1. MOTIVATION OF STUDYAccording to Lowyck (1994), the views or approaches toward

learning and teaching have, during the last 50 years, changed notably. Behaviorism as the old former main view of learning has been replaced by a view that emphasizes a learner's cognitive processes and comprehends learning as a constructive activity (constructivistic view of learning or constructivism). Simultaneously, rather than teaching students in a controlling manner, education has focused on guiding learning. Goals have developed from transferring and recalling knowledge towards the teaching of processes. Knowledge is not seen as the main goal of teaching. The view of knowledge has changed. Knowledge, rather than being based on the domination of one discipline in regard to an event or an idea, should be multistructural and interdisciplinary.

According to Davis and Naumann (1997, p. 14), knowledge is poorly defined. Thus, it is essential to define knowledge in the context of this thesis. We can define knowledge as the sets of data items and information organized and processed to convey understanding, experience, accumulated learning, and expertise as they apply to a given problem or activity, as do Davis and Naumann (1997, p. 14) in their basic textbook "Personal Productivity with Information Technology" of the information systems science.

Because technology has changed faster than the dominant views of learning (Hawkins, 1993, pp. 30-35), computer-supported learning has faced criticism, since it has been carried out using technology in classrooms based on the old views of learning. Technology has often remained a separate, difficult, and expensive matter. Leidner and Jarvenpaa (1993) emphasize that computers in education must be integrated with instructional objectives. In the same way the success of an information system in an organization depends on how well it is linked to the organization's strategy (Leidner & Jarvenpaa, 1993).

General problems in regard to computer-supported learning have also arisen in computer-supported collaborative learning say Wan & Johnson (1994), who state that current collaborative learning systems focus on maximizing shared information. However, they stress that meaningful learning is not simply information sharing but, more importantly, knowledge construction.

Hypermedia and hypertext enable novel ways of finding supportive new views of learning. Hypertext can be defined as a database in which information (text) has been organized nonsequentially (Conklin, 1987). According to Conklin (1987), hypermedia is the extension of hypertext, in which the elements which are networked together can be text, graphics, digitized speech, audio recordings, pictures, animation, filmclips, and

1

presumably tasktes, odors, and tactile sensations. The creation and use of hypertext can be organized in the form of collaborative hypertext. Then hypertext is “grouptext” which has been created collaboratively by a group of people and can be accessed by a group of people (Rada, 1991, p. 112).

The Ministry of Education in Finland (1995) has also paid attention to the role of student in the modern information society reflecting the general reform of education towards constructivistic teaching and learning methods. According to a strategy it created, the ministry emphasizes the responsibility of a student in his/her learning. The role of a teacher is also different. A teacher is a tutor who does not provide facts and theory. Instead, he or she is the counselor of students, supporting them in different learning activities. The ministry stresses the change in school institutions towards being action and learning centers.

During the 90s the reform work of teaching has also reached university education. For example, Isaacs (1994) and Rosenthal (1995) have reported several problems in regard to traditional lecture-based teaching. These problems include ineffectiveness, promoting passivity and isolation in students. Especially in the context of technology and related sciences, some revisions have been suggested to improve lecturing as a teaching method by activating students; using for example, cooperative learning in small groups and essay-writing assignments about technical topics (Isaacs, 1994). From this perspective, lecturing still has its possibilities, if it corrects these problems, but also other methods of learning must be considered. For example, in our context, in the basic of informatics, it is natural of learning informatics using computers, and thus course work utilizing information technology may be a good alternative to conventional lectures.

We claim that hypermedia, hypertext, and collaborative hypertext enable the constructivist view of learning as well as collaborative learning in the proper manner. One way to solve these systems or applications is learning by knowledge construction, which means that a student or a group of students can construct a hyper document based on their view in regard to knowledge to learn. In this way, a computer is a tool supporting cognitive activity, in other words a cognitive tool. Derry (1990) defines cognitive tools as both mental and computational devices that support, guide, and extend the thinking processes of their users.

One way to use a computer or hypertext as a cognitive tool is to form knowledge structures of one domain. In this thesis this domain is the basics of informatics. We test how useful the use of collaborative hypertext as a cognitive tool is, in this domain. Our intention is to compare learning based on collaborative hypertext to

2

learning based on the traditional classes. In this sense we compare open or constructivistic learning and closed behavioristic teaching. Open learning can be realized in different ways, in our sense, with computers. We have selected hypertext as medium to realize this. Additionally, we clarify who benefits from collaborative hypertext and who does not. The thesis, however, pays no attention to the content of the basics in informatics.

In addition, in this thesis we explore if the World Wide Web (WWW) is useful in the learning of the basic concepts in informatics. The WWW is a global hypermedia system on Internet (Berners-Lee et al., 1994). During the 90s and after gathering data for this thesis it has changed the character of hypertext /-media. The WWW means that the pages of hypertext document are available everywhere in the world through the WWW. This creates the opportunities of teamwork regardless of place and time. According to Vuorimaa (1997), the WWW suits teaching and learning of the basics in informatics, if the use of the WWW is organized in minimal instructionist manner. In Vuorimaa's study the students experienced learning based on the WWW meaningful. According to Makkonen (1998b, 1998c, 1999), the WWW suits learning as a complementary part of conventional lectures. The possibilities of the WWW are notable based on the constructivism. Brandt (1997) emphasizes that constructivism asserts that learners construct knowledge by making sense of experiences in terms of what is already known. In constructivist learning the concept of a mental model is essential. According to him, learning is comprehended as the development of a learner’s mental models (or declarative and structural knowledge). We claim that constructivism can be one basis when applying the WWW for teaching and learning (Makkonen, 1998b; Makkonen, 1998c, Makkonen, 1999). Vast information resources are available to teachers and students via the WWW and this information enables multiple ways for knowledge construction. This thesis provides some ideas for the use of the WWW in learning based on the idea of learning by knowledge constructing and collaborating.

Following the first section of this chapter we concentrate on learning as the main activity in our study. This includes the discussions in regard to the character of learning basic concepts, views of learning as a dominating factor of education and computer supported learning. Additionally, section two deals with the area and character of learning of basic concepts in informatics. The next section deals with the technical applications and tools to realize teaching and learning based on the constructivistic approach. We introduce hypermedia, hypertext and collaborative hypertext as well as discuss their opportunities in learning. Since collaborative hypertext is a form of CSCW (Computer Supported Collaborative Work), we discuss its opportunities in learning. The following section presents our research problems and summarizes our results

3

presented in research papers of this thesis, which are included in chapters 2 to 5. Section seven deals with the value of the results using the concepts of validity and reliability. Finally, in section eight, we draw some major conclusions and analyze the meaning of our study from the general perspective.

2. LEARNINGLearning is the main activity concerning this thesis. Thus, it is

essential to define what learning is in our context. In this section we discuss the character of learning of basic concepts. We stress how we comprehend both knowledge and the learning of basic concepts. Secondly in this section, we discuss the views of learning, since it affects our research framework notably. In this thesis we compare traditional learning to learning based on knowledge construction. The third subsection deals with computer support as one essential background of our research. Finally in subsection 2.4, we summarize the discussion expressed in subsections 2.1 to 2.3 from the perspective of our context the basics of informatics.

2.1. Learning of basic conceptsThe earlier defined concept knowledge and its nature are

associated with knowledge acquiring and solving problems (Enkenberg, 1990, pp. 9-18). In this subsection we define the concepts from the perspective of this thesis.

In this thesis the object of learning are concepts and concept structures. Thus, in this sense learning is learning of facts and interrelationships between facts. According to Hiebert and Lefevre (1986), conceptual knowledge is knowledge about interdependencies, which forms networks in which the parts are linked together. Thus, we can claim learning of concepts is becoming better understood based on these interdependencies between the concepts.

Comprehending knowledge as structures is also notable in an another sense. We can recognize three types of knowledge: declarative knowledge, procedural knowledge and structural knowledge (Jonassen, 1993). Declarative knowledge represents cognizance or awareness of some object, event, or idea. Ryle (1949) describes this type of knowledge as knowing that. Procedural knowledge, on the other hand, describes how learners use or apply their declarative knowledge (Jonassen, 1993). The third type of knowledge, structural knowledge, is the knowledge that mediates the translation of declarative into procedural knowledge and facilitates the application of procedural knowledge (Jonassen, 1993).

4

Thus, knowledge structures or structural knowledge is an important measure when we evaluate how well a student has learned concepts. A number of research studies have shown indirectly that knowledge structures are important in problem solving (Chi & Glaser, 1985).

As mentioned in this subsection the term "Knowledge" is important, since cognitive psychology comprehends learning as the process of knowledge instead of changing behavior. Based on this several approaches can be found to teach or learn knowledge in the literature of education.

2.2. Approaches for teaching and learningThe previous subchapter described what the objects of learning,

the basic concepts, are. Concepts can be taught or learnt using different approaches and one can be more effective than other one in one context because based on the situated action theory learning is context dependent (Agre & Chapman, 1987; Suchman, 1987). The approaches or views or paradigms of teaching and learning have affected computer-supported learning notably. Thus, it is essential to comprehend these views in our context.

Different definitions exist for classifying views of learning (see for example Risku, 1992 pp. 3-27 and Rauste-von Wright & von Wright, 1994, pp. 103-133 and Leidner & Jarvenpaa, 1995). In this thesis we comprehend learning as knowledge construction process and computers as cognitive tools. Thus, it sensible to define views of learning from the perspective of these including behavioristic way of learning, i. e. behaviorism, objectivistic way, i. e. objectitivism, cognitive way, i. e. cognitivism, and constructivistic way, i. e. constructivism Jonassen (1992a). Widely known and discussed views in regard to computer supported learning are behaviorism and constructivism (Jonassen, 1992a). Figure 1 illustrates views of learning and the ways of learning in this study based on the discussion by Jonassen (1992a). Programmed instruction is both objectivistic and behavioristic emphasizing learning by manipulating a learner’s behavioral patterns. Cognitive tools (like collaborative hypertext in this thesis) are based upon a constructivist epistemelogy as well as cognitive learning theory emphasizing learning as knowledge construction and the development of a learner’s personal knowledge presentations.

5

Constructivism

Behaviorism Cognitivism

Objectivism

Cognitivetools

Programmedinstruction

Figure 1. Views of learning (Jonassen, 1992a).

The idea of behaviorism in computer supported learning is to divide area to learn into little pieces (Risku, 1992, pp. 4-6). The task of a student is to train matters piece by piece. Using educational software based on behaviorism, students are required to train by answering the questions. The questions are asked by the application and the application simply informs if it is a right or wrong answer. According to Risku (1992, pp. 7-9), the benefit of behavioristic oriented educational software can be proved statistically based on the numbers of right answers. However, this kind of approach does not teach students to learn "using their own brains" and a student remains to be the passive receiver of information (Risku, 1992, pp. 7-9).

We supposed that programmed instruction is partly based on behaviorism. Additionally, it is based on objectivism. This view treats knowledge as externally mediated information, which is generated by a teacher and transmitted to learners (Jonassen, 1992a). The purpose of education is for the learner to acquire the knowledge of the teacher- to assimilate the knowledge of the teacher or expert.

6

Objectivism equates information and knowledge as far as the learner is concerned. According to an objectivist epistemology, the teacher and not the learner determines knowledge. There is an external reality that each individual can come to know in the same way. Knowledge is externally referenced rather than internally generated. An instructionist approach is close to objectivism. It emphasizes that the focus of education has been restricted to the transmission of information from teachers to students.

We can claim that last mentioned approaches are based on the passive role of a student. Cognitive and constructivistic approaches emphasize the active role of a learner. Thus, they can provide an alternative approach to plan education.

According to Jonassen (1992a), cognitive learning theory assumes that learners interact with that information, interpret it, and build personal knowledge representations after relating that information to their prior knowledge. The information with which learners construct their reality represents the external reality. However, this information itself does not represent knowledge. Information is a stimuli that are perceived and recorded by the mind resulting personal knowledge representations (Jonassen, 1992a).

In a constructivistic learning environment a student is a creator of concepts (Risku, 1992, pp. 18-22). The difference between cognitivism and constructivism is that cognitive view is concentrated more on changes in personal knowledge representations and constructivism is concentrated more on in which ways these changes in knowledge representations occur. Constructivism holds that instruction is less a process in which knowledge is communicated to learners, and more a matter of nurturing the ongoing processes whereby learners come to understand the world in which they live (Cunningham et al., 1993). In this view, knowledge is an active process of construction, not the receipt of information from external sources. The role of textbooks and other instructional media shifts from one that seeks to maximize the communication of fixed content and/or skills to one in which students engage in the knowledge construction process. This includes constructing interpretations, appreciating multiple perspectives, developing and defending their own positions while recognizing other views, and becoming aware of and able to manipulate the knowledge construction process itself. An important aspect of this approach is the insistence that learning takes place embedded in the contexts to which it is most relevant in everyday life and with which the students are personally involved.

Within this the constructivistic theory falls into two schools of thought, social constructivism and cognitive constructivism (Confrey, 1995). According to him, although these theories differ, they fall within the same basic assumption about learning: The child's

7

individual development is at the center of instruction. Piaget proposed a development theory has been widely discussed in both psychology and education fields. He stressed the holistic approach concerning learning. A child constructs understanding through many channels: reading, listening, exploring and experiencing his or her environment (Piaget, 1977). On the other hand, Vygotsky is most often associated with the social constructivist theory. He emphasizes the influences of cultural and social contexts in learning and supports a discovery model of learning (Vygotsky, 1978). This type of model places the teacher in an active role while the students' mental abilities develop naturally through various paths of discovery.

The definitions concerning the views of teaching and learning have varied in different publications. However, two main extremes can be found and these extremes are open learning and closed teaching (Nulden, 1998). Nulden comprehends that constructivism and cognitivism represent typical open learning as well as behaviorism and objectivism represent closed teaching.

In spite of constructivism or open learning being the main stream of the 90s in discussion about learning and teaching, some criticism to constructivism has been presented. According to Silverman (1995), by giving the right amount and manner of instructionism (i. e. minimal instructionism), students seem to favor its integration into constructivist environments. This corresponds with the discussion in Vuorimaa's study (Vuorimaa, 1997). According to his study and the study by Dreyfus & Dreyfus (1980) and study by Makkonen (1998b, 1998c), the student as a novice in other words as a beginner has no experience in situations where he or she is supposed to act. The rule-based behavior of a novice is very restricted and inelastic. Thus, several instructions must be provided for a novice's action. For this reason, an introduction course of informatics can not be fully based on the constructivist view of learning and at the beginning of a course the learning must be controlled and well instructed. Additionally, Nulden (1998) has made same kind of conclusions emphasizing the need of a good introduction leaded by a teacher, although we reject conventional lecturing.

In this study we compare two extremes teacher centered traditional closed teaching to open learning based on constructivism and cognitivism and the student's more active role. We do not discuss how these extremes can supplement each other in this thesis, but we accept that the students need some basic exercises concerning basic tools at the beginning of a course as well as the instructions for a course work must be clear.

8

2.3. Paradigms of computer-based learningThe last mentioned views of learning (see subsection 2.2) have

affected the development of computer-based learning. The aim of this subsection is to provide basic knowledge concerning computer-based learning. The development of computer-based learning partly reflects that learning is knowledge construction as well as social interaction. This is consistent with the development of the views of learning.

The first attempts to bring computers to schools were mainly based on the behaviorism (Risku, 1992, p. 3). Behaviorism has influenced on the development and design of several technologies. Black (1995) has introduced some typical examples in her review:

1) Teaching machines uses the principles of the programmed learning to provide a self-pacing delivery of the instruction. There are two programming designs for this technology: linear and branch. Linear design lays out the sequence of frames for all students to follow; whereas, in branch design, a student's response determines what follows.

2) Computer assisted instruction (CAI): The rapid growth of the personal computers in the society facilitated the explosion of educational (instructional) software packages. Hundreds of software products hit the market every school year. No doubt, the first generation of the software was generally designed linearly. Key behavior modification principles are used to program these applications. These principles include: (a) Stating the purpose of the software, (b) applying the appropriate reinforcement - text or visual or audio, (c) depending on the application, shaping, chaining, modeling, punishment, and award principles are used, (d) very often, a scoring (monitoring) system is present, and (e) providing the status of progress CAI comes in various forms: Drill and practice Activities, simulations, and tutorials. Electronic learning could be fun using multimedia approach, but the educators do not think the CAIs can replace active classroom teachers.

3) Virtual reality (VR): VR can definitely address the human interface part if it can provide a "real" teacher to give instruction. Furthermore, if the student can create their own teacher image to teach them. Then, the reward system would be more effective comparing with a mechanical "good job" sign. The VR teacher can even give the child a pat on the head when called for. VR creates a brand new learning environment for the world to explore. Behavioristic principles, like other learning theories, will play a major role in the building of this environment.

However, behavioristic (or objectivistic) approaches have been slowly replaced by new approaches derived from constructivism and

9

cognitivism. Koschmann (1996) identifies three past (and on-going) paradigms, as well as an emerging fourth paradigm. These are computer-aided instruction (CAI), intelligent tutoring Systems (ITS), Logo-as-Latin, and computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL). Each paradigm can be loosely identified with the community that brought about its emergence in the application of computer technology to education.

Computer-aided instruction is a term that describes most early attempts at computer-based learning (CBL) technologies (Koschmann, 1996). The general education community drove this development and thus early applications consisted of practical instructional tools designed around classroom needs. According to Koschmann (1996), the educational community approaches learning from a behavioristic standpoint, where learning is generally thought of as a passive acquisition or absorption of knowledge. Thus, the goal of CAI involved a process of transmission or delivery of knowledge to the student.

Work in intelligent tutoring systems (ITS) is driven by the artificial intelligence community and takes a more cognitive approach to learning (Koschmann, 1996). Learning is seen as problem solving, where gradually the student acquires a richer and richer representation of the problem space. ITS is based on the assumption that students' thinking processes can be modeled, traced, and corrected in the context of problem solving through the use of computers. Thus, the goal of ITS is to emulate the behavior of skilled tutors. Derry and Lajoie (1993) call ITS as one attempt to realize student-modeling paradigm.

Logo-as-Latin is a term coined by Koschmann (1996) to describe the use of a computer programming (by the student) as a method to actively construct knowledge. The view of learning is constructivist where learning is a process of integrating new knowledge with prior knowledge via assimilation and accommodation (Piaget, 1985). The emphasis is on instructional transfer as the individual organizes new knowledge in the mind. In the same sense computers can be comprehended as cognitive tools and Koschmann's Logo-as-Latin can be comprehended one kind of cognitive tool. Logo-as-Latin is a non-modeling approach as a contrast to student modeling approach like ITS (Derry and Lajoie, 1993).

According to Koschmann (1996), the fourth paradigm of computer-based learning is computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL). Dorneich and Jones (1997) argue that CSCL has its roots in the social sciences. Learning is generally seen as a collaborative activity that is situated in its social environment. In contrast to the first three paradigms, which are focused on knowledge as a product, CSCL focuses on learning as a process.

10

CSCL is built upon the research traditions of those disciplines-anthropology, sociology, linguistics, communication science-that are devoted to understanding language, culture, and other aspects of the social setting (Koschmann, 1996). According to him, CSCL can be approached from three main perspectives, which are 1) activity theory, 2) socially oriented constructivist viewpoints, and 3) the theories of situated cognition.

Vygotsky (1978) in particular and activity theory in general, see collaboration as an inherently asymmetrical process between the more capable (expert) and less capable (novice) peer. Thus, collaboration is seen as the scaffolding of knowledge by the expert and an appropriation of that knowledge by the novice (Foreman & Cazden, 1985; Newman et al., 1989).

The constructivist view of learning holds that knowledge is acquired through a constructive process of personal inquiry and discovery. This view has its origins in the work of Piaget, who introduced a theory of learning that holds that through a process of assimilation and accommodation, new knowledge is assimilated and accommodated (Piaget, 1985). The implication for collaborative learning is that conflicts between individuals generate conceptual changes (Doise & Mugny, 1978; Piaget, 1932).

The term situated, as in "situated learning" or "situated cognition" has assumed a variety of meanings in different disciplinary contexts (Koschmann, 1996). He emphasizes that in the context of CSCL the term is best understood associated with "enculturation". Roschelle (1996) advocates the view that collaboration promotes convergence of a shared relational meaning. Thus, knowledge is constructed incrementally through a process of mutually contributions via interaction.

These various views concerning the role of collaboration in learning can all offer insights into the nature of collaboration and learning. Vygotskian depictions of learning stress the reproduction of existing knowledge. Piagatian view points tend to stress the benefits of conflict in the maturation process. The "situated cognition" account of learning stresses collaborative inquiry in the journey towards mutually derived shared knowledge. It is clear that whatever the epistemological perspective, learning by collaboration is a cornerstone of educational practice in CSCL.

Leidner and Jarvenpaa (1993, 1995) have analyzed the use of computers in different kind of situations in university education. First, in the paper (Leidner & Jarvenpaa, 1993) they have compared computer-based teaching/learning methods requiring hands-on student use (exercises and lab sessions with computers) to computer-based methods not requiring hands-on student use (computer-supported lectures). The computer-based teaching

11

methods requiring interactive use during class appeared to help students assimilate the information and acquire insights not stated by the instructor. The main benefit of the computer-based methods not requiring hands-on student use was that students' attention increased in the class sessions. In this case the instructor's notes were displayed in a more colorful and graphical manner during the lessons. Second, in the paper (Leidner & Jarvenpaa, 1993) they dealt with what kind of material is suitable for computer-based learning based on the four categories of information used by Williams (1977). Those categories were factual, procedural, conceptual and exploratory. Computers are the most useful in teaching procedural and exploratory materials, while factual and conceptual material was taught using traditional methods such as lecturing. The authors stressed that it takes a lot of time to develop the class material to be used during the computer exercises. Thus, computers are used for learning procedural and exploratory material. However, we claim that in the era on the Internet it is easier to find the material supporting concept learning (see for example Makkonen, 1999). Jarvenpaa and Leidner emphasize in the paper (Leidner & Jarvenpaa, 1993) that in education it is important to emphasize the meaning of interaction because via interaction a student can learn creative and critical thinking as opposed to factual thinking. According to them, information technology can enhance interaction, which is needed for the development of creative and critical thinking. The paper (Leidner & Jarvenpaa, 1995) combines learning theories and information technology in order to show what kind of technology supports different learning theories. Leidner and Jarvenpaa (1995) have derived four basic visions concerning information technology in learning: (1) automating, (2) informating up, (3) informating down, and (4) transforming. This has been done based on the organizational research on IT visions. First, the vision to automate is the perception that information technology is a means of replacing expensive, unreliable human labor with information technology. In the vision automated classrooms (1) four ways to realize computer-supported teaching and learning can be found. These include: (1.1) instructor consoles equipped with presentation software and display controls, (1.2) instructor consoles and stand-alone student computers, (1.3) computer-assisted instruction (drill and practice programs), and (1.4) distance learning. The instructor console technology (1.1) most closely maps to the objectivist model of learning and instruction. This technology maps secondarily to cognitive model of learning because it enables more structured and vivid transmission and thus, it is easier for a learner to absorb information. The instructor console and stand-alone student computers (1.2) provide two ways of learning. A student can emulate an instructor's steps on a particular software package. This use of technology supports the objectivist model of learning. Another constructivistic way is for an instructor to give students a problem to analyze using appropriate software and assist students when they

12

encounter problems. Computer-assisted instruction (1.3) is based on the objectivist model of learning emphasizing the stimulus-feedback view. Distance learning (1.4), which is the transmission of a course from one location to another, supports the objectivist model of knowledge transmission. In an educational context the vision to informate up (2) would entail giving the instructors feedback concerning the student understanding of class material in a timely fashion so that the instructor could clarify misunderstandings and misinterpretations. Leidner and Jarvenpaa (1995) argue that the ways to realize the vision of informate up are key response pads (2.1) and electronic mail between instructor and students (2.2). Key pad response (2.1) enables a large class of students to participate by responding to questions with a yes/no response or rating agreement to an issue on a scale from 0 to 9. This technology assumes that an instructor is the nucleus of a classroom and that he or she is delivering information. This pedagogical assumption is closely linked to the objectivist model of learning. By enabling an instructor to ask questions based on material being covered and to assess the degree of understanding by the responses, key response pad technology facilitates more effective knowledge transmission and comprehension. The technology is secondarily related to cognitive information processing. If this technology supported questions asked by students, it would be more closely linked to the cognitive information processing model of learning. Another technology that can informate up is electronic mail between instructors and students (2.2). E-mail solicits feedback concerning the student's understanding of course material and hence, promotes the cognitive information processing model of learning. The vision to informate down (3) includes many ways to realize technology-supported learning. First, information classroom technologies (3.1) include learning networks (3.1.1), hypermedia (3.1.2), simulation technologies (3.1.3), and virtual reality (3.1.4). Additionally, the vision to informate down includes communication technology classrooms (3.2), synchronous communication classrooms (3.3), and groupware-supported synchronous communication (3.4). Learning networks (3.1.1) are comprised of networked computers with links to shared databases developed by educators at various locations or to external databases. They are linked to the constructivist model of learning: students are constructing new knowledge from existing information sources. Hypermedia (3.1.2) provides a non-linear means of browsing and sorting through computerized information. Learning networks can be organized in a hypermedia format to encourage students to search the material in the manner that suits their own system logic. Hypermedia can support learning based on the cognitive information processing model of learning. However, Leidner and Jarvenpaa (1995) claim that students with very little working knowledge in a domain, the seeming lack of structure may be disconcerting and may hinder processing. Simulation technology (3.1.3) is linked to the constructivist model of learning because

13

learners need to be actively involved in learning by working with real-life facts or objects. Virtual reality (3.1.4) supports constructivist, cooperative, and sociocultural learning. In this environment students are actively involved in constructing their knowledge of the particular domain for which the virtual reality is being built. Communication technology classrooms (3.2), synchronous communication classrooms (3.3), groupware-supported synchronous communication (3.4) are close to cooperative learning especially if, for practical reasons, a class is divided into smaller discussion groups. In addition, those technologies may enable sociocultural learning. By providing anonymity and non-verbal communication, different cultures are allowed to express themselves without having to adopt a language or opinions of a dominating culture. The vision to transform (4) includes asynchronous communication across distances (4.1) and groupware-supported asynchronous communication across distances (4.2). Those asynchronous virtual learning spaces can support cognitive, constructivist, collaborative, and social cultural learning models.

As the summary of this subsection we emphasize some points. The computer-supported education has been changed from behaviorism towards constructivism. However, CAI technologies represent the old behavioristic way to realize computer supported lessons and ITS systems try model tutors' behavior in the spirit of cognitivism. In our context we prefer non-modeling approach and we reject student-model approach, since the domain may be too complex for beginners in informatics. Based especially on Leidner ja Jarvenpaa (1995) it is obvious concerning many technologies that they can be used in various pedagogical ways and teachers must understand the connection between educational theories and technology. We stress two points. First, learning must be comprehended as a knowledge construction process. The second essential point in learning is social interaction. We must count those points while planning computer-based teaching and learning. Next subsection presents our domain or context.

2.4. Learning of basics in informaticsWhat is included in courses of basics in informatics has

alternated depending on a university and faculty. One reason for that is that informatics is divided into many disciplines traditionally including computer science, information technology and information systems science. In the University of Jyväskylä at the department of computer science and information systems informatics has been information systems science discipline oriented. According to the requirements of the faculty of social sciences at the university of Jyväskylä, the introduction course deals with issues as follows:

- the basic concepts of information technology,

14

- the meaning of information technology and information systems in a society and firms,

- the basic skills in the use of personal computers (including operating system, word processing, graphics at least).

The issues emphasize that both the learning of declarative knowledge (i. e. concepts) and procedural knowledge (i. e. skills) are important in the basic course of informatics in our case. Additionally, the content of the course can be taught in different ways. Teaching and learning can be "traditional" in other words based on behaviorism or student centered based on the constructivism approach. The behavioristic way in the form of lecturing has been a typical approach for realizing basic courses in many cases. However, learning based knowledge construction or constructivism can be a good alternative for learning concepts or interelatedness between concepts. In our study we are interested in both those ways. We want to compare the traditional "theory before practice" learning to constructivistic learning based on the use of computers and collaborative hypertext. Thus, it is important to define what hypertext and collaborative hypertext is especially in the context of learning next.

3. HYPERMEDIA AND HYPERTEXTIn the previous section we defined what the main activity of this

thesis learning is and more accurately computer-based learning is in our context. In this section we describe what computer technologies are in realizing the learning of the basic concepts in informatics based on the learning by knowledge constructing. We claim that hypertext and hypermedia provide a good environment for learning based on a student's knowledge construction or cognitive constructivism. Additionally, supplementing hypertext and hypermedia with collaboration features leads to collaborative hypermedia, which may support learning in the spirit of social constructivism.

The idea of hypertext was originally presented in Vannevar Bush's article "As we may think" (Bush, 1945). The name and content of the article are related to a human's thinking or cognitive activity. Bush's idea was to develop a mechanical device for the management of documents. The operation of it was purposed to mimic the associative character of a human's mind.

In the computer era the concept of hypertext has been redefined. Hypertext can be defined as a database in which

15

information (text) has been organized nonsequentially (Conklin, 1987). Other related terms to hypertext are hypermedia and multimedia. Hypermedia is a database, which may contain pictures, digitized videos, sound and animations in addition to text. Multimedia is a related term to hypermedia. Text, pictures and voice combined in a computer can be called multimedia (Heimbürger et al., 1990, pp. 21-22). The term multimedia ignores the structure of computer presentation. It stresses that multimedia is a combination of selected forms to present information.

Hypertext (hypermedia) has been viewed by many educators as a computer-based information structures that supports a constructivist paradigm (Jonassen, 1992b). Learners can explore a vast assemblage of information, choosing their own meaningful paths, making conscious associations between prior knowledge and hyperlink choices (Spiro et al, 1991) - in short, creating a semantic web which will mirror their own developing cognitive structures (Jones, 1989).

According to Nielsen (1990, pp. 1-11), hypertext is composed of the set of non-linear connected text and other forms of information. Hypertext consists of following properties:

- Database consists of nodes including text (and graphical information).

- The windows of a screen correspond to the nodes in the database.

- Windows can be repositioned, resized, closed, and put aside as small window icons.

- Windows can contain any number of link icons.- The user can easily create new nodes and new links to nodes.

Nielsen (1989, 1990, pp. 8-14) has gathered the opportunities of hypertext together comparing it with both printed material and a traditional computer presentation. The results of analysis are shown in table 1 (see next page).

16

Compared with printed material

Compared with traditional computer presentation

Advantages Can display text, images, animation, movies.

Easy to update.

Information can be transferred via networks.

Information is easy to copy.

Less space is needed to store information.

A document can be shared with several people.

In principle literature of the whole world in reach.

Information structures have user-oriented semantics.

Simple framework for processing of unstructured, semi-structured, and structured information.

No need to (traditional)programming when constructing information structures.

Disadvantages Reading speed, which is 30% lower on present displays.

Excessive load in learning.

No user interface standard.

No standard for data transfer.

No "romantic" first edition.

Text is homogeneous.

Structure like spaghetti possible.

No agreed definition for the structure of information. Thus, it is not easy to find general methods for data processing.

Table 1. Advantages and disadvantages of hypertext compared to more traditional presentation forms of information (Nielsen 1989 &

1990, pp. 8-14).

However, during this decade these disadvantages have been remedied by the standardization of user interfaces. This includes graphic Mac- or Windows-based user interfaces based on windows on the screen. Simultaneously, larger and sharper screens have become more common. Large monitors encourage hypertext and other document systems that employ multiple windows, whereas smaller viewing surfaces demand systems that rely on a more limited card or chunk metaphor (Landow, 1996). Smaller screens also tend to work best with comparatively disorienting systems that replace one window by another rather than those that add new windows to ones already open. From the point of view of someone designing an electronic edition, screen size has major effects because it has direct impact upon the coherence and usability of scholarly annotation.

17

Additionally, the World Wide Web on the Internet has improved the standardization of hypertext because hypertext is usually read using a browser program in a graphic user interface.

Leventhal et al. (1993) have gathered the results of different researchers about the studies in which material in the paper form has been compared with material in the form of hypertext. Additionally, in their article their own results have been presented.

According to Leventhal and her colleagues (Leventhal et al., 1993), existing studies that compare paper media, such as books or journals, to hypertext have not always found superiority for hypertext. For example, Marchionini and Shneiderman (1988) compared the use of a paper versus a hypertext version of a maintenance manual. The paper version resulted in significantly faster times for 12 different tasks. A second study (Shneiderman, 1987) compared a paper versus a hypertext version of a database on the Holocaus, developed in Hyperties. The paper version was faster for simple fact retrieval questions. However, as query complexity increased, the Hyperties system became just as fast. The groups did not differ in accuracy. However, users greatly preferred the Hyperties system. McKnight et al. (1990) compared two versions of a hypertext document on winemaking to a paper version and a word processor file version for accuracy in answering questions. There was no significant difference between the paper and word processor versions, but performance was worse for both hypertext conditions. However, the context where hypertext is applied affects its effectiveness.

Learning style may also affect the effectiveness of hypertext-based learning. Esichaikul et al. (1994) has studied the issue based on Kolb's experimental learning theory. They found that convergers are the best learners in a hypermedia-based problem-solving environment. Generally, it is further argued that a hypertext environment could be ideally suited for experimental learning (Spiro et al., 1991).

Formally, Rada (1991, pp. 112-113) has defined the term collaborative hypertext, which is one of the main concepts in this thesis. Collaborative hypertext is created by a group of people and may be called "grouptext". Grouptext systems help groups of people create and access text in three phases:

(1) The discussion phase occurs as people brainstorm and formulate plans as to how writing should proceed.

(2) In the authoring phase, blocks of text are attached to a network of ideas and the network is traversed to generate a document.

(3) The analog of reading in the collaborative sense is the making of notes by a group of people on a document. This

18

annotative phase may also lead to a revised document as the annotators incorporate their comments into the original document.

Based on Rada's thoughts we can consider collaborative hypertext as an active type of hypertext. Collaborative hypertext and cognitive tools are very similar. These both tools or techniques stress the meaning activity. Thus, using collaborative hypertext as a cognitive tool may be useful in learning.

4. CSCW AND HYPERMEDIACollaborative hypertext is one form of CSCW (Computer

Supported Collaborative Work) tools because it expands the idea of hypertext with collaboration. Thus, it is essential to discuss it and its opportunities in learning. We claim that CSCW solutions can result in good learning outcomes in the spirit of social constructivism and CSCL. However, there is a need for the better understanding both learning models and approaches and technology related to learning.

Hypermedia is potentially an ideal medium for supporting collaborative work, as it can capture the work, discussions about the work, and discussions about the shared use of the medium (Irish & Trigg, 1989). In many ways, the notion of supporting users working together is an old idea in the hypermedia community. Vannevar Bush's Memex (Bush, 1945) was meant to be shared among people interested in similar subject areas. According to Irish and Trigg (1989), Doug Engelbart's NLS system was perhaps the first working implementation of hypermedia supporting collaboration. One important component was the Journal, a means for supporting long-term group collaboration in which interlinked designs, notes, etc. were stored and accessed by multiple authors (Englebart, 1975). Similarly, Nelson's Xanadu project is intended to provide online libraries to which people can add their own links and annotations on others' work as well as their own new papers (Nelson, 1981).

The surge of interest in computer supported collaborative work (CSCW) in the late 80s led Max Mühlhauser (Mühlhauser, 1990) to suggest in 1990 that to be even more useful hypermedia systems should be enhanced with facilities that allow collaboration between students. However, before this at Brown University a well known hypermedia system Intermedia was developed between 1985 and 1990 (Haan et al., 1992). Intermedia is a multiuser hypermedia framework where hypermedia functionality is handled at system level. Intermedia presents to the user with a graphical file system browser and a set of applications that can handle text, graphics,

19

timelines, animations and videodisc data. Additionally, the framework includes a browser for link information, a set of linguistic tools and the ability to create and traverse links. Link information is isolated from the documents and is saved into a separate database. The start and end positions of the link are called anchors. Intermedia supports learning by organizing the information in many ways. For example, timelines are a natural way to present historical events.

Whittington (1996) has summarized current CSCL systems. His own experiences based on the Mole systems have been reported. According to him, by adding collaborative learning facilities to a hypertext, students can study independently and yet not feel isolated. The addition of annotations to the text allows the students to generate threads of discussion and effectively author their own material, perhaps generating a feeling of ownership.

The MUCH system (Rada et al., 1993) developed at the University of Liverpool are a sequence of collaborative hypermedia systems developed to support collaborative authoring and teaching in the Department of Computer Science. The MUCH system allows collaborative authoring of documents, as well as annotation and assessment of existing documents. Because it offers more facilities than Mole, the user interface is complicated.

CLARE (Wan & Johnson, 1994) is a "computer-augmented collaborative learning environment" designed for use with small groups (3-5) of people studying research papers. Its applicability to groups of more than 10 students is very limited. CLARE provides a system that allows the users to compare and ultimately integrate their different points of view.

CSILE (Computer Supported Intentional Learning Environment) (Scardamalia et al., 1989) is similar to CLARE in that it is intended as a tool to aid "knowledge building" within a group, the stated objective being "engaging students in conjecture, theory building and analysis, and providing them with larger and more varied audiences for reflective engagement". CSILE has been used in elementary, secondary and postgraduate sites in the USA and Canada. CSILE is based on a communal database as a center of collaboration. CaMILE (Guzdial, 1995) provides similar communication services like CSILE has. Guzdial et al. have used CaMILE in the engineering education and they evaluated that the effect of CaMILE does not support knowledge building like CSILE. CaMILE is rather a distributor and a mediator of information.

Generally, several novel ways have been established on the WWW to support collaboration. One of them is the BSCW (Basic Support for Collaborative Work) which has been developed by German National Research Center for Information Technology (Bentley et al., 1996). The BSCW System provides basic functionality

20

for group cooperation and uses the WWW as its communication infrastructure. The BSCW system is based on the metaphor of a `shared workspace'. It allows uploading of various types of objects to a workspace and simple access for its group members. The information sharing functionality is enhanced with basic facilities for awareness, authentication and authorization, and version control.

Some computer supported learning environments have been developed on the WWW based on old solutions on local area network. WebCSILE is the WWW version of CSILE. It has multimedia communication capabilities in an Internet environment, which provides access to users in both Mac and PC environments. However, it is still in the development phase and its functionality is limited (Hewitt at al., 1997), even though it is designed with specific tools to enable learning activities such as collaborative learning and knowledge building. WebCaMILE (Guzdial et al., 1997) was inspired by the findings that, when students collaborated face-to-face, they often worked around an artifact (such as a design report or a set of specifications) to ground or anchor their discussion. The 1997 version of CaMILE, WebCaMILE, was designed to structure collaborations around anchoring artifacts, that is, anchored collaboration. WebCaMILE maintained the scaffolding for collaboration from CaMILE. But several key characteristics changed (Guzdial et al., 1997):

- WebCaMILE was implemented on the Web, which improved its speed and enabled its use across platforms.

- Early versions of WebCaMILE did provide multimedia annotations, like in CaMILE, but when these still were never used, they were dropped.

- The most significant advantage of WebCaMILE over CaMILE appears to be that individual notes (and their consequent threads of discussions) are directly addressable on the WWW.

WebCaMILE has been much more successful than CaMILE. Students are much more willing to use WebCaMILE to discuss anchors of interest. In comparison of anchored WebCaMILE discussions with unanchored newsgroup discussions in the same classroom, WebCaMILE discussion threads are longer, which suggests that WebCaMILE is supporting more sustained discussion than in a newsgroup (Guzdial et al., 1997).

Some main points can be found concerning the future in the development of CSCL. Guzdial et al. (1997) recognized three lines as the basis for CSCL. These lines are case-based reasoning driven tools, collaborative-driven tools and reflection and process-driven tools. Case-based reasoning driven tools are inspired by problem based learning. The basis of collaborative-driven tools is the success of the CSILE environment. In the case of reflection and process-

21

driven tools the main interest is in integrating different phases of the students' problem-solving and design process and providing scaffolding (guidance) which includes reflection, choosing between alternatives, and connecting learning goals with activities.

In the development of CSCW and CSCL Chen and Rada (1996) emphasize the importance of user-centered and multi-disciplinary design methodologies. They argue that research is too technique-driven. According to Newman et al., (1997) many current tools primarily support information exchange and produces shared opinions. They emphasize the need of groupware, which supports adopting deep learning strategies and educationally proven group learning techniques. However, from the perspective of the views of learning the combination of CSCW and hypermedia is a promising opportunity, since we can claim this combination supports constructivistic learning (for more details about constructivism, see subsection 2.2). Especially, based on social constructivism using CSCW in teaching and learning can provide an ideal environment for successful learning. Social constructivism emphasizes the influences of cultural and social contexts in learning and supports the discovery model of learning. CSCW and CSCL can support learning by creating the right context.

5. RESEARCH PROBLEMS AND SETTINGWe created our research problem dividing it into subproblems to

evaluate the effectiveness of collaborative hypertext. In this section we introduce them.

In our study the basic problem is

How does collaborative hypertext affect learning outcomes in the learning of basic concepts of information technology comparing it with learning without collaborative hypertext?

We divided it into more specific problems:

1. Are single basic concepts learned better using collaborative hypertext?

2. Can interrelatedness between the concepts be learned better

using collaborative hypertext?

3. Who benefits from by collaborative hypertext in the learning and who does not?

22

4. Does collaborative hypertext support better engagement in learning?

We organized two courses based on collaborative hypertext and collaborative knowledge building using hypertext program Toolbook. Simultaneously, we organized two courses based on conventional programmed instruction. Thus, we wanted to compare learning based on the collaborative knowledge construction using hypertext to conventional learning arrangements.

In addition, we also explored if the WWW-based hypermedia or hypertext presentations caused better learning concerning the basic concepts of informatics. To study this one course was organized with the presentations on the WWW. Those presentations were utilized in the optional coursework of the course.

6. SUMMARY OF WORKThe main part of the work consists of the papers presented in

chapters II-VI. These chapters are briefly summarized in this section. Chapters II and III deal with learning outcomes generally providing answers for the more specific problems 1 and 2 mentioned in previous section. Chapters IV and V, which are connected to the more specific problems 3 and 4, deal with a student's perspective in regard to the collaborative hypertext. Chapter VI presents our results concerning the effect of the WWW-based presentations on the learning of the basic concepts of informatics.

The paper (Makkonen, 1997b), dealing with the more specific problem 1, concentrates on the effect on learning single concepts using collaborative hypertext. However, it does not deal with the learning of interelatedness between concepts sufficiently. Thus, it is important to comprehend learning as acquiring structural knowledge. The paper (Makkonen, 1997c), as an answer for the more specific problem 2, deals with this point of view. The revised version of this paper has been accepted for the World Conference on Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia (ED-Media 1998) (Makkonen, 1998a). Afterwards we deal with our basic problem from the perspective of students as the answers for the more specific problems 3 and 4. In the paper (Makkonen, 1997a) we are interested in which areas of basics in informatics are interesting and useful to learn using collaborative hypertext from a student’s perspective. This paper has also been presented as a short paper later (Makkonen, 1997d). Additionally, we were interested in what kind of student benefits from collaborative hypertext. The paper (Makkonen, 1997e) deals with this issue. This paper has been presented as the shorter version later (Makkonen, 1997f). The focus of the paper

23

(Makkonen, 1999) is the usability of the WWW-based presentations and especially the effect on learning single concepts.

6.1. "Learning of Basic Concepts in Informatics Using Collaborative Hypertext: An Experiment And Its Preliminary Results Based on SOLO Taxonomy"The paper (Makkonen, 1997b) represents our experiment and

the results of the study based on the SOLO taxonomy. We compare two courses on the basics in informatics using collaborative hypertext (experimental groups) to two courses without collaborative hypertext (control groups). In this paper we concentrate on how the single concepts of informatics have been learned. We show that single concepts can be learned more easily using conventional learning methods without collaborative hypertext in our context.

We used the SOLO taxonomy as follows. The learning of single concepts was evaluated based on this taxonomy. All treatments contained 12 items. The items for the tests were selected separately and chosen randomly from 138 concepts of the whole learning area. In each test respondents produced 12 definitions of randomly selected basic concepts. The basic characters of each type of responses in this taxonomy were shown in table 1 in the paper (Makkonen, 1997b) and its five levels were the first basis of our evaluation. The second basis of the evaluation was the contemporary definitions in our course material that was produced based on the course literature:

Holopainen, M., Poutsaari, H., Pyydönniemi, R. (1991 & 1994). Tietojenkäsittely. Espoo: Weilin & Göös. (in Finnish)

Lokki, H., Haikala, I., Linnainmaa, S., Mattila, S. (1989 & 1992). Tietotekniikka. Jyväskylä: Tietotekniikan liitto. (in Finnish)

Kuivalahti, M. (1991 & 1993). Tietojenkäsittely ja sen tekniikka. Porvoo: WSOY. (in Finnish)

Additionally, we utilized current multimedia and Internet-related material

Lallukka, L., Paananen, V. M. (1994). Multimedia-kohti hypermediaa. Jyväskylä: Teknolit Oy. (in Finnish)

Ahonen P., Kolari J. (1994). Internet. Jyväskylä: Teknolit Oy. (in Finnish)

Based on the aforementioned the main themes of the course were

Introduction,

24

Presentation of data in the PC-environment,

Programs and programming,

Hardware technology,

Data communications, and

Information systems development.

Based on those themes and the material concept maps were created covering the critical concepts of the area to learn. The concept maps were utilized in rating the responses of the students. Figure 2 shows an example how we defined the theme Information systems utilizing concept maps.

Information systems development

Functional organization

NEEDED BY IS ONE TASK OF

E. G.Controlling fucntions Performing fucntions Supporting functions

CONSISTS OF CONSISTS OF CONSISTS OF

Strategic planning of information systems

CAN BE

Planning of (single) information system

Project work

CAN BE

UTILIZES

CREATES A BASIS FOR

UTILIZES

Information processing function

IS DONE USING

Figure 2. Concept map dealing with information systems

development based on our course material.

The author conducted analyzing and rating. Examples in table 2 and table 3 clarify how the responses of the students were rated (see next pages).

25

Level of SOLO Example

Subdirectory

1. Prestructural Contents of every program.

2. Unistructural Subdirectories are under main directory.

3. Multistructural A main directory contains numbers of subdirectories. A user can store his or her outcomes systematically.

4. Relational In this case students did not produce responses that should have been rated as extended abstracts.

5. Extended Abstract In this case students did not produce responses that should have been rated as extended abstracts.

Table 2. Example about rating answers dealing with the concept subdirectory.

26

Level of SOLO Example

Commercial-administrative software

1. Prestructural Spreadsheet like Excel or Quattro Pro.

2. Unistructural It is a part of application software.

3. Multistructural Software that can be used in companies. It can help in accounting salaries and stock accounting.

4. Relational It is a part of application software. They idea is that the amount of data is large. Examples of commercial-administrative software are budgeting, accounting.

5. Extended Abstract In this case students did not produce responses that should have been rated as extended abstracts.

Table 3. Example about rating answers dealing with commercial-administrative software.

In our rating useless sentences did not affect evaluation on level 2-5. The most important points in evaluation are the difference between level 2 and 3 and the difference between level 3 and level 4. At level 2 only one sentence included in our material was needed. At level 3 two or more sentences are needed. However, there was no need for the connections between sentences. At level 4 two items were expected. First, all items or sentences included in our material had to be included in the responses of level 4. Second, the sentences expressed by a student had to be in harmony with our material.

6.2. "Learning of Basic Concepts in Informatics Using Collaborative Hypertext: Does Collaborative Hypertext Support Learning as a Whole?"The paper (Makkonen, 1997c) represents the results of the

study based on the tests of structural knowledge. In this paper we

27

concentrate on how knowledge structures i. e. interelatedness between concepts have been learned. The analysis included two subscales: a) the Semantic relationships, and b) the Analogies. The concepts that included in the subscales were exactly same as the concepts of evaluation based on the SOLO taxonomy.

As in the paper (Makkonen, 1997b) we compare the experimental groups to the control groups. We show that structural knowledge can be learned equally in both types of the groups.

6.3. "Does collaborative hypertext support better engagement in learning of the basics in informatics?"The paper (Makkonen, 1997a) shows how engaged the students

are to learn the different themes of informatics. The study found that the use of collaborative hypertext affects both external and internal motivation equally in most cases. Internal motivation was significantly higher in the control groups learning the basic concepts of data communications. On the other hand external motivation was significantly higher in the experimental groups learning the basic concepts of hardware technology. The results have also been published in the paper (Makkonen, 1997d).

6.4. "Learning of Basic Concepts in Informatics Using Collaborative Hypertext: Who Benefits from Collaborative Hypertext?"The paper (Makkonen, 1997e) shows who benefits from

collaborative hypertext. The study found that the use of collaborative hypertext suits best for females and the students of non-humanities sciences. The students who are familiar with computers derive more benefit from the learning methods without collaborative hypertext. However, the students who are not familiar with computers can learn equally effectively using both methods. The results have also been published in the paper (Makkonen, 1997f).

6.5. "The WWW-based Presentations as a Complementary Part of Conventional Lectures in the Basics of Informatics: Is It Worth It?"The paper (Makkonen, 1999) deals with the use of the WWW in

a constructivistic manner as a complementary part of conventional lectures. The data for this study was also gathered in the course introduction to automatic data processing like data in the papers introduced previously.

28

We compared the students, who completed an optional WWW-based coursework, to the students, who did not participate in the WWW-based coursework. The coursework dealt with the basic concepts of informatics. To compare two different groups of the students we utilized a SOLO taxonomy based measure like in the paper introduced in the subsection 6.1.

We found that the WWW-based coursework works well as a complementary part of conventional lectures. Learning outcomes were significantly better in the group of the students, which completed the optional coursework. The students of this group were in a worse situation at the beginning of the course associated with the knowledge of the basic concepts. Thus, the effect of the coursework on learning was significant.

In addition, the paper summarizes our WWW-related research (Makkonen, 1998b, 1998c, 1999) in our introductory course of informatics. Based on the results of three papers we claim that organizing material in the right form is important while using hypertext or the WWW in education. While creating hypertext and web-based material we must concentrate on issues improving the management of material in the use of the students. When we can avoid solutions leading to the phenomena cognitive overload or lost in hyperspace, we succeed and a student can feel real learning.

6.6. Summary of Papers Dealing With Collaborative Hypertext Using CrosstabsThe SPSS crosstabs command was used to test the relationship

between the main variables. These variables were a) the learning outcomes based on the SOLO taxonomy, b) the semantic relationships subscale of learning structural knowledge, c) the analogies subscale of learning structural knowledge, d) post-motivation, e) internal motivation, and f) external motivation. The chi-square statistics showed no significant relationship between the variables in most cases. However, we found the relationship between post-motivation and the semantic relationship subscale in the control groups (p=.013) as well as the relationship between internal motivation and the semantic relationship subscale (p=.011).

Based on above in learning based on traditional methods if students are motivated to learn they can comprehend the area to learn better. This dependence between the variables can not be found concerning the experimental groups.

29

7. VALIDITY AND RELIABILITYThis section deals with the goodness of the results using the

concepts validity and reliability.

7.1. Internal validityInternal validity has been reached in two ways. First, the

subjects have been recruited as follows. We have organized two experimental groups and two control groups. The students selected the group in which they participated freely. All groups were informed in the same way and at the same time. The students were advised to select the course, which suited them best. The student did not know which course they selected (an experimental group or a control group). That helped our research in two ways: (1) the student did not attend the course based on her or his interest in hypertext or hypermedia and (2) in recruiting in this way we made sure that the students had enough time to attend the different activities of our courses. The second way to reach internal validity was the basis of evaluation in the courses. The learning outcomes of the students have been evaluated based on two measures - learning of single concepts in the paper (Makkonen, 1997a) and learning of knowledge structures in the paper (Makkonen, 1997b). Additionally, the background of the students has been evaluated to confirm the equality of the groups. In addition, by giving credits based on the completed exercises the students were motivated to participate in the both types of the courses.

The internal validity might be lower in the course where we had a WWW-based coursework because the coursework was optional. In some cases one motivation for the students to attend the coursework was that they were interested in the WWW. In the same way one motivation not to attend the coursework was that those students were not interested in the WWW. However, in most cases the reason to attend or not attend was time based on the questionnaire conducted at the end of the course.

7.2. External validityExternal validity has been reached because the courses were

based on the requirements of the faculty of social sciences at the University of Jyväskylä. This meant that the situation of the experiments was natural. The students have been expected to acquire knowledge and skills, which were written according to the curriculum by the faculty. In addition, the subjects in the experiments were normal students because in those terms when we had the courses included in this study, there were no other courses available in the basics of informatics.

30

Because external validity concerns the question of generalization, it is important to note that our study deals with the learning concepts. Thus, the findings can be useful in the areas, where information is in the form of concepts. These kind of subjects can be for example biology, history, psychology, and religion.

7.3. ReliabilityThe measures used in the research papers of this thesis were

developed and used by earlier research of the concepts learning. Cronbach's alfa were calculated for the SOLO measure presented in (Makkonen, 1997b, 1999) because it was essential for this test including 12 items (Makkonen, 1997b) or 15 items (Makkonen, 1999), where each item measured varying quality of learning.

8. CONCLUSIONJonassen (1994) has identified seven key learning strategies

necessary for successful learning with technology. Those strategies emphasize that learning must be

active, constructive, collaborative, intentional, conversational, contextualized, and reflective.

(Jonassen, 1994).

Based on our study it appears that collaborative hypertext has its promises but these are restricted. However, technology changes rapidly all the time and new methods and approaches can be found for collaborative (hypertext-based) learning.

Based on the results of our research papers collaborative hypertext is suited for the learning of structural knowledge rather than the learning of single concepts. This is promising because as we mentioned in section one knowledge is multidimensional rather than single facts. Additionally, the study proves that engagement to learn the topics of our basic course using collaborative hypertext is equal compared to traditional learning in most cases. Internal motivation concerning learning hardware technology was higher in the groups of students, which used collaborative hypertext. Generally, from this point of view computer-supported collaborative learning may be suited for teaching the basic concepts of hardware technology. Because of external motivation concerning the learning of the basic

31

concepts of data communications was higher in the groups, which did not use collaborative hypertext, learning without computers may be suited for teaching this topic best. The results show that we must aim at teaching and learning based on collaborative hypertext for certain groups. Based on our research these groups are females, non-humanities students. Thus generally, computer-supported collaborative learning may be the best way of learning for those groups.

We must concentrate on both pedagogical and technological issues in the future. The role of instructionist approach at the beginning of learning must be defined. The questions are what is the right amount of traditional teaching and what is the right amount of new methods based on constructivism. However, as said in subsection 2.3 by Jarvenpaa and Leidner (1993), conceptual and factual knowledge can be learned better using traditional methods. In addition, Jarvenpaa and Leidner (1995) stress that hypermedia may not be a useful tool for students with very little working knowledge in a domain.

However, based on the discussion by Jonassen (1994) at the beginning of this section, we can claim that collaborative hypertext can support each goal and hence, it can be a useful tool for the learning of informatics. The question is the easiness of the tool and how mature students are to utilize technology. We claim that if an environment is manageable, the results will be good. Our results concerning the guided tours on the WWW are one example of this (Makkonen 1998b, 1998c, 1999). We found positive impact on the learning of the basic concepts in informatics using the guided tours on the WWW. The WWW can support learning especially from the perspective of the constructivism (Brandt, 1997 & Ahmad et al., 1998) and, constructivism may thus have a leading role in computer-supported education in the future. The WWW enables many ways of learning from many perspectives. Thus, it is also possible to realize successful experiences based on hypermedia and also for the students, who at the beginning of learning of one area. Our WWW studies (Makkonen 1998b, 1998c, 1999) showed one prosperous case, in which the threats mentioned by Jarvenpaa and Leidner (1993, 1995) were overcome.

Regarding research methods, as we comprehend information systems research as the combination of both qualitative and quantitative research, this study would have needed qualitative approach. The lack of this study is that it measures only the effects of collaborative hypertext on learning. The qualitative approach will clarify what the reasons for the success or the failure in collaborative-hypertext-based learning are. Additionally, the qualitative approach is well argued because the CSCL approach comprehends learning from other perspectives than psychological.

32

Thus, the evaluation based on the qualitative approach appears to be the logical next step in the research concerning both collaborative hypertext and the WWW.

The development of the use of computers emphasizes information sharing, process reengineering, and supporting groups and teamwork. There is a number of reasons to suggest that support for such collaborative working based on information sharing is becoming more necessary (Bentley et al., 1997). According to the trends in the current business world towards decentralisation, joint ventures, outsourcing of business functions and so on are highlighting a need for effective methods of sharing information and coordinating activities. Good examples in this are previous mentioned CSILE, (Scardamalia et al., 1989) and Lotus Notes (Saarimaa, 1996, pp. 1-8), which is very common as an Intranet solution in enterprises. The developers of CSILE have same ideas as what can be found in Lotus Notes environment, which is widely known in enterprises. Both CSILE and Lotus Notes are based on collaboration and communal database. Like CSILE the meaning of Lotus Notes is reengineering of processes and supporting teamwork as well sharing information. In the case of CSILE, it occurs in educational environment and, in the case of Lotus Notes, it occurs in a business environment. Generally in the context of education, the current change is well described by Jarvenpaa and Leidner (1995). They understand the vision to transform (see subsection 2.3 in more detail) is the key approach while planning a complete transformation of education or as well as an organization. In the field of education, the vision transform would involve using information technology (1) to redraw the physical boundaries of the classroom, (2) to enable more teamwork, (3) to allow learning to be a continuous time-independent process, and (4) to enable multi-level, multi-speed knowledge creation. The notion of virtual learning spaces begins to operationalize these assumptions.

The collaboration technologies of the 90s may change the role of information technology. Technology can pay more attention to what real business is and how it goes or what the processes of learning are. We can claim that the new millenium will begin with the new ways of working and the change of behavior will occur by the techniques, which enable the new ways to act.

REFERENCESAgre, P. E., Chapman, D. (1987). Pengi: An Implementation of a Theory of Activity.

Proceedings of AAAI-87, Los Altos, CA, pp. 196-201.

Ahmad, R, Piccoli, G., Ives, B. (1998). Effectiveness of Virtual Learning Environments in Basic Skills Business Education: A Field Study in Progress. Proceedings of ICIS 1998. Helsinki, Finland, pp. 352-357.

Bentley, R., Busbach, U., Sikkel, K. (1996). The Architecture of the BSCW Shared Workspace System. Proceedings of the ERCIM workshop on CSCW and the

33

Web. Sankt Augustin, Germany, February 7-9, 1996, http://orgwis.gmd.de/projects/W4G/proceedings/bscw.html, accessed 30 July 1998.

Bentley, R., Appelt, W., Busbach. U., Hinrichs, E., Kerr, D., Sikkel, S., Trevor, J., Woetzel, G. (1997). Basic Support for Cooperative Work on the World Wide Web. Journal of Human-Computer Studies: Special issue on Innovative Applications of the World Wide Web, Vol. 46, No. 8, pp. 827-846.

Berners-Lee, T., Cailliau, R., Luotonen, A., Nielsen, H. F., Secret, A. (1994). The World-Wide-Web. Communications of the ACM, Vol. 37, No. 8, pp. 76-82.

Black, E. (1995). Behaviorism as a Learning Theory. University Houston Clear Lake, http://129.7.160.115/inst5931/Behaviorism.html, accessed 9 September 1998.

Brandt, D. A. (1997). Constructivism: Teaching for Understanding of the Internet. Communications of ACM, Vol. 40, No. 10, pp. 112-117.

Bush, V. (1945). As We May Think. The Atlantic Monthly, July, pp. 101-108.

Chen, C., Rada, R. (1996). Modelling situated actions in collaborative hypertext databases. Journal of Computer Mediated-Communication, Vol. 2, No. 3, http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol2/issue3/chen.html, accessed 30 July 1998.

Chi, M. T., Glaser, R. (1985). Problem Solving Ability. In R. S. Sternberg (ed.) Human Abilities: An Information Processing Approach. New York: W. H. Freeman.

Confrey, J. (1995). How Compatible Are Radical Constructivism, Sociocultural Approaches and Social Constructivism? In Steffe, L., & Gale, J. (eds.) Constructivism in Education. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Conklin, J. (1987). Hypertext: An introduction and survey. Computer, Vol. 20, No. 9, pp. 17-41.

Cunningham, D. J., Duffy, T. M., Knuth, R. A. (1993). The textbook of the future. In McKnight, C., Dillon, A., Richardson, J. (eds.) Hypertext. A psychological perspective. New York: Ellis Horwood.

Davis, G. B., Naumann, J. D. (1997). Personal Productivity with Information Technology. New York: The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

Derry, S. J. (1990). Flexible cognitive tools for Problem Solving Instruction. Paper presented

at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston, MA, April 16-20.

Derry, S. J., Lajoie, S. P. (1993). A middle camp for (un)intelligent instructional computing: An introduction. In Lajoie, S. P., Derry, S. J. (eds.) Computers as Cognitive Tools. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Doise, W., Mugny, G. (1978) Socio-cognitive conflict and structure of individual and collective performances. European Journal of Social Psychology. Vol. 8, pp. 181-192.

Dorneich, M. C., Jones, P. M. (1997). Supporting Apprenticeship Learning of NMR Spectroscopy in a Collaborative, Web-Based Learning Environment. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Tehnical Report HCCPS-97-01.

Dreyfus, S., Dreyfus, H. (1980). A five-stage model of the mental activities involved in directed skill acquisition. Unpublished report support by the Air Force Office of Scientific Research. University of California at Berkeley.

Engelbart, D. C. (1975). NLS Teleconferencing features: The journal, and shared-screen telephoning. Digest of papers, IEEE Computer Society Conferences (CompCon 75), pp. 173-176.

34

Enkenberg, J. (1990). Tiedon ja ajattelun taitojen oppimisesta tietokoneympäristössä. Joensuu: University of Joensuu. Faculty of Education. (in Finnish)

Esichaikul, V., Smith, R. D., Madey, G. R. (1994). The impact of learning style on problem-solving performance in a hypertext environment. Hypermedia, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 101-110.

Foreman, E. A., Cazden, C. B. (1985) Exploring Vygotskian Perspectives in Education: The Cognitive Value of Peer Interaction. In Wertsch, J. V. (ed.) Culture, Communication, and Cognition: Vygotskian Perspectives. New York: Cambridge Press.

Guzdial., M., Turns, J., Rappin N., Carlson, D. (1995). Collaborative Support for Learning in Complex Domains. A paper presented at CSCL '95 Computer Support for Collaborative Learning '95. Indiana University Bloomington, October 17-20, 1995, http://www-cscl95.indiana.edu/cscl95/guzdial.html, accessed 30 July 1998.

Guzdial, M., Hmelo, C., Hübscher, R., Nagel, K., Newstetter, W., Puntambekar, S., Shabo, A., Turns, J., and Kolodner, J., L. (1997). Integrating and Guiding Collaboration: Lessons Learned in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Research at Georgia Tech. A paper presented at CSCL '97 Computer Support for Collaborative Learning '97. Toronto, Canada, December 10-14, 1997, http://www.oise.utoronto.ca/cscl/, accessed 30 July 1998.

Haan, B. J., Kahn, P., Riley, V. A., Coombs, J. H., Meyrowitz, N. K. (1992). Iris hypermedia services. Communications of the ACM, Vol. 35, No. 1, pp. 36-51.

Hawkins, J. (1993). Technology and the organization of schooling. Communications of the ACM, Vol. 36, No. 5, pp. 30-35.

Heimbürger, A., Alkula, R., Kuhanen, T. (1990). Hyperteksti and hypermedia. Espoo: Technical Research Centre of Finland, Research Notes 1154.

Hewitt, J., Scardamalia, M., Webb, J. (1997). Situative design issues for interactive learning environments: The problem of group coherence. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Association, Chicago.

Hiebert, J., Lefevre, P. (1986). Conceptual and Procedural Knowledge in Mathematics: An Introductory Analysis. In Hiebert, J. (ed.) Conceptual and Procedural Knowledge. London: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Irish, P. M., Trigg, R. H. (1989). Supporting collaboration in hypermedia: Issues and experiences. In Barrett, E. (ed.) The society of text. Cambridge, MA: The MIT press.

Isaacs, G. (1994). Lecturing Practices and Note-Taking Purposes. Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 19, No. 2, 1994, pp. 203-216.

Jonassen, D. H. (1992a). What are cognitive tools? In Kommers, P. A. M., Jonassen, D. H., Mayes, J. T. (eds.) Cognitive tools for learning. Berlin: Springer-Verlag (NATO ASI Series).

Jonassen, D. H. (1992b). Hypertext as cognitive tools. In Kommers, P. A. M., Jonassen, D. H., Mayes, J. T. (eds.) Cognitive tools for learning. Berlin: Springer-Verlag (NATO ASI Series).

Jonassen, D. H. (1993). Effects of semantically structured hypertext knowledge bases on users' knowledge structures. In McKnight, C., Dillon, A., Richardson, J. (eds.) Hypertext. A psychological perspective. New York: Ellis Horwood.

Jonassen, D. H. (1994). Thinking technology. Educational Technology, Vol. 34, No. 4, pp. 34-37.

35

Jones, T. (1989). Incidental learning during information retrieval: A hypertext experiment. Computer Assisted Learning. 2nd. International Conference, ICCAL '89. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

Koschmann, T. (1996). Paradigm Shifts and Instructional Technology. In Koschmann T. (ed.) Theory and Practice of an Emerging Paradigm. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Landow, G. P. (1996). Hypertext, Scholarly Annotation, and the Electronic Edition. http://gonzo.hd.uib.no/allc-ach96/Panels/Finneran/finneran.html, accessed 15 October, 1998.

Leidner, D., Jarvenpaa, S. (1993) The Information Age Confronts Education: Case Studies on Electronic Classrooms. Information Systems Research, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 24-54.

Leidner, D. & Jarvenpaa, S. (1995) The Use of Information Technology to Enhance Management School Education: A Theoretical View. Management Information Systems Quarterly, Vol. 19, No. 3, pp. 265-291.

Leventhal, L. M., Teasley, B. M., Instone, K., Rohlman, D. S., Farhat, J. (1993). Sleuthing in HyperHolmesJ: An Evaluation of Using Hypertext vs. a Book to Answer Questions. Behavior and Information Technology, Vol 12, No. 3, pp. 149-164.

Lowyck, J. (1994). Increasing Access and Participation: The Use of New Educational Methods, Media and Technology for Course Presentation and for Student Support. EADTU News, No. 16, pp 36-37.

Marchionini, G., Scneiderman, B. (1988). Finding facts vs. browsing knowledge in hypertext system. IEEE Computer, No. 21, pp. 70-80.

Makkonen, P. (1997a). Does collaborative hypertext support better engagement in learning of the basics in informatics? Proceedings of the LeTTET '96 seminar (December 1996). Joensuu: University of Joensuu-Research and Development Center for Information Technology in Education. (long paper), pp. 41-48.

Makkonen, P. (1997b). Learning of Basic Concepts in Informatics Using Collaborative Hypertext: An Experiment And Its Preliminary Results Based on SOLO Taxonomy. Proceedings of the 30th HICSS, Hawaii International Conference of Systems Science (Jan. 1997), Vol. 2. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press, pp. 630-638.

Makkonen, P. (1997c). Learning of Basic Concepts in Informatics Using Collaborative Hypertext: Does Collaborative Hypertext Support Learning as a Whole? A paper presented at the Enable '97, Enabling Network-Based Learning- an International Conference organized by Espoo-Vantaa Institute of Technology and the Learning Infobahn Project (May 28-30, 1997), http://www.evitech.fi/CONFERENCE/enable97, accessed 30 July 1998.

Makkonen, P. (1997d). Does collaborative hypertext support better engagement in learning of the basics in informatics? Proceedings of the Integrating Technology into Computer Science Education conference (June 1997). New York: ACM press, pp. 130-132 (short paper)

Makkonen, P. (1997e). Learning of Basic Concepts in Informatics Using Collaborative Hypertext: Who Benefits from Collaborative Hypertext? Proceedings of the 20 th IRIS, Information Systems Research Seminar in Scandinavia. Oslo: University of Oslo, 1997, pp. 749-768.

Makkonen, P. (1997f). Learning of Basic Concepts in Informatics Using Collaborative Hypertext: Who Benefits from Collaborative Hypertext? Proceedings of the 8 th ACIS, Australasian Conference on Information Systems. Darlinghurst: Australian Computer Society Inc., http://business.city.unisa.edu.au/acis97/papers/paper_index.htm (revised version of Makkonen, P. (1997d)), accessed 18 December 1998.

36

Makkonen, P. (1998a). Learning of Basic Concepts in Informatics Using Collaborative Hypertext: Does Collaborative Hypertext Support Learning as a Whole? Proceedings of the ED - MEDIA 98-World Conference on Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia (June 20-25, 1998). Charlottesville, VA: The Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE) Press, 1998, pp. 927-932. (revised version of Makkonen, P. (1997c))

Makkonen, P. (1998b). The WWW-based Presentations as a Complementary Part of Conventional Lectures in the Basics of Informatics. Proceedings of the Conference on Integrating Technology into Computer Science Education (18th- 21st August 1998). New York: ACM Press, pp. 162-165.

Makkonen, P. (1998c). Benefit of the WWW-based Presentations as a Complementary Part of Conventional Lectures in the Basics of Informatics. Proceedings of the 21st IRIS Information Systems Research Seminar in Scandinavia (8th- 11th August 1998), Vol. 2. Aalborg: University of Aalborg, pp. 583-591.

Makkonen, P. (1999). The WWW-based Presentations as a Complementary Part of Conventional Lectures in the Basics of Informatics: Is It Worth it? Proceedings of the IRMA (Information Resources Management Association) 1999 Conference. Hershey, PA, USA: Information Resources Management Association, pp. 365-371.

McKnight, C., Dillon, A., Richardson, J.(1990). A comparison of linear and hypertext formats in information retrieval. In McAleese, R., Green, C. (eds.) Hypertext: State of art. Cambridge: Intellect.

Ministry of Education in Finland (1995). Koulutuksen ja tutkimuksen tietostrategia. Helsinki: Ministry of Education. (in Finnish)

Mühlhauser , M. (1990). Hyperinformation requirements for an integrated authoring/learning environment. In Jonassen, D. H., Mandl, H. (eds.) Designing Hypermedia for Learning Berlin: Spinger-Verlag (NATO ASI Series).

Nelson, T. (1981). Literary machines. Manuscript.

Newman, D., Griffin, P., Cole, M. (1989). The Construction Zone: Working for Cognitive Change in School. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Newman, D. R., Johnson, C., Webb, B., Cochrane, C. (1997). Evaluating the Quality of Learning in Computer Supported Co-Operative Learning. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Vol. 48, No. 6, pp. 484-495.

Nielsen, J. (1989). The Matters that Really Matter for Hypertext Usability. Proceedings of the Hypertext '89. New York: The ACM press, pp. 239-248.

Nielsen, J. (1990). Hypertext and hypermedia. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Nulden, U. (1998). Needed: An Alternative Approach to Prepare Information Technology Professionals. Proceedings of the 21st IRIS Information Systems Research Seminar in Scandinavia (8th- 11th August 1998), Vol. 2. Aalborg: University of Aalborg, pp. 685-699.

Piaget, J. (1932). The Moral Judgment of the Child, Glencoe. IL: The Free Press.

Piaget, J. (1977). The Development of Thought: Equilibration of Cognitive Structures. New York: Viking.

Piaget, J. (1985). The Equilibrium of Cognitive Structures: The central problem of Intellectual Development (T. Brown & K.J. Thampy, trans.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

37

Rada, R. (1991). Hypertext: From text to expertext. London: McGraw - Hill Book Company.

Rada, R., Acquab, S., Baker, B., Ramsey, P. (1993). Collaborative Learning and the MUCH System. Computers and Education, Vol. 20, No. 3, pp. 225-233.

Rauste-von Wright M., M., von Wright J. (1994). Oppinen ja koulutus. Juva: WSOY.

(in Finnish)

Risku, P. (1992). Tietokonepohjainen matematiikan opiskeluympäristö teknisessä koulutuksessa. Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä, Institute for Educational Research. Publication Series A. Research Report 49.(in Finnish)

Roschelle, J. (1996). Learning by Collaborating: Convergent Conceptual Change, CSCL: Theory and Practice of an Emerging Paradigm. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 209-247.

Rosenthal J. (1995). Active Learning Strategies in Advanced Mathematics Classes. Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 19, No. 2, 1994, pp. 223-228.

Ryle, G. (1949). Collected papers, Vol II. Critical essays. London: Hutchinson.

Saarimaa, T. (1996). Lotus Notes 4-Käyttöönotto ja hallinta. Espoo: Suomen Atk-kustannus Oy. (in Finnish)

Scardamalia, M., Beraiter, C., McLean, R. S., Swallow, J., Woodruff, E. (1989). Computer-supported intentional learning environments. Journal of educational computing research, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 51-68.

Shneiderman, B. (1987). User interface design for the Hyperties electronic encyplopedia. Hypertext '87 Proceeding. New York: ACM Press, pp. 189-194.

Silverman, B. G. (1995) Computer supported collaborative learning (CSCL). Computers in education, Vol. 25, No. 3, pp. 81-91.

Spiro, R., Feltovich, P., Jacobson, M., Coulson, R. (1991). Cognitive flexibility, constructivism, and hypertext: Random access instruction for advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domains. Educational Technology, Vol. 31, No. 5, pp. 24-33.

Suchman, L. (1987). Plans and Situated Action: The Problem of Human-Machine Communication. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Vuorimaa, V. (1997). Oppijana hypermediaympäristössä: Tietotekniikan perusteiden opiskelua www-sivuilta ammattikorkeakoulussa. Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä, Department of Teacher Education, Licentiate Thesis. (in Finnish)

Vygotsky L. S. (1978). Mind and Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Wan, D., Johnson, P. M. (1994). Computer supported collaborative learning using CLARE: The approach and experimental findings. Proceedings of the ACM Conference of Computer-Supported Cooperative Work. New York: ACM Press, pp. 187-198

Whittington, C. D. (1996). MOLE: Computer supported collaborative learning. Computers and Education, Vol. 26, pp. 153-161.

38