Students reported using the collaboration support mainly for self-regulation of their own contribution rather than for socially shared regulation of the group's participation¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2021 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Across GAT and GAT + Prompt conditions, students' reported use of the support was higher for individual self-regulation than for group-level shared regulation, and the conditions did not differ significantly in either use. → Strauß 2021

Evidence¶

Strauß 2021¶

Strauß, S., & Rummel, N. (2021). Promoting regulation of equal participation in online collaboration by combining a group awareness tool and adaptive prompts. But does it even matter? International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (2021) 16:67–104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-021-09340-y

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Post-questionnaire ratings in the field experiment asked how far students used the GAT or GAT-and-prompts to adapt their own contribution or the group's collaboration; students "reported using the collaboration support rather for self-regulation than for socially shared regulation". No effect size is printed for this contrast.

"Our results showed that students reported using the collaboration support rather for self-regulation than for socially shared regulation"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Students report regulation strategies mainly at the self- and shared-level, with significantly fewer strategies at the co-level — related
• Contributions to socially shared metacognitive regulation were significantly higher in higher performing groups than in lower performing groups (reported finding) — related