Main Article Content
This research is aimed at developing novel theory to advance innovative methods for examining how collaborative groups progress toward productively engaging during classroom activity that integrates disciplinary practices. This work draws on a situative perspective, along with prior framings of individual engagement, to conceptualize engagement as a shared and multidimensional phenomenon. A multidimensional conceptualization affords the study of distinct engagement dimensions, as well as the interrelationships of engagement dimensions that together are productive. Development and exploration of an observational rubric evaluating collaborative group disciplinary engagement (GDE) is presented, leveraging the benefits of observational methods with a rubric specifying quality ratings, enabling the potential for analyses of larger samples more efficiently than prior approaches, but with similar ability to richly characterize the shared and multidimensional nature of group engagement. Mixed-methods analyses, including case illustrations and profile analysis, showcase the synergistic interrelations among engagement dimensions constituting GDE. The rubric effectively captured engagement features that could be identified via intensive video analysis, while affording the evaluation of broader claims about group engagement patterns. Application of the rubric across curricular contexts, and within and between lessons across a curricular unit, will enable comparative studies that can inform theory about collaborative engagement, as well as instructional design and practice.
FLR adopts the Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs Creative Common License (BY-NC-ND). That is, Copyright for articles published in this journal is retained by the authors with, however, first publication rights granted to the journal. By virtue of their appearance in this open access journal, articles are free to use, with proper attribution, in educational and other non-commercial settings.
Adams-Wiggins, K. R. (2020). Whose meanings belong?: Marginality and the role of microexclusions in middle school inquiry science. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 24, 100353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2019.100353
Barron, B. (2000). Achieving coordination in collaborative problem-solving groups. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9, 403-436. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327809JLS0904_2
Chi, M.T.H. & Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 49, 219-243. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.965823
Chinn, C. A., Duncan, R. G., & Rinehart, R. (2018). Epistemic Design: Design to Promote Transferable Epistemic Growth in the PRACCIS Project. In E. Manalo, Y. Uesaka, & C. A. Chinn (Eds.), Promoting Spontaneous Use of Learning and Reasoning Strategies. pp. 242-259. New York: Routledge.
Danish, J. A., & Gresalfi, M. (2018). Cognitive and Sociocultural Perspective on Learning: Tensions and Synergy in the Cognitive and Sociocultural Perspective on Learning: Tensions and Synergy in the Learning Sciences. In F. Fischer, C. E. Hmelo-Silver, S. R. Goldman, & P. Reimann (Eds.), International Handbook of the Learning Sciences (pp. 33-43). New York: Routledge.
Duschl, R. (2008). Science education in three-part harmony: Balancing conceptual, epistemic, and social learning goals. Review of research in education, 32, 268-291. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X07309371
Engle, R. A., & Conant, F. C. (2002). Guiding principles for fostering productive disciplinary engagement: Explaining an emerging argument in a community of learners classroom. Cognition and Instruction, 20, 399-483. https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532690XCI2004_1
Engle, R. A., Langer-Osuna, J. M., & McKinney de Royston, M. (2014). Toward a model of influence in persuasive discussions: Negotiating quality, authority, privilege, and access within a student-led argument. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 23(2), 245-268. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2014.883979
Forsthuber, B., Motiejunaite, A., & de Almeida Coutinho, A. S. (2011). Science Education in Europe: National Policies, Practices and Research. Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency, European Commission.
Fredricks, J., Blumenfeld, P., & Paris, P. (2004). A school engagement potential of the concept and state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74, 59-109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
Forman, E. A., & Ford, M. J. (2014). Authority and accountability in light of disciplinary practices in science. International Journal of Educational Research, 64, 199-210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2013.07.009
Fulmer, S.M., & Frijters, J.C. (2009). A Review of self-report and alternative approaches in the measurement of student motivation. Educational Psychology Review, 21, 219-246. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-009-9107-x
Gomoll, A. S., Hillenburg, R., & Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2020). “I have never had a pbl like this before”: On viewing, reviewing, and co-design. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning. 14(1). https://doi.org/10.14434/ijpbl.v14i1.28802.
Gomoll, A. S., Šabanović, S., Tolar, E., Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Francisco, M., Lawlor, O. (2018). Between the Social and the Technical: Negotiation of Human-Centered Robotics Design in a Middle School Classroom. International Journal of Social Robotics, 10, 309-324. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-017-0454-3
Graham, J. W. (2009). Missing data analysis: Making it work in the real world. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 549–576. 10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085530
Greeno, J. G. (2006). Learning in activity. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences (pp. 79–96). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Gresalfi, M. S., & Barnes, J. (2016). Designing feedback in an immersive videogame: supporting student mathematical engagement. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64(1), 65-86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-015-9411-8
Gresalfi, M., Martin,T., Hand, V. & Greeno, J. (2009). Constructing competence: an analysis of student participation in the activity systems of mathematics classrooms. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 70, 49-70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-008-9141-5
Hand, V., & Gresalfi, M. (2015). The joint accomplishment of identity. Educational Psychologist, 50, 190-203. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2015.1075401
Hickey, D. T. (2003). Engaged participation versus marginal nonparticipation: A stridently sociocultural approach to achievement motivation. Elementary School Journal, 103(4), 401-429. https://doi.org/10.1086/499733
Hmelo, C. E., Guzdial, M., & Turns, J. (1998). Computer-support for collaborative learning: Learning to support student engagement. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 9, 107-130.
Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Eberbach, C., Jordan, J., Sinha, S., Rogat, T. K. (2015, August). Trajectories for Engaged Learning about Complex Systems. Presented at European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction Biennial Conference. Limassol, Cyprus.
Isohätälä, J., Naykki & Jarvela (2020). Convergences of Joint, Positive Interactions and Regulation in Collaborative Learning. Small Group Research, 51, 229-264. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496419867760
Järvelä, S., Järvenoja, H., Malmberg, J., Isohätälä, J., & Sobocinski, M. (2016). How do types of interaction and phases of self-regulated learning set a stage for collaborative engagement?. Learning and Instruction, 43, 39-51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.01.005
Järvenoja, H., Järvelä, S., Törmänen, T., Näykki, P., Malmberg, J., Kurki, K., Mykkänen, A. & Isohätälä, J. (2018). Capturing motivation and emotion regulation during a learning process. Frontline Learning Research, 6, 85-104. https://doi.org/10.14786/flr.v6i3.369
Khosa, D. K., & Volet, S. E. (2014). Productive group engagement in cognitive activity and metacognitive regulation during collaborative learning: can it explain differences in students’ conceptual understanding?. Metacognition and Learning, 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-014-9117-z
Koretsky, M. D., Vauras, M., Jones, C., Iiskala, T., & Volet, S. (2021). Productive disciplinary engagement in high-and low-outcome student groups: Observations from three collaborative science learning contexts. Research in Science Education, 51, 159-182. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-019-9838-8
Kreijins, K., Kirschner, P.A. & Jochems, W. (2002). The sociability of computer-supported collaborative learning environments. Journal of Education Technology and Society 5, 8–22. http://www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.5.1.8
Langer-Osuna, J. M., Gargroetzi, E., Munson, J., & Chavez, R. (2020). Exploring the role of off-task activity on students’ collaborative dynamics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 112(3), 514-532. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000464
LeBreton, J. M., & Senter, J. L. (2008). Answers to 20 questions about interrater reliability and interrater agreement. Organizational Research Methods, 11(4), 815–852. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428106296642
Lee, O., & Brophy, J. (1996). Motivational patterns observed in sixth‐grade science classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 303-318. https://doi.org/10.1002/
Linnenbrink-Garcia, L., Rogat, T.K. & Koskey, K.L. (2011). Affect and Engagement during Small Group Instruction. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36, 13-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.09.001
Lipponen, L., Rahikainen, M., Lallimo, J., & Hakkarainen, K. (2003). Patterns of participation and discourse in elementary students’ computer-supported collaborative learning. Learning and Instruction, 13, 487-509. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(02)00042-7
Molenaar, I., & Chiu, M. M. (2014). Dissecting sequences of regulation and cognition: statistical discourse analysis of primary school children’s collaborative learning. Metacognition and learning, 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-013-9105-8
Mortimer, E. & de Araújo, A. (2014). Using productive disciplinary engagement and epistemic practices to evaluate a traditional Brazilian high school chemistry classroom. International Journal of Educational Research, 64, 156-169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2013.07.004
Näykki, P. Järvelä, S. Kirschner, P.A. & Järvenoja, H. (2014). Socio-emotional conflict in collaborative learning – A process-oriented case study in a higher education context. International Journal of Educational Research, 68, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2014.07.001
NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Nylund-Gibson, K., Grimm, R., Quirk, M., & Furlong, M. (2014). A latent transition mixture model using the three-step specification. Structural Equation Modeling, 21, 439-454. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2014.915375
Perry, N. E., & Winne, P. H. (2006). Learning from learning kits: gStudy traces of students’ self-regulated engagements with computerized content. Educational Psychology Review, 18(3), 211-228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-006-9014-3
Pintrich, P.R. & DeGroot, E.V. (1990).Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 33-40. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-06184.108.40.206
Rogat, T.K. & Adams-Wiggins, K.R. (2015). Facilitative versus Directive Other-regulation in Collaborative Groups: Implications for Socioemotional Interactions. Computers in Human Behavior, 52, 589-600. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.01.026
Rogat, T.K. & Linnenbrink-Garcia, L. (2011). Socially Shared Regulation in Collaborative Groups: An Analysis of the Interplay between Quality of Social Regulation and Group Processes. Cognition and Instruction, 29, 375-415. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2011.607930
Rogat, T.K. & Linnenbrink-Garcia, L. (2013). Understanding the quality variation of socially shared regulation: A focus on methodology. In M. Vauras & S. Volet (Eds.), Interpersonal regulation of learning and motivation: Methodological advances (pp. 102-125). London: Routledge.
Roschelle, J., Shechtman, N., Tatar, D., Hegedus, S., Hopkins, B., Empson, S.,... & Gallagher, L. P. (2010). Integration of technology, curriculum, and professional development for advancing middle school mathematics: Three large-scale studies. American Educational Research Journal, 47, 833-878. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831210367426
Roschelle, J., & Teasley, S. (1995). The construction of shared knowledge in collaborative problem solving. In C. O’Malley (Ed.), Computer-supported collaborative learning (pp. 69-197). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
Rubin, D. B. (1987). Multiple imputation for nonresponse in surveys. New York: Wiley.
Ryu, S., & Lombardi, D. (2015). Coding Classroom Interactions for Collective and Individual Engagement. Educational Psychologist, 50, 70-83. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/00461520.2014.1001891
Sandoval, W. A. (2014). Conjecture mapping: an approach to systematic educational design research. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 23, 18-36. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2013.778204
Schoor, C., Narciss, S., & Körndle, H. (2015). Regulation During Cooperative and Collaborative Learning: A Theory-Based Review of Terms and Concepts. Educational Psychologist, 50, 97-119. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2015.1038540
Sengupta-Irving, T., & Agarwal, P. (2017). Conceptualizing perseverance in problem solving as collective enterprise. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 19(2), 115-138. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2017.1295417
Shechtman, N., Cheng, B. H., Lundh, P., & Trinidad, G. (2012). Unpacking the black box of engagement: Cognitive, behavioral, and affective engagement in learning mathematics. In van Aalst, J., Thompson, K., Jacobson, M. J., & Reimann, P. (Eds.) The Future of Learning: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS 2012) – Volume 2, Short Papers, Symposia, and Abstracts. International Society of the Learning Sciences: Sydney, NSW, Australia, pp. 53-56.
Sinha, S., Rogat, T., Adams-Wiggins, K. R., & Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2015). Collaborative group engagement in a computer-supported inquiry learning environment. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 10, 273-307. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-015-9218-y
Summers, J. J., Gorin, J. S., Beretvas, S. N., & Svinicki, M. D. (2005). Evaluating collaborative learning and community. The Journal of Experimental Education, 73(3), 165-188. https://doi.org/10.3200/JEXE.73.3.165-188
Volet, S., Summers, M., & Thurman, J. (2009). High-level co-regulation in collaborative learning: How does it emerge and how is it sustained? Learning and Instruction, 19, 128-143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.03.001
Vriesema, C.C, & McCaslin, M. (2020). Experience and meaning in small-group contexts: Fusing observational and self-report data to capture self and other dynamics. Frontline Learning Research, 8,136-139. https://doi.org/10.14786/flr.v8i3.493