Building Shared Mental Models

Part of the SpringerBriefs in Education book series (BRIEFSEDUCAT)


This chapter goes beyond processes of interpersonal interaction and problem-solving to examine commentary claims and empirical research on the sharing and building of knowledge in groups or teams and its importance for collaboration. The following studies illustrate the range and complexity of social and cognitive processes and strategies involved in collaboration and their interaction with problem domain tasks and knowledge building. They connect team knowledge building to the structured CPS described in the previous chapters. They highlight the need for not just shared processes, but shared professional language to communicate in the problem domain and build shared mental models.


Shared Mental Models Team Knowledge Professional Language Knowledge Building (KB) Mutual Performance Monitoring 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Bain, A., Lancaster, J., & Zundans, L. (2009). Pattern language development in the preparation of inclusive educators. International Journal of the Teacher and Learning in Higher Education, 20(3), 336–349. (ERIC Document reproduction Service No. EJ869320).Google Scholar
  2. Ciampaglia, B. I. (2010). Analysis of school-wide supports and barriers to CPS teams: Fidelity in applying the process. A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at Graduate School of the University of Massachusetts, May 2010. UMI Number: 3409557.Google Scholar
  3. Fransen, J., Kirschner, P. A., & Erkens, G. (2011). Mediating team effectiveness in the context of collaborative learning: The importance of team and task awareness. Computers in Human Behaviour, 27(2011), 1103–1113. Scholar
  4. Hmelo-Silver, C. E., & Barrows, H. S. (2008). Facilitating collaborative knowledge building. Cognition and Instruction, 26(1), 48–94. Scholar
  5. Kovaleski, J. F., & Glew, M. C. (2006). Bringing instructional support teams to scale: Implications of the Pennsylvania experience. Remedial and Special Education, 27(1), 16–25. Scholar
  6. Nokes-Malach, T. J., Meade, M. L., & Morrow, D. G. (2012). The effect of expertise on collaborative problem solving. Thinking & Reasoning, 18(1), 32–58. Scholar
  7. OECD. (2017). PISA 2015 collaborative problem-solving framework. In PISA 2015 Assessment and Analytical Framework: Science, Reading, Mathematic, Financial Literacy and Collaborative Problem Solving (pp. 131–188). Paris: OECD Publishing.
  8. Rosen, M. A., Salas, E., Fiore, S. M., Pavlas, D., & Lum, H. C. (2009). Team cognition and external representations: A framework and propositions for supporting collaborative problem solving. Paper presented at the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, Vol. 53, pp. 1295–1299.
  9. Salisbury, C. L., Evans, I. M., & Palombaro, M. M. (1997). Collaborative problem-solving to promote the inclusion of children with significant disabilities in primary grades. Exceptional Children, 63(2), 195–209. Scholar
  10. Stoyanova, N., & Kommers, P.(2002). Concept mapping as a medium of shared cognition in computer-supported collaborative problem solving. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 13(1/2), 111–133. Retrieved from
  11. Zundans-Fraser, L. A. (2014). Self-organisation in course design: A collaborative, theory-based approach to course development in inclusive education (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Charles Sturt University.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Charles Sturt UniversityBathurstAustralia

Personalised recommendations