면대면 수업과의 관련, 교수자의 관여수준에 따른 온라인 협력학습의 과정과 결과 = The Process and Result of Online Collaborative Learning

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The purpose of this study was to identify the conditions of online collaborative learning for improving teaching-learning effect. For the purpose of this study examined the effect of face-to-face teaching existence and the levels of teacher intervention on learning process and result. In this study face-to-face teaching existence meant the connection with traditional classroom lecture. The levels of teacher intervention was divided into three from level 0 to level 2; learner-control, teacher-facilitator and teacher-control. In the data analysis both quantitative method and qualitative method are used. For learning process participation level, message level, individual-level interaction and group-level interaction were examined. The results related to learning process were as follows: In the participation level, the teacher-facilitator situation was higher than learner-control or teacher-control. For the message level, the group without face-to-face teaching was higher than the group with face-to-face teaching. In case of individual-level interaction, from analyzing individual message content, the social interaction frequency in the group without face-to-face teaching was significantly higher than in the group with face-to-face teaching. And learner-control group`s procedural interaction frequency was significantly higher than teacher-control group`s. In the group level interaction, 4 types of interaction discovered through message mapping. The type of ‘frequency poorness-relationship poorness’ came out in the learner-control group with face-to-face teaching. The type of ‘frequency richness-relationship poorness’ came out in the learner-control group without face-to-face teaching. The type of ‘self-reflection’ was from the teacher-facilitator group with face-to-face teaching and the type of ‘centralization’ from learner-control group without face-to-face teaching. The results related to learning achievement were as follows: The group with face-to-face teaching got better scores in academic achievement test, and teacher-facilitator group had higher academic achievement than learner-control or teacher-control group. These results show the interactions of online collaborative learning process are closely connected with learning result.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 정은정, "컴퓨터 매개 통신을 이용한 협력학습 환경에서 질문생성훈련이 문제해결과정에 미치는 영향" 한국교육공학회 16 (16): 201-222, 2000

2 강이철, "웹 기반 가상토론 환경이 학습자의 관점변화에 미치는 영향:사회과 상조적 의사결정모형 활용" 16 (16): 3-27, 2000

3 Ragan. T. J, "What we have here is a failure to communicate: the criticality of writing in online instruction" 18 : 399-409, 2001

4 Soller, A, "What makes peer interaction effective? Modeling effective communication in an inteligent CSCL"

5 Tinzmann, M. B, "What is the collaborative classroom?"

6 Janassen, J, "Visualization of agreement and discussion processes during computer-supported collaborative learning" 23 : 1105-1125, 2007

7 Thomas, P, "Using a phenomenographic approach in evaluation hypermedia stories" 50 : 513-626, 2008

8 Bonk, C. J., "Time to “connect”: synchronous and asynchronous case-based dialogue among preservice teachers. In Electronic Collaborations" Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers 1998

9 Sherry,L, "The nature and purpose of online discourse: a brief synthesis of current research as related to the WEB project" 6 (6): 19-52, 2000

10 Peterson,P.W, "The debate about online learning: key issues for writing teachers" 18 : 359-370, 2001

11 Greek,C.E, "The cutting edge" 64 (64): 64-69, 2000

12 Bransford, J. D, "The abstraction of linguistic idea" 2 : 331-350, 1971

13 Nussbaum, M, "Technology as small group face-to-face collaborative scaffolding. Computers & Education"

14 Carrell,P.L, "Some causes of text-boundedness and schema interference in ESL reading. In Interactive Approaches to Second Langusge Reading" Cambridge University Press 1988

15 Mason,L, "Sharing cognition to construct scientific knowledge in school context: the role of oral and written discourse" 26 : 359-389, 1998

16 Banks, A. P, "Running shared mental models as a distributed cognitive process" 91 : 513-531, 2000

17 Tiene,D, "Online discussion: A survey of advantages and disadvantages compared to face-to-face discussion" 9 (9): 371-384, 2000

18 Hathorn, L. G, "Online Collaboration: Making it work" 2002

19 Veerman, A. L, "Learning through synchronous electronic discussion" 34 : 269-290, 2000

20 Schrie,S, "Knowledge building in asynchronous discussion groups: going beyond quantitative analysis" 46 : 49-70, 2006

21 Ahern,T.C, "Improving the instructional congruency of a computer-mediated small-group discussion: a case study in design and delivery" 32 (32): 385-399, 2000

22 Kim,C.H, "How computer based instruction can be more effectively used in our instruction" 8 (8): 239-245, 1993

23 Tolmie, A, "Factors influencing the success of computer-mediated communication (CMC) environments in university teaching: a review and case study" 34 : 119-140, 2000

24 McNeil, S. G, "Facilitating interactiion, communication and collaboration in online course" 26 : 699-708, 2000

25 Oliver, R, "Exploring student interaction in collaborative world wide web computer-based learning environments" 7 (7): 263-287, 1998

26 Biggs, J. B, "Evaluating the quality of learning: the SOLO taxonomy, Educational psychology" Academic Press 1982

27 Newman, D. R, "Evaluating the quality of learning in computer-supported co-operative learning" 48 (48): 484-495, 1997

28 Van Drie, J, "Effects of representational guidance on domain specific reasoning in CSCL" 21 : 575-602, 2005

29 Kwok, R. C. W, "Effect of GSS on knowledge acquisition" 34 : 307-315, 1998

30 Strijbos, J. W, "Designing for interaction: Six steps to designing computer-supported group-based learning" 42 : 403-424, 2004

31 Garrison, D. R, "Critical Inquiry in a text-based environment: computer conferencing in higher education" 2 (2): 87-105, 2000

32 Dilla,W, "Computer-mediated communication and structured interaction in transfer pricing negotiation" 6 (6): 149-, 1992

33 Henri,F, "Computer conferencing and content analysis. In Collaborative Learning Through Computer Conferencing" Springer-Verlag 1992

34 Lea,M, "Computer conferencing and assessment: new ways of writing in higher education" 26 (26): 163-188, 2001

35 Arvaja, M, "Combining individual and group-level perspectives for studying collaborative knowledge construction in context" 17 : 448-459, 2007

36 Van Boxtel, C, "Collaborative learning task and the elaboration of conceptual knowledge" 10 : 311-330, 2000

37 Dillenbourg, P, "Collaborative learning and the internet"

38 Kneser, C, "Collaboration on the basis of complementary domain knowledge: observed dialogue structure and their relation to learning success" 11 : 53-83, 2001

39 Azevedo,R, "Beyond intelligent tutoring systems: using computers as METAcognitive tools to enhance learning?" 30 : 31-45, 2002

40 Kumar, V. S, "Assessing process in CSCL: an ontological approach"

41 Macdonald,J, "Assessing online collaborative learning: process and product" 40 : 377-391, 2003

42 Naidu, S., "Analyzing CMC content for what?" 46 : 96-103, 2006