Collaboration in Wireless Learning Networks Geri Gay and Helene Hembrooke Human Computer Interaction Group, Cornell University Abstract Wireless computing is becoming an integral component of learning environments in higher education and in the world of work, particularly with the increasing number of “laptop universities” and distributed learning communities. However, little research has been conducted on how wireless computing affects learning experiences or learning environments. In light of extensive research revealing the transformative impact of technology on learning, we can assume that mobile and wireless computing could significantly transform how students learn, the content of courses, learning-related practices, classroom dynamics and relationships among students and faculty. These technologies will bring about fundamental changes in the ways that the university creates and disseminates ideas, knowledge and understanding. Introduction Computer supported collaborative learning The study described here has been guided in part by research that has focused on the sociological implications of pervasive communication tools on many aspects of life, including work and education. One such area is Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL). CSCL is defined as a computer-based network system that supports group work in a common task and provides a shared interface for groups to work with [5]. Collaborative Learning is defined as groups working together for a common purpose [19]. The benefits of collaborative learning are widely recognized [1,4,15]. The Internet and World Wide Web are well suited for hosting CSCL environments [11]. Many CSCL systems designed for group support on projects and communication are currently available [18,16]. Common characteristics include the ability of students to contribute to an existing database of peer work, as well as the option of commenting on the contributions of others. Research has shown that moderated discussions or structured interactions are more effective than un-moderated or undirected interaction [12,14,17]. With the addition of wireless, computing technology comes increased support for the CSCL environment, due to sustained interaction and the resulting creation of closer interpersonal bonds [10,13]. This in turn facilitates a wide sharing of knowledge and the creation of a community of learners sharing common goals [3]. Educational researchers [2,21], argue that students learn best when given the opportunity to learn skills and theories in the context in which they are used, then construct their interpretations of a subject and communicate those understandings to others. Wireless computer-mediated learning environments may support this constructive learning process by helping students find and organize information in context, construct their understandings, and communicate those understandings to others. Wireless computers also support “just-in-time” learning, an adoption by educators of successful industry technique that involves delivery of parts and finished products at precisely the time in which they are needed [20]. Transferred to education, students may receive context –appropriate information or complete a skill-building task, at the most appropriate teachable moment. The work reported here in part, is a natural extension of our earlier work on the development of computer supported learning environments [7,8,9]. Here we hypothesized that compared with a more traditional approach to classroom teaching, a collaborative learning environment would encourage the use of more social computing among students and group members. Social computing is defined here as the use of social communicative tools such as Email, Instant Messaging, and CHAT. It further encompasses where, when, and with whom this computing occurs. We hypothesized that the social network within groups would become increasingly cohesive as work on the group portal projects became the focus of their classroom experience. This cohesiveness was operationalized as an increase in social communication among group members with a concomitant decrease in communication with members outside their individualized group. The “where” and “when” aspects are defined in terms of whether or not students accessed the network to do their work. Thus, we further hypothesized that