An Experimental Study of the Effects of Representational Guidance on Collaborative Learning Processes

By Dan Suthers, C. Hundhausen. 2003

401 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c0e63e025f1743ebb5cb156523f07865934bb3f6

How researchers see this paper

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

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Technology affordances for intersubjective meaning making: A research agenda for CSCL (2006, neutral): “Many empirical studies follow the dominant experimental paradigm that compares an intervention to a control condition in terms of one or more variables (e.g., Baker & Lund, 1997; Rummel & Spada, 2005; Suthers & Hundhausen, 2003; Van Der Pol et al., 2003; Weinberger et al., 2005).”
The ICAP Framework: Linking Cognitive Engagement to Active Learning Outcomes (2014, neutral): “…multimedia resources (Bodemer, Ploetzner, Feuerlein, & Spada, 2004); making plans (Pea & Kurland, 1984); inducing hypotheses and causal relations (Suthers & Hundhausen, 2003); drawing analogies (Chinn & Malhotra, 2002); generating predictions (Schauble, Glaser, Duschl, Schulze, & John, 1995);…”
The Evolution of Research on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (2009, background): “The way representations shape social interaction is referred to by Suthers and Hundhausen (2003) as " representational guidance " .”
Examining the Use of Talk and Writing for Students' Development of Scientific Conceptual Knowledge Through Constructing and Critiquing Arguments (2016, background): “Suthers and Hundhausen (2003) expanded the literature on the use of talk and writing in sequence, suggesting that writing is used as an elaboration process when conducted prior to talk.”
Learners' Epistemic Criteria for Good Scientific Models. (2011, background): “Existing research emphasizes helping students make critical structural distinctions, such as the distinction between explanations and evidence (e.g., Bell & Linn, 2000; McNeill, Lizotte, Krajcik, & Marx, 2006; Suthers & Hundhausen, 2003; Toth, Suthers, & Lesgold, 2002).”
Toward a Script Theory of Guidance in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (2013, background): “Evidence for this comes from a study by Suthers and Hundhausen (2003) in which 30 dyads of university students used either a graph, matrix, or text format to represent data, hypotheses, and evidential relations while exploring the causes of two science phenomena.”
Active-Constructive-Interactive: A Conceptual Framework for Differentiating Learning Activities (2009, background): “…and diagram or across multimedia resources (Bodemer, Ploetzner, Feuerlein, & Spada, 2004), making plans (Pea & Kurland, 1984), inducing hypotheses (Suthers & Hundhausen, 2003), drawing analogies (Chinn & Malhorta, 2002), generating predictions (Klahr & Nigam, 2004), reflecting and monitoring…”
Developing Dialogic Argumentation Skills: A 3-year Intervention Study (2014, background): “…typically with various kinds of software and graphic organizers designed to help students identify and keep track of argument structure (Andriessen, Baker, & Suthers, 2003; Kollar, Fischer, & Slotta, 2007; Nussbaum, 2008; Nussbaum & Edwards, 2011; Schworm & Renkl, 2007; Suthers & Hundhausen, 2003).”
Seven Affordances of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning: How to Support Collaborative Learning? How Can Technologies Help? (2016, positive): “They can be used to negotiate meaning, serve as representational proxies for gestural dei-xis in distributed communication settings, and function as a group memory, reminding people what they have discussed and what they will do next (Suthers & Hundhausen, 2003).”
Collaboration Scripts – A Conceptual Analysis (2006, background): “There is a significant amount of literature about how learners process different forms of external representations and how these affect learning (e.g., Mayer, 2001; Schnotz, 2002; Suthers and Hundhausen, 2003; Vekiri, 2002).”
Cooperation and the Use of Technology (2007, background): “Graphic representations can enhance the controversy process by forcing participants to be explicit and complete in presenting their ideas (Suthers and Hundhausen, 2003; van Bruggen et al., 2003), can be used to develop resources for discussion and reasoning (Baker, 2003; Suthers, 2003), can lead to ”