Finnish upper secondary students’ collaborative processes in learning statistics in a CSCL environment

References

• Smith BL, MacGregor JT. What is collaborative learning? Collaborative learning: a sourcebook for higher education. University Park (PA): National Center on Postsecondary Teaching, Learning, and Assessment (NCPTLA); 1992. p. 1–20.
   Google Scholar
• Dillenbourg P. What do you mean by “collaborative learning”? In: Dillenbourg P, editor. Collaborative learning: cognitive and computational approaches. Amsterdam: Pergamon Press; 1999. p. 1–16.
   Google Scholar
• delMas RC. Statistical literacy, reasoning, and learning [Internet]. 2002. Available from: http://www.amstat.org/publications/jse/v10n3/delmas_intro.html
   Google Scholar
• Hmelo-Silvera CE, Barrows HS. Facilitating collaborative knowledge building. Cognition Instruct. 2008;26(1):48–94.
   Google Scholar
• Soller A. Supporting social interaction in an intelligent collaborative learning system. Int J Artif Intell Educ. 2001;12:40–62.
   Google Scholar
• Garfield J. Teaching statistics using small-group cooperative learning, J Stat Educ. [Internet]. 1993;1(1). Available from: http://www.amstat.org/publications/jse/v1n1/garfield.html
   Google Scholar
• Nussbaum M, Alvarez C, McFarlane A, Gomez F, Claro S, Radovic D. Technology as small group face-to-face collaborative scaffolding. Comput Educ. 2009;52:147–153.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shaughnessy JM. Misconceptions of probability: an experiment with a small-group activity-based model building approach to introductory probability at the college level. Educ Stu Math. 1977;8(3):295–316.
   Google Scholar
• Mudrack PE, Farrell GM. An examination of functional role behavior and its consequences for individuals in group settings. Small Gr Res. 1995;26(4):542–571.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strijbos J-W, Martens RL, Jochems WMG, Broers NJ. The effect of functional roles on group efficiency: using multilevel modeling and content analysis to investigate computer-supported collaboration in small groups. Small Gr Res. 2004;35(2):195–229.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stahl G. Group cognition in computer-assisted collaborative learning. J Comput Assist Lear. 2005;21:79–90.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hare PA. Types of roles in small groups, a bit of history and a current perspective. Small Gr Res. 1994;25(3):433–448.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nolan D, Lang DT. Dynamic, interactive documents for teaching statistical practice. Int Stat Rev. 2007;75(3):295–321.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mills JD. Using computer simulation methods to teach statistics: a review of the literature. J Stat Educ. [Internet]. 2002;10(1). Available from: http://www.amstat.org/publications/ jse/v10n1/mills.html
   Google Scholar
• Mills JD, Raju D. Teaching statistics online: a decade's review of the literature about what works. J Stat Educ. [Internet]. 2011;19(2). Available from: www.amstat.org/publications/jse/v19n2/mills.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Ludvigsen S, Lund A, Rasmussen I, Säljö R. Learning across sites. New tools, infrastructures and practices. Oxford: Routledge; 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Salomon G, Perkins D, Globerson T. Partners in cognition: extending human intelligence with intelligent technologies. Educational Res. 1991;20(4):2–9.
   Google Scholar
• Roschelle J, Teasley S. The construction of shared knowledge in collaborative problem solving. in Computer supported collaborative learning. Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag; 1995. p. 66–97.
   Google Scholar
• Koschmann T. CSCL: theory and practice of an emerging paradigm. Hillsdale (NJ): Erlbaum;1996.
   Google Scholar
• Vygotsky L. Mind in society. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press; 1978.
   Google Scholar
• Stahl G, Koschmann T, Suthers D. Computer-supported collaborative learning: an historical perspective. Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2006. p. 409–426.
   Google Scholar
• Stahl G. Group cognition as a foundation for the new science of learning. New science of learning: cognition, computers and collaboration in education. New York: Springer Science +Business Media; 2010. p. 23–44.
   Google Scholar
• Hurme T-R, Merenluoto K, Järvelä S. Socially shared metacognition of pre-service primary teachers in a computer-supported mathematics course and their feelings of task difficulty: a case study. Educ Res Eval. 2009;15:1–10.
   Google Scholar
• Jävelä S, Hadwin AF. New frontiers: regulating learning in CSCL. J Educ Psychol. 2013;48(1):25–39.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirschner PA, Erkens G. Toward a framework for CSCL research. J Educ Psychol. 2013;48(1):1–8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strijbos J-W, Kirschner PA, Martens RL. What we know about CSCL … and what we do not (but need to) know about CSCL. Computer-supported collaborative learning: what we know about CSCL: and implementing it in higher education. Boston (MA): Kluwer Academic Publishers; 2004. p. 245–259.
   Google Scholar
• Veerman A, Veldhuis-Diermanse E. Collaborative learning through computer-mediated communication in academic education [Internet]. 2001. Available from: http://eculturenet.org/mmi/euro-cscl/Papers/166.doc
   Google Scholar
• Scardamalia M, Bereiter C. Computer support for knowledge-building communities. J Learn Sci. 1994;3(3):265–283.
   Google Scholar
• Chance B. Component of statistical thinking and implications for instruction and assessment [Internet]. 2002. Available from: http://www.amstat.org/publications/jse/v10n3/chance.html
   Google Scholar
• Garfield J. The challenge of developing statistical reasoning [Internet]. 2002. Available from: www.amstat.org/publications/jse/v10n3/garfield.html
   Google Scholar
• Ben-Zvi D, Garfield J. Statistical literacy, reasoning, and thinking: goals, definitions, and challenges. The challenge of developing statistical literacy, reasoning and thinking. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 2004. p. 3–16.
   Google Scholar
• Cobb GW, Moore DS. Mathematics, statistics, and teaching. Amer Math Monthly. 1997;104(9):801–823.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vygotsky LS. The genesis of higher mental functioning. The concept of activity in soviet psychology. Armonk (NY): Sharpe; 1981. p. 144–188.
   Google Scholar
• Piaget J. The equilibrium of cognitive structures: the central problem of intellectual development. Brown T, Thampy KL, translators. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1985.
   Google Scholar
• Wertsch JV. Vygotsky and the social formation of the mind. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press; 1985.
   Google Scholar
• Wittrock MC. Generative processes of comprehension. J Educ Psychol. 1990;24(4):245–376.
   Google Scholar
• Bonk CJ, Cunningham DJ. Searching for learner-centered, constructivist, and sociocultural components of collaborative educational learning tools In: Bonk CJ, King KS, editors. Electronic collaborators: learner-centered technologies for literacy, apprenticeship, and discourse. Hillsdale (NJ): L. Erlbuam Associates; 1998. p. 25–50.
   Google Scholar
• Collins A, Joseph D, Bielaczyc K. Design research: theoretical and methodological issues. J Learn Sci. 2004;13(1):15–42.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Design-Based Research Collective. Design-based research: an emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Res. 2003;32(1):5–8.
   Google Scholar
• Lagemann EC. Harvard Graduate School of Education [Internet]. 2003. Available from: http://www.gse.harvard.edu/news/features/lagemann03202003.html
   Google Scholar
• Bannan-Ritland B. The role of design in research: the integrative learning design framework. Educational Res. 2003;32(1):21–24.
   Google Scholar
• Juuti K, Lavonen J. Design-based research in science education. NorDiNa: Nordic Stud Sci Educ. 2006;2(2)54–63. Available from: https://www.journals.uio.no/index.php/nordina/issue/view/57/showToc
   Google Scholar
• Cobb P, Confrey J, diSessa A, Lehrer R, Schauble L. Design experiments in educational research. Educational Res. 2003;32(1):9–14.
   Google Scholar
• Mor Y. A design approach to research in technology enhanced mathematics education. London: Institute of Education, University of London; 2010. p. 45–49.
   Google Scholar
• Miles M, Huberman M. Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications; 1994.
   Google Scholar
• Powell AB, Francisco JM, Maher CA. An analytical model for studying the development of learners’ mathematical ideas and reasoning using videotape data. Math Behav. 2003;22:405–435.
   Google Scholar
• Kaartinen S, Kumpulainen K. Collaborative inquiry and the construction of explanations in the learning of science. Learn Instr. 2002;12(4):189–212.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strijbos J-W, Martens RL, Prins FJ, Jochems WM. Content analysis: what are they talking about? Comput Educ. 2006;46(1):29–46.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gwet KL. Handbook of inter-rater reliability. The definitive guide to measuring the extent of agreement among raters. 3rd ed. Gaithersburg: Advanced Analytics, LLC; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Stahl G. Rediscovering CSCL. CSCL 2: carrying forward the conversation. Hillsdale (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2002. p. 169–181.
   Google Scholar
• Chi MTH. Quantifying qualitative analyses of verbal data: a practical guide. J Learn Sci. 1997;6(3):271–315.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Derry SJ, Pea RD, Barron B, Engle RA, Erickson F, Goldman R, Hall R, Koshmann T, Lemke JL, Sherin MG, Sherin BL. Conducting video research in the learning sciences: guidance on selection, analysis, technology, and ethics. J Learn Sci. 2010;19:3–53.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van den Bossche P, Gijselaers WH, Segers M, Kirschner PA. Social and cognitive factors driving teamwork in collaborative learning environments: team learning beliefs and behaviors. Small Gr Res. 2006;37(5):490–521.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hmelo-Silver CE. Analyzing collaborative knowledge construction: multiple methods for integrated understanding. Comput Educ. 2003;41(4):397–420.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mayer RE, Moreno R. Animation as an aid to multimedia learning. Educ Psychol Rev. 2002;14(1):87–99.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark J, Paivio A. Dual coding theory and education. Educ Psychol Rev. 1991;3(3):149–210.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lunsford LM, Rowell GH, Goodson-Espy T. Classroom research: assessment of student understanding of sampling distributions of means and the central limit theorem in post-calculus probability and statistics classes, J Stat Educ. [Internet]. 2006;14(3). Available from: http://www.amstat.org/publications/jse/v14n3/lunsford.html
   Google Scholar
• Mun GS. On developing an integrated teaching and learning environment providing a bridge between research findings and teaching practice in statistics education. Chonbuk: Chonbuk National University; 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Arnold P, Pfannkuch M, Wild CJ, Regan M, Budgett S. Enhancing students’ inferential reasoning: from hands-on to movies [Internet]. 2011. Available from: www.amstat.org/publications/jse/v19n2/pfannkuch.pdf
   Google Scholar
• National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston (VA): National Council for Teachers of Mathematics; 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Garfield J, Ben-Zvi D. How students learn statistics revisited: a current review of research on teaching and learning statistics. Int Stat Rev. 2007;75(3):372–396.
   Google Scholar
• Lehtinen E, Hakkarainen K, Lipponen L, Rahikainen M, Muukkonen H. Computer supported collaborative learning: a review [Internet]. 1999. Available from: http://www.comlab.hut.fi/opetus/205/etatehtava1.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Kuopion_kaupunki. Kasvun ja oppimisen palvelualue, Kuopion Lyseon lukion opetussuunnitelma [Internet]. 2013. Available from: http://opspro.peda.net/kuopiolukiot/viewerprint.php3?DB=kuopionlyseo&printmode=full#86
   Google Scholar