Scaffolding at the Inter-group Level: An International Collaboration Experience between Hong Kong and Canada Students
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The concept of scaffolding suggests that with appropriate assistance, a learner could attain a goal or engage in a practice otherwise out of reach (Davis & Miyake, 2004). Previous studies have explored scaffolding between or among individuals (e.g., Wood, et al., 1976; Palincsar & Brown, 1984). This paper examined scaffolding that could happen at an inter-group level. A group of 22 Hong Kong primary five students collaborated with a group of 22 Canada grade five students through an online discussion forum. Although they were of the same grade, it was the first year for Hong Kong students to engage in online discussion activities, while Canada students were much experienced in this type of learning activities. As Pea (2004) argued that “fading”, which was the removal of supports to let learners act on their own, was as an essential component of scaffolding, this study incorporated a three-phase design so that fading could be studied in addition to the effect of scaffolding. In phase one, Hong Kong students discussed among themselves on the forum. In phase two, Canada students joined in the discussion with Hong Kong students. In phase three, Canada students were no longer present on the forum while Hong Kong students continued to discuss among themselves. To analyze the interaction patterns of the students, social network analysis was employed in the present study. It was found that in phase one, Hong Kong students tended to write isolated notes and work on their own topic; while in phase two, with the joining in of Canada students, the interaction pattern changed drastically, with the notes were linked with one another, even among those written by Hong Kong students. In phase three, although Canada students were no longer present on the discussion forum, the interaction pattern retained among Hong Kong students that their notes were linked with one another. The study suggested that with a more experienced group, the interaction pattern of a novice group in online discussion could be changed and the changed pattern could retain even the experienced group no longer present.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,021 | 0,005 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».