Over-scripting CSCL: The risks of blending collaborative learning with instructional design

By Pierre Dillenbourg. 2002

1,159 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9a971d284d3129418fb090b2cb148d44a12fb4d0

How researchers see this paper

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

Citations in the corpus

Productive failure in mathematical problem solving (2010, background): “I am neither alone nor the first one to advocate this, and research on productive failure only adds weight to the growing number of voices that have alluded to resisting an all-so-common, efficiency-dominant rush to overly structure the learning and performance space of learners ( Dillenbourg 2002; ”
The mechanics of CSCL macro scripts (2008, background): “Increasing collaborative effort too much may of course also damage collaboration (Dillenbourg 2002).”
Collaboration Scripts – A Conceptual Analysis (2006, methodology): ““Over-scripting” (Dillenbourg, 2002) might prove more detrimental for some learners than for others.”
Technology for Classroom Orchestration (2010, methodology): “In computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL), the idea of "script" emerged as a method that shapes the way collaboration will occur within a team (Dillenbourg, 2002).”
Analytic Frameworks for Assessing Dialogic Argumentation in Online Learning Environments (2007, background): “Awareness tools can heighten awareness of participation in terms of the number of words students contribute, the number of comments made, or the connections established in terms of who has spoken to whom (e.g., Erkens & Janssen, 2006; Dillenbourg, 2002).”
Predictors for Student Success in an Online Course (2007, background): “One of the ideas in this field is to design scripts that can be defined as “a set of instructions prescribing how students should perform in groups, how they should interact and collaborate and how they should solve the problem” ( Dillenbourg, 2002, p. 63 ), that can be modified according to what ki”
An Evolutionary Upgrade of Cognitive Load Theory: Using the Human Motor System and Collaboration to Support the Learning of Complex Cognitive Tasks (2012, background): “Positive effects are primarily found in highly structured and highly scripted learning environments in which learning processes were bound to strict rules (Dillenbourg 2002).”
Technology in Support of Collaborative Learning (2007, background): “A script is “a story or scenario that the students and tutors play as actors play a movie script” (Dillenbourg, 2002, p. 11).”
Epistemic and social scripts in computer–supported collaborative learning (2005, background): “Scripted interfaces may, for instance, restrain access to the interface so that learners may take turns and contribute at specified times.”
Argumentation for Learning: Well-Trodden Paths and Unexplored Territories (2016, background): “Similar to the expertise reversal effect (Kalyuga, Ayres, Chandler, & Sweller, 2003), externally imposed collaboration support tools can be countereffective when they inhibit the learner’s autonomous application of procedural knowledge, internal scripts, and skills that are already available and pro”
A Cognitive Load Approach to Collaborative Learning: United Brains for Complex Tasks (2009, background): “These results are primarily found in highly structured and/or highly scripted learning environments in which learning processes were bound to strict rules ( Dillenbourg 2002 ).”
Designing Integrative Scripts (2007, background): “Another risk is what we called over-scripting ( Dillenbourg, 2002 ), i.e., situations that constrain natural collaboration in a way that makes it sterile, inhibiting the natural peer interaction mechanisms.”
COLLAGE: A collaborative Learning Design editor based on patterns (2006, background): “A collaboration script is a set of instructions prescribing how students should form groups and how they should interact and collaborate in order to solve a problem (Dillenbourg, 2002).”
Learning from productive failure (2015, background): “…they may not be able to solve problems requiring concepts they have not learned yet (Sweller, 1988), or they may not be able to collaborate productively (Dillenbourg, 2002), or they may have misconceptions of natural phenomenon that need to be addressed (Chi, Glaser, & Farr, 1988), and so on.”
Designs for Collective Cognitive Responsibility in Knowledge-Building Communities (2009, background): “Highly structured collaboration can limit students’ engagement in high-level, creative discourse (Cohen, 1994; Dillenbourg, 2002; Kollar, Fischer, & Hesse, 2006).”
Seven Affordances of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning: How to Support Collaborative Learning? How Can Technologies Help? (2016, unknown): “Technology can certainly turn “pedagogy into subtle ergonomic choices” (Dillenbourg, 2002, p. 21), but it is important to note that there is trade-off in structuring learning.”
The Impact of Role Assignment on Knowledge Construction in Asynchronous Discussion Groups (2005, background): “This aim corresponds to the suggestion of Dillenbourg (2002), who claims that the application of scripts for collaborative learning can be a technique to affect collaborative learning directly.”