Design guidelines to foster cooperation in digital environments

References

• Baker, M. (2002). Forms of cooperation in dyadic problem-solving. Revue d’intelligence artificielle, 16, 587–620.
   Google Scholar
• Baker, M., Quignard, M., Lund, K., & Séjourné, A. (2003, June). Computer-supported collaborative learning in the space of debate. Paper presented at the International Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning, Bergen, Norway.
   Google Scholar
• Bergstrom, T., & Karahalios, K. (2007, January). Conversation clock: Visualizing audio patterns in co-located groups. Paper presented at the Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii, HI.
   Google Scholar
• Bershon, B. L. (1992). Cooperative problem solving: A link to inner speech. In R. Hertz- Lazarowitz & N. Miller (Eds.), Interaction in cooperative learning (pp. 36–48). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Borges, M., & Pino, J. (1999, December). Awareness mechanisms for coordination in asynchronous CSCW. Paper presented at 9th Workshop on Information Technologies and Systems, Charlotte, NC.
   Google Scholar
• Chi, M. T. H. (2009). Active-constructive-interactive: A conceptual framework for differentiating learning activities. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1, 73–105.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collazos, C. A., Guerrero, L. A., Pino, J., & Ochoa, S. (2003a). Collaborative scenarios to promote positive interdependence among group members. In J. Favela & D. Decouchant (Eds.), LNCS 2806 (pp. 356–370). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Collazos, C. A., Guerrero, L. A., Pino, J., & Ochoa, S. (2003b). Improving the use of strategies in computer-supported collaborative processes. In J. Favela & D. Decouchant (Eds.), LNCS 2806 (pp. 247–260). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Collazos, C. A., Guerrero, L. A., & Pino, J. (2004). Computational design principles to support the monitoring of collaborative learning processes. International Journal on Advanced Technology for Learning, 1, 174–180.
   Google Scholar
• Collazos, C. A., Guerrero, L. A., Pino, J., & Ochoa, S. (2004). A method for evaluating computer-supported collaborative learning processes. International Journal of Computer Applications in Technology, 19, 151–161.
   Google Scholar
• Collazos, C. A., Guerrero, L. A., Pino, J., Renzi, S., Klobas, J., Ortega, M., et al. (2007). Evaluating collaborative learning processes using system-based measurement. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 10, 257–274.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collazos, C. A., Guerrero, L. A., Redondo, M. A., & Bravo, C. (2007). Visualizing shared-knowledge awareness in collaborative learning processes. In G. Alonson, P. Dadam, & M. Rosemann (Eds.), LNCS 4714 (pp. 56–71). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Daradoumis, T., Martínez-Monés, A., & Xhafa, F. (2006). A layered framework for evaluating online collaborative learning interactions. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 64, 622–635.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deed, C., & Edwards, A. (2011). Unrestricted student blogging: Implications for active learning in a virtual text-based environment. Active Learning in Higher Education, 12, 11–21.
   Google Scholar
• Delgado, A., Olguin, C., & Ricarte, I. (2001, September). Monitoring learners’ activities in a collaborative environment. Paper presented at the 7th International Workshop on Groupware, Piscataway, NJ.
   Google Scholar
• Demetriadis, S., Dimitriadis, Y., & Fischer, F. (2009, June). Introduction to the SFC-2009. Paper presented at the Scripted vs. Free Collaboration: Alternatives and Paths for Adaptable and Flexible CS Scripted Collaboration, Rhodes, Greece.
   Google Scholar
• Dillenbourg, P. (2002). Over-scripting CSCL: The risks of blending collaborative learning with instructional design. In P. A. Kirschner (Ed.), Three worlds of CSCL. Can we support CSCL? (pp. 61–91). Heerlen: Open Univesiteit Nederland.
   Google Scholar
• Dillenbourg, P., Baker, M., Blake, A., & O’Malley, C. (1995). The evolution of research on collaborative learning. In P. Reimann & H. Spada (Eds.), Learning in humans and machines: Towards an interdisciplinary learning science (pp. 189–211). Oxford: Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• Dillenbourg, P., & Hong, F. (2008). The mechanics of macro scripts. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3, 5–23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dillenbourg, P., & Jermann, P. (2007). Designing integrative scripts. In F. Fischer, I. Kollar., H. Mandl, & J. M. Haake (Eds.), Scripting computer-supported collaborative learning. Cognitive, computational and educational perspectives (pp. 275–301). New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• DiMicco, J. M., Pandolfo, A., & Bender, W. (2004, November). Influencing group participation with a shared display. Paper presented at the ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Collaborative Work, Chicago, IL.
   Google Scholar
• Dix, A., Finlay, J., Abowd, G. D., & Beale, R. (2004). Human–Computer Interaction (3rd ed.). Harlow: Pearson, Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Diziol, D., Walker, E., Rummel, N., & Koedinger, K. R. (2010). Using intelligent tutor technology to implement adaptive support for student collaboration. Educational Psychology Review, 22, 89–102.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Donmez, P., Rosé, C. P., Stegmann, K., Weinberger, A., & Fischer, F. (2005, June). Supporting CSCL with automatic corpus analysis technology. Paper presented at the International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, Taipei, Taiwan.
   Google Scholar
• Dotson, J. (2001). Cooperative learning structures can increase student achievement. Kagan Online Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.kaganonline.com/free_articles/research_and_rationale/increase_achievement.php
   Google Scholar
• Dragon, T., & Woolf, B. P. (2007, July). Understanding and advising students from within an inquiry tutor. Paper presented at the Conference of Artificial Intelligence in Education, Los Angeles, CA.
   Google Scholar
• Duque, R., Bravo, C., & Ortega, M. (2011). A model-based framework to automate the analysis of users’ activity in collaborative systems. Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 34, 1200–1209.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feichtner, S. B., & Davis, E. A. (1984). Why some groups fail: A survey of students’ experiences with learning groups. Journal of Management Education, 9, 58–73.
   Google Scholar
• Fidas, C., Komis, V., Avouris, N. M., & Dimitracopoulou, A. (2002, January). Collaborative problem solving using an open modeling environment. Paper presented at the International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, Boulder, CO.
   Google Scholar
• Fischer, F., Kollar, I., Stegmann, K., & Wecker, C. (2013). Toward a script theory of guidance in computer-supported collaborative learning. Educational Psychologist, 48, 56–66.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gaßner, K., Jansen, M., Harrer, A., Herrmann, K., & Hoppe, H. U. (2003, June). Analysis methods for collaborative models and activities. Paper presented at the International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, Bergen, Norway.
   Google Scholar
• Hewitt, J. (2005). Toward an understanding of how threads die in asynchronous computer conferences. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7, 567–589.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Inaba, A., & Okamoto, T. (1997, August). Negotiation process model for intelligent discussion coordinating system on CSCL environment. Paper presented at the World Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, Kobe, Japan.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, D. W., Johnson, F., & Smith, K. A. (1998). Cooperative learning returns to college. Change, 30, 26–35.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, R. T., & Johnson D. W. (2006). The Cooperative Learning Center at the University of Minnesota. Newsletter 2006. Retrieved from http://www.co-operation.org
   Google Scholar
• Kagan, S. (1990). The structural approach to cooperative learning. Educational Leadership, 47, 12–15.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kagan, S. (1992). Cooperative learning. San Juan Capistrano, CA: Kagan Cooperative Learning.
   Google Scholar
• Kapur, M., & Kinzer, C. K. (2009). Productive failure in CSCL groups. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4, 21–46.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kay, R., & Dyson, E. (2006). Learning to collaborate and collaborating to learn: An experiential approach to teaching collaborative systems. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 1, 36–44.
   Google Scholar
• King, A. (1997). ASK to THINK – TEL WHY: A model of transactive peer tutoring for scaffolding higher-level complex learning. Educational Psychologist, 32, 221–235.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knight, J. (2010). Distinguishing the learning approaches by undergraduates in their use of online resources. Active Learning in Higher Education, 11, 67.
   Google Scholar
• Kollar, I., Fischer, F., & Hesse, F. W. (2006). Computer-supported collaboration scripts – A conceptual analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 18, 159–185.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Liu, C., & Tsai, C. (2008). An analysis of peer interaction patterns as discoursed by on-line small group problem-solving activity. Computers & Education, 50, 627–639.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mattessich, P. W., Murray-Close, M., Monsey, B. R., & Wilder Research Center. (2004). Collaboration: What makes it work (2nd ed.). St. Paul, MN: Publishing Center: Amherst H. Wilder Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Mogus, A. M., Djurdjevic, I., & Nenad, S. (2012). The impact of student activity in a virtual learning environment on their final mark. Active Learning in Higher Education, 13, 177–189.
   Google Scholar
• Nielsen, J., & Molich, R. (1990, April). Heuristic evaluation of user interfaces. Paper presented at the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Seattle, WA.
   Google Scholar
• Olsen, R., & Kagan, S. (1992). About cooperative learning. In C. Kessler (Ed.), Cooperative language learning: A teacher’s resource book (pp. 1–30). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and monitoring activities. Journal of Cognition and Instruction, 8, 117–175.
   Google Scholar
• Palincsar, A. S., & Herrenkohl, L. R. (1999). Designing collaborative contexts: Lessons from three research programs. In A. O’Donnell & A. King (Eds.), Cognitive perspectives on peer learning (pp. 151–177). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6.
   Google Scholar
• Ren, J., Chai, S., & Fang, H. (2009, July). Organizing strategies and relevant system on step discussion in distance CSCL interaction activity. Paper presented at the International Conference on E-Learning, E-Business, Enterprise Information Systems, and E-Government, Las Vegas, NV.
   Google Scholar
• Rockwood, H. S., III (1995). Cooperative and collaborative learning. The National Teaching & Learning Forum, 5, 8–10.
   Google Scholar
• Slavin, R. (1991). Student team learning: A practical guide to cooperative learning. Washington, DC: National Education Association.
   Google Scholar
• Soller, A. (2001). Supporting social interaction in an intelligent collaborative learning system. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 12, 40–62.
   Google Scholar
• Soller, A., Martinez-Monez, A., Jermann, P., & Muehlenbrock, M. (2005). From mirroring to guiding: A review of state of the art technology for supporting collaborative learning. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 15, 261–290.
   Google Scholar
• Stahl, G. (2010). Global introduction to CSCL. Philadelphia, PA: Gerry Stahl at Lulu.
   Google Scholar
• Suchman, L. (1987). Plans and situated actions: The problem of human–machine communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Toth, P. (2009, July). Cooperative learning by utilization of 2nd generation web technologies. Paper presented at the 1st International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies, Barcelona, Spain.
   Google Scholar
• Webb, N., & Farivar, S. (1994). Promoting helping behavior in cooperative small groups in middle school mathematics. American Educational Research Journal, 31, 369–395.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weinberger, A., Ertl., B., Fischer, F., & Mandl, H. (2004). Cooperation scripts for learning via web-based discussion boards and videoconferencing. Paper presented at the first joint meeting of the EARLI SIGs Instructional Design and Learning and Instruction with Computers, Tubingen, Germany.
   Google Scholar
• Weinberger, A., Stegmann, K., & Fischer, F. (2010). Learning to argue online: Scripted groups surpass individuals (unscripted groups do not). Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 506–515.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wenger, E. (2009). A social theory of learning. In K. Illeris (Ed.), Contemporary theories of learning: Learning theorists... in their own words (pp. 209–218). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Woolf, B. P. (2010). A roadmap for education technology. Part of the Global Resources for Online Education Workshop. Retrieved from http://www.coe.uga.edu/itt/files/2010/12/educ-tech-roadmap-nsf.pdf
   Google Scholar