Pub Date : 2022-08-18DOI: 10.1080/10508406.2022.2100704
A. Keune
ABSTRACT Background Fiber crafts occupy a vital position in technology innovation and present a promising space for computer science education, which continues to face lopsided participation. It remains unclear whether and how fiber crafts can become a context for computational learning and what role different materials play with the risk to miss computational approaches that could broaden computational cultures. Methods Fusing constructionist and posthuman perspectives, this study analyzed how middle school students performed computational concepts while weaving and manipulating fabric and how the craft materials drove what could be learned computationally in these contexts. Findings Present the fiber crafts as a context for performing computational concepts (i.e., variables, conditionals, functions) and that the materials play a role in what can be learned computationally. While weaving drove computing as the performance of automation, fabric manipulation required speculative and physical three-dimensional modeling as computational. Contribution The paper presents fiber crafts as a promising context for computational learning and theorizes the ongoing material as material syntonicity, contributing a material direction to fostering more inclusive and sustainable computing cultures.
{"title":"Material syntonicity: Examining computational performance and its materiality through weaving and sewing crafts","authors":"A. Keune","doi":"10.1080/10508406.2022.2100704","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2022.2100704","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Background Fiber crafts occupy a vital position in technology innovation and present a promising space for computer science education, which continues to face lopsided participation. It remains unclear whether and how fiber crafts can become a context for computational learning and what role different materials play with the risk to miss computational approaches that could broaden computational cultures. Methods Fusing constructionist and posthuman perspectives, this study analyzed how middle school students performed computational concepts while weaving and manipulating fabric and how the craft materials drove what could be learned computationally in these contexts. Findings Present the fiber crafts as a context for performing computational concepts (i.e., variables, conditionals, functions) and that the materials play a role in what can be learned computationally. While weaving drove computing as the performance of automation, fabric manipulation required speculative and physical three-dimensional modeling as computational. Contribution The paper presents fiber crafts as a promising context for computational learning and theorizes the ongoing material as material syntonicity, contributing a material direction to fostering more inclusive and sustainable computing cultures.","PeriodicalId":48043,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Learning Sciences","volume":"3 1","pages":"477 - 508"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2022-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80163826","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-12DOI: 10.1080/10508406.2022.2100705
Victor R. Lee
ABSTRACT “Learning engineering” has gained popularity as a term connected to the work of learning sciences. However, the nature of that connection is not entirely clear. For some, learning engineering represents distinct, industry-inspired practices enabled by data abundance and digital platformization of learning technologies. That view is presented as one where learning engineers apply learning research that has resided in experimental studies. For others, learning engineering should refer to the use of the full breadth of knowledge developed within the learning sciences research community. This second view is more inclusive of the fundamentally situated, design-oriented, and real-world commitments that are the backbone of the learning sciences, as reflected in this journal. The two views differ even as far as whether the academic field is labeled “learning science” or “learning sciences”. This article examines and articulates these differences. It also argues that without course correction, many who identify with learning engineering will conduct technology-supported learning improvement work that, at its own risk, will neglect the full and necessary scope of what has already been and continues to be discovered in the learning sciences. Moreover, it behooves all to consider recently elevated, but deeply fundamental questions being asked in the learning sciences about what is important to learn and toward what ends. With some more clarity around what is actually encompassed by the learning sciences and how all interested in design and educational improvement can build upon that knowledge, we can make greater collective progress to understanding and supporting human learning.
{"title":"Learning sciences and learning engineering: A natural or artificial distinction?","authors":"Victor R. Lee","doi":"10.1080/10508406.2022.2100705","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2022.2100705","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT “Learning engineering” has gained popularity as a term connected to the work of learning sciences. However, the nature of that connection is not entirely clear. For some, learning engineering represents distinct, industry-inspired practices enabled by data abundance and digital platformization of learning technologies. That view is presented as one where learning engineers apply learning research that has resided in experimental studies. For others, learning engineering should refer to the use of the full breadth of knowledge developed within the learning sciences research community. This second view is more inclusive of the fundamentally situated, design-oriented, and real-world commitments that are the backbone of the learning sciences, as reflected in this journal. The two views differ even as far as whether the academic field is labeled “learning science” or “learning sciences”. This article examines and articulates these differences. It also argues that without course correction, many who identify with learning engineering will conduct technology-supported learning improvement work that, at its own risk, will neglect the full and necessary scope of what has already been and continues to be discovered in the learning sciences. Moreover, it behooves all to consider recently elevated, but deeply fundamental questions being asked in the learning sciences about what is important to learn and toward what ends. With some more clarity around what is actually encompassed by the learning sciences and how all interested in design and educational improvement can build upon that knowledge, we can make greater collective progress to understanding and supporting human learning.","PeriodicalId":48043,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Learning Sciences","volume":"24 1","pages":"288 - 304"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2022-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90607341","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-20DOI: 10.1080/10508406.2022.2091442
M. Dahn
ABSTRACT Background Art making is a personal and social process in which learners make meaning for themselves and audiences through the production of artifacts. In classrooms, this personal and social process is made concrete through dialogue. Methods This paper presents an illustrative case study of how sixth-grade student, Jo, developed voice through interaction with peers in a classroom context while making art about social issues. Interaction analysis methods supported inquiry into Jo’s talk about art making as she talked with peers in designed conversation spaces (i.e., intentional structures and opportunities to talk about artwork while making it). Findings Jo’s voice development illustrates the collaborative nature of voice as an interactional accomplishment; having a unique voice is something students might strive to achieve as artists, yet that voice is co-constructed through collective social interaction as students take up, appropriate, and build on others’ ideas. Artistic and political dimensions of art making were generative. Contribution Pedagogical implications are discussed for designing socially supported learning experiences in arts classrooms. What Jo’s case makes evident is that voice can be supported in classrooms through intentional pedagogical choices that create the conditions for that voice to develop through interactions with peers and materials.
{"title":"Voice as an interactional accomplishment in art making about social issues","authors":"M. Dahn","doi":"10.1080/10508406.2022.2091442","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2022.2091442","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Background Art making is a personal and social process in which learners make meaning for themselves and audiences through the production of artifacts. In classrooms, this personal and social process is made concrete through dialogue. Methods This paper presents an illustrative case study of how sixth-grade student, Jo, developed voice through interaction with peers in a classroom context while making art about social issues. Interaction analysis methods supported inquiry into Jo’s talk about art making as she talked with peers in designed conversation spaces (i.e., intentional structures and opportunities to talk about artwork while making it). Findings Jo’s voice development illustrates the collaborative nature of voice as an interactional accomplishment; having a unique voice is something students might strive to achieve as artists, yet that voice is co-constructed through collective social interaction as students take up, appropriate, and build on others’ ideas. Artistic and political dimensions of art making were generative. Contribution Pedagogical implications are discussed for designing socially supported learning experiences in arts classrooms. What Jo’s case makes evident is that voice can be supported in classrooms through intentional pedagogical choices that create the conditions for that voice to develop through interactions with peers and materials.","PeriodicalId":48043,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Learning Sciences","volume":"57 1","pages":"594 - 629"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2022-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80224574","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-24DOI: 10.1080/10508406.2022.2073232
Anna F. DeJarnette
ABSTRACT Background Groupwork is a desirable activity in mathematics classrooms for the opportunity it creates for collaborative reasoning and interdependence. Correlations between group-level processes and outcomes have helped characterize the features of more successful groups, but group-level constructs can obscure how students negotiate ideas. This study investigated how students’ interactions, and the written work they produced, reflected their negotiations of authority and mathematics content during groupwork. Methods I used techniques from systemic functional linguistics to analyze transcripts from groups of 7th-grade students during work on an open-ended mathematics task, to document connections between groups’ interpersonal processes and their mathematical products. Findings Two groups who produced similar products did so through different processes. In one group students’ written work reflected consensus, evidenced by students’ verbal contributions. In the other group, the written product reflected two distinct lines of reasoning that were both verbalized but never integrated in conversation. Contribution While previous studies have documented differences in interactional patterns between more and, respectively, less successful groups, this study extends that line of research by describing differences between similarly successful groups. The use of SFL helps explain the path from group-level patterns and group outputs through individual students’ participation.
{"title":"What do correct answers reveal? The interpersonal and mathematical aspects of students’ interactions during groupwork in seventh grade mathematics","authors":"Anna F. DeJarnette","doi":"10.1080/10508406.2022.2073232","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2022.2073232","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Background Groupwork is a desirable activity in mathematics classrooms for the opportunity it creates for collaborative reasoning and interdependence. Correlations between group-level processes and outcomes have helped characterize the features of more successful groups, but group-level constructs can obscure how students negotiate ideas. This study investigated how students’ interactions, and the written work they produced, reflected their negotiations of authority and mathematics content during groupwork. Methods I used techniques from systemic functional linguistics to analyze transcripts from groups of 7th-grade students during work on an open-ended mathematics task, to document connections between groups’ interpersonal processes and their mathematical products. Findings Two groups who produced similar products did so through different processes. In one group students’ written work reflected consensus, evidenced by students’ verbal contributions. In the other group, the written product reflected two distinct lines of reasoning that were both verbalized but never integrated in conversation. Contribution While previous studies have documented differences in interactional patterns between more and, respectively, less successful groups, this study extends that line of research by describing differences between similarly successful groups. The use of SFL helps explain the path from group-level patterns and group outputs through individual students’ participation.","PeriodicalId":48043,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Learning Sciences","volume":"99 1","pages":"509 - 544"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2022-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81402264","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-15DOI: 10.1080/10508406.2022.2073233
R. McNeill, Luis A. Leyva, Brittany L. Marshall
ABSTRACT Background Calculus instruction is underexamined as a source of racialized and gendered inequity in higher education, despite research that documents minoritized students’ marginalizing experiences in undergraduate mathematics classes. This study fills this research gap by investigating mathematics faculty’s perceptions of the significance of race and gender to calculus instruction at a large, public, historically white research university. Methods Theories of colorblind racism and dysconsciousness guided a critical discourse analysis of seven undergraduate calculus faculty’s perceptions of instructional events. Findings Our analysis revealed two dominant discourses: (i) Race and gender are insignificant social markers in undergraduate calculus; and (ii) Instructional events can be objectively deemed race- and gender-neutral. We illustrate how calculus faculty varyingly engaged these colorblind discourses as well as discourses that challenged such conceptions of instruction. We also highlight how faculty dysconsciousness in reports of instructional practices reflect potential operationalization of dominant discourses that reinforce colorblind racism. Contribution With limited research on faculty perspectives on racial equity in mathematics, our study documents how color-evasive, gender-neutral discourses among mathematics faculty shape orientations to instruction that reinforce the gatekeeping role of calculus in STEM higher education. Implications are provided for race- and gender-conscious undergraduate mathematics instruction and faculty development.
{"title":"“They’re just students. There’s no clear distinction”: A critical discourse analysis of color-evasive, gender-neutral faculty discourses in undergraduate calculus instruction","authors":"R. McNeill, Luis A. Leyva, Brittany L. Marshall","doi":"10.1080/10508406.2022.2073233","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2022.2073233","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Background Calculus instruction is underexamined as a source of racialized and gendered inequity in higher education, despite research that documents minoritized students’ marginalizing experiences in undergraduate mathematics classes. This study fills this research gap by investigating mathematics faculty’s perceptions of the significance of race and gender to calculus instruction at a large, public, historically white research university. Methods Theories of colorblind racism and dysconsciousness guided a critical discourse analysis of seven undergraduate calculus faculty’s perceptions of instructional events. Findings Our analysis revealed two dominant discourses: (i) Race and gender are insignificant social markers in undergraduate calculus; and (ii) Instructional events can be objectively deemed race- and gender-neutral. We illustrate how calculus faculty varyingly engaged these colorblind discourses as well as discourses that challenged such conceptions of instruction. We also highlight how faculty dysconsciousness in reports of instructional practices reflect potential operationalization of dominant discourses that reinforce colorblind racism. Contribution With limited research on faculty perspectives on racial equity in mathematics, our study documents how color-evasive, gender-neutral discourses among mathematics faculty shape orientations to instruction that reinforce the gatekeeping role of calculus in STEM higher education. Implications are provided for race- and gender-conscious undergraduate mathematics instruction and faculty development.","PeriodicalId":48043,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Learning Sciences","volume":"33 1","pages":"630 - 672"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2022-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82903303","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-05-27DOI: 10.1080/10508406.2021.2024433
Kevin Cherbow, Katherine L. McNeill
ABSTRACT Background Teachers need to make sense of curricular materials and design instruction to ensure students will be positioned to pursue their own arc of inquiry in curriculum enactment. Whole-group discussions are crucial opportunities for curricular sensemaking, yet planning and enactment can be challenging. Methods We used a single, revelatory case study approach with one focal teacher to research curricular sensemaking for epistemic agency in storyline materials. We identified episodes of pedagogical reasoning for epistemic agency in the teacher’s pre- and post-interview responses and participation in discussion planning cycles (DPCs). This analysis revealed the recurrent sources of tension and ambiguity that the teacher grappled with concerning epistemic agency. Findings The teacher made sense of two key sources of tension: curricular coherence and student coherence-seeking; equitable participation and incremental building of ideas; and one source of ambiguity: uniform or variable form(s) of epistemic agency in different discussion types. The teacher grappled with these tensions and ambiguity and learned to leverage them to position students with epistemic agency in their learning. Contribution The teacher engaged in curricular sensemaking for epistemic agency. This form of sensemaking involves the teacher’s efforts to engage with students’ emergent ideas and participation in their use of curricular materials.
{"title":"Planning for student-driven discussions: A revelatory case of curricular sensemaking for epistemic agency","authors":"Kevin Cherbow, Katherine L. McNeill","doi":"10.1080/10508406.2021.2024433","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2021.2024433","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Background Teachers need to make sense of curricular materials and design instruction to ensure students will be positioned to pursue their own arc of inquiry in curriculum enactment. Whole-group discussions are crucial opportunities for curricular sensemaking, yet planning and enactment can be challenging. Methods We used a single, revelatory case study approach with one focal teacher to research curricular sensemaking for epistemic agency in storyline materials. We identified episodes of pedagogical reasoning for epistemic agency in the teacher’s pre- and post-interview responses and participation in discussion planning cycles (DPCs). This analysis revealed the recurrent sources of tension and ambiguity that the teacher grappled with concerning epistemic agency. Findings The teacher made sense of two key sources of tension: curricular coherence and student coherence-seeking; equitable participation and incremental building of ideas; and one source of ambiguity: uniform or variable form(s) of epistemic agency in different discussion types. The teacher grappled with these tensions and ambiguity and learned to leverage them to position students with epistemic agency in their learning. Contribution The teacher engaged in curricular sensemaking for epistemic agency. This form of sensemaking involves the teacher’s efforts to engage with students’ emergent ideas and participation in their use of curricular materials.","PeriodicalId":48043,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Learning Sciences","volume":"86 1","pages":"408 - 457"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2022-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84098316","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-28DOI: 10.1080/10508406.2022.2032071
Nesra Yannier, K. Crowley, Youngwook Do, S. Hudson, K. Koedinger
ABSTRACT Background Museum exhibits encourage exploration with physical materials typically with minimal signage or guidance. Ideally children get interactive support as they explore, but it is not always feasible to have knowledgeable staff regularly present. Technology-based interactive support can provide guidance to help learners achieve scientific understanding for how and why things work and engineering skills for designing and constructing useful artifacts and for solving important problems. We have developed an innovative AI-based technology, Intelligent Science Exhibits that provide interactive guidance to visitors of an inquiry-based science exhibit. Methods We used this technology to investigate alternative views of appropriate levels of guidance in exhibits. We contrasted visitor engagement and learning from interaction with an Intelligent Science Exhibit to a matched conventional exhibit. Findings We found evidence that the Intelligent Science Exhibit produces substantially better learning for both scientific and engineering outcomes, equivalent levels of self-reported enjoyment, and higher levels of engagement as measured by the length of time voluntarily spent at the exhibit. Contribution These findings show potential for transforming hands-on museum exhibits with intelligent science exhibits and more generally indicate how providing children with feedback on their predictions and scientific explanations enhances their learning and engagement.
{"title":"Intelligent science exhibits: Transforming hands-on exhibits into mixed-reality learning experiences","authors":"Nesra Yannier, K. Crowley, Youngwook Do, S. Hudson, K. Koedinger","doi":"10.1080/10508406.2022.2032071","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2022.2032071","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Background Museum exhibits encourage exploration with physical materials typically with minimal signage or guidance. Ideally children get interactive support as they explore, but it is not always feasible to have knowledgeable staff regularly present. Technology-based interactive support can provide guidance to help learners achieve scientific understanding for how and why things work and engineering skills for designing and constructing useful artifacts and for solving important problems. We have developed an innovative AI-based technology, Intelligent Science Exhibits that provide interactive guidance to visitors of an inquiry-based science exhibit. Methods We used this technology to investigate alternative views of appropriate levels of guidance in exhibits. We contrasted visitor engagement and learning from interaction with an Intelligent Science Exhibit to a matched conventional exhibit. Findings We found evidence that the Intelligent Science Exhibit produces substantially better learning for both scientific and engineering outcomes, equivalent levels of self-reported enjoyment, and higher levels of engagement as measured by the length of time voluntarily spent at the exhibit. Contribution These findings show potential for transforming hands-on museum exhibits with intelligent science exhibits and more generally indicate how providing children with feedback on their predictions and scientific explanations enhances their learning and engagement.","PeriodicalId":48043,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Learning Sciences","volume":"343 1","pages":"335 - 368"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2022-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76400329","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-27DOI: 10.1080/10508406.2021.2024834
S. M. Calor, Rijkje Dekker, J. van Drie, M. Volman
Abstract Background Supporting students during collaborative learning in mathematics is challenging for teachers. We developed the Small-Group Scaffolding Tool (SGS-Tool) to assist teachers regarding how and when to offer support. The tool is based on three characteristics of scaffolding small groups at the group level: contingency to the group, phasing out content support when the group can continue independently, and transferring responsibility for learning to the group. Method We investigated whether the scaffolding behavior of teachers using the SGS-Tool was more adapted to the group level than that of teachers not using the tool. Participants were four teachers and their seventh grade classes. The topic was Early Algebra. We analyzed teachers’ scaffolding behavior with one group during five lessons. Findings The SGS-Tool offered teachers support when the groups discussed mathematics, but adaptations of the tool are needed. Overall, the SGS-Tool seems to be a promising tool for supporting mathematics teachers in scaffolding groups at the group level. Contribution Our study provides insight into what scaffolding small groups at the group level entails and how teachers can apply it.
{"title":"Scaffolding small groups at the group level: Improving the scaffolding behavior of mathematics teachers during mathematical discussions","authors":"S. M. Calor, Rijkje Dekker, J. van Drie, M. Volman","doi":"10.1080/10508406.2021.2024834","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2021.2024834","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Background Supporting students during collaborative learning in mathematics is challenging for teachers. We developed the Small-Group Scaffolding Tool (SGS-Tool) to assist teachers regarding how and when to offer support. The tool is based on three characteristics of scaffolding small groups at the group level: contingency to the group, phasing out content support when the group can continue independently, and transferring responsibility for learning to the group. Method We investigated whether the scaffolding behavior of teachers using the SGS-Tool was more adapted to the group level than that of teachers not using the tool. Participants were four teachers and their seventh grade classes. The topic was Early Algebra. We analyzed teachers’ scaffolding behavior with one group during five lessons. Findings The SGS-Tool offered teachers support when the groups discussed mathematics, but adaptations of the tool are needed. Overall, the SGS-Tool seems to be a promising tool for supporting mathematics teachers in scaffolding groups at the group level. Contribution Our study provides insight into what scaffolding small groups at the group level entails and how teachers can apply it.","PeriodicalId":48043,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Learning Sciences","volume":"41 1","pages":"369 - 407"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2022-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74200709","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-01DOI: 10.1080/10508406.2021.1999817
K. Sheridan, Xiaorong Zhang, A. Konopasky
ABSTRACT Background In studio art, students are expected to be highly agentive—to engage in creative processes to form personalized representations of ideas, yet we lack knowledge on how teachers support their agency. Approaching agency as co-constructed practices across temporal dimensions, we examine how teachers shift between autonomy-supportive and directive approaches, building students’ artistic agency. Methods Secondary qualitative analysis of video-recordings (49 hours) of four teachers’ studio art classes in two arts-intensive high schools used observational frameworks on autonomy-support, theoretical constructs of spaces of authoring and temporal orientations to agency, and functional linguistic agency markers. Findings Studio teaching is primarily autonomy-supportive, but teachers strategically shift their enacted and linguistic practices to directive approaches, such as commands and constraints, taking control over parts of the creative process to build students’ artistic agency. Contribution Our work on teachers co-constructing artistic agency with students adds nuance to accounts of how teachers support agency, particularly forms of direction on open-ended problems. Our theoretical lens of the temporal process of agency and methodological approach of attending to enacted and linguistic practices and to when teachers shift to and away from directiveness, could be used in other learning settings to examine how agency is co-constructed.
{"title":"Strategic shifts: How studio teachers use direction and support to build learner agency in the figured world of visual art","authors":"K. Sheridan, Xiaorong Zhang, A. Konopasky","doi":"10.1080/10508406.2021.1999817","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2021.1999817","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Background In studio art, students are expected to be highly agentive—to engage in creative processes to form personalized representations of ideas, yet we lack knowledge on how teachers support their agency. Approaching agency as co-constructed practices across temporal dimensions, we examine how teachers shift between autonomy-supportive and directive approaches, building students’ artistic agency. Methods Secondary qualitative analysis of video-recordings (49 hours) of four teachers’ studio art classes in two arts-intensive high schools used observational frameworks on autonomy-support, theoretical constructs of spaces of authoring and temporal orientations to agency, and functional linguistic agency markers. Findings Studio teaching is primarily autonomy-supportive, but teachers strategically shift their enacted and linguistic practices to directive approaches, such as commands and constraints, taking control over parts of the creative process to build students’ artistic agency. Contribution Our work on teachers co-constructing artistic agency with students adds nuance to accounts of how teachers support agency, particularly forms of direction on open-ended problems. Our theoretical lens of the temporal process of agency and methodological approach of attending to enacted and linguistic practices and to when teachers shift to and away from directiveness, could be used in other learning settings to examine how agency is co-constructed.","PeriodicalId":48043,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Learning Sciences","volume":"1 1","pages":"14 - 42"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89696722","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-01DOI: 10.1080/10508406.2022.2027715
Dor Abrahamson, Vincent Aleven, Lara Appleby, Golnaz Arastoopour Irgens, Alayne Armstrong, Flavio Azevedo, Michael Baker, Megan Bang, Brigid Barron, J. Beishuizen, Gautam Biswas, Angela Booker, Melissa Braaten, C. Brady, Leah A. Bricker, Susan M. Bridges, Angela Calabrese Barton, Todd Campbell, H. Carlone, Teresa Ceratto-Pargman, Carol Chan, M. Chauraya, Grace Chen, Ying-Chih Chen, Britte Cheng, Cynthia Carter Ching, C. Chinn, Douglas Clark
Dor Abrahamson Vincent Aleven Lara Appleby Golnaz Arastoopour Irgens Alayne Armstrong Flávio Azevedo Michael Baker Megan Bang Brigid Barron Jos Beishuizen Gautam Biswas Angela Booker Melissa Braaten Corey Brady Leah Bricker Susan Margaret Bridges Angela Calabrese Barton Todd Campbell Heidi Carlone Teresa Ceratto-Pargman Carol Chan Million Chauraya Grace Chen Ying-Chih Chen Britte Cheng Cynthia Carter Ching Clark Chinn Douglas Clark JOURNAL OF THE LEARNING SCIENCES 2022, VOL. 31, NO. 1, i–v https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2022.2027715
{"title":"List of Guest Reviewers in 2021","authors":"Dor Abrahamson, Vincent Aleven, Lara Appleby, Golnaz Arastoopour Irgens, Alayne Armstrong, Flavio Azevedo, Michael Baker, Megan Bang, Brigid Barron, J. Beishuizen, Gautam Biswas, Angela Booker, Melissa Braaten, C. Brady, Leah A. Bricker, Susan M. Bridges, Angela Calabrese Barton, Todd Campbell, H. Carlone, Teresa Ceratto-Pargman, Carol Chan, M. Chauraya, Grace Chen, Ying-Chih Chen, Britte Cheng, Cynthia Carter Ching, C. Chinn, Douglas Clark","doi":"10.1080/10508406.2022.2027715","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2022.2027715","url":null,"abstract":"Dor Abrahamson Vincent Aleven Lara Appleby Golnaz Arastoopour Irgens Alayne Armstrong Flávio Azevedo Michael Baker Megan Bang Brigid Barron Jos Beishuizen Gautam Biswas Angela Booker Melissa Braaten Corey Brady Leah Bricker Susan Margaret Bridges Angela Calabrese Barton Todd Campbell Heidi Carlone Teresa Ceratto-Pargman Carol Chan Million Chauraya Grace Chen Ying-Chih Chen Britte Cheng Cynthia Carter Ching Clark Chinn Douglas Clark JOURNAL OF THE LEARNING SCIENCES 2022, VOL. 31, NO. 1, i–v https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2022.2027715","PeriodicalId":48043,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Learning Sciences","volume":"73 1","pages":"i - v"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75985275","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：