Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
Fig. 25.6
General procedure of prototypical task and experimental design
digitized historical newsreel on the Berlin-Blockade from 1948 and consulted addi-
tional material on the respective historical context and filmic codes and style. In
step 3, the design task was introduced and students were randomly joined in dyads
to work with the computer in a face-to-face setting. After briefly practicing the
respective digital processes, they were asked to analyze and comment on the histor-
ical newsreel, so that their product could be published in a virtual history museum.
Working time for the video-based design task was restricted to half an hour. When
students were finished, they proceeded to step 4, in which a post-experimental ques-
tionnaire tapped their appraisal of the design task and the group collaboration, and
a multiple choice tested what knowledge about the topic had been acquired.
While the limited amount of time in the experiment needs to be discussed with
regard to the space it leaves for processes of knowledge building to unfold, our field
data (Zahn, Krauskopf, Pea & Hesse, submitted) show that participants' knowledge
significantly increased during the design task (
F
(1, 106)
2
=
42.2;
p
<0.01, partial
η
=
0.29). These cognitive outcomes were not differentially affected by the different
conditions. In all conditions the design task proved to be interesting for the students
and applicable in regular classroom situations. Replicating findings from the prior
lab study, the affordances of DIVER significantly increased the quality of design
products and influenced design processes positively by focusing the learners' inter-
actions on task-relevant, conversations. Students working with DIVER considered
design-related issues significantly more often than dyads working with the com-
bination of Player & Text and displayed a tendency towards fewer help requests.
Additionally, working with DIVER influenced the collaborative interactions within
dyads indicating more autonomous design activities when working with DIVER.
The digital tools did not further students' general problem solving behavior, which
in all conditions was rather action-oriented and lacked thoughtful planning and eval-
uation (less than 3% of the time on the task was devoted to planning and less than
1% on evaluation).
In order to provide further qualitative evidence of process, we also conducted
additional analyses focusing on how the dyads used and integrated technology
affordances during their design-related interactions. The aim was to replicate corre-
sponding findings from the pilot study that identified processes of “guided noticing”
(Pea et al., 2006; Zahn, Pea, Hesse & Rosen, in press). There, interaction patterns
