Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
Four conditions were used in the study. In a
model
condition, vicarious learn-
ers heard an audio presentation of two model collaborators using dialog to arrive
at a diagnosis and a therapy plan for Case1 in the learning phase. These learners
were also presented animated slide clips displaying the development of the joint
solution by the model collaborators as they clarified questions about the case. As
learners viewed the animation clips, they were prompted by the experimenter (a)
to
self-explain
activities of the model collaborators and (b) to
collaborate
as the
models clarified questions about the case. In a
script
condition vicarious learn-
ers received precise written instructions (O'Donnell, 1999) telling them how to
interact. This script specified the exact collaborative steps that were required to
accomplish the diagnosis and treatment plans for evaluating each part of Case 1.
After learners read the scripted instructions written on paper, the experimenter told
them they had 7 min to ask each other questions and were prompted to “Make use
of each other's knowledge to clarify information given to you about the patient in
the case description before turning to the diagnosis” (p. 220). In an
unscripted
con-
dition the learners engaged in collaborative problem solving for Case 1 without
any instructional guidance whatsoever. In a
control
condition, only the applica-
tion phase (Case 2) was included. In the application phase learners in all four
conditions used the video-conferencing system while formulating a diagnosis and
treatment plan for Case 2. Following the application phase, a posttest with subscales
assessing knowledge of good collaboration, diagnosis, and treatment plans was
administered.
Several measures of performance were obtained during the application phase.
These included patterns of activity as recorded in log files, characteristics of the
dialog, and the quality of both the diagnosis and treatment plans. Performances on
posttest scales were also reported. The model and script conditions significantly
outperformed the unscripted and control conditions on all measures. On the posttest
scales there were also some small differences between the model and script con-
ditions and between the unscripted and control conditions. Rummel and Spada
(2005) concluded that the quality of the performances exhibited by learners in
both the model and script conditions was improved by the instructional guidance
they received during the learning phase: the learners acquired considerable skill in
collaborating and were able to share their knowledge to arrive at good diagnosis
and treatment plans, as evidenced during the application phase; both groups also
acquired explicit knowledge about effective diagnosis and treatment, as evidenced
by the posttest scales.
Clearly, vicarious learners, who overheard model collaborators discussing
Case 1, while viewing corresponding animation clips and being prompted to
discuss features of the solution, achieved substantial learning gains. Similarly, learn-
ers who read precise instructions on the collaborative steps needed to evaluate
Case 1 and were instructed to ask each other questions in order to share knowledge,
also achieved real gains. Both groups acquired the knowledge needed to collaborate
effectively, share knowledge, and use their knowledge to successfully diagnose and
treat a clinical case. These findings of Rummel and Spada (2005) are important and
will no doubt inspire other research and applications.
