Thời gian có ý nghĩa: Tiến bộ trong phương pháp phân tích quy trình giải quyết vấn đề trong môi trường hợp tác hỗ trợ bởi máy tính

Manu Kapur1
1National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore

Tóm tắt

Bài báo này lập luận về sự cần thiết phải phát triển các phương pháp khám phá các mẫu thời gian trong các nhóm học tập hợp tác hỗ trợ bởi máy tính (CSCL). Nó đề xuất một phương pháp định lượng như vậy—Phân tích Thứ tự Lag (LsA)—và áp dụng nó trong một nghiên cứu về các tương tác giải quyết vấn đề của các nhóm hợp tác trong một môi trường trực tuyến, đồng bộ. LsA đã phát hiện được các mẫu thời gian đáng kể trong các cuộc thảo luận của nhóm CSCL mà phương pháp "mã hóa và đếm" thường được sử dụng không thể phát hiện ra. Quan trọng hơn, phân tích cho thấy cách thức biến đổi trong các mẫu thời gian có mối quan hệ đáng kể với biến đổi trong hiệu suất nhóm, qua đó củng cố lý do phát triển và thử nghiệm các phương pháp và thước đo thời gian trong nghiên cứu CSCL. Các phát hiện được thảo luận, bao gồm các vấn đề về độ tin cậy, giá trị và các hạn chế của phương pháp đề xuất.

Từ khóa

#Phân tích Thứ tự Lag #Nhóm học tập hợp tác #Mẫu thời gian #Hỗ trợ máy tính #Nghiên cứu giáo dục

Tài liệu tham khảo

Adami, C., Ofria, C., & Collier, T. C. (2000). Evolution of biological complexity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 97, 4463–4468. Akhras, F. N., & Self, J. A. (2000). Modeling the process, not the product, of learning. In S. P. Lajoie (Ed.), Computers as cognitive tools, volume two: No more walls (pp. 3–28). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Anderson, J. R. (2000). Cognitive psychology and its implications. New York: Worth. Arrow, H., McGrath, J. E., & Berdahl, J. L. (2000). Small groups as complex systems: Formation, coordination, development, and adaptation. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Bakeman, R., & Gottman, J. M. (1997). Observing interaction: An introduction to sequential analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press. Barron, B. (2003). When smart groups fail. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(3), 307–359. Bar-Yam, Y. (2003). Dynamics of complex systems. Reading: Addison Wesley. Bransford, J. D., & Nitsch, K. E. (1978). Coming to understand things we could not previously understand. In J. F. Kavanaugh & W. Strange (Eds.), Speech and language in the laboratory, school, and clinic. Harvard: MIT Press. Burtsev, M. S. (2003). Measuring the dynamics of artificial evolution. In: W. Banzhaf, T. Christaller, P. Dittrich, J. T. Kim, & J. Ziegler (Eds.), Advances in artificial life. Proceedings of the 7th European Conference on Artificial Life, Dortmund, Germany, September 14–17. Chi, M. T. H. (1997). Quantifying qualitative analyses of verbal data: A practical guide. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(3), 271–315. Chi, M. T. H., Bassok, M., Lewis, M., Reimann, P., & Glaser, R. (1989). Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 5, 145–182. Chi, M. T. H., de Leeuw, N., Chiu, M. H., & Lavancher, C. (1994). Eliciting self-explanations improves understanding. Cognitive Science, 18, 439–477. Clifford, M. M. (1984). Thoughts on a theory of constructive failure. Educational Psychologist, 19(2), 108–120. Cohen, J. (1977). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York: Academic. Cohen, E. G., Lotan, R. A., Abram, P. L., Scarloss, B. A., & Schultz, S. E. (2002). Can groups learn? Teachers College Record, 104(6), 1045–1068. Collazos, C., Guerrero, L., Pino, J., & Ochoa, S. (2002). Evaluating collaborative learning processes. Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Groupware (CRIWG’2002). Heidelberg, Germany: Springer. Dillenbourg, P. (2002). Over-scripting CSCL: The risks of blending collaborative learning with instructional design. In P. A. Kirschner (Ed.), Three worlds of CSCL. Can we support CSCL (pp. 61–91). Heerlen: Open Universiteit Nederland. Erkens, G., Kanselaar, G., Prangsma, M., & Jaspers, J. (2003). Computer support for collaborative and argumentative writing. In E. De Corte, L. Verschaffel, N. Entwistle, & J. van Merrienboer (Eds.), Powerful learning environments: Unravelling basic components and dimensions (pp. 157–176). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science. Gall, M., Borg, W., & Gall, J. (1996). Education research: An introduction. White Plains: Longman. Holland, J. H. (1995). Hidden order: How adaptation builds complexity. New York: Addison-Wesley. Jeong, A. (2005). A guide to analyzing message-response sequences and group interaction patterns in computer-mediated communication. Distance Education, 26(3), 367–383. Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Towards a design theory of problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(4), 63–85. Jonassen, D. H., & Kwon, H. I. (2001). Communication patterns in computer-mediated vs. face-to-face group problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(1), 35–52. Kapur, M. (2008). Productive failure. Cognition and Instruction, 26(3), 379–424. Kapur, M. (2009). Productive failure in mathematical problem solving. Instructional Science. DOI: 10.1007/s11251-009-9093-x. Kapur, M. (2010). A further study of productive failure in mathematical problem solving: Unpacking the design components. Instructional Science. DOI: 10.1007/s11251-010-9144-3. Kapur, M., & Kinzer, C. (2007). The effect of problem type on interactional activity, inequity, and group performance in a synchronous computer-supported collaborative environment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(5), 439–459. Kapur, M., & Kinzer, C. (2009). Productive failure in CSCL groups. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(1), 21–46. Kapur, M., Voiklis, J., & Kinzer, C. (2005). Problem solving as a complex, evolutionary activity: A methodological framework for analyzing problem-solving processes in a computer-supported collaborative environment. Proceedings the Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) Conference. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Kapur, M., Voiklis, J., Kinzer, C., & Black, J. (2006). Insights into the emergence of convergence in group discussions. In S. Barab, K. Hay, & D. Hickey (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference on the Learning Sciences (pp. 300–306). Mahwah: Erlbaum. Kapur, M., Hung, D., Jacobson, M., Voiklis, J., Kinzer, C., & Chen, D.-T. (2007). Emergence of learning in computer-supported, large-scale collective dynamics: A research agenda. In C. A. Clark, G. Erkens, & S. Puntambekar (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference of Computer-supported Collaborative Learning (pp. 323–332). Mahwah: Erlbaum. Kapur, M., Voiklis, J., & Kinzer, C. (2008). Sensitivities to early exchange in synchronous computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) groups. Computers & Education, 51, 54–66. Kauffman, S. (1995). At home in the universe. New York: Oxford University Press. Lee, E. Y. C., Chan, C. K. K., & van Aalst, J. (2006). Student assessment of collaborative learning in a CSCL environment. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(1), 57–87. McGrath, J. E., & Tschan, F. (2004). Temporal matters in social psychology: Examining the role of time in the lives of groups and individuals. Washington: American Psychological Association. Muukkonen, H., Hakkarainen, K., Konsonen, K., Jalonen, S., Heikkil, A., Lonka, K., et al. (2007). Process-and context-sensitive research on academic knowledge practices: Developing CASS-tools and methods. In C. Chinn, G. Erkens, & S. Puntambekar (Eds.), Minds, mind, and society. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Computer-supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL 2007) (pp. 541–543). New Brunswick: International Society of the Learning Sciences. Olson, G. M., Herbsleb, J. D., & Rueter, H. H. (1994). Characterizing the sequential structure of interactive behaviors through statistical and grammatical techniques. Human-Computer Interaction, 9, 427–472. Poole, M. S., & Holmes, M. E. (1995). Decision development in computer-assisted group decision making. Human Communication Research, 22(1), 90–127. Rabiner, L. (1989). A tutorial on Hidden Markov Models and selected applications in speech recognition. Proceedings of the IEEE, 77(2), 257–286. Reimann, P. (2009). Time is precious: Variable- and event-centred approaches to process analysis in CSCL research. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(3), 239–257. Rourke, L., & Anderson, T. (2004). Validity in quantitative content analysis. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(1), 5–18. Ross, S. M. (1996). Stochastic processes. New York: John Wiley. Sanderson, P., & Fisher, C. (1994). Exploratory sequential data analysis: Foundations. Human-Computer Interaction, 9, 251–317. Scardamalia, M. (1989). Computer-supported intentional learning environments. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 5(1), 51–68. Scardamalia, M. (1992). Educational applications of a networked communal database. Interactive Learning Environments, 2(1), 45–71. Schellens, T., & Valcke, M. (2006). Fostering knowledge construction in university students through asynchronous discussion groups. Computers & Education, 46, 349–370. Schmidt, R. A., & Bjork, R. A. (1992). New conceptualizations of practice: Common principles in three paradigms suggest new concepts for training. Psychological Science, 3(4), 207–217. Schwartz, D. L., & Bransford, J. D. (1998). A time for telling. Cognition and Instruction, 16(4), 475–522. Soller, A., Wiebe, J., & Lesgold, A. (2002). A machine learning approach to assessing knowledge sharing during collaborative learning activities. In G. Stahl (Ed.), Proceedings of Computer Support for Collaborative Learning (pp. 128–137). Hillsdale: Erlbaum. Spada, H., Meier, A., Rummel, N., & Hauser, S. (2005). A new method to assess the quality of collaborative process in CSCL. Proceedings of the Computer-supported Collaborative Learning conference 2005, Taipei, Taiwan. Stahl, G. (2005). Group cognition in computer-assisted collaborative learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21, 79–90. Strijbos, J. W., Martens, R. L., Prins, F. J., & Jochems, W. M. G. (2006). Content analysis: What are they talking about? Computers & Education, 46, 29–48. Suthers, D. D. (2006). Technology affordances for intersubjective meaning making: A research agenda for CSCL. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(3), 315–337. Suthers, D. D., Dwyer, N., Medina, R., & Vatrapu, R. (2007). A framework for eclectic analysis of collaborative interaction. In C. Chinn, G. Erkens, & S. Puntambekar (Eds.), Minds, mice, and society. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Computer-supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL 2007) (pp. 694–703). New Brunswick: International Society of the Learning Sciences. Van Lehn, K., Siler, S., Murray, C., Yamauchi, T., & Baggett, W. B. (2003). Why do only some events cause learning during human tutoring? Cognition and Instruction, 21(3), 209–249. Voiklis, J., Kapur, M., Kinzer, C., & Black, J. (2006). An emergentist account of collective cognition in collaborative problem solving. In R. Sun (Ed.), Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 858–863). Mahwah: Erlbaum. Wampold, B. E. (1992). The intensive examination of social interaction. In T. R. Kratochwill & J. R. Levin (Eds.), Single-case research design and analysis: New directions for psychology and education (pp. 93–131). Hillsdale: Erlbaum. Zumbach, J., Schonemann, J., & Reimann, P. (2005). Analyzing and supporting collaboration in cooperative computer-mediated communication. Proceedings of the Computer-supported Collaborative Learning Conference 2005, Taipei, Taiwan.