Affiliation:
1. Department of Chemistry , Georgia State University , Atlanta , USA
2. Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Spelman College , Atlanta , USA
Abstract
Abstract
Student-centered approaches are critical to improving outcomes in STEM courses. Collaborative learning, in particular, allows students to co-construct understanding of concepts and refine their skills in analyzing and applying information. For collaborative learning to be effective, groups must engage in productive dialogue. The work reported here characterizes the quality of dialogue during group quizzes in a first-semester organic chemistry course. The group quiz sessions were video and audio recorded. The recordings were transcribed and coded using the Interactive, Constructive, Active, Passive (ICAP) framework. The quiz prompts were analyzed using Marzano’s taxonomy. In this study, students within the group demonstrated varying degrees of interactional quality as defined by the ICAP framework. Our data also indicate that the level of constructive and interactive dialogue is highest and most consistent when prompts are at Marzano Level 3 or higher. Marzano Level 3 prompts required students to compare and contrast concepts or extend their understanding of concepts by developing an analogy. Any benefit derived from collaborative learning depends on the quality of dialogue during the group discussion. Implications of these results for research and teaching are offered.
Funder
National Science Foundation
Subject
Education,Chemistry (miscellaneous)
Reference60 articles.
1. Akyol, Z., Garrison, D. R., & Ozden, M. Y. (2009). Online and blended communities of inquiry: Exploring the developmental and perceptional differences. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 10(6), 65–83. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v10i6.765
2. Aleven, V. A., & Koedinger, K. R. (2002). An effective metacognitive strategy: Learning by doing and explaining with a computer‐based cognitive tutor. Cognitive Science, 26(2), 147–179. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog2602_1
3. Arbaugh, J. B., & Benbunan-Finch, R. (2006). An investigation of epistemological and social dimensions of teaching in online learning environments. The Academy of Management Learning and Education, 5(4), 435–447. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2006.23473204
4. Bloom, D. (2009). Collaborative test taking: Benefits for learning and retention. College Teaching, 57(4), 216–220. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567550903218646
5. Chen, J. (2018). Dialogue patterns and peer social relationships during collaborative small-group discussions: A multiple methods approach. The Ohio State University. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=osu1531955704880496
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献