Communication in collaborative discovery learning

Nadira Saab · Wouter van Joolingen · B.H.A.M. van Hout‐Wolters

98 citations0/0 files storedBritish Journal of Educational Psychology

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods Science Education and Pedagogy Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Constructivist approaches to learning focus on learning environments in which students have the opportunity to construct knowledge themselves, and negotiate this knowledge with others. Discovery learning and collaborative learning are examples of learning contexts that cater for knowledge construction processes. We introduce a computer-based learning environment in which the two forms of learning are implemented simultaneously. We focus on the interaction between discovery learning and collaborative learning. AIM: We aim to investigate which communicative activities are frequently used in the discovery learning process and which communicative and discovery activities co-occur. SAMPLE: The study involved 21 pairs of 10th-grade students enrolled in pre-university education, ranging from 15 to 17 years of age. METHOD: Participants worked in dyads on separate screens in a shared discovery learning environment. They communicated using a chat box. In order to find a possible relationship between communicative activities and discovery learning processes, correlational analysis and principal component analysis were performed. RESULT: Significant relationships were found between communicative and discovery activities, as well as five factors combining the communicative process and the discovery learning processes. Communicative activities are performed most frequently during the activities in generating hypotheses, experimental design, and conclusion construction. Argumentation occurs less than expected, and is associated with the construction of conclusions, rather than generating hypotheses. CONCLUSION: Communicative activities co-occur with discovery activities most of the time, as we expected. Further research should concentrate on means to augment communicative and discovery activities that are related to positive learning outcomes.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 98 citations exist upstream.

References

1989Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems 1999Effects of Small-Group Learning on Undergraduates in Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology: A Meta-Analysis 1989Self‐Explanations: How Students Study and Use Examples in Learning to Solve Problems 1998Scientific Discovery Learning with Computer Simulations of Conceptual Domains 1991Objectivism versus constructivism: Do we need a new philosophical paradigm?2000Collaborative Learning: Cognitive and Computational Approaches 1988Dual Space Search During Scientific Reasoning 1995Schemas in Problem Solving

Cited by

2011Support of the collaborative inquiry learning process: influence of support on task and team regulation 2006Supporting Communication in a Collaborative Discovery Learning Environment: the Effect of Instruction 2010Tacit guidance for collaborative multimedia learning 2010Collaborative argumentation and justifications: A statistical discourse analysis of online discussions 2008Supporting medical decision making with argumentation tools

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.