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 essentially the most essential element in studying even though devoid of excluding other elements such because the finding out material and interactions with teachers. The term computer-supported refers not merely to connecting remote college students but also to applying technologies to form face-to-face interactions Dillenbourg et al. 2008.
The usefulness of your info and communication technological innovation ICT in education is based on the equipment- synchronous and asynchronous communication multimedia real-life simulations Net and its data sources and so forth. ICT has not just altered the entire activity setting but additionally the theoretical method on studying and instruction. Luotolax finland meteorite Lehtinen 2003 So the emergence on the computer-supported collaborative mastering CSCL reflects technological revolution as well as the evolution of studying theories Dillenbourg et al. 2008.
Collaboration involves the mutual engagement of participants in a coordinated work to solve the issue together Lehtinen 2003. In collaborative finding out students engage in creative social interaction in which they combine all their knowledge and information as a way to resolve complicated challenges which cant be solved independently. Collaboration also deepens the understanding with the predicament. Nivala et al. 2008. Final results of the collaborative studying depend upon the extent of engagement and commitment from the group members Dillenbourg et al. 2008.
Computer-supported mastering setting helps make communication guidance and assistance simpler. It forces college students to consider visibly externalize cognitive processes. In CSCL this substance could be evaluated and elaborated by other people. Socio-cognitive load is shared involving learners and studying setting. Nivala et al. 2008 In personal computer environments the interaction as well as the inquiry course of action are visible in addition to the determination producing paths and argumentation structures Lehtinen 2003.
Mastering in CSCL needs cognitive motivational and socio-emotional capabilities. Self-regulated learner requires charge of studying process chooses and sets targets uses unique tactics to monitor regulate control and evaluate learning and the many elements and actions affecting finding out process. Metacognition suggests the awareness of own cognitive strengths and weaknesses information and ability to regulate the learning course of action and engagement in tasks.Jrvel et al. 2007
Regulation and metacognition have also a social aspect. A single learner regulates or impacts other individuals or group-members cooperatively regulate other people or themselves in shared regulation. Metacognition is an vital aspect of collaboration and group-regulation. Jrvel et al. 2007.
Articles presented in this book
The primary theoretical tips in CSCL are totally described in the to begin with chapter by Laura Palmgren-Neuvonen William Burton Janne Hellsten Esther Perez Jake McMullen and Alberto Ramirez. They also make an articulate evaluate to the long term challenges in CSCL.
Inside the second report Pia Wikholm Yang Kun Anna Pohjola Sanna Pokka and Anne Korhonen give a detailed clarification of motivation and regulation in CSCL situations exactly where the learners peers and teachers every have an equally significant role inside the learning process and learning outcome.
Also emotions are a substantial element in CSCL which is illustrated by Miki Kallio Nonamanut Pongsakdi Pete Santos and Maria Cerrato Lara. They analyze the progressive inquiry model made with the University of Helsinki so as to demonstrate the essential position of scaffolding.
In their report 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 info of CSCW and introduce one example of CSCW tool Wikispaces.
In chapter authorsMariona CorcellesGerardo BaalesandJie Shen introduce the function of the note-taking in CSCW processes.Designing CSCL is really a tough task as Pipsa Keski-Hakuni Elina Koskipahta and Juha-Matti Ristiharju brilliantly explain not forgetting the importance of collecting feedback to improve courses.
Johanna Hnninen Heidi Hyytinen and Janne Niinivaara present the pedagogical framework of designing computer-supported collaborative learning and consequently full the image of diverse and demanding CSCL.
The purpose on the CSCL book
This book is often 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 have been also participants from University of Lapland Finland. Initially in person phase students explored the four themes- motivation and emotions in CSCL collaborative writing in CSCL designing of CSCL and state of art in CSCL by usually means of provided learning materials. The assignment was to create a manuscript on the basis of it to the blogs in WordPress.com. College students had been supposed to deepen their understanding about one of many the four themes above by deciding upon 1 to write a chapter for the book about CSCL. In the course of this phase college students inside the similar team collaborated using the chat-tool in Edomodo.com plus 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 operate and adding comments. The teachers also applied these tools to manual and keep track of theirs get the job done and make sure all the progressgoing on very well determined by the schedule.
Laura Palmgren-Neuvonen William Burton Janne Hellsten Esther Perez Jake McMullen andAlberto Ramirez 1. State from the Art in CSCL
one.one The emergence of Laptop or computer Supported Collaborative Understanding
Theories from the 1970s that influenced the birth of CSCL are broadly termed sociocultural theories constructivist theories and early theories of little one improvement. These theories assumed that the learner could be the direct participant in hisher progress the teacher could be the data provider. The context of computer-supported collaborative mastering has been developed drastically through the final couple of decades. The fast improvement of facts technology has changed way that computer systems have been utilized in education. The roles of facts technologies and learner have changed crucially and group involvement is advocated. Even inside the early phases of computerized education computer systems had been utilized to support the studying processes of a person learners by using behaviourist-based programs in order to practice distinct capabilities in line with the learners cognitive level. This technique called computer-aided instruction CAI was interested extra in finding individualized teaching approaches by means of computer systems so it did not take into account the social interaction as a essential element in finding out. Therefore there was tiny social interaction. Lehtinen 2003Usages of CSCL
CSCL emerges as an try to approximate methodologies of collaborative mastering with info and communication technologies ICT the latter in action and rapid improvement in a variety of social fields. The paradigm CSCL reacts for the 1st employs of ICT in education which have been focused primarily on supporting person progresses to be able to practice some particular capabilities as outlined by the learners cognitive level. Collaborative discovering is now extra focused on the interaction amongst peers and teachers and not exclusively on the part of technology. Naturally technology plays a substantial function but study and practice concentrates a lot more on the cognitive and structural approaches to finding out.The improved use of details engineering and world wide web based programs make it possible for social interaction involving teachers students and among college students themselves. The situation is just not only the affordance of getting get in touch with with remote teachers or peers but with obtaining the ability to arrange such learning environments in order that they facilitate social interaction amongst the studying neighborhood and can for example instantly analyze collaboration. Lehtinen 2003
one.two Primary theoretical tips behind CSCL
Collaboration is usually defined as the procedure of negotiation arranging 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 totally shared by peers. Members of a collaborating group find out misunderstandings and differences of viewpoint to be negotiated. Conflicts due to divergence and finding the convergence will be the crucial mechanism for social learning not simply the final outcome. Dillenbourg et al. 2008. Collaboration and cooperation are made disticnt in this challenge. Lehtinen refers to Roschelles1999function in which he considers that cooperative function is carried out by get the job done division amongst participants who operate independently - this is not wholly productive. Thus collaboration advocates the mutual engagement of participants in a coordinated work to solve the issue together. This usually means that cooperation is morean individual activity that affects get the job done 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 effort.
Digressing from tradition
In virtual communication the traditional student-teacher roles change. The teachers roles are no longer purely information deliverers. In addition some of your college students had been very centralized actors inside 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 get the job done of other college students. When the activity of your course created it became similar to project-like learning where the end product starts to dominate working procedures. Sometimes this is often harmful if the students stop advancing their strategies and solving complications because they are just aiming for the end product. Lakkala Ilomki Palonen 2007 20-21. It is true that the role of teacher changes considerably inside a CSCL surroundings and teacher becomes similar to a facilitator. In order to run a successful CSCL mastering environment it is significant to have these central students but in a middle school context it could be difficult. This project-like discovering is useful skill in working life.Traditionally theories have stated that studying is individual cognitive procedure for example Vygoskian or Piagetian broadly termed constructivist approaches. These constructivist approaches fail to acknowledge the part of peer interaction collaboration and language use. This over-emphasis on the person 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 important aspect in cognitive progress McLoughlin Oliver 1998.The three metaphors of theoretical tips
Lehtinen 2003 describes in his article the principle theoretical tips behind the CSCL- constructivism and its metaphors. Based on Sfard 1998 in the acquisition metaphor finding out is explained as acquisition of something in an individual mind and knowledge is seen as property or possession. The participation metaphor sees studying by means of becoming a participant and expertise as an aspect of practice discourse and activity. The understanding creation metaphor proposed by Hakkarainen et al. 2002 explains finding out as information creation where new information and knowledge are designed in cultural practices the original idea brought out by Nonaka and Takeuchi. Hakkarainen et al. 2003 explains that the two basic elements do not try to exceed former expertise like the third metaphor does. Hakkarainen et al want to highlight the interaction of tacit and explicit know-how by the model of knowledge creating organization by Nonaka ja Takeuchi 1995. They regard tacit knowledge as extra significant in creating innovations than explicit understanding that does not help expertise creating processes. Nonaka and Takeuchi critisize the explicit dimension of information because in accordance with them understanding is social dynamic and changing by nature. Hakkarainen ym. 2003 6-8. The third metaphora sees the expertise as a creation course of action of new knowledge 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 to the expertise as a course of action of individual and collaborative method of creating knowledge.
In line with many recent studies for example Kaptelin and Cole 2002 the role of social interaction is crucial for studying. These authors consider that there are two ways not necessarily exclusive to seethe function of social interaction in mastering. Around the a single hand finding out is an individual course of action but either facilitated or inhibited by different forms of social interaction. The interactions in between the learner and the others are the mechanisms that can make understanding occur. Kaptelin and Cole ibid called these interactions as set of external modifiers. Around the other hand and related with the Vygotskyan method person understanding and activity in a social system are just two distinct dimensions of your same phenomenon- in accordance with his two steps advancement knowledge is made on a social degree at 1st and later internalised by the members as an individual. Lehtinen 2003. Social interaction helps college students to get towards the zone of proximal improvement ZDP by creating support in collaboration the additional advancedstudents can help less advanced ones to reach a learning degree that they could not reach alone.A variety of new forms of collaborative mastering practices Barab et al. 2004 Strijbos et al. 2004 are based on the recent concepts of social cognition Jrvel et al. 2007- Higgins 2000 Thompson Fine 1999. Social learning scenarios may enhance finding out because cognitive conflicts emerging in groups of members with diverse cognitive approaches facilitate cognitive performances both in case of less or much more advanced students Piaget 1980.Synchronous and asynchronous communication and social interaction
The communication tools utilized to facilitate interaction and joint information 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 assistance asynchronous communication Lehtinen et al. 1999 Clark et al 2007. In asynchronous understanding environments this kind of as Expertise Forum Optima or wikis interaction is according to written messages. In accordance with Lehtinen video 2008 and Carter 2003 participants utilizing asynchronous finding out environments are able to study the background with the topic and to reflect before formulating their notes which helps them to deepen their understanding. Synchronous and asynchronous finding out environments can be equipped with a set of distinct tools for collaboration and document sharing.
Lehtinen explains how the perform of Crook 1994 quoted by Lehtinen 2003 has influenced the distinction between interacting through a pc and around a computer system. According to the distinction made by Crook interaction around computer systems involves the use of tools that facilitate communication among college students when they are working with each other in face to face settings e.g. applying a laptop equipped with several mice. Provided the characteristics of virtual enviroments that enable combining different ways of presenting details this provide students with what Crook called points of shared reference from which students can discuss clarify and negotiate meanings when they are working together. Around the other hand to function 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 technological innovation a teacherfacilator can easily gain the students attention by creating an interest towards a shared object or aim. These aims is often divided into separate chunks and provided towards the group then collaboration can take place this would be the concept of Distributed and Shared suggestions.
Concept of distributed and shared strategies
Lehtinen 2003 explains discovering by means of distributed and shared activities. The distribution and sharing of learning by activities helps bring about a better and broader understanding of a particular difficulty or matter. The distribution of a certain task can get the job done effectively for a number of reasons- i the group will feel confident that an matter is being address ii organisation can function additional 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 suggestions and thus ultimately learn from one particular another in the course of action. 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 elements to discuss as far as CSCLs improvements on learning or assessment of a CSCL course are concerned. In accordance with Lehtinen 2003 26 experiments on network-based CSCL discovering show some positive effects on discovering when CSCL mastering and face-to-face finding out circumstances happen to be combined or carried out with the exact same time. However experiences only in virtual environments are a lot more problematic. In addition producing assessments on CSCL studying is difficult because many researches are limited in terms in the duration and also the number of participants. When we examine CSCL understanding we have to realize some background details about the participants. For example the necessary thing is to know how long the selected group has been collaborating before the study. The results in the study may be very distinctive to the situation exactly where group is formed so that you can run the study or participate for a single course.
Another significant dilemma is how to evaluate discovering final results how to measure the outcome of discovering. Lissa 2008 emphasizes that obtaining empirical evidence of effects on learning is difficult and almost impossible. However it could be said that if there is a goal for a course then the knowledgework will compare with the outcomes of CSCL plus the face-to-face discovering. It must not be forgotten that kowledge construction is a person method along with the final internalisation happens within the head of an individual. Even if collaboration and know-how creation has been social the meaning of know-how depends around the requirement of context where the understanding is utilized- the group can not always keep collectively so mastering ought to be evaluated individually too. Lehtinen discussed the problematic nature of assessment and evaluation he said that if the taskin the course is usually a social activity butafter the course has finished individual test or assessment approaches are applied to evaluateindividual studying but what the studentshave been doing is socialin nature. Lehtinen 2003
There are several studies done with both positive and negative results but more study is still needed. Lissa defends his argumentation that ICT will not be just a tool to be adopted as this kind of in the prevailing situation but it has effects on several things like teachers function teaching practice students collaboration and studying tasks Lissa 2008. This point of view queatios if CSCL discovering might be compared with traditional learning- they are depending on widely diverse pedagocial and theoretical approaches the nature of understanding the technique of assessment and as far as the aims and targets of studying are completely different. The analysis ofSalomon 1995 shows that ICT students learned a lot more and faster than college students in management group but the great effects of CSCL can not come out if we only take it as a tool. The powerful effect happens while one is engaged intellectual partnership with peers or with a personal computer tool inside a team or computer-enhanced collaboration teaches college students to ask a lot more exact questions even when not making use of that system. Salomon 1995
Even though it is hardly possible to create a single coherent theory in the field of CSCL analysis that could adequately describe every one of the varying forms of discovering the advancement and analysis of educational technologies should be extra coordinated. As Jrvel 2008 summarizes the challenges of CSCL research the most significant dilemma is how to ensure the know-how accumulation when concepts and approaches 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 much more traditional approaches.Assessment evaluation and perspectives on discovering
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 evaluate and understand the degree of the students participation. This would include the students their peers evaluating their personal development and progress. This is very problematic because as Jefferies 2003 studied the effects that CSCL can harm improvement of students. He found that the perceptions from the students working with the conferencing environment did not really match with the usage statistics with the conferencing system. The study did demonstrate that this related towards the students lack of organisational and critical faculties Meaning- capability tocriticize and thus in-opportunity to learn effectively. It is worth noting that the system was not always completely accurate.Influence of theoretical strategies
It is obvious that the effects of ICT rely around the technological innovation made use of but mostly the pedagogical implementation of technological innovation is additional vital than the technical features. By making use of ICT we can create new environments equipped with a rich selection of tools effectively supporting students attempts to management the complex relationships of studying tasks that may offer a lot more complicated dilemma situations to be solved in collaboration than in face-to-face discovering. Lehtinen 2003 Data technological innovation may enable conditions in which effective group interactions are expected to happen. In addition to development of information technology the evolution of mastering theories has transformed the conception of CSCL- in accordance with Dillenbourg et al. 2008 situated and distributed cognition has proved to be the basis for pedagogical procedures which activate and motivate learners. Social interaction could be the magic word which has appeared to promote learning also at computer systems.Implications of CSCL
The use of CSCL in studying has allowed for much change and adaptation to lessons in which previous concepts could not be sought. Currently collaborative discovering 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 on the archipelago islands to have education from a skilled teacher who would otherwise be unavailable to them weekly sessions bring them with each other to discuss and learn their subject.Because the articles and other material from the universities in our CSCL finding out project have descibed us there are so many aspects in this field which have enhanced and will be enhanced very fast.Pedogocial analysis has come far in supplying new and enhanced discovering tools including updated discovering models and artefacts improved understanding environments and a greater amount of web-based tools. These tools can simplify organisation and make learning more effective for example many new internet browsers feature add-ons which can permit the user to quickly share information and facts resources and references. There are many benefits in CSCL reported but in practice there can still be seen many kinds of challenges and issues to overcome. McLoughlin Oliver 1998 state the quality of CSCL does not lie dependantly upon the interaction between technological innovation and the learners but instead from the classroom dynamics along with the social climate as a complete. They further clarify how the surroundings must be adequately suited to meet the needs of every participant involved.Contentions of pedagogical solutions
Tensions between progressive inquiry pedagogy and school curriculum might be sometimes quite problematic. The course progression plus the content in the virtual communication revealed some tensions in between inquiry pedagogy along with the schools institutional practices. For example curriculum and assessment processes had been problematic when groups have been working collaboratively in virtual atmosphere. In general the study showed that practices of this new kind of discovering and collaboration had been still something special differing from schools normal routines. Lakkala Ilomki Palonen 2007 This investigation certifies some in the common sense views. I was previously wondering how this technique 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 final results and ultimately on ones very own long term. This could largely be a reflection of western-cultures dominant individualistic philosophy in which team get the job done is valued to a lesser extent than to personal targets. It could however be said that CSCL inspires people to become more aware in 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 additional communal approach to benefit education and hopefully society as a whole. 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 elements which need to be studied much more intensively-e.g. how studying in CSCL surroundings 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 finding out environments. In pedagogical technological practices the support scripts and scaffold must be studied further.
Nowadays in CSCL the importance of the situated perspective plus the neighborhood of practice plus 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 much more ousider participants areable to join the discussion and collaboration of understanding networks. There are also numerous web-based collaborative databases for studying materials to be shared and enhanced. Web 2.0 tools make it possible for for an simpler extra accessible use from the online. Mozilla Google and Microsoft have advanced progress within the improvement of tools which can make the user have everything at their finger tips with this in mind collaboration can become additional popular and useable.
Foreseeable future of CSCL
Lastly we will focus around the questions related to CSCLs foreseeable future. Questions this kind of as- is it even possible to run a course in a purely virtual atmosphere Can the benefits obtained from these courses ever be fully 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 help the net experience and also the potential for CSCL to do likewise is questioned. Questions of assessment are of particular value will there ever be a way of accurately testing student particpiation and levels of understanding Perhaps if CSCL have 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 studying per se i.e. do the theories and mechanisms of learning stay the identical regardless in the tools utilised
Are governments able to take CSCL environments seriously inside a society where accountability in education would be the dominant culture Will CSCL ever be additional beneficial than face-to-face approaches to group discovering After all we would like our pupils and college students to learn essential social expertise. Will teachers respond effectively towards the wider implementation of CSCL and is it beneficial to all 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 function 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 students need more assistance than they believe a proper scaffold helps the pioneer college students to get acquainted in this new discovering method and find the actual benefits for their mastering.
Pia WikholmYang Kun Anna Pohjola Sanna Pokka and Anne Korhonen
two. Determination in CSCL
Probably many of us would agree if we were to say that one of several major challenges in CSCL may be the question about how to motivate college students to function collaboratively with each other as a result of laptop or computer networks We know that feelings direct all kind of understanding and that feelings has an great impact on determination. Researchers has emphazised that collaboration does not instantly take place when a group of college students are brought together the participants actually need to be fully comitted towards the offered job and continuosly update and reflect upon both progress and achievement Jrvel Hurme Jrvenoja 2007. Participants need to regulate their feelings as a way to achieve a certain degree of determination in exactly where the group is expected to affect individuals in a positive way Jrvel et al. 2007.
In this chapter we write about certain aspects of CSCL with the main focus around the college students experiences concerning motivation. Since the college students experiences about determination in CSCL seemed to have many similarities we found it essential to understand why precisely the same problems often seems to occur. In an effort to reach a deeper understanding towards motivational challenges in CSCL we will reflect on reasons answers and concepts 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 the need of explaining the part of determination regulation in socially shared activities Jrvel et al. 2007. 2.two Dimensions of motivation in CSCL
Determination in CSCL context should be analyzed by means of four dimensions which are defined as follows- cognitive processes self-regulation co-regulation and socially shared regulation. Since the four 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 of your concerns. Cognitive processes
The finding out 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 mastering Jrvel Volet Jrvenoja 2006.Within the traditional classroom the teacher is seen as the provider of knowledge exactly where the students are seen like passive receivers. In CSCL the many participants are seen as equal and active members of the group exactly where understanding is shared and where the group members collectively aim for the same goal. Self-regulation
Self-regulation means that the person aims to regulate her-himself Jrvel et al. 2006. In other words this implies that the individual 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 learning emotions direct motivate and develop diverse kind of learners. Attending a class with lack of interest demands an enormous amount of determination from the learner it can be very demanding to sit still throughout those 45 minutes when the only motivator will be the ticking clock or the upcominglunch break. College students and teachers often feel that CSCL involves even additional determination from the participants. The individual may easily feel helpless alone and lost when lacking the face-to-face communication and technical support. To be able to completely participate in CSCL we have to step out of our comfort zone trusting that we have something of value to provide towards the group. Co-Regulation and socially shared regulation
In co-regulation the situation might be that only some from 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 significant since it defines the group and its outcome. Just by being friendly or having the skill to leave the right kind of comments to other participants can at its best encourage and inspire other folks. It often seems that the co-regulation is most difficult it is in which the communication somehow starts and exactly where the group builds a base and a strategy for the final outcome. When CSCL is successfull it is possible to reach a socially shared regulation in which the group collectively as a entire consensually regulate themselves and collaborate and get the job done with each other towards the identical goals Jrvel et al. 2006.
2.3 Challenges in CSCL
As a newly born form of learning and a novel pattern needless to say CSCL brings different people together to diversify the way of interaction and help them effectively organize the data by taking advantage of personal computer technological innovation world wide web technology and multimedia engineering. While CSCL can facilitate learners to achieve the collaborative discovering procedure to a higher qulity and wider range it may also face some challenges. We will illustrate two principal challenges as followchallenges of self-regulation and challenges of sociociltural challenges. Challenges of self-regulation in CSCL
Researchers define self-regulated understanding in a variety of ways. The widely accepted definition offered by Wikipedia defines the term self-regulated like this self-regulated could be utilized to describe finding out that is guided by metacognition thinking about oness thinking strategic action preparing 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 very own. In the long term the student who can regulate the studying and motivate himher-self will cope the best. The self-regulation of studying is that you can focus on the task 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 used everywhere. Technologies can motivate to studying but around the other hand it takes additional self-regulation than ordinary classroom studying. When youre alone its a lot easier to skip the tasks than in a physical classroom where you can easily get help and encouragement.
When studying within the net there are lots of materials and stimulation so the self-regulation gets emphasized in this also when you have to separate the necessary from the unessential. There are many other temptations lurking within the net for example surfing within the world-wide-web Facebook e-mail and so on. that can take your attention away from the essential. Self-regulation is important because in the net you usually have to set the targets of studying the studying isnt that guided as traditionally teacher isnt available that easily. This may set challenges for the teacher when it comes for the netcourses how to motivate the student how and what kind of materials will be chosen. The teachers function as a motivator and encourager is remarkable especially when it comes to the outward funnelled ones. The learner should be committed to his targets take responsibility by himself of his discovering and to sustain his studying this may be the way to make good mastering benefits. Maybe you could say that the skill of self-regulation is totally unconditional inside the netcourses. Otherwise you can really easily drop out in the course plus the level of understanding remain weak.Self-regulation is usually internal or external. When determination is external student needs to have rewards to be able to achieve studying targets. In these cases learning is not motivated by actual will to learn. Key purpose is just to get this course done. Challenges of sociocultural differences in CSCL
The social surroundings 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 personal uniqueness--- They have unique educational levels they may come from unique countries with diverse cultural backgrounds they have different personal characteristics and different communicative styles even the genders are distinctive then comes the social challenges- Can the provided activity be truly carried out by such 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 full a operate successfully
It is actually a common phenomenon that the group members come from distinct social environments. The very first impediment factor may be the language differences. If the language a participant needs to use in 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 various types of people with various education backgrounds will be involved in this kind of kind of studying. Then the relationship in between group members the relationship in between teacher and group members and also the relationship in between experts as well as the group members should also be taken into considered. The pressure and less confidence from people with lower degree of education will also become obstruction in CSCL.
Some considerable roles such as guides group leaders and mediators are the vital aspects contribute towards the success of a complicated collaboration system. However individual members understanding behaviors and communicative styles are entirely unique from one another. It may cause the disagreement inside the course of action of collaboration studying. The interaction among crucial type and obstinate type of person will lead to generating tiny progress within the practice of discussion. Likewise if there are too many members who easily compromise with other people will induce the low quality of discussion benefits. For example most of the group members dont express their opinion freely with echoing the sentiments of other folks. Consequently the discussion outcomes are the adding of some simple suggestions. Compared with traditional classroom studying CSCL needs extra active interaction amongst group members to achieve the setting objectives. There is an affinity among the ways to approach the information along with the outcome of studying. For instance some people will actively promote the discussion some will manual others to be involved in the discussion. These people will be considered because the leaders or organizers from the group and they always make a major contribution for the finding out job. Some members will discuss with other individuals 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 mastering. Though it can not be denied that they also do the serious reading online and speculate around the topics such way of finding out is detrimental indeed to the maintenance in the group dynamics. Furthermore the behavior of gaining without contributing is unfair to those who actively participate in the online finding out.
Gender differences is another significant issue that cannot be ignored in CSCL. According to my own experience people with exactly the same sex are less complicated 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 much more around the topic instead of getting onto irrelevant topics.
Therefore the tutoring teachers have the responsibility to effectively know every one of the members in the group by usually means of person interviewing group interviewing observing and questionnaires. They should also pay much attention to the design in 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 each of the participants and learners can have an equal opportunity to take aspect in the understanding approach especially those with less confidence and seldom take part inside the online study and discussions.
2.4 Guidance and assistance - to join the forces
Collaborative efforts in CSCL enviroment may 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 conditions you all are aware whether someone is much more passive but in CSCL context presence can be extra hidden. Assistance and guidance are therefore critical but difficult ways to prevent the project failing. The responsibility on the collective projects succes is common but its crucial 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 finding out and push yourself to try and activate in it And how it affects determination if you are unaware of your styles how to take aspect in the enviroment - for instance people are taught in school to create total texts essays and so forth. so it could be a challenge to feel free to write just some glimpses of strategies via web.
Materials as a backup are also a aspect of help distinctive than comminucation. Also the accession to other folks comments inthe network can operate supportively. As mentioned there are many challenges what come to motivation in CSCL - but what I found is motivating in it is that you often get to see much more clearly how others have seen the concern and you can sometimes even feel the group better than in face-to-face groups that are sometimes unsocial. When able to see other individuals texts and views its educative to reflect your own thinking in relation to other individuals.
The question of decision-making and separation of powers is interesting since people interact with one another in a virtual enviroment made by e-learning instead of face to face discussion. When directing the procedure guidanceis a critical aspectbu is it enough just to set the targets 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 understanding processes needs be satisfied also all through the method- intermediate stopping points considering goals. Ambitions must be set properly otherwise it could be hard to regulate yourself on doing something abstract. So intermittent feedback is useful to contribute determination. Themanner of giving feedback could be built into the process 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 people 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 collectively to improve motivation. Should there be a lot 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 in the course of lack of self-regulation. In CSCL a student is forced toadvance by her-hisself what might be encumbering. Hence the role of a manual or acoach is needful for reducing the pressure plus the feeling of being alone. Coaching can gain self-confidence in relation for the network andit can help to reveal tips and help gain the objectives faster.
Does CSCL-learning push you to reflect expertise extra and so promotes understanding I have found that in CSCLthe feeling of obligationto do ones bit is interestingly strongerthan in typical discovering conditions - in CSCL we cansupport guideand facilitate every otherby participating actively and courageously. two.5 Long term challenges in CSCL
The feelings and experiences depending on CSCL seems to vary quite much. All of us have probably heard both positive and negative opinions about CSCL. As a finding out 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 in between the CSCL practitoners as well as the CSCL developers. These gaps could be minimized by making CSCL something that is applied in everyday school conxtexts. Only as a result of 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 assistance guidance design and scaffolding in CSCL enough this is usually 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 extra structured since these directly affect the college students individual motivation. If CSCL can manage to light the spark of interest in the students the final result is very much depending around the social challenges inside the collaborative phase. It often feels that the teachers help within the collaborative phase is only provided to groups that are already succeeding by for example giving encouraging comments to the group. Encouragement is naturally 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 also. To be able to create a trustworthy atmosphere in CSCL the teachers should be given the time they need to be active and present members in the CSCL-community.
The list of long term motivational challenges in CSCL seems to be quite long but the core issue seems to be in how students see CSCL CSCL is often seen in a negative way by college students probably as a result of personal experiences from a less sucessfull CSCL-course. Almost as if CSCL directly usually means piles of much boring and hard perform. As college students we need to overcome our negative emotions 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 distinct kind of discovering 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
Pc Supported Collaborative Understanding CSCL might be supported and facilitated in many ways. From literature on CSCL motivation and emotion are substantial features to CSCL that can trigger this surroundings negatively or positively in obtaining success. CSCL usually is really a combination of individuals and groups performing together around or by means of computer systems to complete a process or a goal. Individuals and groups are driven by determination and emotion causing challenges that affect the setting and on the very same time this surroundings affects initial determination and emotions that students bring for the class. Learners cooperate and collaborate in CSCL based on motivation and emotion. In other words determination and emotion are vital in the discovering process and this is very evident in CSCL taking into account that students must be committed to collaboration. The tasks or goals deemed necessary for success in CSCL are driven then by motivation and emotion. Figure one. highlights one of the most vital and interesting topics dealing with CSCL and motivation and emotion.
Figure 1. The most essential and interesting topics and highlighted questions dealing with CSCL and determination and emotion.
Three significant 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 last two constructs have emerged from empirical perform carried out in dynamic and collaborative learning environments. These three concepts stimulate understanding processes and development 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 mastering environments. Self-regulated understanding has been defined by Jrvel et al. 2007 cited from Boekaerts et al.2000 and Pintrich 2000 as -an active constructive course of action whereby learners set objectives for their understanding and then attempt to plan keep track of regulate and control their cognition motivation behavior and context.- In other words on a person level the learners construct their understanding in the educational surroundings for themselves and to figure out how they will engage it and to what degree.
Co-regulated finding out can be defined as a far more knowledgeable actor supporting or scaffolding a less knowledgeable actor enabling the less knowledgeable actor to reach a higher potential of studying Turku CSCL class discussion 2008. Shared regulated learning 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 with the group members simply cooperate to regulate other people or inside the best cases regulate themselves consensually.- Shared regulation offers group insight and ideas derived by the individuals for the group as a group helping or aiding the management in the group for the group improvement. Shared regulation is then an indicator that collaborative discovering 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.
Discovering how to evaluate and deal with determination and emotions may prove vital to the success of CSCL. The individuals intrinsic understanding and performanceof self-regulation co-regulation and shared-regulation will help the advancement with the group when working in CSCL and may possibly contribute for the personal improvement of your individual outside of CSCL also. These central concepts will be discussed further in the next section of your chapter. 3.two Central concepts
Role of motivation and feelings in CSCL
Most of us realize that specific motivations and emotions are necessaryin order to make the practice of collaborative finding out successful. However the process of collaborative learning itself evokes learners to have desirable motivations and emotions. Collaborative finding out comprises a diversity of shared processes in which individuals aim to regulate the prerequisites for learning 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 element the aim is to discuss about the main variables that help motivation and emotions in CSCL.
Self-regulation and metacognition
The theory of learning has been developed to be able to increase extra effective understanding inside the difficult changing world of today. Discovering in postmodern society is just not a fixed set of know-how anymore but usually an open unstructured changing process for whichwe must construct know-how together with less familiar peers additional often by implies in the technological innovation working with online. New finding out tools has been innovated and empirically examined. Self-regulated discovering abilities - how learners develop learning knowledge and use them effectively - are found very substantial for finding out. Lately it has been found out that their value is crucial also in social practices- how learners engage and cope in cognitive and motivational elements amongst peers. Difficult social learning scenarios require cognitive motivational and socio-emotional abilities especially as far as life-long understanding is concerned. These skills are termed self-regulation and when students are able to assume about them conscioulsy and with an intention we termed it metacognition- the capacity to regulate cognition emotions and motivations.
Self-regulated learners take charge of their very own learning- they set ambitions for their learning and then plan individual tactics 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 vital portion of self-regulated understanding in addition to volition and self-efficacy. As outlined by many studies all these multiple aspects affect use of tactics and students studying differently.
Recent ideas of social cognition Higgins 2000 Thompson Fine 1999 have established multiple new forms of social and collaborative learning practices. In social collaborative learning conditions learners share information and proceed coordinated social activities which demands cognitive motivational and socio-emotional skills differing from those required in well-structured teacher-centered studying circumstances. In self-regulated social finding out situation joint goal setting emphasizing collaboration and negotiation and scaffolding are provided by new student-centered understanding procedures. This kind of discovering may be much more difficult but additionally intrinsically extra interesting for learners- posting questions explaining and analyzing their answer outcome in higher levels of regulation and metacognition higher order mastering three aspects that walk hand in handand higher levels ofengagement.
In the social understanding surroundings some learners use social comments so that you can maintain determination and a socio-emotionally secure atmosphere inside the group. Several recent studies have shown that social learning and collaboration for shared tasks enhance students adaptation of context precise motivational objectives even if they have distinct socio-emotional orientation tendencies and even if their motivations to do the process are diverse.
Self-regulated finding out is conventionally treated as a person phenomena but in CSCL it is socially constructed and socially shared regulated. The elements of individual perspective have to be regarded also at a social degree- inside the case of many learners social regulation shared regulation and co-regulation happen to be 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 mastering a learner should also affect other people and all the group members co-operate so that you can 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 may regulate the cognitive resources of the group for example by indicates 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 understanding with other individuals.
What does learning implies in CSCL Learning in CSCL implies negotiation organizing questioning conflicting reasoning exploratory talk etc. Littleton Miell 2004. It is not easy for college students nor is it easy for facilitators either. Recent analysis reveals that college students face difficulties in engaging learning and achieving their goals in a range of mastering contexts Jrvel et al. 2007 Volet Jrvel 2001. How these difficulties affect the mastering processes and determination
The basic thing to notice is that collaboration just isnt spontaneous i.e. understanding by means of collaboration is just not 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 overview achievement Jrvenoja Jrvel 2008 and therefore multiple types of social challenges is usually faced.
Secondly emotions are often aroused and therefore regulation is needed. Emotions generated in social online environments are not diverse in nature from those generated in face-to-face understanding conditions. What is unique in social online mastering would be the fact that emotions are expressed via technological innovation and that the disclosure of emotions is necessarily voluntary. The benefits highlight the multiple directions emotions can take along with the significance of students interpretations of their emotions on the discovering course of action Jrvel et al. 2007. But it is easier to cause misunderstandings and far more difficult to clarify thoughts via technologies and therefore the risk for lost determination is higher.
There are also many other causes of low motivation or bad self-regulation in CSCL. Among the list of 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 of your other students too.
Also too high workload or a too high looking workload can kill the motivation for CSCL. It is difficult for college students to start the work if they can only see a huge mountain of assignments. For teachers everything might look clear and easy but for college students the setting tools as well as the other group mates can all be totally new. Properly organized schedules tasks and tools are a must for any successful CSCL course and one shouldnt forget scaffolding either. Asking students to function with each other is simply not enough.
Self-regulated learners must take charge of their own mastering by deciding upon and setting objectives working with individual strategies so as to monitor regulate and management distinct aspects which influence the finding out course of action and evaluating his or her actions Jrvel et al. 2007. That is usually seen as a possibility for deep mastering but additionally as a source of difficulties. Are all students really ready for self-regulation other-regulation shared regulation and within the best cases socially shared regulation
Many times college students tend to underestimate available time or resources. If motivation is already a bit low and there are a lot easier and more interesting things to do maybe it is not so easy to carry out any time-consuming assignments in complicated social and technological environments. One particular essential feature is that especiallyat the beginning from the discovering project the self-driven emotions play an crucial role in inhibiting or facilitating task-involvement Jrvel et al. 2007. 3.four Improving CSCL and supporting actors involved
Improving CSCL is imperative to the improvement of powerful learningenvironments. Many troubles have been revealed in CSCL earlier within the chapter and these issues impair finding out and developing suggestions. Help for the surroundings and for the college students and teachers plays a considerable part within the progression of CSCL.
The progressive inquiry model is quite impressive on paper and if used correctly it could develop CSCL in a very positive manner. The model was created at the Univeristy of Helsinki and is made use of to facilitate understanding creation practices in educational scenarios. The model is similar towards the scientific neighborhood 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 complications. The traditional setting of education places the teacher in a position to create the difficulties that the college students will answer. In this progressive inquiry model the teacher becomes a facilitator in aiding or supporting the college students achieve their targets or tasks. The teachers facilitation must have a delicate balance so thatheshe does not interfere with the groups development. In an ideal situation according to this model important evaluation develops independent thinking by way of person and group reflection. The capitalization of reflection occurs throughout the method at different times by distinct individuals in the group. From hindsight this practice of evaluation and independent thinking continues as well beyond the CSCL experience and occurs when students have to face authentic finding out issues or when they arereintroduced to group work.
The progressive inquiry model builds fans because it can change the behavior from the student and also the teacher. The model builds confidence within the intelligence with the person and group. Individuals inside a group have the opportunity for leadership within the development of concepts and concepts. In this case college students are called to step out and create in situations in which they maybe the only one particular inside the group constructing a particular idea or rationale. The model supports group thinking and person thinking which in return the individual benefits. Teachers dictate less and can potentially learn from the groups.
Of course these are all positives about the progressive inquiry model and there can be some potential complications with it too. Students can do the opposite and crawl into a shell through group function feel with-drawn or even lazy. A single should not focus on these drawbacks because they can occur inside a tradition educational setting and also the point on the 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 actually a must that we keep in mind an significant argument that Vygotskian made. The collaborative learning surroundings causes individual finding out. By means of the interactions of your individuals within the group finding out develops inside the group. As the group develops concepts and tips the information and facts is then reflected on later by the individual. Lehtinen 2003 This among other things is what the model is trying to accomplish within the CSCL educational atmosphere.
As support is factored into CSCL facilitating the motivation perspective along with the social cohesion perspective becomes a very positive process. College students have distinct interests when joining CSCL and these interests should be maintained or transformed to the wished directionand guided toward the goal from the process. The question becomes should the teacher or the college students facilitate these perspectives or both The second question is who plays a a lot more significant part inside the facilitation of these perspectives and how do they impact the atmosphere
Systematic training along with background data as a base combined with scaffolding is often a must for successful positive outcomes in CSCL. Lehtinen 2003 Nussbaum 2002 Marttunen 2001 Background details and scaffolding largely prepare the college students for the job at hand.Something simple yet strategic like the group figuring out if they operate better cooperatively or collaboratively may play a huge function in the improvement of group get the job done. 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 work.
In this chapter we have discussed how motivation and feelings are substantial features towards the CSCL atmosphere that can inflict on this atmosphere negatively or positively as students must be committed to collaboration. That is the reason why the important point is to studyhow college students self-regulate co-regulate and socially shared regulate their emotional and motivational challenges concerning both learning and well-being ambitions which deeply affect the quality oftheir studying all through their collaboration in the teamwork studying approach and at the end of it mastering results or product.
Another critical point from the previous one will be to study how students can enhance these three levels of regulation so as to learn additional and better and how to assess teachers in the achievement of this ambitious objective. As Jrvel et al. 2007 point out golden rules that enable members to feel safe take risks and share tips are needed for successful engagement in collaborative learning. This actually involves not merely motivational emotional and discovering regulation with the three levels mentioned but also metacognitive manage on them.
Taking into account the previous idea in this chapter we have also discussed how learning as a result of collaboration just isnt something that just takes place whenever students come collectively- in any joint project students need to be committed to ongoing negotiation and continuously update and critique achievement and as it has been explained facemultiple types of social challenges. Therefore the assistance for the setting and for the college students and teachers play a important function in CSCL.
Satu Salmela Tero Paakki Linda Pohorska and MelinaMarkatzinou four. Socially Shared Regulation of CSCwriting
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 perform. Technological development is a single big element that changes our life but around the other hand it can offer us solutions to solve challenges in our hectic setting. But side by side there is a need to assume understanding teaching working and environments that all this is done through new angles also. As our ways of doing thing changes plus the new engineering is around us we need to emphasize the collaboration among people as a way to reach know-how supported by the technological solutions.
A single are of collaborative working is shared writing experience and this report concentrates on Laptop or computer Supported Collaborative and regulated writing. The article is according to the materials provided our group within the international Pc Supported Collaborative Discovering CSCL course autumn 2008. Moreover we will concentrate on the characteristics of your shared regulation in writing. The aim is to explane this new model by analysing the advantages and the disadvantages of its use. The fact that our very own writing procedure was socially shared writing gives as the possibility to clarify depending on our experience this new kind of working and also the challenges in it.
We are dealing with the epistemic function of elaborative writing -note taking- contrasting person and collaborative teaching and finding out conditions in which note-taking will take place as well as the distinction in between two kinds of writing- elaborative writing and communicative writing. We are going to give the definition on the critical 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 the difficulties people may have in the course of the use of this new system and we will give some advises in order college students to improve their writing. Finally we will summarise the results of our post.
It is significant to be mentioned that our write-up 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 on the EARLI Special Interest Group on Writing Lund Sweden.
four.2 Essential concepts
To understand our topic fully you need to understand some critical consepts releted to socially shared regulation of writing. These are CSCL CSCWriting unique learning models but especially socially shared regulation and socially shared writing. In the next paragraphs of this chapter will provide you an appropriate introduction of these concepts.
Computer system Supported Collaborative mastering CSCL is nowadays very developing topic in which there has been done a lot of researches. CSCL is determined by collaborative function provided throughout technologies especially computers. 1 important component of collaborative discovering and working is colloborative writing. Written communication is crucial component of our daily life and even when we consider that we create alone we still operate with others. At least in the sense that we communicate with other authors and readers and perhaps our lecturers etc. The interaction only goes deeper when we write totally collaboratively with each other with other writers colleagues or fellow students.
Laptop or computer Supported Collaborative Writing CSCW is growing study field as additional and more of our perform is done collaboratively the nature is distributed or done distantly. Collaborative writing is an event in which many writers prepare precisely the same document. The collaborative writing is often carried out very in unique ways depending on objectives on the writing what is written in what kind of an setting is written who participates inside the writing or how are the writers roles defined. Collaborative writing is very often visible in expert articles which appear in specialized literature magazines for expert public and so on. 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 happen to be created because of this on the collaborative writing have usually been estimated to be inside a good quality. Additional writers have much more details abilities and points of view. Altough finally it is written like just one particular person wrote it. The writers also have to act as the readers of your text and give feedback to each other.
When combining a technologies in to 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 approach which can be always dialogic and situated. Engineering makes possible the discussion among the members of your group in genuine time synchronously or asynchronously and it also provides an opportunity to collaborate with other writers from anywhere. For example Wikispace is 1 good alternative which provides many opportunities for the network writing. Collaborative writing develops cooperative expertise argumentation expertise and negotiation abilities. The writing knowledge are developed by writing it implies that in collaborative portion of writing we are giving and getting a feedback which teach us develop our techniques and helps 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 individuals understand us because otherwise we cannot succeed.
As always the way we try to build or guide teaching or learning is or at least should be grounded around the way we see understanding in general. Good studying environments are constructed on finding out conseptions as they define who we learn. Writing self-regulated or socially shared is just not different. 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 complete process function and what components are relevant. The four distinctive discovering models behind self-regulation in writing thatCastell Gonzlez Iesta 2008 highlight are- Cognitive models Socio-cognitive models Socio-cultural models Socially-shared models
The identical models are familiar from CSCL general theoretical background but here they are examined inwriting context. They distinct variables we can see as a result of them tell us how we should design CSCL writing and motivate it in addition to how to study and what to study if we want to learn additional. We can tabulate these four models andreview the differences in them in how they see writing what function they give to the context what is their conception about writing regulation methods applied by models as well as the units to analyse. SEE TABLE ATTACHED The study done by thatCastell Gonzlez Iesta 2008 is depending on the understanding model of socially shared regulation so we need to understand this model better.Socially shared regulation is in this strategy seen as a writing which can be considered as a cognitive process which can be always dialogic and situated. In socially shared processes its dyads regulate their joint activity of revision and their very own individual writing Castell Gonzlez Iesta 2008.
Socially shared writing. Within the socially shared writing there is very important how the collaboration looks like. It is about entire group and about atmosphere which the group makes. There is always some work which has to be done and all members should participate on it. In accordance with this all members should feel comfortable in their group. Moreover the group should be aware of challenges which may arise. For example the group members should motivate each other and should be active otherwise they will lose speak to with the group and entire work is often damaged by this.
4.3 Challenges in CSCWriting
Castell Gonzlez andIesta 2008 implemented a study that concentrates on socially shared writing a lot more closely on peers suggestions in doctoral studens writing. Their objective was to find out difficulties that doctoral 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 techniques implemented by the college students. Throughout the study Castell Gonzlez and Iesta defines major complications that college students faced and divided those issues into eight categories-
1. Unconnected data
2. Lack of structure
3. Unpersonalized info
four. Information and facts taken for granted
5. Unspecified difficulty
6. Unjustified information
7. Unprecise terminology
8. Redundant information and facts
During three sessions which they had studentsanalysed their problems 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 of the text and for simpler reading. This structure markers led to guide function within the writing. Due to all these changeswritten texts was improveda lot and it was all done by peer- and socially-shared revisions. It made students to realize how to do their writing extra 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 personal 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 usually a mechanism with which we can avoid these.It is impossiblethat students can built a completely shared understandinghoweverit is important to tryfor the best outcome.All these things supports the name of this kind of writing - socially-shared regulation of writing. It is actually a combination of individual writing that is under the manage of other members on the group and social communication amongst memebers. This handle requires the form of a dialoguein which the socially shared regulation turns into both a collective and a social discovering experience among the members of a neighborhood which have already been bound together by the joint participation within the writing activity.
four.4 Scaffoldingstudents in writing and collaboration
In this component of our chapter we will focused on help which should be provided to college students to enhance their writing and collaboration. At initial it is important that the common targets are set. The group have to reach an full understanding on the goal from the text. If the aims of your members with the group are not exactly the same it is sure that the complete approach will fail. It is indispensable that eachone of your members will put aside hisher personal ambitions to be able to assume and act inside a common spirit.
Itis true that when they are writing collaboratively in an effort to reachcommon objectives the writing method becomes a relevant experience for every single with the co-writers. This might be linked towards the idea that any kind of regulation requires the whole-person-in-context thatmeans each and every writer brings with himher a series of interests and goals within which we can find discovering ambitions aimed at discovering but additionally wellbeing objectives aimed at keeping.Theimportanceof these two kinds of goals has to do with the fact that the complexity in the writing process and especially from the CSCWriting may bring extra challenges to the writers. These challenges may lead the writers to decide to focus on their wellbeing objectives because it is usually a -safer- land for them and they feel better. But like this they decrease their efforts to reach the commonly set task objectives. In this sense it is obvious thatin order to avoid the challenges and reach the deep information it is very important in CSCW producing negotiation and dialogue. They should feel that the outcomes mustsatisfy everyone. Unfortunately there will not be a recipe which can ensure us the succed of this system.In a big component it depends on the attitudesof the participants.How open minded they are to here unique 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 of your document. In the identical time the group must also make plans with the continuing of the complete process and the actual working. With the organizing stage the group will define their intention and how they intends to reach them. Team collaborating is critical because the working is well binding. Collectively the work of the writing group is often organised according to distinct writing strategies- as divided next to one another or reciprocal writing. Lowry Curtis Lowry 2004.
The distinct roles can also be defined for the writers. For example it can be a writer an editor an evaluator a critic etc. Mostly it is very obvious who plays which function. The interaction inside the relaxed and permissive atmosphere creates the opportunity towards the dialogue and to collaborative writing. The thoughts that are embeded within the plans get to be clear often in connection with the production with the actual text. For this reason members on the group who write separately may understand differently towards the earlier planned things which are planned collectively. The suggestions from the group must of course correspond with offered instructions and plans must be checked in order that the output is often made. For all those reasons it is really very significant for students participating in computer system supported collaborative understanding totally understand the whole scope of such project.They should participate in this approach 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 degree should be taken into consideration when picking it. In this component 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 difficulties but also the teachers complications. Students should feel comfortable with the CSCL enviroment and every doubts should be solved immediatelly to anticipate further bigger complications or failures etc. As outlined by this it is clear that the part of a teachertutor is here undoubtable. Another thing which can help students with collaborative writing can be a previous experience. There is actually a big difference whether someone has already had some experiences with the CSCW or not. Such a member should be active and initiative and make the function for other members a lot easier by his help and his comments. Mostly they can become leader with the complete group and he can provide a structure with the entire get the job done or at least a model by which other folks is usually led. But in order to do so the teacher must be trained and prepared to teach CSCLCSCW. We cant forget that this is often a new model of understanding which cannot be adopted in a day. The knowhow demanded from teachers covers good engineering skills also deep information and understanding of understanding and how to mix these two.
The suitable tools of CSCW have already been developed and have been examined in the cooperation with the researchers of internationally various disciplines. Pargman 2003 pp.737-757 In CSCW there isnt merely situation that is employed environments which make the collaborative writer but how promoted with their help interaction amongst the writers. The technological innovation can make possible the discussion among the members of the group in genuine time synchronously or asynchronically. For example Wikispace is a single 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 perform premises. In the wikispace the writing has not been bound to time or place plus the history in the writing could be flexibly tracked. The environment allow also interaction along with the writers can negotiate together and can build the text. It also allows every one of the writers equal participation when every writer has the same rights for the production and handling of your text. This will form also the issue within the wiki space if for example the number in the notes of the writing history increases so that it will become difficult to follow them. Furthermore you have to learn wiki space functions a tiny before its use is fluent. Wei Maust Barrick Cuddihy Spyridakis 2005 p.204-209
Collaborative writing in the wikispace may be apromisingalternative when one is looking for a suitable tool for the network writing. When it is written inside the network the cooperation will be additional flexible than the fact that documents would be traditionally altered with e-mail however. The availability and divident from the text within the network are also essential because with the sketching stage the members of the group typically will function their own shares separately other people and the help of your system to the asynchronic working is emphasised.
Today inside the worklife it is natural that the common object is produced asynchronically which needs adaptable applications to that purposes. It is difficult to change something that exists the identical for decades and everybody know it the way it is like the education system. But since the technology 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 often a good training and in combination with the traditional solutions is usually prooved very beneficial. It is in our hands to change the future to move on and develop it so that you can reach deep know-how and be able to give solution towards the issues that emmerge everyday.
Mariona CorcellesGerardo BaalesandJie Shen
5. The Roles of Note-Taking in CSCW Processes
Almost every day most of people take notes in daily academic and non-academic contexts with unique purposes Bosch Piolat 2005 Hartley 2002. They generally take notes to leave a message to express their emotions and feelings to other folks to make a shopping list to study to write a text to solve complex challenges to believe about themselves plus 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 part to their extraordinary memory in general the analysis point out that the notes taken by people in these activities help them not merely as tools to register to remember and to transmit facts but also as epistemic tools to transform the information and facts in expertise. Castell Monereo 2005
Within the school context the students usually take notes in a person way working with various note-taking tactics and diverse signifies of registration of information See Castell Monereo 2005 Piolat Olive Kellogg 2005 From a person point of view note-taking implies an elaborative writing process exactly where the writer writes to itself writer-based-prose and as a result of which the writer reflect around the logged contents and regulates his finding out processes Castell Iesta Gonzales 2008.
Nevertheless with the present time with the use with the new paradigms of collaborative finding out 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 applied to share ideas with peoplein face-to-face collaborative finding out activities Castell Monereo 2005 and also inside a online collaborative understanding activities for example the Pc Supported Collaborative Writing CSCW Cerrato 2003 Lowry Curtis Lowry 2004.
As outlined by Lowry et al. 2004 we can define the collaborative writing as an iterative and social approach that involves a team focused on a common objective that negotiates coordinates and communicates throughout the creation of a common document p.75. In this sense the term CSCW signifies thattwo o much more people working with each other trying to be coordinated as a result of networked technology-based environments like synchronous communication media ex. chat videoconferences etc and asynchronous ex email forums wikis and so on to construct a common text which could be complemented with face-to-face interactions between participants Dillenbourg Jrvel Fisher 2008. According to Lowry et al 2004 and Cerrato 2003 note-taking is an activity frequently employed by people when they perform in Collaborative Writing and CSCW.
Despite of thisfrequent use its surprising thatto the date we have a tiny knowledge about the functions of note-taking in CSCW processes. In this sense our objective in this article is to believe about this question- What could be the roles of note taking in CSCW
Basing us on the available facts in the present chapter we expose that note-taking is actually a tool that has two key roles in CSCW processes- information-transmission and know-how 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 to begin with research in 60s and 70 shas focused mainly on cognitive aspects or around the relationship betweenquality of your notes and finding out in the 80s and 90s but always inside a very individualistic perspective Castell et al. 2005
In contrast nowadays technologies provide news ways of communicating much 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 and the social approach. Laptop or computer Supported Collaborative writing CSCW can be a very complicated and distinct composition course of action where 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 help mainly to plan and evaluate every single textelaborated individually Castello Iesta Gonzales 2008. In this sense reciprocal writing approach could not be considereda collaborative writing activity.
Otherwise based on Lowry et al 2004 in CSCW conditions the college students should generate their text jointly as a result of the realization of diverse tasks thats signifies they have to negotiate and consensuate their text before writing in the course of and after text production. For example before writing the students have to planificate collaboratively the objective along with the sense in the text theywant to produce. For the duration of the CSCW processes the students have to set common objectives see section four.3. for a discussion around the negotiation of private and common ambitions define their writing strategies 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 ensure that they have achieve their ambitions.In this scenario CSCW processes usually requires a combination of phases of writing and communication periods of synchronous activity in which the group works with each other at the similar time and periods of individual function in which group members work asynchronically at various times. The diverse range of activities involved plus the diverse 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 often a tool that the students can use to confront such challenges mainly those related with the communication understanding construction and socially shared regulation processes implied in CSCW activities. Within the next aspect of chapter we exposethis two mainroles that note-taking has in CSCW processes.
The role of note taking as a tool for socially shared information-transmission
Inside the 1st place notes taking in CSCW can be a tool for communicating andsocially sharing the info. 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 individual data-collection becausein this CSCW contextareessentiallysocial and shared.Notes are not only 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 strategies concepts etc. but with the identical 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 could be considered as short condensations of details of a source that a person log usually from a lecture a book or another situation which needs to be remembered or used later on to carry out some process Piolat Olive Kellogg 2005. Therefore in CSCW scenarios note-taking could be defined as an activity and a tool for stable registration of info like an external memory that make it possible for the co-writers to store in diverse formats various types and quantities of info for their later distribution among the rest of the group members Castello Monereo 2005 Piolat Olive Kellogg 2005.
In this sense notes takingallowsthe social sharing on the group memberss undersatandings and perceptions. Writing comments in posts could be considered as a privileged way of sharingthoughts with other folks andpromotesreachinga groupsintersubjective means. In this senesein aCSCW everybody has thechance to shareand make publichisher opinions making use of note- taking. In other sensenote-takingalso can embody relevant aspects of classroom culture. Students words in notes can in some way reflect how is going on within the classroom.
In a CSCW the co-writers usually use the notes in the course of the entire course of action of CSCW as communication tools to be helped to set ambitions to socialize facts to remember agreements to clarify interpretations to reflect on the followed process 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 details but we would like to note that this course of action may be carried out in two diverse ways- singular-asynchronous and collaborative- synchronous.In the 1st one particular the group members take notes individually from a single or extra sources at diverse moments. Even when the students can take their notes in the notebook they usually transforms this notes into digital format working with diverse tools such as Microsoft Word or Microsoft OneNote that allow them to register to search and to share facts in a flexible way with the rest with the team. They can also write and to share their notes directly with their partners applying posts. Otherwise in collaborative- synchronous note-taking two or much more members of your team share a whiteboard in real time to take notes to fix to add to delete data 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 data amongst the members from the team. Additionally in both situations the co-writers can use their produced notes in 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 circumstances the co-writers can use several procedures or formats to take their notes which affect their mastering processes plus the co-construction of meanings and understanding amongst co-writers Castello Monereo 2005 Piolat Olive Kellogg 2005. We will expose this aspect inside the following section.
The part of note-taking as an epistemic tool for socially shared know-how co-construction
In second place notes taking have an significant part in the co-construction of knowledge in CSCW. As we have said before CSCW activities involve the college students in a collaborative composition procedure that needs co-construction and transformation of information Bereiter Scardamalia 1987.
Elaborating a common text implies taking decisions collaboratively to consensuate what to say and how to say it in 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 precise audience or discursive neighborhood taking account previous texts. This suggests that according to Castell et al. 2008 the co-writers are participating in a shared approach that always is situated and dialogic.
This situated and dialogic course of action implies a challenge for the co-construction of meanings and know-how within the CSCW processes. According to the literature in CSCW Dillenbourg Traum 1999 Roschelle Teasley 1995 this method of co-construction in CSCW scenarios demand the externalization and negotiation on the participants positions by the dialogue in an effort to reach intersubjectivity or a shared representation from the activity.
Notes taking in CSCW have a public but additionally person function that helps make possiblethis co-construction of know-how because it helps make visible the thinking and the questions of the participants and it promotes the dialogue inside the group. From a Vygoskian perspective dialogue is the essential tool for finding out appropriation and interiorisation.In a dialoguedifferent voices could be reflected it enhances intertextuality and inter-thinking could be developed.
In this sense notes is often made use of as authentic epistemic tools because it promotes sharing negotiating and co-constructing the information collaboratively.In accordance with Piolat et al. 2005 p.293-294 the principle tactics of note-taking in an effort to transform info to information are those who arent linear like maps outlines schemas and so forth. These approaches have better result in studying because promote the selection organization and resignification of info and it could be employed as tools to negotiate means and to co-construct understanding between co-writers in CSCW contexts.
Nevertheless extra than the different processes and formats of notes taking what we consider that is crucial to promote co-construction of information would 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 in order to develop the students metacognitive use of notes as tools for social sharing details and for co-construction of understanding in CSCW circumstances.
As conclusion we consider that notes taking in CSCW brings us an necessary tool to socially shared facts and a privilegied tool to make possible the difficult procedure of co-construction of information. Nowadays technologies in CSCL develop very quickly and every day in our society is much more necessaryto incorporate it in our daily day. New technologies will provide new makes use of of notes that can help us tointeract much more efficiencyand collaboratively with other folks. This major situation has to be explored broadest in 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 understanding that you must take into consideration before through and after the course. There is also certain advantages and disadvantages on employing these techniques. The objective of this chapter is to clarify few basic things one particular must consider when designin a computer- supported collaborative discovering.
Initial we introduce three questions one particular must ask from himself in an effort to clarify if computer system supported collaborative learning CSCL from now on would be the best way to carry out the course intended. After that we deal with the practical issues of designin CSCL and how to resolve them sensibly. Finally we have a handful of words about the value of feedback before generating our conclusions and taking a look to the future. 6.1 Central concepts
Beforewe go on and study thethings a single must take into consideration when developing CSCL we should familiarize ourselves with some of your mainconsepts that are closely assosiated with CSCL.
1. The knowledge-creation learning method indicates those kinds of activities where people collaboratively develope new artefacts and products or commit themselves to long term-process of working and learning. Students need dialogical thinking techniques and also individualistic working practices. Muukkonen Lakkala Paavola 2007.
2. Object-oriented inquiry refers to a method where students work is organized for developing with each other some concrete outcomes throughout the course therefore of a sustained inguiry course of action. Central elements of an advanced finding out paradigm are still dialogical thinking expertise and individualistic working practices but this also focus on those ways that students activities are organized for collaboratively modifying and generating something tangible.
3.Metaskills of collaborative object-oriented inquiry- Addressing collectively the elements of individuals small groups and objects of activity in educational settings we may gain novel understanding of students and teachers practices. Metaskills signifies those techniques that students must develop for monitoring evaluating and coordinating efforts of information advancement.
4. Four pedagogical dimensions- techincal social epistemological and cognitive infrasructures. This would 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. Discovering in Groups- Collaborative studying suggests discovering exactly where not only the teacher but also students actively participate in the production and presentation of know-how. Project-Based Mastering and Problem-Based Mastering are examples of that. There are six principles of effective collaborative learning. A group engaged in mutual pursuit of know-how provides a source for multiple perspectives and interpretations Principle of Multiplicity. The power on the group to engage the college 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 procedures prepare college students for entry into a culture of practice Principal of Authenticity. Mastering of rich materials is termless instruction should instill a sense of tentativeness with regard to knowing a realization that understanding of complex material is never competed only enriched and a life-long commitment to advancing ones knowledge Principle of Termlessness.
Koschmann Kelson Feltovich Barrows 1996 83-114.
6. Theory-based design for CSCL should progress as a result of 4 steps-
one. making 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 goals
3. developing a specification based on the identified requirements and limitation of your instructional setting plus 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 Learning PBL is actually a curricular reform that was initial introduced with the founding on the Health sciences at McMaster University within the late 1960s. Extra generally PBL can be considered an example of a collaborative case-centered and learner-directed technique of instruction. It is now widely made use of in several educations like architecture biochemistry business administration dentistry economics engineering law social get the job done and other areas of postsecondary education.
Components of Problem-Based Understanding are Dilemma Formulating Self-Directed Finding out Reflecting Abstracting and Applying Knowledge. In collaborative mastering course of action 1 might be a lot more likely to see dilemma formulating taking place early in the discussion of a case and reflective activities toward its conclusion as well as the group may utilize any of these elements in the process at any time.
The PBL tutorcoach is a person trained to facilitate this finding out practice. The coachs part includes monitoring group approach and 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 Vital considerations when designing CSCL
Technological innovation seems to have some great advantages by providing easy access to data and real-world problems and also new usually means for communication and collaboration. Engineering also provides tools for developing higher-order thinking and understanding management techniques. It is also worth noting that usage of Web-based engineering in educational contexts raises also the possibility of extending the collaborative mastering activities beyond the school walls and beyond school time.
The three golden questions of a CSCL course designer
Based on study done by Kozma 2003 the usage of ITC should actually be included into curriculum. Kozma wrote that when students also use technological innovation to conduct research projects analyse data resolve issues design products and assess their personal perform college students are more likely to develop new ICT issue solving information and facts management collaboration and communication skills p. 13. Obviously there is some catch in all of this. Developing CSCL isnt easy and there are many things one must take into consideration when developing CSCL.
The initial 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 other folks 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 technology and pc supported collaboration it becomes rather obvious for the college students that normal teaching procedures would have been much far 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 naturally choose your technological innovation and software and so on.
Secondly CSCL needs a lot more labour to develop than normal course would require. The technologies doesnt make it all happen all by itself. Actually it is very common that developing virtual course might take much a lot more time than normal course. This is true also within the grading that usually in virtual course usually differs totally from the normal courses too. In CSCL it is common to have several teachers from several subject domains to take component into developing the courses. You could even say that CSCL is jointly adventure of your teachers exactly where they with each other carry out the pedagogical planning and the guidance and assessment of students via out the course.
Thirdly when designing pc supported collaborative studying the designer has to remember that it forces both the college 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 facts but they are additional like a supportive function whos job changes from the teacher to a lot more like a guider. As for the college students become the source of information and facts 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 students. They also concern the attitude of your schools as institutes. Not all schools are willing to try something new. The new way of studying is often 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 studying as odd and arent as willing to participate into them as they would be in normal classes. One particular reason for this might be that it will take totally diverse attitude from the college students to take a component in a understanding in CSCL instead of normal one particular. Here are handful of examples of these changes-
Time arranging is 1 major thing that differs in between normal classroom learning and CSCL. This is because it requires much far more time to do things in virtual environments in collaboration with other people that it does in genuine face-to-face learning situation or when studying alone. Also some college students might not like the idea that they are accountable to other people and other folks are accountable to their studying.
CSCL also demands at least certain amount of technical proficiency from the college students to ensure that they are capable to participate inside the course inside the first place. Most of these courses happen in virtual reality with computers and if you cant handle computers too very well sooner or later you will get into challenges. 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 extra time than someone is accustomed to themselves. You just cant expect people to be online all of the time so that you can collaborate or even help you with your predicament. Also its worth noting that some students get discouraged much less difficult than others. Some might just give up when technical or timetable difficulties arise.
1 answer for the presented problems will not be to forget face-to-face understanding completely. Even though the goal of computer supported collaborative mastering is to educate people applying computer system and internet 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 difficulties caused by not being able to see your collaborative partners plus the big challenge it causes when because people cannot see each other. They cannot read each and every other people body language or facial expressions. College students will have to focus on what other people say and concentrate hard to get the many info 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 college students a way to be able to really associate and throw around suggestions in fast pace. College students also could be able to react immediately and get feedback for their idea not hours after the first idea was born.
In our opinion just employing forums just isnt enough if it is employed as only means of interaction amongst 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 in a blog or forum.
The part of feedback
In the early stage of these kind of courses a lot of help and adaptation is needed because the situation plus the roles are new for everybody. Therefore its also very important to capture the process closely in order that we can learn from every experimentation of it. For example inquiries made afterwards are in an significant role when trying to correct the many made mistakes for the next time. The opinions from the students and teachers are very vital when designing new courses and developing the idea of computer supported collaborative learning. In other words important to understand that the engineering does not automatically change educational practises teachers deliberate effort to develop the learning culture is also needed plus the teachers need positive experiences that affect on their attitude towards new courses.
So at least when carrying out a CSCL course of your personal remember to collect some feedback from both the college students and the teachers. It will help you in the future and you have a chance to try to correct the mistakes made for the duration of the course or even before and make it much more alluring for the next time. Not always people are willing to valuate their learning as well as the implementation of a course but the usually its possible to get at least handful of good answers. It might be an inquiry that every one of the participants fill in both before and after the course or just after the course. If it seems that working with the computer and within 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 of 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 along with the choice your making should guarantee you the answers so choose wisely.The method is still new and every teacher that desides to try out CSCL will take it to their own direction.
In all when designing a CSCL course it is critical to consider how your course or your college students benefit from the use in the CSCL system. Does it bring something extra for the teaching or does it get in the way of your actual learning If you can cope with the time tables and the technical features you have a very interesting course in your hands. Despite each of the considerable questions along with the handful of common challenges CSCL still has a lot of possibilities. The concept of college students interacting via net is very interesting because that way people face each other only within the level of thought. When the practice of thinking becomes visible you can follow the birth of your own tips and also learn about your very own cognition.
We believe that this kind of understanding will probably be a lot more common inside the long term because people today need to lead their own learning additional and a lot more. Many people find it very frustrating that their part within the working life is changing the many 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 mastering may be in crucial position in teaching young people how to educate themselves if needed. It can also help teach college students to form questions about phenomenoms and create their very own interpretations not just believe everything that is said.
Johanna Hnninen Heidi Hyytinen and Janne Niinivaara 7. Designing Teaching in CSCL
7. 1 Introduction
In this chapter our aim is to describe pedagogical frameworks which are useful for designing teaching in CSCL. We also overlook the elements on the teachers role in CSCL. In addition we believe over the certain difficulties and demands that teacher should be aware of when designing teaching through computer-supported collaborative finding out.
Laptop or computer supported collaborative discovering CSCL suggests understanding with computer systems. It also refers to utilizing technologies to fulfil face-to-face interaction involving student and teacher and amongst college students Dilenbourg Jrvel Fisher 2008 one. In teaching computers and net might be utilized amongst others for information storage or as a communication tool structure or virtual classroom. Pc Supported Collaborative Understanding can have very great opportunities inside the future. Fore example it can offer a chance to create new teams and networks which share and construct know-how with each other. It also demands engagement to appointed targets. When collaborative action is succesful it can make positive interdependence between 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 within the 1990s. In those days engineering changed rapidly. In the exact same time new finding out theories came up in the field of education. Very soon teachers and researchers realized that traditional models of teaching had been not suitable to designing educational practices which rely on these new understanding theories. Therefore there was a need to develop pedagogical practices.
In the field of CSCL understanding researchers have advanced new pedagogical practices and models of teaching. For example Lakkala Muukkonen Paavola and Hakkarainen 2008 have already been 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 knowledge creation discovering 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 mostly usually on constructive theories of discovering. Tissari et al. 2005 75. Joyce and Weil 1980 9-20 have divided 22 different pedagogical models to 4 category which are information processing models personal models social interaction models behavioral models.
Regardless of all good things CSCL is very difficult course of action and often also appears many difficulties. CSCL is very difficult to execute amongst a broad group of teachers or college students. It might be noticed that good collaborative understanding 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 perform with each other folks Are the laptop applications so difficult to use Or is it about the lack of functional models of making use of computers in understanding When we are designing web based mostly environments it is vital to assume what kinds of forms of discovering we want to support how studying and studying should organize and how learning is supported during the course Hmlinen Hkkinen 2006 232. When we are applying new technological innovation we also should have ambition to develop especially learning culture. It suggests that we should develop some subtexts or models which help us to structure collaborative learning processes along with the concepts which relate to it.Lakkala Lipponen 2004 117.
However developing needs pedagogical practical social and technological perspectives when teachers function is crucial. These all mentioned perspectives could be taken into account by using the idea of pedagogical infrastructure which can be 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 important 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 finding out. The concept of infrastructure is applied as a metaphor to discuss the design on the vital components in collaborative studying settings Lakkala et al. 2008 4. 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 is usually find in all learning environments knowingly or unknowlingly. When the infrastructures are done we dont have to do they again because the infrastructures become a way to operate 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 4 distinctive infrastructures which are technical- social- epistemological- and cognitive infrastructure.
The primary a single is technical infrastructure which usually means that discovering neighborhood has oppurtunity to use technology. It is providing technical advices and appropriateness of tools for the desired activity Lakkala et al. 2008 7 Lakkala Lipponen 2004 120. Applied technological innovation 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 elements could be for example ambitions of understanding working manners and solutions which contains teaching arrangements.Lakkala Lipponen 2004 120. Its very critical 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 includes e.g the part and responsibilities of numerous agents in expertise creation approaches towards the process of expertise advancement plus the nature of understanding sources applied. Lakkala et al. 2008 5.
The fourth is cognitive infrastructure supports for students awareness and independent mastery of your crucial elements within the desirable practices and promotes metacognitive thinking.
The four infrastructures overlap and cannot be totally separated. However they are proposed to represent fundamental aspects 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 a possibility to analyse them individually.
How to assistance the communication in between college students in CSCL
What it requires to be a teacher or a student in computer-supported collaborative learning CSCL includes many features to break the normal classroom type discovering approach. Thinking peer-interaction and a role with 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 whole new strategy to discovering prosesses. College students must be aware of what it requires to co-operate in groups in eLearning environments. There might be circumstances where CSCL doesnt work the advantages of this kind of understanding method remains unreachable. Computer as a discovering device involves certain prerequisites that student must hold or have an access to. Students working online have to assume many new ways to operate comapred to face-to-face classroom finding out. For example the basic reading from the screen might be difficult. In addition access to certain technical equipment and network connections is required. Kortelainen 2004.Above-mentioned things 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 really a important analysis subject yet there arent so many surveys from that area. However nowadays when communication and mastering studies cover justly also computer-mediated communication the mentioned phenomenon should also be visible extra. Especially in computer-supported collaborative learning because supporting college 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 students to confront different people and communicational situations Muukkonen Lakkala Paavola 2007.
The circumstances in CSCL may be unpredictable. The possible complications may occur in theory in any degree of mentioned pedagogical infrastructures. All those demands may stay unfilledfor example they may occur some technical troubles. In addition studying in CSCL may bring that kind of demanding scenarios exactly where the study books or experiences from the classroom do not help e.g Muukkonen Lakkala Paavola 2007.
All in all there are many variables to be considered when designing CSCL. The possible fears and apprehensions due to a changing of teachers function should be alleviated by supporting the communication and collaboration. The college 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 and also the surveys are made to help designing CSCL. Like it said inside the introduction element CSCL may have great opportunities inside the long term. It would enable to connect networking and understanding. When CSCL is realized properly it is beneficial for college students social and cognitive development. However it also sets certain demands which we have overlook in this chapter. These demands relate both teachers and students. Some of thes demands relate to equipment requirements. That would be the reason why is useful to deliberate CSCL as a component of the studying in universities. It is also a question of teaching arrangements. It calls for that students have the access to net and have the computer systems to use. However when designing CSCL it is mainly essential to recognize the attitudes towards computer-supported collaborative studying.
Like it said partly within the chapter 2.two sometimes college students may feel a bit insecure when they suppose get the job done independently when the function with the teacher has changed which is one of several purposes in CSCL especially when they suppose to get the job done through web. Generally there are not so many courses offered in universities in which you can utilize CSCL. That might be the reason why some of your college students may feel a bite shy with CSCL kind working procedures. 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 essential to keep going to investigate CSCL and everything related to it. It is very critical that the solutions and applications to encourage people to express themselves and to create their collaborative information by way of CSCL are constantly developing and under discussion. The question is- When will univeristies truly be ready for CSCL
In line with Lahtinen 2003 23-24 some studies have shown quality of discovering in CSCL environments differ strongly in unique understanding situation. It is said that best learning results are brought out when computer based collaborative understanding is connected to face to face understanding. There is actually a need of systematic training for network based learning in daily school life. Lahtinen 2003 24. By developing these kind of new understanding techniques we can guarantee the beneficial affection of CSCL. Computer-supported collaborative understanding contains many possibilities for long term. It is also pointed out in this chapter that also certain troubles might occur via CSCL. Understanding these issues and knowing the origin and key reasons of these possible troubles is crucial for designing CSCL. Universities should pay attention towards 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 for the course It may also be fertile to point out that utilizing CSCL as a teaching and finding out approach doesnt automatically mean that collaboration communication and e-learning in general will carry off. Students and teachers should both know the principal rules of computer-supported collaborative learning 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 on the phenoma of discovering by means of. However there are still many things that we dont know about problem-solving and so forth. related to CSCL. According because the investigations are made our information about CSCL is increasing. Quantity of our experiences from computer-supported collaborative mastering will expand. By encouraging other people and telling about and investigating we can utilize the benefits of CSCL increasingly in the future.
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 with 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 even though their distinctive perspectives. We do not find it disturbing for the reason that every single chapter is usually a outcome of mastering of various students. In other words contributing this book although it is written to serve university college students and teachers is primarily a mediational mean for finding out of multicultural college students in Finland and Spain inside the course of CSCL 2008.
In relation for the State of theart in CSCL this methodology is progressingdue for 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 along with the help of scripts and scaffold. It is essential to say that this investigation 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 college students in their understanding and in their acquisition of social techniques. 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 students have of this methodology determines to a large extend their discovering outcomes. 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 abilities in the understanding procedure and in the collaborative discovering practice 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 determination and emotions and their regulation is crucial in CSCL context.
In relation to Collaborative writing in CSCL tools for CSCW have been created in an effort 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 info and communication technologies ICT inside the co-construction of understanding through the writing is usually a young field that needs to be much 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 towards the traditional teaching and understand certain problems that might occur in order to enhance the design of the course. Regardless of this the study of virtual interaction is relevant as the approach of thinking becomes visible and analysis in the cognition field could progress notably. A reliable source of information and facts in this approach may be the very same student as heshe can turn a lot more metacognitive in hisher interaction through World-wide-web. This characteristic is relevant within the understanding 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. Students and teachers then should both know the most important rules of pc supported collaborative learning 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 1 hand society is progressing by leaps and bounds especially in the technological field open applications of social web web-based collaborative databases and Web two.0 tools like wikispaces are some examples and demands schools to integrate ICT within the classrooms as traditional lessonsare valued as obsolete. It also demands autonomous citizens in the info societywith enough qualities to operate in ateam. On the other hand schools are not progressing in the similar speed- researchers in CSCL are interested in integrating ICT in the learning procedure as a way to develop it so integration of ICT is usually a complex taskas a lot of study is required to understand how students learn in a CSCL atmosphere and how this methodology affect their determination and feelings and finally their identity. Considerating this traditional studying is just not underestimated as can give us a lot of clues for this. Lastly the goal of CSCL is topromote autonomous learners with social abilities to learn collaboratively.
While the interests on the society and CSCL researchers seem to be exactly the same but with distinctive words they hide various purposes within the end as in our society the individualistic philosophy along with the lack of interest inside the mastering process not inthe learningresultsseems to domain and this could corrupt the CSCL ideology- it would mean that CSCL wouldnt operate even though the effort of researchers if society just isnt prepare for this change -the CSCL phenomenon.
This book a outcome of university students intensive perform in the course of 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 few 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 very same time rather they drop in small by tiny. It seems to be cognitively and socially rather challenging to define and settle ambitions and practices before getting into core process. Much more time and external support is often needed.
Another notion highlighted by college students as well may be the function of emotions during the method. On the a single hand they had been not hidden but expressed openly. On the other hand students have been cautious to express themselves in collaborative writing. Despite the fact that the text is supposed to be common and shared it seemed to be somebodys property. Collaborative writing is obviously something that college students are not utilized to do thus it should be critical to practice it and discuss about it.
As outlined by questionnaires data collection for the duration of the course students regarded that major challenges inside the CSCL had been following- a students objectives had been not alike 275 b students were not fullycommittedto group activity 20 and c group members did not 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 students out of ten were not satisfied in theirgroup operate.On the other hand it is interesting to notice that students diverse standards of function 0 have been not experienced as a challenge at all.The questionnaire was supposed to fill up three times for the duration of 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 within the CSCL settings.
Im grateful to the professors researchers and lecturers who provided valuable finding out materials for this course. Thank for Sanna Jrvel Erno LehtinenMontse Castell Anna Iesta Loles GonzlezMinna Lakkala andHanna Jrvenoja who was in charge in the questionnaires too.I thank professor Paul Kirschner for his constructive advice in designing CSCL. This course is often 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 Learning- University college students as authors within the CSCL course.Retrieved Month x 200x from
Atjonen P. 2005 Effective Studies of Pedagogical Ethics with Computer systems A Quasi-experimental Process-Product Study of Two Understanding Modes. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Investigation Nov2005 Vol. 49 Matter 5 523-542.
Bereiter C. Scardamalia M. 1987. The psychology of written composition. Hillsdale NJ- Erlbaum.
Boch F. PiolatA. 2005. Note Taking and Learning- A Summary of Analysis. 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 with the self-regulated finding out approach - EARLI presidential address 2001.Studying 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 from the EARLI Special Interest Group on Writing Lund Sweden.
Castello M. Monereo C. 2005. Students note-taking as a understanding construction tool.L1-Educational Studies in Language and Literature 53 265-285.
Cerrato T. 2003. Collaborating with writing tools An instrumental perspective on the issue of computer-supported collaborative activities. Interacting with Computer systems 15 6 737-757.
Dillenbourg P. Jrvel S. Fisher 2008. The evolution of investigation on computer-supported collaborative understanding- 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.Personal computer Assistance for Collaborative Learningpp. 127-135. Stanford University Palo Alto CA.
Grnfors T. 2002. Tyst oppiminen - Action finding out. Tyss oppiminen - e-learning. Espoo- Facile Publishing.
Hudson J. M. Bruckman A. 2004. The Bystander Effect- A Lens for Understanding Patterns of Participation. Journal with the Discovering Sciences 132 165-195.
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.Determination and writing. In- C. MacArthur S. Graham and J. Fitzgerald Eds. Handbook of writing research. Mahwah N.J.- Lawrence Erlbaum
Hkkinen P. Arvaja M. Mkitalo K. 2004. Prerequisites for CSCL- Investigation approaches methodological challenges and pedagogical improvement. In K. Littleton D. Faulkner D. Miell Eds. Finding out 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 Finding out- 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 understanding.Manuscript submitted for publication.
Jrvel S. Volet S. Jrvenoja H. 2006. Determination in collaborative discovering- New concepts and procedures 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. Discovering in social practices- ICT and new artifacts-transformation of social and cultural practices. Pergamon. In press.
Jrvenoja H. Jrvel S. 2008. Emotion manage in collaborative learning situations - Do college students regulate emotions 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 of your use of electronic journals and commercial journal post collections via the FinELib portal. Details Study two. University of Oulu.
Koschmann T. Kelson A.Feltovich P. BarrowsH. 1996. Computer-Supported Problem-Based Finding out- A Principle Method to Use of Computer systems in Collaborative Understanding. Article 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. Analysis and Practice in Engineering Enhanced Finding out 31 33-64.
Lehtinen E. 2003. Computer-Supported Collaborative Finding out- An Approach to Powerful Understanding 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 Research and Practice.Journal of Business Communication.41 one 66-99.
McLoughlin C. Oliver R. 1998. Maximising the language and finding out link in computer system learning environments. British Journal of Educational Engineering 29 2 125-136
Marttunen M. Laurinen L. 2001. Discovering of argumentation techniques 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 know-how creation and object orientedinquiry in university courses. In S. Ludvigsen A. Lund I. Rasmussen R. SljEds. Finding out 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 at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association New Orleans LA.
ODonnell A. King A. EDS 1999- Cognitive perspectives on peer learning. Mahwah New Jersey- Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Pargman T. C. 2003. Collaborating with writing tools- An instrumental perspective around the dilemma of computer-supported collaborative activities. Interacting with Computers 15 6. pp.737-757.
Pintrich P.R. 2000. The role of goal orientation in self-regulated discovering. 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 for the duration of Note Taking. Applied Psychology. 19 291-312.
Roschelle J. Teasley S. D. 1995. The construction of shared expertise in collaborative dilemma solving. In C. E. OMalley Ed.Computer-supported Collaborative Finding out. 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 discovering plus the dangers of deciding upon 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 determination of collaborating peers- A case analysis. Psychologia 461 19-37.
Volet S. E. Jrvel S. Eds. 2001. Motivation in finding out 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 Technological innovation. Proceedings with the Society for Technical Communication 52nd Conference SeattleUSA.pp.204-209
Inglnd Siget Language Phonemic Writing Dictionaries
Luotolax finland meteorite Sale are intended to push up the buying price of items via real-time competitive bidding thus someone can offer several of high costs for such items. However some of the items at auctions are usually unexpectedly sold outside of expectation. Here is the report on most bizarre and also expensive auctions on this planet.
Lennons Toilet 1500
John Lennons toilet is probably the most expensive items to have an auction of Beatles memorabilia. Lennon intended to use the porcelain lavatory as a vegetable pot. After above 40 years the toilet is sold for the price nearly 1000. The actual organizer of the sell said The toilet may very well be worth something and yes it might not but it is among the most unusual items weve sold.
John Lennons bathroom is one of the most expensive products for an auction associated with Beatles memorabilia
A Jerking Off of Manga-boy Sculpture135 mil
My Lonesome Dodgy is a life-sized sculpture
The Lonesome Cowboy is usually a life-sized sculpture of a bright-eyed cartoons manga-boy jerking off and cooking his jizz into a big lasso around his head.
Tagged with: Luotolax finland meteorite
Filed under: Astronomy News