International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning

Quality of collaborative group engagement (QCGE) is conceptualised as a complex, shared, and multidimensional construct critical to learning outcomes in collaborative learning. It is currently measured in a variety of ways, including rich observation-based methods. However, a standardised self-assessment method for the construct of QCGE has not yet been developed. This contribution presents a pragmatic self-assessment approach to QCGE for higher education contexts and a new self-assessment scale: the QCGE-SAS. Our findings from a study with N = 246 students support the four-factor structure of QCGE originally proposed by Sinha et al. (2015), namely behavioural, social, cognitive, and conceptual-to-consequential collaborative group engagement, and demonstrate that the QCGE-SAS can successfully capture the multidimensional nature of QCGE. Construct and criterion validity were supported by significant correlations with related scales and with self-reported and objective learning outcomes. However, while three subscales proved reliable, the social engagement dimension subscale showed unsatisfactory reliability, indicating further refinement of the scale in future research. Overall, our findings contribute to an accurate operationalisation of the QCGE construct and complement existing methods and comprehensive multi-method approaches to measuring QCGE, thereby informing CSCL research and practice.

Fostering students’ dialogic reflection in the classroom entails promoting diverse perspectives and collaborative aspects of reflective thinking. However, few studies have developed visualisation tools to create a collaborative environment that fosters dialogic reflection, especially for young learners. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy of visualising classroom discourse to enhance students’ dialogic reflection. Two information and communication technology (ICT) teachers and their students (n = 53) from a Hong Kong primary school participated in a 3-month study. After engaging in visualisation-supported dialogic reflection, students’ subject knowledge of ICT improved, accompanied by an increase in the proportion of words spoken by students during lessons. Interviews with the two teachers and eight students underscored the positive impact of visualising classroom discourse, which enabled students to embrace alternative problem-solving approaches and actively engage in both collaborative group work and whole-class discussions. This study illuminates the advantages of employing classroom discourse visualisation as a reflective tool. Beyond mere revisiting, students can view experiences from multiple perspectives and reconstruct their knowledge. Furthermore, this approach fostered accountability for students’ contribution during classroom interactions, ultimately improving their learning outcomes. These findings advocate for the development of evidence-based, dialogic reflective tools specifically designed for young learners to optimise their learning experiences.

Computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) offers a modern setting for learners to engage in meaningful (meta)cognitive and socioemotional interactions. However, the task design, not technology alone, significantly shapes students’ learning interactions. This study investigates how a conceptual physics task and a hands-on robotics task promote collaborative knowledge construction (CKC) and group-level cognitive, as well as emotion–motivation, regulation among secondary school students. Utilizing video recordings of students’ collaborative interactions and process-oriented methods, we examined the occurrence and temporal interplay of these processes from the two tasks. Transmodal network analysis complemented by qualitative case examples revealed significant differences in the nature of CKC and regulation of learning during the tasks. Cognitive processes and strong interconnections between cognitive regulation and negotiation were more typical for the conceptual physics task. The hands-on robotics task featured more frequent, but shorter, sequences of initial CKC phases and emphasized socioemotional interactions for sustained positive collaboration. This study highlights task design’s importance in collaborative learning processes and provides insights for optimizing CSCL environments for effective collaboration.

Here, we present comparative case studies of two young adolescents engaged in electronic dialogs on a social issue with a sequence of partners. We trace how an individual coordinates existing ideas with new input the interaction provides. Tracing the evolution of an individual’s ideas entails close examination of the process by means of which it occurs. The skills the individual brings to the interaction shape this evolution, as well as undergo development themselves as a consequence of practice. The two case studies revealed strikingly different patterns, and their comparison provides insights into the processes involved. Their description encompasses not simply the knowledge but also the argument skills the individual brings to the activity and, underlying them, understandings of the purposes and objectives of argumentation. Metacognitive talk about their thinking may be key in conferring the benefit the dialogic activity provides; it aides in dissociating a belief from the holder of the belief, thereby promoting claims being situated in argumentative relation to one another. Text-only communication proved a beneficial condition for this to occur.

Disagreement is often perceived negatively, yet it can be beneficial for learning and scientific inquiry. However, students tend to avoid engaging in disagreement. Peer critique activities offer a promising way to encourage students to embrace disagreement, which supports learning as students articulate their ideas, making them available for discussion, revision, and refinement. This study aims to better understand how students express disagreement during peer critique within small groups and how that affects moving their inquiry forward. It explores 5th-grade students’ management of disagreement within a computer-supported collaborative modeling environment. Using conversation analysis, we identified various forms of disagreements employed by students when engaging with different audiences. We observed a tendency for students to disagree softly; that is, disagreement was implied and/or mitigated. Students’ resolution of both direct and soft disagreements effectively promoted their collective knowledge advancement, including building shared scientific understanding and improving their models, while maintaining a positive socio-emotional climate. These findings have implications for designing CSCL environments with respect to supporting students in providing and responding to peer critiques at the group level.