Weitere Kapitel dieses Buchs durch Wischen aufrufen
Learning takes place in a social context, shaping and shaped by discourses. In online projects such as the Schome Park Programme, these discourses are material-semiotic practices that make use of writing and other manifestations of digital literacies. Discourses include traceable patterns with linguistic features of distinctive forms and functions. Employing a sociocultural perspective of discourse as mediated interaction (Scollon, Mediated discourse as social interaction: a study of news discourse. Longman, London/New York, 1998), we identify use of register and cohesive ties as salient to the practices of learning communities. The study reported here focuses on two groups of teenagers, one a formal learning community based in the USA, the other a larger, online, informal learning community based in the UK. The groups were originally only weakly tied within a network, but aimed to work together within the virtual world environment, despite some different aims. Working with McMillan’s (J Community Psychol, 24(4):315–325, 1996) concept of community as characterised by spirit, authority, trade and art, we illustrate how misalignments in register and problems with cohesive ties can be associated with difficulties in the cooperative learning enterprise and we also make recommendations for future practice.
Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten
Sie möchten Zugang zu diesem Inhalt erhalten? Dann informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:
Bandura, A. (1971). Social learning theory. Morristown: General Learning Press.
Bell, C., & Newby, H. (1971). Community studies: An introduction to the sociology of the local community (Studies in sociology). London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd.
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). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. CrossRef
Claxton, G. (2002). Education for the learning age: A sociocultural approach to learning to learn. In G. Wells & G. Claxton (Eds.), Learning for life in the 21st century (pp. 21–34). Oxford: Blackwell.
Conole, G. (2008). New schemas for mapping pedagogies and technologies. Ariadne, 56. http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue56/conole/56
Edwards, D., & Mercer, N. (1989). Common knowledge: The development of understanding in the classroom. London: Routledge.
Ferguson, R. (2009). The construction of shared knowledge through asynchronous dialogue. Ph.D. thesis, The Open University, Milton Keynes. http://oro.open.ac.uk/19908/
Ferguson, R., & Buckingham Shum, S. (2011). Towards a social learning space for open educational resources. In A. Okada, T. Connolly, & P. Scott (Eds.), Collaborative learning 2.0 – Open educational resources. Hershey: IGI Global.
Gee, J. P. (1996). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourses (2nd ed.). London: Taylor & Francis.
Gillen, J. (2009). Literacy practices in Schome Park: A virtual literacy ethnography. Journal of Research in Reading, 32(1), 57–74. CrossRef
Gillen, J. (2012). Archaeology in a virtual world: Schome Park. In R. Jones (Ed.), Discourse and creativity. Harlow: Pearson.
Gillen, J., & Merchant, G. (2012). From virtual histories to virtual literacies. In G. Merchant, J. Gillen, J. Marsh, & J. Davies (Eds.), Virtual literacies: Interactive spaces for children and young people (pp. 9–26). New York: Routledge.
Gillen, J., Ferguson, R., Peachey, A., & Twining, P. (2012a). Distributed cognition in a virtual world. Language and Education (Special Issue: Literacies and Sites of Learning), 26(2), 151–167.
Gillen, J., Ferguson, R., Peachey, A., & Twining, P. (2012b). Seeking planning permission to build a Gothic cathedral on a virtual island. In G. Merchant, J. Gillen, J. Marsh, & J. Davies (Eds.), Virtual literacies: Interactive spaces for children and young people (Routledge research in education). New York: Routledge. 190–207.
Goodfellow, R. (2003). Virtual learning communities: A report for the National College for School Leadership. http://kn.open.ac.uk/
Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. The American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360–1380. CrossRef
Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1985). Language, context, and text: Aspects of language in a social-semiotic perspective. Deakin: Deakin University.
Hayles, N. K. (1990). How we became posthuman: Virtual bodies in cybernetics, literature and informatics. London: The University of Chicago Press.
Haythornthwaite, C., & de Laat, M. (2010, May 3–4). Social networks and learning networks: Using social network perspectives to understand social learning. In L. Dirckinck-Holmfeld, V. Hodgson, C. Jones, M. De Laat, D. McConnell, & T. Ryberg (Eds.), 7th international conference on networked learning. Aalborg: Centre for Learning Sciences and Technologies.
Hick, D. (1996). Discourse, learning, and schooling. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossRef
Jones, Q. (1997). Virtual communities, virtual settlements and cyber-archaeology: A theoretical outline. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 3(3). unpaged, Available online at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.10836101.1997.tb00075.x/full
Jones, C. (2004). Networks and learning: Communities, practices and the metaphor of networks. The Journal of the Association for Learning Technology (ALT-J): Research in Learning Technology, 12(1), 82–93.
Jones, A., & Preece, J. (2006). Online communities for teachers and lifelong learners: A framework for comparing similarities and identifying differences in communities of practice and communities of interest. International Journal of Learning Technology, 2(2–3), 112–137. CrossRef
Kumpulainen, K., & Kaartinen, S. (2000). Situational mechanisms of peer group interaction in collaborative meaning-making: Processes and conditions for learning. European Journal of Psychology of Education, XV(4), 431–454. CrossRef
McMillan, D. W. (1996). Sense of community. Journal of Community Psychology, 24(4), 315–325. CrossRef
Mercer, N. (2000). Words minds: How we use language to think together. London: Routledge. CrossRef
Scollon, R. (1998). Mediated discourse as social interaction: A study of news discourse. London/New York: Longman.
Sheehy, K., Ferguson, R., & Clough, G. (2007). Learning and teaching in the panopticon: Ethical and social issues in creating a virtual educational environment. International Journal of Social Sciences, 2(2), 89–96.
Sheehy, K., Ferguson, R., & Clough, G. (Eds.). (2010). Virtual worlds: Controversies at the frontier of education (Education in a competitive and globalizing world). New York: Nova Science.
Sinclair, J. M., & Coulthard, R. M. (1975). Towards an analysis of discourse: The English used by teachers and pupils. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Twining, P. (2010). When educational worlds collide. In K. Sheehy, R. Ferguson, & G. Clough (Eds.), Virtual worlds: Controversies at the frontier of education (pp. 125–142). New York: Nova.
Vavoula, G. (2004). KLeOS: A knowledge and learning organisation system in support of lifelong learning. Ph.D. thesis, University of Birmingham, Birmingham.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). The development of scientific concepts in childhood (N. Minick, Trans.). In R. W. Rieber, & A. S. Carton (Eds.), The collected works of L S Vygotsky (Vol. 1, pp. 167–243). New York: Plenum Press. (Original publication, 1934, written between 1929 and 1934.)
Walsh, M. (2006). The ‘textual shift’: Examining the reading process with print, visual and multimodal texts. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 29(1), 24–37.
Walton, A., Weller, M., & Conole, G. (2008). Social: Learn widening participation and sustainability of higher education. In EDEN 2008: Annual conference of the European distance and e-learning network, Lisbon, Portugal.
Wells, G., & Claxton, G. (Eds.). (2002). Learning for life in the 21st century. Oxford: Blackwell.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossRef
Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
- The Strength of Cohesive Ties: Discursive Construction of an Online Learning Community
- Springer London
- Chapter 5
Neuer Inhalt/© Filograph | Getty Images | iStock