Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Group practices: a new way of viewing CSCL

  • Published:
International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The analysis of group practices can make visible the work of novices learning how to inquire in science or mathematics. These ubiquitous practices are invisibly taken for granted by adults, but can be observed and rigorously studied in adequate traces of online collaborative learning. Such an approach contrasts with traditional pre/post comparisons that miss sequential interactional processes or that reduce group phenomena to individual or social factors. The analysis of the enactment of practices by small groups in CSCL contexts can systematically inform the design, testing, and refinement of collaborative-learning software, curriculum, pedagogy, and theory. CSCL can be re-conceptualized as the design of technology to foster the adoption of group practices by student teams.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

References

  • Barron, B. (2003). When smart groups fail. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(3), 307–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. (1972/1995). Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cakir, M. P., Zemel, A., & Stahl, G. (2009). The joint organization of interaction within a multimodal CSCL medium. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(2), 115–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cress, U. (2008). The need for considering multilevel analysis in CSCL research: An appeal for the use of more advanced statistical methods. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3(1), 69–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Descartes, R. (1633/1999). Discourse on method and meditations on first philosophy. New York: Hackett.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dillenbourg, P., Baker, M., Blaye, A., & O'Malley, C. (1996). The evolution of research on collaborative learning. In P. Reimann & H. Spada (Eds.), Learning in humans and machines: Towards an interdisciplinary learning science (pp. 189–211). Oxford: Elsevier http://tecfa.unige.ch/tecfa/publicat/dil-papers-2/Dil.7.1.10.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giddens, A. (1984). Elements of the theory of structuration. In The constitution of society (pp. 1–40). Oakland, CA: U of California Press.

  • Hammond, M. (2015). A Habermasian perspective on joint meaning making online: What does it offer and what are the difficulties? International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 10(3), 223–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hutchins, E. (1996). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeong, H., Hmelo-Silver, C. E., & Yu, Y. (2014). An examination of CSCL methodological practices and the influence of theoretical frameworks 2005-2009. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 9(3), 305–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kant, I. (1787/1999). Critique of pure reason. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kapur, M., & Kinzer, C. K. (2009). Productive failure in CSCL groups. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(1), 21–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Medina, R., Suthers, D. D. & Vatrapu, R. (2009). Representational practices in VMT. In G. Stahl (Ed.), Studying virtual math teams (ch. 10, pp. 185–205). New York: Springer.

  • Öner, D. (2016). Tracing the change in discourse in a collaborative dynamic-geometry environment: From visual to more mathematical. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 11(1), 59–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reckwitz, A. (2002). Toward a theory of social practices: A development in culturalist theorizing. European Journal of Social Theory, 5, 243–263 http://est.sagepub.com/content/5/2/243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogoff, B. (1995). Sociocultural activity on three planes. In B. Rogoff, J. Wertsch, P. del Rio, & A. Alvarez (Eds.), Sociocultural studies of mind (pp. 139–164). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2014). Knowledge building and knowledge creation: Theory, pedagogy and technology. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schatzki, T. R., Knorr Cetina, K., & Savigny, E. V. (Eds.). (2001). The practice turn in contemporary theory. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, D. (1995). The emergence of abstract representations in dyad problem solving. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4(3), 321–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz, B., & Baker, M. (2017). Dialogue, argumentation and education: History, theory and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 27(2), 4–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sfard, A. (2008). Thinking as communicating: Human development, the growth of discourses and mathematizing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, G. (1993). Interpretation in design: The problem of tacit and explicit understanding in computer support of cooperative design. Unpublished Dissertation, Ph.D., Department of Computer Science, University of Colorado. Boulder, CO. http://GerryStahl.net/elibrary/tacit.

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, G. (2006b). Supporting group cognition in an online math community: A cognitive tool for small-group referencing in text chat. Journal of Educational Computing Research (JECR) special issue on Cognitive tools for collaborative communities, 35(2), 103–122 http://GerryStahl.net/pub/jecr.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, G. (2009). Studying virtual math teams. New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, G. (2012a). Ethnomethodologically informed. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 7(1), 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, G. (2012b). Traversing planes of learning. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 7(4), 467–473.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, G. (2013a). Learning across levels. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 8(1), 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, G. (2013b). Translating Euclid: Designing a human-centered mathematics. San Rafael: Morgan & Claypool Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, G. (2014). The constitution of group cognition. In L. Shapiro (Ed.), Handbook of embodied cognition (ch. 32, pp. 335–346). New York: Routledge. http://GerryStahl.net/pub/embodied.pdf.

  • Stahl, G. (2015). Conceptualizing the intersubjective group. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 10(3), 209–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, G. (2016a). Constructing dynamic triangles together: The development of mathematical group cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, G. (2016b). From intersubjectivity to group cognition. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 25(4), 355–384 http://GerryStahl.net/pub/intersubjectivity.pdf.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, G. (2016c). The group as paradigmatic unit of analysis: The contested relationship of CSCL to the learning sciences. In M. A. Evans, M. J. Packer & R. K. Sawyer (Eds.), Reflections on the learning sciences (ch. 5, pp. 76–102). New York: Cambridge University Press. http://GerryStahl.net/pub/ls.pdf.

  • Stahl, G., Zhou, N., Çakir, M. P. & Sarmiento-Klapper, J. W. (2011). Seeing what we mean: Co-experiencing a shared virtual world. In the Proceedings of CSCL 2011. Lulu: ISLS. Proceedings (pp. 534–541). http://GerryStahl.net/pub/cscl2011.pdf.

  • Suthers, D. D., Dwyer, N., Medina, R., & Vatrapu, R. (2010). A framework for conceptualizing, representing, and analyzing distributed interaction. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 5(1), 5–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. (1930/1978). Mind in society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research. Design and methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zemel, A., Çakir, M. P. & Stahl, G. (2009). Understanding and analyzing chat in CSCL as reading’s work. In the Proceedings of CSCL 2009. Rhodes, Greece. http://GerryStahl.net/pub/cscl2009zemel.pdf.

Download references

Acknowledgements

Thanks to everyone who participated in the VMT project and who collaborated on the analysis of its data. Also, to the anonymous reviewers, who prompted me to elaborate several aspects and implications of this view of CSCL.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Drexel University, Chatham, MA, USA

    Gerry Stahl

Authors
  1. Gerry Stahl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gerry Stahl.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Stahl, G. Group practices: a new way of viewing CSCL. Intern. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn 12, 113–126 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-017-9251-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-017-9251-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation