Marije van Amelsvoort

Rainbow: A framework for analysing computer-mediated pedagogical debates

In this paper we present a framework for analysing when and how students engage in a specific form of interactive knowledge elaboration in CSCL environments: broadening and deepening understanding of a space of debate. The framework is termed “Rainbow,” as it comprises seven principal analytical categories, to each of which a colour is assigned, thus enabling informal visualisation by the analyst of the extent to which students are engaging in interaction relating to potential achievement of its pedagogical goal. The categories distinguish between activities that are part of the prescribed assignment and activities that are not, and between task-focused and non-task-focused activities. Activities focused on managing the interaction itself are distinguished from argumentative interaction. Notably, an operational definition of what it means to broaden and deepen understanding in this case is also provided here. The functional Rainbow analysis is complemented by an analysis of topics and subtopics that enables identification of one form of conceptual deepening of the question. In comparison with existing analysis techniques, Rainbow synthesises much of what is known into a single framework, with a broad theoretical base. The usability and educational relevance of the framework has been validated experimentally across a variety of collaborative learning tasks and communication media. Possible and actual extensions to the framework are discussed, with respect to additional CSCL tools, domains and tasks.

Going Dutch or Joining Forces? Some Experiences With Team Teaching in the Netherlands

Lu Rehling is a professor in the Technical & Professional Writing Program at San Francisco State University, where she has taught since 1994. She also has over 15 years of professional industry experience as a writer, editor, trainer, manager, and consultant. Her Ph.D. is from the University of Michigan. Address correspondence to Lu Rehling, HUM 413, SF State University, 1600 Holloway Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94132; email: RehLingL@sfsu.edu.In the Netherlands, most universities have a Faculty of Humanities that offers several bachelor’s and master’s programmes in the field of communication and information sciences. Each of these programmes outnumbers the classical studies such as linguistics, history, and philosophy, in terms of students that is, not in terms of teaching staff. The high student-staff ratio in the communication programmes necessitates a careful investment of teaching resources. Here we report on some recent developments within our institutes. The Need for Team Teaching A teacher has two challenges when facing a large group of 50 to over 300 students: to instill an active attitude toward learning and an academic attitude toward knowledge. The first challenge is addressed in all our courses by fostering the students’ repertoire for self-directed learning.

Perspective-Taking in Referential Communication: Does Stimulated Attention to Addressees’ Perspective Influence Speakers’ Reference Production?

In two experiments, we investigated whether speakers’ referential communication benefits from an explicit focus on addressees’ perspective. Dyads took part in a referential communication game and were allocated to one of three experimental settings. Each of these settings elicited a different perspective mind-set (baseline, self-focus, other-focus). In the two perspective settings, speakers were explicitly instructed to regard their addressees’ (other-focus) or their own (self-focus) perspective before construing their referential message. Results evidenced speakers’ egocentricity bias. Even though speakers were explicitly aware of addressees’ informational need, speakers still referred to information not known to their addressee. Speakers’ self-reported perspective-taking behavior correlated with their actual reference behavior. Those who reported to have regarded addressees’ perspective were also less likely to have leaked information about their own knowledge and attentional state. Findings are discussed in light of speakers’ egocentricity bias and the role of speaker-addressee collaboration in language production.

Does Facebook Use Predict College Students’ Social Capital? A Replication of Ellison, Steinfield, and Lampe’s (2007) Study Using the Original and More Recent Measures of Facebook Use and Social Capital

In 2007 Ellison, Steinfield, and Lampe published an article on the positive association between Facebook use and social capital that started a decade of research on the social outcomes of social network site use. Although cited almost 9,000 times, it received critique on the conceptualization and operationalization of Facebook use and social capital. In this study we replicate Ellison et al.’s study with original and alternative measures of social capital and Facebook use, thereby shedding light on the robustness, stability, and ecological validity of the original findings. We found that Facebook intensity positively predicts the original social capital measures, lending support to the validity of the original findings. Its relationship with structural measures, however, was weak for bridging and absent for bonding social capital.