Abstract
Research analysis usually focuses on terms of negotiation –argument, conflict, agreement, disagreement- as indications of collaborative learning. The reported research suggests that the latter can also exist in terms of prompting and inspiring and in terms of negotiation. To that purpose, a study of computer supported collaborative learning has taken place in a Virtual Learning Community (VLC), in the frame of an authentic educational activity. Analysis of discourse and artifacts was conducted. The nature of the dialogues in the reported VLC seems to be a special form of discourse addressing community context, mainly characterized by prompting and inspiring while less of negotiation and conflicts. Furthermore, the suggested rethinking can be the shift to the kind of discourse that researchers are seeking for, as the form of changing in VLCs.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.References
Annansingh, F. (2019). Mind the gap: Cognitive active learning in virtual learning environment perception of instructors and students. Education and Information Technologies, 24, 3669–3688. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09949-5.
Avouris, N., Dimitracopoulou, A., & Komis, V. (2003). On analysis of collaborative sroblem solving: An object-oriented approach. Computers in Human Behavior, 19, 147–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0747-5632(02)00056-0.
Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). Speech genres and other late essays. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Bereiter, C. (1994). Implications of postmodernism for science, or, science as progressive discourse. Educational Psychologist, 29(1), 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2901_1.
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (2018). Fixing humpty-dumpty: Putting higher-order skills and knowledge together again. In L. Kerslake & R. Wegerif (Eds.), Theory of teaching thinking: International perspectives (pp. 72–87). London: Routledge.
Bielaczyc, K., & Collins, A. (1999). Learning communities in classrooms: A reconceptualization of educational practice. In Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (Vol. 2, pp. 269–292).
Bielaczyc, K., & Collins, A. (2006). Fostering knowledge-creating communities. In A. M. O’Donnell, C. E. Hmelo-Silver, & G. Erkens (Eds.), Collaborative learning, reasoning, and technology (pp. 37–60). London: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Bielaczyc, K., Kapur, M., & Collins, A. (2013). Cultivating a community of learners in K-12 classrooms. In C. E. Hmelo-Silver, A. M. O’Donnell, C. Chan, & C. A. Chinn (Eds.), International handbook of collaborative learning (pp. 233–249). Taylor & Francis, Inc.
Brailas, A., Koskinas, K., & Alexias, G. (2017). Teaching to emerge: Toward a bottom-up pedagogy. Cogent Education, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2017.1377506.
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, S. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18, 32–42. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X018001032.
Chan, C., Burtis, J., & Bereiter, C. (1997). Knowledge building as a mediator of conflict in conceptual change. Cognition and Instruction, 15(1), 1–40. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci1501_1.
Chen, B., Scardamalia, M., Resendes, M., Chuy, M., & Bereiter, C. (2012). Students’ intuitive understanding of promisingness and promisingness judgments to facilitate knowledge advancement. In The future of learning: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS 2012) (Vol. 1, pp. 111–118).
Chen, B., Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2015). Advancing knowledge-building discourse through judgments of promising ideas. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 10(4), 345–366. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-015-9225-z.
Cole, M. (1996). Cultural psychology: A once and future discipline. Cambridge: Belknap Press.
Cole, M., & Engeström, Y. (1993). A cultural - historical approach to distributed cognition. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed Cognition’s - psychological and educational consideration (pp. 1–47). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cole, M., Engeström, Y., Sannino, A., Gutiérrez, K., Jurow, S., Packer, M., Penuel, W. R., Johnson, R., Severance, S., Leary, H., & Miller, S. (2014). Toward an argumentative grammar for socio-cultural/cultural-historical activity approaches to design research. In J. L. Polman, E. A. Kyza, K. O'Neill, I. Tabak, W. R. Penuel, A. S. Jurow, K. O'Connor, T. Lee, & L. D'Amico (Eds.), Learning and becoming in practice: The International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS) 2014 (Vol. 3, pp. 1254–1263). Boulder: International Society of the Learning Sciences. https://doi.org/10.22318/icls2014.1254.
Collins, I., Singer J., Tenney, M., Thomasson, A., & Yavorcik, C. (2011). Online collaboration for the masses: A user study of Google docs, Final Project, Understanding and Serving Users, Fall 2011. Retrieved from http://carinyavorcik.com/GoogleDocsUserStudy.pdf.
Dekeyser, S. & Watson, R. (2006). Extending Google docs to collaborate on research papers. University of Southern Queensland, Australia, 23, 2008.
Emerson, C. (1983). The outer word and inner speech: Bakhtin, Vygotsky, and the internalization of language. Critical Inquiry, 10(2), 245–264.
Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Orienta-Konsultit: Helsinki.
Engeström, Y. (2008). From design experiments to formative interventions, ICLS'08 Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on International Conference for The Learning Sciences (Vol. 1, pp. 3–24). Utrecht, NL.
Engeström, Y. (2011). From design experiments to formative interventions. Theory & Psychology, 21(5), 598–628. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354311419252.
Engeström, R. (2014a). The interplay of developmental and dialogical epistemologies. Outlines. Critical Practice Studies, 15(2), 119–138.
Engeström, Y. (2014b). Learning by expanding. Cambridge University Press.
Engeström, Y., & Sannino, A. (2010). Studies of expansive learning: Foundations, findings and future challenges. Educational Research Review, 5(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2009.12.002.
Erkens, M., Bodemer, D., & Hoppe, H. U. (2016). Improving collaborative learning in the classroom: Text mining based grouping and representing. ijcscl, 11(4). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-016-9243-5.
Felton, M., Garcia-Mila, M., Villarroel, C., & Gilabert, S. (2015). Arguing collaboratively: Argumentative discourse types and their potential for knowledge building. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(3), 372–386. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12078.
Foster, L., Neuer Colburn, A., & Briggs, C. (2018). Language & online learning: Inform, inspire and engage virtual learning communities. The Journal of Counselor Preparation and Supervision, 11(1). Retrieved from https://repository.wcsu.edu/jcps/vol11/iss1/6.
Fu, E. L., van Aalst, J., & Chan, C. K. (2016). Toward a classification of discourse patterns in asynchronous online discussions. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 11(4), 441–478. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-016-9245-3.
Furberg, A. (2016). Teacher support in computer-supported lab work: Bridging the gap between lab experiments and students’ conceptual understanding. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 11(1), 89–113. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-016-9229-3.
Gan, Y., & Zhu, Z. (2007). A learning framework for knowledge building and collective wisdom advancement in virtual learning communities. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 10(1), 206–226.
Greiffenhagen, C. (2012). Making rounds: The routine work of the teacher during collaborative learning with computers. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 7(1), 11–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-011-9134-8.
Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action Volume 1. Reason and the rationalization of society (T. McCarthy, trans.). Boston: Beacon.
Hod, Y., Charles, E., Bielaczyc, K., Kapur, M., Acosta, A., Ben-Zvi, D., Chen, M., Choi, K., Dugdale, M., Kali, Y., Lenton, K., McDonald, S. P., Moher, T., Quintana, R. M., Rook, M. M., Slotta, J. D., Tietjen, P., Weiss, P. T., Whittaker, C., & Zhang, J. (2016). Future learning spaces for learning communities: New directions and conceptual frameworks. In C. K. Looi, J. L. Polman, U. Cress, & P. Reimann (Eds.), Transforming learning, empowering learners: The international conference of the learning sciences (ICLS) (Vol. 2, pp. 1063–1070). Singapore: International Society of the Learning Sciences. https://doi.org/10.22318/icls2016.167.
Hod, Y., Bielaczyc, K., & Ben-Zvi, D. (2018). Revisiting learning communities: Innovations in theory and practice. Instructional Science, 46(4), 489–506. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-018-9467-z.
Horkheimer, M. (2004). Eclipse of reason. NY: Continuum.
Khanlari, A., Resendes, M., Zhu, G., & Scardamalia, M. (2017). Productive knowledge building discourse through student-generated questions. In B. K. Smith, M. Borge, E. Mercier, & K. Y. Lim (Eds.), Making a difference: Prioritizing equity and access in CSCL, 12th international conference on computer supported collaborative learning (CSCL) 2017 (Vol. 2, pp. 585–588). Philadelphia: International Society of the Learning Sciences. https://doi.org/10.22318/cscl2017.84.
Khoo, M., & Stahl, G. (2015). Constructing knowledge: A community of practice framework for evaluation in the VMT project. In Proceedings exploring the material conditions of learning: The Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) conference 2015 (Vol. 1, pp. 126–133). Gothenburg: The International Society of the Learning Sciences. https://doi.org/10.22318/cscl2015.171.
Kim, B., Tan, L., & Bielaczyc, K. (2015). Learner-generated designs in participatory culture: What they are and how they are shaping learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 23(5), 545–555. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2015.1067974.
Komis, V., Avouris, N., & Fidas, C. (2002). Computer supported collaborative concept mapping: Study of interaction. Education and Information Technologies, 2002, 7(2), 169–188. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020309927987.
Kuuti, K. (1996). Activity theory as a potential framework for human computer interaction research. In B. Nardi (Ed.), Context and consciousness: Activity theory and human computer interaction (pp. 17–44). Cambridge: MIT Press.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. NY: Cambridge University Press.
Leontyev, A. (2009). Activity and consciousness. Marxists internet archive. Retrieved from http://marxistsfr.org/archive/leontev/works/activity-consciousness.pdf.
Leontyev, A. (n.d.). Activity, Consciousness, Personality (E. P. Xenopoulos transl.), Athens: Ger. Anagnostidis.
Medina, R., & Stahl, G. (2019). Analysis of group practices. In U. Cress, C. Rosé, A. Wise, & J. Oshima (Eds.), International handbook of computer-supported collaborative learning. New York: Springer.
Paavola, S., & Haakarinen, K. (2005). The knowledge creation metaphor – An emergent epistemological approach to learning. Science & Education, Springer, 14(6), 535–557. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-004-5157-0.
Radkowitsch, A., Vogel, F., & Fischer, F. (2020). Good for learning, bad for motivation? A meta-analysis on the effects of computer-supported collaboration scripts. International Journal of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, 15, 5–47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-020-09316-4.
Sannino, A., & Engeström, Y. (2018). Cultural-historical activity theory. Cultural-Historical Psychology, 14(3), 43–56. https://doi.org/10.17759/chp.2018140305.
Scardamalia, M. (2002). Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. In B. Smith (Ed.), Liberal education in a knowledge society (pp. 67–98). Chicago: Open Court.
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1993). Technologies for knowledge-building discourse. Communications of the ACM, 36(5), 37–41. https://doi.org/10.1145/155049.155056.
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1994). Computer support for knowledge-building communities. The Journal of Learning Sciences, 3(3), 265–283. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0303_3.
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2006). Knowledge building: Theory, pedagogy, and technology. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 97–118). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2010). A brief history of knowledge building. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology/La revue canadienne de l’apprentissage et de la technologie, 36(1).
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2014). Knowledge building and knowledge creation: Theory, pedagogy and technology. In The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 397–417).
Schwarz, B., & Baker, M. (2017). Dialogue, argumentation and education: History, theory and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Slakmon, B., & Schwarz, B. B. (2019). Deliberative emotional talk. International Journal of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, 14(2), 185–217. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-019-09304-3.
Sokolov, A. (1972). Inner speech and thought. New York: Plenum Press.
Stahl, G. (2000). A model of collaborative knowledge-building. In B. Fishman & S. O'Connor-Divelbiss (Eds.), Fourth international conference of the learning sciences (pp. 70–77). Mahwah: Erlbaum.
Stahl, G. (2013). Theories of cognition in collaborative learning. In The international handbook of collaborative learning (pp. 86–102). NY: Routledge.
Stahl, G., & Hakkarainen, K. (2019). Theories of CSCL. In U. Cress, C. Rosé, A. Wise, & J. Oshima (Eds.), International handbook of computer-supported collaborative learning. New York: Springer.
Stein, S. J., Isaacs, G., & Andrews, T. (2004). Incorporating authentic learning experiences within a university course. Studies in Higher Education, 29(2), 239–258. https://doi.org/10.1080/0307507042000190813.
Tchounikine, P. (2019). Learners’ agency and CSCL technologies: Towards an emancipatory perspective. International Journal of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, 14(2), 237–250. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-019-09302-5.
Tissenbaum, M., & Slotta, J. (2019). Supporting classroom orchestration with real-time feedback: A role for teacher dashboards and real-time agents. International Journal of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, 14(2), 325–351. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-019-09306-1.
Tzanavaris, S. (2015). Collaborative learning in virtual communities: Socio-psychological and pedagogical approach. (Doctoral thesis, Panteion University, Dept of Psychology, Athens).
Tzanavaris, S. P., Sepetis, A., & Tzanavaris, S. T. (2009). Collaboration in social networks: The problem solving activity leading to interaction – ‘Struggle’ Analysis Framework (SAF). In J. Bourdeau, R. Mizoguchi, S. Isotani, B. Wasson, W. Q. Chen, & J. Jovanovic (Eds.), Proceedings of workshop on intelligent and innovative support for collaborative learning activities. 9th International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL2009) (pp. 27–36). Rhodes: International Society of the Learning Sciences.
Vandeyar, T. (2020). The academic turn: Social media in higher education. Education and Information Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10240-1.
Vygotsky, L. S. (2000). Mind in society. The development of higher psychological proccesses (A. Bibou & S. Vosniadou, Transl.). Athens: Gutenberg.
Vygotsky, L. S. (2008). Thought & language (A. Rodi, Transl.). Athens: Gnosi.
Walton, D. (2009). Burden of proof in deliberation dialogs. In International workshop on argumentation in multi-agent systems (pp. 1–22). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-12805-9_1.
Zhang, J., Scardamalia, M., Lamon, M., Messina, R., & Reeve, R. (2007). Socio-cognitive dynamics of knowledge building in the work of 9- and 10- year old, Educational Technology. Research and Development, 55(2), 117–145. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-006-9019-0.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethical approval
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Human and animal rights
This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.
Informed consent
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Conflicts of interest
None.
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tzanavaris, S., Nikiforos, S., Mouratidis, D. et al. Virtual Learning Communities (VLCs) rethinking: From negotiation and conflict to prompting and inspiring. Educ Inf Technol 26, 257–278 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10270-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10270-9