usually made use of as authentic epistemic tools because it promotes sharing negotiating and co-constructing the expertise collaboratively.Based on Piolat et al. 2005 p.293-294 the key techniques of note-taking in order to transform information and facts to expertise are those who arent linear like maps outlines schemas etc. These strategies have better result in learning because promote the selection organization and resignification of details and it could be utilised as tools to negotiate indicates and to co-construct know-how between co-writers in CSCW contexts.
Nevertheless extra than the various processes and formats of notes taking what we believe that is crucial to promote co-construction of know-how will be the strategic use or the writers consciences in elaborating and making use of this notes Castello Monereo 2005. In this scenario it seems that it is necessary to teach notes tactics as a way to develop the students metacognitive use of notes as tools for social sharing info and for co-construction of knowledge in CSCW situations.
5.3 Conclusion
As conclusion we consider that notes taking in CSCW brings us an necessary tool to socially shared details and a privilegied tool to make possible the difficult practice of co-construction of expertise. Nowadays technologies in CSCL develop very quickly and every day in our society is more necessaryto incorporate it in our daily day. New technologies will provide new uses of notes that can help us tointeract far more efficiencyand collaboratively with other individuals. This principal situation has to be explored broadest within the next years.
Pipsa Keski-Hakuni Elina Koskipahta and Juha-Matti Ristiharju
6. Theoretical and Practical Viewpoints for Designing CSCL
There are many challenges that relate towards the implementation of virtual inquiry practises in any kind of mastering that you must take into consideration before through and after the course. There is also certain advantages and disadvantages on making use of these techniques. The purpose of this chapter is to clarify couple of basic things one particular must consider when designin a computer- supported collaborative discovering.
Very first we introduce three questions one particular must ask from himself to be able to clarify if laptop supported collaborative understanding CSCL from now on may be the best way to carry out the course intended. After that we deal with the practical problems of designin CSCL and how to solve them sensibly. Finally we have a few words about the value of feedback before creating our conclusions and taking a look to the future. 6.1 Central concepts
Beforewe go on and study thethings one particular must take into consideration when developing CSCL we should familiarize ourselves with some of the mainconsepts that are closely assosiated with CSCL.
one. The knowledge-creation mastering procedure implies those kinds of activities exactly where people collaboratively develope new artefacts and products or commit themselves to long term-process of working and finding out. Students need dialogical thinking knowledge and also individualistic working practices. Muukkonen Lakkala Paavola 2007.
two. Object-oriented inquiry refers to a process exactly where college students perform is organized for developing with each other some concrete outcomes all through the course as a result of a sustained inguiry approach. Central elements of an advanced studying paradigm are still dialogical thinking knowledge and individualistic working practices but this also focus on those ways that students activities are organized for collaboratively modifying and producing something tangible.
3.Metaskills of collaborative object-oriented inquiry- Addressing together the aspects of individuals small groups and objects of activity in educational settings we may gain novel understanding of students and teachers practices. Metaskills indicates those skills that college students must develop for monitoring evaluating and coordinating efforts of understanding advancement.
4. 4 pedagogical dimensions- techincal social epistemological and cognitive infrasructures. This may be the framework of peagogical infrastructures that need to be taken into account in analysing and designing pedagogical settings which are intended to promote collaborative object-oriented inquiry into actual educational settings.
5. Finding out in Groups- Collaborative understanding implies studying where not merely the teacher but additionally college students actively participate in the production and presentation of expertise. Project-Based Finding out and Problem-Based Understanding are examples of that. There are six principles of effective collaborative studying. A group engaged in mutual pursuit of knowledge provides a source for multiple perspectives and interpretations Principle of Multiplicity. The power of your group to engage the students also promotes activeness Principle of Activeness. Group participation demands articulation Principle of Articulation and because the individuals thoughts and ideas become apparent challenged and shaped fosters adaptation Principle of Adaptation and Accommodation. Because much of modern works depends of teams and individuals coordinating their efforts toward a common goal and because this is an acquired skill collaborative methods prepare college students for entry into a culture of practice Principal of Authenticity. Understanding of rich materials is termless instruction should instill a sense of tentativeness with regard to knowing a realization that understanding of complicated materials is never competed only enriched and a life-long commitment to advancing ones information Principle of Termlessness.
Koschmann Kelson Feltovich Barrows 1996 83-114.
6. Theory-based design for CSCL should progress through 4 steps-
one. generating explicit the instructional requirements that serve as design goals for the project
2. performing a comprehensive study of current educational practice with regard to these targets
3. developing a specification depending on the identified requirements and limitation on the instructional setting and the known capabilities on the technology
four. producing an implementation that allows for local adaptation to instructional practice. Koschmann Kelson Feltovich Barrows 1996 83-84.
7. Problem-Based Finding out PBL is often a curricular reform that was initial introduced with the founding with the Health sciences at McMaster University within the late 1960s. Far more generally PBL might be considered an example of a collaborative case-centered and learner-directed strategy of instruction. It is now widely employed in several educations like architecture biochemistry business administration dentistry economics engineering law social operate and other areas of postsecondary education.
Components of Problem-Based Mastering are Difficulty Formulating Self-Directed Studying Reflecting Abstracting and Applying Understanding. In collaborative studying practice one particular might be much more likely to see challenge formulating taking place early within the discussion of a case and reflective activities toward its conclusion plus the group may utilize any of these elements in the method at any time.
The PBL tutorcoach is a person trained to facilitate this learning procedure. The coachs function includes monitoring group practice as well as the participation of individuals within it guiding externalizing self-questioning and self-reflection evaluating and motivating the college students. Koschmann Kelson Feltovich Barrows 1996 95-99.
6.two Essential considerations when designing CSCL
Engineering seems to have some great advantages by providing easy access to information and facts and real-world troubles and also new indicates for communication and collaboration. Technologies also provides tools for developing higher-order thinking and understanding management capabilities. It is also worth noting that usage of Web-based technology in educational contexts raises also the possibility of extending the collaborative learning activities beyond the school walls and beyond school time.
The three golden questions of a CSCL course designer
In line with study done by Kozma 2003 the usage of ITC should actually be included into curriculum. Kozma wrote that when students also use technologies to conduct research projects analyse data solve problems design products and assess their personal get the job done students are a lot more likely to develop new ICT predicament solving facts management collaboration and communication skills p. 13. Not surprisingly there is some catch in all of this. Developing CSCL isnt easy and there are many things 1 must take into consideration when developing CSCL.
The primary thing to do before designing CSCL and doing anything with it is to look at the subject really critically and ask- Does this subject gain something when learned in group within collaboration with others It seems that it is way too common these days to try new ways of studying just for the sake of it being new way. Many times in courses that use technological innovation and personal computer supported collaboration it becomes rather obvious for the college students that normal teaching strategies would happen to be much much more beneficial to this subject instead of CSCL. If you are sure that CSCL will be the best way to go with this subject then you must needless to say choose your engineering and software and so on.
Secondly CSCL calls for extra labour to develop than normal course would require. The technological innovation doesnt make it all happen all by itself. Actually it is very common that developing virtual course might take much far more time than normal course. This is true also within the grading that usually in virtual course usually differs totally from the normal courses at the same time. In CSCL it is common to have several teachers from various subject domains to take aspect into developing the courses. You could even say that CSCL is jointly adventure on the teachers exactly where they with each other carry out the pedagogical preparing and also the guidance and assessment of students as a result of out the course.
Thirdly when designing computer supported collaborative learning the designer has to remember that it forces both the students and teachers to take a new stand that they might now be familiar. In this kind of finding out the student-teacher roles turn upside down. Teachers are no longer the supreme providers of information and facts but they are far more like a supportive function whos job changes from the teacher to far more like a guider. As for the college students become the source of information and they have to seek for the knowledge needed themselves.
The question of time and space- how to solve it
The changes dont just concern the teachers and college students. They also concern the attitude with the schools as institutes. Not all schools are willing to try something new. The new way of studying may be felt as a threat for the already established norms classroom practises and culture in some schools. Similarly also the students might feel the new type of ways of mastering as odd and arent as willing to participate into them as they would be in normal classes. One reason for this might be that it will take totally unique attitude from the college students to take a component inside a discovering in CSCL instead of normal 1. Here are couple of examples of these changes-
Time preparing is 1 major thing that differs involving normal classroom finding out and CSCL. This is because it requires much far more time to do things in virtual environments in collaboration with other individuals that it does in genuine face-to-face learning situation or when studying alone. Also some students might not like the idea that they are accountable to other individuals and other individuals are accountable to their mastering.
CSCL also demands at least certain amount of technical proficiency from the college students in order that they are capable to participate within the course within the first place. Most of these courses happen in virtual reality with computer systems and if you cant handle computer systems too effectively sooner or later you will get into issues. Because the courses happen in virtual reality it might take quite some time to get help or guidance. Similar thing is also true within the collaboration with fellow college students. Their participation might take a lot more time than someone is accustomed to themselves. You just cannot expect people to be online all the time so that you can collaborate or even help you with your predicament. Also its worth noting that some college students get discouraged much less complicated than others. Some might just give up when technical or timetable troubles arise.
One answer for the presented problems will not be to forget face-to-face understanding completely. Even though the goal of computer supported collaborative learning is to educate people using laptop and world-wide-web some kind of tool that allows students to communicate in real-time could be included into the course structure. We feel that this is needed due towards the troubles caused by not being able to see your collaborative partners along with the big challenge it causes when because people cannot see one another. They cannot read every single other people body language or facial expressions. Students will have to focus on what other people say and concentrate hard to get each of the information they usually get in face-to-face interaction. Adding some sort of face-to-face collaboration to CSCL course structure would get around this. It would enable the students a way to be able to really associate and throw around concepts in fast pace. Students also could be able to react immediately and get feedback for their idea not hours after the very first idea was born.
In our opinion just working with forums will not be enough if it is used as only implies of interaction between the college students when people have to get to know one another and get the collaborative project going. Especially when the exploratory question is still somewhat unspecified it would be really helpful for people to discuss and form a functioning group not just share their private opinions inside a blog or forum.
The function of feedback
Within the early stage of these kind of courses a lot of help and adaptation is needed because the situation and the roles are new for everybody. Therefore its also very vital to capture the method closely so that we can learn from every experimentation of it. For example inquiries made afterwards are in an crucial role when trying to correct every one of the made mistakes for the next time. The opinions on the college students and teachers are very important when designing new courses and developing the idea of laptop or computer supported collaborative finding out. In other words crucial to understand that the technological innovation does not automatically change educational practises teachers deliberate effort to develop the studying culture is also needed and also the teachers need positive experiences that affect on their attitude towards new courses.
So at least when carrying out a CSCL course of your very own remember to collect some feedback from both the students along with the teachers. It will help you inside the future and you have a chance to try to correct the mistakes made through the course or even before and make it much more alluring for the next time. Not always people are willing to valuate their studying and also the implementation of a course but the usually its possible to get at least handful of good answers. It is usually an inquiry that the many participants fill in both before and after the course or just after the course. If it seems that working with the computer and in the web is getting started slowly and it seems troublesome it might be a good idea to give people a handout that feels safer compared to web form. Instead if the course starts effectively and everything goes just fine you can even make the feedback an element from the course that will influence on passing the course. This obviously doesnt guarantee you the answers from other teachers. However the goal is to get feedback from as many participants as possible and the choice your generating should guarantee you the answers so choose wisely.The system is still new and every teacher that desides to try out CSCL will take it to their own direction.
6.3 Conclusion
In all when designing a CSCL course it is crucial to consider how your course or your college students benefit from the use of your CSCL method. Does it bring something extra towards the teaching or does it get within the way with the actual mastering If you can cope with the time tables plus the technical features you have a very interesting course in your hands. Despite every one of the considerable questions along with the few common issues CSCL still has a lot of possibilities. The concept of college students interacting by means of internet is very interesting because that way people face one another only within the level of thought. When the method of thinking becomes visible you can follow the birth of your personal suggestions and also learn about your personal cognition.
We believe that this kind of mastering will probably be extra common in the future because people today need to lead their own mastering additional and more. Many people find it very frustrating that their role within the working life is changing each of the time. They need to adapt to new scenarios very fast and learn new tricks in a moment. Faster than they are able or even willing to do. This kind of school studying could be in critical position in teaching young people how to educate themselves if needed. It can also help teach students to form questions about phenomenoms and create their own interpretations not just believe everything that is said.
Johanna Hnninen Heidi Hyytinen and Janne Niinivaara 7. Designing Teaching in CSCL
7. one Introduction
In this chapter our aim is to describe pedagogical frameworks which are useful for designing teaching in CSCL. We also overlook the aspects in the teachers role in CSCL. In addition we consider over the certain difficulties and demands that teacher should be aware of when designing teaching by computer-supported collaborative understanding.
Computer system supported collaborative studying CSCL means learning with computer systems. It also refers to applying technologies to fulfil face-to-face interaction between student and teacher and amongst college students Dilenbourg Jrvel Fisher 2008 1. In teaching computer systems and net is often utilized among other people for information and facts storage or as a communication tool structure or virtual classroom. Personal computer Supported Collaborative Understanding can have very great opportunities in the long term. Fore example it can offer a chance to create new teams and networks which share and construct understanding collectively. It also involves engagement to appointed targets. When collaborative action is succesful it can make positive interdependence involving the individuals. Hmlinen Hkkinen 2006 231. Collaborative working also promotes college students thinking processes because students need to explain and give reasons for other college students about their conceptions thoughts and views.
The history of computer systems in education reaches inside the 1990s. In those days technology altered rapidly. At the same time new mastering theories came up inside the field of education. Very soon teachers and researchers realized that traditional models of teaching were not suitable to designing educational practices which rely on these new mastering theories. Therefore there was a need to develop pedagogical practices.
Inside the field of CSCL learning researchers have advanced new pedagogical practices and models of teaching. For example Lakkala Muukkonen Paavola and Hakkarainen 2008 are developing the Pedagogical Infrastructure Framework. The aim of this framework is to provide for the teachers a conceptual and heuristic tool to design CSCL and expertise creation mastering see further Lakkala et al. 2008. Pedagogical models can see as tools for the teachers to design teaching and plan the teaching. These models based usually on constructive theories of finding out. Tissari et al. 2005 75. Joyce and Weil 1980 9-20 have divided 22 various pedagogical models to four category which are information and facts processing models personal models social interaction models behavioral models.
Regardless of all good things CSCL is very difficult method and often also appears many complications. CSCL is very tough to execute amongst a broad group of teachers or college students. It is often noticed that good collaborative finding out will not be very prevailing phenomenon in our schools. Hmlinen Hkkinen 2006 231. We should consider what can make CSCL so difficult. Are we just unaccustomed to use computers and operate with each and every other people Are the pc applications so difficult to use Or is it about the lack of functional models of working with computer systems in learning When we are designing web based mostly environments it is vital to assume what kinds of forms of finding out we want to help how studying and mastering should organize and how studying is supported in the course of the course Hmlinen Hkkinen 2006 232. When we are working with new technological innovation we also should have ambition to develop especially mastering culture. It suggests that we should develop some subtexts or models which help us to structure collaborative mastering processes and also the concepts which relate to it.Lakkala Lipponen 2004 117.
However developing requires pedagogical practical social and technological perspectives when teachers function is crucial. These all mentioned perspectives could be taken into account by utilizing the idea of pedagogical infrastructure which is usually considred as a teaching tool in CSCL. In this chapter we deliberate those pedagogical infrastuctures related to techers role as a tutor and as a pedagogical designer in CSCL.
7. two The rules of pedagogical thinking in CSCL
Designing teaching and pedagogical infrastructures
Studying and finding out via CSCL set down the certain rules for the concept of teaching. Educators must change the traditional ways of teaching to tutor in object-oriented inquiry Muukkonen Lakkala Paavola 2007 5. Thats why is mainly essential to acquaint oneself with major tools and consepts to help designing teaching. Lakkala et al. 2008 have planed the Pedagogical Infrastructure Framework. The idea of this framework is to provide for the teachers a tool to design computer system supported collaborative learning. The concept of infrastructure is utilized as a metaphor to discuss the design with the crucial components in collaborative learning settings Lakkala et al. 2008 four. The concept also helps to concretize that when we are organizing education we have to take into consideration also to enduring basic structures. These basic structures could be find in all mastering environments knowingly or unknowlingly. When the infrastructures happen to be done we dont have to do they again because the infrastructures become a way to work and organize things. Another feature for infrastructures is that it doesnt necessarily show to users – its rather structure behind the action Lakkala Lipponen 2004 119. The Pedagogical Infrastructure framework includes four various infrastructures which are technical- social- epistemological- and cognitive infrastructure.
The primary 1 is technical infrastructure which suggests that finding out community has oppurtunity to use technologies. It is providing technical advices and appropriateness of tools for the desired activity Lakkala et al. 2008 7 Lakkala Lipponen 2004 120. Employed technology should make possible the utilization og shred-knowledge artefacts Muukkonen Lakkala Paavola 2007 6.
The second is social infrastructure which represents the components that promotes or encumbers collaboration. The variables might be for example ambitions of finding out working manners and solutions which contains teaching arrangements.Lakkala Lipponen 2004 120. Its very significant to build an appropriate social infrastructure around technical infrastructure because that helps college students to gain successful CSCL experiments Lakkala et al. 2008.
In addition to technical and social infrastructure there is epistemological infrastructure. It involves e.g the role and responsibilities of different agents in knowledge creation approaches to the course of action of understanding advancement as well as the nature of expertise sources utilized. Lakkala et al. 2008 5.
The fourth is cognitive infrastructure supports for students awareness and independent mastery on the vital elements in the desirable practices and promotes metacognitive thinking.
The 4 infrastructures overlap and cant be totally separated. However they are proposed to represent fundamental elements that for example planners need to be taken into account in analyzing and designing pedagogical settings which are intended to promote collaborative object-oriented inquiry. Muukkonen Lakkala Paavola in press. Muukkonen Lakkala and Paavola 2007 have investigated how pedagogical infrastructures show in practice in students working in CSCL. Th survey proves that even if these infrastructures cannot be totally separated there is really a possibility to analyse them individually.
How to help the communication among students in CSCL
What it takes to be a teacher or a student in computer-supported collaborative discovering CSCL includes many features to break the normal classroom type finding out process. Thinking peer-interaction and a function of the teacher are all about to change in CSCL. Thus when CSCL provides many valuable things to put to use it also demands us to create a complete new approach to discovering prosesses. College students must be aware of what it requires to co-operate in groups in eLearning environments. There might be situations where CSCL doesnt work the advantages of this kind of understanding technique remains unreachable. Laptop as a mastering device calls for certain prerequisites that student must hold or have an access to. Students working online have to assume many new ways to work comapred to face-to-face classroom finding out. For example the basic reading from the screen might be tough. In addition access to certain technical gear and network connections is required. Kortelainen 2004.Above-mentioned components might cause nervousness if the student feels that she are not as confident with computer systems or netiquette. Lacking of straight face-to-face contacts might seem uncomfortable and uncanny. Communication apprehensions affection on discovering is actually a important study subject yet there arent so many surveys from that area. However nowadays when communication and studying studies cover justly also computer-mediated communication the mentioned phenomenon should also be visible a lot more. Especially in computer-supported collaborative mastering because supporting students in their studies taken by CSCL a teacher should be familiar with possible conditions that might cause communicational difficulties due to alleviate interaction. Teaching via CSCL is also about encouraging college students to confront unique people and communicational situations Muukkonen Lakkala Paavola 2007.
The scenarios in CSCL may be unpredictable. The possible challenges may occur in theory in any level of mentioned pedagogical infrastructures. All those demands may stay unfilledfor example they may occur some technical challenges. In addition studying in CSCL may bring that kind of demanding scenarios where the study books or experiences from the classroom do not help e.g Muukkonen Lakkala Paavola 2007.
All in all there are many things to be considered when designing CSCL. The possible fears and apprehensions due to a changing of teachers part should be alleviated by supporting the communication and collaboration. The students should be encouraged to be self-regulated and communicationally brave. The teacher should be aware of possible troubles that may occur when studying via CSCL. Besides the technical complications the many troubles might appear in communication.
When will universities be ready for CSCL
Among other investigations the survey by Muukkonen Lakkala and Paavola 2007 proves that in the recent years the range of intensions to understand the phenomena related to CSCL has constantly increased. The new ways of pedagogical thinking are rising as well as the surveys are made to help designing CSCL. Like it said inside the introduction part CSCL may have great opportunities within the long term. It would enable to connect networking and discovering. When CSCL is realized properly it is beneficial for students social and cognitive development. However it also sets certain demands which we have overlook in this chapter. These demands relate both teachers and college students. Some of thes demands relate to gear requirements. That may be the reason why is useful to deliberate CSCL as a component of your studying in universities. It is also a question of teaching arrangements. It calls for that students have the access to world wide web and have the computers to use. However when designing CSCL it is mainly essential to recognize the attitudes towards computer-supported collaborative discovering.
Like it said partly within the chapter 2.two sometimes college students may feel a bit insecure when they suppose function independently when the part in the teacher has altered that is one of several purposes in CSCL especially when they suppose to work as a result of net. Generally there are not so many courses offered in universities where you can utilize CSCL. That might be the reason why some on the college students may feel a bite shy with CSCL kind working approaches. And excluding them there are the teachers who hold on to their classic classroom lectures and final exams. To break these fears and attitudes is vital to keep going to investigate CSCL and everything related to it. It is very essential that the solutions and applications to encourage people to express themselves and to create their collaborative expertise via CSCL are constantly developing and under discussion. The question is- When will univeristies truly be ready for CSCL
7.3 Conclusions
Based on Lahtinen 2003 23-24 some studies have shown quality of discovering in CSCL environments differ strongly in distinctive discovering situation. It is said that best learning outcomes are brought out when personal computer based collaborative studying is connected to face to face mastering. There can be a need of systematic training for network based understanding in daily school life. Lahtinen 2003 24. By developing these kind of new mastering approaches we can guarantee the beneficial affection of CSCL. Computer-supported collaborative mastering contains many possibilities for long term. It is also pointed out in this chapter that also certain difficulties might occur via CSCL. Understanding these complications and knowing the origin and major reasons of these possible problems is crucial for designing CSCL. Universities should pay attention to the above-mentioned need. CSCL may require a decent introduction before it is going to pay off. In addition there is always a need to weigh the question about face-to-face teaching. If there are not any what kind of demands it will set towards the course It may also be fertile to point out that applying CSCL as a teaching and learning technique doesnt instantly mean that collaboration communication and e-learning in general will carry off. Students and teachers should both know the primary rules of computer-supported collaborative understanding before taking courses on-line via CSCL.
In this chapter we have discussed the certain risks and demands that occur in CSCL. We also have overlooked pedagogical infrastructures that offer a considerable foundation for designing teaching. They help to throw light around the phenoma of studying by way of. However there are still many things that we dont know about problem-solving and so on. related to CSCL. According as the investigations are made our know-how about CSCL is increasing. Quantity of our experiences from computer-supported collaborative discovering will expand. By encouraging other people and telling about and investigating we can utilize the benefits of CSCL increasingly in the long term.
Maria Cerrato and LiliCarrin Pea
Conclusions and Discussions
The goal of this book was to reflect on history and recent studies of CSCL. Especially four current topics were analyzed- they are the state in the art in CSCL determination and feelings in CSCL collaborative writing in CSCL and designing of CSCL. The four topics are discussed along seven chapters. Some topics have some overlapping content although their diverse perspectives. We do not find it disturbing for the reason that each and every chapter is really a outcome of studying of various college students. In other words contributing this book though it is written to serve university college students and teachers is mainly a mediational mean for mastering of multicultural students in Finland and Spain inside the course of CSCL 2008.
In relation towards the State of theart in CSCL this methodology is progressingdue towards the expansion of open applications of social web web-based collaborative databases and Web 2.0 tools. However there are several aspects which need to be studied further concerning the influence on an individuals self consciousness as an interlocutor or agroup member communication apprehension plus the support of scripts and scaffold. It is important to say that this analysis wont be a step forward if governments dont take seriously they need to move further away from self-centered values. It neither will be a step forward if we dont search enoughtheoretical and empirical reasons to argue that CSCL is beneficial for all students in their mastering and in their acquisition of social skills. Our investigations then need to go in this direction.
In relation to motivational and emotional challenges in CSCL we know that support guidance design and scaffoldare vital inside the collaborative phase and that the conceptions college students have of this methodology determines to a large extend their learning benefits. However we need to study deeply how studentsself-regulate co-regulate and share regulate their emotional and motivational challenges as it is evident that cognitive skillsare impregnated withmotivational and socio-emotional techniques in the understanding method and within the collaborative learning approach especially wecan proof it from our experience in this course. We also need to study how college students canimprove their regulation and how to assess teachers in this field. Definitely collaboration is strongly determined by motivation and feelings and their regulation is crucial in CSCL context.
In relation to Collaborative writing in CSCL tools for CSCW have already been developed in order to promote an appropriate collaborative writing environment in actual time synchronously and asynchronically. Wikispace is being studied especially as it seems to offermany advantages for bringing to reality an authentic collaborative writing course of action and for studying the social shared regulation in it. However the use of details and communication technologies ICT within the co-construction of expertise by way of the writing can be a young field that needs to be more explored there are some incipient studies in note-taking considerating that ithas turned a priority if we want to survive intodays society.
In relation for the design of CSCL we have to value if a designed course brings extra benefits to the traditional teaching and understand certain issues that might occur in order to improve the design on the course. Regardless of this the study of virtual interaction is relevant as the practice of thinking becomes visible and study within the cognition field could progress notably. A reliable source of info in this practice is the exact same student as heshe can turn far more metacognitive in hisher interaction as a result of World wide web. This characteristic is relevant inside the information society that demands college students to be autonomous learners. However applying CSCL methodology per se doesnt guarantee this as it doesntguarantee collaboration communication nore-learning. College students and teachers then should both know the key rules of pc supported collaborative understanding before taking courses on-line via CSCL soresearch needs to go in this direction.
To conclude we would like to share a general reflection that could come off after the reading of each oneof the single chapters- Around the one hand society is progressing by leaps and bounds especially inside the technological field open applications of social web web-based collaborative databases and Web 2.0 tools like wikispaces are some examples and demands schools to integrate ICT in the classrooms as traditional lessonsare valued as obsolete. It also demands autonomous citizens inside the details societywith enough qualities to perform in ateam. Around the other hand schools are not progressing with the exact same speed- researchers in CSCL are interested in integrating ICT in the understanding practice as a way to strengthen it so integration of ICT is usually a complicated taskas a lot of research is required to understand how students learn in a CSCL atmosphere and how this methodology affect their motivation and feelings and finally their identity. Considerating this traditional learning is not underestimated as can give us a lot of clues for this. Lastly the objective of CSCL is topromote autonomous learners with social techniques to learn collaboratively.
Though the interests of your society and CSCL researchers seem to be precisely the same but with different words they hide distinctive purposes inside the end as in our society the individualistic philosophy and also the lack of interest in the understanding course of action not inthe learningresultsseems to domain and this could corrupt the CSCL ideology- it would mean that CSCL wouldnt perform even though the effort of researchers if society isnt prepare for this change -the CSCL phenomenon.
Editors words
This book a outcome of university students intensive perform through the period of 29.9.2008 – 30.11.2008. They didnt merely study about CSCL but they indeed experienced it in authentic settings. After analyzing the collaborative process by means of discussions inside the Wiki Confluence and within the Edmodo I have a couple of notions to recount.
The first steps seem to be difficult to take. The very obvious reason is that group members do not start working at similar time rather they drop in tiny by small. It seems to be cognitively and socially rather tough to define and settle ambitions and practices before getting into core process. More time and external assistance is often needed.
Another notion highlighted by students at the same time may be the role of feelings throughout the approach. Around the a single hand they were not hidden but expressed openly. On the other hand students had been cautious to express themselves in collaborative writing. Although the text is supposed to be common and shared it seemed to be somebodys property. Collaborative writing is obviously something that students are not utilized to do thus it should be vital to practice it and discuss about it.
In accordance with questionnaires data collection through the course college students regarded that major challenges in the CSCL were following- a students ambitions were not alike 275 b college students were not fullycommittedto group activity 20 and c group members didnt participate equally 15 .There are many explanations behind suchbehaviorand goal settings. In addition to technical reasons theories of determination and self-regulationhave to be regarded.Very coarse conclusion is thattwo college students out of ten had been not satisfied in theirgroup get the job done.Around the other hand it is interesting to notice that students different standards of work 0 had been not experienced as a challenge at all.The questionnaire was supposed to fill up three times throughout the collaborative phase however we received 40 replies instead of 94. The questionnaires do not provide scientific evidence of challenges of collaboration but it provides valuable insight of challenges to taken into account in designing courses inside the CSCL settings.
Im grateful to the professors researchers and lecturers who provided valuable learning material for this course. Thank for Sanna Jrvel Erno LehtinenMontse Castell Anna Iesta Loles GonzlezMinna Lakkala andHanna Jrvenoja who was in charge in the questionnaires as well.I thank professor Paul Kirschner for his constructive advice in designing CSCL. This course is actually a result ofa greatco-operation of colleagues from other universities thank for Sanna Vahtivuori-Hnninen Tarja-Riitta Hurme Hanna Vuontisjrvi and Ana Inesta. TheCSCL book is agood media to show how CSCL works and helpthose who have interests in itHOW TO REFER TO THIS BOOKE.g.Salmela S. Paakki T. Pohorska L. Markatzinou M. 2008.Socially shared regulation of CSCwriting In. P. HyvnenEd.Computer-Supported Collaborative Finding out- University college students as authors in the CSCL course.Retrieved Month x 200x from
REFERENCES
Atjonen P. 2005 Effective Studies of Pedagogical Ethics with Computers A Quasi-experimental Process-Product Study of Two Finding out Modes. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Investigation Nov2005 Vol. 49 Problem 5 523-542.
Bereiter C. Scardamalia M. 1987. The psychology of written composition. Hillsdale NJ- Erlbaum.
Boch F. PiolatA. 2005. Note Taking and Mastering- A Summary of Study. The Wac Journal. p. 101-114 in Andrews R. ed. The WAC Journal. Volume 16. Plymouth State University. Kase Printing.
Boekaerts M 2002 Bringing about change in the classroom. Strengths and weaknesses of your self-regulated mastering approach – EARLI presidential address 2001.Finding out and Instruction 12 6 pp.589-604
Boekarts M. Pintrich P. R. Zeidner M. Eds. 2000. Handbook of self-regulation. San Diego CA- Academic Press.
Castell M. Gonzlez L. Iesta A. 2008. Approaching socially shared regulation of writing- The impact of peers suggestions in doctoral students writing. SIG Writing 2008. Program Abstracts.The 11th International Conference of your EARLI Special Interest Group on Writing Lund Sweden.
Castello M. Monereo C. 2005. Students note-taking as a know-how construction tool.L1-Educational Studies in Language and Literature 53 265-285.
Cerrato T. 2003. Collaborating with writing tools An instrumental perspective on the dilemma of computer-supported collaborative activities. Interacting with Computer systems 15 6 737-757.
Dillenbourg P. Jrvel S. Fisher 2008. The evolution of research on computer-supported collaborative mastering- from design to orchestration. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Dillenbourg P. Traum D. 1999. Does a shared screen make a shared solution In C. Hoadley J. Roschelle Eds.Computer Assistance for Collaborative Understandingpp. 127-135. Stanford University Palo Alto CA.
Grnfors T. 2002. Tyst oppiminen – Action studying. Tyss oppiminen – e-learning. Espoo- Facile Publishing.
Hudson J. M. Bruckman A. 2004. The Bystander Effect- A Lens for Understanding Patterns of Participation. Journal in the Understanding Sciences 13two 165-195.
Hakkarainen K. Paavola S. Lipponen L. 2003. Kytntyhteisist innovatiivisiin tietoyhteisihin. 4-13.Aikuiskasvatus 23 one 4-13.
Hakkarainen K. Palonen T. Paavola S. 2002. Kolme nkkulmaa asiantuntijuuden tutkimiseen. Psykologia37 6 448-464.
Hayes J. Flower L. 1980. Identifying the organization of writing processes pp. 3-30. InGreeg L.W. Steinberg E.R.Eds.Cognitive processes in writing.Hillsdale NJ- Erlbaum.
Hidi S. P. Boscolo 2006.Motivation and writing. In- C. MacArthur S. Graham and J. Fitzgerald Eds. Handbook of writing investigation. Mahwah N.J.- Lawrence Erlbaum
Hkkinen P. Arvaja M. Mkitalo K. 2004. Prerequisites for CSCL- Research approaches methodological challenges and pedagogical development. In K. Littleton D. Faulkner D. Miell Eds. Studying to collaborate and collaborating to learn 161-175. Nova Science Publishers- New York.
Hmlinen R. Hkkinen P. 2006. Verkkotyskentelyn vaiheistaminen yksilllisen ja yhteisllisen oppimisen tukena. Teoksessa Jrvel S. Hkkinen P. Lehtinen E. toim. Oppimisen teoria ja teknologian opetuskytt. Helsinki- WSOY 230-246.
Jefferies P. 2003. ICT in Supporting Collaborative Understanding- Pedagogy and practice. Journal of Media Education
28 one 35-48
Joyce B. Weil M. 1980. Models of Teaching. London- Prentice-Hall.
Jrvel S. Jrvenoja H. Veermans M. 2007.Understanding dynamics of determination in socially shared finding out.Manuscript submitted for publication.
Jrvel S. Volet S. Jrvenoja H. 2006. Motivation in collaborative understanding- New concepts and solutions for studying social processes of motivation. Submitted.
Jrvel S. Hurme T.-R. Jrvenoja H. 2008. Self-regulation and motivation in CSCL environments. In S. Ludvigsen A. Lund R. Slj Eds. Learning in social practices- ICT and new artifacts-transformation of social and cultural practices. Pergamon. In press.
Jrvenoja H. Jrvel S. 2008. Emotion management in collaborative discovering situations – Do college students regulate feelings evoked from social challenges Submitted.
Kirschner P. 2002. Three worlds of CSCL- Can we help CSCL. Heerlen- Universiteit Nederland. ISBN- 90-3582-047-9
Kortelainen K. 2004. An analysis on the use of electronic journals and commercial journal write-up collections by the FinELib portal. Info Study 2. University of Oulu.
Koschmann T. Kelson A.Feltovich P. BarrowsH. 1996. Computer-Supported Problem-Based Mastering- A Principle Approach to Use of Computer systems in Collaborative Studying. Write-up from edited by Koscmann T.CSCL- Theory and Practice of an Emerging Paradigm. New Jersey- Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 83-114.
Lakkala M. Helsinki CSCL Lecture Podcast one 15112008.
Lakkala M. Lipponen L. 2004. Oppimisen infrastruktuurit verkko-oppimisen tukena. Teoksessa Korhonen V. toim. Verkko-opetus ja yliopistopedagogiikka. Tampere- Tampere University Press 113-130.
Lakkala M. Muukkonen H. Paavola S. Hakkarainen K. 2008. Designing pedagogical infrastructures in university courses for technology-enhanced collaborative inquiry. Study and Practice in Technologies Enhanced Discovering 3one 33-64.
Lehtinen E. 2003. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning- An Strategy to Powerful Finding out Environments. Paper published in E. De Corte L. Verschaffel N. Entwistle J. Van Merriboer Eds. Unravelling basic componets and dimensions of powerful finding out environments pp. 35-53. Amsterdam- Elsevier.
Lowry P Curstis A. Lowry M. 2004. Building a Taxonomy and Nomenclature of Collaborative Writing to improve Interdisciplinary Study and Practice.Journal of Business Communication.41 one 66-99.
McLoughlin C. Oliver R. 1998. Maximising the language and finding out link in laptop or computer finding out environments. British Journal of Educational Engineering 29 two 125-136
Marttunen M. Laurinen L. 2001. Studying of argumentation skills in networked and face-to-face environments. Instructional Science 29 127-153.
Miell and Littleton 2004 In- D. Miell and K. Littleton Editors Collaborative creativity- Contemporary perspectives Free Association Books London 2004.
Muukkonen H. Lakkala M. Paavola S. in press. Promoting information creation and object orientedinquiry in university courses. In S. Ludvigsen A. Lund I. Rasmussen R. SljEds. Studying across sites- New tools infrastructures and practices. Pergamon Press.
Muukkonen H.Lakkala M. Paavola S. 2007. Promoting Understanding Creation and Object-Oriented Inquiry in University courses. Department of Psychology University ofHelsinki Finland.
Nivala M. Lehtinen E. Hurme T-R. 2008. Theoretical rationale for CSCL. Manuscript submitted for publication
Nonaka I. Takeuchi H. 1995. The knowledge-creating company- How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. New York- Oxford University Press.
Nussbaum E.M. Hartley K. Sinatra G.M. Ralph E. Reynolds R.E. Bendixen L.D. 2002. Enhancing the Quality of On-Line Discussions. Paper presented in the annual meeting in the American Educational Research Association New Orleans LA.
ODonnell A. King A. EDS 1999- Cognitive perspectives on peer understanding. Mahwah New Jersey- Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Pargman T. C. 2003. Collaborating with writing tools- An instrumental perspective on the issue of computer-supported collaborative activities. Interacting with Computers 15 6. pp.737-757.
Pintrich P.R. 2000. The function of goal orientation in self-regulated finding out. In M. Boekaerts P.R. Pintrich M. Zeidner Eds. Handbook of self-regulation pp.451-502. San Diego CA- Academic Press. PAGE NUMBERS
Piolat A. Olive T. Kellogg R 2005. Cognitive Work all through Note Taking. Applied Psychology. 19 291-312.
Roschelle J. Teasley S. D. 1995. The construction of shared know-how in collaborative challenge solving. In C. E. OMalley Ed.Computer-supported Collaborative Discovering. pp. 69-97. Berlin- Springer-Verlag.
Turku CSCL Class Discussion 2008
Tynjl P. 2004. Asiantuntijuus ja tykulttuurit opettajan ammatissa. Kasvatus 35 2 174-190.
Sfard A. 1998. On two metaphors for finding out as well as the dangers of deciding on just a single. Educational Researcher 272 4-13.
Tissari V Vahtivuori-Hnninen S. Vaattovaara V. Ruokamo H. Tella S. 2005. Pedagogiset mallit verkko-opetuksessa – Opettajien ja opiskelijoiden ksityksi pedagogisten mallien toteutumisesta virtuaaliyliopistohankkeen verkkokursseissa in S. Tella H. Ruokamo J. Multisilta R. Smeds toim. Opetus opiskelu oppiminen. Tieto- ja viestinttekniikka tiederajat ylittviss konteksteissa. Rovaniemi- Lapin yliopiston kasvatustieteellisi julkaisuja 12 73-92.
Vauras M. Iiskala T. Kajamies A. Kinnunen R. Lehtinen E. 2003. Shared regulation and motivation of collaborating peers- A case analysis. Psychologia 46one 19-37.
Volet S. E. Jrvel S. Eds. 2001. Determination in discovering contexts- Theoretical advances and methodological implications. Amsterdam- Elsevier Science.
Wei C. Maust B. Barrick J. Cuddihy E. Spyridakis J. H. 2005. Wikis for Supporting Distributed Collaborative Writing. Tools and Technology. Proceedings in the Society for Technical Communication 52nd Conference SeattleUSA.pp.204-209
Inglnd Siget Language Phonemic Writing Dictionaries
Scaffolding uk Persuasive and Effective WritingControlled writing shares with just about all expository writing the need to become clear concise and intellectually creative not to mention engaging. A legal analogy utilized by my days being a practicing attorney is the point. You are writing this short or presenting in a situation to a jury — quite literally – in the form of a cell of reviewers as well as editors. You will current facts the data as well as describe how the facts fit or dont fit into the existing precedent. You will argue articulately in an evidence-based manner why your analysis should carry the day and also be accepted as part of the rule of accepted intelligence – at least right up until someone comes along as well as upends you Dividing the project of writing in tasks or aliquots to suit your needs pharmacists and biochemists is often a key feature to become efficient.