Traversing planes of learning

Learning, cognition and knowledge building can be analyzed at multiple units of analysis. For instance, analyses of CSCL are often conducted on one of three levels: individual learning, small-group cognition or community knowledge building. One can identify and analyze important processes taking place at each of these levels of description. This tripartite distinction is grounded in the practices of CSCL. With its focus on collaborative learning, CSCL naturally emphasizes providing support for dyads and small groups working together. In practice, CSCL small-group activities are often orchestrated within a classroom context by providing some initial time for individual activities (such as background reading or homework drill), followed by the small-group work, and then culminating in whole-class sharing of group findings. Thus, the typical classroom practices tend to create three distinguishable levels of activity. Often, the teacher sees the group work as a warm-up or stimulation and preparation for the whole-class discussion, facilitated directly by the teacher. Conversely, the importance of testing individual performance and valuing individual learning positions the group work as a training ground for the individual participants, who are then assessed on their own, outside of the collaborative context. In both of these ways, group cognition tends to be treated as secondary to either individual or community goals. By contrast, the role of intersubjective learning is foundational in Vygotsky (1930/1978), the seminal theoretical source for CSCL. Regardless of which is taken as primary, the three planes are actualized in CSCL practice, and the matter of their relative roles and connections becomes subsequently problematic for CSCL theory (Dillenbourg et al. 1996; Rogoff 1995; Stahl 2006). While these different units, levels, dimensions or planes are intrinsically intertwined, research efforts generally focus on only one of them and current analytic methodologies are designed for only one. Furthermore, there is little theoretical understanding of how the different planes are connected. To the extent that researchers discuss the connections among levels, they rely upon commonsensical notions of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (2012) 7:467–473 DOI 10.1007/s11412-012-9159-7

[1]  Sten R. Ludvigsen,et al.  Student sensemaking with science diagrams in a computer-based setting , 2013, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[2]  J. Chatwin Conversation analysis. , 2004, Complementary therapies in medicine.

[3]  Jacques Lonchamp,et al.  Supporting synchronous collaborative learning: A generic, multi-dimensional model , 2006, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[4]  E. Tiryakian,et al.  Theoretical Sociology: Perspectives and Developments. , 1970 .

[5]  Lucy Suchman Plans and situated actions: the problem of human-machine communication , 1987 .

[6]  Gerry Stahl,et al.  Ethnomethodologically informed , 2012, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[7]  Jacques Lonchamp A three-level analysis of collaborative learning in dual-interaction spaces , 2009, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[8]  Lev Vygotsky Mind in society , 1978 .

[9]  David M. Nichols,et al.  Designing interfaces to support collaboration in information retrieval , 1998, Interact. Comput..

[10]  E. Hutchins Cognition in the wild , 1995 .

[11]  H. Gardner The mind's new science: a history of the cognitive revolution , 1985 .

[12]  Gerry Stahl,et al.  The joint organization of interaction within a multimodal CSCL medium , 2009, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[13]  B. Rogoff Observing sociocultural activity on three planes: participatory appropriation, guided participation, and apprenticeship , 1995 .

[14]  B. Latour Drawing Things Together , 2011 .

[15]  K. K. Cetina,et al.  The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory , 2001 .

[16]  Gerry Stahl,et al.  Welcome to the future: ijCSCL volume 2 , 2007, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[17]  S. Woolgar,et al.  Representation in Scientific Practice , 1990 .

[18]  Nancy Law,et al.  An international research community , 2012, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[19]  P. Dillenbourg,et al.  The evolution of research on collaborative learning , 1996 .

[20]  F. Hesse,et al.  ijCSCL—a journal for research in CSCL , 2006 .

[21]  Per Linell,et al.  Approaching Dialogue: Talk, Interaction and Contexts in Dialogical Perspectives , 1998 .

[22]  David McNeill,et al.  A multimodal approach to coding discourse: Collaboration, distributed cognition, and geometric reasoning , 2011, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[23]  Harold Garfinkel,et al.  On Formal Structures of Practical Actions , 2005 .

[24]  Lucy A. Suchman,et al.  Plans and Situated Actions: The Problem of Human-Machine Communication (Learning in Doing: Social, , 1987 .

[25]  J. Wertsch,et al.  Sociocultural studies of mind: Human action: historical and theoretical foundations , 1995 .

[26]  Carlos Caldeira,et al.  Group Cognition: Computer Support for Building Collaborative Knowledge (Acting with Technology) , 2006 .

[27]  Jacques Lonchamp,et al.  An instrumental perspective on CSCL systems , 2012, International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning.

[28]  Hans Spada,et al.  Learning in Humans and Machines: Towards an Interdisciplinary Learning Science , 1995 .

[29]  E. Wenger,et al.  Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation in Communities of Practice , 1991 .

[30]  Martin Wessner,et al.  The CSCL community in its first decade: development, continuity, connectivity , 2006, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[31]  Nina Bonderup Dohn Affordances revisited: Articulating a Merleau-Pontian view , 2009, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..