Verbal-utterance-based methods leave collaboration in groups with asymmetrical interactions, such as young children, unexamined¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r2 · q1
Currency · newest study 2021 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q1 i? Restricting collaboration analysis to verbal utterances implies either that no CL learning can occur without verbal utterances or that existing methods are insufficient, leaving groups such as small children who cannot fully articulate arguments but can nevertheless collaborate understudied. → Juliene Madureira Ferreira 2021

Evidence¶

Juliene Madureira Ferreira 2021¶

Juliene Madureira Ferreira. (2021). What If We Look at the Body? An Embodied Perspective of Collaborative Learning. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09607-8

q1 · i? · review · r2

This is the review's theoretical argument, not a tested result: it reasons that cognitivist, utterance-based methods cannot elucidate all aspects of collaboration and cites work on young children's collaborative capability (Fantasia et al., 2014; Ferreira, submitted).

"Such limitations open gaps with regard to collaboration within groups that have asymmetrical interactions such as groups of small children, who sometimes cannot sufficiently articulate their thinking as arguments but are nevertheless capable of collaboration"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Interactive engagement requires both partners' utterances to be primarily constructive and a sufficient degree of turn taking — related
• ENA reveals different utterance co-occurrence structures by age: older adults show a stronger active–interactive connection while younger adults' constructive–interactive connection is not statistically confirmed — related
• T-pattern analysis detected temporal-structure differences between children with specific language disorder and typically developing children that frequency and sequential lag analyses did not — related