Learning to Collaborate: An Instructional Approach to Promoting Collaborative Problem Solving in Computer-Mediated Settings

By Nikol Rummel, Hans Spada. 2005

503 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Communication, Developmental and Educational Psychology, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/69ee9279d74d08f88e95f8087edd0938b624df6f

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Communication

1. E. Michael Nussbaum
2. Ordene V. Edwards
3. Tamara van Gog
4. Frank Fischer
5. Ingo Kollar
6. Alexander Renkl
7. Friedrich W. Hesse
8. Michelene T. H. Chi

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

1. Tamara van Gog
2. Fred Paas
3. John Sweller
4. Alexander Renkl
5. J. V. van Merriënboer
6. Nikol Rummel
7. Paul Ayres
8. Liesbeth Kester

In Social Psychology

1. E. Michael Nussbaum
2. Tamara van Gog
3. Paul Ayres
4. John Sweller
5. Ordene V. Edwards
6. Fred Paas
7. Frank Fischer
8. Ingo Kollar

Citations in the corpus

• The worked example and expertise reversal effect in less structured tasks : Learning to reason about legal cases (2013, background): “…the effects of examples using less structured tasks such as, for example, learning to recognize designer styles (Rourke & Sweller, 2009), learning to collaboratively diagnose a patient and design a treatment plan (Rummel & Spada, 2005), or learning argumentation skills (Schworm & Renkl, 2007).”
• Assessment of Collaborative Problem Solving in Education Environments (2016, background): “The forerunner to this focus has been evidence that demonstrates that collaboration as such is difficult (Rummel & Spada, 2005).”
• Collaboration Scripts – A Conceptual Analysis (2006, methodology): “, O’Donnell and Dansereau, 1992; Palincsar and Brown, 1984) and computer-mediated collaboration (e.g., Dillenbourg, 2002; Rummel and Spada, 2005; Weinberger et al., 2005).”
• Example-Based Learning: Integrating Cognitive and Social-Cognitive Research Perspectives (2010, background): “In modeling examples that consist of screen recordings with spoken text (e.g., McLaren et al. 2006, 2008; Rummel and Spada 2005; Rummel et al. 2009; Van Gog et al. 2009a) or in animated modeling examples with a pedagogical agent and spoken text (e.g., Atkinson 2002; Wouters et al. 2009), issues of…”
• Effects of worked examples, example-problem, and problem-example pairs on novices learning (2011, background): “In addition, it has also been demonstrated in collaborative learning situations (Rummel & Spada, 2005; Rummel, Spada, & Hauser, 2009).”
• Concept mapping as a follow-up strategy to learning from texts: what characterizes good and poor mappers? (2008, background): “2000; Renkl 2005) as well as in more complex domains (Hilbert et al. 2006; Rummel and Spada 2005).”
• Critical Questions and Argument Stratagems: A Framework for Enhancing and Analyzing Students' Reasoning Practices (2011, methodology): “…been proposed, including argumentation scripting (Schellens, Van Keer, De Wever, & Valcke, 2007), the use of worked examples of a “good discussion” (Rummel & Spada, 2005), and the provision of a dual-positional text that outlines some potential arguments and counterarguments (Nussbaum & Kardash,…”
• Active-Constructive-Interactive: A Conceptual Framework for Differentiating Learning Activities (2009, background): “…students use simple sentence openers (Soller, Linton, Goodman, & Lesgold, 1999), posing questions with generic prompts (Chi, Bassok, Lewis, Reimann & Glaser, 1989), or following a more complicated set of scripted instructions (Rummel and Spada, 2005; Weinberger, Ertl, Fischer, & Mandl, 2005).”
• A rating scheme for assessing the quality of computer-supported collaboration processes (2007, background): “Furthermore, we would like to thank the CSCL community for their valuable questions and remarks on a preliminary version of the rating scheme that was presented at the CSCL 2005 conference, as well as three anonymous reviewers for their helpful suggestions.”
• Seven Affordances of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning: How to Support Collaborative Learning? How Can Technologies Help? (2016, unknown): “In CSCL, scripted collaboration has received significant attention as a way to promote productive collaborative learning activities (Noroozi et al., 2013; Overdijk & Diggelen, 2008; Rummel & Spada, 2005; Stegmann, Weinberger, & Fischer, 2007).”
• Toward a Script Theory of Guidance in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (2013, background): “Empirical support for the internal script induction principle (Principle 3) comes from a study by Rummel and Spada (2005) in which participants (N = 72) engaged in an unfamiliar CSCL practice (interdisciplinary work on patient cases between students of psychology and medicine) in a…”
• Example-Based Learning in Heuristic Domains: A Cognitive Load Theory Account (2009, background): “A number of studies have shown that heuristic double-content examples can effectively foster cognitive skill acquisition in a variety of learning domains such as applying learning strategies in journal writing (Hubner et al. 2008), concept mapping as a learning strategy (Hilbert and Renkl 2008), coo”
• Technology in Support of Collaborative Learning (2007, unknown): “…like problem-based learning and project-based learning, have been associated with positive learning outcomes (Blumenfeld, Marx, Soloway, & Krajcik, 1996; Duisburg & Hoope, 1999; McManus & Aiken, 1995; Pearson, 2006; Rummel & Spada, 2005; Steinkuehler, Derry, Hmelo-Silver, & DelMacelle, 2002).”