Sabine Hauser

Learning to collaborate while being scripted or by observing a model

In an earlier study, we had tested if observing a collaboration model, or alternatively, following a collaboration script could improve students’ subsequent collaboration in a computer-mediated setting and promote their knowledge of good collaboration. Both model and script showed positive effects. The current study was designed to further probe the effects of model and script by comparing them to conditions in which the learning was supported by providing elaboration support (instructional prompts and a reflective self-explanation phase). In addition, we applied a newly developed, innovative rating scheme to analyze the collaborative process: The rating scheme combines qualitative evaluation with quantitative assessment. Forty dyads were tested, eight in each of the following conditions: model plus elaboration, model, script plus elaboration, script, and control. Observing a collaboration model with elaboration support yielded the best results over all other conditions on measures of the quality of collaborative process and on outcome variables. Model without elaboration was second best. The results for the script conditions were mixed; on some variables, even below those of the control condition. The results of the current study lead us to challenge the positive view on collaboration scripts prevalent in CSCL research. We propose adaptive scripting as a possible solution.

A new method to assess the quality of collaborative process in CSCL

In CSCL research, the collaborative process - the way people collaborate while working on tasks and learning -- is of central importance. Instructional measures are being developed to improve the quality of the collaboration which itself determines to a great extent the results of working and learning in groups. However, assessing collaborative process is not easy. We have developed a new assessment method by quantitatively rating nine qualitatively defined characteristic dimensions of collaboration. In this paper, we first describe how these dimensions were extracted from video-recordings of dyads collaborating to solve interdisciplinary tasks. Then we explain how the resulting rating system was applied to and tested on another sample. Based on positive findings from this application, we argue that the new method can be recommended for different areas of CSCL research.

Enhancing computer-supported writing of learning protocols by adaptive prompts

Cognitive and metacognitive prompts are a central support procedure in eHELp a computer-based environment that supports the writing of learning protocols. In order to investigate the effectiveness of adapting prompts, 79 students revised a learning protocol in eHELp either supported by prompts that were adapted on the basis of the results of an integrated learning-strategy questionnaire or a meta-knowledge test, respectively, by randomly selected prompts, or without any support. Adaptive prompts improved the quality of the learning protocols and fostered the acquisition of declarative knowledge and deep understanding, irrespective of the applied diagnostic instrument. In conclusion, open-ended learning tasks like the writing of learning protocols can be made more effective by adaptive support based on prior strategy assessment.

How does net-based interdisciplinary collaboration change with growing domain expertise?

This study examined how growing domain expertise influences net-based interdisciplinary collaboration of persons with medical and psychological background. We compared the quality of the collaborative process and the joint solution of interdisciplinary dyads of different expertise levels (advanced students, trainees, and experts) working on a patient case. To assess the quality of the collaborative process, a rating scheme developed by Meier et al. (in press) was used. Additionally, process log files measuring individual and joint time and number of work phases were gathered, and joint solutions were analyzed. As had been assumed, the experts scored lower than the less experienced dyads in most measures of collaborative process. Looking in more detail at the less experienced dyads revealed that the trainee dyads outperformed the student dyads in most of the process variables. Analyses of process logfiles revealed the same pattern regarding the number of phases used. The predictions for the quality of the joint solution were more difficult and the results for these variables more mixed.

Computergestütztes Schreiben von Lernprotokollen

Zusammenfassung. Universitares Lernen fordert von den Studierenden die Entwicklung effektiver Lern- und Arbeitsstrategien. Eine solche Strategie zum Erwerb flexibel anwendbaren Wissens ist die Lern...