Building community together: towards equitable CSCL practices and processes
- PDF / 212,497 Bytes
- 7 Pages / 439.37 x 666.142 pts Page_size
- 81 Downloads / 185 Views
Building community together: towards equitable CSCL practices and processes Carolyn P. Rosé 1 & Sanna Järvelä 2 Published online: 8 September 2020 # International Society of the Learning Sciences, Inc. 2020
Introduction As a research community, the International Society of the Learning Sciences has always worked hard to maintain representation across multiple dimensions of diversity, including, but certainly not limited to regions and disciplines. The events of this past Summer challenge both our personal senses of safety and wellbeing as well as our bonds of community and joint engagement, which rest upon that foundation, a foundation meant to enable a productive synergy in the light of diversity. In this time that shakes us to our very core, we reflect on our research with renewed vigor, asking ourselves the hard questions of what we stand for as a community. In the research of the learning sciences, we strive to further STEM education (Matuk and Linn 2018; Solli et al. 2018), but now our faith even in science is challenged as we look to an uncertain future with respect to a vaccine for COVID 19. In our CSCL research, we advocate for support that increases transactivity in the collaborative interactions supported in our learning environments (van Heijst et al. 2019), but in both our personal and professional lives we struggle to engage with communities whose political beliefs are far different from our own. We conduct research in the hopes to foster a sense of agency and self-efficacy in the students our research touches (Lee and Song 2016; Tchounikine 2019), and yet the natural disasters around us challenge the extent to which we can truly believe we are in control. In the midst of these shifting sands, we offer to this community the September edition of the International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative learning, comprising four full articles and one squib, all of which speak to these themes, with a consistent deep inspection of processes of collaboration. In the words of Gutiérrez and Jurow (2016), we look hopefully into these processes “that empower learners to become authors of their own futures”. Though we as a journal community greatly value both large scale quantitative research (Holtz et al.
* Carolyn P. Rosé [email protected] Sanna Järvelä [email protected]
1
Carnegie Mellon University Language Technologies Institute and HCI Institute, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
2
University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland
250
Rosé C.P., Järvelä S.
2018) and deep, reflective qualitative research, in this time of quiet reflection, we offer a collection fully within the qualitative tradition, though we look forward to strong empirical articles in future editions of the journal.
Making sense through interaction The first three articles of this edition present a progression of methodologies for qualitative inspection of collaborative discussion processes, each of which brings novelty in its methods as well as in the questions asked of the data. In the first such article, “Data Wrangling Practices and Learning with
Data Loading...
