Social Network Analysis to Examine Interaction Patterns in Knowledge Building Communities

This paper describes use of social network analysis to examine student interaction patterns in a Grade 5/6 Knowledge Building class. The analysis included face-to-face interactions and interactions in the Knowledge Forum® Knowledge Building environment. It is argued that sociogram data are useful to reveal group processes; in sociological terms, the community lies in the connections among the group. A classroom of unconnected individuals is unlikely to form as a Knowledge Building community; data analyses reported in this study show promise in understanding the dynamics of Knowledge Building in a consistent and measurable way. The strength of the work is not in particular patterns demonstrated but in new forms of assessment and their potential to inform work as it proceeds. The research reported shows that teachers and students are finding social network analysis useful and that through their engagement research-practitioner-engineer teams are better positioned to develop tools to advance Knowledge Building pedagogy.

[1]  Danyel Fisher,et al.  Visualizing the Signatures of Social Roles in Online Discussion Groups , 2007, J. Soc. Struct..

[2]  M. Ruef,et al.  Strong ties, weak ties and islands: structural and cultural predictors of organizational innovation , 2002 .

[3]  Alain Degenne,et al.  Introducing Social Networks , 1999 .

[4]  W. Ong.  Orality and literacy , 1982 .

[5]  Caroline Haythornthwaite,et al.  Strong, Weak, and Latent Ties and the Impact of New Media , 2002, Inf. Soc..

[6]  Huang-Yao Hong,et al.  Knowledge Society Network: Toward a Dynamic, Sustained Network for Building Knowledge , 2010 .

[7]  S. Wasserman,et al.  Social Network Analysis: Computer Programs , 1994 .

[8]  Rena M. Palloff,et al.  Lessons from the Cyberspace Classroom: The Realities of Online Teaching , 2001 .

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

[10]  John Skvoretz,et al.  Relations, Species, and Network Structure , 2002, J. Soc. Struct..

[11]  L. Lipponen,et al.  Patterns of participation and discourse in elementary students’ computer-supported collaborative learning , 2003 .

[12]  Melanie Barnes,et al.  Critical mass. , 2015, Nursing times.

[13]  David Romm,et al.  Smart World: Breakthrough Creativity and the New Science of Ideas , 2008 .

[14]  Gina Lai,et al.  The tie effect on information dissemination: the spread of a commercial rumor in Hong Kong , 2002, Soc. Networks.

[15]  Nancy Law,et al.  Assessing learning outcomes in CSCL settings , 2005, CSCL.

[16]  M. Scardamalia.  Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge , 2002 .

[17]  Morten T. Hansen,et al.  The Search-Transfer Problem: The Role of Weak Ties in Sharing Knowledge across Organization Subunits , 1999 .

[18]  Carl Bereiter,et al.  Education and Mind in the Knowledge Age , 2002 .

[19]  Mark S. Granovetter.  The Strength of Weak Ties , 1973, American Journal of Sociology.

[20]  I. E. Allen,et al.  Growing by Degrees: Online Education in the United States, 2005. , 2005 .

[21]  Andrew Parker,et al.  Making Invisible Work Visible , 2002 .