Socially shared regulation of learning in CSCL: understanding and prompting individual- and group-level shared regulatory activities

The field of computer supported collaborative learning (CSCL) is progressing instrumentally and theoretically. Nevertheless, few studies examine the effectiveness and efficiency of CSCL with respect to cognitive, motivational, emotional, and social issues, despite the fact that the role of regulatory processes is critical for the quality of students’ engagement in collaborative learning settings. We review the four earlier lines in developing support in CSCL and show how there has been a lack of work to support individuals in groups to engage in, sustain, and productively regulate their own and the group’s collaborative processes. Our aim is to discuss how our conceptual work in socially shared regulation of learning (SSRL) contributes to effective and efficient CSCL, what tools are presently available, and what the implications of research on these tools are for future tool development.     

Empathy in preschool children: The development of the Southampton Test of Empathy for Preschoolers (STEP).

In this study, we investigated a new instrument: the Southampton Test of Empathy for Preschoolers (STEP). The test incorporated 8 video vignettes of children in emotional scenarios, assessing a child's ability to understand (STEP-UND) and share (STEP-SHA) in the emotional experience of a story protagonist. Each vignette included 4 emotions (angry, happy, fearful, sad) that reflected emotion judgments based on the protagonist's facial expression, situation, verbal cues, and desire. The STEP was administered to 39 preschool children, and internal reliability, concurrent validity, and construct validity were addressed. The results showed good internal consistency. They also highlighted moderate concurrent validity with parent-rated empathy, a measure of facial indices, and construct validity with teacher-rated prosocial behavior. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Cognitive processing and trait anxiety in typically developing children: Evidence for an interpretation bias.

In this study the authors examined whether increases in children's levels of self-reported trait anxiety would be related to their interpretation of ambiguous stimuli. By using the Revised Children's Manifest Anxiety Scale (C. R. Reynolds & B. O. Richmond, 1985), the authors obtained measurements of anxiety for 40 children ages 7 and 9 years. Interpretation of ambiguous stimuli was measured by using a pictorial homophone task, where homophones could be interpreted as either threatening or neutral. Results showed that children's interpretations of homophones was significantly predicted by level of anxiety. Increases in levels of trait anxiety were positively associated with threatening interpretations of homophones. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Advancing educational research on collaboration through the use of gStudy computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) tools: Introduction to special issue

This is an introduction to a special issue on computer-supported collaborative learning.     

Measurement and assessment in computer-supported collaborative learning

The overall goal of CSCL research is to design software tools and collaborative environments that facilitate social knowledge construction via a valuable assortment of methodologies, theoretical and operational definitions, and multiple structures [Hadwin, A. F., Gress, C. L. Z., & Page, J. (2006). Toward standards for reporting research: a review of the literature on computer-supported collaborative learning. In Paper presented at the 6th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies, Kerkrade, Netherlands; Lehtinen, E. (2003). Computer-supported collaborative learning: an approach to powerful learning environments. In E. De Corte, L. Verschaffel, N. Entwistle & J. Van Merriëboer (Eds.), Unravelling basic components and dimensions of powerful learning environments (pp. 35–53). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier]. Various CSCL tools attempt to support constructs associated with effective collaboration, such as awareness tools to support positive social interaction [Carroll, J. M., Neale, D. C., Isenhour, P. L., Rosson, M. B., & McCrickard, D. S. (2003). Notification and awareness: Synchronizing task-oriented collaborative activity. International Journal of Human–Computer Studies 58, 605] and negotiation tools to support group social skills and discussions [Beers, P. J., Boshuizen, H. P. A. E., Kirschner, P. A., & Gijselaers, W. H. (2005). Computer support for knowledge construction in collaborative learning environments. Computers in Human Behavior 21, 623–643], yet few studies developed or used pre-existing measures to evaluate these tools in relation to the above constructs. This paper describes a review of the measures used in CSCL to answer three fundamental questions: (a) What measures are utilized in CSCL research? (b) Do measures examine the effectiveness of attempts to facilitate, support, and sustain CSCL? And (c) When are the measures administered? Our review has six key findings: there is a plethora of self-report yet a paucity of baseline information above collaboration and collaborative activities, findings in the field are dominated by ‘after collaboration’ measurement, there is little replication and an over reliance on text-based measures, and an insufficient collection of tools and measures for examining processes involved in CSCL.     

Innovative ways for using gStudy to orchestrate and research social aspects of self-regulated learning

This paper explores the ways three different theoretical perspectives of the social aspects of self-regulated learning [Hadwin, A. F. (2000). Building a case for self-regulating as a socially constructed phenomenon. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada; Hadwin, A. F., & Oshige, M. (2006). Self-regulation, co-regulation, and socially-shared regulation: Examining many faces of social in models of SRL. In A. F. Hadwin, & S. Jarvela (Chairs), Socially constructed self-regulated learning: Where social and self meet in strategic regulation of learning. Symposium conducted at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA] have been operationalized in a computer supported learning environment called gStudy. In addition to contrasting social aspects of SRL and drawing connections with specific collaborative tools and structures, this paper explores the potential of gStudy to advance theory, research, and practice. Specifically it discusses how the utilization of differing collaborative models provides new avenues for systematically researching social aspects of SRL and their roles in collaboration.     

Assessing process in CSCL: An ontological approach

Educational technology innovations enable students to collaborate in online educational tasks, across individual, institutional, and national boundaries. However, online interactions across these boundaries are seldom transparent to each other. As a result, students are not motivated to share their best learning practices. Also, there is no singular basis on which one can compare learning practices of multiple students. In addressing these problems, we offer a solution that encourages students to record and share their learning interactions using our ontology-oriented theory-centric software tool. In doing so, students not only observe the products of their learning but also the process of how they learnt. These unique and computationally formal recordings of learning interactions not only allow educators to observe how learners learn, but also provide opportunities for learners to reflect on their understanding of meta-cognitive processes that they employed or neglected in their learning. Further, these recordings feed our software system to autonomously analyze students’ learning behaviour and to actively promote self- and co-regulation among learners. This article presents the need for such a system, the architecture of the system, and concludes with key experimental observations from software prototypes.     

The learning kit project: Software tools for supporting and researching regulation of collaborative learning

Computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) is a dynamic and varied area of research. Ideally, tools for CSCL support and encourage solo and group learning processes and products. However, most CSCL research does not focus on supporting and sustaining the co-construction of knowledge. We identify four reasons for this situation and identify three critical resources every collaborator brings to collaborations that are underutilized in CSCL research: (a) prior knowledge, (b) information not yet transformed into knowledge that is judged relevant to the task(s) addressed in collaboration, and (c) cognitive processes used to construct these informational resources. Finally, we introduce gStudy, a software tool designed to advance research in the learning sciences. gStudy helps learners manage cognitive load so they can re-assign cognitive resources to self-, co-, and shared regulation; and it automatically and unobtrusively traces each user′s engagement with content and the means chosen for cognitively processing content, thus generating real-time performance data about processes of collaborative learning.     

Challenges in online collaboration: effects of scripting shared task perceptions

Difficulties with planning, such as negotiating task understandings and goals, can have a profound effect on regulation and task performance when students work collaboratively (Miller and Hadwin, Computers in Human Behaviour, 52, 573-588, 2015a). Despite planning being a common challenge, teams often fail to identify strategies for addressing those challenges successfully. The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of team planning support in the form of awareness visualizations (quantified, nominal, and no visualization of individual planning perceptions summarized across group members) on the challenges students face during collaboration, and the ways they report regulating in the face of those challenges. Findings revealed differences across conditions. Individuals in the no visualization condition (a) rated planning as more problematic, and (b) were likely to encounter doing the task, checking progress, and group work challenges when they encounter planning challenges, (c) reported more time and planning main challenges compared to doing the task and group work challenges, and (d) reported that planning strategies (adopted as a team) were most effective for addressing planning challenges, followed by teamwork strategies which were less effective. In contrast, individuals belonging to groups who received one of the two visualizations (a) reported that both planning and teamwork strategies to be equally effective for addressing planning challenges, and (b) reported higher levels of success with their strategies than groups without a visualization support. Findings attest to the importance of supporting group planning with planning visualizations.