Advertisement

Exploring the relationship between resistance and perspectival understanding in computer-mediated discussions

  • SoonAh Lee
  • Kwangok Song
Article
First Online:

Abstract

This discourse analytic study explored the interconnection between resistance and perspectival understanding when students negotiated and constructed understandings in computer-mediated discussions in a graduate level course on the psychology of learning. Findings showed that resistance expressions often accompanied perspectival understanding as students elaborated on ideas from authors of course readings or peers. Furthermore, perspectival understanding was achieved both on the individual level and the group level as students showed resistance to the authors of course readings, their peers, and educational issues. These findings suggested that resistance played a role as a constructive discourse tool in a collaborative learning environment in which students made meaning of scholarly texts. This study is of importance in understanding the integral role of resistance in perspectival understanding in computer-mediated classroom discussions that has been rarely explored in empirical educational research.

Keywords

Resistance Perspectival understanding Computer-mediated discussion Classroom discourse Learning theory 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Notes

Contributions of the two authors to this article were equal. We rotate order of authorship in our writing.

References

  1. Ageyev, V. S. (2003). Vygotsky in the mirror of cultural interpretations. In A. Kozulin, B. Gindis, V. S. Ageyev, & A. M. Miller (Eds.), Vygotsky’s educational theory in cultural context (pp. 432–449). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alexander, P. A., & Murphy, P. K. (1998). Profiling the differences in students’ knowledge, interest, and strategic processing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(3), 435–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alexander, P. A., Schallert, D. L., & Reynolds, R. E. (2009). What is learning anyway? A topographical perspective considered. Educational Psychologist, 44(3), 176–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Anderson, R. C., Nguyen-Jahiel, K., McNurlen, B., Archodidou, A., Kim, S.-Y., Reznitskaya, A., Tillmanns, M., & Gilbert, L. (2001). The snowball phenomenon: Spread of ways of talking and ways of thinking across groups of children. Cognition & Instruction, 19(1), 1–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Astleitner, H. (2002). Teaching critical thinking online. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 29, 53–76.Google Scholar
  6. Bakhtin, M. (1981). Dialogic imagination: Four essays. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  7. Bereiter, C. (1994). Constructivism, socioculturalism, and Popper’s World 3. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 21–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1993). Chapter Four: Expertise as process. In Surpassing ourselves: An inquiry into the nature and implications of expertise (pp. 77–120). Chicago: Open Court.Google Scholar
  9. Brookfield, S. D. (2006). The skillful teacher: On technique, trust, and responsiveness in the classroom (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  10. Brown, R. A. J., & Ranshaw, O. D. (2000). Collective argumentation: A sociocultural approach to reframing classroom teaching and learning. In H. Cowie & G. van der Aalsvoort (Eds.), Social interaction in learning and instruction: The meaning of discourse for the construction of knowledge (pp. 52–66). New York: Elsevier Science.Google Scholar
  11. Bruner, J. (1982). The language of education. Social Research, 49(4), 835–853.Google Scholar
  12. Chan, C., Burtis, J., & Bereiter, C. (1997). Knowledge building as a mediator of conflict in conceptual change. Cognition & Instruction, 15(1), 1–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Clark, A., Anderson, R. C., Kuo, L., Kim, I., Archodidou, A., & Nguyen-Jahiel, K. (2003). Collaborative reasoning: expanding ways for children to talk and think in school. Educational Psychology Review, 15(2), 181–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cole, M., & Engestrom, Y. (1999). A cultural-historical approach to distributed cognition. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 1–46). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Cooper, M., & Selfe, C. L. (1990). Computer conferences and learning: Authority, resistance, and internally persuasive discourse. College English, 52(8), 847–869.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Corbin, J. M., & Strauss, A. M. (2014). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (4th ed.). Los Angeles: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  17. Do, S. L., & Schallert, D. L. (2004). Emotions and classroom talk: Toward a model of the role of affect in students’ experience of classroom discussions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(4), 619–634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dong, T., Anderson, R. C., Kim, I., & Li, Y. (2008). Collaborative reasoning in China and Korea. Reading Research Quarterly, 43(4), 400–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Duff, P. A. (2012). Language socialization into academic discourse communities. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 30, 169–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dyson, A. H. (1987). The value of “time off task”: Young children’s spontaneous talk and deliberate text. Harvard Educational Review, 57(4), 396–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Greeno, J. G. (2006). Learning in activity. In R. Keith Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 79–96). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Greeno, J. G., & van de Sande, C. (2007). Perspectival understanding of conceptions and conceptual growth in interaction. Educational Psychologist, 42(1), 9–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Halliday, M. A. (1975). Learning how to mean: Explorations in the development of language. London: Edward Arnold.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hicks, D. (1995). Discourse, learning, and teaching. Review of Research in Education, 21, 49–95.Google Scholar
  25. Holzer, E. (2015). Welcoming opposition: Havruta learning and Montaigne’s the art of discussion. Journal of Moral Education, 44(1), 64–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Huspeck, M. (1993). Dueling structures: The theory of resistance in discourse. Communication Theory, 3(1), 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Illeris, K. (2004). Transformative learning in the perspective of a comprehensive learning theory. Journal of Transformative Education, 2(2), 79–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Illeris, K. (2007). How we learn: Learning and nonlearning in school and beyond. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  29. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1985). Classroom conflict: Controversy versus debate in learning groups. American Educational Research Journal, 22(2), 237–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Jordan, M., Cheng, A. J., Schallert, D. L., Song, K., Lee, S., & Park, Y. (2014). “I guess my question is”: What is the co-occurrence of uncertainty and learning in computer-mediated discourse? International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 9(4), 451–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lee, S., Schallert, D. L., Song, K., Park, Y., Ching, Y. V., Vogler, J. S., Jordan, M. E., Lee, J., Cheng, A. J., Sanders, A. Z., & Park, J. (2011). Resistance phenomena in collaborative online discussions. Yearbook of the Literacy Research Association, 60, 370–388.Google Scholar
  33. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  34. Mason, L., Gava, M., & Boldrin, A. (2008). On warm conceptual change: The interplay of text, epistemological beliefs, and topic interest. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 291–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Matusov, E. (1996). Intersubjectivity without agreement. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 3, 25–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Mercer, N. (1995). The guided construction of knowledge. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  37. Moje, E. B., & Lewis, C. (2007). Examining opportunities to learn literacy: The role of critical sociocultural literacy research. In C. Lewis, P. Enciso, & E. B. Moje (Eds.), Reframing sociocultural research on literacy: Identity, agency, and power (pp. 15–48). Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  38. Nussbaum, E. M. (2011). Argumentation, dialogue theory, and probability modeling: Alternative frameworks for argumentation research in education. Educational Psychologist, 46, 84–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Piaget, J. (1972). Intellectual evolution from adolescence to adulthood. Human Development, 15, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Rochelle, J. (1992). Learning by collaborating: convergent conceptual change. The Journal of the Learning Science, 2(3), 235–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Salomon, G., & Perkins, D. N. (1998). Individual and social aspects of learning. Review of Research in Education, 23, 1–24.Google Scholar
  42. Schallert, D.L., Reed, J.H., & the D-Team (2003, 2004). Intellectual, motivational, textual, and cultural considerations in teaching and learning with computer-mediated discussion. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36(2), 104–118.Google Scholar
  43. Stein, N. L., & Albro, E. R. (2001). The origins and nature of arguments: Studies in conflict understanding, emotion, and negotiation. Discourse Processes, 32, 113–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Torrance, P. (1950). The phenomenon of resistance in learning. Journal of Abnormal & Social Psychology, 15(4), 592–597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. van de Sande, C. C., & Greeno, J. G. (2012). Achieving alignment of perspectival framings in problem-solving discourse. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21, 1–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Wells, G. (1999). Dialogic inquiry: Toward a sociocultural practice and theory of education. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wells, G. (2002). The role of dialogue in activity theory. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 9(1), 43–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Society of the Learning Sciences, Inc. 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EducationChonnam National UniversityGwangjuRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.School of Teacher Education and LeadershipArkansas State UniversityJonesboroUSA

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options