Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

  • 10 - Analyzing Collaboration

  • from Part II - Methodologies
  • Edited by R. Keith Sawyer, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
  • Book:
    The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences
    Published online:
    14 March 2022
    Print publication:
    07 April 2022, pp 196-216

  • Summary

    Learning sciences researchers study different types of collaboration, study it for different reasons, and use a variety of methods. Many of these methods focus on talk and interaction patterns, often using a methodology called interaction analysis that builds on linguistic anthropology and sociolinguistics. This chapter reviews four broad approaches: collaboration as a window onto individual learning; collaboration as a way to study how to help students learn better; collaboration as a way to study how collaboration changes during learning; and collaboration itself as a form of learning. These approaches differ along four dimensions: the unit of analysis for describing collaborative processes; the unit of analysis for documenting learning outcomes; the degree to which those learning outcomes are identified within the collaboration or outside the collaboration; and the degree to which the researcher considers some forms of collaboration to be more effective.