Understanding CSCL Through the Lens of Research Syntheses.

Computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) forms a diverse field with researchers from different backgrounds using a variety of learning theories and research methods to design and analyze CSCL learning environments. The dynamic and active features of the field can lead to confusion about its identity and conclusions that can be drawn from the outcomes of CSCL research. Syntheses of CSCL research can help to answer questions about the prevalent topics and outcomes in the field. There are a number of synthesis methods to choose depending on the methods used in the primary studies as well as goals of the synthesis. Meta-synthesis is also available to better integrate findings obtained using different research methods. This symposium showcases a spectrum of different synthesis methods used in CSCL. Benefits and disadvantages of the synthesis methods will be discussed along with the question of how different synthesis methods can be used to inform each other. The field of computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) brings together researchers from diverse disciplines (Computer Science, Psychology, Education, Linguistics, etc.) with diverse learning theories. A broad spectrum of different research methods is used in the field of CSCL depending on considerations such as the specific research goals, the maturity of the theories, the complexity of the problems and the researcher’s epistemological orientation. Thus, CSCL is a dynamic and active research community and a wealth of CSCL research has been conducted to reveal the mechanisms of successful CSCL (King, 2007; Scardamalia & Bereiter, 1994). In order to achieve a more comprehensive and precise conclusion about CSCL mechanism, structured research synthesis are needed that integrate the rich amount of primary studies about specific topics in CSCL However it also became of a source of confusion and disagreement about integrative conclusions that can be drawn from CSCL research (see also Wise & Schwarz, 2017).. Goals and motivations of the synthesis may dictate the use of quantitative or qualitative synthesis methods, which, in turn, limit the type and scope of conclusions that can be drawn from them. These goals might be the generation of innovation, the building of theories, finding evidence for specific hypotheses, or informing policy and practice in education. However, even when the most adequate synthesis method might have been selected to integrate primary research done in a specific area of CSCL, challenges still remain. For instance, deciding for meta-analysis means the exclusion of a part of primary studies. Qualitative syntheses, in spite its depth and insights, lack the precision of meta-analyses. This means that even the most adequate synthesis method may lead to biased conclusions about CSCL research. This symposium showcases a spectrum of syntheses used in the field of CSCL which all have the common goal to integrate CSCL research and to contribute to the understanding of the CSCL community and its research outcomes. Firstly, three papers will be presented that depict a bibliometric analysis, a qualitative systematic review and a quantitative meta-analysis all conducted in the field of CSCL. Secondly, the fourth paper will introduce meta-synthesis as a method to integrate quantitative and qualitative research outcomes and a way to overcome the disadvantages of using only one particular synthesis method. More specifically, the first paper by Håklev et al. used bibliometric analysis to get a better understanding of the CSCL researcher community. In this paper, ICLS and CSCL proceedings are analyzed to uncover and portray patterns in co-authorship, authors’ field of research, geographical location and commitment to the community. While qualitative analyses are quite common in CSCL research, few qualitative syntheses exist. In the second paper, Wan and Wan instead present a qualitative systematic review to uncover how phenomenography, a specific qualitative research method, is used in the field of CSCL. This paper presents how CSCL 2019 Proceedings 783 © ISLS a novel qualitative research method is adopted by the field of CSCL, the depth of explanation of qualitative syntheses, and makes suggestions how phenomenography could be utilized to synthesize CSCL research. The third paper by Radkowitsch et al. represents the use of quantitative meta-analysis in the field of CSCL. Their choice of synthesis method was justified by the substantial amount of quantitative experimental studies already available. More specifically they synthesized experimental studies about the effects of CSCL scripts as a scaffold to enhance collaborative learning. Their findings provide a strong empirical argument for the effectiveness of CSCL scripts against the critic – raised in the controversial debate within the CSCL field – that CSCL scripts may be too constraining and thus ineffective. In the fourth paper, Hmelo-Silver and Jeong showcase a way to synthesize qualitative and quantitative primary studies in evaluating the outcomes of STEM CSCL. The study provides one model of meta-synthesis that takes into account both quantitative and qualitative outcomes. It aims to integrate CSCL research outcomes both from quantitative and qualitative studies and thus overcome some of the existing synthesis methods that solely uses either quantitative or qualitative outcomes. Continued efforts are needed to synthesize CSCL research outcomes across different theoretical and methodological boundaries.. Taken together, the current symposium will showcase available synthesis techniques and provide a forum to reflect on their advantages and limitations. It can help us better understand which synthesis method might be adequate for the different research goals and motivations and how the various syntheses can inform each other and the field in general. A bibliographic analysis of our community through the lens of ICLS and CSCL