In this early empirical study on co-creation in learning, Pee (2019) attempts to support the hypothesis that the open-ended nature of ill-structured problem solving (ISPS) can be used to a learner’s advantage in increasing cognitive and epistemic knowledge. Three concepts were derived from business disciplines, where co-creation is commonly used, to develop a framework to determine of online co-creation to test for increased student learning in ISPS: solution co-creation, decision co-creation, and solution sharing. Pee created an asynchronous, voluntary, and optionally anonymous activity on Blackboard for students to participate in decision co-creation for evaluative criteria and then to discuss their solutions to the problem in the assignment to engage in co-solution sharing and solution co-creation. Pee interprets the student survey results to indicate that by engaging in online co-creation, learning increases. Ultimately, Pee suggests that while this study is an early study and cannot yet be generalized, it should be replicated in other areas and current course instructors can implement this method to increase learning in the context of working with ISPS.
While the article excels in presenting its data visually and the limitations of the study are adequately acknowledged, there are areas of concern in the arguments Pee presents. While Pee (2019) presents a cogent statistical analysis of the survey deployed to students (n=225), and the survey had an excellent return rate of 70.3%, the findings were presented in the article as proving learning increased when the survey measured student perception of learning. A brief follow up interview with 13 students was mentioned in the article, but these were not discussed in depth and did not support the hypothesis that learning had increased, but a single student was quoted as showing their perception of learning increased. Finally, the examples to illustrate the method for collecting data was described and limited to the graduate student sample who made up only 32.4% of the sample size – the undergraduate student experience shaped most of the survey results, but it was not described in the methodology or discussion. Pee draws a conclusion that the survey results show the model for co-creation online worked in a classroom to “leverage the multiplicity of ISPs,” to enhance student learning, not noting the survey can only measure objective perception since student work was not evaluated or controlled for with groups who used co-creation and groups who did not.
As a writing teacher, the idea of ill-structured problems and co-creation is interesting to me. Writing is often difficult to teach because it’s amorphous and doesn’t have a “right” answer. The idea of online co-creation where students work together to contribute to discussions of how a project will be evaluated is exciting because it shifts the burden of teaching in an ISP context from the instructor only to instructor and students. I like this idea in terms of establishing rubrics that are more individualized for learners to help them grow their writing in ways they find relevant while also meeting course standards and outcomes. As a doctoral student, I am interested in the ways students perceive their own learning versus how instructors perceive student learning based on knowledge acquisition. I find the methodology and framework used by Pee to study perception of learning is interesting.
References
Pee, L. G. (2019). Enhancing the learning effectiveness of ill-structured problem solving with online co-creation. Studies in Higher Education, 45(11), 2341-2355. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2019.1609924
Educational Technology Blog 