No abstract

No abstract

Abstract:The analysis of the process of collaboration is a central topic in current CSCL research. However, defining process characteristics relevant for collaboration quality and developing instruments capable of assessing these characteristics are no trivial tasks. In the assessment method presented in this paper, nine qualitatively defined dimensions of collaboration are rated quantitatively: sustaining mutual understanding, dialogue management, information pooling, reaching consensus, task division, time management, technical coordination, reciprocal interaction, and individual task orientation.The data basis for the development of these dimensions was taken from a study in which students of psychology and medicine collaborated on a complex patient case via a desktop-videoconferencing system. A qualitative content analysis was performed on a sample of transcribed collaboration dialogue. The insights from this analysis were then integrated with theoretical considerations about the roles of communication, joint information processing, coordination, interpersonal relationship, and motivation in the collaboration process. The resulting rating scheme was applied to process data from a new sample of 40 collaborating dyads. Based on positive findings on inter-rater reliability, consistency, and validity from this evaluation, we argue that the new method can be recommended for use in different areas of CSCL.A rating scheme for assessing collaboration quality 3 The development of appropriate methods for analyzing interactive processes is a major research topic in CSCL. Numerous papers published in the proceedings of the CSCL 2005 conference as well as in this journal address this issue (e.g., Clark & Sampson, 2005;Dönmez, Rose, Stegmann, Weinberger, & Fischer, 2005;Kapur, Voiklis & Kinzer, 2005;Lee, Chan, & van Aalst, 2006;Spada, Meier, Rummel, Hauser, 2005; Zumbach, Schönemann & Reimann, 2005). These authors and other groups of CSCL researchers, often combining different fields of expertise, strive for insights into processes relevant for computer-supported collaborative learning and work, and for the development of assessment methods that are capable of capturing these aspects.There are several motivations for analyzing the collaboration process in CSCL. For example, specific challenges of collaborative learning and computer-supported communication have to be identified in order to find out where support is needed in the first place, and which aspects of the collaborative process are crucial for successful learning and problem-solving in CSCL (Rummel & Spada, 2005a). In the future, support measures may even be adaptive to real-time analyses of the interaction process, which can be either automated (Dönmez et al., 2005) or performed online by a human tutor (Zumbach et al., 2005). Assessment methods are further needed in order to evaluate the effects that computer support and instruction may have on learners' interactions as opposed to exclusively evaluating learning outcomes (e.g., Carell, Herrman, Kienle, & Menold,...

Example-based learning has been studied from different perspectives. Cognitive research has mainly focused on worked examples, which typically provide students with a written worked-out didactical solution to a problem to study. Social-cognitive research has mostly focused on modeling examples, which provide students the opportunity to observe an adult or a peer model performing the task. The model can behave didactically or naturally, and the observation can take place face to face, on video, as a screen recording of the model's computer screen, or as an animation. This article reviews the contributions of the research on both types of example-based learning on questions such as why examplebased learning is effective, for what kinds of tasks and learners it is effective, and how examples should be designed and delivered to students to optimize learning. This will show both the commonalities and the differences in research on example-based learning conducted from both perspectives and might inspire the identification of new research questions. Bandura's (1977Bandura's ( , 1986) social learning theory. Both argue that it would be Educ Psychol Rev (2010) 22:155-174 Keywords