Collaborative Learning in Collaborative Learning in CS/ IT SubjectsCS/ IT Subjects

By Dr SC LiBy Dr SC Li

Programming languages are not flexible enough to facilitate student’s cognitive process

Lack of social context of learning computer programming

too much emphasis on individualized learning

“one person one PC” physical constraints

Lack of multiple perspectives and authenticity in problem solving

Learning Difficulties RevisitLearning Difficulties Revisit

Strategies to tackle the difficultiesStrategies to tackle the difficulties

Individualized Learning (one person to one

computer)

Collaborative Learning

Authentic Problem Solving

Unrealistic/ decontextualized Problem Solving

Process-driven Assessment

Product-driven Assessment

Rationale: cognitive restructuring may occur

when students give and receive help from each other

In formulating explanations to give to another student, students may reorganize or clarify the material in ways they have not previously thought of (Bargh & Schul 1980), and help them reshape their ideas, rectify misunderstandings.

Collaborative LearningCollaborative Learning

Rationale: group settings provide a diversity of

skills and knowledge. This diversity may

help them how to solve complex problems that they would not be able to complete on their own

give rise to conceptual conflict and conflict resolution

Collaborative LearningCollaborative Learning

Rationale: peer interaction provide opportunities

for scaffolding, modelling and imitation.

Viewing a peer successfully perform a task may raise children’s self-efficacy form performing well more than observing the teacher (Schunk 1987)

This may lower their level of anxiety and increase their willingness to ask for help

Collaborative LearningCollaborative Learning

Collaborative LearningCollaborative Learning

individualized collaborative

Pretest/Posttest gain scorePretest/Posttest gain score

No. of No. of studentsstudents

(Joyce et al. 1989)

Collaborative LearningCollaborative Learning

Student who learned alone

Student who received

explanations

Student who gave

explanations

(Farivar & Webb 1994)

Student Interaction in groupStudent Interaction in group Six types of interaction (kappa, E. 1999):

Together and apart One of the pair is working, the other is ‘drea

ming’ One of the pair is working, the other is mostl

y observing Distributed work or parallel work on

separate parts of the task One of the pair is dominant Both of them work together

Together and ApartTogether and Apart

The students sit together but they are not really collaborating. Each one of them solves the problem in his or her own way and does not consult with the other.

Working and DreamingWorking and Dreaming

The task actually is being done by one of the pair while the other is mostly occupied in things that are irrelevant to the educational task.

Working and ObservingWorking and Observing

Both of them are working together but there is a gap between them in the level of contribution to the solution of the problem: one is active and the second is passive most of the time and follows the partner.

Distributed or Parallel WorkDistributed or Parallel Work

Both are dominant and want to contribute their part to the problem solution. They are aware of each other’s will, and therefore they decide to divide the work between them. Sometimes distributed work is done for other motives, for instance, the need to complete the task in limited time.

One of the pair is dominantOne of the pair is dominant

One of the pair is dominant cognitively and the other finds himself doing mostly routine work because of a wish to participate in the task actively.

Work TogetherWork Together

The Both of them are busy in the task while searching/receiving information each from the partner. If there are contradictions, they are solved by cognitive negotiation between them.

Cooperation Chapter 1

Chapter 2

Chapter 3

Chapter 4

Chapter 5Collaboration

Book

Intentions: personal Expectations:of othersof self

shared

Cooperation vs. CollaborationCooperation vs. Collaboration

core knowledge

zone ofproximal development

gives ability to performautonomous actions

action requires help from colleagues or tutors

Learning processesCooperation vs. CollaborationCooperation vs. Collaboration

an enlarged corelearning has taken place

but there is always a newzone of proximal development

Cooperation vs. CollaborationCooperation vs. Collaboration

Group learningOverlapping core knowledge of a group

Overlapping zones of a group

Cooperation vs. CollaborationCooperation vs. Collaboration

Cooperation:Cooperation: depends upon a supportive community of actors who agree to help one another in activities aimed at attaining the goals of each person involved.

CollaborationCollaboration: on the other hand, depends upon the establishment of a common meaning and language on a task which leads to the community setting a common goal.

Cooperation vs. CollaborationCooperation vs. Collaboration

Conditions for collaborative learning team building conflict management communication/ explanation skills group size and composition equalization of status gender difference reward structure planning ability metacognition and problem solving ability

Collaborative LearningCollaborative Learning

What are the opportunities of integrating Internet technologies into Pascal programming? Is it possible to design meaningful tasks or problems for students regarding CGI programming with Pascal? Discuss.

Transform the about exercises into meaningful problem-solving activities.

Reference: Irie Pascal Free pascal

Authentic ActivitiesAuthentic Activities