Abstract
The POWERTECH contest in Taiwan was established in an attempt to promote inventiveness and technology to elementary school pupils. The POWERTECH contest is designed as a collaborative learning system for project design. Project design is comprised of technical processes, which include the construction of an artifact and improvement of its functions. Thus, pupils learn scientific and technical knowledge through a collaborative design project. The purpose of the study was to examine how collaborative learning could be facilitated in technological project design, and whether and how pupils working collaboratively were able to share their design ideas. The study was carried out by analyzing the design portfolio compiled by a team of four elementary school pupils who were engaged in a collaborative design project that focused on making a robot rat for the POWERTECH contest. A portfolio analysis was used in this study to help researchers assess the actual collaboration process among the team members. The study indicated that collaborative learning in a contest facilitated the sharing of knowledge and resources among the team members. Furthermore, reflections essential for problem-solving among the team members were often raised during the design process. These reflections were also conducive to the reduction of mistakes during the contest.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
de Lisi, R., & Golbeck, S. L. (1999). Implications of Piagetian theory for peer learning. In S. M. O’Donnell & A. King (Eds.), Cognitive perspectives on peer learning (pp. 3–38). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Engeström, Y., Engeström, R., & Suntio, A. (2002). Can a school community learn to master its own future? An activity-theoretical study of expansive learning among middle school teachers. In G. Wells & G. Claxton (Eds.), Learning for life in the 21st century. Oxford: Blackwell.
Frey, K. S., Nolen, S. B., Edstrom, L. V. S., & Hirschstein, M. K. (2005). Effects of a school-based social-emotional competence program: Linking children’s goals, attributions, and behavior. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 26(2), 171–200.
Gallagher, P. (2001). An evaluation of a standards based portfolio. Nurse Education Today, 21(5), 409–416.
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2–3), 87–105.
Gilly, M. (1990). The psychosocial mechanisms of cognitive constructions: Experimental research and teaching perspectives. In A. N. Perret-Clermont & M. L. Schubauer-Leoni (Eds.), Social factors in learning and instruction (pp. 607–621). Oxford, NY: Pergamon.
Green, N. (1995). Looking at landscape: Class formation and the visual. In E. Hirsch & M. O’Hanlon (Eds.), The anthropology of landscape (pp. 31–42). Oxford: Clarendon.
Gruber, H. E., & Wallace, D. B. (1999). The case study method and evolving systems approach for understanding unique creative people at work. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 313–335). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Harris, S., Dolan, G., & Fairbairn, G. (2001). Reflecting on the use of student portfolios. Nurse Education Today, 21(4), 278–286.
Hayes-Roth, B., & Hayes-Roth, F. (1979). A cognitive model of planning. Cognitive Science, 3(4), 275–310.
Hogan, D. M., & Tudge, J. R. H. (1999). Implications of Vygotsky’s theory for peer learning. In A. M. O’Donnell & A. King (Eds.), Cognitive perspectives on peer learning (pp. 39–66). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Isaksen, D. J., & Treffinger, D. J. (1985). Creative problem solving: The basic course. Buffalo, NY: Bearly Limited.
Kamradt, T. F., & Kamradt, E. J. (1999). Structured design for attitudinal instruction. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (Vol. 2). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Kelly, G. A. (1955). The psychology of personal constructs. New York: Norton.
Kirschman, J. S., & Greenstein, J. S. (2002). The use of groupware for collaboration in distributed student engineering design teams. Journal of Engineering Education, 91(4), 403–407.
Ladyshewsky, R. K. (2006). Building cooperation in peer coaching relationships: Understanding the relationships between reward structure, learner preparedness, coaching skill and learner engagement. Physiotherapy, 92(1), 4–10.
Lahti, H., Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P., & Hakkarainen, K. (2004). Collaboration patterns in computer-supported collaborative designing. Design Studies, 25(4), 351–371.
Lickona, T. (1991). Educating for character. New York: Bantam Books.
Lipman, M. (1991). Thinking in education. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Mascolo, M. F. (2005). Change processes in development: The concept of coactive scaffolding. New Ideas in Psychology, 23, 185–196.
McMullan, M. (2006). Students’ perceptions on the use of portfolios in pre-registration nursing education: A questionnaire survey. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 43(3), 333–343.
Nelson-Le Gall, S. A., & Gumerman, R. A. (1984). Children’s perceptions of helpers and helper motivation. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 5(1), 1–12.
Newman, R. S., & Goldin, L. (1990). Children’s reluctance to seek help with schoolwork. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 92–100.
Newman, R. S., & Murray, B. J. (2005). How students and teachers view the seriousness of peer harassment: When is it appropriate to seek help? Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(3), 347–365.
Piaget, J. (1976). The grasp of consciousness: Action and concept in the young child. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Savage, E., & Sterry, L. (1990). A conceptual framework for technology education. Reston, VA: International Technology Education Association.
Segal, S. (2001). Socrates says. Management Today, (January–February), pp. 20–22.
Shuell, T. J. (1996). Teaching and learning in a classroom context. In D. Charles & E. Silver (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 726–764). New York: Macmillan.
Stanulis, R. N., & Russell, D. (2000). “Jumping in”: Trust and communication in mentoring student teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16(1), 65–80.
Sweller, J. (1989). Cognitive technology: Some procedures for educational psychology, facilitating learning and problem solving in mathematics and science. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 457–466.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Webb, N. M., & Mastergeorge, A. (2003). Promoting effective helping behavior in peer directed group. International Journal of Educational Research, 39(1–2), 73–97.
Webb, N. M., & Palinscar, A. S. (1996). Group processes in the classroom. In D. Berliner & R. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 841–873). New York: Macmillan.
Wittrock, M. C. (1990). Generative processes of comprehension. Educational Psychologist, 24, 345–376.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hong, JC., Yu, KC. & Chen, MY. Collaborative learning in technological project design. Int J Technol Des Educ 21, 335–347 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-010-9123-7
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-010-9123-7