Research has suggested that CSCL environments contain fewer social context clues, resulting in various group processes, performance or motivation. This study thus attempts to explore the relationship among collective efficacy, group processes (i.e. task cohesion, cognitive quality) and collaborative performance in a CSCL environment. A total of 75 Taiwanese college students (divided into 25 groups) participated in the study. Both quantitative and qualitative methods were applied for data analysis. The results indicate that collective efficacy significantly predicted task cohesion but not cognitive quality in the CSCL environment. For the role of group processes in performance, both task cohesion and cognitive quality significantly predicted group performance, but cognitive quality predicted better than task cohesion. In addition, for the predictive capability of prior performance, task cohesion, and cognitive quality in collective efficacy, the results showed that only task cohesion predicted subsequent collective efficacy significantly in the CSCL environment.

The role of collective efficacy, cognitive quality, and task cohesion in computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL)

This paper reports an investigation into the effects of collaborative concept mapping in a digital learning environment, in terms of students' overall learning gains, knowledge retention, quality of student artefacts (the collaboratively created concept maps), interactive patterns, and learning perceptions. Sixty-four 12-year-old students from two 6th grade classes (32 from each class) participated in the study. Guided by the methodology of quasi-experimental research, group scribbles 1.0 was adopted in which students carried out collaborative concept mapping activities for social studies in two different settings: (1) 1:1 (one-device-per-student) – students working in pairs with one Tablet PC assigned to each of them; and (2) 1:m (one-device-to-many-students) – multiple students sharing a Tablet PC. Both settings were evaluated and the interactional patterns of the student groups' concept mapping were identified. The results indicated that in both 1:1 and 1:m settings, students had improved their learning results and retention. Nevertheless, while 1:1 groups had demonstrated more consistency in group participation, improved communication and interaction, the 1:m groups had instead generated superior artefacts as all the notes were well discussed among the group members. The findings suggest that a higher quality of collaborative processes does not necessarily lead to improved student artefacts. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Comparison of 1:1 and 1:m CSCL environment for collaborative concept mapping

This study explored the differences among online elementary school student groups based on their communication features. Two hundred and ninety-one Taiwanese students, ranging in age from 11 to 12years old, participated in this study. The students were randomly arranged within-class into three-member groups. Each group was asked to use a collaborative learning system to accomplish a group task generating a shared concept map. The textual discussions in each group during collaboration were collected, coded, categorized, and quantified to profile their communication characteristics. Cluster analysis on the resulting communication characteristics resulted in four types of small student groups, including passive or reticent, frequently off-task, actively participating, and knowledge emphasizing. Most student groups (56%) were found to be relatively passive or reticent. Frequently off-task student groups made a protrusive amount of messages for off-task social purposes. The actively participating student groups were characterized by abundant discussion, particularly for continuing task, managing procedure and coordinating efforts. The distinctive feature of knowledge emphasizing student groups was that they devoted particular attention to task related knowledge. In addition, they performed better in task accomplishment.

Group differences in computer supported collaborative learning: Evidence from patterns of Taiwanese students' online communication

Computer-supported collaborative concept mapping (CSCCM) leverages technology and concept mapping to support conceptual understanding, as well as collaborative learning to foster knowledge co-construction. This article investigated the effect of different instructional designs using CSCCM on students' conceptual understanding, and on the type of processes of knowledge co-construction that students engage. Participants (N = 120) were 10th graders enrolled in their physics course, randomly distributed in dyads. They were asked to draw concept maps related to the conservation of energy law, by using CSCCM with different instructional designs (i.e., control, Exp. 1 and Exp. 2). In the control condition, dyads worked collaboratively all the time. In both Exp. 1 and Exp. 2, dyads worked first individually (one week) and then collaboratively (two weeks). However, in Exp. 2, the individual concept map was shared with the peer before collaborating. Conceptual understanding improved significantly for learners in all three experimental conditions, especially in Exp. 2. Statistically significant differences were found in students' knowledge co-construction among the three conditions. Dyads in the control group showed a significantly higher use of quick consensus-building. Dyads in Exp. 1 showed a significantly higher reliance on externalization and elicitation. Dyads in Exp. 2 showed a significantly higher enacting of integration- and conflict-oriented consensus building. Accordingly, an instructional design like Exp. 2 optimizes CSCCM learning outcomes in terms of conceptual understanding and knowledge co-construction.

Computer-supported collaborative concept mapping: The effects of different instructional designs on conceptual understanding and knowledge co-construction

Concept maps represent knowledge as node-link networks that show concepts as nodes and the relationships among the concepts as arrows or links. Researchers and teachers have used concept maps as media for constructive learning activities, instructional presentations, and as shared materials for co-construction of knowledge (Cañas et al., 2003). Researchers have suggested that concept maps may also serve as an effective learning medium when implemented as interactive software (Cañas et al., 2003; Novak, 2002). An example of a concept map is shown in Figure 1. The map in Figure 1 has links that are directional and labeled with a relational term, but the maps used in educational research sometimes have non-directional, unlabeled links. Dansereau and his colleagues (e.g., Hall, Dansereau, & Skaggs, 1992; Lambiotte & Dansereau, 1992; McCagg & Dansereau, 1991) have used the term ‘knowledge map’ to refer to a type of concept map with directional links labeled AbSTRACT

ng-Hui Chiu

Papers

Exploring how primary school students function in computer supported collaborative learning