Open Universiteit
www.ou.nl
Enhancing socially shared regulation in collaborative
learning groups: designing for CSCL regulation tools
Citation for published version (APA):
Järvelä, S., Kirschner, P. A., Panadero, E., Malmberg, J., Phielix, C., Jaspers, J., Koivuniemi, M., & Järvenoja,
H. (2015). Enhancing socially shared regulation in collaborative learning groups: designing for CSCL regulation
tools. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63(1), 125-142. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-014-
9358-1
DOI:
10.1007/s11423-014-9358-1
Document status and date:
Published: 01/02/2015
Document Version:
Other version
Document license:
CC BY-NC-ND
Please check the document version of this publication:
• A submitted manuscript is the version of the article upon submission and before peer-review. There can be important differences between
the submitted version and the official published version of record. People interested in the research are advised to contact the author for the
final version of the publication, or visit the DOI to the publisher's website.
• The final author version and the galley proof are versions of the publication after peer review.
• The final published version features the final layout of the paper including the volume, issue and page numbers.
Link to publication
General rights
Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners
and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.
• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research.
• You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain
• You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal.
If the publication is distributed under the terms of Article 25fa of the Dutch Copyright Act, indicated by the “Taverne” license above, please
follow below link for the End User Agreement:
https://www.ou.nl/taverne-agreement
Take down policy
If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us at:
pure-support@ou.nl
providing details and we will investigate your claim.
Downloaded from https://research.ou.nl/ on date: 09 Aug. 2022
DEVELOPMENT ARTICLE
Enhancing socially shared regulation in collaborative
learning groups: designing for CSCL regulation tools
Sanna Ja
¨
rvela
¨
•
Paul A. Kirschner
•
Ernesto Panadero
•
Jonna Malmberg
•
Chris Phielix
•
Jos Jaspers
•
Marika Koivuniemi
•
Hanna Ja
¨
rvenoja
Published online: 11 October 2014
Ó Association for Educational Communications and Technology 2014
Abstract For effective computer supported collaborative learning (CSCL), socially
shared regulation of learning (SSRL) is necessary. To this end, this article extends the idea
first posited by Ja
¨
rvela
¨
and Hadwin (Educ Psychol 48(1):25–39, 2013) that successful
collaboration in CSCL contexts requires targeted support for promoting individual self-
regulatory skills and strategies, peer support, facilitation of self-regulatory competence
within the group, and SSRL. These (meta)cognitive, social, motivational, and emotional
aspects related to being/becoming aware of how one learns alone and with others are for
the most part neglected in traditional CSCL support. Based upon a review of theoretical
and empirical studies on the potential of and challenges to collaboration, three design
principles for supporting SSRL are introduced: (1) increasing learner awareness of their
own and others’ learning processes, (2) supporting externalization of one’s own and others’
learning process and helping to share and interact, and (3) prompting acquisition and
activation of regulatory processes. Finally, an illustrative example is presented for how
these principles are applied in a technological tool for supporting SSRL.
Keywords Computer supported collaborative learning Collaborative learning
Self-regulated learning Socially shared regulation of learning Technological tools
S. Ja
¨
rvela
¨
(&) E. Panadero J. Malmberg M. Koivuniemi H. Ja
¨
rvenoja
Learning and Educational Technology Research Unit (LET), Department of Educational Sciences
and Teacher Education, University of Oulu, P.O. BOX 2000, 90014 Oulu, Finland
e-mail: sanna.jarvela@oulu.fi
P. A. Kirschner
Open University of The Netherlands, Heerlen, Netherlands
C. Phielix J. Jaspers
University of Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
123
Education Tech Research Dev (2015) 63:125–142
DOI 10.1007/s11423-014-9358-1
Author's personal copy
Introduction
Learning has been moving from a purely individual and externally programmed endeavor
(i.e., planned and executed with the aid of a teacher) to learning in and with groups in a
problem-based or inquiry-based situation. This is the case not only in the classroom but
also in distributed environments (Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, CSCL;
Strijbos et al. 2004). Educators increasingly see new information and communication
technologies integrated into CSCL (e.g., multimedia, simulations, external representations,
group awareness widgets, and coordination tools) as useful for enhancing cognitive per-
formance (Kirschner et al. 2014; Johnson and Johnson 1999) and stimulating knowledge
construction (Stahl 2004). Students in CSCL environments have reported higher levels of
learning (Hertz-Lazarowitz and Bar-Natan 2002) and have been shown to make higher
quality decisions, to deliver completer reports, to participate more equally in the learning
process (Fjermestad 2004; Janssen et al. 2007), and to engage in more complex and
challenging discussions Ja
¨
rvela
¨
et al. (2008) than when working alone. They also have
reported higher levels of satisfaction compared to students in contiguous groups (Fjer-
mestad 2004).
Recent theories of collaborative learning explain the process of sharing in collaboration
and stress the importance of meta-communicative awareness and successful strategy
coordination, aspects of socially shared regulation of learning (SSRL), that are emerging in
collaborative learning research (e.g. Barron 2003; Dillenbourg 1999). The most widely
used definition of collaboration describes it as a construction of shared understanding
through interaction with others, where the participants are committed to or engaged in
shared goals and problem solving (Roschelle and Teasley 1995).
There are, however, also less positive findings about CSCL and collaboration. Students
in CSCL environments sometimes perceive discussions as being more confusing
(Thompson and Coovert 2003), less productive (Straus 1997; Straus and McGrath 1994)
and more time-consuming (Fjermestad 2004) than in face-to-face settings. They also have
been found to experience lower participation (Lipponen et al. 2003), more conflict
(Hobman et al. 2002), less group cohesiveness (Straus andMcGrath 1994), and less sat-
isfaction (Baltes et al. 2002) in CSCL environments. This discrepancy can be ascribed to
the design of the CSCL environment and/or the social and cognitive behavior of the group
members (Kreijns et al. 2003).
Looking at the major problems encountered when using CSCL as pedagogy, one can
conclude that many of them might be solved if we had tools at our disposal that could help
the participants in CSCL groups in the regulation of their working and learning within the
group. Being able to strategically regulate one’s own learning and that of others is a vital
and increasingly important 21st century skill. This includes, for example, learners’ ability
to purposefully influence and adjust their own cognitive, motivational, and emotional
behavior as well as that of others for optimal learning and working (Zimmerman and
Schunk 2011). Unfortunately, research consistently shows that learners fail to plan ade-
quately, use adaptive learning strategies, and/or leverage technologies for learning, col-
laborating, and problem solving (Ja
¨
rvela
¨
and Hadwin 2013; Zimmerman and Schunk 2011;
Kirschner and van Merrinboer 2013). This happens because the regulation of one’s own
learning is not easy and needs to be both learned and also often supported with self-
regulation tools and/or environments (e.g. Hadwin et al. 2010). Most learners are not
equipped to regulate and direct their own learning or might lack the motivation to do so.
Additionally, if self-regulation of learning is difficult at the individual level, it becomes
even more difficult when interacting with peers and in teams, known as co-regulation and
126 S. Ja
¨
rvela
¨
et al.
123
Author's personal copy
shared regulation. In sum, properly planning and strategically adapting one’s learning to
challenges during the learning process requires being able to strategically regulate oneself
(i.e., self-regulated learning; SRL), others (i.e., co-regulated learning; CoRL), and the
individuals in a group together (i.e., SSRL) (Hadwin et al. 2011; Winne et al. 2013).
This theoretical paper attempts to explain why socially shared regulation support is
needed in CSCL and introduces design principles for supporting SSRL. It extends the idea
posited by Ja
¨
rvela
¨
and Hadwin (2013) that successful collaboration in CSCL contexts
requires targeted support for promoting individual self-regulatory skills and strategies, peer
support, and the facilitation of self-regulatory competence within the group along with
shared regulation of learning.
Potentials of and challenges to collaboration
Decades of research have shown that social interactions are key to successful collaborative
learning. According to Dillenbourg (1999), learners benefit from collaboration because
they produce interactions such as argumentation (Baker 1994), knowledge building (Be-
reiter and Scardamalia 2003), mutual regulation (Blaye and Light 1990), or positive
conflict resolution (Doise and Mugny 1984). The extent to which these collaborations
between group members lead to elaboration of new knowledge depends on the quality of
these interactions, especially the process of building and maintaining shared understanding
(Kirschner et al. 2008; Roschelle and Teasley 1995). Also, social, non-task related
affective interactions, such as feelings of group cohesiveness, team orientation, mutual
trust, and sense of community (Fransen et al. 2013; Fransen et al. 2011; Kreijns and
Kirschner 2004), are keys to successful collaboration.
Evidence for motivational benefits and challenges of collaborative groups has been
recently discussed (Kempler Rogat et al. 2013). Researchers have identified motivating
features of group work, such as the integration of challenging tasks for supporting interest
(Ja
¨
rvela
¨
and Renniger 2014) or individual accountability and interdependence (Cohen
1994). Others have studied motivational challenges within collaborative learning related to
different goals, priorities, and expectations within the group toward group activities (Ja
¨
r-
vela
¨
et al. 2010). Even though there is an increasing interest in motivation in collaborative
learning groups, (Belland et al. 2013) remind us that when designing learning environ-
ments, in general, motivation has been ignored in the designs of learning environments.
While the above-mentioned aspects can all be considered success factors, there are also
a number of challenges or failure factors that can negatively influence collaboration. Many
things can go wrong in collaboration, and cognitive, motivational, and socioemotional
challenges may emerge (Van den Bossche et al. 2006), even when the group activity is
carefully pedagogically designed (Kirschner et al. 2006). Cognitive challenges may derive
from difficulties in understanding others’ thinking or negotiating of multiple perspectives
Table 1 Target of regulation in collaborative learning task
Regulation target
Factors Cognitive Task, content, understanding, strategies, behavior
Motivational Goals, interest, beliefs, expectations
Emotional Social interaction, trust, sense of community
Enhancing SSR in CL groups 127
123
Author's personal copy
(Kirschner et al. 2008;Ma
¨
kitalo et al. 2002). Motivational problems, in turn, can emerge
due to differences in group members’ goals, priorities, and expectations (Blumenfeld et al.
1996;Ja
¨
rvela
¨
et al. 2008). In sum, earlier research recognized a need for supporting the
challenging factors of collaboration in their cognitive, motivational, and emotional regu-
lation targets of group processes (see Table 1.).
Socially shared regulation of learning in collaborative groups
There is a strong consensus that successful learners self-regulate their learning; that is, they
use a repertoire of cognitive, behavioral, and motivational strategies to guide and enhance
their learning processes while completing academic tasks (Schunk and Zimmerman 2008).
Since group learning activities bring together multiple self-regulating agents (Volet et al.
2009), the study of interpersonal regulation has been focused on the articulation of individual
and social processes (Ja
¨
rvela
¨
et al. 2010). The mainstream of the research on self-regulation
has dealt with individual learning situations, but the notion that social context is important in
students’ self-regulated learning is evidenced in a wide range of SRL research, and research
into social aspects of SRL has increased considerably in recent years (Hadwin et al. 2011).
Co-regulation (CoRL) builds on Vygotskian and neo-Vygotskian theories that suggest that
social interactions with individuals who are more capable facilitate students’ development of
SRL through internalizing the modeled cognitive processes. CoRL emphasizes the impor-
tance of giving and receiving support in peer interactions (McCaslin 2009).
In collaborative learning research, regulatory processes have been usually considered from a
cognitive perspective and, thus, the definition has been linked tocognitive processes involved in
or instrumental for knowledge co-construction (Hmelo-Silver and Barrows 2008), socio-cog-
nitive dynamics of knowledge building (Zhang et al. 2007), knowledge convergence (Wein-
berger et al. 2007), or task- and team-related aspects (Fransen et al. 2013). What is important
and different in the shared regulation of learning is that self-regulated learning theory extends
conceptions of learning beyond cognitive processes and outcomes, acknowledging the inter-
active roles of motivation, emotion, metacognition, and strategic behavior in successful
learning (Zimmerman and Schunk 2011). SSRL refers to processes by which group members
regulate their collective activity. This type of regulation involves interdependent or collectively
shared regulatory processes, beliefs, and knowledge (e.g., strategies, monitoring, evaluation,
goalsetting, motivation, andmetacognitivedecision making) orchestratedin the service of a co-
constructed or shared outcome (Hadwin et al. 2011).
Thus far, research has emphasized the development and testing of the functionality and
usability of technology-based tools for the cognitive aspects of learning and collaborating
(e.g., scripting: Fischer et al. 2013), paying little attention to researching how emerging
technologies can be leveraged to support learners and collaborators to effectively plan,
monitor, and adapt their own, their peers’, and collective engagement (Ja
¨
rvela
¨
and Hadwin
2013; Kirschner and Erkens 2013). This is to say, the metacognitive, social, motivational,
and emotional aspects related to being/becoming aware of how one learns alone and with
others have been neglected.
Traditions for supporting social and cognitive performance in CSCL
Many efforts have been made to support students’ social and cognitive performance in
CSCL. Much of the research that has been carried out with respect to CSCL, as well as the
128 S. Ja
¨
rvela
¨
et al.
123
Author's personal copy
