In computer-mediated problem solving, students may attribute their problems to the technology rather than to their own work, complicating how they frame the problem context¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · qualitative r? · q1
Currency · newest study 2008 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q1 i? Students working in a CSCL environment may attribute their problems to the technology rather than to their own work, and must frame the problem context while guessing a teacher expectation modified by the opaque computer-supported context. → Gerry Stahl 2008

Evidence¶

Gerry Stahl 2008¶

Gerry Stahl. (2008). Yes we can! Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-008-9055-3

q1 · i? · qualitative · r?

A case study in which students collaborated, allowing researchers to observe their quandaries, while non-collaboration-support software mediated the task. Computer responses to partially correct answers are "likely to be inscrutable" because the programming is opaque, so students attribute difficulties to the technology.

"In an insightful case study, Annika Lantz-Andersson shows how students working in a CSCL environment may attribute their problems to the technology rather than to their own work."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Problem Solving — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• Design features of the CSCL environment — procedural-only educational inscriptions on the website and the storyline of the 3D model — pulled interactions toward procedural problem solving — related
• In a CSCL biology problem-solving session, procedural problem solving tended to dominate students' interactions, with conceptual knowledge construction present only where strictly necessary — related
• Moderation of synchronous computer-mediated interaction differs from face-to-face or asynchronous moderation — related
• Teacher support with real-time labs requires adaptive expert input that closes cognitive, social, and design gaps — related