Collaborative Research and Paper Masters

The use of the Internet for online learning is rapidly expanding. The characteristics of the Internet that make it well suited for use in a collaborative approach to learning are nearly infinate. One of the leading ways of assisting students on the Internet is by working with them in research and writing. This style of learning is called collaborative learning. Johnson and Johnson (1998) defined cooperative learning, the theory upon which it is based, and how it can be used. The concepts describing social interdependence, behavioral, and cognitive-developmental theories all contribute to the practice of cooperative learning. The way in which social interdependence is structured dictates how individuals interact, which in turn determines outcomes. The interdependence between members of a group defines the essence of the group and interdependence can be nonexistent (individualistic), negative (competition), or positive (cooperation).

Cognitive-developmental theory states that cooperation is an essential prerequisite for cognitive growth. Both Piaget and Vygotsky held that cognitive development and intellectual growth stem from cooperative learning arrangements with peers. Behavioral learning theory posits that students will work for reward, but will not if the task yields either punishment or no reward. These three theories use different assumptions about cooperative efforts, but are basically in agreement that cooperative learning promotes higher achievement than learning that has as its basis competition and individual effort. The successful use of cooperative learning requires five key elements. (1) There is an understanding shared by all members of the group that either everyone, or no one, succeeds. (2) Individual performances are assessed to ensure individual accountability. (3) Students work to achieve mutual success using verbal discussion and explanation, knowledge sharing, and comparing present to past learning. (4) Students are taught appropriate social skills in leadership, trust-building, decision-making, communication, and conflict management. (5) The students identify how the processes used by the members maximize learning for everyone involved.

Palincsar (1998) explored the social constructivist perspectives on learning and teaching. The postmodern constructivist perspective is that understanding and learning are inherently social; social interaction engenders greater levels of learning and reasoning. Several explanatory theories attempt to explain why social interaction has this result. According to Piaget, social interaction creates cognitive conflict, which in turn generates intellectual development. The learner is led in new directions by the conflict created between understanding and experiences. When all the participants are engaged in problem solving versus observing, and if the partners’ cognitive levels are comparable, children working with peers exhibit greater cognitive growth than those working alone. Verbal interaction is seen as the key to cognitive change.

Harland (2003) and his university colleagues developed a problem in zoology based on a curriculum known as problem-based learning (PBL), which utilizes action research. PBL involves presenting a collaborative group with a challenge or problem as if it were a genuine professional situation. The investigators applied Vygotsky’s approach, which holds that learning and development are different, that learning leads development and also creates what he called a zone of proximal development (ZPD). Vygotsky’s ZPD theory was integrated into the PBL curriculum. ZPD is the difference between what one can do through problem solving with adult guidance or collaboration with more capable peers, and without it. The beginning point for instruction is the current skills and knowledge of the learner. Existing knowledge is assumed, and it is applied to problem solving, which yields new knowledge. Students construct their own meaning from interactions between current learning experiences and prior knowledge. When a PBL group takes on a problem, the collective knowledge possessed by the group about the problem is pooled, and by defining what the group needs to find out, it sets its own learning objectives. Vygotsky suggested that the best environment for learning utilizes “whole and authentic activities.” The investigators found that the introduction of ZPD theory into the PBL curriculum enhanced the research, as the groups worked within their own zones.

This social constructivist perspective is exerting an influence on the educational reform efforts that encourage students to take a more active role in their learning by discussing disagreements, explaining their ideas, and solving complicated problems cooperatively (Palincsar, 1998).
Lundberg (2003) researched two questions pertaining the role of peer learning, first whether non-traditional students (defined as part-time, commuting, working more than 20 hours a week) participated in peer learning less than traditional students, and second, whether student success in understanding science can be predicted using a peer learning approach. Discussing science with and teaching it to peers was the strongest predictor for understanding the material. The finding held even when nontraditional students are less frequently engaged in peer interactions. Using the College Student Experiences Questionnaire (CSEQ), Lundberg found that for both traditional and non-traditional students, the strongest predictor of understanding science was teaching it to peers. More frequent participation in explanations of procedures, theories and use of equipment resulted in a better grasp of science. This variable was more significant than research with faculty, quality of relationships with faculty, and homework. The second strongest predictor of understanding also applied to both groups of students, and was the discussion of science theories.

One of the drawbacks to collaborative learning occurs when a member engages in social loafing, allowing the rest of the group to do the work. Carlsmith and Cooper (2002) designed a collaborative learning group project incorporating the benefits of collaborative learning while minimizing social loafing. The project, to change the attitudes and behavior of a target population, was designed so that each individual took responsibility for a different aspect. Peer evaluation was avoided so that competition was discouraged. The project goals and the steps necessary to achieve them were delineated. Each group was made up of students with different areas of expertise. During the first part of the course, students studied texts about persuasion, and for the remainder, worked in groups. Using measures of student satisfaction, the collaborative learning project was evaluated for effectiveness compared to lecture-and textbook-based courses. Findings revealed that students learned more from participating in the collaborative learning project than by a traditional approach. They also worked more cooperatively and harder in their groups.
In industry, software developers spend half their time collaborating with others, but while earning their degrees, programmers work in isolation. A form of programmer collaboration for students, called pair programming, has recently become popular. Two programmers work together at the same computer on the same design, code, algorithm, or test. This programming relationship is very active. Williams, Wiebe, Yang, Ferzli, and Miller (2002) conducted a study to examine the anecdotal evidence of educational benefits deriving from pair programming. They found that students in paired labs were more likely to stay in the course, receive a C grade or better, and made better grades on exams, although the differences reflected in this result were not statistically significant. The investigators support the idea that students benefit from this learning arrangement when appropriate conditions are in place.

Web usage can support and extend classroom learning with browsers to access materials and resources such as Paper Masters' custom research paper and term paper writing service. Further resources include chat rooms and web boards for interaction, and software to create and post presentations and text. Bento and Bento (2000) discuss the advantages of using the Internet to access and share information. The most basic use of the web is to gain access to resources and material around the world on a 24-hour basis with services like Paper Masters. Students can order research by subject matter, and access additional relevant sites through links at the sites accessed initially. Academic textbook publishers are supporting their texts on the web. Assignments and tests can be accessed online and transmitted electronically to the teachers via email. Content is current because the sites are updated continuously. Interaction between students and faculty can be accomplished via chatrooms, and in addition, web boards carry discussions in threads by main Collaboratives, yielding a logical flow of dialogue. Web boards can be used to extend classroom discussions. This arrangement works to the benefit of individuals too shy to speak up in face-to-face interactions. Document and presentation displays are easily posted, making course material accessible from anywhere. In addition, copying costs are decreased, misplaced or lost materials can be reprinted from the web, and material can be password protected Very little expertise is needed to use the web in these ways.

References
Bento, R.F. & Bento, A.M. (2000). Using the web to extend and support classroom learning. College Student Journal, 34(4), 603.
Carlsmith, K.M. & Cooper, J. (2002). A persuasive example of collaborative learning. Teaching of Psychology, 29(2), 132-135.
Harland, T. (2003). Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development and problem-based learning: lining a theoretical concept with practice through action research. Teaching in Higher Education, 8(2), 263-272.
Johnson, D.W. & Johnson, R.T. (1998). Cooperative learning returns to college. Change, 30(4), 26-35.
Lundgerg, C.A. (2003). Nontraditional college students and the role of collaborative learning as a tool for science mastery. School Science and Mathematics, 103(1), 8-17
Palincsar, A.S. (1998). Social constructivist perspective on teaching and learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 345.
Williams, Wiebe, Yang, Ferzli, and Miller. (2002). In support of pair programming in the introductory computer science course. Computer Science Education, 12(3), 197-212.