Alm Module 3-Collaboration

Rheingold (2008, February) discussed people collaborating to achieve positive collective results. While I do not necessarily believe that it is a “basic instinct” to work together and interact in a group, I believe that human beings strive to do things that make their own individual lives easier, so in that context, i.e., a more self-serving context, I think human beings will work collaboratively to strive for a positive collective result if it is in the individual’s self-interest. Sociology says that human beings are by nature gregarious, and I presume that means that people band together, for example, in towns and cities because they need each other’s assistance to live in modern society. That grouping into villages, towns, communities, and cities seems to imply a need to live in groups in order to cooperate for better living conditions because we do not have time to grow our own vegetables and other necessities. We buy gas from the gas station, groceries from stores, and clothing from department stores. So, it would seem that we are at least cooperating for a positive collective results.

There is at type of collaboration on a face-to-face level that I call teamwork that is real collaboration. I have been in those teamwork situations where the team had to come up with a product or a solution and after meeting a time or two, individual egos merge into a group synergistic entity that comes up with products and solutions that no one individual in the group would have thought of alone. It is a fascinating process and exciting to observe and participate in. While Driscoll claimed that “Rather, collaboration enables insights and solutions to arise synergistically (Brown et all, 1989) that would not otherwise come about” (p. 396). I have not experienced that type of synergy in an online setting, and I think it may require a physical presence for it to work.

Technology can facilitate collaboration based on constructivist principles by incorporating opportunities to discuss ideas and ask questions and by setting up group activities that promote collaboration, so, some types of collaboration are possible in an online setting. Ill-devised concepts or erroneous ideas can be clarified through collaboration and students can learn in virtual reality situations that give them opportunities to understand different points of view and as Driscoll stated, “transmission or sharing of cultural knowledge” (p. 397). Papanikolaou and Boubouka (2010) conducted an empirical study that ask three questions: “What are the design variables for a collaboration script intended to promote metacognitive knowledge; what types of metacognitive knowledge should be better supported at specific phases of a project, and which phases of a project should be better supported by peer learning?” (p. 137).

Driscoll, M. P. (2005). Psychology of learning for instruction (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.

Papanikaou, K., and Boubouka, M. (2010). Promoting collaboration in a project-based e-learning context. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 43(2), pp. 135-155

Rheingold, H. (2008, February). Howard Rheingold on collaboration [Video file]. Retrieved from
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/howard_rheingold_on_collaboration.html

Posted comments to:

http://technibug.wordpress.com/2012/04/13/module-3-blog-3-collaboration-4/#comments

http://jacobseduc8845.wordpress.com/2012/04/13/lets-make-meaning-online-and-together/#respond