Skip to main content

A Framework for Teachable Collaborative Problem Solving Skills

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Assessment and Teaching of 21st Century Skills

Abstract

In his book “Cognition in the Wild”, Hutchins (1995) invites his readers to scan their immediate environment for objects that were not produced through collaborative efforts of several people, and remarks that the only object in his personal environment that passed this test was a small pebble on his desk. In fact, it is remarkable how our daily lives are shaped by collaboration. Whether it is in schools, at the workplace, or in our free time, we are constantly embedded in environments that require us to make use of social skills in order to coordinate with other people. Given the pervasiveness of collaboration in everyday life, it is somewhat surprising that the development of social and collaborative skills is largely regarded as something that will occur naturally and does not require any further facilitation. In fact, groups often fail to make use of their potential (Schulz-Hardt, Brodbeck, Group performance and leadership. In: Hewstone M, Stroebe W, Jonas K (eds) Introduction to social psychology: a European perspective, 4th edn, pp 264–289. Blackwell, Oxford, 2008) and people differ in the extent to which they are capable of collaborating efficiently with others. Therefore, there is a growing awareness that collaborative skills require dedicated teaching efforts (Schoenfeld, Looking toward the 21st century: challenges of educational theory and practice. Edu Res 28:4–14, 1999). Collaborative problem solving has been identified as a particularly promising task that draws upon various social and cognitive skills, and that can be analysed in classroom environments where skills are both measurable and teachable.

This chapter provides a conceptual framework of collaborative problem solving that is informed by findings from fields of research as diverse as cognitive science, education, social psychology and psycholinguistics.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The acronym ATC21STM has been globally trademarked. For purposes of simplicity the acronym is presented throughout the chapter as ATC21S.

References

  • Brodbeck, F. C., & Greitemeyer, T. (2000). Effects of individual versus mixed individual and group experience in rule induction on group member learning and group performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 36(6), 621–648.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A. (1987). Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation, and other more mysterious mechanisms. In F. Reiner & R. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation, and understanding (pp. 65–116). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, H. H. (1996). Using language. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, H. H., & Murphy, G. L. (1982). Audience design in meaning and reference. Advances in Psychology, 9, 287–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, E. G. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups. Review of Educational Research, 64, 1–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crowston, K., Rubleske, J., & Howison, J. (2006). Coordination theory: A ten-year retrospective. In P. Zhang & D. Galletta (Eds.), Human-computer interaction in management information systems (pp. 120–138). Armonk: M.E. Sharpe.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Wit, F. R. C., & Greer, L. L. (2008). The black-box deciphered: A meta-analysis of team diversity, conflict, and team performance. In Academy of Management best paper proceedings, Anaheim.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dehler, J., Bodemer, D., Buder, J., & Hesse, F. W. (2011). Guiding knowledge communication in CSCL via group knowledge awareness. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(3), 1068–1078.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diehl, M., & Stroebe, W. (1987). Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: Toward the solution of a riddle. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(3), 497–509.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dillenbourg, P., Baker, M., Blaye, A., & O’Malley, C. (1996). The evolution of research on collaborative learning. In E. Spada & P. Reiman (Eds.), Learning in humans and machines: Towards an interdisciplinary learning science (pp. 189–211). Oxford: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doise, W., & Mugny, G. (1984). The social development of the intellect. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flavell, J. H. (1976). Metacognitive aspects of problem solving. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), The nature of intelligence (pp. 231–236). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greeno, J. G. (1998). The situativity of knowing, learning, and research. American Psychologist, 53(1), 5–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, P. (2014). Performance assessment of higher order thinking. Journal of Applied Measurement, 15(1), 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunzelmann, G., & Anderson, J. R. (2003). Problem solving: Increased planning with practice. Cognitive Systems Research, 4, 57–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gurtner, A., Tschan, F., Semmer, N. K., & Nägele, C. (2007). Getting groups to develop good strategies: Effects of reflexivity interventions on team process, team performance, and shared mental models. Organisational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 102(2), 127–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hastie, R., & Pennington, N. (1991). Cognitive and social processes in decision making. In L. B. Resnick, J. M. Levine, & D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 308–327). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes-Roth, B., & Hayes-Roth, F. (1979). A cognitive model of planning. Cognitive Science, 3, 275–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, E. T. (1981). Role taking and social judgment: Alternative developmental perspectives and processes. In J. H. Flavell & L. Ross (Eds.), Social cognitive development: Frontiers and possible futures (pp. 119–153). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hinsz, V. B., Tindale, R. S., & Vollrath, D. A. (1997). The emerging conception of groups as information processors. Psychological Bulletin, 121, 43–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horton, W. S., & Keysar, B. (1996). When do speakers take into account common ground? Cognition, 59, 91–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D., Johnson, R., & Holubec, E. (1998). Cooperation in the classroom. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonas, E., Schulz-Hardt, S., Frey, D., & Thelen, N. (2001). Confirmation bias in sequential information search after preliminary decisions: An expansion of dissonance theoretical research on selective exposure to information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(4), 557–571.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(4), 681–706.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klimoski, R., & Mohammed, S. (1994). Team mental model: Construct or metaphor? Journal of Management, 20, 403–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larson, J. R., Jr., & Christensen, C. (1993). Groups as problem-solving units: Toward a new meaning of social cognition. British Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 5–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laughlin, P. R., & Ellis, A. L. (1986). Demonstrability and social combination processes on mathematical intellective tasks. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22, 177–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. (1983). Thinking, problem solving, cognition. New York: W.H. Freeman and Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, G. A., Galanter, E., & Pribram, K. H. (1960). Plans and the structure of behaviour. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Nardi, B. A. (1996). Context and consciousness: Activity theory and human-computer interaction. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norton, R. (1975). Measurement of ambiguity tolerance. Journal of Personality Assessment, 39(6), 607–619.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (1999). Measuring student knowledge and skills: A new framework for assessment. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, R. S., & Behfar, K. J. (2005). Leadership as group regulation. In D. M. Messick & R. M. Kramer (Eds.), The psychology of leadership: New perspectives and research (pp. 143–162). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1962). The psychology of the child. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polya, G. (1973). How to solve it. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roschelle, J. (1992). Learning by collaborating: Convergent conceptual change. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(3), 235–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roschelle, J., & Teasley, S. (1995). The construction of shared knowledge in collaborative problem solving. In C. E. O’Malley (Ed.), Computer supported collaborative learning (pp. 69–97). Heidelberg: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Salomon, G. (Ed.). (1993). Distributed cognitions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scardamalia, M. (2002). Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. In B. Smith (Ed.), Liberal education in a knowledge society (pp. 67–98). Chicago: Open Court.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoenfeld, A. H. (1999). Looking toward the 21st century: Challenges of educational theory and practice. Educational Researcher, 28, 4–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schulz-Hardt, S., & Brodbeck, C. F. (2008). Group performance and leadership. In M. Hewstone, W. Stroebe, & K. Jonas (Eds.), Introduction to social psychology: A European perspective (4th ed., pp. 264–289). Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 27(2), 4–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Star, J. R., & Rittle-Johnson, B. (2008). Flexibility in problem solving: The case of equation solving. Learning and Instruction, 18(6), 565–579.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stasser, G., & Titus, W. (1985). Pooling of unshared information in group decision making: Biased information sampling during discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48(6), 1467–1478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stasser, G., & Vaughan, S. I. (1996). Models of participation during face-to-face unstructured discussion. In E. H. Witte & J. H. Davis (Eds.), Understanding group behavior: Consensual action by small groups (Vol. 1, pp. 165–192). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steiner, I. D. (1972). Group processes and productivity. New York: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, L. L., Wang, J., & Gunia, B. C. (2010). Negotiation. Annual Review of Psychology, 61, 491–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trötschel, R., Hüffmeier, J., Loschelder, D. D., Schwartz, K., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (2011). Perspective taking as a means to overcome motivational barriers in negotiations: When putting oneself into the opponent’s shoes helps to walk toward agreements. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(4), 771.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Gundy, A. B. (1987). Creative problem solving: A guide for trainers and management. Westport: Greenwood Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Knippenberg, D., & Schippers, M. C. (2007). Work group diversity. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 515–541.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Knippenberg, D., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Homan, A. C. (2004). Work group diversity and group performance: An integrative model and research agenda. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 1008–1022.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wegner, D. M. (1986). Transactive memory: A contemporary analysis of the group mind. In B. Mullen & G. R. Goethals (Eds.), Theories of group behavior (pp. 185–205). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weinstein, E. A. (1969). The development of interpersonal competence. In D. A. Goslin (Ed.), Handbook of socialization theory and research (pp. 753–775). Chicago: Rand McNally & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weldon, E., & Weingart, L. R. (1993). Group goals and group performance. British Journal of Social Psychology, 32(4), 307–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wittenbaum, G. W., Hollingshead, A. B., & Betero, I. C. (2004). From cooperative to motivated information sharing in groups: Moving beyond the hidden profile paradigm. Communication Monographs, 71, 286–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood, W., Lundgren, S., Ouellette, J., Busceme, S., & Blackstone, T. (1994). Minority influence: A meta-analytic review of social influence processes. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 323–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zuckerman, M., Kernis, M. H., Guarnera, S. M., Murphy, J. F., & Rappoport, L. (1983). The egocentric bias: Seeing oneself as cause and target of others’ behavior. Journal of Personality, 51(4), 621–630.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Friedrich Hesse .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hesse, F., Care, E., Buder, J., Sassenberg, K., Griffin, P. (2015). A Framework for Teachable Collaborative Problem Solving Skills. In: Griffin, P., Care, E. (eds) Assessment and Teaching of 21st Century Skills. Educational Assessment in an Information Age. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9395-7_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics