Collaborative Learning, Reasoning, and Technology

Angela M. O'Donnell,Cindy E. Hmelo-Silver,Gijsbert Erkens

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2005
• ISBN:
  9781136797026
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education General

This volume presents research findings on the use of technology to support learning and reasoning in collaborative contexts. Featuring a variety of theoretical perspectives, ranging from sociocultural to social psychological to information processing views, Collaborative Learning, Reasoning, and Technology includes an international group of authors

Chapter 1

Introduction: Learning with Technology

Angela M. O’Donnell

Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey

A major initiative in considering the potential contribution of technology to education was the appointment of the Web-Based Education Commission. In December 2000, the commission released its report, The power of the Internet for learning: Moving from promise to practice. An important issue addressed by the commission was the need to build a research framework for how people learn in the Internet age. According to the commission, this research framework would need to address learning outcomes and should be developed from an “understanding of how people learn and, of how new tools support and assess learning gains, what kinds of organizational structures support these gains, and what is needed to keep the field of learning moving forward” (Kerrey & Isakson, 2000, p. iv). Clearly much work remains to be done in understanding how and when to use various technologies to promote learning and instruction.

The use of technology in education can, under the right circumstances, have positive effects on teaching and learning in elementary and secondary schools (Honey, 2001; Norris, Smolka, & Soloway, 2000). According to Honey (2001), the benefits of educational technology implementations include increases in standardized test scores, support for the development of early literacy skills, promotion of students’ mastery of mathematical concepts, and increases in students’ understanding of core science concepts. However, these benefits are likely to accrue only when there is leadership around technology that is focused on clear educational goals, there is sustained and intensive professional development, there are adequate technology resource available, sufficient time is allowed for change to occur, and evaluations are conducted to identify whether educational goals are being met. In reporting on the Snapshot Survey of approximately 1000 k-12 classroom teachers, Norris and colleagues concluded that educational technology has had little impact on teaching and learning because students have little access to computers. (Norris, Sullivan, Poirot, & Soloway, 2003). Sixty-seven percent of respondents to the survey indicated that they had access to a computer lab once or less than one a week. The use of technology for instruction in higher education is less constrained than in k-12 environments as students do a great deal of their learning outside of the classroom. Access to computing facilities is not constrained to a single time period or location.

Many key aspects of learning and instruction may be influenced by the use of technology. For example, the report by the National Center for Postsecondary Education (Gumport & Chun, 2000) described a number of areas of impact of technology on teaching and learning in higher education including the nature of knowledge, the relationships among participants in the learning and teaching process, the content of courses, and the dimension of time as an influence on the processes of learning and teaching. The kind of knowledge students can acquire may be different in that new research becomes more readily available via the Internet than was previously possible. Multiple sources can be easily located and different perspectives on particular topics can also be easily found. Students must be more careful about the trustworthiness of sources and data available on the Internet, as the rigors of peer review are not applied to all the materials that are available on the Internet. The relationships among participants in the teaching and learning process can change from those typically found in most college classrooms. Participants have more equal access to opportunities to participate when using online tools. In face-to-face groups, students may feel intimidated by other students in their groups. In asynchronous online interaction, students can choose to participate when they feel prepared to do so. The content of courses may be changed because of the availability of technological resources such as videos. Learning is not limited to particular times of day or particular days. Students can tailor their learning environment to their own needs. Technology can be used to enhance existing strategies for instruction or to fundamentally alter the roles of teachers and students. The wealth of writing about the role of technology in higher education includes concerns about the role of faculty, the incentives for faculty to improve their own technological competence, the costs of introducing and maintaining the infrastructure needed to support instructional uses of technology, and access and equity.

Attention to what students are learning as a result of the introduction of technology has received less attention, and rigorous evaluations of the impact of technology on student learning are few (Merisotis, 1999; Phipps & Merisotis, 1999). However, despite the promises of the contribution of technology to effective learning and instruction, the assumption that the use of technology for learning and instruction is necessary and effectively promotes learning is so pervasive that it is virtually unexamined as an assumption. Some would argue that to query its use is not even appropriate. It is difficult, nevertheless, to justify an uncritical approach to any educational intervention when one considers the costs involved in both human and financial capital. Frequently, claims are made for the importance of technology to student learning although the empirical basis for such claims is limited. The enormous costs involved in the introduction, maintenance, and expansion of instructional uses of technology in terms of money and faculty and student time warrant a serious examination of the claims made. The report of the Web-Based Education Commission (Kerrey & Isakson, 2000) notes that only 0.1% of the budget allocated to education is dedicated to examining outcomes from education.

Given the enormous costs involved in developing an infrastructure to support the use of technology in education and the human capital involved, it is important to consider the outcomes associated with the introduction and use of technology. Jones and Paolucci (1999) noted that less than 5% of published research on the effectiveness of educational technology could adequately address the question of the role of technology in contributing to learning outcomes. Their criticisms rest largely on their viewpoint that quantitative measures were inadequately used. Merisotis (1999) also criticized the lack of rigor in evaluation of the outcomes from the use of technology. An alternative view, however, was provided by Agnew (2001), who criticized some of the research on the effectiveness of educational technology in instruction because of its dependence on quantitative measures that lacked sensitivity to changes in learning and instruction. The difference in opinions voiced by Agnew and by Jones and Paolucci is indicative of the general disarray in the consideration of learning outcomes that result from the use of technology in learning and teaching. Although these authors were writing about the use of technology for instruction in higher education contexts, it is likely that the same differences of opinion can be found at any educational level.

The goal of this book is to provide a critical analysis of work involving the use of technology in instruction and learning and to present research findings related to that work. The contents of the book center on two themes: the use of technology to promote argumentation and reasoning and the use of technology as a scaffold for learning. Collaboration among peers is a key element of both of these strands.

FOCUS ON COLLABORATION

Many of the justifications for the use of technology in instructional contexts are made on the basis that higher levels of learning goals can be accomplished if supported by various technological applications. Examples of tools that can foster higher levels of thinking include the visualization tools in CoVIS (Pea, Edelson, & Gomez, 1994) or the data collection and manipulation tools such as those students encounter in the Global Lab (Tinker & Berenfeld, 1994). The CoVis project provides students with the kinds of tools that researchers use in their work. Participating students use these tools when engaged in inquiry-based activities related to the study of atmospheric and environmental science. The focus is on the use of scientific visualizations conducted in collaborative groups. The Global Lab curriculum is a year- long interdisciplinary science course in which students learn to investigate scientific topics in collaboration with others.

The current focus on technology to support higher order learning is markedly different than the focus that permeated the 1970s and 1980s when computer-based instruction was largely directed toward the acquisition of basic skills (Kulik, Kulik, & Cohen, 1980). The change in emphasis on the expected role of technology in education paralleled a change during the same time frame in the conceptualization of human learning and how it can be supported or promoted. In the early 1970s and 1980s, learning was still construed within a more behavioral tradition. Issues such as the complex contribution of social context to individual learning had not received broad consideration. Human learning as described in more recent writings (e.g., the American Psychological Association’s Learner-centered Principles (1997); the National Research Council’s project How people learn (Bransford, Brown, and Cocking, 1999) is viewed as complex; strongly influenced by social context; involving metacognitive, motivational, and cognitive components; and characterized by individual differences in almost every facet. Technology in support of instruction and learning may be deployed to support or enhance one or more of these facets of human learning.

Collaboration among peers or others such as domain experts is generally considered to be an important contributor to students’ conceptual development. Such collaborations have the potential to increase the quality of discourse, provide alternative explanations for phenomenon, generate multiple solutions to problems, and allow for the inclusion of many different kinds of skills in solving problems. It is also true, however, that successful collaborations are not easy to create or sustain (O’Donnell, 1999; Salomon & Globerson, 1989).

The use of technology by groups of students to support their learning also requires a model of the nature of the anticipated collaboration. A variety of theoretical approaches to peer learning have been delineated (O’Donnell & O’Kelly, 1994) and include those based on developmental psychological theories of Piaget and Vygotsky or on social psychological theory drawing on Lewin’s field theory (Deutsch, 1949). Explanations of why collaboration is important to conceptual growth based on Piagetian theory rely on the concept of cognitive conflict that may be engendered by group discussions and arguments. The opportunity for differing opinions is enhanced in collaborative groups and those differences that may provoke conceptual change. Explanations of the utility of collaboration based on Vygotskian theory focus on both individual learning and group learning. Individuals may benefit in a collaborative group because there is an opportunity for their learning to be scaffolded by a more knowledgeable or experienced peer. The group may also come to shared understandings and involve individuals at different levels of participation. Other approaches to understanding collaboration include those based primarily on information processing theory and focusing on cognitive elaboration as a mechanism that promotes learning in collaborative groups. From this perspective, collaboration provides opportunities for deeper processing of content and the elaboration of existing knowledge structures. The quality of discourse in a collaborative group is critical for learning to occur. A final approach to describing collaboration is a sociocultural approach in which the collaborative is seen as a community of learners.

The chapters in this book describe various forms and uses for technology. Understanding the model of collaboration that underpins the work is important to understanding the contribution that the technology made to the enhancement of learning. Chapters address the following questions:

• What theoretical perspective on collaboration is being adopted in the chapter?

• Within this theoretical framework, how and for whom does collaboration facilitate learning?

• How is technology conceptualized as a contributor to learning within the theoretical framework adopted and in what way does it contribute?

Theme of Argumentation

As collaboration among students is intended to foster higher level learning outcomes, a major theme in this book is argumentation. A number of the chapters in this book focus on the use of technology to support argumentation. Across all domains, students need to learn to make arguments, draw on reasons to support ideas, use evidence in support of their ideas, and draw valid conclusions. Skills in argumentation are very much in demand in school and also out of school. There is no end to the opportunities that people have to engage in argumentation. Public meetings of school boards, public hearings about development in a township, political meetings, and so on, provide many opportunities to use skills in argumentation. All too often, the quality of argumentation skills one observes is often lacking. Students can benefit greatly from developing skills in argumentation and technology can be fruitfully used to support that development.

Collaboration among students provides a context in which argumentation can be promoted. A number of researchers have shown that collaboratively constructed arguments are more beneficial than individually constructed arguments (Chinn, O’Donnell, & Jinks, 2001; Schwartz, Neumann, Gil, & Ilya, 2003).

Theme of Scaffolding

The complexities of collaboration in a computer-based environment are well illustrated in the chapters that specifically address argumentation. Clearly students need support as they learn to develop arguments or engage in higher levels of learning objectives. Much of how such scaffolding is conceptualized in the various chapters depends on the authors’ orientation toward collaboration. To provide instructional environments that can support higher level reasoning, instructors need to consider how to design supports in the environment that will make it possible for students to engage in these higher order cognitive processes.

In the next few pages, I provide an overview of the contents of the book and how the various contributions address collaboration, argumentation, and scaffolding. The chapters are not discussed in the order in which they appear. Many chapters contribute to the themes of argumentation and scaffolding to varying degrees. In some chapters, these themes are integrally related. In others they are less tightly woven. Together, the chapters contribute to our understanding of the complexity of using technology effectively for the purposes of instruction and meaningful learning.

COLLABORATION, ARGUMENTATION, AND SCAFFOLDING

De Lisi’s chapter (chap. 2) provides a developmental perspective on virtual scaffolding and the use of technology in learning. He identifies two communalities in the work of Piaget and Vygotsky, two theorists who provided influential theoretical perspectives on how collaboration among peers might promote cognitive development or facilitate learning. The two points of common ground are (a) the use of developmental methods, and (b) a constructivist approach to learning and instruction that emphasizes both individual and social processes. The chapter provides a very clear characterization of sociocultural constructivist theory. This over...