Encyclopedia of Education and Information Technologies

Living Edition
| Editors: Arthur Tatnall

Distributed Collaboration in Project-Based Learning and Its Assessment in Next-Generation Learning Environments

Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60013-0_59-1


Distributed Collaboration in Project-Based Learning and Its AssessmentAdvances in technology historically have altered the ability of individuals to communicate with and to collaborate with one another (Hollingshead et al. 1993; Walther et al. 2015; Liao et al. 2018). The implications and opportunities for education have been and will continue to be profound (Collins and Halverson 2018). This entry introduces the nascent area of IT-mediated collaborative learning activities that focus on creating a product or an artifact and that involve virtual teams of individuals who work together, both synchronously and asynchronously, from geographically distinct locations (Hamilton 2018; Hamilton and Owens 2018; Lee et al. 2019). While contemporary society is accustomed to the anywhere/anytime nature of Internet-mediated communication, formal and informal education models have not yet substantially incorporated research-based approaches to virtual, project-based collaboration in...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.


  1. Alsharo M, Gregg D, Ramirez R (2017) Virtual team effectiveness: the role of knowledge sharing and trust. Inf Manag 54(4):479–490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barab S, Dede C (2007) Games and immersive participatory simulations for science education: an emerging type of curricula. J Sci Educ Technol 16(1):1–3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barab S, Thomas M, Dodge T, Carteaux R, Tuzun H (2005) Making learning fun: quest Atlantis, a game without guns. Educ Technol Res Dev 1:86–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chua RYJ, Morris MW, Mor S (2012) Collaborating across cultures: cultural metacognition and affect-based trust in creative collaboration. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 118(2):116–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Collins A, Halverson R (2018) Rethinking education in the age of technology: the digital revolution and schooling in America. Teachers College Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. Crippen K, Earl B (2007) The impact of web-based worked examples and self-explanation on performance, problem solving, and self-efficacy. Comput Educ 49(3):809–821CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dede C (2009) Immersive interfaces for engagement and learning. Science 323(5910):66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dillenbourg P, Tchounikine P (2007) Flexibility in macro-scripts for computer-supported collaborative learning. J Comput Assist Learn 23(1):1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dillenbourg P, Järvelä S, Fischer F (2009) The Evolution of Research on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning. In: Balacheff N, Ludvigsen S, de Jong T, Lazonder A, Barnes S (eds) Technology-Enhanced Learning. Springer, DordrechGoogle Scholar
  10. Dunleavy M (2014) Design principles for augmented reality learning. TechTrends 58(1):28–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Eagan B, Hamilton E (2018) Epistemic network analysis of an international digital makerspace in Africa, Europe, and the US. Annual Meeting of the American Education Research Association, New York CityGoogle Scholar
  12. Erdem F, Ozen J (2003) Cognitive and affective dimensions of trust in developing team performance. Team Perform Manag Int J 9(5/6):131–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Failer JL, Harvey A, Hochschild J (1993) Only one oar in the water: the political failure of school desegregation in Yonkers, New York. Educ Policy 7(3):276–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fischer F, Kollar I, Mandl H, Haake JM (2007) Scripting computer-supported collaborative learning: cognitive, computational and educational perspectives. Springer Science & Business Media. New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  15. Fischer F, Kollar I, Stegmann K, Wecker C (2013) Toward a script theory of guidance in computer-supported collaborative learning. Educ Psychol 48(1):56–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fontichiaro K (2016) Sustaining a makerspace. Teach Libr 43(4):39Google Scholar
  17. Gerard L, Matuk C, McElhaney K, Linn MC (2015) Automated, adaptive guidance for K-12 education. Educ Res Rev 15:41–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Greeno JG (2016) Cultural-historical activity theory/design-based research in Pasteur’s quadrant. J Learn Sci 25(4):634–639CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Greenwald S, Kulik A, Kunert A, Beck S, Frohlich B, Cobb S, Parsons S, Newbutt N, Gouveia C, Cook C (2017) Technology and applications for collaborative learning in virtual reality. Paper presented at Making a Difference: Prioritizing Equity and Access in CSCL, 12th International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL), Bristol, UKGoogle Scholar
  20. Hamilton E (2012) SAVI: Finland-USA EAGER: Innovations in Learning and Education. NSF Award 1254189. Arlington, VAGoogle Scholar
  21. Hamilton E (2015) Advancing a complex systems approach to personalized learning communities: bandwidth, sightlines, and teacher generativity. J Interact Learn Res 26(1):89–104Google Scholar
  22. Hamilton E (2018) Synthesis and design workshop: distributed collaboration in STEM-rich project-based learning. National Science Foundation Award DRL-1824924Google Scholar
  23. Hamilton E, Culp K (2016) Research on an international network for STEM Media Making and Student-led Participatory Teaching. National Science Foundation Award DRL-161284 (Advancing Informal STEM Learning (AISL) Program). Alexandria, VAGoogle Scholar
  24. Hamilton E, Owens AM (2018) Computational thinking and participatory teaching as pathways to personalized learning. Digital technologies and instructional design for personalized learning. IGI Global, Hershey, PA. pp 212–228Google Scholar
  25. Hamilton E, Foeaman G, Foeaman L, Ramirez-Gamez I (2016) A cyberensemble of inversion, immersion, shared knowledge areas, query and digital media-making in STEM classrooms. Revolutionizing education with digital ink. T. Hammond, Springer International Publishing, pp 191–207Google Scholar
  26. Hennessy S, Murphy P (1999) The potential for collaborative problem solving in design and technology. Int J Technol Des Educ 9(1):1–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hesse F, Care E, Buder J, Sassenberg K, Griffin P (2015) A framework for teachable collaborative problem solving skills. In: Griffin P, Care E (eds) Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills: methods and approach. Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, pp 37–56Google Scholar
  28. Hmelo-Silver CE (2016) Seven affordances of computer-supported collaborative learning: how to support collaborative learning? How can technologies help? AU – Jeong, Heisawn. Educ Psychol 51(2):247–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hollingshead AB, McGrath JE, O’Connor KM (1993) Group task performance and communication technology: a longitudinal study of computer-mediated versus face-to-face work groups. Small Group Res 24(3):307–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Holme JJ, Wells AS, Revilla AT (2005) Learning through experience: what graduates gained by attending desegregated high schools. Equity Excell Educ 38(1):14–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Immordino-Yang MH, Damasio A (2007) We feel, therefore we learn: the relevance of affective and social neuroscience to education. Mind Brain Educ 1(1):3–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Järvelä S, Kirschner PA, 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. Educ Technol Res Dev 63(1):125–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Jeevan S, Townsend J (2015) Forging a new deal in education. Stanford Social Innovation Review. ssir.org/articles/entry/forging_a_new_deal_in_education. Accessed 17 Aug 2015
  34. Jeong H, Hmelo-Silver CE (2016) Seven affordances of computer-supported collaborative learning: how to support collaborative learning? How can technologies help? Educ Psychol 51(2):247–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kallunki V, Hamilton E (2017) Analysis of Finnish and international students participating an international digital makerspace community. Paper presented in MEC 2017 conference, Under the Northern Lights. H. Rokamo. RovaniemiGoogle Scholar
  36. Koschmann TD (1996) CSCL, theory and practice of an emerging paradigm. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  37. Kreijns K, Kirschner PA, Vermeulen M (2013) Social aspects of CSCL environments: a research framework. Educ Psychol 48(4):229–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lee S, Espino D, Hamilton E (2019) Exploratory research application of epistemic network analysis for examining international virtual collaborative STEM learning. American Educational Research Association, TorontoGoogle Scholar
  39. Lee S, Gui X, Manquen M, Hamilton E (2019) Use of training, validation, and test sets for developing automated classifiers in quantitative ethnography. In: Shaffer DW, Eagan B (eds) Proceedings of the first international conference for quantitative ethnography. Springer, MadisonGoogle Scholar
  40. Leinonen T, Durall E, Kuikkaniemi K, Mikkonen T, Nelimarkka M, Syvänen A, Toikkanen T (2014) Design for learning: enhancing participation in learning through design thinking. In: World conference on educational multimedia, hypermedia and telecommunications. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NCGoogle Scholar
  41. Liao W, Bazarova NN, Yuan YC (2018) Unpacking medium effects on social psychological processes in computer-mediated communication using the social relations model. J Comput-Mediat Commun 23(2): 90–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Liedtka J, King A, Bennett KB (2013) Solving problems with design thinking: 10 stories of what works. Columbia Business, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  43. Lindgren R (2009) Perspective-based learning in virtual environments. Stanford University, StanfordGoogle Scholar
  44. Maloney J, Resnick M, Rusk N, Silverman B, Eastmond E (2010) The scratch programming language and environment. ACM Trans Comput Educ 10(4):16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Marope M (2017) Reconceptualizing and repositioning curriculum in the 21st century: a global paradigm shift. Retrieved 22 Apr 2018 from http://www.ibe.unesco.org/en/news/document-reconceptualizing-and-repositioning-curriculum-21st-century
  46. McKeown J, Hmelo-Silver CE, Jeong H, Hartley K, Faulkner R, Emmanuel N (2017) A meta-synthesis of CSCL literature in STEM education. International Society of the Learning Sciences, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  47. Mitchell N (2009) Learning through self-explanation of mathematics examples: effects of cognitive load. Education resource information clearinghouse (ERIC). Number ID: ED372095Google Scholar
  48. Müller S, Kapadia M, Frey S, Klinger S, Mann RP, Solenthaler B, Sumner RW, Gross M (2015) HeapCraft social tools: understanding and improving player collaboration in minecraft. In: Proceedings of the 10th international conference on the foundations of digital games (FDG 2015). Foundations of Digital Games 2015:22–25. Pacific Grove, CA, USAGoogle Scholar
  49. Multisilta J (2014) Mobile panoramic video applications for learning. Educ Inf Technol 19(3):655–666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Niemeyer DJ, Gerber HR (2015) Maker culture and minecraft: implications for the future of learning. Educ Media Int 52(3):216–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Niemi H, Multisilta J (2016) Digital storytelling promoting twenty-first century skills and student engagement. Technology, Pedagogy and Education 25(4):451–468Google Scholar
  52. Nokes-Malach TJ, VanLehn K, Belenky DM, Lichtenstein M, Cox G (2013) Coordinating principles and examples through analogy and self-explanation. Eur J Psychol Educ 28(4):1237–1263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Panadero E, Kirschner PA, Järvelä S, Malmberg J, Järvenoja H (2015) How individual self-regulation affects group regulation and performance: a shared regulation intervention. Small Group Res 46(4): 431–454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Paul AM (2016) The coding revolution. Sci Am 315(2):42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Paavola S, Hakkarainen K (2014) Trialogical Approach for Knowledge Creation. In: Tan S, So H, Yeo J (eds) Knowledge Creation in Education. Education Innovation Series. Springer, SingaporeGoogle Scholar
  56. Pea R, Lindgren R (2008) Video collaboratories for research and education: an analysis of collaboration design patterns. IEEE Trans Learn Technol 1(4): 235–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Roschelle J (2013) Special issue on CSCL: discussion. Educ Psychol 48(1):67–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Rouvrais S, Ormrod J, Landrac G, Mallet J, Gilliot JM, Thepaut A, Tremenbert P (2006) A mixed project-based learning framework: preparing and developing student competencies in a French Grande Ecole. Eur J Eng Educ 31(1):83–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Rowe E, Shernoff D (2014) The Finnish-US Network (FUN): Studying Flow in Educational Games & Gamified Learning Environments in World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications. Tampere, FinlandGoogle Scholar
  60. Shaffer D (2017) Quantitative ethnography. Cathcart Press, MadisonGoogle Scholar
  61. Shaffer DW, Svarovsky D, Navoa G, Nash P, Nulty A, Bagley E, Frank K, Rupp AA, Mislevy R (2009) Epistemic network analysis: a prototype for 21st-century assessment of learning. Int J Learn Media 1(2):33–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Sharples M (2015) Seamless learning: using location-aware technology to support art education. Computer 48(11):6–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Sheridan K, Halverson ER, Litts B, Brahms L, Jacobs-Priebe L, Owens T (2014) Learning in the making: a comparative case study of three makerspaces. Harv Educ Rev 84(4):505–531CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Soegaard M, Dam RF (2012) The encyclopedia of human-computer interaction. In: The encyclopedia of human-computer interaction. Idea Reference Group, Hershey PAGoogle Scholar
  65. Spector JM (2014) Conceptualizing the emerging field of smart learning environments. Smart Learn Environ 1(1):2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Stahl G, Koschmann T, Suthers D (2006) Computer-supported collaborative learning: an historical perspective. In: Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UKGoogle Scholar
  67. Strijbos J-W, Weinberger A (2010) Emerging and scripted roles in computer-supported collaborative learning. Comput Hum Behav 26(4):491–494CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Suthers DD (2006) Technology affordances for intersubjective meaning making: a research agenda for CSCL. Int J Comput-Support Collab Learn 1(3):315–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Teasley SD, Roschelle J (1993) Constructing a joint problem space: the computer as a tool for sharing knowledge. Computers as cognitive tools. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, pp 229–258Google Scholar
  70. Tsai C-W, Shen P-D, Lin R-A (2015) Exploring the effects of student-centered project-based learning with initiation on students’ computing skills: a quasi-experimental study of digital storytelling. Int J Inf Commun Technol Educ 11(1):27–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. van der Linden S (2015) Intrinsic motivation and pro-environmental behaviour. Nat Clim Chang 5(7): 612–613CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Von Kotze A, Cooper L (2000) Exploring the transformative potential of project-based learning in university adult education. Studies in the Education of Adults 32(2):212–228Google Scholar
  73. Wagner C (2008) Learning experience with virtual worlds. J Inf Syst Educ 19(3):263–266MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  74. Walther JB, Van Der Heide B, Ramirez A Jr, Burgoon JK, Peña J (2015) Interpersonal and hyperpersonal dimensions of computer-mediated communication. In: The handbook of the psychology of communication technology, vol 1. Wiley, Chichester, p 22Google Scholar
  75. Wang X, Mu J (2017) Introduction to collaboration scripts. Flexible scripting to facilitate knowledge construction in computer-supported collaborative learning. Springer, Singapore. pp 13–24Google Scholar
  76. Wells AS, Holme JJ, Atanda AK, Revilla AT (2005) Tackling racial segregation one policy at a time: why school desegregation only went so far. Teach Coll Rec 107(9):2141–2177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. West KC (1994) A desegregation tool that backfired: magnet schools and classroom segregation. Yale Law J 103(8):2567–2592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Williamson B (2017) Who owns educational theory? Big data, algorithms and the expert power of education data science. E-Learning Digital Media 14(3):105–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Wong RMF, Lawson MJ, Keeves J (2002) The effects of self-explanation training on students’ problem solving in high-school mathematics. Learn Instr 12(2):233–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. World Bank (2017) World development report: learning to realize education’s promise. International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Washington, DCCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Pepperdine UniversityMalibuUSA
  2. 2.Centre for University Teaching and Learning (HYPE), Faculty of Educational SciencesUniversity of HelsinkiHelsinkiFinland

Section editors and affiliations

  • Jari Multisilta
    • 1
  1. 1.Satakunta University of Applied SciencesPoriFinland