Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T07:33:39.941Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

20 - Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning

from Part IV - Learning Together

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2022

R. Keith Sawyer
Affiliation:
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
Get access

Summary

In its broadest definition, computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) is any learning that involves two or more learners as well as one or more computers. CSCL research studies how collaboration contributes to learning and how computer technology can facilitate collaborative learning. This chapter discusses CSCL in terms of four conceptions: (1) collaborative knowledge building; (2) dialogic interaction; (3) intersubjective meaning making; (4) group cognition. CSCL research demonstrates that collaboration among students – when well-designed to scaffold student interactions – is more effective than teachers delivering information to students through a recorded lecture or a synchronous video meeting. This chapter reviews major themes in CSCL, including: empirical studies of cooperative learning in groups; theoretical explanations of learning as an emergent, collective phenomenon; conceptions of knowledge as interactions between learners, rather than as mental representations in student’s heads; and the use of interaction analysis to study moment-to-moment collaborations.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bereiter, C. (2002). Education and mind in the knowledge age. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Button, G., Crabtree, A., Rouncefield, M., & Tolmie, P. (2015). Deconstructing ethnography: Towards a social methodology for ubiquitous computing and interactive systems design. New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cakir, M., Xhafa, F., Zhou, N., & Stahl, G. (2005). Thread-based analysis of patterns of collaborative interaction in chat. In Proceedings of the International Conference on AI in Education (AI-Ed 2005). Amsterdam, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Cuban, L. (1986). Teachers and machines: The classroom use of technology since 1920. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
David, M. (2016). The correspondence theory of truth. In Zalta, E. N. (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Retrieved September 10, 2019 from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2016/entries/truth-correspondenceGoogle Scholar
Dewey, J., & Bentley, A. (1991). Knowing and known. In Boydston, J. A. (Ed.), John Dewey: The later works, 1949–1952 (Vol. 16, pp. 1294). Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
Dillenbourg, P. (1999). What do you mean by “collaborative learning”? In Dillenbourg, P. (Ed.), Collaborative learning: Cognitive and computational approaches (pp. 116). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Pergamon, Elsevier Science.Google Scholar
Dillenbourg, P. (2005). Designing biases that augment socio-cognitive interactions. In Bromme, R., Hesse, F., & Spada, H. (Eds.), Barriers and biases in computer-mediated knowledge communication – and how they may be overcome. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Dillenbourg, P., Baker, M., Blaye, A., & O’Malley, C. (1996). The evolution of research on collaborative learning. In Reimann, P. & Spada, H. (Eds.), Learning in humans and machines: Towards an interdisciplinary learning science (pp. 189211). Oxford, England: Elsevier. http://tecfa.unige.ch/tecfa/publicat/dil-papers-2/Dil.7.1.10.pdfGoogle Scholar
Donmez, P., Rosé, C. P., Stegmann, K., Weinberger, A., & Fischer, F. (2005). Supporting CSCL with automatic corpus analysis technology. In Proceedings of the International Conference of Computer Support for Collaborative Learning (CSCL 2005). Taipei, Taiwan.Google Scholar
Dwyer, N., & Suthers, D. D. (2006). Consistent practices in artifact-mediated collaboration. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(4), 481511.Google Scholar
Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki, Finland: Orienta-Kosultit Oy.Google Scholar
Fischer, K., & Granoo, N. (1995). Beyond one-dimensional change: Parallel, concurrent, socially distributed processes in learning and development. Human Development, 1995 (38), 302314.Google Scholar
Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. New York, NY: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Hanks, W. (1996). Language and communicative practices. Boulder, CO: Westview.Google Scholar
Heritage, J. (1984). Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Cambridge, England: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Hicks, D. (1996). Contextual inquiries: A discourse-oriented study of classroom learning. In Hicks, D. (Ed.), Discourse, learning and schooling (pp. 104141). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 1426.Google Scholar
Jonçich, G. (1968). The sane positivist: A biography of Edward L. Thorndike. Middleton, CT: Wesleyan University Press.Google Scholar
Koedinger, K., & Corbett, A. (2006). Cognitive tutors: Technology bringing learning science to the classroom. In Sawyer, R. K. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (1st ed., pp. 6177). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Koschmann, T. (1996). Paradigm shifts and instructional technology. In Koschmann, T. (Ed.), CSCL: Theory and practice of an emerging paradigm (pp. 123). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Koschmann, T. (1997). Logo-as-Latin redux: Review of Papert’s “The children’s machine.” Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(4), 409415.Google Scholar
Koschmann, T. (2001). A third metaphor for learning: Toward a Deweyan form of transactional inquiry. In Carver, S. & Klahr, D. (Eds.), Cognition and instruction: 25 years of progress (pp. 119132). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Koschmann, T. (2002). Dewey’s contribution to the foundations of CSCL research. In Stahl, G. (Ed.), Computer support for collaborative learning: Foundations for a CSCL community: Proceedings of CSCL 2002 (pp. 1722). Boulder, CO: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Koschmann, T. (2011). Theorizing practice. In Koschmann, T. (Ed.), Theories of learning and studies of instructional practice (pp. 317). New York, NY: Springer Science+Business Media.Google Scholar
Koschmann, T. (2018). Ethnomethodology: Studying the practical achievement of intersubjectivity. In Fischer, F., Hmelo-Silver, C., Goldman, S., & Reimann, P. (Eds.), International handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 465474). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Koschmann, T., Stahl, G., & Zemel, A. (2007). The video analyst’s manifesto (or the implications of Garfinkel’s policies for studying practice within the design-based research). In Goldman, R., Pea, R., Barron, B., & Derry, S. (Eds.), Video research in the learning sciences (pp. 133143). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Koschmann, T., Zemel, A., Conlee-Stevens, M., Young, N., Robbs, J., & Barnhart, A. (2003). Problematizing the problem: A single case analysis in a DPBL meeting. In Wasson, B., Ludvigsen, S., & Hoppe, U. (Eds.), Designing for change in networked learning environments: Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning (CSCL ‘03) (pp. 3746). Bergen, Norway: Kluwer Publishers.Google Scholar
Lave, J. (1991). Situating learning in communities of practice. In Resnick, L., Levine, J., & Teasley, S. (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 6383). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
LeBaron, C. (2002). Technology does not exist independent of its use. In Koschmann, T., Hall, R., & Miyake, N. (Eds.), CSCL 2: Carrying forward the conversation (pp. 433439). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Lipponen, L., Hakkarainen, K., & Paavola, S. (2004). Practices and orientations of CSCL. In Strijbos, J.-W., Kirschner, P., & Martens, R. (Eds.), What we know about CSCL: And implementing it in higher education (pp. 3150). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Medina, R., & Stahl, G. (2021). Analysis of group practices. In Cress, U., Rosé, C., Wise, A., & Oshima, J. (Eds.), International handbook of computer-supported collaborative learning (pp. 199218). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
Reckwitz, A. (2002). Toward a theory of social practices: A development in culturalist theorizing. European Journal of Social Theory, 5(2), 243263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rommetveit, R. (1974). On message structure: A framework for the study of language and communication. New York, NY: Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Rorty, R. (1974). Philosophy and the mirror of nature. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Roschelle, J. (1996). Learning by collaborating: Convergent conceptual change. In Koschmann, T. (Ed.), CSCL: Theory and practice of an emerging paradigm (pp. 209248). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Roschelle, J., & Teasley, S. (1995). The construction of shared knowledge in collaborative problem solving. In O’Malley, C. (Ed.), Computer-supported collaborative learning (pp. 69197). Berlin, Germany: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
Sacks, H. (1992). Lectures on conversation. Oxford, England: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1991). Higher levels of agency in knowledge building: A challenge for the design of new knowledge media. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 1(1), 3768.Google Scholar
Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 27(2), 413.Google Scholar
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1982). Mutual knowledge and relevance of theories of comprehension. In Smith, N. V. (Ed.), Mutual knowledge. New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Stahl, G. (2002). Rediscovering CSCL. In Koschmann, T., Hall, R., & Miyake, N. (Eds.), CSCL 2: Carrying forward the conversation (pp. 169181). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. http://GerryStahl.net/cscl/papers/ch01.pdfGoogle Scholar
Stahl, G. (2006). Group cognition: Computer support for building collaborative knowledge. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stahl, G. (2009). Studying virtual math teams. New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stahl, G. (2013). Translating Euclid: Designing a human-centered mathematics. San Rafael, CA: Morgan & Claypool Publishers.Google Scholar
Stahl, G. (2016). Constructing dynamic triangles together: The development of mathematical group cognition. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Stahl, G. (2021). Theoretical investigations: Philosophical foundations of group cognition. New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
Stahl, G., & Hakkarainen, K. (2021). Theories of CSCL. In Cress, U., Rosé, C., Wise, A., & Oshima, J. (Eds.), International handbook of computer-supported collaborative learning (pp. 2343). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
Suthers, D. D. (2006). Technology affordances for intersubjective meaning-making: A research agenda for CSCL. International Journal of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(3), 315337.Google Scholar
Suthers, D. D., Lund, K., Rosé, C. P., Teplovs, C., & Law, N. (Eds.). (2013). Productive multivocality in the analysis of group interactions. New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
Thorndike, E. L. (1912). Education: A first book. New York, NY: Macmillan Co.Google Scholar
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Wegerif, R. (2006). A dialogic understanding of the relationship between CSCL and teaching thinking skills. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(1), 143157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, J. (2018). The coherence theory of truth. In Zalta, E. N. (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Retrieved September 10, 2019 from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2018/entries/truth-coherenceGoogle Scholar
Zemel, A., Xhafa, F., & Stahl, G. (2005). Analyzing the organization of collaborative math problem-solving in online chats using statistics and conversation analysis. In Fuks, H., Lukosch, S., & Salgado, A. C. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Groupware: Design, Implementation, and Use: 11th International Workshop, CRIWG 2005. Porto de Galinhas, Brazil (pp. 271283). http://GerryStahl.net/pub/criwg2005zemel.pdfGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×