Effects of two differently sequenced classroom scripts on common ground in collaborative inquiry learning

Abstract

Collaborative learning involves the collaborative regulation of cognitive activities to establish common ground for the coordination of content. Drawing on research on cognitive scripts to embed collaboration in learning, this study examines the effect of the quality of the grounding and testing processes on the quality of the inquiry processes (i.e., generating and evaluating evidence, drawing conclusions) in two differently sequenced classroom scripts. Both script conditions began with the teacher modeling each inquiry skill at the plenary level. After the plenary session, students in the Plenary–Individual–Small Group (PISG) classroom script first worked individually before working in small groups, whereas students in the Plenary–Small Group–Individual (PSGI) condition first worked in small groups before working individually. Overall, 61 students (grades 6–9) participated in a quasi-experimental study: 10 groups of three to four students in each condition. We coded all 20 groups’ discourse. Descriptive findings showed no statistical significance in both script conditions. Case studies of the two groups’ discourse in each experimental condition showed that occurrences of high-level grounding and high-level testing processes led to more occurrences of high-level inquiry processes in the PISG script condition. Excerpts of students’ work at the individual level in both conditions illustrated how the script sequence shaped the discourse moves at the small group level. We discuss these findings against the background of literature on grounding, anticipated interaction, and cognitive scripts in collaborative learning.