Return to CreateDebate.comcscl • Join this debate community

SISLT CSCL


CSCL's Waterfall RSS

This personal waterfall shows you all of CSCL's arguments, looking across every debate.
CSCL(26) Clarified
1 point

;sjdha uifhausfh aduhf sdfhjklsdh faufh asofha aifo afh a fhio aiofh adofhi sdfh sdiofh soif jaoidhf asif kl

1 point

Similarly, an argument that too many practitioners misuse or do not understand the tools available does not mean that the edifice those tools were designed to build is unnecessary – it means that the tools need to be refined. In their conclusion, Marsick and Volpe state that two components that make the efficacy of CSCL cloudy include the difficulty of transferring and negotiating knowledge – passing on knowledge in a community of practice – and incorporating the impact of distributed working relationships and cultural differences. We submit that these cloudy areas are exactly the areas that an emphasis on effective community building will bring into focus.

1 point

It is argued that collaborative success is not a given in a CSCL environment and is therefore an incidental byproduct of the process, not an integral part. But scholars – from Vygotsky in 1978 through to modern researchers such as Kreijns and Kirschner - reiterate the same point: the key element in CSCL learning is social interaction. (Kreijns, Kirschner, Vermuelen, 2013) That it has not always been done successfully does not negate the fact that it needs to be done successfully.

1 point

Although frustration may occur when collaborating with people they do not know well or when other group member do not engage in the activity, one of the goal of collaborative learning is to foster knowledge and mutual act of working together among group members. Collective knowledge occurs when students learn together or work together in a group. For example, one individual in the group with unique knowledge could explain to the others a strategy or solution, and this explanation could benefit both those who receive it as well as the one who generates it. Also, working cooperatively with peers and valuing cooperation result in greater psychological health than working independently. More specifically, cooperativeness is positively related to emotional maturity, well-adjusted social relations, strong personal identity, ability to cope with adversity, social competencies, basic trust and optimism about people, self-confidence, independence and autonomy, higher self-esteem, and increased perspective taking skills

1 point

Well, we will like to point out that the issues of ‘whether the instructor and student are trained or not’ and ‘whether the right resources were selected or not’ are not specific to collaborative and cooperative learning. These can definitely affect students regardless of whether they learning in a group or individually. On the other hand, I think collaborative can help resolve these issues in the sense that in collaborative learning, collective knowledge occurs when students learn together or work together in a group; they complement one another’s knowledge, so that different members of the group may contribute different components of the solution.

1 point

We agreed with you that free-riding, the sucker-effect, and social loafing, a situation where some group members do not engage optimally in the task because they believe someone else in the group will pick up the slack, may exist in some collaborative learning. In fact, there are some cases where some group members feel reluctant to engage in social interactions during group work, and they often use delay tactics in responding to the group work so that the other group members can get the work done. However, these are not necessarily applicable to most collaborative learning. On the contrary, collaborative and cooperative learning foster social support and increase individual motivation and engagement. For example, students in cooperative groups help each other, encouraging engagement in the learning activity.

1 point

Lack of cooperative learning leads to anxiety and possible negative attitudes towards other group learners and instructors. If learning is not student centered instructions, students’ self-esteem will decrease leading to poor psychological health. Academic excellence is more often personified by valedictorian than by academic teamwork, Johnson, Johnson, Smith (1998). Learners today do not understand the cooperative learning in the social environment in which they are surrounded.

1 point

While collaboration can create individual motivation and engagement, it can just as easily destroy it. For example, one student did not make the needed connections with the others in his group. He is not comfortable enough to speak up and his group members move on without him. He is unengaged and giving up, he will not learn.

1 point

Technology is not enough to improve memory and allow the learning to retain information. It can lead to information overload and in turn decrease the collaboration among learners.

1 point

The second tier in Bloom’s Taxonomy is understand; to comprehend the meaning and interpret instruction, when understanding is reached one is to state the problem in their own words. If working in a group, one is more likely to use the words of their peers, they will not gain full understanding because this was not reached on their own.

1 point

Drawing on prior knowledge is a key to learning new topics. You can draw on your prior on knowledge on your own; there is no need for a group or partner to do this for you. Your knowledge is yours, how you make connections is up to you alone. If drawing on prior knowledge in a group setting and one does not share the common knowledge of the others, that member will already feel behind. This will leave him/her unengaged and frustrated, concluding in lack of learning.

1 point

Lastly, working cooperatively with peers and valuing cooperation result in greater psychological health than working independently. Cooperative attitudes were highly correlated with a wide variety of indices of psychological health. More specifically, cooperativeness is positively related to emotional maturity, well-adjusted social relations, strong personal identity, ability to cope with adversity, social competencies, basic trust and optimism about people, self-confidence, independence and autonomy, higher self-esteem, and increased perspective taking skills.

For these reasons we assert that the construction of an effective social environment to enhance collaborative learning is not just an incidental benefit but an essential part of any successful distance education solution.

1 point

In addition, in line with small group cognition theory, when small groups engage in cooperative problem solving or collaborative knowledge building, there are distinctive processes of interest at the individual, small-group and community levels of analysis, which interact strongly with each other.

Furthermore, collaborative and cooperative learning promote positive relationships and social support in agreement with social judgment theory, which states that social judgments individuals make about each other result in either a process of acceptance, resulting in mutual liking and respect, or a process of rejection, resulting in mutual dislike and lack of respect. Cooperative experiences promoted greater task-oriented and personal social support than learning alone.

1 point

Thirdly, collaboration can also increase memory and problem-solving resources through each individual’s contribution to the recall of the relevant problem features and possible strategies. This is in line with both the cognitive load model and the ZPF model. Consequently, the group has more cognitive resources to spend thinking through possible solutions and correcting errors.

Also, collaborative learning can increase individual motivation and engagement. For example, students in cooperative groups help each other, encouraging engagement in the learning activity. The act of establishing what information is shared by all collaborators contributes to the construction of common ground, while the exchange of multiple perspectives of shared information provides for the opportunity to reexamine and reevaluate stored perceptions and acquire points of view that they might not have considered if working alone.

1 point

Secondly, collective knowledge occurs when students learn together or work together in a group; they complement one another’s knowledge, so that different members of the group may contribute different components of the solution. For example, one individual in the group with unique knowledge could explain to the others a strategy or solution, and this explanation could benefit both those who receive it as well as the one who generates it. And since explaining or demonstrating a task or skill is in a different cognitive domain within Bloom’s Taxonomy than information recall there are benefits to all members of the group – including the original knowledge provider.

1 point

Although CSCL is fundamentally different from other domains of study in the learning sciences, it takes collaborative and cooperative learning, that is, learning and interactions that take place among students when they work together in a small group that promote social learning. Therefore, we are of the position that learning in collaboration is better than learning alone and that it broadly involves active engagement and interaction among group members to achieve a common goal. Our arguments are supported by the following points.

First, group members can use their collective knowledge about a problem-solving task or domain to cue each other’s prior knowledge when trying to think of ideas, strategies, and solutions. Although, this depends on collaborators having some shared (i.e., common) knowledge to increase the likelihood of retrieving the most relevant knowledge for the problem or task.

1 point

Our last argument supports the points presented in argument two. When an instructor develops a course with the thought of implementing CSCL and does not fully understood the requirement need for success, learners will not incidental or magically collaborate an assignment. Collaboration will not take place and the take-away of knowledge by the learner will not happen. Learning and collaboration in this type of atmosphere will be taken for granted. A study regarding learning systems conducted by Marsick and Volpe (1999) concluded that informal incidental learner through computer supported activities is haphazard and influenced by chance.

1 point

Our fourth argument is based on collaboration not being a given of CSCL but instead a hoped-for byproduct. Collaboration is an incidental byproduct at best in building new knowledge, not a substantial asset. Learning is perceived as an active, not passive process where knowledge is constructed not merely acquired. Each learner has a different interpretation of the learning and knowledge gaining process based on past experience and cultural differences. CSCL is not merely the belief that a course can be offered through eLearning and presented to learners without a great deal of continuous instructor involvement. It is quite often a false mindset to develop an eLearning course without the 3 C’s; consideration, constant and consistent involvement from both learners and instructors. Without the 3 C’s, continued involvement and collaboration among learners towards gaining knowledge is not going to happen.

1 point

Thirdly, students in collaborative learning activities can feel a high level of frustration which causes negative effects. It can be frustrating if the student is not engaged in the activity. Frustration can also occur when collaborating with people they do not know well. This introduces negative emotions and that results in a bigger challenge when trying to motivate the student affecting the students’ learning experience. This may cause the student to abandon their studies and give up on the class.

1 point

Secondly, lack of training to instructors and students. Even with the best CSCL resource available, if the instructor/ student are not trained their lessons/ performance will suffer. Another technological issue is selecting the right resources. With all the CSCL resources out there how does one simply pick out the correct tools for their assignment? Some learning topics will require more resources than others; some learning topics will require different resources than others. If the instructor/ student are not comfortable with the resources their outcome will lack understanding and comfort.

1 point

While CSCL may lead you to believe it is right for everyone, it should not be an approach for every learning situation. CSCL has a number of limitations for both the instructor and student.

Our first argument will be directed at the students. Students find it hard to engage in spur-of-the-moment written communication, which makes social collaboration more challenging. Social loafing, free-riding, and the sucker-effect are other social factors that impact the collaboration performance. Such negative behaviors happen easily with technology. Technology adds a pressure to students participate in group discussion within a time frame. This makes the students without much technology experiences feel behind, and also may create a since of competition among students. This creates nervousness and tension which negatively impacts the students’ experience.



Results Per Page: [12] [24] [48] [96]