INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CHANGES IN EDUCATION
Research Article
Feb 25, 2025 1 0

Effects of Social Roles Rotation on the Cognitive Learning Process in Online Collaborative Conversation

Linjing Wu 1,
Yu Gao 1 * ,
Yujia Zang 1,
Puliang He 2
1 Faculty of Artificial Intelligence in Education, Central China Normal University, China2 No.1 Middle School affiliated to Central China Normal University, China* Corresponding Author
International Journal of Changes in Education, 2(1), 2025, 19-28, https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE42023453
Publication date: Feb 25, 2025
Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

Online collaborative conversation is one of the crucial approaches to promote students’ collaborative skills and cognitive development. Students’ social roles in collaborative learning have a key impact on the process of collaborative learning activities and the
development of students’ cognition. What are the differences in the cognitive structures and processes between rotated-role and fixedrole in students’ groups? This paper explored this question by empirical research. The results of epistemic network analysis showed that the rotated-role groups had more high-level cognition and more complex cognitive structure, while the fixed-role groups had more management activities. In the rotated-role groups, the leaders can better mobilize the atmosphere, organize, and coordinate the cognitive processes of the team, to contribute more to the collaborative conversations. The cognitive depth and efficiency of fixed-role groups significantly decreased over time. These imply that in online collaborative conversation activities, role-rotation can be used to promote higher-order cognitive development, and fixed role can be used to improve management efficiency. Teachers should encourage team leaders to take on more cognitive activity organization and coordination tasks in online collaborative conversation activities. In the later stages of online collaborative conversation activities, teachers should strengthen intervention and support for fixed social role groups.

KEYWORDS

social roles collaborative learning online collaborative conversation epistemic network analysis

CITATION (APA)

Wu, L., Gao, Y., Zang, Y., & He, P. (2025). Effects of Social Roles Rotation on the Cognitive Learning Process in Online Collaborative Conversation. International Journal of Changes in Education, 2(1), 19-28. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE42023453
Harvard
Wu, L., Gao, Y., Zang, Y., and He, P. (2025). Effects of Social Roles Rotation on the Cognitive Learning Process in Online Collaborative Conversation. International Journal of Changes in Education, 2(1), pp. 19-28. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE42023453
Vancouver
Wu L, Gao Y, Zang Y, He P. Effects of Social Roles Rotation on the Cognitive Learning Process in Online Collaborative Conversation. International Journal of Changes in Education. 2025;2(1):19-28. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE42023453
AMA
Wu L, Gao Y, Zang Y, He P. Effects of Social Roles Rotation on the Cognitive Learning Process in Online Collaborative Conversation. International Journal of Changes in Education. 2025;2(1), 19-28. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE42023453
Chicago
Wu, Linjing, Yu Gao, Yujia Zang, and Puliang He. "Effects of Social Roles Rotation on the Cognitive Learning Process in Online Collaborative Conversation". International Journal of Changes in Education 2025 2 no. 1 (2025): 19-28. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE42023453
MLA
Wu, Linjing et al. "Effects of Social Roles Rotation on the Cognitive Learning Process in Online Collaborative Conversation". International Journal of Changes in Education, vol. 2, no. 1, 2025, pp. 19-28. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE42023453

REFERENCES

  1. Wu, L., Li, J., Liu, Q., He, L.,Yang, W., Zhang, Y., & Cheng, Y. (2021). Information measures of knowledge contribution: A new method to measure knowledge contribution in collaborative knowledge building: An information theory perspective. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59(7), 1319–1342. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633121994939
  2. Šorgo, A., Ploj Virtič, M., & Dolenc, K. (2023). The idea that digital remote learning can happen anytime, anywhere in forced online teacher education is a myth. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 28(4), 1461–1484. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-023-09685-3
  3. Berry, L. A., & Kowal, K. B. (2022). Effect of role-play in online discussions on student engagement and critical thinking. Online Learning, 26(3), 4–21. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v26i3.3367
  4. Luo, H., Chen, Y., Chen, T., Koszalka, T. A., & Feng, Q. (2023). Impact of role assignment and group size on asynchronous online discussion: An experimental study. Computers & Education, 192, 104658. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104658
  5. Wang, P., Luo, H., Liu, B., Chen, T., & Jiang, H. (2024). Investigating the combined effects of role assignment and discussion timing in a blended learning environment. The Internet and Higher Education, 60, 100932. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2023.100932
  6. Yilmaz, R., & Karaoglan Yilmaz, F. G. (2019). Assigned roles as a structuring tool in online discussion groups: Comparison of transactional distance and knowledge sharing behaviors. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 57(5), 1303–1325. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633118786855
  7. He, S., Shi, X., Choi, T. H., & Zhai, J. (2023). How do students’ roles in collaborative learning affect collaborative problem solving competency? A systematic review of research. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 50, 101423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2023.101423
  8. Dunbar, R. L., Dingel, M. J., Dame, L. F., Winchip, J., & Petzold, A. M. (2018). Student social self-efficacy, leadership status, and academic performance in collaborative learning environments. Studies in Higher Education, 43(9), 1507–1523. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2016.1265496
  9. Koeslag-Kreunen, M., van den Bossche, P., Hoven, M., van der Klink, M., & Gijselaers, W. (2018). When leadership powers team learning: A meta-analysis. Small Group Research, 49(4), 475–513. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496418764824
  10. Luo, H., Han, X., Chen, Y., & Nie, Y. (2022). Should you become a leader in online collaborative learning? Impact of assigned leadership on learning behaviors, outcomes, and perceptions. PLOS ONE, 17(4), e0266653. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0266653
  11. Mead, G. H., & Strauss, A. L. (1934). The social psychology of George Herbert Mead. USA: The University of Chicago Press.
  12. Saqr, M., L´opez-Pernas, S., & Murphy, K. (2024). How group structure, members’ interactions and teacher facilitation explain the emergence of roles in collaborative learning. Learning and Individual Differences, 112, 102463. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2024.102463
  13. Wang, C., & Li, S. (2021). The trade-off between individuals and groups: Role interactions under different technology affordance conditions. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 16(4), 525–557. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-021-09355-5
  14. Benmira, S., & Agboola, M. (2021). Evolution of leadership theory. BMJ Leader, 5(1), 3–5. https://doi.org/10.1136/leader-2020-000296
  15. Khanagha, S., Volberda, H. W., Alexiou, A., & Annosi, M. C. (2022). Mitigating the dark side of agile teams: Peer pressure, leaders’ control, and the innovative output of agile teams. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 39(3), 334–350. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12589
  16. Yin, X. (2023). Promoting peer learning in education: Exploring continuous action iterated dilemma and team leader rotation mechanism in peer-led instruction. Electronic Research Archive, 31(11), 6552–6563. https://doi.org/10.3934/era.2023331
  17. Kim, M. K., Lee, I. H., & Wang, Y. (2020). How students emerge as learning leaders in small group online discussions. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 36(5), 610–624. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12431
  18. Ghazal, S., Al-Samarraie, H., & Wright, B. (2020). A conceptualization of factors affecting collaborative knowledge building in online environments. Online Information Review, 44(1), 62–89. https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-02-2019-0046
  19. de Gagne, J. C., Park, H. K., Hall, K., Woodward, A., Yamane, S., & Kim, S. S. (2019). Microlearning in health professions education: Scoping review. JMIR Medical Education, 5(2), e13997. https://doi.org/10.2196/13997
  20. Henri, F. (1992). Computer conferencing and content analysis. In A. R. Kaye (Ed.), Collaborative learning through computer conferencing: The Najaden papers (pp. 117–136). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-77684-7_8
  21. Gunawardena, C. N., Lowe, C. A., & Anderson, T. (1997). Analysis of a global online debate and the development of an interaction analysis model for examining social construction of knowledge in computer conferencing. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 17(4), 397–431. https://doi.org/10.2190/7MQV-X9UJ-C7Q3-NRAG
  22. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking and computer conferencing: A model and tool to assess cognitive presence. Retrieved from: https://auspace.athabascau.ca/handle/2149/740
  23. Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. UK: Addison Wesley Longman.
  24. Shaffer, D. W., & Ruis, A. (2017). Epistemic network analysis: A worked example of theory-based learning analytics. In C. Lang, G. Siemens, A. Wise & D. Gaševi´c (Eds.), Handbook of learning analytics (pp. 175–187). Society for Learning Analytics Research. https://doi.org/10.18608/hla17.015
  25. Shaffer, D. W. (2012). Models of situated action: Computer games and the problem of transfer. In C. Steinkuehler, K. Squire & S. Barab (Eds.), Games, learning, and society: Learning and meaning in the digital age (pp. 403–432). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139031127.028
  26. Shaffer, D. W., Collier, W., & Ruis, A. R. (2016). A tutorial on epistemic network analysis: Analyzing the structure of connections in cognitive, social, and interaction data. Journal of Learning Analytics, 3(3), 9–45. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2016.33.3
  27. Wu, L., Liu, Q., Mao, G., & Zhang, S. (2020). Using epistemic network analysis and self-reported reflections to explore students’ metacognition differences in collaborative learning. Learning and Individual Differences, 82, 101913. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2020.101913
  28. Zhang, S., Gao, Q., Sun, M., Cai, Z., Li, H., Tang, Y., & Liu, Q. (2022). Understanding student teachers’ collaborative problem solving: Insights from an epistemic network analysis (ENA). Computers & Education, 183, 104485. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104485
  29. Guo, J., & Huo, X. S. (2014). Collaborative knowledge building research of web-based teaching discussion. China Educational Technology, 3, 101–109.
  30. Ott, L. E., Kephart, K., Stolle-McAllister, K., & LaCourse, W. R. (2018). Students’ understanding and perceptions of assigned team roles in a classroom laboratory environment. Journal of College Science Teaching, 47(4), 83–91.
  31. Schellens, T., van Keer, H., deWever, B., & Valcke, M. (2007). Scripting by assigning roles: Does it improve knowledge construction in asynchronous discussion groups? International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2(2), 225–246. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-007-9016-2
  32. O’Brien, G., & Bedford, S. (2012). Small group work in large chemistry classes: Workshops in first year chemistry. In Aiming for Excellence in STEM Learning and Teaching: Proceedings of STEM Annual Conference 2012, 1–10.
  33. Wise, A. F., & Chiu, M. M. (2011). Analyzing temporal patterns of knowledge construction in a role-based online discussion. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6(3), 445–470. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-011-9120-1
  34. Strijbos, J. W., Martens, R. L., Jochems, W. M. G.,& Broers, N. J. (2004). The effect of functional roles on group efficiency: Using multilevel modeling and content analysis to investigate computer-supported collaboration in small groups. Small Group Research, 35(2), 195–229. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496403260843

LICENSE

Creative Commons License
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.