Boundary Practices and the Use of Boundary Objects in Collaborative Networked Learning
- 4 Downloads
Building on a continued interest in boundaries and boundary practice in relation to ICT-based networked learning (Ryberg & Sinclair, 2016), this paper addresses the issue of knowledgeability and identification in design for boundary practice in networked learning. We analyse how two different case studies conducted at the Danish online master programme on ICT and learning (MIL) differ with regard to potential boundary practice and the use of boundary objects.
In study I, the design for learning was based on a 2D virtual learning environment (Dirckinck-Holmfeld, 2006), whereas study II was based on a 3D virtual world (Riis, Avatar-mediation and transformation of practice in a 3D virtual world. Meaning, identity, and learning. Ph.D. dissertation. Aalborg University Press, 2016). Our findings show similarities and differences in terms of boundary practices and the use of boundary objects. In particular, the 3D avatar seems to influence the participants’ practices, and the 3D virtual space affords a concrete materialised, albeit virtual, opportunity for reification.
We elaborate on similarities and differences and based on our findings we propose that boundaries in networked learning should be regarded not only as sociocultural differences, but also as socio-material differences and dependencies. The materiality of a 3D virtual environment and avatars provides new relational and performative opportunities that might raise new research questions in networked learning in general.
KeywordsNetworked learning Boundary practice Boundary object Culture Materiality
- L. Dirckinck-Holmfeld, Designing for collaboration and mutual negotiation of meaning: boundary objects in networked learning, ed. by S. Banks, V. Hodgson, C. Jones, B. Kemp, McConnell (eds.). Proceedings of the fifth international conference on networked learning 2006: Symposium: Relations in networks and networked learning, organised by Chris Jones. Lancaster University, p. 1–8, 2006Google Scholar
- L. Dirckinck-Holmfeld, Networked learning and problem and project based learning – how they complement each other. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Networked Learning 2016, ed. by S Cranmer, N.B. Dohn, M. de Laat, T. Ryberg, J.A. Sime JA, Lancaster University, 2016Google Scholar
- L. Dirckinck-Holmfeld, C. Jones, B. Lindström (eds.), Analysing Networked Learning Practices in Higher Education and Continuing Professional Development, Technology Enhanced Learning, vol 4 (Brill | Sense, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 2009)Google Scholar
- L. Dirckinck-Homfeld, Designing virtual learning environments based on problem oriented project pedagogy, in Learning in Virtual Environments, ed. by L. Dirckinck-Holmfeld, B. Fibiger, (Samfundslitteratur, Frederiksberg, 2002), pp. 31–54Google Scholar
- T. Fenwick, R. Edwards, P. Sawchuk, Emerging Approaches to Educational Research. Tracing the Sociomaterial (Routledge, Abington, 2011)Google Scholar
- B. Fibiger, J. Nielsen, M. Riis, E.K. Sorensen, L. Dirckinck-Holmfeld, O. Danielsen, B.H. Sørensen,. Master in ICT and learning – project pedagogy and collaboration in virtual e-learning. Contribution to the 3rd European Conference on e-learning. Paris, November 2004, 2005, ISBN: 9547096-7-5Google Scholar
- A. Fjuk, Computer Support for Distributed Collaborative Learning. Exploring a Complex Problem Area. Dr. Scient. Thesis 5. Dep. of informatics. University of Oslo, 1998Google Scholar
- C. Geertz, The interpretation of cultures. Selected Essays (Basic Books, Inc., Publishers, New York, 1973)Google Scholar
- K. Herr, G.L. Anderson, The Action Research Dissertation (Sage, Thousand Oaks, 2005)Google Scholar
- C. Hine, Ethnography for the Internet: Embedded, Embodied and Everyday (Bloomsbury, London, 2015)Google Scholar
- A. Johiri, Engineering knowing in the digital workplace: aligning materiality and sociality through action, in Reconceptualising Professional Learning. Sociomaterial Knowledges, Practices and Responsibilities, ed. by T. Fenwick, M. Nerland, (Routledge, Abington, 2014), pp. 112–124Google Scholar
- C. Ondrejka, Education unleashed: participatory culture, education and innovation in second life, in The Ecology of Games: Connecting Youth, Games, and Learning, ed. by K. Salen, (The MIT Press, Cambridge, 2008), pp. 229–252Google Scholar
- T. Rapley, Doing conversation, discourse and Document analysis, in The SAGE Qualitative Research Kit, (SAGE Publications, Cambridge, 2007)Google Scholar
- M. Riis, Avatar-mediation and transformation of practice in a 3D virtual world. Meaning, identity, and learning. Ph.D. dissertation. Aalborg University Press, 2016Google Scholar
- S.L. Star, J.R. Griesemer, Institutional ecology, ‘translations’ and boundary objects: amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s museum of vertebrate zoology, 1907-39. Soc. Stud. 19(1989), 387–420 (1989)Google Scholar
- S. Timmis, J. Williams, Transitioning across networked, workplace and educational boundaries: shifting identities and chronotopic movements, in Research, Boundaries and Policy in Networked Learning, ed. by T. Ryberg, C. Sinclair, S. Bayne, M. de Laat, (Springer, New York, 2016), pp. 111–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- E. Wenger-Trayner, B. Wenger-Trayner, Learning in a landscape of practice. A framework, in Learning in Landscapes of Practice. Boundaries, Identity, and Knowledgeability in Practice-based Learning, ed. by E. Wenger-Trayner, M. Fenton-O’Creevy, S. Hutchinson, C. Kubiak, B. Wenger-Trayner, (Routledge, Abington, 2015), pp. 13–29Google Scholar
- B. Wenger-Trayner, E. Wenger-Trayner, J. Cameron, S. Eryigit-Madzwamuse, A. Hart, Boundaries and boundary objects: an evaluation framework for mixed methods research. J. Mixed Methods Res., 1–18 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689817732225