This study aimed to find out how and on what level the students of two separate secondary schools shared and constructed knowledge on imperialism by interacting through historical role characters in a Web-based environment. Furthermore, the study aimed to find out how social and contextual features affected the nature of knowledge sharing and construction. The data about the history project were gathered by various means in order to validate the findings of the case study. The results demonstrated that the level of the Web-based messages remained quite low. Also the use of the Web-based environment in terms of shared knowledge construction was rather weak. In comparison, different instructional activities of the two teachers resulted in different learning activities in the two schools and, thus, different level of interaction in the Web-based environment. The findings of this research are discussed in terms of important factors influencing the knowledge sharing and constructing activities.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArvajaM.HäkkinenP.EteläpeltoA.Rasku-PuttonenH. (2000a). Collaborative processes during report writing of a science-learning project: The nature of discourse as a function of task requirements. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 15(4), 455–466.
2.
ArvajaM.HäkkinenP.EteläpeltoA.Rasku-PuttonenH. (2000b). Social processes and knowledge building in project-based face-to-face and networked interactions. In BopryJ.EteläpeltoA. (Eds.), Collaboration and learning in virtual environments (pp. 48–61). http://selene.lib.jyu.fi:8080/julpu/9513914208.pdf
3.
ArvajaM.HäkkinenP.Rasku-PuttonenH.EteläpeltoA. (2002). Social processes and knowledge building during small group interaction in a school science project. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 46(2), 161–179.
4.
BakerM. (2002). Forms of cooperation in dyadic problem-solving. In SalembierP.BenchekrounH. (Eds.), Cooperation and complexity. Sociotechnical Systems, 16, 587–620. Paris: Hermès.
5.
BakerM.HansenT.JoinerR.TraumD. (1999). The role of grounding in collaborative learning tasks. In DillenbourgP. (Ed.), Collaborative learning: Cognitive and computational approaches (pp. 31–63). Oxford: Elsevier Science Ltd.
6.
BarronB. (2000). Achieving coordination in collaborative problem-solving groups. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(4), 403–436.
7.
BrennanS. (1998). The grounding problem in conversations with and through computers. In FussellS.KreutzR. (Eds.), Social and cognitive approaches to interpersonal communication (pp. 201–225). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
8.
ClarkH.SchaeferE. (1989). Contributing to discourse. Cognitive Science, 13, 259–294.
9.
CohenE. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups. Review of Educational Research, 64(1), 1–35.
10.
CrookC. (1999). Computers in the community of classrooms. In LittletonK.LightP. (Eds.), Learning with computers. Analysing productive interaction (pp. 102–117). London: Routledge.
11.
CrookC. (2000). Motivation and the ecology of collaborative learning. In JoinerR.LittletonK.FaulknerD.MiellD. (Eds.), Rethinking collaborative learning (pp. 161–178). Free Association Books: London.
12.
DillenbourgP. (1999). Introduction: What do you mean by collaborative learning? In DillenbourgP. (Ed.), Collaborative learning: Cognitive and computational approaches (pp. 1–19). Oxford: Pergamon.
13.
DillenbourgP.BakerM. (1996, June 12–14). Negotiation spaces in human-computer collaborative learning. In proceedings of the International Conference on Cooperative Systems (COOP '96), Juan-les-Pins, France.
14.
FabosB.YoungM. (1999). Telecommunication in the classrooms: Rhetoric versus reality. Review of Educational Research, 69(3), 217–259.
15.
FischerF.BruhnC.GräselC.MandlH. (2002). Fostering collaborative knowledge construction with visualization tools. Learning and Instruction, 12(2), 213–232.
16.
GudzialM.CarrollK. (2002, January 7–11). Exploring the lack of dialogue in computer-supported collaborative learning. In StahlG. (Ed.), Computer support for collaborative learning: Foundations for a CSCL community (pp. 418–424). Proceedings of the Conference on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning 2002, Boulder, Colorado, USA.
17.
GuzdialM.TurnsJ. (2000). Effective discussion through a computer-mediated anchored forum. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(4), 437–469.
18.
HäkkinenP.JärveläS.BymanA. (2001, March 22–24). Sharing and making perspectives in Web-based conferencing. In DillenbourgP.EurelingsA.HakkarainenK. (Eds.), European perspectives on computer-supported collaborative learning (pp. 285–291). Proceedings of the First European Conference on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, Maastricht, Netherlands.
19.
HaraN.BonkC. J.AngeliC. (2000). Content analysis of online discussion in an applied educational psychology course. Instructional Science, 28, 115–152.
20.
JärveläS.HakkinenP. (2002). Web-based cases in teaching and learning—The quality of discussion and a stage of perspective taking in asynchronous communication. Interactive Learning Environments, 10(1), 1–22.
21.
JeongH.ChiM. (1997, December 10–14). Construction of shared knowledge during collaborative learning. Paper presented at the CSCL-conference, Toronto, Canada.
22.
KingA. (1999). Discourse patterns for mediating peer learning. In O'DonnellA.KingA. (Eds.), Cognitive perspectives on peer learning (pp. 87–115). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
23.
KoschmannT., (Ed.) (1996). CSCL: Theory and practice of an emerging paradigm. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
24.
KraussR.FussellS. (1991). Constructing shared communicative environments. In ResnickL.LevineJ.TeasleyS. (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 172–200). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
25.
LallyV.de LaatM. (2002, January 7–11). Cracking the code: Learning to collaborate and collaborating to learn in a networked environment. In StahlG. (Ed.), Computer support for collaborative learning: Foundations for a CSCL community (pp. 160–168). Proceedings of the Conference on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning 2002, Boulder, Colorado, USA.
26.
LipponenL.RahikainenM.LallimoJ.HakkarainenK. (2001, March 22–24). Analyzing patterns of participation and discourse in elementary students' online science discussion. In DillenbourgP.EurelingsA.HakkarainenK. (Eds.), European perspectives on computer-supported collaborative learning (pp. 421–428). Proceedings of the First European Conference on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, Maastricht, Netherlands.
27.
LittletonK.FaulknerD.MiellD.JoinerR.HäkkinenP. (2000). Introduction. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 15(4), 371–374.
28.
LittletonK.HäkkinenP. (1999). Learning together: Understanding the processes of computer-based collaborative learning. In DillenbourgP. (Ed.), Collaborative learning: Cognitive and computational approaches (pp. 20–31). Oxford: Pergamon.
29.
MarttunenM.LaurinenL. (2000, August 30-September 2). Quality of E-mail argumentation in higher education. Paper presented at the International Conference “Innovation in Higher Education,” Helsinki, Finland.
30.
MasonL. (1998). Sharing cognition to construct scientific knowledge at school: The role of oral and written discourse. Instructional Science, 26, 359–389.
31.
MercerN. (1996). The quality of talk in children's collaborative activity in classroom. Learning and Instruction, 6(4), 359–377.
32.
MäkitaloK.SaloP.HäkkinenP.JärveläS. (2001, March 22–24). Analysing the mechanism of common ground in collaborative Web-based interaction. In DillenbourgP.EurelingsA.HakkarainenK. (Eds.), European perspectives on computer-supported collaborative learning (pp. 445–453). Proceedings of the First European Conference on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, Maastricht, Netherlands.
33.
MäkitaloK.HäkkinenP.LeinonenP.JärveläS. (2002). Mechanisms of common ground in case-based Web-discussions in teacher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 5(3), 247–265.
34.
Rasku-PuttonenH.EteläpeltoA.HäkkinenP.ArvajaM. (2002). Teacher's instructional scaffolding in an innovative ICT-based history-learning environment. Teacher Development, 6(2), 269–287.
35.
RoschelleJ.PeaR. (1999). Trajectories from today's WWW to a powerful educational infrastructure. Educational Researcher, 28(5), 22–25.
36.
RoschelleJ.TeasleyS. (1995). The construction of shared knowledge in collaborative problem solving. In O'MalleyC. (Ed.), Computer supported collaborative learning (pp. 69–97). NATO ASO Series F: Computer and System Sciences, Vol. 128. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
37.
RovaiA. (2000). Building and sustaining community in asynchronous learning networks. The Internet and Higher Education, 3(4), 285–297.
38.
SaloP.JärveläS. (2001, March 22–24). What is the role of an individual student in a process of networked collaboration? Poster presented at the First European Conference on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, Maastricht, Netherlands.
39.
SchoberM. (1998). Different kinds of conversational perspective-taking. In FussellS.KreutzR. (Eds.), Social and cognitive approaches to interpersonal communication (pp. 145–173). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
40.
Van BoxtelC.Van der LindenJ.KanselaarG. (2000). Collaborative learning tasks and the elaboration of conceptual knowledge. Learning and Instruction, 10(4), 311–330.
41.
WegerifR.MercerN.DawesL. (1999). From social interaction to individual reasoning: An empirical investigation of a possible sociocultural model of cognitive development. Learning and Instruction, 9(6), 493–526.
