Finding Common Ground During Collaborative Problem Solving: Pupils’ Engagement in Scenario-Based Inquiry

2015 ◽  
pp. 133-151
Author(s):  
Frederick Toralballa Talaue ◽  
Mijung Kim ◽  
Tan Aik-Ling
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Common Ground ◽  
Collaborative Problem Solving ◽  
Collaborative Problem

scholarly journals Comparing Collaboration Fidelity between VR, MR and Video Conferencing Systems: The Effects of Visual Communication Media Fidelity on Collaboration

2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (8) ◽  
pp. 972-995
Author(s):  
Sangsun Han ◽  
Kibum Kim ◽  
Seonghwan Choi ◽  
Mankyu Sung
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Common Ground ◽  
Mixed Reality ◽  
Video Conferencing ◽  
The Other ◽  
Collaborative Problem Solving ◽  
Communication Media ◽  
Remote Collaboration ◽  
Collaborative Problem ◽  
The Creation

Video/audio conferencing systems have been used extensively for remote collaboration over many years. Recently, virtual and mixed reality (VR/MR) systems have started to show great potential as communication media for remote collaboration. Prior studies revealed that the creation of common ground between discourse participants is crucial for collaboration and that grounding techniques change with the communication medium. However, it is difficult to find previous research that compares VR and MR communication system performances with video conferencing systems regarding the creation of common ground for collaborative problem solving. On the other hand, prior studies have found that display fidelity and interaction fidelity had significant effects on performance-intensive individual tasks in virtual reality. Fidelity in VR can be defined as the degree of objective accuracy with which the real-world is represented by the virtual world. However, to date, fidelity for collaborative tasks in VR/MR has not been defined or studied much. In this paper, we compare five different communication media for the establishment of common ground in collaborative problem-solving tasks: Webcam, headband camera, VR, MR, and audio-only conferencing systems. We analyzed these communication media with respect to collaborative fidelity components which we defined. For the experiments, we utilized two different types of collaborative tasks: a 2D Tangram puzzle and a 3D Soma cube puzzle. The experimental results show that the traditional Webcam performed better than the other media in the 2D task, while the headband camera performed better in the 3D task. In terms of collaboration fidelity, these results were somehow predictable, although there was a little difference between our expectations and the results.

scholarly journals What affordances do open-ended real-life tasks offer for sharing student agency in collaborative problem-solving?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juuso Henrik Nieminen ◽  
Man Ching Esther Chan ◽  
David Clarke
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Video Recording ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Collaborative Problem Solving ◽  
Student Agency ◽  
Student Groups ◽  
Collaborative Problem ◽  
Mathematical Arguments ◽  
Life Tasks ◽  
Collaborative Construction

AbstractThe important role of student agency in collaborative problem-solving has been acknowledged in previous mathematics education research. However, what remains unknown are the processes of agency in open-ended tasks that draw on real-life contexts and demand argumentation beyond “mathematical”. In this study, we analyse a video recording of two student groups (each consisting of four students) taking part in collaborative problem-solving. We draw on the framework for collaborative construction of mathematical arguments and its interplay with student agency by Mueller et al. (2012). This original framework is supplemented by (i) testing and revising it in the context of open-ended real-life tasks, with (ii) student groups rather than pairs working on the tasks, and by (iii) offering a strengthened methodological pathway for analysing student agency in such a context. Based on our findings, we suggest that the framework suits this new context with some extensions. First, we note that differences in student agency were not only identified in terms of the discourse students drew on, but in how students were able to shift between various discourses, such as between “mathematical” and “non-mathematical” discourses. We identify a novel discourse reflecting student agency, invalidation discourse, which refers to denying other students’ agency by framing their contribution as invalid. Finally, we discuss the need to reframe “mathematical” arguments—and indeed student agency—while the task at hand is open-ended and concerns real-life contexts.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document