Individual versus collaborative problem solving: divergent outcomes depending on task complexity

Many studies have tested external supports for promoting productive collaboration, but relatively few have examined what features characterize naturally productive collaborative tasks. Two lines of research have come to distinct conclusions on the primary task feature associated with productive coll...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Instructional science 2013-11, Vol.41 (6), p.1153-1172
Main Authors: Sears, David A., Reagin, James Michael
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Acceleration (Education)
Achievement Gains
Collaboration
Collaborative learning
Conventional Instruction
Cooperative Learning
Cooperative Programs
Coordination
Difficulty Level
Dyadic relations
Education
Educational Psychology
Grade 7
Group Dynamics
Group performance
Intermode Differences
Laughter
Learning and Instruction
Mathematical complements
Mathematical problems
Mathematics Education
Mathematics Instruction
Middle school students
Pedagogic Psychology
Performance Based Assessment
Pretests
Problem Solving
Productivity
Reagins
Task Analysis
Teaching Methods
Transfer of Training
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Many studies have tested external supports for promoting productive collaboration, but relatively few have examined what features characterize naturally productive collaborative tasks. Two lines of research have come to distinct conclusions on the primary task feature associated with productive collaboration: demonstrability versus complexity. This study examined the problem-solving performance of 110 seventh grade students on a demonstrable mathematical task, including 69 in three traditional math classrooms (for whom the task was complex) and 41 in two accelerated math classrooms (for whom the task was not complex). Students were further assigned to one of four conditions split by two factors: grouping (individual versus dyad) and number of problems (one or two). For the accelerated math classes, individuals performed significantly better than dyads. For the traditional math classes, dyads performed significantly better than individuals and exceeded the truth-wins criterion (a theoretical maximum indicating how individuals would perform if they shared knowledge perfectly). A complex-demonstrable task framework is proposed for characterizing naturally productive collaborative tasks.
ISSN:0020-4277
1573-1952
DOI:10.1007/s11251-013-9271-8