Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Investigation 4. Technology Affordances for Intersubjective Meaning Making: A Research Agenda for CSCL

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Theoretical Investigations

Part of the book series: Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Series ((CULS,volume 18))

  • 292 Accesses

Abstract

Now well into its second decade, the field of computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) appears healthy, encompassing a diversity of topics of study, methodologies, and representatives of various research communities. It is an appropriate time to ask: what central questions can integrate our work into a coherent field? This chapter proposes the study of technology affordances for intersubjective meaning making as an integrating research agenda for CSCL. A brief survey of epistemologies of collaborative learning and forms of computer support for that learning characterize the field to be integrated and motivate the proposal. A hybrid of experimental, descriptive, and design methodologies is proposed in support of this agenda. A working definition of intersubjective meaning making as joint composition of interpretations of a dynamically evolving context is provided and used to propose a framework around which dialogue between analytic approaches can take place.

Suthers, D. D. (2006). Technology affordances for intersubjective meaning making: A research agenda for CSCL. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning. 1(3), 315–337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-006-9660-y.

Received: 10 August 2005/Revised: 29 June 2006/

Accepted: 30 June 2006/Published online: 30 August 2006

© International Society of the Learning Sciences, Inc.; Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2006

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Anderson, J. R., Corbett, A. T., Koedinger, K. R., & Pelletier, R. (1995). Cognitive tutors: Lessons learned. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4(2), 167–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andriessen, J., Baker, M., & Suthers, D. (Eds.). (2003). Arguing to learn: Confronting cognitions in computer-supported collaborative learning environments. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, M. (2003). Computer-mediated argumentative interactions for the co-elaboration of scientific notations. In J. Andriessen, M. Baker, & D. Suthers (Eds.), Arguing to learn: Confronting cognitions in computer-supported collaborative learning environments (pp. 47–78). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, M., Hansen, T., Joiner, R., & Traum, D. (1999). The role of grounding in collaborative learning tasks. In Dillenbourg (Ed.), Collaborative learning: Cognitive and computational approaches (pp. 31–63). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, M., & Lund, K. (1997). Promoting reflective interactions in a CSCL environment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 13, 175–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barab, S., & Squire, K. (2004). Design-based research: Putting a stake in the ground. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blackwell, A., & Green, T. (2003). Notational systems—The cognitive dimensions of notations framework. In J. M. Carroll (Ed.), HCI models, theories and frameworks: Towards a multidisciplinary science (pp. 103–133). San Francisco, CA: Mogan Kaufmann.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bromme, R., Hesse, F. W., & Spada, H. (Eds.). (2005). Barriers and biases in computer-mediated knowledge communication—And how they may be overcome. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bronckart, J. P. (1995). Theories of action, speech, natural language, and discourse. In J. V. Wertsch, P. Del Rio, & A. Alvarez (Eds.), Sociocultural studies of mind (pp. 75–91). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Button, G. Y., & Dourish, P. (1996). Technomethodology: Paradoxes and possibilities. In M. Tauber (Ed.), Proceedings of ACM conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 19–26). New York, NY: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, H. H., & Brennan, S. E. (1991). Grounding in communication. In L. B. Resnick, J. M. Levine, & S. D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 127–149). Hyattsville, MD: American Psychological Association.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Colella, V. (2002). Participatory simulations: Building collaborative understanding through immersive dynamic modeling. In T. Koschmann, R. Hall, & N. Miyake (Eds.), CSCL 2: Carrying forward the conversation (pp. 357–391). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cresswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dervin, B. (2003). Chaos, order, and sense-making: A proposed theory for information design. In B. Dervin, L. Foreman-Wernet, & E. Lauterbach (Eds.), Sense-making methodology reader selected writings of Brenda Dervin (pp. 325–340). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dillenbourg, P. (1999). What do you mean by “collaborative learning”? In P. Dillenbourg (Ed.), Collaborative learning: Cognitive and computational approaches (pp. 1–19). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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, The Netherlands: Open Universiteit Nederland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dillenbourg, P. (2005). Designing biases that augment socio-cognitive interactions. In R. Bromme, F. W. Hesse, & H. Spada (Eds.), Barriers and biases in computer-mediated knowledge communication—And how they may be overcome (pp. 243–264). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Doise, W., & Mugny, G. (1984). The social development ofthe intellect. Oxford, UK: Pergamon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dwyer, N., & Suthers, D. (2005). A study of the foundations of artifact-mediated collaboration. In T. Koschmann, D. Suthers, & T. W. Chan (Eds.), Proceedings of CSCL 2005: The next 10 years! (pp. 135–144). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engeström, Y. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14(1), 133–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erickson, T., & Kellogg, W. A. (2000). Social translucence: An approach to designing systems that support social processes. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 7(1), 59–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, G., & Ostwald, J. (2005). Knowledge communication in design communities. In R. Bromme, F. W. Hesse, & H. Spada (Eds.), Barriers and biases in computer-mediated knowledge communication—And how they may be overcome (pp. 213–242). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, J. J. (1977). The theory of affordances. In R. Shaw & J. Bransford (Eds.), Perceiving, acting and knowing (pp. 67–82). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago, IL: Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldman, R., Crosby, M., Swan, K., & Shea, P. (2004). Introducing quisitive research: Expanding qualitative methods for describing learning in ALN. In R. Starr Hiltz & R. Goldman (Eds.), Learning together online: Research on asynchronous learning networks (pp. 103–121). Mahwah, NJ: LEA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guzdial, M., Hmelo, C., Hubscher, R., Newstetter, W., Puntambekar, S., Shabo, A., et al. (1997). Integrating and guiding collaboration: Lessons learned in computer-supported collaboration learning research at Georgia Tech. In R. Hall, N. Miyake, & N. Enyedy (Eds.), Proceedings of computer support for collaborative learning 1997 (pp. 91–100). Toronto, ON: University of Toronto.

    Google Scholar 

  • Häkkinen, P., Järvelä, S., & Mäkitalo, K. (2003). Sharing perspectives in virtual interaction: Review of methods of analysis. In B. Wasson, S. Ludvigsen, & U. Hoppe (Eds.), Proceedings of CSCL 2003: Designing for change in networked learning environments (pp. 395–404). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, T., Dirckinck-Holmfeld, L., Lewis, R., & Rugelj, J. (1999). Using telematics for collaborative knowledge construction. In P. Dillenbourg (Ed.), Collaborative learning: Cognitive and computational approaches (pp. 169–196). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hermann, D. (Ed.). (2003). Narrative theory and the cognitive sciences. Stanford, CA: Center for the Study of Language and Information.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollan, J., Hutchins, E., & Kirsh, D. (2002). Distributed cognition: Toward a new foundation for human-computer interaction research. In J. M. Carroll (Ed.), Human-computer interaction in the new millennium (pp. 75–94). New York, NY: ACM/Addison Wesley. Reprinted from ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 7(2), June 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollan, J., & Stornetta, S. (1992). Beyond being there. In P. Bauersfeld, J. Bennett, & G. Lynch (Eds.), Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 119–125). New York, NY: ACM.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Jermann, P., & Dillenbourg, P. (2003). Elaborating new arguments through a CSCL script. In J. Andriessen, M. Baker, & D. Suthers (Eds.), Arguing to learn: Confronting cognitions in computer-supported collaborative learning environments (pp. 205–226). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Jermann, P., Soller, A., & Lesgold, A. (2004). Computer software support for CSCL. In J. W. Strijbos, P. A. Kirschner, & R. L. Martens (Eds.), What we know about CSCL and implementing it in higher education (pp. 141–166). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jordan, B., & Henderson, A. (1995). Interaction analysis: Foundations and practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4(1), 39–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaput, J., & Hegedus, S. (2002). Exploiting classroom connectivity by aggregating student constructions to create new learning opportunities. In A. D. Cockburn & E. Nardi (Eds.), Proceedings of the 26th annual conference of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education (Vol. 3, pp. 177–184). Norwich, UK: University of East Anglia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kato, H., Yamazaki, K., Suzuki, H., Kuzuoka, H., Miki, H., & Yamazaki, A. (2001). Designing a video-mediated collaboration system based on a body metaphor. In T. Koschmann, R. Hall, & N. Miyake (Eds.), CSCL 2: Carrying forward the conversation (pp. 409–423). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirschner, P. A., Martens, R. L., & Strijbos, J. W. (2004). CSCL in higher education? A framework for designing multiple collaborative environments. In J. W. Strijbos, P. A. Kirschner, & R. L. Martens (Eds.), What we know about CSCL and implementing it in higher education (pp. 3–30). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Koschmann, T. (2002). Dewey’s contribution to the foundations of CSCL research. In G. Stahl (Ed.), Proceedings of CSCL 2002: Foundations for a CSCL community (pp. 17–22). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koschmann, T., & LeBaron, C. (2003). Reconsidering common ground: Examining Clark’s contribution theory in the OR. In K. Kuutti, E. Karsten, G. Fitzpatrick, P. Dourish, & K. Schmidt (Eds.), ECSCW 2003: Proceedings of Eighth European conference on computer-supported cooperative work. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koschmann, T., Stahl, G., & Zemel, A. (2004). The video analyst’s manifesto (or the implications of Garfinkel’s policies for the development of a program of video analytic research within the learning sciences). In Y. Kafai, W. Sandoval, N. Enyedy, A. Nixon, & F. Herrera (Eds.), Proceedings of the sixth international conference of the learning sciences (pp. 278–285). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koschmann, T., Zemel, A., Conlee-Stevens, M., Young, N., Robbs, J., & Barnhart, A. (2003). Problematizing the problem: A single case analysis in a dPBL meeting. In B. Wasson, S. Ludvigsen, & U. Hoppe (Eds.), Proceedings of CSCL 2003: Designing for change in networked learning environments (pp. 37–46). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Koschmann, T., Zemel, A., Conlee-Stevens, M., Young, N., Robbs, J., & Barnhart, A. (2005). How do people learn? Members’ methods and communicative mediation. In R. Bromme, F. W. Hesse, & H. Spada (Eds.), Barriers and biases in computer-mediated knowledge communication—And how they may be overcome (pp. 265–294). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kreijns, K., & Kirschner, P. A. (2004). Designing sociable CSCL environments. In Strijbos, Kirschner, & Martens (Eds.), What we know about CSCL and implementing it in higher education (pp. 221–243). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. (1990). Drawing things together. In M. Lynch & S. Woolgar (Eds.), Representation in scientific practice (pp. 19–68). Cambridge, MA: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lingnau, A., Hoppe, H. U., & Mannhaupt, G. (2003). Computer supported collaborative writing in an early learning classroom. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19(2), 186–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matusov, E. (1996). Intersubjectivity without agreement. Mind, Culture and Activity, 3(1), 25–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norman, D. N. (1999). Affordance, conventions, and design. ACM Interactions, 6(3), 38–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunberg, G. (1993). Indexicality and deixis. Linguistics and Philosophy, 16(1), 1–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olson, G. M., & Olson, J. S. (2000). Distance matters. Human-Computer Interaction, 15, (2/3), 139–178. Reprinted in: J. M. Carroll (Ed.), (2002). Human-computer interaction in the new Millennium (pp. 397–417). New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfister, H. R. (2005). How to support synchronous net-based learning discourses: Principles and perspectives. In R. Bromme, F. W. Hesse, & H. Spada (Eds.), Barriers and biases in computer-mediated knowledge communication—And how they may be overcome (pp. 39–58). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Piaget, J. (1976). The grasp of consciousness: Action and concept in the young child. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Resnick, P. (2002). Beyond bowling together: Sociotechnical capital. In J. M. Carroll (Ed.), Human-computer interaction in the new millennium (pp. 647–672). New York, NY: ACM Addison Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rieber, L. P. (2004). Microworlds. In D. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (2nd ed., pp. 583–603). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robertson, J., Good, J., & Pain, H. (1998). BetterBlether: The design and evaluation of a discussion tool for education. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 9. Online: http://cbl.leeds.ac.uk/ijaied/abstracts/Vol_9/robertson.html

  • Rogoff, B. (1995). Observing sociocultural activity on three planes: Participatory appropriation, guided participation, and apprenticeship. In J. V. Wertsch, P. Del Rio, & A. Alvarez (Eds.), Sociocultural studies of mind (pp. 139–164). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Roschelle, J. (1994, May). Designing for cognitive communication: Epistemic fidelity or mediating collaborative inquiry? The Arachnet Electronic Journal of Virtual Culture, 2(2) Retrieved from http://www.infomotions.com/serials/aejvc/aejvc-v2n02-roschelle-designing.txt

  • Roschelle, J., & Teasley, S. D. (1995). The construction of shared knowledge in collaborative problem solving. In C. E. O’Malley (Ed.), Computer supported collaborative learning (p. 69197). Berlin, Germany/Heidelberg, Germany/New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rummel, N., & Spada, H. (2005). Sustainable support for computer-mediated collaboration. How to achieve and how to assess it. In R. Bromme, F. W. Hesse, & H. Spada (Eds.), Barriers and biases in computer-mediated knowledge communication—And how they may be overcome. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking in conversation. Language, 50(4), 696–735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salomon, G. (Ed.). (1993). Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1991). Higher levels of agency for children in knowledge building: A challenge for the design of new knowledge media. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 1(1), 37–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaffer, D. W., & Clinton, K. A. (2005). Why all CSL is CL: Distributed mind and the future of computer supported collaborative learning. In T. Koschmann, D. Suthers, & T. W. Chan (Eds.), Proceedings of CSCL 2005: The next 10 years! (pp. 592–601). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slavin, R. E. (1995). Cooperative learning: Theory, research and practice (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smolka, A. L. B., De Goes, M. C. R., & Pino, A. (1995). The constitution of the subject: A persistent question. In J. V. Wertsch, P. Del Rio, & A. Alvarez (Eds.), Sociocultural studies of mind (pp. 165–184). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, G. (2000). Collaborative information environments to support knowledge construction by communities. AI & Society, 14, 71–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, G. (2004). Building collaborative knowing: Elements of a social theory of CSCL. In J. W. Strijbos, P. A. Kirschner, & R. L. Martens (Eds.), What we know about CSCL and implementing it in higher education (pp. 53–86). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, G. (2006). Group cognition: Computer support for building collaborative knowledge. Cambridge, MA: MIT.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Star, S. L. (1990). The structure of ill-structured solutions: Boundary objects and heterogeneous distributed problem solving. In L. Gasser & M. N. Huhns (Eds.), Distributed artificial intelligence (Vol. 2, pp. 37–54). San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suthers, D. (2006). A qualitative analysis of collaborative knowledge construction through shared representations. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 1(2), 1–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suthers, D., Girardeau, L., & Hundhausen, C. (2003). Deictic roles of external representations in face-to-face and online collaboration. In Proceedings of CSCL 2003: Designing for change in networked learning environments (pp. 173–182). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Suthers, D., & Hundhausen, C. (2003). An empirical study of the effects of representational guidance on collaborative learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(2), 183–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. G. W. C. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10(3), 251–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toth, E., Suthers, D., & Lesgold, A. (2002). Mapping to know: The effects of evidence maps and reflective assessment on scientific inquiry skills. Science Education, 86(2), 264–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van der Pol, J., Admiraal, W., & Simons, R.-J. (2003). Grounding in electronic discussions: Standard (threaded) versus anchored discussion. In B. Wasson, S. Ludvigsen, & U. Hoppe (Eds.), Proceedings of CSCL 2003: Designing for change in networked learning environments (pp. 77–81). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Glasersfeld, E. (1995). A constructivist approach to teaching. In L. Steffe & J. Gale (Eds.), Constructivism in education (pp. 3–16). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (Originally published in 1930).

    Google Scholar 

  • Wartofsky, M. (1979). Models, representation and scientific understanding. Boston, MA: Reidel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wegerif, R. (2006). A dialogic understanding of the relationship between CSCL and teaching thinking skills. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(1), 143–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weinberger, A., Reiserer, M., Ertl, B., Fischer, F., & Mandl, H. (2005). Facilitating collaborative knowledge construction in computer-mediated learning environments with cooperation scripts. In R. Bromme, F. W. Hesse, & H. Spada (Eds.), Barriers and biases in computer-mediated knowledge communication—And how they may be overcome. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E. (1987). Artificial intelligence and tutoring systems: Computational and cognitive approaches to the communication of knowledge. Los Altos, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder, W. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice: A guide to managing knowledge. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitworth, B., Gallupe, B., & McQueen, R. (2000). A cognitive three-process model of computer-mediated group interaction. Group Decision and Negotiation, 9, 431–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yukawa, J. (2006). Co-reflection in online learning: Collaborative critical thinking as narrative. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(2), 203–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This is an expanded and revised version of a paper presented at the CSCL 2005 conference, which originated in a commentary on Bromme et al. (2005). I am in gratitude to Tim Koschmann and Gerry Stahl for comments on drafts and especially for their papers that have challenged my thinking; to Nathan Dwyer for years of stimulating discussions and for extensive comments on drafts of the present paper; to reviewers of the CSCL 2005 version for deeply insightful and detailed comments, the most challenging of which remain to be addressed; and to Vi Harada and Ravikiran Vatrapu for additional insights and commentary. I dedicate this chapter to James Kaput, an inspiration to many, who requested a draft shortly before he died. This work was supported by the National Science Foundation under award 0093505. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this chapter are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation or those who have graciously offered their assistance.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Information and Computer Sciences, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, HI, USA

    Daniel D. Suthers

Authors
  1. Daniel D. Suthers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniel D. Suthers .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Chatham, MA, USA

    Gerry Stahl

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Suthers, D.D. (2021). Investigation 4. Technology Affordances for Intersubjective Meaning Making: A Research Agenda for CSCL. In: Stahl, G. (eds) Theoretical Investigations. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Series, vol 18. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-49157-4_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-49157-4_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-49156-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-49157-4

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation