Lessons Learned from Conducting Collaborative Immersive Learning


Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Lessons Learned from Conducting Collaborative Immersive Learning file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Lessons Learned from Conducting Collaborative Immersive Learning book. Happy reading Lessons Learned from Conducting Collaborative Immersive Learning Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Lessons Learned from Conducting Collaborative Immersive Learning at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Lessons Learned from Conducting Collaborative Immersive Learning Pocket Guide.
Posts navigation

After two correct constructions, players are instructed, via text in the headset, to build multi-stage rockets with very specific sequences of colors. This is an engaging task, but it also serves as a form of stealth assessment Shute, Now a teacher or spectator can observe whether the student really understands how strontium and copper need to be sequenced to make a red then a blue explosion. The new VR principles are grouped first as general guidelines and second as those pertaining to gesture and hand controls. They are listed in the order that they are often performed in. That is, a design and development team starts with a paper version of the interface.

It is necessary though to iterate on a module several times before the module is ready for release. In an effort to keep the number of guidelines tractable, the article closes with the Necessary Nine. An important point to drive home for designers of education in VR is to remember that presence is immediate and for the learners to internally adjust to that feeling, it can take time.

VR for entertainment can purposefully overwhelm, but the goal of education is for learners to leave the space with new concepts embedded in their ever-changing knowledge structures the definition of learning. Some of your learners will also come to the task with low spatial abilities, and those students learn differently in 3D space Jang et al. This is why the first start screen should always be somewhat sparse with a user-controlled start button. They can start when they feel acclimated. Declutter the user interface UI as much as possible, especially in the early minutes of the game. Not everyone knows to look around.

Users are now in a sphere and sometimes need to be induced to turn their heads… but only so far. Do not place important UI components or actionable content too far from each other. Be gentle with users' proprioceptive systems where the body is in space. If the content includes varying levels of difficulty, allow the user to choose the level at the start menu. This also gives a sense of agency. The multi-chambered cylinders are not available in the interface until users show mastery of the simpler content.

Johnson-Glenberg et al. As described in the electric field lesson instructing in Coulomb's Law, each component or variable in the equation is revealed one component at a time. Users explore and master each component in successive mini-lessons Johnson-Glenberg and Megowan-Romanowicz, Playtesting is a crucial part of the design process. Write down all comments made while in the game. Especially note where users seem perplexed, those are usually the breakpoints.

Working with teachers will also ensure that your content is properly contextualized Dalgarno and Lee, , that it has relevance to and is generalizable to the real world once users are out of the headset. You can guide using constructs like pacing, signposting, blinking objects, etc. Prolonged text decoding in VR headsets causes a special sort of strain on the eyes, perhaps due to the eyes' vergence-accomodation conflict, but see Hoffman et al. In our VR game on evolution we do not make players read lengthy paragraphs on how butterflies emerge during chrysalis, instead a short cut-scene animation of butterflies emerging from cocoons is displayed.

In our recent evolution game, the player must deduce which butterflies are poisonous, just like a natural predator must. In the first level, the first few butterflies on screen are poisonous. Eating them is erroneous and depletes the learner's health score, but there is no other way to discern toxic from non-toxic without feedback on both types.

Thus, some false alarms must be made. Later in the game, errors are weighted heavier. See recent learning from errors literature in psychology Metcalfe, This is different from co-designing with teachers. Playtesting with developers does not count. Our brains learn to reinterpret visual anomalies that previously induced discomfort, and user movements become more stable and efficient over time Oculus, Developers spend many hours in VR and they physiologically respond differently than your end-users will. Feedback and adjustments must be integrated into the learner's ongoing mental model, that process takes time.

Higher level learning cognitive change is not facilitated by twitch. Reflection allows the mental model to cohere. Should the user stay in the headset or not? How taboo is it to break immersion? Should short quizzes be embedded to induce a retest effect Karpicke and Roediger, ? Dyads could ask each other questions? At this stage, it is advised that reflection should be incorporated, but we need more research on optimal practices within the headset.

Try to include workarounds to make the experience more social and collaborative, either with a preprogrammed non-player character NPC , having a not-in-headset partner interact via the 2D computer screen, or by designing sequential tasks that require back-and-forth in an asynchronous manner. A classroom collaboration and cooperation classic is Johnson and Johnson Note: prediction is a metacognitive, well-researched comprehension strategy Palinscar and Brown, For example, the action to start a gear train spinning should be moving something in a circle, not pushing a toggle up or down.

See section entitled Embodiment for multiple citations. Agency has positive emotional affects associated with learning. With the use of VR hand controls, the ability to manipulate content and interactively navigate appears to also attenuate effects of motion sickness Stanney and Hash, For example, prompt the learner to demonstrate negative acceleration with the swipe of a hand controller.

Does the controller speed up or slow down over time? Can the learner match certain target rates? This is an embodied method to assess comprehension that includes the added benefit of reducing guess rates associated with the traditional text-based multiple choice format. Gesture research on younger children shows they sometimes gesture knowledge before they can verbally state it. Gesture-speech mismatches can reveal a type of readiness to learn Goldin-Meadow, Thus, gestures can also be used as inputs in adaptive learning algorithms.

Adding adaptivity dynamic branching to lessons is more costly, but it is considered one of the best practices in educational technology Kalyuga, This article focuses on the two profound affordances associated with VR for educational purposes: 1 the sensation of presence, and 2 the embodied affordances of gesture in a three dimensional learning space.

Über dieses Buch

VR headsets with hand controls allow for creative, kinesthetic manipulation of content, these movements and gestures have been shown to have positive effects on learning. As more sophisticated extrapolation algorithms are being designed, the whole body can be mapped while in a headset. The mapping of full body movement may provide for even more creative gestures and actions for learning in 3D.

We encourage designers to also incorporate seamless assessment within VR lessons, perhaps using the idea of leveling up during learning. This would add adaptivity to the system, and gesture can be one of the variables that feeds the adaptive algorithm. Lessons should get more complex as the learner demonstrates competency on previous material. We also encourage designers to include collaboration, which will become easier when multiple players can be synced in the virtual space. As the technology moves forward, designers should keep principles of best practices in mind, and instructors should consult the principles to help make instructional and purchasing decisions.

The previous section describes 18 principles in more detail. This article ends with the top contenders below. If there are only resources to focus on a subset, then the author recommends the Necessary Nine. The author confirms being the sole contributor of this work and approved it for publication. MJ-G also oversees the website called www. All education games on the site are free to the public as they have primarily been grant funded. Source code is available upon request. The electric field study was funded by NSF grant number In the active condition, participants had full control over movement in the VR space including pitch and roll, movements which were not needed for several of the, admittedly simplistic, tasks.

They found that fewer symptoms of simulator sickness were reported in the mixture condition. Thus, targeted control was best. How do we resolve when the internal state does not match the external state? There are inputs that determine the organism's actions, which again determine the input states. Some is known about what happens physiologically when there is a mismatch between reality e. There is an eagerness to explore what happens in terms of long term cognitive change i.

Future theories should further explore what happens when we place people in fantastic, fully immersive environments that are perceived of as very real. In the upcoming years, our community needs to hone in the most applicable theories and run RCT's to verify best pedagogies for teaching with VR technologies. Indeed, a handful of middle school players in the gears game called Tour de Force would insist on using the largest gear and spin furiously while the bike stayed in one place on the steep hill and the timer ran down Johnson-Glenberg et al. The experimental group suspended in the VR immersion rig answered one out of two key questions significantly better than the untreated control group.

The control group was asked to merely imagine how long it would take to reach a door in a microgravity environment Tamaddon and Stiefs, Clearly, larger studies with more robust assessments are needed. Abrahamson, D. Embodied design: constructing means for constructing meaning.

Alaraj, A. Virtual reality training in neurosurgery: review of current status and future applications. Alibali, M. Embodiment in mathematics teaching and learning: evidence from learners' and teachers' gestures. Bailenson, J. New York, NY: W. Google Scholar. The effect of interactivity on learning physical actions in virtual reality. Media Psychol. Bailey, J. Banakou, D. Virtual embodiment of white people in a black virtual body leads to a sustained reduction in their implicit racial bias. Barsalou, L. Perceptual symbol systems. Brain Sci.

Grounded cognition. Bergstrom, I. The plausibility of a string quartet performance in virtual reality. IEEE Xplore 23, — Bertrand, P. Learning empathy through virtual reality: multiple strategies for training empathy-related abilities using body ownership illusions in embodied virtual reality. Robot AI. Birchfield, D. Gaming Comput. Bjork, R. The science of learning and the learning of science: introducing desirable difficulties. Black, J. Jonassen and S. Blascovitch, J. Bourbon, W. Models and their worlds.

Broaders, S. Making children gesture brings out implicit knowledge and leads to learning. Cline, E. Ready Player One. Congdon, E. Better together: simultaneous presentation of speech and gesture in math instruction supports generalization and retention. Cook, S. The role of gesture in learning: do children use their hands to change their minds.

Craik, F.

Levels of processing: a framework for memory research. Verbal Learn. Verbal Behav. Csikszentmihalyi, M. Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention. Dalgarno, B. What are the learning affordances of 3-D virtual environments? Dede, C. The evolution of constructivist learning environments: immersion in distributed, virtual worlds. Liu, C. Dede, and J. Richards Berlin: Springer Verlag , 5— Dewey, J.

Dixon, S. Duffy, T. Constructivism and the Technology of Instruction: A Conversation. Dunleavy, M. Design principles for augmented reality learning. TechTrends 58, 28— Affordances and limitations of immersive participatory augmented reality simulations for teaching and learning. Engelkamp, J. Motor similarity in subject-perfromed tasks. Fowler, C. Virtual reality and learning: where is the pedagogy? Freina, L. A literature review on immersive virtual reality in education: state of the art and perspectives.

CiteSeer 1, — Gibson, J. The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin. Glenberg, A. Embodiment as a unifying perspective for psychology. Wiley Interdisciplinary Rev. Grounding language in action. From the revolution to embodiment: 25 years of cognitive psychology. Goldin-Meadow, S. When gestures and words speak differently. Learning through gesture. WIREs Cognit. Widening the lens: What the manual modality reveals about learning, language and cognition. Explaining math: gesturing lightens the load. Gutierrez, F. PubMed Abstract Google Scholar.

Hasler, B. Virtual race transformation reverses racial in-group bias. Hauk, O. Somatotopic representation of action words in human motor and premotor cortex. Neuron 41, — Hoffman, D. Vergence—accommodation conflicts hinder visual performance and cause visual fatigue. Hofstein, A. The laboratory in science education: foundations for the twenty-first century.

Hostetter, A. Visible embodiment: gestures as simulated action. IJsselsteijn, W. Is this my hand i see before me? Presence Teleoper. Virtual Environ. Jacobson, J. Digital dome versus desktop display in an educational game: gates of horus. James, K. Only self-generated actions create sensori-motor systems in the developing brain. Jang, S. Direct manipulation is better than passive viewing for learning anatomy in a three-dimensional virtual reality environment. Jeannerod, M. Neural simulation of action: a unifying mechanism for motor cognition.

Neuroimage 14, S—S Johnson, D. Johnson-Glenberg, M. Richards Berlin: Springer Verlag , — Collaborative embodied learning in mixed reality motion-capture environments: two science studies. If the gear fits, spin it! Embodied education and in-game assessments. Alien Health game:: an embodied, motion-capture exer-game teaching nutrition and MyPlate.

Games Health J. Embodied science and mixed reality: how gesture and motion capture affect physics education. Effects of embodied learning and digital platform on the retention of physics content: centripetal force. Kalyuga, S. Managing cognitive load in adaptive ICT-based learning. Karpicke, J. The critical importance of retrieval for learning. Science , — Kirschner, P. Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: an analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching.

Koch, S. Up and down, front and back: movement and meaning in the vertical and sagittal axes. Kontra, C. Physical experience enhances science learning. Laviola, J. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley. Lindgren, R. Emboldened by embodiment: six precepts regarding the future of embodied learning and mixed reality technologies. CrossRef Full Text. Enhancing learning and engagement through embodied interaction within a mixed reality simulation.

Maister, L. Changing bodies changes minds: Owning another body affects social cognition. Trends Cogn. Makransky, G.

PDF Lessons Learned from Conducting Collaborative Immersive Learning

Development and validation of the multimodal presence Scale for virtual reality environments: a confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory approach. Human Behav. Mayer, R. Multimedia Learning, 2nd Edn. McNeill, D. Megowan, M. Merchant, Z. Effectiveness of virtual reality-based instruction on students' learning outcomes in K and higher education: a meta-analysis. Metcalfe, J. Learning from errors. Mikropoulos, T. Educational virtual environments: a ten-year review of empirical research Minocha, S.

Its annual conference is the premier scholarly event focusing on advances in the use of virtual reality VR , augmented reality AR , mixed reality MR , and other extended reality XR technologies to support learners and learning. Leading scholars and professionals operating in formal education settings as well as those representing diverse industry sectors will converge on the historic and picturesque coastal city of San Luis Obispo, California for iLRN , where they will share their research findings, experiences, and insights; network and establish partnerships to envision and shape the future of XR and immersive technologies for learning; and contribute to the emerging scholarly knowledge base on how these technologies can be used to create experiences that educate, engage, and excite learners.

Description Welcome to our mini webinar featuring PrintLab! Educators will be introduced to the resources PrintLab has to offer including a 3D printing curriculum and lessons based around Assistive Technology. MLN September Newsletter. We hope you enjoy the variety of resources we've provided in this issue. More Announcements. Featured Members. Greg Preston Newcastle University. Connect and collaborate year-round.

Annual Report Advertise Community Calendar. Community Guidelines Edtech Careers. Post a Message Join a Community. In addition, among all 48 studies we included in our study, only two studies examined the dyad group size Table 1. It is noteworthy that structured CL scenarios that emphasized designated steps e. In contrast, most of the included studies used LT as their teaching method Table 1. Q reached statistical significance, indicating that the ESs differed significantly among the various categories. The mCSCL studies that were implemented in informal settings had the largest ES, followed by formal settings and multiple settings.

No significant ESs were found for categories of group rewards for individual learning and group rewards for group outcomes. Q did not reach statistical significance. The effects of mCSCL might be moderated by different variables. Previous research has indicated that factors such as group composition, interactions between group members, implementation setting, and intervention duration may influence CSCL effects. The analysis of the effects of those moderating effects provided converging evidence for previous research that the mCSCL effects may vary with different moderating variables, and their corresponding effects sizes may be visualized in Figure 2.

A more detailed discussion of moderating effects follows. Although previous studies have confirmed the effects of CSCL e. This finding suggests that the most essential element of CSCL may be not the delivering devices; instead, the design of CSCL, such as learning scenarios, mechanism of encouraging interaction, and reward method, may be more important for enhancing the effects of CSCL. To illuminate the effects of mCSCL, researchers and practitioners may need to pay more attention to how to exploit the functionalities of mobile devices by matching with the core elements of CSCL.

Our results indicate that mCSCL is beneficial for different learning outcomes. The results are similar to findings in the meta-analyses by Springer et al. Some empirical research might illustrate those effects.

For instance, Valdivia and Nussbaum found that face-to-face cooperative learning assisted by mobile devices personal digital assistants enabled learners to receive timely feedback and express their views, which enhanced interaction among peers. Researchers have also investigated factors that may affect interaction in cooperative learning. For example, White found that giving everyone a connected mobile device enhanced the effects of interaction among group members.

In addition, Klein and Schnackenberg discovered that the effects of interaction may be influenced by affiliation among the group members. High-affiliation groups exhibited more helping and on-task group behaviors conducive to the completion of learning tasks. However, they also exhibited more off-task behaviors that are not linked to learning and might be detrimental to the completion of learning tasks.

It is therefore very important to monitor cooperative learning groups and keep track of how they learn. We found that mCSCL had fewer positive effects on social studies and language arts than on sciences and mathematics, which is similar to findings by Kyndt et al. These authors proposed that learning mathematics and science may need more peer-based interaction and inquiry; therefore, interaction and problem-solving procedures in a small-group setting may produce larger effects in those subjects e. For instance, Uzunboylu et al. During the learning process, students used mobile devices to record their observations, then discussed their findings with their peers.

The study found that the features of mobile devices—real-time feedback and freedom from the limitations of time and place—helped learners collect information in their science classes more efficiently and also helped them find appropriate methods to solve problems, which led to positive cognitive understanding and learning attitudes. Lai and White used software on mobile devices to assist students in cooperative learning activities in geometry, where learners were asked to complete group tasks using cooperation and discussion. The research found that intervention with mobile devices enhanced learning performance by increasing the efficiency of cooperation among group members as they sought to understand the geometry lesson and the questions asked.

In addition, the intervention provided learners with more opportunities to present their views and receive timely feedback. On the other hand, C. Chen, Shih, and Ma use mobile devices to assist in CL activities in social studies. They found that the individual learning groups had better learning achievements than the mCSCL groups. Kyndt et al. Our findings differ somewhat from those of previous research e. However, mCSCL may demonstrate different styles and features because mCSCL group interactions are not limited by distance, and the real-time display of the discussion process, products, and comments in mobile devices may also enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of group members.

Furthermore, groups containing more members may increase the diversity of viewpoints and mutual feedback, which may also satisfy the needs of different group members e. Chen, ; T. Previous studies indicated that heterogeneous groups may have better effects in CL. For example, some research indicated that heterogeneous groups could provide greater degrees of critical thinking, providing and receiving explanations, and perspective taking in discussing materials; it not only helps low-ability students get more learning support but also allows high-ability students to deepen their learning impressions e.

Therefore, although we found that the difference of effects between homogeneous and heterogeneous groups was not obvious in mCSCL, more elaborate experimental designs aimed at investigating group compositions are warranted. This finding was consistent with D. The reason TGT and STAD groups did not exhibit a significant effect may be that both methods emphasized competition by executing tournaments or individual quizzes in the learning activities Kyndt et al.

We also found that in mCSCL, researchers employed more ill-structured scenarios e. This may be due to LT only loosely encouraging whole-group discussion among team members, as well as its lack of a designated learning procedure making the design of learning activities easier D. Previous researchers Lou et al. For instance, Vogel et al. However, we found that when applying mobile devices with CL activities, structured CL did not show any advantages.

There are at least two possible reasons for this finding. The first is that mobile devices compensated for the deficiency of ill-structured scenarios through certain beneficial functionalities, such as real-time sharing and feedback. The other may be that although certain mCSCL studies claimed to have used structured teaching methods e.

For example, both Chen et al. Another possible reason could be that these studies did not formulate clear regulations for the division of labor and procedure for executing the tasks among the team members, which might not only result in inefficient group processes, such as social loafing, but also reduce learning performance.

Based on the second possible reason, more technology-based assistance may be needed to help teachers easily and efficiently build their scripts for task structure e. Slavin , proposed an even more concrete intervention duration for CL: CL needed to last longer than 1 week or even several weeks to achieve beneficial learning effects. Our study provided solid and converging evidence supporting those claims, because mCSCL studies that lasted less than 1 week did not show significant effects. Furthermore, most of the studies with teaching duration less than 1 week belonged to one-shot interventions It was hardly possible for members of a small group to get familiar with team members, tasks, hardware, and software, let alone fulfill their function roles for discussion, feedback, and problem solving, given such a short time frame.

Another interesting finding in our study was that the effects of longer durations decreased when the intervention duration was longer than 1 month, because durations between 1 and 4 weeks demonstrated more prominent effects than those between 1 and 6 months. Moreover, mCSCL studies with durations longer than 6 months did not show significant effects. Cheung and Slavin proposed that the novelty effect may produce better technology-based-learning results in the short term but not necessarily in the long run.

This hypothesis may be one of the reasons why 1 to 6 months of mCSCL did not show better effects than those programs of 2 to 4 weeks. The lower ESs for long-term interventions of more than 6 months may be due to a loss of the sense of novelty in the devices themselves and a loss of interest in the routine scenarios. Monotonous teaching scenarios and learning software may result in the learners not maintaining their motivation to use mobile devices for learning, which then reduces the frequency of using mobile devices in the classrooms and ultimately makes mobile use in teaching superficial Fleischer, For instance, Persky and Pollack divided learners into two groups: The experimental group engaged in more than 6 months of mCSCL, with learners studying through group discussion, whereas the control group was given traditional large-class lectures.

They found that compared with traditional large-class lectures long-term mCSCL may enhance learner efficiency in acquiring information because mobile devices enable rapid access to information, but the experimental group did not significantly outperform the control group in terms of learning achievements. Delgado-Almonte et al. The possible reason might be that both studies employed long-term interventions, but their teaching methods only encouraged group discussions and lacked clear teaching goals and appropriate logistical support in learning activities, which may reduce the interest and participation of learners Fleischer, ; Sandberg et al.

This result could be due to learners having higher motivation for learning in informal settings such as outdoors or museums; in addition, the use of new learning tools induces a novelty effect that boosts the motivation of learners e. Liu et al. For example, in T. Melero et al. They found that an outdoor learning setting created a sense of novelty for learners and helped raise levels of interest and participation; consequently, learning achievements also improved significantly. Our study found that in mCSCL using individual rewards might produce better effects than group rewards.

The research findings of Slavin , , similarly indicated that in a CL environment, group rewards based on the group outcome are the least effective. Slavin , , noted that group rewards based on the group outcome may often result in little incentive for group members to explain concepts to one another and in the workload being distributed unequally among group members e. For instance, Kim et al. A possible explanation could be that mCSCL group members with a higher level of performance might carry most of the workload, and meanwhile group members with a lower level of learning performance could contribute little while exploiting the skills of the high performers and get the same reward, which might result in overall lower quality group interactions and productions.

The present meta-analysis and critical synthesis on mCSCL provide substantial evidence for the overall effect of using mobile devices in CSCL and how those effects vary with moderator variables. Using mobile devices for CL produced an overall positive effect, with a moderate mean ES of 0. Larger groups, such as four or more than four members, produced better effects than smaller groups, such as two or three members, with mCSCL. Homogeneous group composition and heterogeneous group composition demonstrated similar effects with mCSCL.

Structured collaborative scenarios had similar effects to ill-structured collaborative scenarios. Mid-length intervention durations, such as interventions between 1 and 4 weeks or interventions between 1 and 6 months, demonstrated effects superior to short intervention durations lasting less than 1 week or long interventions lasting more than 6 months. The findings above may provide insight into the optimal arrangement of mCSCL activities regarding the precondition e.

Based on these findings, several implications for further research and practice of mCSCL are discussed. Compared with traditional personal computers, mobile devices provide a more personalized learning interface, instant information access, context awareness, and instant messaging. Our review study found that using these features may help increase the application effects of CSCL. For example, personalized interfaces and instant messaging can facilitate the sharing of information, either face-to-face or online, thus increasing interaction among the members of small groups; instant information access through context-awareness techniques can facilitate the gathering and analysis of information and, consequently, help learners engage in inquiry and interaction with the environment.

Furthermore, the portability and interconnectivity of learning devices help integrate formal and informal settings, which makes CL activities in different situations more tightly connected, helping achieve the goal of seamless learning. As one of the platforms and tools for CSCL with the most potential, the functionalities of mobile devices may play an important role for ameliorating the problems and challenges associated with CSCL implementations, such as insufficient information sharing, lack of instant interaction among members, and difficulty integrating learning activities out of classrooms Asabere, ; Laurillard, ; Song, In addition to the functionalities of mobile devices, another key factor that will influence the effectiveness of mCSCL is the mechanism for effective CL, such as intervention duration, group size, teaching method, and reward method.

Efforts should be made to find out the critical leverage points that may optimize the effects of integrating mobile devices with group learning. Regarding the reward method, our research—as well as those of Slavin , , —indicates that when rewards are distributed individually, the overall effect is better than when group rewards are given for group outcomes. This result not only provides insight for designing reward guidance for mCSCL but also shows the importance of finding out the possible balancing point for individual performance—based fairness and group-based accountability in mCSCL.

Furthermore, previous researchers have indicated the benefits of a smaller group size for CSCL e. However, our study revealed that group size deserves additional scrutiny when mCSCL is used, because mCSCL may empower group members to have equal access and opportunity to participate with fewer interaction restrictions caused by group size, time, and location. Therefore, sufficient group members may bring in more diverse input and insights and more opportunities for interaction.

However, more studies are needed to establish the optimal group size for different types of mCSCL. In CSCL, quality group learning processes, such as coaching, sharing, and negotiation, are necessary conditions for quality products, especially for higher level products like problem solving and creation. However, even though product-level variables are essential, the fundamental contribution of group-level variables on a necessarily social intervention should be obvious.

Yet, despite the importance of group learning processes, CSCL studies have focused on product variables Gress et al. The same phenomenon appeared in our present review research: Only 7 Examining the way in which group interaction is investigated, most studies just counted the frequencies of certain interactive behaviors, and almost none of the studies were concerned with the sequence or dynamic patterns of interactions between group members. Important issues, such as the way in which the functionalities of mobile devices e.

Furthermore, even if mCSCL researchers focused on product variables, most of the learning activities were limited to knowledge and skill acquisition, instead of higher level cognitive abilities, such as complex problem solving and knowledge creation, which may be one of the most desirable products for illustrating the power of CSCL.

At least two methods may help empower researchers and practitioners facilitate the mCSCL administration process and product creation. Second, research designs appropriate for gathering diverse processes and product data in mCSCL, such as mixed research methods e.

Furthermore, data analysis methods that may capture the complete picture and dynamics of group interaction, such as the quantitative content analysis e. Despite our findings and implications, this study is subject to several limitations. First, owing to the limited number of empirical mCSCL studies, the quality of experimental research was not used as a criterion for the inclusion or exclusion of research samples.

After the number of mCSCL studies grows, some approaches to examining the quality of experimental studies, such as the Best Evidence Synthesis e. More abundant mCSCL studies may also increase the power of meta-analysis, especially for certain categories of moderators with very limited numbers of studies e. Second, the study samples included in this study covered earlier studies e. Future research may consider using technology type as a moderator when comparing the effects of mCSCL. References marked with an asterisk indicate studies included in the meta-analysis.

National Center for Biotechnology Information , U. Review of Educational Research. Rev Educ Res. Published online Apr Author information Copyright and License information Disclaimer. National Taiwan Normal University. Abstract One of the trends in collaborative learning is using mobile devices for supporting the process and products of collaboration, which has been forming the field of mobile-computer-supported collaborative learning mCSCL. Keywords: collaborative learning, critical synthesis, mCSCL, meta-analysis, mobile device. Open in a separate window. Figure 1. Figure 2.

The specific research questions addressed are as follows: What is the overall effect of mCSCL research on learning performance in terms of learning achievement, learning attitude, and peer interaction? Do mCSCL programs produce different effects for different domain subjects?

OWL Immersive

Do mCSCL effects vary with different group sizes of participants in programs? Will the homogeneous or heterogeneous composition of groups affect mCSCL effects? Do different teaching methods implemented in mCSCL produce different effects? Do different intervention durations of mCSCL produce different effects? Do mCSCL activities implemented in different settings produce different effects? Do mCSCL effects vary with different reward methods? Screening of Experimental Studies The second stage focused on literature related to experimental studies. Coding Framework The study descriptors consisted of the author names, publication year, and title.

Investigating Publication Bias The study adopted two methods to investigate publication bias. Table 1 Categories and proportion of studies for the 48 included articles. Variable Category No. Non-CL CL that did not use computers CSCL that did not use mobile devices 6.

Learning achievement Learning attitude Peer interaction 7. Elementary school Junior high school 3. Senior high school 6. College Teacher 1. Mixed 5. Language arts Social studies 6. Science 9. Mathematics 5. Specific abilities 5.

Featured Members

Health care programs 4. Finance and economics 1. Education 1. Computer and information technology 3. Engineering projects 3. Not mentioned 9. Dyad 2. Triad Tetrad 6. More than four people 7. Mixed Not mentioned Homogeneous 4. Heterogeneous LT TGT 4. Jigsaw 6. STAD 2. Not mentioned 4. Not mentioned 0. Classroom Museum 1. Outdoors 3. Multiple settings 8. Library 1. Not mentioned 1. Group rewards for individual learning 4. Group rewards for group outcomes 4. Individual rewards Table 2 Results for the classic fail-safe N.

Figure 3. Histogram of the effect sizes for the 48 included articles of this meta-analysis. Table 4 Learning-performance ESs of categories and their related moderator variables. Non-CL 31 0. CL that did not use computers 11 0. CSCL that did not use mobile devices 6 0. Learning achievement 39 0. Learning attitude 13 0. Peer interaction 7 0. Elementary school 16 0. Secondary school 9 0. Adult 18 0. Mixed 5 0. Language arts 11 0. Social studies 6 0. Science 9 0. Mathematics 5 0. Specific abilities 5 0. Professional subjects 12 0.

Not mentioned 9 0. Dyad 2 0. Triad 10 0. Tetrad 6 0. More than four people 7 0. Mixed 14 0. Not mentioned 27 0. Homogeneous 4 0. Heterogeneous 17 0. LT 29 0. TGT 4 0. Jigsaw 6 0. STAD 2 0. Not mentioned 4 0. Formal settings classroom, library 36 0. Informal settings museum, outdoors 4 0.

Lessons Learned from Conducting Collaborative Immersive Learning Lessons Learned from Conducting Collaborative Immersive Learning
Lessons Learned from Conducting Collaborative Immersive Learning Lessons Learned from Conducting Collaborative Immersive Learning
Lessons Learned from Conducting Collaborative Immersive Learning Lessons Learned from Conducting Collaborative Immersive Learning
Lessons Learned from Conducting Collaborative Immersive Learning Lessons Learned from Conducting Collaborative Immersive Learning
Lessons Learned from Conducting Collaborative Immersive Learning Lessons Learned from Conducting Collaborative Immersive Learning
Lessons Learned from Conducting Collaborative Immersive Learning Lessons Learned from Conducting Collaborative Immersive Learning

Related Lessons Learned from Conducting Collaborative Immersive Learning



Copyright 2019 - All Right Reserved