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 topics, 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.