Role Scripting as a Tool to Foster Transactivity of Asynchronous Student Discussions

Transactivity of student discussions is crucial in computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL). However, CSCL learners often lack well-developed argumentation and negotiation skills, which makes it challenging for them to engage in and maintain a transactive discussion. Collaboration scripts have been implemented in CSCL contexts and have demonstrated positive effects on students' collaboration and argumentation skills. Yet, the degree of transactivity of student interactions is rarely addressed directly in CSCL research. Employing a qualitative content analysis approach, this study seeks to understand how a role script affects the transactivity of students' argumentative knowledge co-construction in the context of a multicultural master's degree CSCL course. The study employs an experimental design. The results demonstrate that students in the scripted condition produced more contributions on higher levels of argumentative knowledge construction than unscripted students. However, tutor involvement may be necessary to ensure proper script appropriation.

The effects of collaboration scripts on the number and quality of student interactions in a social annotation tool

Social Annotation (SA) tools can be used to facilitate active and collaborative learning when students have to study academic texts. However, making these tools available does not ensure students participate in argumentative discussions. Scaffolding students by means of collaborations scripts geared towards collaboration and discussion encourages students to engage in meaningful, high-quality interactions. We conducted an experiment with students (n=59) in a course running at a Dutch university, using the SA tool Perusall. A control group received normal instructions, while an experimental group received scaffolding through collaboration scripts. The results showed a significant increase in the number of responses to fellow students for the experimental group compared to the control group. The quality of the annotations, measured on levels of Bloom’s taxonomy, increased significantly for the experimental group compared to both its baseline measurement and the control group. However, when scaffolding was faded out over subsequent assignments these differences became non-significant. The experimental groups’ increased quality of annotations did not remain over time, suggesting that internalization of the scripts was not achieved.

Comparing effects of two collaboration scripts on learning activities for wiki-based environments

Knowledge construction assignments with wikis can be found in various educational settings. However, wiki environments are not inevitably suited to help learning and thus more guidance could be useful. In this study, we investigated the effects of two collaboration scripts with different aims during a two-week period of knowledge construction with wikis as a supplement to lectures about descriptive statistics. One script that is derived from Wikipedia’s suggested workflow promoted a high frequency of individual article edits without further coordination, while the alternative script encouraged participants to discuss any planned changes upfront. Results showed that our proposed collaboration script encouraged students to take part in the whole script process, while in Wikipedia’s script proposal only the first step of article editing was executed. These edits were generally of slightly lower quality. Learning success was not directly affected by the scripts, though the data suggests small effects in favour of our script proposal.

Supportive guidance methods for wiki-based learning and knowledge construction

Wikis are a special representative of socio-technical systems that are increasingly used for the collaborative construction of knowledge and furthermore for individual and collaborative learning. The basic design of wiki systems enables users to generate content as articles and as well to discuss about subject matters on corresponding discussion forums in the article background, the so-called talk pages. Building upon prevailing theories and previous research on knowledge building with wikis, and more broadly computer supported collaborative learning (CSCL) in general, this dissertation investigated several effects of added supplemental scaffolding measures for wiki-based learning on processes and outcomes. Specifically, this work focused on (1) the effectiveness and efficiency implicit guidance approaches for wiki talk pages, (2) the effects of two distinct collaboration scripts as explicit guidance for knowledge construction with wikis, and (3) the relevance of specific learning-related individual differences for collaborative learning with wikis. Overall, five empirical studies have been conducted as part of this dissertation. Study 1 examined the effects of added controversy awareness highlights for wiki discussions. Results of the experiment showed that added highlights for controversial discussions directly affect individual selection and reading behaviour, as well as indirectly and to a lesser extent the learning outcomes and wiki contribution quality. Study 2 examined whether visualisations of author expertise and community-rating implicitly affect the user perception of controversial discussions in wikis. Results showed that if additional author information is visualised, it is much more likely that readers of wiki discussions follow an assumed expert’s argumentation. Studies 3 and 4 both examined effects of two distinct collaboration script approaches. The first script was derived from Wikipedia, whereas the second script is a self-developed script that was inspired by related empirical research. Results showed that the alternative script proposal is more beneficial for perspective-taking and integration of opposing evidence, as well as for individual learning success and the quality of collaboratively edited articles. Study 5 examined the effects of the controversy awareness highlights and the alternative collaboration script in interaction with individual differences of the Need for Cognitive Closure. This construct is relevant for the understanding of how people process ambiguous information that are likely to be found in controversial discussions. Results showed that persons with a high Need for Cognitive Closure benefit more, in terms of learning success, from the controversy awareness highlights for implicit guidance, whereas persons with a low Need for Cognitive Closure benefit more from the collaboration script as explicit guidance. This study series extends the empirical base of research on wiki-based knowledge construction and learning processes with investigations of supplemental different guidance measures and the consideration of individual differences.