Good for learning, bad for motivation? A meta-analysis on the effects of computer-supported collaboration scripts

Abstract

Scripting computer-supported collaborative learning has been shown to greatly enhance learning, but is often criticized for hindering learners' agency and thus undermining learners' motivation. Beyond that, what makes some CSCL scripts particularly effective for learning is still a conundrum. This meta-analysis synthesizes the results of 53 primary studies that experimentally compared the effect of learning with a CSCL script to unguided collaborative learning on at least one of the variables motivation, domain learning, and collaboration skills. Overall, 5616 learners enrolled in K-12, higher education, or professional development participated in the included studies. The results of a random-effects meta-analysis show that learning with CSCL scripts leads to a nonsignificant positive effect on motivation (Hedges' g = 0.13), a small positive effect (Hedges' g = 0.24) on domain learning and a medium positive effect (Hedges' g = 0.72) on collaboration skills. Additionally, the meta-analysis shows how scaffolding single particular collaborative activities and scaffolding a combination of collaborative activities affects the effectiveness of CSCL scripts and that synergistic or differentiated scaffolding is hard to achieve. This meta-analysis offers the first counterevidence against the widespread criticism that CSCL scripts have negative motivational effects. Furthermore, the findings can be taken as evidence for the robustness of the positive effects on domain learning and collaboration skills.

Deconstructing orchestration load: comparing teacher support through mirroring and guiding

“…By proposing an activity sequence and allocating roles to students with specific duties and responsibilities, scripts aim to trigger certain types of beneficial collaborative learning interactions between students (Kobbe et al, 2007). Several studies have reported the effectiveness of using scripts to achieve productive learning outcomes in collaboration (Radkowitsch et al, 2020;Rummel & Spada, 2005).…”

The Influence of Online Learning on Students’ Academic Achievement: Mediated by Collaborative Learning

“…They aim to share ideas, knowledge, and skills in the scope of collaborative learning [53]. Collaborative learning encourages not only social presence but also promotes new knowledge and teamwork skills [54]. A well-designed collaborative learning activity benefits the students [55].…”

Regulating self-organized collaborative learning: the importance of homogeneous problem perception, immediacy and intensity of strategy use

“…Collaboration scripts scaffold the collaboration process within groups by specifying, sequencing and distributing activities and roles among the learners of a group (Kollar et al 2006). Even though such scripts generally have been shown to be effective (Vogel et al 2017), their application "in the wild", i.e., in informal, selfguided learning contexts, is not unproblematic, as scholars have criticized collaboration scripts for possibly over-structuring the learning process so that collaboration might become a highly coercive experience ("over-scripting";Dillenbourg 2002), though recent work challenges this concern (Radkowitsch et al 2020). Especially self-organized groups, i.e., groups that students form completely voluntarily based on their own initiative outside regular classroom contexts (e.g., to jointly study for an upcoming exam), might find discomfort in following such finegrained externally imposed instructions.…”

“…However, the very idea of a script could be seen in opposition to the ideal of a group engaging in self-organized collaboration. One might even invoke the concern over the danger of over-scripting collaboration (Dillenbourg 2002), though recent work challenges this concern (Radkowitsch et al 2020). Nevertheless, self-organized groups might benefit from less coercive guidance, such as group awareness tools (Schnaubert and Bodemer 2019).…”