Ten years of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning: A meta-analysis of CSCL in STEM education during 2005–2014

Jeong, Heisawn; Hmelo‐Silver, Cindy E.; kihyun, Jo

doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2019.100284

Cited by 205 publications

(131 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

119

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Within domain learning, CSCL scripts have a stronger effect on recall tests than on knowledge application tests. These findings are in line with theoretical assumptions and empirical findings on learning and transfer in CSCL contexts (Jeong et al 2019). Within collaboration skills, the differences between negotiation and information sharing skills were rather small.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

“…Although the average effect size of CSCL scripts on collaboration skills is comparable to the effect sizes other scaffolds such as example-based learning have on learning (J. Chen et al 2018;Jeong et al 2019;Wittwer and Renkl 2010), some studies report effect sizes far beyond the usual effects of scaffolding (Noroozi et al 2013c). These studies reveal a need for closer examination and challenge future CSCL script designs to increase the effectiveness for domain learning to a similar size.…”

Section: Overall Effects Of Learning With Cscl Scripts On Domain Learmentioning

confidence: 94%

See 1 more Smart Citation

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

Radkowitsch

Vogel

Fischer

2020

Intern. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Section: Overall Effects Of Learning With Cscl Scripts On Domain Learmentioning

confidence: 94%

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

Radkowitsch

Vogel

Fischer

2020

Intern. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is supported by the finding that more active groups achieve better grades [8,10]. In general, CSCL seems to have a positive effect on learning in the field of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education [18].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Student Participation in Online Content-Related Discussion and Its Relation to Students’ Background Knowledge

Turkkila

Lommi

2020

Education Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents two novel network methods developed for education research. These methods were used to investigate online discussions and the structure of students’ background knowledge in a blended university course for pre-service teachers (n = 11). Consequently, these measures were used for correlation analysis. The social network analysis of the online discussions was based on network roles defined using triadic motifs instead of more commonly used centrality measures. The network analysis of the background knowledge is based on the Katz centrality measure and Jaccard similarity. The results reveal that both measures have characteristic features that are typical for each student. These features, however, are not correlated when student participation is controlled for. The results show that the structure and extension of a student’s background knowledge does not explain their activity and role in online discussions. The limitations and implications of the developed methods and results are discussed.

show abstract

“…It favors socialization and social interaction processes, the student's satisfaction in learning acquisition, and promotes the use of innovative didactic models that confer a leading role to students. Even in learning environments where the use of Google Docs is prevalent, it is considered a good method [56][57][58][59].…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bibliometric Study of Scientific Production on the Term Collaborative Learning in Web of Science

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Currently, more and more teachers decide to follow active teaching methods, leaving behind traditional teaching methods. Among the most used pedagogical methods in the educational field is the collaborative learning. The general objective of the present investigation is to know the performance and academic development of the term "collaborative learning" in the documents collected in the Web of Science database. The research method developed was based on a bibliometric study, identifying academic performance and conceptual development, through a co-word analysis. Particularly, we have pursued four main objectives: (a) To determine the degree of performance of documents collected from collaborative learning; (b) to identify the scientific development of so-called collaborative learning; (c) to analyze the most incidental aspects of collaborative learning; and (d) to value the most representative authors who are experts in the use of collaborative learning. The total number of manuscripts studied is 3295. The results show the manuscripts are written mainly in English by researchers who belong from the United States. The main area of knowledge is Education Educational Research. As a conclusion, it can be said that the collaborative learning pedagogical method is at a turning point in the scientific field. Its scientific evolution, focused on its principles in the students themselves, has extended to other branches. At present, studies are oriented towards technological resources, co-regulation, and the academic achievements of students. Furthermore, in the coming years the terms innovation, design, patterns, collaboration, and communication will probably be the new lines of study in this scientific field.

show abstract

Ten years of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning: A meta-analysis of CSCL in STEM education during 2005–2014

Cited by 205 publications

References 55 publications

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

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

Student Participation in Online Content-Related Discussion and Its Relation to Students’ Background Knowledge

Bibliometric Study of Scientific Production on the Term Collaborative Learning in Web of Science

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About