Collaborative Learning Design within Open Source E-Learning Systems - E-Infrastructures and Technologies for Lifelong Learning - page 219

and constructivist views of learning, (b) specific
collaboration methods, including guidelines for
the formation of collaborative learning activities,
(c) diverse teacher interventions encouraging stu-
dent engagement in the tasks at hand, (d) diverse
types of questions encouraging the development
of student critical thinking, (e) specific structures
including guidelines for the encouragement of
effective collaborative communication activities,
and (f) diverse learning activities to be included in
specific parts of a lesson plan. PCSPs were asked
to take into account all the guidelines included in
the said learning materials in order to design their
online courses.
As regards the formation of appropriate lesson
plans, it was considered critical for them to com-
prise learning activities related to the following
specific parts: (i) student emotional and cognitive
preparation for the learning of the subject matter
in question, including; motivation of students
to be actively and passionately engaged in the
tasks proposed, clarification of the aims of the
course and of each learning activity proposed for
students, investigation of students' previous and
prerequisite knowledge for the understanding of
the concepts in question, (ii) introduction of stu-
dents to the learning of the previously mentioned
concepts, (iii) consolidation of the said concepts
by the students, (iv) assessment of the knowledge
constructed during the lesson, (v) development of
student metacognitive skills, and (vi) extension
of the lesson by providing learning materials and
activities for further study.
Regarding the design of collaborative learning
activities, PCSPs were provided with learning
materials on specific collaboration methods to
design collaborative learning tasks and also group/
whole class communication. Specifically, these
materials concerned the following context free
collaboration methods: Brainstorming (Osborn,
1963), Student Teams Achievement Divisions
(STAD; Slavin, 1978), Jigsaw (Aronson, Blaney,
Sikes, Stephan & Snapp, 1978), Group Investiga-
tion Method (Sharan & Hertz-Lazarowitz, 1980),

Co-op Co-op (Kagan, 1985), Guided Reciprocal
Peer Questioning (Palincsar, & Brown, 1984;
Martin, and Blanc, 1984; King, 1990), Three Step
Interview (Kagan, 1994), Paired Annotations
(Millis & Cottell, 1998), Double entry journal
(Berthoff, 1981). These methods were selected
as being representative of the achievement of
diverse learning objectives such as: the genera-
tion of a large number of ideas for the solution of
a problem ( Brainstorming), motivating students
to encourage and help each other, while at the
same time accelerating their achievement ( STAD ),
emphasizing interpersonal inter-dependence
( Jigsaw ), cultivating student ability to approach
problems with different structures ( Group Investi-
gation Method, Co-op, Co-op ), encourage critical
thinking ( Guided Reciprocal Peer Questioning) ,
enhancing team building and engagement of
students in conversation (Three Step Interview ),
developing the ability to concentrate on important
terms (Double entry journal) as well as promoting
cooperative learning through accountability and
positive interdependence (Paired Annotations ).
To avoid repetitions, the said methods will be
analytically presented in combination with their
implementation within LAMS in a specific sec-
tion of this chapter (see Implementation within
LAMS later on).

Data Resources and Analysis

The data collected consisted of the specific online
courses within MOODLE formed by each PCSP
as well as their written reports describing/docu-
menting these courses. In the first stage of data
analysis, each individual PCSP's approaches to
the said task were identified and reported in terms
of design of learning activities related to all the
specific parts an online course consists of, namely;
stating the stage, scheduling of the course, inte-
gration of learning materials, class organization,
learning tasks, communication, collaboration and
evaluation. In the second stage, data was codified
using themes that had emerged. Next, the focus was