Comparing Dynamic Versus Pre‐Planned Combinations of Individual and Collaborative Learning in a Classroom Experiment.
Background: Traditionally, combining individual and collaborative learning happens in a pre‐planned and synchronised manner where the whole class switches between activities at the same time. However, in an era where personalised learning is showing great promise, a more dynamic way of combining the...
| Publicado en: | Journal of Computer Assisted Learning Vol. 42; no. 1; pp. 1 - 19 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , , , , |
| Formato: | glossary pictorial research tables/charts Journal Article |
| Publicado: |
Wiley-Blackwell
Feb2026
|
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=191181610&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ccm uiTerm: 191181610 longDbName: CINAHL Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: dissinfo: jinfo: jid: 02664909 6M1 jtl: Journal of Computer Assisted Learning issn: 02664909 maglogo: Y pubinfo: dt: Feb2026 vid: 42 iid: 1 pid: 480 pub: Wiley-Blackwell place: Malden, Massachusetts artinfo: ui: 191181610 191181610 191181610 10.1111/jcal.70158 191181610 ppf: 1 ppct: 18 formats: tig: atl: Comparing Dynamic Versus Pre‐Planned Combinations of Individual and Collaborative Learning in a Classroom Experiment. aug: au: Yang, Kexin Bella Pan, Yiliu Liu, Menghan Rummel, Nikol Aleven, Vincent affil: Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh Pennsylvania,, USA sug: subj: Faculty Attitudes Evaluation Student Attitudes Evaluation Collaboration Learning Methods Evaluation Learning Environment Outcomes of Education Teachers Psychosocial Factors Students, Middle School Psychosocial Factors Human United States Funding Source Qualitative Studies Comparative Studies Experimental Studies Stakeholder Participation Group Dynamics Educational Technology Descriptive Statistics Public Sector Schools, Middle Schools, Elementary Interviews Algorithms Student Knowledge Evaluation Pretest-Posttest Design Artificial Intelligence Videorecording Audiorecording Student Experiences Two-Way Analysis of Variance T-Tests Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test Chi Square Test Post Hoc Analysis ab: Background: Traditionally, combining individual and collaborative learning happens in a pre‐planned and synchronised manner where the whole class switches between activities at the same time. However, in an era where personalised learning is showing great promise, a more dynamic way of combining the two activities may lead to better learning outcomes and/or be preferred by teachers and students. Objective: The current study aims to study teachers' and students' perspectives on two ways of combining individual and collaborative learning, as well as compare their potential differences in learning outcomes. Methods: Working with 195 students in 13 middle‐school classes, we conducted an experimental study with two conditions: Dynamic and Standard. The Dynamic condition allows personalized, self‐paced, and real‐time pairing up of students as the need arises in class; in the Standard condition, by contrast, students switch between activities in a pre‐planned manner, which happens at the same time for everyone in the class. We examined students' learning outcomes as the primary dependent measure, complemented by analyses of process data and stakeholder perceptions. Results: This study provides one of the first empirical examinations comparing dynamic versus pre‐planned combinations of individual and collaborative learning in authentic classroom settings. By triangulating quantitative learning data with stakeholder insights, we provide valuable findings and design implications for researchers and educational technology practitioners. We found that both conditions supported significant learning gains, with the Standard condition showing greater collaboration efficiency. While learning outcomes were comparable, both teachers and students favoured the dynamic approach for its flexibility and pedagogical value. This study steps closer to the future of highly personalized smart classrooms that can address the unique needs of each student. Summary: What is currently known about this topic? ○Classes often switch between activities in a fixed, pre‐planned schedule.○Personalised learning approaches are becoming increasingly important.○Dynamically switching may support more flexible student learning.What does this paper adds? ○Compares dynamic and standard switching between activities.○Examines both learning outcomes and teacher–student perceptions.○Provides one of the first empirical tests of dynamic orchestration.○Shows that both methods support learning, but differ in experience.Implications for practice or policy ○Dynamic switching can support flexible pacing based on classroom needs.○Teachers may benefit from tools that enable real‐time student pairing.○Standard, fixed schedules may offer stronger collaboration structure.○Results point toward smart classrooms that adapt to each student. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: glossary pictorial research tables/charts Journal Article ougenre: Article language: English refInfo: holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|