Participatory practices: Lessons learnt from two initiatives using online digital technologies to build knowledge

This study drew on data from two different initiatives in which groups of participants were asked to work together to build knowledge. In the first initiative school students were asked to discuss ethical issues in science, using a moderated online discussion board and in the second, researchers in the field of Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL) used a wiki to develop a vision statement. Despite the different contexts and purposes of the initiatives, the outcomes were remarkably similar in terms of a) the extent and patterns of contributions and b) the quality of the contributions. In both, there was some level of success in that the intended outcome was reached. However, in both, there were fewer contributions than anticipated and the quality of a large proportion of the contributions was disappointing. It is suggested that the reasons for this are related to four factors; the socio-cultural setting, the nature of the knowledge that was being built, the tools used and the way the activity was set up (including setting shared goals).

[1]  P. Dillenbourg.  What do you mean by collaborative learning , 1999 .

[2]  M. Joubert,et al.  Discussing Ethical Issues in School Science: An investigation into the opportunities to practise and develop arguments offered by online and face‐to‐face discussions , 2011 .

[3]  Daniel D. Suthers,et al.  Technology affordances for intersubjective meaning making: A research agenda for CSCL , 2006, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[4]  LuAnn Bean,et al.  Wiki: A speedy new tool to manage projects , 2005 .

[5]  Sarah Ann Long.  Exploring the wiki world: the new face of collaboration , 2006 .

[6]  Roy D. Pea,et al.  Seeing What We Build Together: Distributed Multimedia Learning Environments for Transformative Communications , 1994 .

[7]  Curtis J. Bonk,et al.  Content analysis of online discussion in an applied educational psychology course , 2000 .

[8]  M. Scardamalia,et al.  Knowledge Building: Theory, Pedagogy, and Technology , 2006 .

[9]  M. J. W. Thomas,et al.  Learning within incoherent structures: the space of online discussion forums , 2002, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[10]  Don Fallis,et al.  Toward an epistemology of Wikipedia , 2008, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[11]  J. Lanier.  Edge; DIGITAL MAOISM: The Hazards of the New Online Collectivism By Jaron Lanier , 2010 .

[12]  Deepak Ramachandran,et al.  Trust and Online Reputation Systems , 2009, Computing with Social Trust.

[13]  Qiyun Wang,et al.  Comparing asynchronous online discussions and face-to-face discussions in a classroom setting , 2007, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[14]  R. Oxford.  Cooperative Learning, Collaborative Learning, and Interaction: Three Communicative Strands in the Language Classroom , 1997 .

[15]  Wendy A. Kellogg,et al.  Social translucence: an approach to designing systems that support social processes , 2000, TCHI.

[16]  P. Anderson.  What is Web 2.0? Ideas, technologies and implications for education , 2007 .

[17]  Jim Hewitt,et al.  An investigation of student practices in asynchronous computer conferencing courses , 2010, Comput. Educ..

[18]  Steven R. Aragon.  Creating Social Presence in Online Environments , 2003 .

[19]  Benjamin Kehrwald,et al.  Understanding social presence in text‐based online learning environments , 2008 .

[20]  Catalina Danis,et al.  A wiki instance in the enterprise: opportunities, concerns and reality , 2008, CSCW.

[21]  Darren Gergle,et al.  Effects of four computer-mediated communications channels on trust development , 2002, CHI.

[22]  C. Tu,et al.  The Relationship of Social Presence and Interaction in Online Classes , 2002 .

[23]  Lada A. Adamic,et al.  Individual Focus and Knowledge Contribution , 2010, First Monday.

[24]  M. Scardamalia,et al.  Designs for Collective Cognitive Responsibility in Knowledge-Building Communities , 2009 .

[25]  K. Sterelny.  Externalism, Epistemic Artefacts and The Extended Mind , 2004 .

[26]  M. Reiss,et al.  Key Issues in Bioethics a Guide for Teachers , 2003 .

[27]  S. Erduran,et al.  TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin's Argument Pattern for studying science discourse , 2004 .

[28]  Sheng-Yi Wu,et al.  Analyzing the social knowledge construction behavioral patterns of an online synchronous collaborative discussion instructional activity using an instant messaging tool: A case study , 2011, Comput. Educ..

[29]  Charalambos Vrasidas,et al.  E-moderating: the key to online teaching and learning , 2013 .

[30]  Batya Friedman,et al.  Trust online , 2000, CACM.

[31]  Theresa Kwong,et al.  Creating interaction in online learning : a case study , 2007 .

[32]  Peter Gerjets,et al.  Instructional design for effective and enjoyable computer-supported learning , 2006, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[33]  D. Garrison,et al.  Assessing Social Presence In Asynchronous Text-based Computer Conferencing , 1999 .

[34]  Curtis J. Bonk,et al.  Communication in a web-based conferencing system: the quality of computer-mediated interactions , 2003, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[35]  David Coleman,et al.  Collaboration 2.0: Technology and Best Practices for Successful Collaboration in a Web 2.0 World , 2008 .

[36]  Doug Vogel,et al.  e-collaboration: the reality of virtuality , 2002 .

[37]  Ann Majchrzak,et al.  Enabling Customer-Centricity Using Wikis and the Wiki Way , 2006, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[38]  Pierre Dillenbourg,et al.  Designing Biases That Augment Socio-Cognitive Interactions , 2005 .

[39]  J. Osborne,et al.  The place of argumentation in the pedagogy of school science , 1999 .

[40]  Balachander Krishnamurthy,et al.  Key differences between Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 , 2008, First Monday.

[41]  A. Sierpińska.  Research in Mathematics Education through a Keyhole: Task Problematization. , 2004 .