Team regulation correlates positively with learning results only in the CHT condition¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3 · i3 large
Currency · newest study 2012 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i3 In the CHT condition, team regulation correlated positively with learning results (r=.68, p<.01); correlations in Control and RIDE conditions were not significant. → Saab 2012

Evidence¶

Saab 2012¶

Saab, N., van Joolingen, W., & van Hout-Wolters, B. (2012). Support of the collaborative inquiry learning process: influence of support on task and team regulation. Metacognition and Learning, 7, 7-23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-011-9068-6

q3 · i3 · causal · r2

Pearson product-moment correlations between regulation frequencies and SWLEP computed per condition (Table 7). Only the CHT condition's team regulation correlation was significant (r = .68); task regulation correlations were −.28, −.20, and .32, none significant.

"There was a positive correlation between Team regulation and the learning results in the CHT condition ( r=.68, p<.01)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Provided support does not influence task regulation between conditions — related
• RIDE communication instruction and RIDE plus CHT both increase team regulation relative to no support — related
• In collaborative inquiry learning, dyads use more team regulation than task regulation in all support conditions — related
• Support conditions did not differ from control in learning scores within the environment — related
• Instruction combining communication rules (RIDE) and a hypothesis tool (CHT) increases team regulation in computer-supported collaborative inquiry, and team regulation relates to learning outcomes only in that combined condition — reports the opposite
• Team regulation affected group learning results in one condition (Saab et al.) — a broader claim this one bears on