The collaborative construction of chronotopes during computer-supported collaborative professional tasks

  • Maria Beatrice Ligorio
  • Giuseppe Ritella


In this paper, we use the concept of chronotope to analyse the co-construction of spatial and temporal frameworks during collaborative interaction. A chronotope is a genre of movement or pacing in the space that participants adopt over the temporal duration of an activity. We look in particular at the conjunction point of time and space as revealing how collaboration works and what role is played by technology. Six sessions during which 10 teachers prepared a pedagogical scenario to be implemented in school were filmed and qualitatively analysed. The tempo of the activity was found to vary considerably depending on various factors, such as the features of the tools used, the aims of the activity, and the skills employed by the participants to achieve them. Three different tempos were identified, which we named, using a musical metaphor, Adagio, Andante, and Allegretto. Some representative excerpts of each of these tempos, and of the moving from one tempo to another, are selected and discussed. Our results allow an in-depth understanding of coordination within a group of teachers working on planning a common educational scenario for their classrooms with the mediation of a software tool.


Chronotope Heterotopia Teachers Video analysis Socio-constructivism Bakhtin Software supporting face-to-face interaction 


  1. Avouris, N., Komis, V., Margaritis, M., & Fidas, C. (2004). Modeling space: A tool for synchronous collaborative problem solving. In ED-MEDIA’ 04, 16th World Conference on Educational Multimedia & Telecommunications (pp. 381–386). AACE Press.Google Scholar
  2. Backtin, M. (1981). The dialogic imagination. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  3. Baker, M., & Lundt, K. (1997). Promoting reflecting interactions in a CSCL environment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 13, 175–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bateson, G. (1987). Steps to an ecology of mind. Northvale, New Jersey: Jason Aronson Inc.Google Scholar
  5. Boje, D. M. (2007). What is chronotopic strategy stories? In D. M. Boje (Ed.), Storytelling organization (pp. 138–154). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  6. Bruner, J. S. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Cole, M., & Engeström, Y. (1993). A cultural-historical approach to distributed cognition. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 1–46). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Dillenbourg, P., & Traum, D. (2006). Sharing solutions: Persistence and grounding in multimodal collaborative problem solving. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(1), 121–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Duranti, A., & Goodwin, C. (Eds.). (1992). Rethinking context: Language as an interactive phenomenon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Dewiyanti, S., Brand-Gruwel, S., & Jochems, W. (2007). Students’ experiences with collaborative learning in asynchronous computer-supported collaborative learning environments. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(1), 496–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Foucault, M. (1967). Of other spaces, heterotopias.
  12. Goodwin, C. (1994). Professional vision. American Anthropologist, 96(3), 606–633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Goodwin, C. (2000). Practices of color classification. Mind, culture, and activity, 7(1 & 2), 19–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Harrison, S., & Dourish, P. (1996). Re-place-ing space: The roles of place and space in collaborative systems. Proceedings of the 1996 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. Boston, Massachusetts, United States, pp. 67–76.Google Scholar
  15. Heidegger, M. (1927/1996). Being and time: A translation of Sein und Zeit (J. Stambaugh, Trans.). Albany: SUNY.Google Scholar
  16. Hollan, J., Hutchins, E., & Kirsh, D. (2000). Distributed cognition: Toward a new foundation for human-computer interaction research. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 7, 174–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jefferson, G. (1984). Transcript notation. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. ix–xvi). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Kirsh, D. (1995). The intelligent use of space. Artificial Intelligence, 73, 31–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Koschmann, T. (1999). Toward a dialogic theory of learning: Bakhtin’s contribution tolearning in settings of collaboration. Paper presented at the Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL ‘99), Palo Alto, CA. Proceedings pp. 308–313. Retrieved from
  20. Lemke, J. L. (2004). Learning across multiple places and their chronotopes. Contribution at the symposium: Spaces and boundaries of learning (
  21. Ligorio, M. B. (2001). Integrating communication formats: Synchronous versus asynchronous and text-based versus visual. Computers & Education, 37(2), 103–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ligorio, M. B., Cesareni, D., & Schwartz, N. (2008). Collaborative virtual environments as means to increase the level of intersubjectivity in a distributed cognition system. Journal of Research on Technology in Education (JRTE), 40(3), 339–358.Google Scholar
  23. Ligorio, M. B., Andriessen, J., Baker, M., Knoller, N., Klonyguy, M., & Tateo, L. (Eds.). (2009). Talking over the computer: Pedagogical scenarios to blend computers and face to face interaction. Naples: Scriptaweb.Google Scholar
  24. Matusov, E. (2001). Intersubjectivity of a way of informing teaching design for a community of learners class. Teaching and Teachers Education, 17, 383–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. McGrath, J. E., & Tschan, F. (2004). Temporal matters in social psychology: Examining the role of time in the lives of groups and individuals. Washington: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Muhlpfordt, M., & Wessner, M. (2005). Explicit referencing in chat supports collaborative learning. Paper presented at the International Conference on CSCL, Taipei, Taiwan.Google Scholar
  27. Overdijk, M., & van Diggelen, W. (2008). Appropriation of a shared workspace: Organizing principles and their application. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3(2), 165–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Perret-Clermont, A.-N. (2004). Thinking spaces of the young. In A.-N. Perret-Clermont et al. (Eds.), Joining society. Social interaction and learning in adolescence and youth (pp. 3–10). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Perret-Clermont, A.-N. (Ed.). (2006). Thinking time. Seattle: Hogrefe Publishers.Google Scholar
  30. Sarmiento, J., & Stahl, G. (2008). Extending the joint problem space: Time and sequence as essential features of knowledge building. Paper presented at the International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS 2008), Utrecht, Netherlands. Available at
  31. Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1994). Computer support for knowledge-building communities. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(3), 265–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Schegloff, E. A. (1972). Notes on a conversational practice: Formulating place. In D. Sudnow (Ed.), Studies in social interaction (pp. 75–119). New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  33. Soller, A., & Lesgold, A. (2003). A computational approach to analyzing online knowledge sharing interaction. Paper presented at the Artificial Intelligence in Education, Sydney, Australia.Google Scholar
  34. Stahl, G. (2006). Group cognition: Computer support for building collaborative knowledge. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  35. Stahl, G. (2009). Studying virtual math teams. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Suchman, L. (1987). Plans and situated action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Trausan-Matu, S., Stahl, G., & Sarmiento, G. (2007). Supporting polyphonic collaborative learning. E-service Journal, 6(1), 58–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wegerif, R. (2007). Dialogic, educational and technology: Expanding the space of learning. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Society of the Learning Sciences, Inc.; Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of BariBariItaly

Personalised recommendations