Tarja-Riitta Hurme

Students’ Activity in Computer-Supported Collaborative Problem Solving in Mathematics

The purpose of this study was to analyse secondary school students’ (N = 16) computer-supported collaborative mathematical problem solving. The problem addressed in the study was: What kinds of metacognitive processes appear during computer-supported collaborative learning in mathematics? Another aim of the study was to consider the applicability of networked learning in mathematics. The network-based learning environment Knowledge Forum (KF) was used to support students’ collaborative problem solving. The data consist of 188 posted computer notes, portfolio material such as notebooks, and observations. The computer notes were analysed through three stages of qualitative content analysis. The three stages were content analysis of computer notesin mathematical problem solving, content analysis of mathematical problem solving activity and content analysis of the students’ metacognitive activity. The results of the content analysis illustrate how networked discussions mediated mathematical knowledge and students’ questions, while the mathematical problem solving activity shows that the students co-regulate their thinking. The results of the content analysis of the students’ metacognitive activity revealed that the students use metacognitive knowledge and make metacognitive judgments and perform monitoring during networked discussions. In conclusion, the results of this study demonstrate that working with the networked technology contributes to the students’ use of their mathematical knowledge and stimulates them into making their thinking visible. The findings also show some metacognitive activity in the students’ computer-supported collaborative problem solving in mathematics.

What Makes Metacognition as Socially Shared in Mathematical Problem Solving

Mechanisms making metacognition as differentiator for successful collaborative problem solving has become an important topic for self-regulated and collaborative learning research. Recent empirical research on socially shared metacognition has examined the role of metacognition in technology supported learning situations. However, detailed research on operationalizing metacognition in collaborative learning remains scarce. Advancing understanding regarding socially shared metacognition in learning, the mechanisms and processes that advance the use of metacognition beyond the individual level to the group level should be defined more precisely. In this article, the aim is to contribute to the ongoing discussion and advance empirical understanding what makes metacognition as socially shared when pre-service primary teachers triads’ (N = 18) collaborative mathematical problem solving is supported by an asynchronous and text-based WorkMates (WM) learning environment.

When “doing” matters: The emergence of group–level regulation in planning for a music lesson

ABSTRACT The processes of individual and group-level regulation are important mechanisms of all collaborative learning, and we argue that recognising group-level regulatory processes would aid music educators when they guide students in collaborative settings. In music education, there is extensive research on group music-making, whereas the interest towards regulatory processes at group level is just emerging. At the same time educational psychology research has focused on regulation of collaborative learning processes in other domains. This study aims to combine both perspectives by examining the characteristics of self-, co- and socially shared regulation in a collaborative task of planning and preparing a music lesson, relating work on domain-specific learning processes to literature from educational psychology. The regulatory processes of three groups consisting of one music educator and two pre-service teachers were examined through qualitative video analysis. Examples of participants’ verbal interaction and musical activities during episodes depicting group-level regulation are presented. The examples guide the rationalisation that non-verbal musical interaction could validate socially shared regulation, and ways to distinguish co- from socially shared regulation in collaborative music-making are discussed.