Process and Content Structuring in Collaborative Learning

1. INTRODUCTION Group Support Systems (GSS) technology, which has been developed over the course of the last dozen years, has been initially researched in laboratory-based experiments. More recently, fieldwork has examined how GSS function in real world environments involving businessmen, diplomats, soldiers and students. GSS were originally designed to support discussion and decision making in the commercial/business sector, but in the last few years there has been a surge of interest in its usage to support collaborative learning (e. and Kwok, 1999). Previous empirical results indicated that GSS had significant positive effects on both the process and the outcome of collaborative learning. GSS were shown to encourage participation and to enhance knowledge acquisition (Khalifa and Kwok, 1999). GSS-supported learners also demonstrated higher levels 2 of interest in the material and perceived that they achieved more significant levels of Although previous studies reported positive effects of GSS on learning, they have not explained how such effects could be affected by facilitation. The potential effects of facilitation on the process and outcome of electronic meetings have been 1996), but not in the context of collaborative learning. According to the facilitation framework proposed by Bostrom et al. (1993), a facilitator can influence three general targets: meeting process, relationships and task outcomes. Structures are applied primarily through the development of the meeting process (agenda/activities: the how?). These structures influence the exploration and accomplishment of tasks (content: the what?) and relationships (affect/emotions: feel about?). In return, the individual's and/or the group's relationships influence an individual's involvement in and contribution to the process, the quality of his/her contribution, and his/her commitment to and acceptance of the task outcomes (decision, plan, etc.). While most researchers agree on the importance of the facilitator's role, it is not clear how interventionist it should be. Some researchers (e.g., Albright et al., 1993; Dennis et al. 1997) stress the active role of the facilitator in defining the agenda and enforcing it. Others (e.g., Dickson et al., 1993), on the other hand, call for more open and less restrictive facilitation. Teachers who use GSS to support collaborative learning need some specific guidelines for their new role as facilitators. Although some studies (e.g., Clawson et al., 1993) have discusses good practices, it is still not clear how much influence the facilitators should exert on the various facilitation dimensions. 3 Teachers may be tempted to introduce too much structure in an attempt to focus …