Supporting communities of learners in the elementary classroom: the common knowledge learning environment
- 437 Downloads
We report on a multi-year design study of a technology environment called Common Knowledge (CK), designed to support learning communities in K-12 classrooms. Students represent their ideas in the form of notes, add their ideas to a collective knowledge base, and use this knowledge base as a resource for their subsequent inquiries. CK supports teachers’ orchestration of inquiry in blended learning environments, scaffolding the learning community as it progresses through a complex inquiry script. A community knowledge base is dynamically visualized on the classroom’s interactive whiteboard, serving as a persistent visual reference that allows teachers to gauge the progress of the class, identify patterns, gaps or conflicts, and engage the students in extemporaneous or planned discussions of their ideas. We present enactments of two design iterations in which CK was integrated within broader elementary science units where the curriculum was guided by a theoretical framework called Knowledge Community and Inquiry (KCI). For each version, we analyzed the role of CK in scaffolding student inquiry, with a focus on teachers’ facilitation of productive whole-class discussions. Analysis of teachers’ orchestration patterns revealed a “3R” orchestration cycle (Reflect–Refocus–Release) that teachers used repeatedly within a single class session, to guide reflective community discussion and refocus students’ inquiry. We also identified four distinct teacher discourse orientations, finding that these were invoked in different proportions depending on the orchestrational needs of the inquiry script. Synthesizing our findings, we discuss the role of CK within a classroom activity system for learning communities.
KeywordsOrchestration Scripting Discourse Collective inquiry Collaboration Blended learning Technology-enhanced learning
This research was made possible through the generous support of educators, administrators, students, and parents at the Dr. Eric Jackman Institute of Child Study Laboratory School; OISE/University of Toronto; cross-lab collaborations between the ENCORE Lab at OISE/University of Toronto and the Learning Technologies Group at the University of Illinois at Chicago; and funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (Grant No. 410-2011-0474), as well as from the US National Science Foundation (Grant No. 1324977). We are grateful to Instructional Science reviewers and guest editors Dani Ben-Zvi, Katerine Bielaczyc, and Yotam Hod for careful review.
- Acosta, A., & Slotta, J. D. (2013). Evaluating knowledge community curricula in secondary science using model-based design research. In Proceedings of the 17th Annual Knowledge Building Summer Institute. Puebla, Mexico: Institute for Knowledge, Innovation and Technology.Google Scholar
- Amiel, T., & Reeves, T. C. (2008). Design-based research and educational technology: Rethinking technology and the research agenda. Educational Technology & Society, 11(4), 29–40.Google Scholar
- Aronson, E. (1978). The jigsaw classroom. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (2012). Theory building and the pursuit of understanding in history, social studies, and literature. In M. J. Lawson & J. R. Kirby (Eds.), The quality of learning. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Bielaczyc, K., & Collins, A. (1999). Learning communities in classrooms: A reconceptualization of educational practice. Instructional-Design Theories and Models, 2, 269–292.Google Scholar
- Bielaczyc, Katerine, & Collins, A. (2006). Fostering knowledge-creating communities. In A. M. O’Donnell, C. E. Hmelo-Silver, & G. Erkens (Eds.), Collaborative learning, reasoning, and technology (pp. 37–60). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.Google Scholar
- Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (1996). Communities of learning and thinking, or a context by any other name. In P. Woods (Ed.), Contemporary issues in teaching and learning (pp. 120–126). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Chen, B. (2016). Fostering scientific understanding and epistemic beliefs through judgments of promisingness. Educational Technology Research and Development. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11423-016-9467-0?utm_content=bufferee759&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer.
- Chen, B., Scardamalia, M., Resendes, M., Chuy, M., & Bereiter, C. (2012). Students’ intuitive understanding of promisingness and promisingness judgments to facilitate knowledge advancement. In The future of learning: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS 2012) (Vol. 1, pp. 111–118).Google Scholar
- Cober, R., McCann, C., Moher, T., & Slotta, J. D. (2013). Aggregating students’ observation in support of community knowledge and discourse. In N. Rummel, M. Kapur, M. Nathan, & S. Puntambekar (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Computer-supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) (Vol. 1, pp. 121–128). Madison, WI: International Society of the Learning Sciences (ISLS).Google Scholar
- Cress, U., & Kimmerle, J. (2013). Successful knowledge building needs group awareness: Interaction analysis of a 9th grade CSCL biology lesson. In Productive multivocality in the analysis of group interactions (pp. 495–509). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
- Dillenbourg, P. (2002). Over-scripting CSCL: The risks of blending collaborative learning with instructional design. In P. A. Kirschner (Ed.), Three worlds of CSCL: Can we support CSCL? (pp. 61–91). Heerlen: Open Universiteit Nederland.Google Scholar
- Erickson, F. (1982). Classroom discourse as improvisation: Relationships between academic task structure and social participation structure in lessons. In L. C. Wilkinson (Ed.), Communicating in the classroom (pp. 153–181). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
- Fischer, F., Slotta, J. D., Dillenbourg, P., Kollar, I., Stegmann, K., Wecker, C., et al. (2013). Scripting and orchestration: Recent theoretical advances. In N. Rummel, M. Kapur, M. Nathan, & S. Puntambekar (Eds.), Conference Proceedings of the 10th Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) (Vol. 1, pp. 564–571). Madison, WI: International Society of the Learning Sciences (ISLS).Google Scholar
- Fong, C., Cober, R. M., Messina, R., Moher, T., Murray, J., Peebles, B., et al. (2015a). The 3R orchestration cycle: Fostering multi-modal inquiry discourse in a scaffolded inquiry environment. In O. Lindwall, P. Häkkinen, T. Koschmann, P. Tchounikine, & S. R. Ludvigsen (Eds.), Exploring the material conditions of learning: The computer supported collaborative learning (CSCL) conference 2015 (Vol. 1, pp. 39–46). Gothenburg: The International Society of the Learning Sciences.Google Scholar
- Fong, C., Cober, R. M., Moher, T., & Slotta, J. D. (2015b). Spatial mapping of inquiry discourse in the classroom through knowledge visualization. In T. Moher, & J. D. Slotta (Chairs), Knowledge Construction in the Instrumented Classroom: Supporting Student Investigations of Their Physical Learning Environment. In O. Lindwall, P. Häkkinen, T. Koschmann, P. Tchounikine, & S. R. Ludvigsen (Eds.), Exploring the material conditions of learning: The computer supported collaborative learning (CSCL) conference 2015 (Vol. 2, pp. 634–635). Gothenburg: International Society of the Learning Sciences (ISLS).Google Scholar
- Fong, C., Pascual-Leone, R., & Slotta, J. D. (2012). The role of discussion in orchestrating inquiry. 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)—Short Papers, Symposia, and Abstracts (Vol. 2, pp. 68–69). Sydney, NSW: International Society of the Learning Sciences (ISLS).Google Scholar
- Forte, A. (2015). The new information literate: Open collaboration and information production in schools. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1–17.Google Scholar
- International Society for Technology in Education. (2016). ISTE Standards for Students. International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/standards/standards/for-students-2016.
- Jenkins, H. (2009). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for the 21st century. Cambridge. MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.Google Scholar
- Linn, M. C., Bell, P., & Davis, E. A. (2004). Internet environments for science education (pp. 315–339). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.Google Scholar
- Moher, T. (2006). Embedded phenomena: Supporting science learning with classroom-sized distributed simulations. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in computing Systems (pp. 691–700). Montreal, Quebec: ACM.Google Scholar
- Moher, T., & Slotta, J. D. (2012). Embedded Phenomena for Knowledge Communities: Supporting complex practices and interactions within a community of inquiry in the elementary science classroom. 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)—Short papers, symposia, and abstracts (Vol. 2, pp. 64–71). Sydney, NSW: International Society of the Learning Sciences.Google Scholar
- National Research Council. (2012). Education for Life and Work: Guide for Practitioners. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. Retrieved from https://www.nap.edu/resource/13398/dbasse_084153.pdf.
- OECD. (2017). The OECD handbook for innovative learning environments. Paris: OECD Publishing. Retrieved from http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/the-oecd-handbook-for-innovative-learning-environments_9789264277274-en.
- Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2011). Framework for 21st century learning. Washington, DC: Partnership for 21st Century Skills. Retrieved from http://www.p21.org/storage/documents/1.__p21_framework_2-pager.pdf.
- Penuel, W. R., & DeBerger, A. H. (2011). Sample of contingent pedagogies project materials. Menlo Park: SRI International. Retrieved from http://contingentpedagogies.org/research.html.
- Raes, A., Schellens, T., De Wever, B., Kollar, I., Wecker, C., Langer, S., et al. (2012). Scripting science inquiry learning in CSCL classrooms. 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) (Vol. 2, pp. 118–125). Sydney, NSW: International Society of the Learning Sciences (ISLS).Google Scholar
- Roschelle, J., & Penuel, W. R. (2006). Co-design of innovations with teachers: Definition and dynamics. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Learning Sciences (pp. 606–612). Bloomington, Indiana.Google Scholar
- Sanders, E. B.-N., & Stappers, P. J. (2008). Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. Co-Design, 4(1), 5–18.Google Scholar
- Scardamalia, Marlene. (2002). Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. Liberal Education in a Knowledge Society, 97, 67–98.Google Scholar
- Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2006). Knowledge building: Theory, pedagogy, and technology. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 97–118). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Schwarz, B., Dreyfus, T., Hadas, N., & Hershkowitz, R. (2004). Teacher guidance of knowledge construction. In Proceedings of the 28th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 4, pp. 169–176). Cape Town: International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. Retrieved from http://emis.ams.org/proceedings/PME28/RR/RR175_Schwarz.pdf.
- Slotta, J. D. (2010). Evolving the classrooms of the future: The interplay of pedagogy, technology and community. In K. Makital-Siegl, J. Zottmann, F. Kaplan, & F. Fischer (Eds.), Classroom of the future: Orchestrating collaborative spaces (pp. 215–242). Rotterdam: Sense Press.Google Scholar
- Slotta, J. D. (2013). Knowledge Community and Inquiry. In Network of Associated Programs in the Learning Sciences (NAPLeS).Google Scholar
- Slotta, J. D., & Najafi, H. (2012). Supporting collaborative knowledge construction with web 2.0 technologies. In N. Lavigne (Ed.), Emerging technologies for the classroom: A learning sciences perspective. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
- Slotta, J. D., Tissenbaum, M., & Lui, M. (2013). Orchestrating of complex inquiry: Three roles for learning analytics in a smart classroom infrastructure. In D. Suthers, K. Verbert, E. Duval, & X. Ochoa (Eds.), Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (pp. 270–274). Leuven: The Association for Computing Machinery (ACM).Google Scholar
- Wertsch, J. V., & Smolka, A. L. B. (1994). Continuing the dialogue: Vygotsky, Bakhtin & Lotman. In H. Daniels (Ed.), Charting the agenda: Educational activity after Vygotsky (pp. 69–92). London: Routledge.Google Scholar