Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Group-level formative feedback and metadiscourse

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

Abstract

This research explores the ability of grade 2 students to engage in productive discussion about the state of their knowledge building using group-level feedback tools to support their metadiscourse. Two aspects of knowledge work were common to the comparison and experimental classes: “Knowledge Building talk” (KB talk) involving teacher-student discussions and the use of Knowledge Forum, an online environment optimized to support Knowledge Building/knowledge creation and to represent and support student work and KB talks. Students in experimental conditions additionally reviewed visualizations of vocabulary use and discourse patterns during KB talk time. Two formative feedback visualization tools were co-developed by the classroom teacher and researchers to show (a) overlaps and discrepancies between words students used in their Knowledge Forum notes and words used by writers more knowledgeable in the field and (b) frequency of discourse moves indicated by students’ use of epistemic discourse markers in Knowledge Forum. These visualizations served as grounding for KB talk concerned with interpreting the visualizations and considering their implications. A comparison of two classes similar except for presence or absence of these visualizations showed significant effects favoring the experimental class in domain-specific vocabulary, repertoire of discourse moves, scientific understanding, epistemic complexity of ideas, and interpersonal connectedness of online discourse.

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
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Because the term “knowledge building” now appears in many documents, often without definition, we use lower case with the generic term and capitalize Knowledge Building when referring to the approach originating in our laboratory and promoted by organizations such as Knowledge Building International.

References

  • Andrade, H., & Du, Y. (2007). Student responses to criteria-referenced self-assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 32(2), 159–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baltzersen, R. K. (2013). The importance of metacommunication in supervision processes in higher education. International Journal of Higher Education, 2(2), 128–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bateman, S., Gutwin, C., & Nacenta, M. (2008). Seeing things in the clouds: The effect of visual features on tag cloud selections. In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia (pp. 193–202). Pittsburgh: ACM.

  • Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., & Omanson, R. C. (1987). The effects and uses of diverse vocabulary instructional techniques. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bereiter, C. (2010). How to make good knowledge-building discourse better. Keynote address at the 2010 Knowledge Building Summer Institute “New Assessments and Environments for Knowledge Building”, Toronto, Canada, August 3–6, 2010.

  • Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (2003). Learning to work creatively with knowledge. In E. De Corte, L. Verschaffel, N. Entwistle, & J. van Merriënboer (Eds.), Powerful learning environments: Unraveling basic components and dimensions (pp. 55–68). Advances in Learning and Instruction Series). Oxford: Elsevier Science.

  • Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (2014). Knowledge building and knowledge creation: One concept, two hills to climb. In S. C. Tan, H. J. So, & J. Yeo (Eds.), Knowledge creation in education (pp. 35–52). Singapore: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bereiter, C., Scardamalia, M., Cassells, C., & Hewitt, J. (1997). Postmodernism, knowledge-building, and elementary science. Elementary School Journal, 97(4), 329–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bielaczyc, K., & Collins, A. (1999). Learning communities in classrooms: A reconceptualization of educational practice. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (pp. 269–292). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biemiller, A. (2005). Size and sequence in vocabulary development: Implications for choosing words for primary grade vocabulary instruction. In A. Hiebert & M. Kamil (Eds.), Teaching and learning vocabulary: Bringing research to practice (pp. 223–242). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, B. S., Hastings, J. T., & Madaus, G. (1971). Handbook on formative and summative evaluation of student learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boud, D. (1995). Enhancing learning through self-assessment. London: Kogan Page.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (1996). Psychological theory and design of innovative learning environments: On procedures, principles, and systems. In L. Schauble & R. Glaser (Eds.), Innovations in learning: New environments for education (pp. 289–325). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burtis, P. J. (1998). Analytic toolkit for Knowledge Forum. Centre for Applied Cognitive Science, The Ontario Institute for Studies in Education/University of Toronto.

  • Campbell, D., & Stanley, J. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago: Rand-McNally.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chan, C. K. K. (2001). Peer collaboration and discourse patterns in learning from incompatible information. Instructional Science, 29(6), 443–479.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chan, C. K. K. (2013). Collaborative knowledge building. Towards a knowledge creation perspective. In C. E. Hmelo-Silver, C. A. Chinn, C. Chan, & A. M. O’Donnell (Eds.), The international handbook of collaborative learning (pp. 437–461). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chappuis, S., & Stiggins, R. J. (2002). Classroom assessment for learning. Educational Leadership, 60(1), 40–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, B., Scardamalia, M., Resendes, M., Chuy, M., & Bereiter, C. (2012). Students’ intuitive understanding of promisingness and promisingness judgments to facilitate knowledge advancement. In J. van Aalst, K. Thompson, M. J. Jacobson, & P. Reimann (Eds.), The future of learning: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS 2012) - volume 1, full papers (pp. 111–118). Sydney: ISLS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chuy, M., Scardamalia, M., Bereiter, C., Prinsen, F., Resendes, M., Messina, R., Hunsburger, W., Teplovs, C., & Chow, A. (2010). Understanding the nature of science and scientific progress: A theory-building approach. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 36(1). Published online at http://www.cjlt.ca/index.php/cjlt/article/view/580.

  • Chuy, M., Resendes, M., Tarchi, C., Chen, B., Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2011). Ways of contributing to an explanation-seeking dialogue in science and history. QWERTY: Journal of Technology and Culture, 6(2), 242–260.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cobb, P., Confrey, J., DiSessa, A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 9–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, K. W. (1980). A theory of cognitive development: The control and construction of hierarchies of skills. Psychological Review, 87, 477–531.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, K. W., & Pipp, S. L. (1984). Processes of cognitive development: Optimal level and skill acquisition. In R. J. Steinberg (Ed.), Mechanisms of cognitive development (pp. 45–80). San Francisco: Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, L. (2006). The development of social network analysis. Vancouver: Empirical Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halatchliyski, I., Hecking, T., Goehnert, T., & Hopper, H. U. (2014). Analyzing the main paths of knowledge evolution and contributor roles in an Open Learning Community. Journal of Learning Analytics, 1(2), 71–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haythornthwaite, C. (2010). Social networks and information transfer. In M. J. Bates & M. N. Maack (Eds.), Encyclopedia of library and information sciences, (1)1, (pp. 4837–4847). NY: Taylor & Francis.

  • Haythornthwaite, C., & de Laat, M. (2012). Social network informed design. In A. D. Olofsson & J. O. Lindberg (Eds.), Informed design of educational technologies in higher education: Enhanced learning and teaching (pp. 352–374). Hershey: IGI Global.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Haythornthwaite, C. & Gruzd, A. (2012). Exploring patterns and configurations in networked learning texts. In Proceedings of the 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) (pp. 3358–3367). Los Alamitos: IEEE.

  • Hirsch, E. D. (2003). Reading comprehension requires knowledge of words and the world: Scientific insights into the fourth-grade slump and the nation’s stagnant comprehension scores. American Educator, 27(1), 10–13, 16–22, 28–29, 48.

  • Inhelder, B., & Piaget, J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence. New York: Basic Books.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jeong, D. (2009). Discussion Analysis Tool (DAT). Retrieved from: http://myweb.fsu.edu/ajeong/dat.

  • Koutrika, G., Zadeh, Z. M., & Garcia-Molina, H. (2009). Data clouds: Summarizing keyword search results over structured data. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Extending Database Technology (EDBT2009) (pp. 391–402). Saint-Petersburg: ACM.

  • Lakatos, I. (1976). Proofs and refutations: The logic of mathematical discovery. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Matsuzawa, Y., Oshima, J., Oshima, R., Niihara, Y., & Sakai, S. (2011). KBDeX: A platform for exploring discourse in collaborative learning. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences, 26, 198–207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Newman, M. E. J. (2010). Networks: An introduction. Oxford University Press.

  • Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge creating company. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ontario Ministry of Education. (2007). The Ontario curriculum, grades 1–8: Science and technology. Retrieved from: http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/curriculum/elementary/scientec18currb.pdf.

  • Oshima, J., Oshima, R., & Matsuzawa, Y. (2012). Knowledge building discourse explorer: A social network analysis application for knowledge building discourse. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60, 903–921.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paavola, S., & Hakkarainen, K. (2005). The knowledge creation metaphor – an emergent epistemological approach to learning. Science & Education, 14(6), 535–557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pauwels, P., De Meyer, R., & van Campenhout, J. (2013). Design thinking support: Information systems versus reasoning. Design Issues, 29(2), 42–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puntambekar, S., Erkens, G., & Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2011). Analyzing interactions in CSCL: Methodology, approaches, and issues. New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Quintana, C., Reiser, B. J., Davis, E. A., Krajcik, J., Fretz, E., Duncan, R. G., Kyza, E., Edelson, D., & Soloway, E. (2004). A scaffolding design framework for software to support science inquiry. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 337–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramaprasad, A. (1983). On the definition of feedback. Behavioral Science, 28(1), 4–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reeve, R., Messina, R., & Scardamalia, M. (2008). Wisdom in elementary school. In M. Ferrari & G. Potworowski (Eds.), Teaching for wisdom: Cross-cultural perspectives on fostering wisdom (pp. 79–92). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roschelle, J., Penuel, W. R., & Shechtman, N. (2006). Co-design of innovations with teachers: Definition and dynamics. In Proceedings of the International Conference of the Learning Sciences (pp. 606–612). Bloomington: ACM.

  • Ross, J. A. (2006). The reliability, validity, and utility of self-assessment. Practical Assessment Research & Evaluation, 11(10), 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scardamalia, M. (2002). Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. In B. Smith (Ed.), Liberal education in a knowledge society (pp. 67–98). Chicago: Open Court.

    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). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2014). Knowledge building and knowledge creation: Theory, pedagogy, and technology. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (2nd ed., pp. 397–417). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schrammel, J., Leitner, M. & Tscheligi, M. (2009). Semantically structured tag clouds: An empirical evaluation of clustered presentation approaches. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 2037–2040). Boston: ACM.

  • Simmons, K. (1993). Universality and the liar: An essay on truth and the diagonal argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Snow, C. E., Porche, M. V., Tabors, P. O., & Harris, S. R. (2007). Is literacy enough? Pathways to academic success for adolescents. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, S. A. (2003). Words are learned incrementally over multiple exposures. American Educator, 27(1), 18–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, G. (2006). Group cognition: Computer support for building collaborative knowledge. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, S., & Fairbanks, M. (1986). The effects of vocabulary instruction: A model-based meta analysis. Review of Educational Research, 56(1), 72–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stromer-Galley, J. (2007). Measuring deliberation’s content: A coding scheme. Journal of Public Deliberation, 3(1), Article 12.

  • Tsoukas, H. (2009). A dialogical approach to the creation of new knowledge in organizations. Organization Science, 20, 941–957.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Aalst, J. (2009). Distinguishing knowledge-sharing, knowledge-construction, and knowledge creation discourses. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(3), 259–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vande Kopple, W. J. (1985). Some exploratory discourse on metadiscourse. College Composition and Communication, 36(1), 82–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von Krogh, G., Ichijo, K., & Nonaka, I. (2000). Enabling knowledge creation: Unlocking the mystery of tacit knowledge. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Xexéo, G., Morgado, F., & Fiuza, P. (2009). Differential tag clouds: Highlighting particular features in documents. In Proceedings of 2009 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology (pp. 129–132). Milano: IET.

  • Zhang, J., & Messina, R. (2010). Collaborative productivity as self-sustaining processes in a grade 4 knowledge building community. In K. Gomez, J. Radinsky, & L. Lyons (Eds.), Proceedings of the 9th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (pp. 49–56). Chicago: International Society of the Learning Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, J., Scardamalia, M., Lamon, M., Messina, R., & Reeve, R. (2007). Socio-cognitive dynamics of knowledge building in the work of nine- and ten-year-olds. Educational Technology Research and Development (ETR&D), 55(2), 117–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, J., Scardamalia, M., Reeve, R., & Messina, R. (2009). Designs for collective cognitive responsibility in knowledge building communities. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 18(1), 7–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, J., Chen, M.-H., Tao, D., Lee, J. Sun, Y., & Judson, D. (2015). Fostering sustained Knowledge Building through metadiscourse aided by the Idea Thread Mapper. In T. Koschmann, P. Häkkinen, & P. Tchounikine (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL 2015). International Society of the Learning Sciences.

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was made possible through generous support of teachers, administrators, and students at the Dr. Eric Jackman Institute of Child Study Laboratory School, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto and funding from the Ontario Ministry of Education, Literacy and Numeracy Secretariat; Ontario principals’ association’s Leading Student Achievement initiative: Networks for Learning project, and two grants from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada titled “Ways of Contributing to Dialogue in Elementary School Science and History” and “Digitally-Mediated Group Knowledge Processes to Enhance Individual Achievement in Literacy and Numeracy.” We are grateful to ijCSCL reviewers for careful review.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Knowledge Innovation and Technology (IKIT), OISE/University of Toronto, 252 Bloor Street West, Toronto, ON, M5S 1V6, Canada

    Monica Resendes, Marlene Scardamalia & Carl Bereiter

  2. Department of Curriculum and Instruction, College of Education and Human Development, University of Minnesota, 159 Pillsbury Drive S.E., Minneapolis, MN, 55455, USA

    Bodong Chen

  3. Dr. Eric Jackman Institute of Child Study, OISE/University of Toronto, 45 Walmer Road, Toronto, ON, M5R 2X2, Canada

    Cindy Halewood

Authors
  1. Monica Resendes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marlene Scardamalia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Carl Bereiter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Bodong Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Cindy Halewood
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bodong Chen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Resendes, M., Scardamalia, M., Bereiter, C. et al. Group-level formative feedback and metadiscourse. Intern. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn 10, 309–336 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-015-9219-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-015-9219-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation