Cognitive Group Awareness Tools for Implicitly Guiding Small Group Collaboration (Poster 1)

• In Event: Theory-Driven Development of Classroom Orchestration Tools to Support Learning at Multiple Social Planes

Abstract

Cognitive Group Awareness (CGA) Tools provide information about others’ knowledge, interests, or opinions (CGA information). The presented information can initiate group awareness processes about CGA information (e.g., perceiving that another student has a specific idea on a topic) that can be used for learning-related thinking and acting (e.g., elaborating on the idea or asking about it) (e.g., Author et al., 2018). Within classroom orchestration, such tools offer particular opportunities for self- or group-regulated processes due to their implicit way of structuring individual and collaborative learning behavior (Järvelä & Hadwin, 2013). Research shows that didactically desired behavior (e.g., sharing and discussing different ideas) can be successfully initiated by presenting CGA information (e.g., contrasting visualization of ideas). Even if subtle guidance approaches are not always effective on an overall tool level, findings generally indicate that CGA tools can be beneficial for learning.
This contribution presents a series of experimental studies performed to reveal potential tool functions beyond an overall level. For example, (1) as a core function, providing knowledge-related information on learning partners might facilitate grounding and partner modelling processes during collaborative learning. However, (2) such information does not only comprise information on a person but also to specific content, thereby cueing essential learning material information and constraining content-related communication. Moreover, (3) when CGA tools provide information that allows for comparing learning partners, they may guide learners to discuss particularly beneficial issues, such as diverging perspectives. Three consecutive experimental studies have been conducted that systematically disentangle these functions by varying only one of the tool features in each study. In each experimental study, learning dyads collaborated in two subsequent phases instructed to collaboratively elaborate on statistics concepts by means of multimedia learning material presented on a joint multitouch tabletop. In each collaboration phase, one of the three differentiated CGA tool features was provided in two of four experimental groups. Study 1 (N = 172) showed better learning outcomes for learners that were provided with information cueing support in terms of highlighted elements and relations in the learning material. Additionally, supported learners reported lower mental effort, discussed more essential components, and connected multiple representations more often and more deeply. Study 2 (N = 120) also showed benefits of the tool support. Learners provided with knowledge-related information on the learning partner performed significantly better than learners without additional collaboration support. Further, providing CGA information facilitated partner modelling processes during collaboration. Study 3 (N = 104) did not reveal a beneficial effect on learning outcomes when learners have been supported by visualized knowledge constellations. However, process analyses indicated that learners resolved controversial views more often when provided with visualized constellations.
This series of experimental studies reveals some potential for using CGA tools for classroom orchestration, but also some surprising results regarding the effectiveness of the different functions. In the symposium, the results will be complemented by CGA tool experiences in practice. We will also discuss how these findings intertwine and can influence the development of CGA tools for effective classroom orchestration.

Author

• Daniel Bodemer, University of Duisburg-Essen