Extending the joint problem space: time and sequence as essential features of knowledge building

Our attempts at describing the processes involved in learning and knowledge building activities depend on our ways of conceptualizing the context in which such activities take place. Here we trace the development of the concept of "problem space" from its inception within the information-processing perspective as a characterization of individual problem-solving activity. We review reformulations and extensions made to the concept within the Learning Sciences, and explore them as attempts to better describe small-group interactions in complex knowledge-building contexts. Using a detailed analysis of sustained, online collaborative problem solving activity, we propose that a new aspect of the problem space needs to be carefully considered in order to fully account for these kinds of experiences: temporal and sequential orientation to inter-subjective meaning making.

[1]  E. Goffman,et al.  Forms of talk , 1982 .

[2]  Hans Spada,et al.  Barriers and Biases in Computer-Mediated Knowledge Communication , 2005 .

[3]  Marshall Scott Poole,et al.  Handbook of Organizational Change and Innovation , 2004 .

[4]  Brigid Barron.  When Smart Groups Fail , 2003 .

[5]  S JOURARD.  HOW DO PEOPLE LEARN? , 1964, The Canadian nurse.

[6]  M. Scardamalia,et al.  Higher Levels of Agency for Children in Knowledge Building: A Challenge for the Design of New Knowledge Media , 1991 .

[7]  Gerry Stahl,et al.  Group creativity in virtual math teams: interactional mechanisms for referencing, remembering and bridging , 2007, C&C '07.

[8]  R. Sternberg,et al.  Recognizing, defining, and representing problems. , 2003 .

[9]  Stephanie D. Teasley.  Constructing a Joint Problem Space: The Computer as a Tool for Sharing Knowledge , 1993 .

[10]  K. McGilly,et al.  Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice. , 1994 .

[11]  Johan F. Hoorn,et al.  Distributed cognition , 2005, Cognition, Technology & Work.

[12]  M. Chi,et al.  Learning from collaborative problem solving: An analysis of three hypothesized Mechanisms , 2004 .

[13]  Timothy Koschmann,et al.  How Do People Learn , 2005 .

[14]  R. A. Engle.  Framing Interactions to Foster Generative Learning: A Situative Explanation of Transfer in a Community of Learners Classroom , 2006 .

[15]  D. Kirsh.  Problem Solving and Situated Cognition , 2009 .

[16]  Peter Reimann,et al.  Time is precious: why process analysis is essential for CSCL (and can also help to bridge between experimental and descriptive methods) , 2007, CSCL.

[17]  Brigid Barron.  Achieving Coordination in Collaborative Problem-Solving Groups , 2000 .

[18]  A. Newell.  Reasoning, problem solving, and decision processes: the problem space as a fundamental category , 1993 .

[19]  Gerry Stahl,et al.  Sustaining Group Cognition in a Math Chat Environment , 2006, Res. Pract. Technol. Enhanc. Learn..

[20]  R. Keith Sawyer,et al.  Group Creativity: Music, Theater, Collaboration , 2003 .

[21]  P. Robbins,et al.  The Cambridge Handbook of Situated Cognition , 2001 .

[22]  H. Simon,et al.  What makes some problems really hard: Explorations in the problem space of difficulty , 1990, Cognitive Psychology.

[23]  Gerry Stahl,et al.  Group Cognition: Computer Support for Building Collaborative Knowledge (Acting with Technology) , 2006 .

[24]  Rupert Wegerif,et al.  A dialogic understanding of the relationship between CSCL and teaching thinking skills , 2005, CSCL.

[25]  J. Lemke.  The Long and the Short of It: Comments on Multiple Timescale Studies of Human Activity , 2001 .

[26]  G. Salomon.  Distributed cognitions : psychological and educational considerations , 1997 .

[27]  Janet E. Davidson,et al.  The psychology of problem solving , 2003 .

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

[29]  J. Roschelle.  Learning by Collaborating: Convergent Conceptual Change , 1992 .

[30]  R. A. Engle,et al.  Guiding Principles for Fostering Productive Disciplinary Engagement: Explaining an Emergent Argument in a Community of Learners Classroom , 2002 .

[31]  Allen Newell,et al.  Human Problem Solving. , 1973 .

[32]  H. Garfinkel.  Studies in Ethnomethodology , 1968 .

[33]  Etienne Wenger,et al.  Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation , 1991 .

[34]  D. Perkins.  Person plus: A distributed view of thinking and learning , 1994 .

[35]  Talcott Parsons,et al.  Working papers in the theory of action , 1981 .

[36]  Holly Arrow,et al.  Time, Change, and Development , 2004 .

[37]  Ann L. Brown,et al.  Guided discovery in a community of learners. , 1994 .

[38]  A. Sfard.  On Two Metaphors for Learning and the Dangers of Choosing Just One , 1998 .

[39]  Daniel L. Schwartz,et al.  The Emergence of Abstract Representations in Dyad Problem Solving , 1995 .

[40]  Martin Wessner,et al.  Designing an online service for a math community , 2006 .

[41]  Martin Wessner,et al.  Shared referencing of mathematical objects in online chat , 2006 .

[42]  E. Salas,et al.  Team cognition : understanding the factors that drive process and performance , 2004 .

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

[44]  Victor Kaptelinin,et al.  Group Cognition Computer Support for Building Collaborative Knowledge , 2007 .