CRITICAL EXPLORATION OF THE PRINCIPLE OF COLLABORATIVE LEARNING FOR THE REALIZATION OF COLLECTIVE INTELLIGENCE
Journal of Global Research in Education and Social Science,
Collaborative learning, as a method of working together in groups based on shared educational interests, has received considerable attention for past decades. A remarkable upsurge in research has taken place on the academic, attitudinal, and social interactive effects of collaborative learning. However, through many empirical studies on group task performance, it can be confirmed that the collaboration itself does not guarantee the ‘synergy’, and that the strict conditions are required to realize the collective intelligence beyond the sum of individual performance. Based on critical examination of precedent studies, the endogenous principles of collaborative learning for realization of collective intelligence and its implications for further research are suggested as follows. First, the value of the task in collaborative learning should be reconceptualized as a means to provide the synergy experience rather than as an end which needs to be accomplished in due time. Second, the interpersonal relations should be primarily based on the mutual and multilateral exchange rather than the hierachical and unilateral relation. Finally, the effect of collaborative learning should be assessed focusing on the subjective individual experience rather than objective group products.
- Collaborative learning
- cooperative learning
- collective intelligence
- team-based work
- social interdependence
How to Cite
Yang Mikyeong. The characteristics and mechanism of collective intelligence and its educational significance. The Journal of Yeolin Education. 2010;18(4):1-30.
Surowiecki J. The wisdom of crowds. Doubleday, a division of Random House, Inc; 2004.
Mesmer-Magnus JR, De Church LA. Information sharing and team performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2009;94:535-546.
Stasser G, Titus W. Pooling of shared and unshared information in group decision making: Biased information sampling during discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1985;48:1467-1478.
Van Ginkel WP, Van Knippenberg D. Knowledge about the distribution of information and group decision making: When and why does it work? Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 2008;108:218-229.
Antil LA, Jenkins JR, Wayne SK, Vadasy PF. Cooperative learning: Prevalence, conceptualization, and the relation between research and practice. American Educational Research Journal. 1998;35(3):419-454.
Johnson DW, Johnson RT, Stanne MB. Cooperative learning methods: A meta-Analysis. University of Minnesota; 2000.
Retrieved August 13, 2018.
Rousseau V, Aubé C, Savoie A. Teamwork behaviors: A review and an integration of frameworks. Small Group Research. 2006; 37(5):540-570.
Trongtorsak S, Saraubon K, Nilsook P. Collaborative Experiential Learning Process for Enhancing Digital Entrepreneurship. Higher Education Studies. 2021;11(1):137-147.
Johnson DW, Johnson RT. An educational psychology success story: Social interdependence theory and cooperative learning. Educational Researcher. 2009;38(5): 365-379.
Allen NJ, Hecht TD. The ‘romance of teams’: Toward an understanding of its psychological underpinnings and implications. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. 2004a;77:439-461.
Allen NJ, Hecht TD. Further thoughts on the romance of teams: A reaction to the commentaries. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. 2004b;77:485-491.
Meindl JR. The romance of teams: Is the honeymoon over? Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. 2004;77:463-466.
Paulus PB, Van der Zee K. Should there be a romance between teams and groups? Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. 2004;77:475-480.
West MA, Brodbeck FC, Richter AW. Does the ‘romance of teams’ exist? The effectiveness of teams in experimental and field settings. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. 2004;77:467-473.
McGlynn RP, McGurk D, Effland VS, Johll NL, Harding DJ. Brainstorming and task performance in groups constrained by evidence. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 2004;93:75-87.
Mullen B, Johnson C, Salas E. Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: A meta-analytic integration. Basic and Applied Social Psychology. 199l;12:3-24.
Taylor DW, Berry PC, Block CH. Does group participation when using brainstorming facilitate or inhibite creative thinking. Adminitrative Science Quarterly. 1958;3:23-47.
Larson JR Jr. In search of synergy in small group performance. New York: Taylor and Francis Group, LLC; 2010.
Suthers DD. Technology affordances for intersubjective meaning making: A research agenda for CSCL. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning. 2006;1:315-337.
Dennis AR, Williams ML. A meta-analysis of group size effects in electronic brainstorming: More heads are better than one. International Journal of e-Collaboration. 2005;1:24-42.
Parks CD, Cowlin RA. Acceptance of uncommon information into group discussion when that information is or is not demonstrable. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 1996;66(3):307-315.
Gigone D, Hastie R. The common knowledge effect: Information sharing and group judgement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1993;65:959-974.
Kerr NL, Bruun SE. Dispensability of member effort and group motivation losses: Free-rider effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1983;44(1):78-94.
Weber B, Hertel G. Motivation gains of inferior group members: A meta-analytical review. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2007;93(6):973-993.
De Dreu CKW, Nijstad BA, Van Knippenberg D. Motivated information processing in group judgment and decision making. Personality and Social Psychology Review. 2008;12(1):22-49.
Larson JR Jr. Deep diversity and strong synergy: Modeling the impact of variability in members' problem-solving strategies on group problem-solving performance. Small Group Research. 2007;38(3):413-436.
Zellmer-Bruhn ME, Maloney MM, Bhappu AD, Salvador R. When and how do differences matter? An exploration of perceived similarity in teams. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 2008;107:41-59.
Latané B, Williams K, Harkins S. Many hands make light the work: The causes and consequences of social loafing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1979;37(6):822-832.
Williams K, Harkins S, Latané B. Identifiability as a deterrent to social loafing: Two cheering experiments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1981;40(2): 303-311.
Hertel G, Niemeyer G, Clauss A. Social indispensability or social comparison: The why and when of motivation gains of inferior group members. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 2008;38:1329-1363.
Williams KD, Karau SJ. Social loafing and social compensation: The effects of expectations of co-worker performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1991;61:570-581.
Hertel G, Kerr NL, Messe LA. Motivation gains in performance groups: Paradigmatic and theoretical developments on the Köhler effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2000;79:580-601.
Dillenbourg P, Tchounikine P. Flexibility in macro-scripts for computer-supported collaborative learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 2007;23:1-13.
Kollar I, Fischer F, Hesse FW. Collaboration scripts- A conceptual analysis. Educational Psychology Review. 2006;18:159-185.
Zhang S, Chen J, Wen Y, Chen H, Gao Q, Wang Q. Capturing regulatory patterns in online collaborative learning: A network analytic approach. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning. 2021;16(1):37-66,
Swiecki Z, Ruis AR, Farrell C, Shaffer DW. Assessing individual contributions to Collaborative Problem Solving: A network analysis approach. Computers in Human Behavior. 2020;104.
Sharan S. Cooperative learning in small groups: Recent methods and effects on achievement, attitudes, and ethnic relations. Review of Educational Research. 1980;50(2): 241-271.
Webb NM, Mastergeorge A. Promoting effective helping behavior in peer-directed groups. International Journal of Educational Research. 2003;39:73-97.
Leadbeater C. We-think: Mass innovation, not mass production. London: Aitken Alexander Associates; 2008.
Polanyi M. Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-critical philosophy. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul; 1958.
Gillies RM, Ashman AF. (Eds.) Co-operative Learning: The social and intellectual outcomes of learning in groups. London and New York: Routledge Falmer; 2003.
Never H, Finsterwald M, Urban N. Cooperative learning with gifted and high-achieving students: a review and meta-analyses of 12 studies. High Ability Studies. 2001;12(2):199-214.
Dillenbourg P. What do you mean by ‘collaborative learning’? In P. Dillenbourg (Ed.). Collaborative-learning: Cognitive and computational approaches. Oxford: Elsevier. 1999;1-19.
Lévy P. L'intelligence collective: Pour une anthropologie de cyberspace. Les Editions La Découverte. Kwon, S. (trans.) Collective intelligence: For an anthropology of cyberspace, Seoul: Moonji Publishing Co., Ltd. 1994,2002.
Wegner D. Transactive memory: A contemporary analysis of group mind. In B. Mullen & G. R. Goethals (Eds.). Theories of group behavior. New York: Springer-Verlag. 1987;185-208.
Shimazoe J, Aldrich H. Group work can be gratifying: Understanding & overcoming resistance to cooperative learning. College Teaching. 2010;58:52-57.
Abstract View: 346 times
PDF Download: 2 times