Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Taking a stance in the process of learning: Developing perspectival understandings through knowledge co-construction during synchronous computer-mediated classroom discussion

  • Published:
International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study extends research on perspectival understanding (Greeno & van de Sande, 2007) by using Du Bois’ (2007) discourse work on stancetaking to investigate how students expressed their perspectives on course content through a variety of stances/positions as they negotiated meaning in online discussions. Participants were students in a hybrid graduate-level course with weekly synchronous computer-mediated discussions. Adapting Du Bois’ stancetaking triangle, we coded discussion transcripts for shifts in stance and for evidence of influence on students’ perspective taking as they considered course concepts. Findings were that stances and stance objects (that is, topics) were introduced as students collaborated in discussion, with an epistemic stance indicating students’ primary focus on wanting to learn and understand course concepts. Evaluative and affective stances were less frequent and most often intertwined with an epistemic stance but nevertheless important in supporting the group’s discussion. Synchronous online discussions afforded a venue for iterative discourse interactions of evaluation, positioning, and alignment and for shared knowledge co-construction and perspectival understanding.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Original transcript data are available by contacting the first author.

References

  • Aldemir, T., Borge, M., & Soto, J. (2022). Shared meaning-making in online intergroup discussions around sensitive topics. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 17(3), 361–396. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-022-09375-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). Speech genres and other late essays. University of Texas Press.

  • Barron, B. (2000). Achieving coordination in collaborative problem solving groups. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9, 403–446. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327809JLS0904_2

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Bird, E. B., Ballard, H. L., & Harte, M. (2023). Data to decision-making: how elementary students use their community and citizen science project to reimagine their school campus. Instructional Science, 1-29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-022-09612-6

  • Chiu, M. M. (2008). Effects of argumentation on group micro-creativity: Statistical discourse analyses of algebra students’ collaborative problem solving. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33(3), 382–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2008.05.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins, A., & Greeno, J. G. (2011). Situative view of learning. In V. Aukrust (Ed.), Learning and cognition: Introduction (pp. 64–67). Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (3rd ed.). Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cress, U., Rosé, C. P., Law, N., & Ludvigsen, S. (2019). Investigating the complexity of computer-supported collaborative learning in action. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 14, 137–142. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-019-09305-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dascalu, M. D., Ruseti, S., Dascalu, M., McNamara, D. S., & Trausan-Matu, S. (2022). Dialogism meets language models for evaluating involvement in CSCL conversations. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Smart Learning Ecosystems and Regional Development: Ludic, Co-design and Tools Supporting Smart Learning Ecosystems and Smart Education (pp. 67–78). Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-3930-2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • De Beaugrande, R. A., & Dressler, W. U. (1981). Introduction to text linguistics. Longman.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ding, A. C. E., & Pawan, F. (2020). Multimodal identity construction of technology-using language teachers via stance taking in an online learning space. In B. Yazan & K. Lindahl (Eds.), Language Teacher Identity in TESOL (pp. 83–100). Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Du Bois, J. W. (2007). The stance triangle. In E. Robert (Ed.), Stancetaking in discourse (pp. 139–182). John Benjamins. https://digital.casalini.it/9789027291929. Accessed 25 Oct 2023.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Du Bois, J. W. (2011). Co-opting intersubjectivity: Dialogic rhetoric of the self. In C. Meyer & F. Girke (Eds.), The rhetorical emergence of culture (pp. 52–83). Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Du Bois, J. W., & Karkkainen, E. (2012). Taking a stance on emotion: Affect, sequence, and intersubjectivity in dialogic interaction. Text & Talk, 32(4), 433–451. https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2012-0021

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farris, A. V., & Sengupta, P. (2014). Perspectival computational thinking for learning physics: A case study of collaborative agent-based modeling. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS 2014). https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1403.3790

  • Furberg, A., & Silseth, K. (2022). Invoking student resources in whole-class conversations in science education: A sociocultural perspective. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 31(2), 278–316. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2021.1954521

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (1999). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2–3), 87–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giere, R. N. (2006). Perspectival pluralism. In S. H. Kellert, H. E. Longino, & C. K. Waters (Eds.), Scientific pluralism (NED-New 19, pp. 26–41). University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin, C., & Goodwin, M. H. (1992). Assessments and the construction of context. In A. Duranti & C. Goodwin (Eds.), Rethinking context: Language as an interactive phenomenon (pp. 147–190). Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greeno, J. G. (1998). The situativity of knowing, learning, and research. American Psychologist, 53(1), 5. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.53.1.5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greeno, J. G. (2009). A theory bite on contextualizing, framing, and positioning: A companion to Son and Goldstone. Cognition and Instruction, 27(3), 269–275. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370000903014386

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greeno, J. G. (2011). A situative perspective on cognition and learning in interaction. In T. Koschmann (Ed.), Theories of learning and studies of instructional practice (pp. 41–71). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Greeno, J. G., & MacWhinney, B. (2006). Learning as perspective taking: Conceptual alignment in the classroom. Proceedings of International Conference of the Learning Sciences-ICLS 2006 (2nd ed., pp. 930–931). International Society of the Learning Sciences. https://doi.org/10.22318/icls2006.930

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Greeno, J. G., & van de Sande, C. (2007). Perspectival understanding of conceptions and conceptual growth in interaction. Educational Psychologist, 42(1), 9–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520709336915

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ha, H., & Kim, H. B. (2022). How a marginalized student’s attempts to position himself as an accepted member are constrained or afforded in small-group argumentation. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 17(3), 915–935. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-021-10100-5

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, R., & Jurow, A. S. (2015). Changing concepts in activity: Descriptive and design studies of consequential learning in conceptual practices. Educational Psychologist, 50(3), 173–189. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2015.1075403

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herring, S. C. (1996). Introduction. In S. C. Herring (Ed.), Computer-mediated communication: Linguistic, social and cross-cultural perspectives (pp. 1–10). Benjamins.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Herring, S. C. (2019). The coevolution of computer-mediated communication and computer-mediated discourse analysis. In P. Bou-Franch & P. G. Blitvich (Eds.), Analyzing digital discourse (pp. 25–67). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92663-6

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Iwasaki, S. (2022). Stancetaking in motion: Stance triangle and double dialogicality. Text & Talk. https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2020-0222

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Järvelä, S., Malmberg, J., & Koivuniemi, M. (2016). Recognizing socially shared regulation by using the temporal sequences of online chat and logs in CSCL. Learning and Instruction, 42, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2015.10.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jordan, M. E., Cheng, A. J., Schallert, D. L., Song, K., Lee, S., & Park, Y. (2014). “I guess my question is”: What is the co-occurrence of uncertainty and learning in computer-mediated discourse? International Journal of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, 9(4), 451–475. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-014-9203-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kärkkäinen, E. (2006). Stance taking in conversation: From subjectivity to intersubjectivity. Text & Talk, 26(6), 699–731. https://doi.org/10.1515/TEXT.2006.029

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kiesling, S. F., Pavalanathan, U., Fitzpatrick, J., Han, X., & Eisenstein, J. (2018). Interactional stancetaking in online forums. Computational Linguistics, 44(4), 683–718. https://doi.org/10.1162/coli_a_00334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koschmann, T., & Schwarz, B. B. (2021). Case studies in theory and practice. In U. Cress, C. Rosé, A. F. Wise, & J. Oshima (Eds.), International Handbook of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (pp. 463–478). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-65291-3

  • Kroencke, L., Harari, G. M., Back, M. D., & Wagner, J. (2023). Well-being in social interactions: Examining personality-situation dynamics in face-to-face and computer-mediated communication. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 124(2), 437–460. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000422

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S., & Schallert, D. L. (2016). Becoming a teacher: Coordinating past, present, and future selves with perspectival understandings about teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 56, 72–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.02.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S., & Song, K. (2016). Exploring the relationship between resistance and perspectival understanding in computer-mediated discussions. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 11(1), 41–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-016-9228-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linell, P. (2009). Rethinking language, mind, and world dialogically. IAP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marani, I. N., Subarkah, A., & Wijayanto, A. (2020). The use of computer mediated communication (CMC) in distance learning during Covid-19 pandemic: Pros and cons. 6th International Conference on Social and Political Sciences (ICOSAPS 2020) (pp. 95–102). Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.201219.015

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Masala, M., Ruseti, S., Rebedea, T., Dascalu, M., Gutu-Robu, G., & Trausan-Matu, S. (2021). Identifying the structure of CSCL conversations using string kernels. Mathematics, 9(24), 3330. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9243330

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mason, A. J., & Carr, C. T. (2022). Toward a theoretical framework of relational maintenance in computer-mediated communication. Communication Theory, 32(2), 243–264. https://doi.org/10.1093/ct/qtaa035

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNamara, D. S., Graesser, A. C., McCarthy, P., & Cai, Z. (2014). Automated evaluation of text and discourse with Coh-Metrix. Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mortensen, J., Baumgarten, N., Du Bois, I., & House, J. (2012). Subjectivity and intersubjectivity as aspects of epistemic stance marking. In N. Baumgarten, I. Du Bois, & J. House (Eds.), Subjectivity in language and in discourse (pp. 229–246). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004261921_011

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Naidu, S., & Järvelä, S. (2006). Analyzing CMC content for what? Computers & Education, 46(1), 96–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2005.04.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nowak, K. L., & Fox, J. (2018). Avatars and computer-mediated communication: A review of the definitions, uses, and effects of digital representations. Review of Communication Research, 6, 30–53. https://doi.org/10.12840/issn.2255-4165.2018.06.01.015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parini, A., & Fetzer, A. (2019). Evidentiality and stance in YouTube comments on smartphone reviews. Internet Pragmatics, 2(1), 112–135. https://doi.org/10.1075/ip.00025.par

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, J. H., Schallert, D. L., Sanders, A. K. Z., Williams, K. M., Seo, E., Yu, L., Vogler, J. S., Song, K., Williamson, Z. H., & Knox, M. C. (2015). Does it matter if the teacher is there?: A teacher’s contribution to emerging patterns of interactions in online classroom discussions. Computers and Education, 82, 315–328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.11.019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pedaste, M., Maeots, M., Siiman, L. A., de Jong, T., van Riesen, S. A. N., Kamp, E. T., Manoli, C. C., Zacharia, Z. C., & Tsourlidaki, E. (2015). Phases of inquiry-based learning: Definitions and the inquiry cycle. Educational Research Review, 14, 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.02.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pereira, L. (2007). Developing perspectival understanding. In P. C. Taylor & J. Wallace (Eds.), Contemporary qualitative research: Exemplars for science and mathematics educators (pp. 189–203). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Phuong, A. E., Nguyen, J., Hunn, C. T., & Mejia, F. D. (2021). A learning sciences and organizational behavior framework for analyzing how college instructors learn inclusive pedagogies. Proceedings of the 15th International Conference of the Learning Sciences-ICLS 2021. International Society of the Learning Sciences. https://doi.org/10.22318/icls2021.1171

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rincon-Mendoza, L. (2023). Beyond language fluidity: the role of spatial repertoires in translingual practices and stancetaking. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 26(6), 755–766. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2020.1775780

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosé, C. P., & Järvelä, S. (2020). Building community together: towards equitable CSCL practices and processes. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 15, 249–255. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-020-09329-z

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Sakita, T. I. (2013). Discourse markers as stance markers: Well in stance alignment in conversational interaction. Pragmatics & Cognition, 21(1), 81–116. https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.21.1.04sak

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2006). Knowledge building: Theory, pedagogy, and technology. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 97–118). Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schallert, D. L., Reed, J. H., the D-Team. (2003-2004). Intellectual, motivational, textual, and cultural considerations in teaching and learning with computer-mediated discussion. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36, 103–118. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2003.10782407

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schallert, D. L., Lissi, M. R., Reed, J. H., Dodson, M. M., Benton, R. E., & Hopkins, L. F. (1996). How coherence is socially constructed in oral and written classroom discussions of reading assignments. Yearbook of the National Reading Conference, 45, 471–483. https://app.box.com/s/2wys1sogov1ru2u8l8ou/file/13138498747. Accessed 5 Feb 2024.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schallert, D. L., Song, K., Jordan, M. E., Lee, S., Park, Y., Kim, T., Cheng, A. J., Chu, H.-N.R., Vogler, J. S., & Lee, J. E. (2016). Shifts in trajectories in thought communities and “wobbly” identities enacted in computer-mediated classroom discussions. International Journal of Educational Research, 80, 49–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2016.08.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sherblom, J. C., Withers, L. A., & Leonard, L. G. (2013). The influence of computer-mediated communication (CMC) competence on computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) in online classroom discussions. Human Communication, 16(1), 31–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shim, S. Y., & Krist, C. (2022). Expanding the interpretive functions of framing for understanding marginalized students’ participation in collaboration and learning. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 17(3), 937–944. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-022-10122-7

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, G. (2004). Building collaborative knowing: Elements of a social theory of CSCL. In J. Strijbos, P. A. Kirschner, & R. L. Martens (Eds.), What we know about CSCL: And implementing it in higher education (pp. 53–85). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, G. (2010). Guiding group cognition in CSCL. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 5, 255–258. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-010-9091-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, G. (2023). Contributions to a theoretical framework for CSCL. In G. Stahl (Ed.), Computer support for collaborative learning (pp. 62–71). Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, G., Koschmann, T. D., & Suthers, D. D. (2006). CSCL: An historical perspective. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 409–426). Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suthers, D. D. (2017). Technology affordances for intersubjective learning: A thematic agenda for CSCL. In T. Koschmann (Ed.), Computer supported collaborative learning 2005: The next 10 years (pp. 662–671). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351226905

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Trausan-Matu, S. (2022). Detecting micro-creativity in CSCL chats. Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning-CSCL 2022 (pp. 601–602). Press University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trausan-Matu, S., Wegerif, R., & Major, L. (2021). Dialogism. In U. Cress, C. Rosé, A. F. Wise, & J. Oshima (Eds.), International Handbook of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (pp. 219–239). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-65291-3

  • Treem, J. W., Leonardi, P. M., & van den Hooff, B. (2020). Computer-mediated communication in the age of communication visibility. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 25(1), 44–59. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmz024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van de Sande, C., & Greeno, J. G. (2012). Achieving alignment of perspectival framings in problem-solving discourse. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21, 1–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2011.639000

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Heijst, H., de Jong, F. P., Van Aalst, J., De Hoog, N., & Kirschner, P. A. (2019). Socio-cognitive openness in online knowledge building discourse: Does openness keep conversations going? International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 14(2), 165–184. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-019-09303-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Villa-Torrano, C., Asensio-Pérez, J. I., Dimitriadis, Y., Martínez-Monés, A., Lorenzo, M. B., & Gómez-Sánchez, E. (2022). Connecting CSCL scripting and socially-shared regulation of learning: An exploratory study. Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning-CSCL 2022 (pp. 573–574). International Society of the Learning Sciences. https://doi.org/10.22318/cscl2022.573

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Vogler, J. S., Schallert, D. L., Park, Y., Song, K., Chiang, Y. V., Jordan, M. E., Lee, S., Cheng, A. J., Lee, J., Park, J., & Sanders, A. J. Z. (2013). A microgenetic analysis of classroom discussion practices: How literacy processes intermingle in the negotiation of meaning in an online discussion. Journal of Literacy Research, 45(3), 211–239. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296X13499846

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vogler, J. S., Schallert, D. L., Jordan, M. E., Song, K., Sanders, A. J. Z., Chiang, Y. Y. T., Lee, J., Park, J., & Yu, L.-T. (2017). Life history of a topic in an online discussion: A complex systems theory perspective on how one message attracts class members to create meaning collaboratively. International Journal of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, 12, 173–194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-017-9255-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wegerif, R. (2006). A dialogic understanding of the relationship between CSCL and teaching thinking skills. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1, 143–157. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-006-6840-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, J. R. (2019). Marking online community membership: The pragmatics of stance-taking. In A. Capone, M. Carapezza, & F. Lo Piparo (Eds.), Further Advances in Pragmatics and Philosophy: Part 2, Theories and Applications (pp. 535–548). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00973-1

  • Williams, K. M., Park, J. H., Gaines, R. E., Choi, E., Lee, J. J., Mattar, L., & Schallert, D. L. (2016). “I wonder if...”: The process of inquiry in support of students’ co-learning from online discussion. Literacy Research: Theory, Method, and Practice, 65, 365–383. https://doi.org/10.1177/2381336916661515

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zengilowski, A. L., Schallert, D. L., & the D Team (2018). Students discussing ideas in online spaces: Research-infused recommendations for making computer-mediated discussions productive for learning. Proceedings of 2018 IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment, and Learning for Engineering (TALE) (pp. 243–250). IEEE.

  • Zengilowski, A., & Schallert, D. L. (2020). Using “plain vanilla” online discussions to foster students’ learning: From research to practice. In L. Wilton & C. Brett (Eds.), Handbook of research on online discussion-based teaching methods (pp. 26–54). IGI Global.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA

    Hannah Park

  2. University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA

    Diane L. Schallert

  3. Austin Independent School District, Austin, TX, USA

    Kyle M. Williams

  4. Kennesaw State University, Kennesaw, GA, USA

    Rachel E. Gaines

  5. Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA

    Jeonghyun Lee

  6. City University of Seattle, Seattle, WA, USA

    Eunjeong Choi

Authors
  1. Hannah Park
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Diane L. Schallert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kyle M. Williams
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Rachel E. Gaines
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jeonghyun Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Eunjeong Choi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hannah Park.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (PDF 148 KB)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Park, H., Schallert, D.L., Williams, K.M. et al. Taking a stance in the process of learning: Developing perspectival understandings through knowledge co-construction during synchronous computer-mediated classroom discussion. Intern. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn 19, 67–95 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-023-09416-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-023-09416-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation