Abstract
With the recognition of the value of learning in informal spaces, it has been proposed that learning in the informal spaces should be an integral part of the formal schooling. The ubiquitous use of mobile technology creates various opportunities for connecting learning in the formal and informal contexts. In seamless learning, different efforts have been devoted to improving the synergy of these two learning contexts supported by mobile technology, but challenges still exist in the design of seamless learning scenarios that involve the pedagogical integration of learning in formal and informal spaces with active boundary interaction. To promote the mutual interaction of learning contexts in seamless learning, and improve the smooth transformation of students’ cognition in crossing borders, we elaborate on the conception of “boundary object” which is borrowed from science education and learning sciences and inspired by the notion of border crossing from the cultural perspectives, as the knot for tightening learning in different contexts. In this chapter, we will summarize the origins of the boundary objects and discuss their application in improving the boundary interactions in seamless learning. Based on these, the principle of boundary activity-based learning (BABL) is articulated for improving the design of seamless learning activities. A BABL lesson exemplar is illustrated for BABL application, and the initial results of a pilot study are discussed. The BABL principle and the research will inform the pedagogical design of technology-supported STEM education and science learning in a seamless learning context.
Keywords
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Ahmed, S., & Parsons, D. (2013). Abductive science inquiry using mobile devices in the classroom. Computers & Education, 63, 62–72.
Aikenhead, G. S. (1996). Science education: Border crossing into the subculture of science. Studies in Science Education, 27, 1–52.
Aikenhead, G. S. (2001). Students’ ease in crossing cultural borders into school science. Science Education, 85(2), 180–188.
Aikenhead, G. S., & Jegede, O. J. (1999). Cross-cultural science education: A cognitive explanation of a cultural phenomenon. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 269–287.
Akkerman, S. F., & Bakker, A. (2011). Boundary crossing and boundary objects. Review of Educational Research, 81(2), 132–169.
Bell, P., Lewenstein, B., Shouse, A. W., & Feder, M. A. (2009). Learning science in informal environments: People, places, and pursuits. Washington, DC: The National Academy of Sciences.
DeWitt, J., & Osborne, J. (2007). Supporting Teachers on Science-focused School Trips: Towards an integrated framework of theory and practice. International Journal of Science Education, 29(6), 685–710.
Education Bureau. (2016). Report on promotion of STEM education: Unleashing potential in innovation. Retrieved from: https://www.edb.gov.hk/attachment/en/curriculum-development/renewal/STEM%20Education%20Report_Eng.pdf.
Gerber, B. L., Cavallo, A. M., & Marek, E. A. (2001). Relationships among informal learning environments, teaching procedures and scientific reasoning ability. International Journal of Science Education, 23(5), 535–549.
Gilbert, J., & Priest, M. (1997). Models and discourse: A primary school science class visit to a museum. Science Education, 81(6), 749–762.
Hofstein, A., & Rosenfeld, S. (1996). Bridging the gap between formal and informal science learning. Studies in Science Education, 28(1), 87–112.
Hwang, G. J., & Tsai, C. C. (2011). Research trends in mobile and ubiquitous learning: A review of publications in selected journals from 2001 to 2010. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(4), E65–E70.
Kim, C. M., Kim, D., Yuan, J., Hill, R. B., Doshi, P., & Thai, C. N. (2015). Robotics to promote elementary education pre-service teachers’ STEM engagement, learning, and teaching. Computers & Education, 91, 14–31.
Kisiel, J. F. (2014). Clarifying the complexities of school–museum interactions: Perspectives from two communities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(3), 342–367.
Looi, C.-K., Sun, D., Wu, L., Seow, P., & Chia, G. (2014). Implementing mobile learning curricula in a grade level: Empirical study of learning effectiveness at scale. Computers & Education, 77, 101–115.
Looi, C.-K., Wong, L.-H., So, H.-J., Seow, P., Toh, Y., Chen, W., … Soloway, E. (2009). Anatomy of a mobilized lesson: Learning my way. Computers & Education, 53(4), 1120–1132.
Merchant, G. (2012). Mobile practices in everyday life: Popular digital technologies and schooling revisited. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(5), 770–782.
Morag, O., & Tal, T. (2012). Assessing learning in the outdoors with the field trip in Natural Environments (FiNE) Framework. International Journal of Science Education, 34(5), 745–777.
Nadelson, L. S., Callahan, J., Pyke, P., Hay, A., Dance, M., & Pfiester, J. (2013). Teacher STEM perception and preparation: Inquiry-based STEM professional development for elementary teachers. Journal of Educational Research, 106(2), 157–168.
National Research Council. (2009). National Science Education Standards. Washington, D.C: The National Academy Press.
National Research Council. (2011). Successful STEM education: A workshop summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Nugent, G., Barker, B., Welch, G., Grandgenett, N., Wu, C., & Nelson, C. (2015). A model of factors contributing to STEM learning and career orientation. International Journal of Science Education, 37(7), 1067–1088.
OECD. (2008). Recognition of non-formal and informal learning. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/education/skills-beyond-school/recognitionofnon-formalandinformallearning-home.htm.
Otero, N., Milrad, M., Rogers, Y., Santos, A. J., Verissimo, M., & Torres, N. (2011). Challenges in designing seamless learning scenarios: Affective and emotional effects on external representations. International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation, 5(1), 15–27.
Patrick, P., Mathews, C., & Tunnicliffe, S. D. (2013). Using a field trip inventory to determine if listening to elementary school students’ conversations, while on a zoo field trip, enhances preservice teachers’ abilities to plan zoo field trips. International Journal of Science Education, 35(15), 2645–2669.
Rickinson, M., Dillon, J., Teamey, K., Morris, M., Choi, M. Y., Sanders, D., et al. (2004). A review of research on outdoor learning. Shrewsbury: National Foundation for Educational Research and King’s College London.
Rogers, Y., & Price, S. (2008). The role of mobile devices in facilitating collaborative inquiry in situ. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 3(3), 209–229.
Sharples, M., Sánchez, I.A., Milrad, M., Vavoula, G. (2009). Mobile learning: Small devices, big issues. In N. Balacheff, S. Ludvigsen, T. Jong, & S. de Barnes (Eds.), Technology enhanced learning: Principles and products (pp. 233–249). Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.
Sharples, M., Eileen, S., Shaaron, A., Stamatina, A., Trevor, C., Charles, C., … Claire, O.M. (2014). Personal inquiry: Orchestrating science investigations within and beyond the classroom. Journal of the Learning Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2014.944642.
So, H.-J., Seow, P., & Looi, C.-K. (2009). Location matters: Leveraging knowledge building with mobile devices and Web 2.0 technology. Interactive Learning Environments, 17(4), 367–382.
Song, Y. (2016). “We found the ‘black spots’ on campus on our own”: Development of inquiry skills in primary science learning with BYOD (Bring Your Own Device). Interactive Learning Environments, 24(2), 291–305.
Song, Y., Wong, L.-H., & Looi, C.-K. (2012). Fostering personalized learning in science inquiry supported by mobile technologies. Education Technology Research Development, 60(4), 679–701.
Star, S.L & Griesemer, J.R. (1989). Institutional ecology, translation and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s museum of vertebrate zoology, 1907–39. Social Studies of Science, 19(3), 387–420.
Sun, D., & Looi, C.-K. (2017). Boundary interaction: Towards developing a mobile technology-enabled science curriculum to integrate learning in the informal spaces. British Journal of Educational Technology. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12555.
Sun, D., Looi, C.-K., & Wu, L. (2016a). The innovative immersion of mobile learning into a science curriculum in Singapore: An exploratory study. Research in Science Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-015-9471-0.
Sun, D., Looi, C.-K., Wu, L., & Xie, W. (2016b). The innovative immersion of mobile learning into a science curriculum in Singapore: An exploratory study. Research in Science Education, 46(4), 547–573.
Starkey, L. (2011). Evaluating learning in the 21st century: a digital age learning matrix. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 20(1), 19–39.
Suáreza, A., Spechta, M., Prinsenb, F., Kalza, M., & Terniera, S. (2018). A review of the types of mobile activities in mobile inquiry-based learning. Computers & Education, 118, 38–55.
Thijs, A., & van den Akker, J. (Eds.). (2009). Curriculum in development. Enschede, Netherlands: SLO-Netherlands Institute for Curriculum Development. Retrieved from http://www.slo.nl/downloads/2009/curriculum-in-development.pdf/.
Thüs, H., Chatti, M. A., Yalcin, E., Pallasch, C., Kyryliuk, B., Mageramov, T., & Schroeder, U. (2012). Mobile learning in context. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 4(5–6), 332–344.
Tsurusaki, B. K., Calabrese Barton, A., Tan, E., Koch, P., & Contento, I. (2012). Using transformative boundary objects to create critical engagement in science: a case study. Science Education, 97(1), 1–31.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Williams, J., & Wake, G. (2007). Black boxes in workplace mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 64(3), 317–343.
Wong, L.-H., & Looi, C.-K. (2011). What seams do we remove in mobile-assisted seamless learning? A critical review of the literature. Computers & Education, 57, 2364–2381.
Wong, L.-H., Chen, W., & Jan, M. (2012). How artefacts mediate small-group co-creation activities in a mobile-assisted seamless language learning environment? Journal of Computer Assisted learning, 28(5), 411–424.
Zhang, J. (1997). The nature of external representations in problem solving. Cognitive Science, 21(2), 179–217.
Zhang, J., Bogouslavsky, M., & Yuang, G. (2017). Cross-community interaction for knowledge building in two grade 5/6 classrooms. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL 2017). International Society of the Learning Sciences.
Zhang, J., Tao, T., Chen, M.-H., Sun, Y., Judson D., & Naqvi, S. (2018). Co-organizing the collective journey of inquiry with idea thread mapper. Journal of the Learning Sciences. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2018.1444992.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Sun, D., Looi, CK. (2019). An Inspiration from Border Crossing: Principle of Boundary Activity for Integrating Learning in the Formal and Informal Spaces. In: Looi, CK., Wong, LH., Glahn, C., Cai, S. (eds) Seamless Learning. Lecture Notes in Educational Technology. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-3071-1_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-3071-1_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-13-3070-4
Online ISBN: 978-981-13-3071-1
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)