Contextual perspective in analysing collaborative knowledge construction of two small groups in web-based discussion

Article

Abstract

This paper presents a methodology designed to explore the role of context in collaborative knowledge construction activity in asynchronous web-based discussion. The discussions of two student groups participating in a web-based teacher education course were compared. The comparison aimed to highlight the differences and similarities between the groups’ knowledge construction activity through studying the thematic structure, communicative functions and contextual resources used in their discussions. The results indicated that the different backgrounds of the two student groups influenced the way context was created and interpreted, and how meanings were negotiated. The differences and similarities between the groups’ activity illuminated the situated and mediated nature of learning. The possibilities of the methodology used in this study for evaluating collaborative knowledge construction in context are also discussed.

Keywords

Collaborative knowledge construction Computer-supported collaborative learning Context Higher education Socio-cultural learning theory 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Arvaja, M., Salovaara, H., Häkkinen, P., & Järvelä, S. (2007). Combining individual and group-level perspectives for studying collaborative knowledge construction in context. Learning and Instruction, 17(4), 448–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bliss, J., & Säljö, R. (1999). The human-technological dialectic. In J. Bliss, R. Säljö, & P. Light (Eds.), Learning sites: Social and technological resources of learning (pp. 1–16). Amsterdam: Pergamon.Google Scholar
  3. Buttny, R. (1998). Putting prior talk into context: Reported speech and the reporting context. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 31(1), 45–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chen, F. C., Lee, Y. W., Chu, H. J., Wang, H. R., & Jiang, H. M. (2005). Effective discussions, social talks and learning—A paradox on learning in discussion forums. In T. Koschmann, D. D. Suthers, & T-W. Chan (Eds.), Proceedings of CSCL 2005. Computer support for collaborative learning: The Next 10 Years! (pp. 33–42). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  5. Crook, C. (1999). Computers in the community of classrooms. In K. Littleton & P. Light (Eds.), Learning with computers. Analysing productive interaction (pp. 102–117). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Crook, C., & Light, P. (1999). Information technology and the culture of student learning. In J. Bliss, R. Säljö, & P. Light (Eds), Learning sites: Social and technological resources of learning (pp. 183–193). Amsterdam: Pergamon.Google Scholar
  7. 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
  8. Dillenbourg, P., & Tchounikine, P. (2007). Flexibility in macro-scripts for computer-supported collaborative learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23(1), 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fischer, F., Bruhn, C., Gräsel, C., & Mandl, H. (2002). Fostering collaborative knowledge construction with visualization tools. Learning and Instruction, 12(2), 213–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Goodwin, C. (2000). Action and embodiment within situated human interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 32, 1489–1522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Goodwin, C., & Duranti, A. (1992). Rethinking context: An introduction. In A. Duranti & C. Goodwin (Eds), Rethinking context: Language as interactive phenomenon (pp.1–42). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Guzdial, M., & Turns, J. (2000). Effective discussion through a computer-mediated anchored forum. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(4), 437–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hicks, D. (1996). Contextual inquiries: A discourse-oriented study of classroom activity. In D. Hicks (Ed.), Discourse, learning and schooling (pp. 104–141). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Hmelo-Silver, C. (2003). Analyzing collaborative knowledge construction: Multiple methods for integrated understanding. Computers & Education, 41(4), 397–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hämäläinen, R., Manninen, T., Järvelä, S., & Häkkinen, P. (2006). Learning to collaborate: Designing collaboration in a 3-D game environment. The Internet and Higher Education, 9(1), 47–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kumpulainen, K., & Mutanen, M. (1999). The situated dynamics of peer group interaction: An introduction to an analytic framework. Learning and Instruction, 9(5), 449–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Linehan, C., & McCarthy, J. (2001). Reviewing the “Community of practice” metaphor: An analysis of control relations in a primary classroom. Mind, Culture and Activity, 8(2), 129–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Linell, P. (1998). Approaching dialogue. Talk, interaction and contexts in dialogical perspectives. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  19. Lipponen, L., Rahikainen, M., Lallimo, J., & Hakkarainen, K. (2003). Patterns of participation and discourse in elementary students’ computer-supported collaborative learning. Learning and Instruction, 13(5), 487–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mercer, N. (1996). The quality of talk in children’s collaborative activity in classroom. Learning and Instruction, 6(4), 359–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Polanyi, M. (1966). The tacit dimension. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.Google Scholar
  22. Puntambekar, S. (2006). Analyzing collaborative interactions: Divergence, shared understanding and construction of knowledge. Computers & Education, 47, 332–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2001). Methodological issues in the content analysis of computer conference transcripts. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 12, 8–22.Google Scholar
  24. Säljö, R. (1999). Learning as the use of tools. A sociocultural perspective on the human–technology link. In K. Littleton & P. Light (Eds.), Learning with computers. Analysing productive interaction (pp. 144–161). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Schrire, S. (2006). Knowledge building in asynchronous discussion groups: Going beyond quantitative analysis. Computers & Education, 46, 49–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Stahl, G. (2002). Rediscovering CSCL. In T. Koschmann, R. Hall, & N. Miyake (Eds.), CSCL 2: Carrying forward the conversation (pp. 169–181). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  27. Stahl, G. (2004). Building collaborative knowing. Elements of a social theory of CSCL. In P. Dillenbourg (Series Ed.) & J. W. Strijbos, P. A. Kirschner & R. L. Martens (Vol Eds.), Computer-supported collaborative learning, Vol 3. What we know about CSCL... and implementing it in higher education (pp. 53–85). Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  28. Stahl, G. (2006). Scripting group cognition: The problem of guiding situated collaboration. In F. Fischer, H. Kollar, I. Mandl, & J. Haake (Eds.), Scripting computer-supported collaborative learning: Cognitive, computational and educational perspectives (pp.327–335). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  29. Valleala, U. M. (2006). Yhteinen ymmärtäminen koulutuksessa ja työssä. Kontekstin ymmärtäminen opiskelijaryhmän ja työtiimin keskusteluissa. [Shared understanding in education and work. Context of understanding in student group and work team discussions]. Jyväskylä Studies in Education, Psychology and Social research 280. Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä.Google Scholar
  30. Van Boxtel, C. Van der Linden, J., & Kanselaar, G. (2000). Collaborative learning tasks and the elaboration of conceptual knowledge. Learning and Instruction, 10(4), 311–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind and society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Vygotsky, L. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  33. Weinberger, A., Ertl, B., Fischer, F., & Mandl, H. (2005). Epistemic and social scripts in computer-supported collaborative learning. Instructional Science, 33(1), 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Weinberger, A., & Fischer, F. (2006). A framework to analyze argumentative knowledge construction in computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers & Education, 46, 71–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Wertsch, J. (1991). A sociocultural approach to socially shared cognition. In L. Resnick, J. M. Levine, & S. D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 85–100). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Society of the Learning Sciences, Inc.; Springer Science+ Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Educational ResearchUniversity of JyväskyläJyväskyläFinland

Personalised recommendations