Abstract
Interpersonal physiological synchrony has been consistently found during collaborative tasks. However, few studies have applied synchrony to predict collaborative learning quality in real classroom. To explore the relationship between interpersonal physiological synchrony and collaborative learning activities, this study collected electrodermal activity (EDA) and heart rate (HR) during naturalistic class sessions and compared the physiological synchrony between independent task and group discussion task. The students were recruited from a renowned university in China. Since each student learn differently and not everyone prefers collaborative learning, participants were sorted into collaboration and independent dyads based on their collaborative behaviors before data analysis. The result showed that, during group discussions, high collaboration pairs produced significantly higher synchrony than low collaboration dyads (p = 0.010). Given the equivalent engagement level during independent and collaborative tasks, the difference of physiological synchrony between high and low collaboration dyads was triggered by collaboration quality. Building upon this result, the classification analysis was conducted, indicating that EDA synchrony can identify different levels of collaboration quality (AUC = 0.767 and p = 0.015).
Highlights
AND RELATED LITERATURESIn a world that is deeply connected, collaborative learning is believed to be the most important way of learning, shared knowledge construction, decision-making, critical thinking, and problem solving (Bruffee, 1999; Dillenbourg, 1999; Van Kleef et al, 2010; Gokhale, 2012)
In the real class sessions, students acted in their own learning style, which refers to the stable trait which decides how learners perceive and respond to learning environments (Keefe, 1979)
The aim of the present study is to explore the potentials of using physiological synchrony to classify collaboration quality in realistic educational settings, based on consistently identified synchrony during interpersonal interaction by previous studies
Summary
AND RELATED LITERATURESIn a world that is deeply connected, collaborative learning is believed to be the most important way of learning, shared knowledge construction, decision-making, critical thinking, and problem solving (Bruffee, 1999; Dillenbourg, 1999; Van Kleef et al, 2010; Gokhale, 2012). Successful collaboration benefits the whole group by immersing the students in an active learning condition to increase engagement and joint attention, relearn through retrieval, negotiate multiple perspectives, increase working memory resources, to name a few (Johnson and Johnson, 1985; Barron, 2003; Roediger III and Karpicke, 2006; Kirschner et al, 2009; Kuhn and Crowell, 2011). Broader education goals, such as involvement, cooperation and teamwork, Collaborative Learning Quality Classification and civic responsibility, are believed to be achieved by collaborative learning (Smith and MacGregor, 1992). Individual interaction is crucial in successful collaborative learning (Soller et al, 1998; Hiltz and Turoff, 2002; Kreijns et al, 2003), and serves as a key component of collaboration quality
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
