4.7 Article

Computer-supported collaborative concept mapping: The effects of different instructional designs on conceptual understanding and knowledge co-construction

期刊

COMPUTERS & EDUCATION
卷 142, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103640

关键词

Concept mapping; Computer-supported collaborative learning; Conceptual understanding; Knowledge co-construction

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Computer-supported collaborative concept mapping (CSCCM) leverages technology and concept mapping to support conceptual understanding, as well as collaborative learning to foster knowledge co-construction. This article investigated the effect of different instructional designs using CSCCM on students' conceptual understanding, and on the type of processes of knowledge co-construction that students engage. Participants (N = 120) were 10th graders enrolled in their physics course, randomly distributed in dyads. They were asked to draw concept maps related to the conservation of energy law, by using CSCCM with different instructional designs (i.e., control, Exp. 1 and Exp. 2). In the control condition, dyads worked collaboratively all the time. In both Exp. 1 and Exp. 2, dyads worked first individually (one week) and then collaboratively (two weeks). However, in Exp. 2, the individual concept map was shared with the peer before collaborating. Conceptual understanding improved significantly for learners in all three experimental conditions, especially in Exp. 2. Statistically significant differences were found in students' knowledge co-construction among the three conditions. Dyads in the control group showed a significantly higher use of quick consensus-building. Dyads in Exp. 1 showed a significantly higher reliance on externalization and elicitation. Dyads in Exp. 2 showed a significantly higher enacting of integration- and conflict-oriented consensus building. Accordingly, an instructional design like Exp. 2 optimizes CSCCM learning outcomes in terms of conceptual understanding and knowledge co-construction.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据