Scripting the Collaboration for Exploiting the Learning Affordances of a Modeling Environment
PROCEEDINGS
Rachel Or-Bach, Academic College of Emek Yezreel, Israel ; Bert Bredeweg, University of Amsterdam, Netherlands
Proceedings of the Informing Science and Information Technology Education Conference, ISSN 1535-0703 Publisher: Informing Science Institute
Abstract
This paper describestwo studies that explored how specific instructional measures enabled students to take advantage of the diagrammatic representations of a learning environment for conducting effective collaborative modeling. The two studies employed different instructional measures to support collaborative learning and employed two different research designs. One study was a case study with video analysis while the other compared achievement scores of two groups. Results from both studies complete each other and show the combined and integrated need for structuring the collaboration as well as for providing concrete visual anchors for collaboration. The studies show that the affordances of the learning environment get exploited by appropriate scripting
Citation
Or-Bach, R. & Bredeweg, B. (2013). Scripting the Collaboration for Exploiting the Learning Affordances of a Modeling Environment. In E. Cohen & E. Boyd (Eds.), Proceedings of Proceedings of the Informing Science and Information Technology Education Conference 2013 (pp. 401-411). Informing Science Institute. Retrieved March 28, 2024 from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/114681/.
Keywords
References
View References & Citations Map- Ainsworth, S. (1999). The functions of multiple representations. Computers & Education, 33, 131-152.
- Ainsworth, S. (2006). DeFT: A conceptual framework for considering learning with multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 16(3), 183–198.
- Baker, M., de Vries, E., Lund, K., & Quignard, M. (2001) Computer-mediated epistemic interactions for coconstructing scientific notions: Lessons learned from 5-year research programme. In Proceedings of the European CSCL Conference, March, Maastricht.
- Bouwer, A., & Bredeweg, B. (2010). Graphical means for inspecting qualitative models of system behaviour. Instructional Science, 38(2), 173-208.
- Bredeweg, B., Liem, J., Beek, W., Salles, P., & Linnebank, F. (2010). Learning spaces as representational scaffolds for learning conceptual knowledge of system behaviour. In M. Wolpers, P.A. Kirschner, M. Scheffel, S. Lindstaedt, & V. Dimitrova (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Volume 6383,
- Bredeweg, B., Linnebank, F., Bouwer, A., & Liem, J. (2009). Garp3-Workbench for qualitative modelling and simulation. Ecological Informatics, 4(5-6), 263-281.
- Cheng, P.C.-H., Lowe, R.K., & Scaife, M. (2001). Cognitive science approaches to understanding diagrammatic representations. Artificial Intelligent Review, 15(1–2), 79–94.
- De Jong, T. (2006). Computer simulations—technological advances in inquiry learning. Science, 312, 532– 533.
- Dillenbourg, P. (2002). Over-scripting CSCL: The risks of blending collaborative learning with instructional design. In P.A. Kirschner (Ed.), Three worlds of CSCL. Can we support CSCL (pp. 61–91). Heerlen: Open Universiteit Nederland.
- Dillenbourg, P., & Betrancourt, M. (2006). Collaboration load. In J. Elen & R.E. Clark (Eds.), Handling complexity in learning environments: research and theory. Amsterdam: Elsevier. Or-Bach & Bredeweg
- Dillenbourg, P., & Hong, F. (2008). The mechanics of CSCL macro scripts. International Journal of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (ijCSCL), 3(1), 5–23.
- Gaver, W.W. (1996). Affordances for interaction: The social is material for design. Ecological Psychology, 8(2), 111–129.
- Gergle, D., Kraut, R.E., & Fussell, S.R. (2004). Action as language in a shared visual space. Proceedings of CSCW 2004. ACMPress (2004). 487-496
- Gibson, J.J. (1977). The theory of affordances. In R. Shaw & J. Bransford (Eds.), Perceiving, acting, and knowing: Toward an ecological psychology (pp. 67-82). Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
- Gilbert, J.K. (2005). Visualization in science education. Springer-Verlag, New York.
- Koedinger, K. (1991). On the design of novel notations and actions to facilitate thinking and learning. Proceedings of the International Conference on the Learning Sciences (pp. 266–273). Charlottesville,VA:
- Novak, J. (1990). Concept mapping: A useful tool for science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27, 937–49.
- Novick, L.R., & Hmelo, C.E. (1994). Transferring symbolic representations across nonisomorphic problems. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 1296–1321.
- Larkin, J.H., & Simon, H.A. (1987). Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Science, 11(1), 65–99.
- Norman, D.A. (1993). Things that make us smart: Defending human attributes in the age of the machine. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books.
- King, A. (2007). Scripting collaborative learning processes: A cognitive perspective. In F. Fischer, I. Kollar, H. Mandl, & J.M. Haake (Eds.), Scripting computer-supported collaborative learning: Cognitive, computational, and educational perspectives. New York: Springer.
- Kirschner, P.A. (2002). Can we support CSCL? Educational, social and technological affordances for learning. In P.A. Kirschner (Ed). Three worlds of CSCL. Can we support CSCL (pp. 61-91). Heerlen,
- Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
- Or-Bach, R., & Bredeweg, B. (2011). Pair modeling with DynaLearn – Students’ attitudes and actual effects. Interdisciplinary Journal of Information, Knowledge, and Management, 6, 119-135. Retrieved from http://www.ijikm.org/Volume6/IJIKMv6p119-135OrBach547.pdf
- Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1991). Higher levels of agency for children in knowledge building: A challenge for the design of newknowledge media. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 1, 37–68.
- Schank, R.C., & Abelson, R.P. (1977). Scripts, plans, goals and understandings. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
- Springer, L., Stanne, M.E., & Donovan, S. (1999) Effects of small group learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 69, 21–51.
- Suthers, D., Girardeau, L. & Hundhausen, C. (2003). Deictic roles of external representations in face-toface and online collaboration. In B. Wasson, S. Ludvigsen, & U. Hoppe (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning 2003 (pp. 173–182). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
- Suthers, D. (2005). Collaborative knowledge building through shared representations. Proceedings 38th Hawai`i International Conference on the System Sciences (HICSS-37), January 3-6, 2005, Wakoloa, Hawai`i (CD-ROM), Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.(IEEE).
- Van Boxtel, C., Van der Linden, J. & Kanselaar, G. (2000). Collaborative learning tasks and the elaboration of conceptual knowledge. Learning and Instruction, 10(4), 311–330.
- Van Joolingen, W.R., de Jong, T., Lazonder, A.W., Savelsbergh, E.R., & Manlove, S. (2005). Co-Lab: Research and development of an online learning environment for collaborative scientific discovery learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 21, 671–688.
- Webb, N., & Palincsar, A. (1996). Group processes in the classroom. In D. Berlmer & R. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 841–873). New York: Macmillan.
- Zhang, J. (1997). The nature of external representations in problem solving. Cognitive Science, 21, 179– 217.
- Zumbach, J., Schönemann, J., & Reimann, P. (2005). Analyzing and supporting cooperative computer mediated communication. In T. Koschmann, D. Suthers, & Chan, T.W. (Eds.), Proceedings of the CSCL2005 (pp. 758–767). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.
Suggest Corrections to References