nach oben

International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning

Erschienen in:

01.09.2015

Group-level formative feedback and metadiscourse

verfasst von: Monica Resendes, Marlene Scardamalia, Carl Bereiter, Bodong Chen, Cindy Halewood

Erschienen in: International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning | Ausgabe 3/2015

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

This research explores the ability of grade 2 students to engage in productive discussion about the state of their knowledge building using group-level feedback tools to support their metadiscourse. Two aspects of knowledge work were common to the comparison and experimental classes: “Knowledge Building talk” (KB talk) involving teacher-student discussions and the use of Knowledge Forum, an online environment optimized to support Knowledge Building/knowledge creation and to represent and support student work and KB talks. Students in experimental conditions additionally reviewed visualizations of vocabulary use and discourse patterns during KB talk time. Two formative feedback visualization tools were co-developed by the classroom teacher and researchers to show (a) overlaps and discrepancies between words students used in their Knowledge Forum notes and words used by writers more knowledgeable in the field and (b) frequency of discourse moves indicated by students’ use of epistemic discourse markers in Knowledge Forum. These visualizations served as grounding for KB talk concerned with interpreting the visualizations and considering their implications. A comparison of two classes similar except for presence or absence of these visualizations showed significant effects favoring the experimental class in domain-specific vocabulary, repertoire of discourse moves, scientific understanding, epistemic complexity of ideas, and interpersonal connectedness of online discourse.

Vorheriger Artikel Collaborative group engagement in a computer-supported inquiry learning environment

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Because the term “knowledge building” now appears in many documents, often without definition, we use lower case with the generic term and capitalize Knowledge Building when referring to the approach originating in our laboratory and promoted by organizations such as Knowledge Building International.

Andrade, H., & Du, Y. (2007). Student responses to criteria-referenced self-assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 32(2), 159–181.CrossRef

Baltzersen, R. K. (2013). The importance of metacommunication in supervision processes in higher education. International Journal of Higher Education, 2(2), 128–140.CrossRef

Bateman, S., Gutwin, C., & Nacenta, M. (2008). Seeing things in the clouds: The effect of visual features on tag cloud selections. In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia (pp. 193–202). Pittsburgh: ACM.

Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., & Omanson, R. C. (1987). The effects and uses of diverse vocabulary instructional techniques. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Bereiter, C. (2010). How to make good knowledge-building discourse better. Keynote address at the 2010 Knowledge Building Summer Institute “New Assessments and Environments for Knowledge Building”, Toronto, Canada, August 3–6, 2010.

Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (2003). Learning to work creatively with knowledge. In E. De Corte, L. Verschaffel, N. Entwistle, & J. van Merriënboer (Eds.), Powerful learning environments: Unraveling basic components and dimensions (pp. 55–68). Advances in Learning and Instruction Series). Oxford: Elsevier Science.

Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (2014). Knowledge building and knowledge creation: One concept, two hills to climb. In S. C. Tan, H. J. So, & J. Yeo (Eds.), Knowledge creation in education (pp. 35–52). Singapore: Springer.

Bereiter, C., Scardamalia, M., Cassells, C., & Hewitt, J. (1997). Postmodernism, knowledge-building, and elementary science. Elementary School Journal, 97(4), 329–340.CrossRef

Bielaczyc, K., & Collins, A. (1999). Learning communities in classrooms: A reconceptualization of educational practice. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (pp. 269–292). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Biemiller, A. (2005). Size and sequence in vocabulary development: Implications for choosing words for primary grade vocabulary instruction. In A. Hiebert & M. Kamil (Eds.), Teaching and learning vocabulary: Bringing research to practice (pp. 223–242). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

Bloom, B. S., Hastings, J. T., & Madaus, G. (1971). Handbook on formative and summative evaluation of student learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Boud, D. (1995). Enhancing learning through self-assessment. London: Kogan Page.

Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (1996). Psychological theory and design of innovative learning environments: On procedures, principles, and systems. In L. Schauble & R. Glaser (Eds.), Innovations in learning: New environments for education (pp. 289–325). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Burtis, P. J. (1998). Analytic toolkit for Knowledge Forum. Centre for Applied Cognitive Science, The Ontario Institute for Studies in Education/University of Toronto.

Campbell, D., & Stanley, J. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago: Rand-McNally.

Chan, C. K. K. (2001). Peer collaboration and discourse patterns in learning from incompatible information. Instructional Science, 29(6), 443–479.CrossRef

Chan, C. K. K. (2013). Collaborative knowledge building. Towards a knowledge creation perspective. In C. E. Hmelo-Silver, C. A. Chinn, C. Chan, & A. M. O’Donnell (Eds.), The international handbook of collaborative learning (pp. 437–461). New York: Routledge.

Chappuis, S., & Stiggins, R. J. (2002). Classroom assessment for learning. Educational Leadership, 60(1), 40–43.

Chen, B., Scardamalia, M., Resendes, M., Chuy, M., & Bereiter, C. (2012). Students’ intuitive understanding of promisingness and promisingness judgments to facilitate knowledge advancement. In J. van Aalst, K. Thompson, M. J. Jacobson, & P. Reimann (Eds.), The future of learning: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS 2012) - volume 1, full papers (pp. 111–118). Sydney: ISLS.

Chuy, M., Scardamalia, M., Bereiter, C., Prinsen, F., Resendes, M., Messina, R., Hunsburger, W., Teplovs, C., & Chow, A. (2010). Understanding the nature of science and scientific progress: A theory-building approach. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 36(1). Published online at http://www.cjlt.ca/index.php/cjlt/article/view/580.

Chuy, M., Resendes, M., Tarchi, C., Chen, B., Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2011). Ways of contributing to an explanation-seeking dialogue in science and history. QWERTY: Journal of Technology and Culture, 6(2), 242–260.

Cobb, P., Confrey, J., DiSessa, A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 9–13.CrossRef

Fischer, K. W. (1980). A theory of cognitive development: The control and construction of hierarchies of skills. Psychological Review, 87, 477–531.CrossRef

Fischer, K. W., & Pipp, S. L. (1984). Processes of cognitive development: Optimal level and skill acquisition. In R. J. Steinberg (Ed.), Mechanisms of cognitive development (pp. 45–80). San Francisco: Freeman.

Freeman, L. (2006). The development of social network analysis. Vancouver: Empirical Press.

Halatchliyski, I., Hecking, T., Goehnert, T., & Hopper, H. U. (2014). Analyzing the main paths of knowledge evolution and contributor roles in an Open Learning Community. Journal of Learning Analytics, 1(2), 71–93.

Haythornthwaite, C. (2010). Social networks and information transfer. In M. J. Bates & M. N. Maack (Eds.), Encyclopedia of library and information sciences, (1)1, (pp. 4837–4847). NY: Taylor & Francis.

Haythornthwaite, C., & de Laat, M. (2012). Social network informed design. In A. D. Olofsson & J. O. Lindberg (Eds.), Informed design of educational technologies in higher education: Enhanced learning and teaching (pp. 352–374). Hershey: IGI Global.CrossRef

Haythornthwaite, C. & Gruzd, A. (2012). Exploring patterns and configurations in networked learning texts. In Proceedings of the 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) (pp. 3358–3367). Los Alamitos: IEEE.

Hirsch, E. D. (2003). Reading comprehension requires knowledge of words and the world: Scientific insights into the fourth-grade slump and the nation’s stagnant comprehension scores. American Educator, 27(1), 10–13, 16–22, 28–29, 48.

Inhelder, B., & Piaget, J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence. New York: Basic Books.CrossRef

Jeong, D. (2009). Discussion Analysis Tool (DAT). Retrieved from: http://myweb.fsu.edu/ajeong/dat.

Koutrika, G., Zadeh, Z. M., & Garcia-Molina, H. (2009). Data clouds: Summarizing keyword search results over structured data. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Extending Database Technology (EDBT2009) (pp. 391–402). Saint-Petersburg: ACM.

Lakatos, I. (1976). Proofs and refutations: The logic of mathematical discovery. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Matsuzawa, Y., Oshima, J., Oshima, R., Niihara, Y., & Sakai, S. (2011). KBDeX: A platform for exploring discourse in collaborative learning. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences, 26, 198–207.

Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Newman, M. E. J. (2010). Networks: An introduction. Oxford University Press.

Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge creating company. New York: Oxford University Press.

Ontario Ministry of Education. (2007). The Ontario curriculum, grades 1–8: Science and technology. Retrieved from: http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/curriculum/elementary/scientec18currb.pdf.

Oshima, J., Oshima, R., & Matsuzawa, Y. (2012). Knowledge building discourse explorer: A social network analysis application for knowledge building discourse. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60, 903–921.CrossRef

Paavola, S., & Hakkarainen, K. (2005). The knowledge creation metaphor – an emergent epistemological approach to learning. Science & Education, 14(6), 535–557.CrossRef

Pauwels, P., De Meyer, R., & van Campenhout, J. (2013). Design thinking support: Information systems versus reasoning. Design Issues, 29(2), 42–59.CrossRef

Puntambekar, S., Erkens, G., & Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2011). Analyzing interactions in CSCL: Methodology, approaches, and issues. New York: Springer.CrossRef

Quintana, C., Reiser, B. J., Davis, E. A., Krajcik, J., Fretz, E., Duncan, R. G., Kyza, E., Edelson, D., & Soloway, E. (2004). A scaffolding design framework for software to support science inquiry. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 337–386.CrossRef

Ramaprasad, A. (1983). On the definition of feedback. Behavioral Science, 28(1), 4–13.CrossRef

Reeve, R., Messina, R., & Scardamalia, M. (2008). Wisdom in elementary school. In M. Ferrari & G. Potworowski (Eds.), Teaching for wisdom: Cross-cultural perspectives on fostering wisdom (pp. 79–92). New York: Springer.

Roschelle, J., Penuel, W. R., & Shechtman, N. (2006). Co-design of innovations with teachers: Definition and dynamics. In Proceedings of the International Conference of the Learning Sciences (pp. 606–612). Bloomington: ACM.

Ross, J. A. (2006). The reliability, validity, and utility of self-assessment. Practical Assessment Research & Evaluation, 11(10), 1–13.

Scardamalia, M. (2002). Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. In B. Smith (Ed.), Liberal education in a knowledge society (pp. 67–98). Chicago: Open Court.

Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2006). Knowledge building: Theory, pedagogy, and technology. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 97–118). New York: Cambridge University Press.

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., pp. 397–417). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Schrammel, J., Leitner, M. & Tscheligi, M. (2009). Semantically structured tag clouds: An empirical evaluation of clustered presentation approaches. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 2037–2040). Boston: ACM.

Simmons, K. (1993). Universality and the liar: An essay on truth and the diagonal argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Snow, C. E., Porche, M. V., Tabors, P. O., & Harris, S. R. (2007). Is literacy enough? Pathways to academic success for adolescents. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.

Stahl, S. A. (2003). Words are learned incrementally over multiple exposures. American Educator, 27(1), 18–19.

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

Stahl, S., & Fairbanks, M. (1986). The effects of vocabulary instruction: A model-based meta analysis. Review of Educational Research, 56(1), 72–110.CrossRef

Stromer-Galley, J. (2007). Measuring deliberation’s content: A coding scheme. Journal of Public Deliberation, 3(1), Article 12.

Tsoukas, H. (2009). A dialogical approach to the creation of new knowledge in organizations. Organization Science, 20, 941–957.CrossRef

van Aalst, J. (2009). Distinguishing knowledge-sharing, knowledge-construction, and knowledge creation discourses. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(3), 259–287.CrossRef

Vande Kopple, W. J. (1985). Some exploratory discourse on metadiscourse. College Composition and Communication, 36(1), 82–93.CrossRef

von Krogh, G., Ichijo, K., & Nonaka, I. (2000). Enabling knowledge creation: Unlocking the mystery of tacit knowledge. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRef

Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Xexéo, G., Morgado, F., & Fiuza, P. (2009). Differential tag clouds: Highlighting particular features in documents. In Proceedings of 2009 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology (pp. 129–132). Milano: IET.

Zhang, J., & Messina, R. (2010). Collaborative productivity as self-sustaining processes in a grade 4 knowledge building community. In K. Gomez, J. Radinsky, & L. Lyons (Eds.), Proceedings of the 9th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (pp. 49–56). Chicago: International Society of the Learning Sciences.

Zhang, J., Scardamalia, M., Lamon, M., Messina, R., & Reeve, R. (2007). Socio-cognitive dynamics of knowledge building in the work of nine- and ten-year-olds. Educational Technology Research and Development (ETR&D), 55(2), 117–145.CrossRef

Zhang, J., Scardamalia, M., Reeve, R., & Messina, R. (2009). Designs for collective cognitive responsibility in knowledge building communities. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 18(1), 7–44.CrossRef

Zhang, J., Chen, M.-H., Tao, D., Lee, J. Sun, Y., & Judson, D. (2015). Fostering sustained Knowledge Building through metadiscourse aided by the Idea Thread Mapper. In T. Koschmann, P. Häkkinen, & P. Tchounikine (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL 2015). International Society of the Learning Sciences.

Titel: Group-level formative feedback and metadiscourse
verfasst von: Monica Resendes
Marlene Scardamalia
Carl Bereiter
Bodong Chen
Cindy Halewood
Publikationsdatum: 01.09.2015
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning / Ausgabe 3/2015
Print ISSN: 1556-1607
Elektronische ISSN: 1556-1615
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-015-9219-x

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2015

Collaborative group engagement in a computer-supported inquiry learning environment

Conceptualizing the intersubjective group

A Habermasian perspective on joint meaning making online: What does it offer and what are the difficulties?

Learning to learn together with CSCL tools

Naomi Miyake: 1949–2015