16 SES 04.5 PS, General Poster Session
General Poster Session
Various researchers have emphasized the importance of adopting pedagogical frameworks that can address the challenges of the 21st century. One of these frameworks is the Knowledge Building Pedagogy (KBP), a pedagogical framework that promotes collective inquiry toward the continual resolution of knowledge problems that are valuable to a community (Scardamalia & Bereiter, 1994, Scardamalia, ).
Scardamalia (2002) suggested that the creation and advancement of knowledge depend on Collective Cognitive Responsibility (CCR). CCR refers to members’ commitment to the discourse constructed for the shared improvement of ideas, rather than to the exactitude of the ideas (Chuy, Zhang, Resendes, Bereiter & Scadarmalia, 2009). In other words, the levels of commitment to the symmetrical distribution and improvement of shared ideas are determining factors in the expansive transformation of knowledge objects.
Gutiérrez-Braojos and colleagues (Gutiérrez-Braojos, Salmerón-Vílchez, & García, 2012; Gutiérrez-Braojos, Chen, & Resendes, 2013; Gutiérrez-Braojos, Resendes, & Chen, 2013) purposed a peers evaluation of impacting ideas to analyse CCR. Thus, they created the concept of impacting builders (IB) to analyse CCR. The IB to refer to students who make a high percentage of contributions that impact the community, whereas impacting contributions to refer to contributions that must perform at least one of two complementary functions: i) they must be perceived and accepted by the community as complex cognitive contributions that facilitate a symmetrical distribution of knowledge. They must helping other members to achieve an integrative understanding of the collective knowledge produced up to that moment; ii) they must be perceived and accepted by the as original and potential solutions to the knowledge problems discussed. Thus, they must be the result of retroductive/abductive reasoning.
In this study, we purpose and discuss Scientometric indices that explains students’ impact in a knowledge community supported by a virtual platform (Knowledge Forum). In order to determine the index of builders with potential impact, students were asked to evaluate and select contributions from the database had a great impact on their learning and on advancing the group’s ideas. In parallel, we performed a content analysis from SOLO Taxonomy in order to identify impacting ideas from criterion of external judges. Finally, we checked every indices regarding the evaluation of external judges to identify better indices.
Bereiter, C. & Scardamalia, M (1993). Surpassing ourselves: an inquiry into the nature and implications of expertise. Chicago: Open Court. Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (2009). Teaching how science really works. Education Canada, 49(1), 14–17. Biggs, J. B. & Collis, K. (1982). Evaluating the Quality of Learning: the SOLO taxonomy. New York: Academic Press. Biggs, J.B. (2011). Teaching for Quality Learning at University. Buckingham: Open University Press/McGraw Hill, 2011. Chen, B., Chuy, M., Resendes, M., & Scardamalia, M. (2010). Big ideas tool as a new feature of knowledge forum. Presented at the 2010 Knowledge Building Summer Institute: New Assessments and Environments for Knowledge Building. Toronto, Canada. Chen, B., Resendes, M., Chuy, M., Tarchi, C., Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (2011). Identificare, selezionare e sviluppare le idee promettenti nel Knowledge Building. Interdisciplinary Journal of Technology, Culture and Education, 6(2), 224–241. Gutiérrez-Braojos, C., Chen, B., & Resendes, M. (2013). Exploring an index of builders with potential impact on Knowledge Building from SOLO Taxonomy. Presented at the 17th Annual Knowledge Building summer institute: Crossing the educational Chasm. From the basics to creative work with ideas. La Puebla, Mexico. Gutiérrez-Braojos, C., Salmerón-Vílchez, P., García, J.M. (2012). Profiles of Student Participation in Virtual Computer Learning and Building Environment. Presented at the 16th Annual Knowledge Building summer institute: Building Cultural Capacity for Innovation. Toronto, Canada. Holmes, K. (2005). Analysis of asynchronous online discussion using the SOLO Taxonomy. Australian Journal of Educational & Developmental Psychology, 5, 117-127. Morgan, D. L. (1998). Practical strategies for combining qualitative and quantitative methods: applications for health research. Qualitative Health Research, 8, 362-376. Scardamalia, M. (2002). Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. In B. Smith (Ed.), Liberal education in a knowledge society (67–98). Chicago, IL: Open Court. Scardamalia, M. & Bereiter, C. (1994). Computer support for knowledge-building communities. The Journal of Learning Sciencies, 3(3), 265-283. Stahl, G., Koschmann, T., & Suthers, D. (2006). Computer-supported collaborative learning: An historical perspective. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 409-426). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Zhang, J., Scardamalia, M., Reeve, R., & Messina, R. (2009). Designs for collective cognitive responsibility in knowledge-building communities. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 18, 7–44.
00. Central Events (Keynotes, EERA-Panel, EERJ Round Table, Invited Sessions)
Network 1. Continuing Professional Development: Learning for Individuals, Leaders, and Organisations
Network 2. Vocational Education and Training (VETNET)
Network 3. Curriculum Innovation
Network 4. Inclusive Education
Network 5. Children and Youth at Risk and Urban Education
Network 6. Open Learning: Media, Environments and Cultures
Network 7. Social Justice and Intercultural Education
Network 8. Research on Health Education
Network 9. Assessment, Evaluation, Testing and Measurement
Network 10. Teacher Education Research
Network 11. Educational Effectiveness and Quality Assurance
Network 12. LISnet - Library and Information Science Network
Network 13. Philosophy of Education
Network 14. Communities, Families and Schooling in Educational Research
Network 15. Research Partnerships in Education
Network 16. ICT in Education and Training
Network 17. Histories of Education
Network 18. Research in Sport Pedagogy
Network 19. Ethnography
Network 20. Research in Innovative Intercultural Learning Environments
Network 22. Research in Higher Education
Network 23. Policy Studies and Politics of Education
Network 24. Mathematics Education Research
Network 25. Research on Children's Rights in Education
Network 26. Educational Leadership
Network 27. Didactics – Learning and Teaching
The programme is updated regularly (each day in the morning)
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.