Conference PaperPDF Available

Developing participatory learning practices when studying the learning sciences: A theoretical framework and its pedagogical implications.

Authors:
66
Developing Participatory Learning Practices when Studying the Learning Sciences
Developing Participatory Learning
Practices when Studying the
Learning Sciences: A Theoretical
Framework and its Pedagogical
Implications
Yotam Hod and Dani Ben-zvi
University of Haifa, LINKS I-CORE
Introduction
Over the past 20 years, the learning sciences has become an inuential discipline
in education on how people learn (Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 2000), advancing
learning research into real use as technology has proliferated (Kolodner, 2012),
and producing ideas that are at the heart of a robust movement to reform education
(Darling-Hammond et al., 2009). Graduate courses and programs of the learning
sciences that have sprung up worldwide (e.g., Network of Academic Programs in the
Learning Sciences - NAPLES) have sought to teach the next generation of scholars
and practitioners the complexity of this discipline (e.g., Ronen-Fuhrmann, Kali, &
Hoadley,2008).Yet,thisremainsachallengingtaskgiventhedifcultyofdeepening
novices’ often naive or traditional understandings on learning (Rogoff, 1994).
Based on our own extended experiences in a graduate level course that has a goal
of teaching the learning sciences, we1 have developed an innovative pedagogical
model where students learn about the science of learning through the prism of their
own experiences. This is based on the view that learning involves enculturation of
the authentic practices of experts in a discipline (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989;
Scardamalia & Bereiter, 1994). In our unique setting, students participate in an
emerging classroom learning community (LC) (Bielaczyc & Collins, 1999; Brown &
Campione,1994).Astheydothis,theyareguidedtoaskpersonalreectivequestions
about their participatory learning practices – practices relating to the way they
1 Developedandledbythesecondaryauthorofthispaper,andlaterjoinedbytherstauthor
as a researcher and contributor.
67
Yotam Hod Dani Ben-zvi
learn alone or with others – with a focus on the individual and collaborative learning
they experience in the present LC. Students’ informal and personal ideas about these
learning processes are deepened by relating them to the learning sciences content that
they study. For example, students may be challenged to collaboratively build their
knowledge on an article about collaboration. Thus, the process of their studies is
integrated with the content.
While this pedagogical approach builds upon an established view of learning by the
learning sciences community that all learning is situated (Sawyer & Greeno, 2006),
upon close investigation we have found a unique phenomenon occurring (reported
inHod& Ben-Zvi,in press).Specically,the deeplearningexperiences thatmany
students were reporting could be described by an adapted theoretical framework
which underlies process-oriented group psychotherapies (henceforth referred to as
just GP).
While the relationship between learning about learning and GP may seem odd at
rst,thereisaninherentconnectionbetweenthesetwo.Inbothcases,deeplearning
isbasedongoingthroughagroupprocessandmakingsenseofitbyreectingupon
it individually and interpersonally (Yalom & Leszcz, 2005). Although GP deals with
a different population of participants and has therapeutic goals, it offers a unique
lens that sheds light on some of the processes involved in learning about the learning
sciences.
Adapting a GP framework to describe learning of
the learning sciences
We have adapted a framework that has been articulated in GP for therapeutic change
into three learning dimensions that include (a) social microcosms, (b) motivation
for change, and (c) changing practices. These adaptations were made to relate
the framework to learning-based research while maintaining the basic principles
underlying GP.
The essence of the framework is based upon social microcosm theory, which is “of
paramount importance in group therapy and is a keystone of the entire approach to
group therapy” (Yalom & Leszcz, 2005, p. 32), and is a widely accepted clinical
68
Developing Participatory Learning Practices when Studying the Learning Sciences
assumption (Markin & Kivlighan, 2008). Social microcosm theory posits that the
group setting serves as a social microcosm, whereby each participant transfers2 their
general relationship pattern in their everyday life to the group situation. When given
the opportunity to interact freely, over time participants’ interpersonal styles from
their everyday lives manifest within the therapeutic group. For example, a person who
is very competitive with others in their everyday life will recreate such competitive
practices in their new social microcosm.
Building upon the social microcosms that manifest, a reective process allows
participants to become aware of their participatory learning practices within their
microcosm, enabling them to decide if they are satised with what they nd, and
if not, empowers them to exercise the will to change it (Yalom & Leszcz, 2005).
Participants may also develop the motivation to change by observing others in the
group and by getting advice from their peers or the moderator about how or what
to change. Moreover, participants may have certain dispositions making them more
or less ready to change (Hod & Ben-Zvi, in press). While all of these contribute to a
person’s motivation to change, ultimately it is up to a person to decide for themselves
if they are willing. This implies that change is deliberate, directed towards a goal, and
is the responsibility of the individual.
Pedagogical and Design Implications
A great deal is already known about the design of LCs based on various descriptions
and syntheses of them. One prominent example is Bielaczyc and Collins' (1999)
14 principles for the design of effective LCs. In relation to these, we offer a design
principle that we believe is innovative in that we do not nd it described in any
relevant literature on LCs, yet is central to ours. As such, an exploration of this
principle on theoretical and pedagogical grounds is important so that future research
can investigate its existence elsewhere. Our principle is based on the process and
content integration that underlies the adapted GP framework. We believe there are
fourcharacteristicsofthisprinciple,brieydescribedhere-in.
2 We use the terms transfer and transference in the context of its use in GP and not in relation
to the concept as it is used commonly in the learning sciences (e.g., Bransford, et al., 2000).
69
Yotam Hod Dani Ben-zvi
Here-and-now reective discourse
Reective here-and-now discourse focuses on eliciting the group’s present
collaborative experience. To do this, the moderator must focus students on sharing
their feelings openly about their present collaborative efforts. This can include, for
example, preventing students from intellectualizing or digressing into past, historical
experiences that are outside the boundaries of the group.
Ill-structured collaborative learning
Instead of being assigned clear and organized tasks, assignments should be ill-
structured, leaving the group members to decide for themselves how much and where
to invest their efforts. Additionally, the moderators’ interventions should challenge the
students to be in a continual search for improvement and deepening of understanding,
evenwhentheycreatedproductsthattheyperceiveasnished.
So that these collaborative experiences are deep, face-to-face sessions are not
enough. Thus, there needs to be a supplement to ftf sessions, otherwise there may be
agroupprocess,butwithoutasufcientexperientialbasistoreect.Assuch,online
collaborative processes can supplement face-to-face meetings so that the community
is continually active, as Fig. 1 illustrates.
Fig. 1 Process-content integration via reection in GP and in our framework
70
Developing Participatory Learning Practices when Studying the Learning Sciences
Technology-enhanced relationship building
So that students can speak openly, honestly, and non-defensively about their own
participatory practices, technology must support relationship-building efforts.
Emergent-design
The emergent-design principle guides decisions of the moderator(s) based on the idea
that they need to be sensitive to the activities of the group and respond accordingly. The
moderator(s) must actively review the events that transpire in each meeting, discuss
theirmeaning,andplanthesubsequentmeetingsbasedontheirinformalndings.
In this presentation, we will further describe these four characteristics and provide
illustrative examples of them to demonstrate our innovative approach. Likewise,
we will show their inter-connectivity in supporting process-content integration. We
believe that this can contribute to graduate programs and courses worldwide seeking
to teach their students the learning sciences, as well as the design of LCs in general.
71
Yotam Hod Dani Ben-zvi
Bibliography
Bielaczyc, K., & Collins, A. (1999). Learning communities in classrooms: A reconceptualization
of educational practice. In C.M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and
models, Vol. II (pp. 269-291). Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How People Learn: Brain, Mind,
Experience, and School (Expanded). Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press.
Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (1994). Guided discovery in a community of learners. In K.
McGilly (Ed.), Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice
(pp. 229-272). Cambridge, U.K.: The MIT Press.
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning.
Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.
Darling-Hammond, L., Wei, R. C., Andree, A., Richardson, N., & Orphanos, S. (2009).
Professional learning in the learning profession. Washington, DC: National Staff
Development Council.
Hod, Y., & Ben-Zvi, D. (in press). A group psychotherapeutic perspective on transforming
participation in a learning community. Instructional Science. Doi: 10.1007/s11251-
014-9321-x
Kolodner, J. (2012). Envisioning the next generation classroom and the next generation of
learning technologies. In The Future of Learning: Proceedings of the 10th International
Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS) (Vol. 2).
Markin, R. D., & Kivlighan, D. M. (2008). Central relationship themes in group psychotherapy:
A social relations model analysis of transference. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research,
and Practice, 12(4), 290-306.
Rogoff, B. (1994). Developing understanding of the idea of communities of learners. Mind,
Culture, and Activity, 1(4), 209-229.
Ronen-Fuhrmann, T., Kali, Y., & Hoadley, C. M. (2008). Helping education students understand
learning through designing. Educational Technology, 48(2), 26-33.
Sawyer, K., & Greeno, J. (2006). Situativity and learning. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge
handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 355-367). New York, NY: Cambridge University
Press.
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1994). Computer support for knowledge-building communities.
Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(3), 265-283.
Yalom, I. D., & Leszcz, M. (2005). The theory and practice of group psychotherapy (5th Ed.).
New York, NY: Basic Books.
Article
Full-text available
The aim of this study is to investigate learners’ transforming participation as they enter and engage in a learning community. To do this, we investigated the micro-development of two students’ learning and collaborative practices in the context of a unique learning community that was fostered within a graduate level course. Interpretations of the data, which were reviewed by the researchers and triangulated by a group of expert and novice peers, led us to suggest three dimensions of transforming participation that is based on a group psychotherapy framework: (a) the social microcosm—examining one’s learning and collaboration practices in the LC in comparison with one’s everyday life; (b) developing the motivation to change based on dissatisfaction or a desire to grow; and (c) making incremental changes to practices in a socio-cultural context. We discuss the intricacies and implications of this framework for future research on learning communities.
Article
Full-text available
Group members (N = 55) in 11 therapy groups reported central relationship themes (CRTs) (wishes, responses of others, and responses of self) with other group members and with a romantic partner. Social relations model analyses were used to partition the variance in group member CRT ratings with other members into perceiver, target, and relationship plus error variance components. Significant perceiver variance in member CRT ratings was proposed to serve as a proxy for transference. Overall, significant perceiver variance and mostly insignificant target variance was found, and the perceiver effect accounted for substantially more variance than the target effect. As an exploratory question, the authors wondered to what extent relationship variance accounted for the total variance in member ratings of their CRT. Unfortunately, relationship variance could not be separated from error in this study. Relationship plus error variance accounted for, on average, 42% of the variance in scores. In addition, as a test of the social microcosm of the group theory, it was hypothesized that group member CRTs within the group would relate to member CRTs with a romantic partner outside of the group. Contrary to expectation, this hypothesis was not supported. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Article
Full-text available
This article describes a course in which graduate students in education learn practical and theoretical aspects of educational design by creating technologies for learning. The course was built around three themes: Analyzing technologies, in which students study state-of-the-art technologies and interview their designers; design studio, in which students design their own technologies using an instructional model that was developed in this study; and theory, in which literature is reviewed. Outcomes illustrate tensions between students' professed beliefs about learning and their actual design practices in four dimensions that characterize the technologies they designed: Learner activity, Collaboration, Autonomy, and Content accessibility. Via peer-negotiating of these tensions in each of the course themes, students have developed their skills to design educational technologies and increased the coherence of their epistemological understanding of how people learn.
Article
The idea of a community of learners is based on the premise that learning occurs as people participate in shared endeavors with others, with all playing active but often asymmetrical roles in sociocultural activity. This contrasts with models of learning that are based on one‐sided notions of learning— either that it occurs through transmission of knowledge from experts or acquisition of knowledge by novices, with the learner or the others (respectively) in a passive role. In this paper, I develop the distinction between the community of learners and one‐sided approaches from the perspective of a theory of learning as participation, and use two lines of research to illustrate the transitions in perspective necessary to understand the idea of communities of learners. One line of research examines differing models of teaching and learning employed by caregivers and toddlers from Guatemalan Mayan and middle‐class European‐American families; the other line of research involves a study of how middle‐class parents make a transition from their own schooling background to participate in instruction in a public US elementary school.
Article
In this article we focus on educational ideas and enabling technology for knowledge-building discourse. The conceptual bases of computer-supported intentional learning environments (CSILE) come from research on intentional learning, process aspects of expertise, and discourse in knowledge-building communities. These bases combine to support the following propositions: Schools need to be restructured as communities in which the construction of knowledge is supported as a collective goal, and the role of educational technology should be to replace classroom discourse patterns with those having more immediate and natural extensions to knowledge-building communities outside school walls. CSILE is described as a means for refraining classroom discourse to support knowledge building in ways extensible to out-of-school knowledge-advancing enterprises. Some of the most fundamental problems are logistic, and it is in solving these logistic problems that we see the greatest potential for educational technology.
Article
Many teaching practices implicitly assume that conceptual knowledge can be abstracted from the situations in which it is learned and used. This article argues that this assumption inevitably limits the effectiveness of such practices. Drawing on recent research into cognition as it is manifest in everyday activity, the authors argue that knowledge is situated, being in part a product of the activity, context, and culture in which it is developed and used. They discuss how this view of knowledge affects our understanding of learning, and they note that conventional schooling too often ignores the influence of school culture on what is learned in school. As an alternative to conventional practices, they propose cognitive apprenticeship (Collins, Brown, & Newman, in press), which honors the situated nature of knowledge. They examine two examples of mathematics instruction that exhibit certain key features of this approach to teaching.