Specifying computer-supported collaboration scripts

Aronson, E., Blaney, N., Stephan, C., Sikes, J., & Snapp, M. (1978). The jigsaw classroom. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Baker, M. (2003). Computer-mediated argumentative interactions for the co-elaboration of scientific notions. In: J. Andriessen, M. Baker, & D. Suthers (eds.), Arguing to learn: confronting cognitions in computer-supported collaborative learning environments. (Vol. 1) (pp. 1–25). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

Bargh, J. A., & Schul, Y. (1980). On the cognitive benefits of teaching. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 593–604.

Barron, B. (2003). When smart groups fail. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(3), 307–359.

Cohen, E. G. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups. Review of Educational Research, 64(1), 1–35.

Dansereau, D. F., Collins, K. W., McDonald, B. A., Holley, C. D., Garland, J. C., Diekhoff, G., et al. (1979). Development and evaluation of a learning strategy program. Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 64–73.

Dillenbourg, P. (2002). Over-scripting CSCL: The risks of blending collaborative learning with instructional design. In: P. A. Kirschner (ed.), Three worlds of CSCL. Can we support CSCL? (pp. 61–91). Heerlen, NL: Open Universiteit Nederland.

Dillenbourg, P., & Jermann, P. (2006). Designing integrative scripts. In: F. Fischer, I. Kollar, H. Mandl, & J. Haake (Eds.), Scripting computer-supported collaborative learning: Cognitive, computational and educational perspectives. New York: Springer.

Fischer, F., Kollar, I., Mandl, H., & Haake, J. (eds.). (2007). Scripting computer-supported collaborative learning: Cognitive, computational and educational perspectives. New York: Springer.

Haake, J. & Pfister, H. R. (2007). Flexible scripting in net-based learning groups. In: F. Fischer, I. Kollar, H. Mandl, & J. Haake (eds.), Scripting computer-supported collaborative learning: Cognitive, computational and educational perspectives. New York: Springer.

Hamilton, R. J. (1997). Effects of three types of elaboration on learning concepts from text. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 22(3), 299–318.

Harrer, A., & Malzahn, N. (2006). Bridging the gap—towards a graphical modelling language for learning designs and collaboration scripts of various granularities. In: Kinshuk, R. Koper, P. Kommers, P. Kirschner, D. Sampson, & W. Didderen (eds.), Advanced learning technologies ICALT 2006 (pp. 296–300). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society.

Herring, S. C. (1999). Interactional coherence in CMC. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 4(4).

King, A. (1990). Enhancing peer interaction and learning in the classroom through reciprocal questioning. American Educational Research Journal, 27(4), 664–687.

King, A. (1994). Guiding knowledge construction in the classroom: Effects of teaching children how to question and how to explain. American Educational Research Journal, 30, 338–368.

King, A. (2006). Scripting collaborative learning processes: A cognitive perspective. In: F. Fischer, I. Kollar, H. Mandl, & J. Haake (eds.), Scripting computer-supported collaborative learning: Cognitive, computational and educational perspectives. New York: Springer.

Kollar, I., Fischer, F., & Hesse, F. (2006). Computer-supported cooperation scripts—A conceptual analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 18(2), 159–185.

Leitão, S. (2000). The potential of argument in knowledge building. Human Development (Karger), 43, 332–360.

MOSIL (2004). Framework for integrated learning. Retrieved January 13th, 2006, from http://www.iwm-kmrc.de/cossicle/resources/D23-05-01-F.pdf

O’Donnell, A. M. (1999). Structuring dyadic interaction through scripted cooperation. In: A. M. O’Donnell, & A. King (eds.), Cognitive perspectives on peer learning. (pp. 179–196). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

O’Donnell, A. M., & Dansereau, D. F. (1992). Scripted cooperation in student dyads: A method for analyzing and enhancing academic learning and performance. In: R. Hertz-Lazarowitz, & N. Miller (eds.), Interaction in cooperative groups: The theoretical anatomy of group learning. (pp. 120–141). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1994). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1(2), 117–175.

Pea, R. D. (2004). The social and technological dimensions of scaffolding and related theoretical concepts for learning, education, and human activity. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 423–451.

Rosenshine, B., Meister, C., & Chapman, S. (1996). Teaching students to generate questions: A review of the intervention studies. Review of Educational Research, 66(2), 181–221.

Schwartz, D. L. (1995). The emergence of abstract representations in dyad problem solving. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4(3), 321–354.

Van Boxtel, C., van der Linden, J., & Kanselaar, G. (2000). Collaborative learning tasks and the elaboration of conceptual knowledge. Learning and Instruction, 10, 311–330.

Webb, N. (1989). Peer interaction and learning in small groups. International Journal of Educational Research, 13(1), 21–39.

Webb, N. M., Troper, J. D. & Fall, R. (1995). Constructive activity and learning in collaborative small groups. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(3), 406–423.

Webb, N. M., & Palincsar, A. S. (1996). Group processes in the classroom. In: D. C. Berliner, & R. C. Calfee (eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 841–873). New York: Macmillan.

Weinberger, A., Ertl, B., Fischer, F., & Mandl, H. (2005). Epistemic and social scripts in computer-supported collaborative learning. Instructional Science, 33(1), 1–30.

White, B. Y., & Frederiksen, J. R. (1998). Inquiry, modelling, and metacognition: Making science accessible to all students. Cognition and Instruction, 16(1), 3–118.