Adaptable scripting to foster regulation processes and skills in computer-supported collaborative learning | International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Adaptable scripting to foster regulation processes and skills in computer-supported collaborative learning

  • Published:
International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Collaboration scripts have repeatedly been implemented in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) to facilitate collaboration processes and individual learning. However, finding the right degree of structure is a subtle design task: scripts that are too rigid may impair self-regulation and hinder learning; scripts that are too flexible may fail to evoke high-level interactions. This study investigated whether making collaboration scripts adaptable would be a way to raise their effectiveness. Three experimental phases were realized: In a first phase (exposure phase), all students solved three problem cases by aid of a collaboration script in an asynchronous, text-based CSCL environment. In a second phase (treatment phase), another three cases were presented that were to be solved by aid of a different theory that was presented to the learners through a summary on a sheet of paper. During this phase, a three-groups between-subject design was realized: (a) an unscripted condition, in which students received no specific guidance how to structure their collaboration, (b) a non-adaptable script condition, in which students’ collaboration was guided by the collaboration script they were trained in before, and (c) an adaptable script condition, in which students were allowed to modify parts of the trained script based on their self-perceived needs. In a third phase (subsequent transfer phase), students received a new case that they were to solve without guidance. N = 87 university students participated. Results showed that during the treatment phase, planning processes were most often performed in the unscripted condition. Yet, the adaptable script substantially increased students’ engagement in metacognitive activities of planning compared to learning with a non-adaptable script, and increased monitoring and reflection activities when compared to learning without script. Mediation analyses showed that the adaptable script facilitated learners’ use of self-regulation skills in the subsequent, unscripted transfer phase through the promotion of co-regulation processes of reflection in the treatment phase. The results reveal that adaptable scripting is a promising means of implementing flexible scripting and promoting self-regulation in CSCL.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
¥17,985 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Japan)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  • Azevedo, R. (2005). Using hypermedia as a metacognitive tool for enhancing student learning? The role of self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 40(4), 199–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Azevedo, R. (2007). Understanding the complex nature of self-regulatory processes in learning with computer-based learning environments: An introduction. Metacognition and Learning, 2(2–3), 57–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Azevedo, R., & Feyzi-Behnagh, R. (2010). Dysregulated learning with advanced learning technologies. Journal of E-Learning and Knowledge Society, 7(2), 5–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Azevedo, R., & Hadwin, A. F. (2005). Scaffolding self-regulated learning and metacognition - implications for the design of computer-based scaffolds. Instructional Science, 33(5–6), 367–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Azevedo, R., Witherspoon, A., Graesser, A., McNamara, D., Rus, V., Cai, Z., et al. (2008). MetaTutor: An adaptive hypermedia system for training and fostering self-regulated learning about complex science topics. Chicago: Paper to be presented at a Symposium on ITSs with Agents at the Annual Meeting of the Society for Computers in Psychology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bannert, M., & Reimann, P. (2012). Supporting self-regulated hypermedia learning through prompts. Instructional Science, 40(1), 193–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bannert, M., Reimann, P., & Sonnenberg, C. (2014). Process mining techniques for analysing patterns and strategies in students’ self-regulated learning. Metacognition Learning, 9, 161–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bates, D. M., Kliegl, R., Vasishth, S., & Baayen, H. (2015). Parsimonious mixed models. arXiv:1506.04967.

  • Cascallar, E., Boekaerts, M., & Costigan, T. (2006). Assessment in the evaluation of self-regulation as a process. Educational Psychology Review, 18(3), 297–306. doi:10.1007/s10648-006-9023-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M. T. H. (1997). Quantifying qualitative analyses of verbal data: A practical guide. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(3), 271–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DiDonato, N. C. (2013). Effective self- and co-regulation in collaborative learning groups: An analysis of how students regulate problem solving of authentic interdisciplinary tasks. Instructional Science, 41(1), 25–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dillenbourg, P. (2002). Over-scripting CSCL: The risks of blending collaborative learning with instructional design. In P. A. Kirschner (Ed.), Three worlds of CSCL. Can we support CSCL (pp. 61–91). Heerlen: Open Universiteit Nederland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dillenbourg, P., Järvelä, S., & Fischer, F. (2009). The evolution of research on computer-supported collaborative learning: From design to orchestration. In N. Balacheff, S. Ludvigsen, T. de Jong, A. Lazonder, & S. Barnes (Eds.), Technology-enhanced learning: Principles and products (pp. 3–19). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Dillenbourg, P., & Tchounikine, P. (2007). Flexibility in macro-scripts for computer-supported collaborative learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23, 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dillon, C., & Greene, B. (2003). Learner differences in distance learning: Finding differences that matter. In M. G. Moore & W. G. Anderson (Eds.), Handbook of distance education (pp. 235–244). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diziol, D., Walker, E., Rummel, N., & Koedinger, K. R. (2010). Using intelligent tutor technology to implement adaptive support for student collaboration. Educational Psychology Review, 22(1), 89–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, F., Kollar, I., Stegmann, K., & Wecker, C. (2013). Toward a script theory of guidance in computer-supported collaborative learning. Educational Psychologist, 48(1), 56–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gweon, G., Rosé, C. P., Carey, R., & Zaiss, Z. S. (2006). Providing support for adaptive scripting in an on-line collaborative learning environment. Paper presented at the CHI 2006, End User Programming, Montréal, Québec, Canada.

  • Hadwin, A. F., Järvelä, S., & Miller, M. (2010). Self-regulated, co-regulated, and socially shared regulation of learning. In B. Zimmerman & D. Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 65–84). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hesse, F. W. (2007). Being told to do something or just being aware of something? An alternative approach to scripting CSCL. In F. Fischer, I. Kollar, H. Mandl, & J. M. Haake (Eds.), Scripting computer-supported collaborative learning – Cognitive, computational, and educational perspectives (pp. 91–98). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hew, K. F., Cheung, W. S., & Ng, C. S. L. (2010). Student contribution in asynchronous online discussion: A review of the research and empirical exploration. Instructional Science, 38(6), 571–606.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hox, J. J., & Kreft, I. G. G. (1994). Multilevel analysis methods. Sociological Methods & Research, 22(3), 283–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Imai, K., Keele, L., & Yamamoto, T. (2010). Identification, inference and sensitivity analysis for causal mediation effects. Statistical Science, 26(1), 51–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Järvelä, S., & Hadwin, A. F. (2013). New frontiers: Regulating learning in CSCL. Educational Psychologist, 48(1), 25–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Järvelä, S., Järvenoja, H., & Veermans, M. (2008). Understanding the dynamics of motivation in socially shared learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 47(2), 122–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Järvelä, S., Malmberg, J., & Koivuniemi, M. (2016). Recognizing socially shared regulation by using the temporal sequences of online chat and logs in CSCL. Learning and Instruction, 42, 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karakostas, A., & Demetriadis, S. (2011). Enhancing collaborative learning through dynamic forms of support: The impact of an adaptive domain-specific support strategy. Journal of Computer-Assisted Learning, 27, 243–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, A. (1991). Effects of training in strategic questioning on children's problem-solving performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(3), 307–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kollar, I., Fischer, F., & Hesse, F. W. (2006). Collaboration scripts-a conceptual analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 18(2), 159–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leutner, D. (2009). Adaptivität und Adaptierbarkeit multimedialer Lehr- und Informationssysteme [Adaptivity and adaptability of multimedia teaching and information systems]. In L. J. Issing & P. Klimsa (Eds.), Online-Lernen: Handbuch für Wissenschaft und Praxis. Oldenbourg: Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linn, M. C., & Eylon, B.-S. (2011). Science learning and instruction: Taking advantage of technology to promote knowledge integration. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mäkitalo, K., Weinberger, A., Häkkinen, P., Järvelä, S., & Fischer, F. (2005). Epistemic cooperation scripts in online learning environments: Fostering learning by reducing uncertainty in discourse? Computers in Human Behavior, 21, 603–622.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Quintana, C., Reiser, B. J., Davis, E. A., Krajcik, J., Fretz, E., Duncan, R. G., Kyza, E., Edelson, D., & Soloway, E. (2004). A scaffolding design framework for software to support science inquiry. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 337–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rienties, B., Tempelaar, J., Van den Bossche, P., Gijselaers, W., & Segers, M. (2009). The role of academic motivation in computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 25, 1195–1206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rummel, N., & Spada, H. (2005). Learning to collaborate: A instructional approach to promoting collaborative problem solving in computer-mediated settings. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(2), 201–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rummel, N., Spada, H., & Hauser, S. (2009). Learning to collaborate while being scripted or by observing a model. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4, 69–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scheiter, K., & Gerjets, P. (2007). Learner control in hypermedia environments. Educational Psychology Review, 19(3), 285–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schellens, T., & Valcke, M. (2006). Fostering knowledge construction in university students through asynchronous discussion groups. Computers & Education, 46(4), 349–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoor, C., & Bannert, M. (2011). Motivation in a computer-supported collaborative learning senario and its impact on learning activities and knowledge acquisition. Learning and Instruction, 21, 560–573.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shute, V., & Towle, B. (2003). Adaptive e-learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(2), 105–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stegmann, K., Weinberger, A., & Fischer, F. (2007). Facilitating argumentative knowledge construction with computer-supported collaboration scripts. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2, 421–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tchounikine, P. (2016). Contribution to a theory of CSCL scripts: Taking into account the appropriation of scripts by learners. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 11(3), 349–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tingley, D., Yamamoto, T., Hirose, K., Keele, L., & Imai, K. (2014). Mediation: R package for causal mediation analysis. Journal of Statistical Software, 59(5), 1–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vallerand, R. J., Blais, M. R., Brière, N. M., & Pelletier, L. G. (1989). Construction et validation de l'échelle de motivation en éducation (EME) [construction and validation of a scale of educational motivation]. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 21(3), 323–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vauras, M., Iiskala, T., Kajamies, A., Kinnunen, R., & Lehtinen, E. (2003). Shared regulation and motivation of collaborating peers: A case analysis. Psychologia, 46(1), 19–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Volet, S., Summers, M., & Thurman, J. (2009). High-level co-regulation in collaborative learning: How does it emerge and how is it sustained? Learning and Instruction, 19, 128–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, E., Rummel, N., & Koedinger, K. R. (2011). Designing automated adaptive support to improve student helping behaviors in a peer tutoring activity. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6, 279–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, X., Kollar, I., Stegmann, K., & Fischer, F. (2011). Preventing overscripting effects in computer-supported collaborative learning by adaptable scripts. In H. Spada, G. Stahl, N. Miyake, & N. Law (Eds.), Connecting computer-supported collaborative learning to policy andpractice: CSCL2011 conference proceedings, volume I—Long papers (pp. 382–389). Hong Kong: International Society of the Learning Sciences.

  • Wecker, C., & Fischer, F. (2011). From guided to self-regulated performance of domain-general skills: The role of peer monitoring during the fading of instructional scripts. Learning and Instruction, 21(6), 746–756.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wecker, C., Kollar, I., Fischer, F., & Prechtl, H. (2010b). Fostering online search competence and domain-specific knowledge in inquiry classrooms: Effects of continuous and fading collaboration scripts. In K. Gomez, L. Lyons, & J. Radinsky (Eds.), Learning in the disciplines: Proceedings of the 9th International conference of the learning sciences—ICLS 2010 (Vol. 1, pp. 810–817). Chicago: International Society of the Learning Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wecker, C., Stegmann, K., Bernstein, F., Huber, M. J., Kalus, G., Kollar, I., Rathmeyer, S., & Fischer, F. (2010a). S-COL: A Copernican turn for the development of flexibly reusable collaboration scripts. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 5(3), 321–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weinberger, A., Stegmann, K., & Fischer, F. (2010). Learning to argue online: Scripted groups surpass individuals (unscripted groups do not). Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 506–515. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2009.08.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weinberger, A., Ertl, B., Fischer, F., & Mandl, H. (2005). Epistemic and social scripts in computer-supported collaborative learning. Instructional Science, 33(1), 1–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weiner, B. (1985). An attribution theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychological Review, 92, 548–573.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodward-Kron, R., & Remedios, L. (1998). Classroom discourse in problem-based learning classrooms in the health sciences. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 30(1), 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B. J., & Kitsantas, A. (1997). Development phases in self-regulation: Shifting from process goals to outcome goals. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(1), 29–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. (2001). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical perspectives. Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. (2011). Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Education, Beijing Normal University, Xinjiekouwai Str. 19, Beijing, 100875, China

    Xinghua Wang

  2. Augsburg University, Universitaetsstrasse 10, 86135, Augsburg, Germany

    Ingo Kollar

  3. Department of Psychology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, 80802, Munich, Germany

    Karsten Stegmann

Authors
  1. Xinghua Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ingo Kollar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Karsten Stegmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Xinghua Wang.

Appendix

Appendix

An example of the problem case on attribution theory

“Somehow I begin to realize that math is not my kind of thing. Last year I almost failed math. Mrs. Weber, who is my math teacher, told me that I really had to make an effort if I wanted to pass 10th grade. Actually, my parents stayed pretty calm when I told them. Well, mom said that none of us is ‘gifted’ in math. My father just grinned. Then he told the story of how he just barely passed his final math exams with lots of copying and cheat slips. ‘The Peters family,’ Daddy said then, ‘has always meant horror to any math teacher.’ Slightly merry at a school party, I once told Ms Weber this story. She it wasn’t a bad excuse, but it wasn’t a good one either. Just an excuse in other words, and anyone could come up with some more to justify beingbone idle. Last year I just passed, but I’m really anxious about the new school year!”

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wang, X., Kollar, I. & Stegmann, K. Adaptable scripting to foster regulation processes and skills in computer-supported collaborative learning. Intern. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn 12, 153–172 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-017-9254-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-017-9254-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation