Socially shared regulation in computer-supported collaborative learning

This dissertation examined how groups in CSCL developed and sustained socially shared regulation, defined as multiple members’ regulation of their collective learning by developing shared goals, shared plans, shared monitoring, and shared evaluation through mutual agreement and other-regulation, referring to a dominant member temporarily facilitating group members’ learning by taking an instructive role to guide the joint activity and others’ understanding in collaborative learning environments (Hadwin & Oshige, 2011; Järvelä & Hadwin, 2013; Rogat & Linnenbrink-Garcia, 2013). The first part of the study used content analysis and adopted a social constructionist lens, revealing the occurrence of socially shared regulatory processes in CSCL. Log files from three sessions of 13 undergraduate student groups were analyzed. The first key finding of this study was the identification of seven socially shared regulatory processes (planning and goal setting, scheduling, role assignment, task monitoring, content monitoring, task evaluation, and content evaluation) emerging in CSCL, suggesting that an analytical framework of cognitive regulatory processes in individual self-regulated learning can be applied to collective regulation in CSCL. Second, high quality regulation can be called socially shared regulation in the true sense of the word because multiple members successfully involved their shared regulation by establishing shared plans, shared goals, shared monitoring, and shared meaning of their learning. The second part of the study was a case study using content analysis, social network analysis, and quantitative analysis of group members’ self-report questionnaires. Three group regulation patterns were identified: a socially shared regulation group, a mixed regulation group and an other-regulation group. The key finding was that the socially shared regulation group showed more dynamic social interaction and high quality regulation than the other two groups. The mixed regulation group also demonstrated dynamic social interaction but with the existence of a dominant member. The other-regulation group revealed dyadic social interaction between a dominant member and the rest of the members. This study hopes to provide educators with tangible and practical knowledge of online course design and the implementation of online group discussion.