Sean P. Goggins
James Laffey
ABSTRACT
We present a detailed descriptive analysis of the adoption and adaptation of common online tools by a newly forming small group with a cooperative work task. We compare their use of different tools over the course of successive specific cooperative activities, and describe how they use these tools as objects in the formation of a small online community. General patterns of participation that recognize the physical contexts of online group members, and specific patterns of interaction that influence the formation of an online community are explicated. The results of this study have implications for understanding how tools and tasks influence group formation and sense of community in online systems.
- Agostinho, S., Meek, J., & Herrington, J. (2005). Design methodology for the implementation and evaluation of a scenario--based online learning environment. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 16(3), 229--242.Google Scholar
- Bers, M.U. (2001). Identity Construction Environments: Developing Personal and Moral Values Through the Design of a Virtual City. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 10(4), 365--415.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Blanchard, A. L. & Markus, M. L. (2002). Sense of Virtual Community -- Maintaining the Experience of Belonging. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 35th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Brown, J. S. & Duguid, P. (1991). Organizational Learning and Communities--Of--Practice: Toward a Unified View of Working, Learning and Innovation. Organizational Science, 2(1), 40--57.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Brown, J. S. & Duguid, P. (2000). The Social Life of Information. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Brown, J. S. & Duguid, P. (2001). Knowledge and Organization: A Social-Practical Perspective. Organizational Science, 12(2), 198--213. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Chapman, C., Ramondt, L., & Smiley, G. (2005). Strong community, deep learning: Exploring the link. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 42(3), 217--230.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Charmaz, K. (2003). Qualitative Interviewing and Grounded Theory Analysis. In J. A. Holstein & J. F. Gubrium (Eds.), Inside Interviewing: New Lenses, New Concerns. (pp. 311--330). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
- Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
- Coffey A., Atkinson P. (1996). Making Sense of Qualitative Data. London: Sage PublicationsGoogle Scholar
- Cohen, D. & Prusak, L. (2001). In Good Company. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
- Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital. Americn Journal of Sociology, 94, 95--120.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Gabriel, M. A. (2004). Learning Together: Exploring Group Interactions Online. Journal of Distance Education, 19(1), 54--72.Google Scholar
- Gloor, P. A. (2005). Swarm Creativity: Competitive Advantage Through Collaborative Innovation Networks. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Hughes, M. & Daykin, N. (2002). Towards Constructivism: Investigating Students' Perceptions adn Learning as a Result of Using an Online Environment. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 39(3)(3), 217--224.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Jeong, A., Joung, S. (2005). Scaffolding Collaborative Argumentation in Asynchronous Discussions With Message Constraints and Message Labels, Computers and Education, 48, 427--445. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Johnson, S.D., Suriya, C., Yoon, S.W., Berrett, J.V., La Fleur, J. (2002). Team Development and Group Processes of Virtual Learning Teams. Computers and Education, 39, 379--393.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Kanuka, H., & Anderson, T. (1998). Online social interchange, discord, and knowledge construction. Journal of Distance Education, 13(1), 57--74.Google Scholar
- Knowles & Knowles. Introduction to Group Dynamics. New York: Associated Press.Google Scholar
- Laffey, J., Lin, G. Y., & Lin, Y. (2006). Assessing Social Ability in Online Learning Environments. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 17(2), 163--177.Google Scholar
- Lave, J. & Wegner, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. New York, USA: Cambridge University Press.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Lin, Y.--M. & Laffey, J. (2004). Exploring the Relationship Between Mediating Tools and Student Perception of Interdependence in a CSCL Environment. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 17(4), 385--400.Google Scholar
- Lock, J. V. (2002). Laying the Groundwork for the Development of Learning Communities Within Online Courses. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 3(4), 395--408.Google Scholar
- Makinster, J.G., Barab, S.A., Harwood, W., Andersen, H.O. (2006). The Effect of Social Context on the Reflective Practice of Preservice Science Teachers: Incorporating a Web-Supported Community of Teachers, Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 14(3), 543--579.Google Scholar
- Nevgi, A., Virtanen, P. & Niemi, H. (2006). Supporting Students to Develop Collaborative Learning Skills in Technology--Based Environments. British Journal of Educational Technology, 37(6), 937--947.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Papastergiou, M. (2006). Course management systems as tools for the creation of online learning environments: Evaluation from a social constructivist perspective and implications for their design. International Journal on E--Learning, 5(4), 593--622.Google Scholar
- Rohde, M., Klamma, R., Jarke, M., & Wulf, V. (2007). Reality is Our Laboratory: Communities of Practice in Applied Computer Science. Behaviour and Information Technology, 26(1), 81--94. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Rohde, M., Reinecke, L., Pape, B., & Janneck, M. (2004). Community--Building with Web--Based Systems -- Investigating a Hybrid Community of Students. Computer Suppoerted Cooperative Work, 13, 471--499. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Rohde, M. & Shaffer, D. W. (2003). Us, Ourselves and We: Thoughts about Social (Self--) Categorization. SIGGROUP Bulletin, 24(3), 19--24. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Smith, R. (2005). Working with Differences in Online Collaborative Groups. Adult Education Quarterly, 55(3), 182--299.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Stahl, G. (2006). Group Cognition: Computer Support for Building Cooperative Knowledge. Boston, MA: MIT Press. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Stake, R. E. (1995). The Art of Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
- Tajfel, H. (1978). Differentiation Between Social Groups. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
- Tajfel, H. (1982). Social Identity and Intergroup Relations. London: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning and Identity. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Wise, A., Chang, J., Duffy, T., & delValle, D. (2004). The effects of teacher social presence on student satisfaction, engagement, and learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 31(3), 247--271.Google ScholarCross Ref
Index Terms
- Cooperation and groupness: community formation in small online collaborative groups
Recommendations
Network analysis of trace data for the support of group work: activity patterns in a completely online course
GROUP '10: Proceedings of the 2010 ACM International Conference on Supporting Group WorkA 16-student, completely online software design course was studied using social network analysis and grounded theory techniques. Bi-directional (read and post) log data of user activity was recorded to understand how small group networks change over ...
Diversity among enterprise online communities: collaborating, teaming, and innovating through social media
CHI '12: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsThere is a growing body of research into the adoption and use of social software in enterprises. However, less is known about how groups, such as communities, use and appropriate these technologies, and the implications for community structures. In a ...
Creating a model of the dynamics of socio-technical groups
Individuals participating in technologically mediated forms of organization often have difficulty recognizing when groups emerge, and how the groups they take part in evolve. This paper contributes an analytical framework that improves awareness of ...
Comments