Advertisement

Instructional Science

, Volume 46, Issue 4, pp 621–625 | Cite as

Productive dissent in learning communities

  • Dragan Trninic
  • Hillary Swanson
  • Manu Kapur
Article

Abstract

“Community” has become a commonplace term in the learning sciences. Alongside this popularization comes the view that communities are, in general, something to strive towards. We draw on contemporary trends to problematize this assumption and motivate a discussion for the productivity of dissent.

Keywords

Communities of learning Learning communities Conserving communities Dissent Critical thinking 

References

  1. Bielaczyc, K., & Collins, A. (1999). Learning communities in classrooms: A reconceptualization of educational practice. Instructional-Design Theories and Models, 2, 269–292.Google Scholar
  2. Brown, A. L., Metz, K. E., & Campione, J. C. (1996). Social interaction and individual understanding in a community of learners: The influence of Piaget and Vygotsky. Piaget-Vygotsky: The social genesis of thought (pp. 145–170). Hove: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  3. Collins, A. (1998). Learning communities: A commentary on chapters by Brown, Ellery, and Campione, and by Riel. In J. G. Greeno & S. V. Goldman (Eds.), Thinking practices in mathematics and science learning (pp. 399–405). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoicates.Google Scholar
  4. Doebel, S., & Munakata, Y. (2018). Group influences on engaging self-control: Children delay gratification and value it more when their in-group delays and their out-group doesn’t. Psychological Science, 29(5), 738–748.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dyson, F. (2008). The scientist as rebel. New York: New York Review Books.Google Scholar
  6. Feyerabend, P. K. (1993). Against method. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  7. Feyerabend, P. K. (2011). The tyranny of science. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  8. Fong, C., & Slotta, J. D. (2018). Supporting communities of learners in the elementary classroom: the common knowledge learning environment. Instructional Science.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-018-9463-3.Google Scholar
  9. Forscher, P. S., & Kteily, N. (2018). A psychological profile of the alt-right.  https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/C9UVW.
  10. Goodwin, C. (1994). Professional vision. American Anthropologist, 96(3), 606–633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hod, Y. & Ben-Zvi, D. (2018). Co-development patterns of knowledge, experience, and self in humanistic knowledge building communities. Instructional Science.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-018-9459-z.Google Scholar
  12. Kapur, M. (2016). Examining productive failure, productive success, unproductive failure, and unproductive success in learning. Educational Psychologist, 51(2), 289–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kuhn, T. S. (2012). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lilienfeld, S. O., Ammirati, R., & Landfield, K. (2009). Giving debiasing away. Can psychological research on correcting cognitive errors promote human welfare? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4, 390–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ma, J. Y., & Hall, R. (2018). Learning a part together: ensemble learning and infrastructure in a competitive high school marching band. Instructional Science.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-018-9455-3.Google Scholar
  16. Melser, D. (2004). The act of thinking. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  17. Nagle, A. (2017). The lost boys: The young men of the alt-right could define American politics for a generation. The Atlantic. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/.
  18. Smith, F. (1988). Joining the literacy club. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann Educational Books.Google Scholar
  19. Tao, D., & Zhang, J. (2018). Forming shared inquiry structures to support knowledge building in a grade 5 community. Instructional Science.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-018-9462-4.Google Scholar
  20. Trninic, D., Wagner, R., & Kapur, M. (2018). Rethinking failure in mathematics education: A historical appeal. Thinking Skills and Creativity.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2018.03.008.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Departement Geistes-, Sozial- und StaatswissenschaftenETH ZürichZurichSwitzerland
  2. 2.Northwestern UniversityEvanstonUSA

Personalised recommendations