I'd like to mention identity formation (Chapter 7, Suzuki & Kato, 2001) and individual and collective activities (Chapter 8, Kaptelinin & Cole, 2001) in this post. The common feature of these chapters is that both are discussing the human side of collaborative learning. The the seventh chapter Suzuki and Kato are discussing that individual's identity in the community is formed as the time goes by. I have to admit that I had never thought about that before, and actually it is a very interesting phenomenon. We are always shy or introvert when we join a new community. We don't want to be visible or the one in change. Self-perceptions of the individual in a community changes as he/she learns new things and gains experience. And some time is needed to develop a perspective on a topic or the field. Peers, instructor and resources are really affective in identity formation. The person shouldn't feel helpless or unsafe in the learning process. If she/he fells so, this would affect his/her identity development as well as learning process negatively.
As Kaptelinin and Cole (2001) suggest, there are times in which students cannot achieve their goals by themselves. They have to interact with other people to do collective activities and achieve shared goals. In that process, they are supposed to achieve their own individual goals, as well. So, social interaction has an impact in both the social development and the individual development. In order for the interaction to be very effective on the individual development and transfer of knowledge, the area of study should match with the interests of the individual. That way, learner can make more effort to develop the individual and group identity.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Ipek,
ReplyDeleteI agree with your statement, "self perceptions of the individual in the community changes as he/she gains experiences and learns new things". If each of us as teachers or students can be sensitive to the needs of these individuals, we can help them to become active members. Then we can learn from their participation in the community. So,it's a win/win situation.
Sometimes we do not realize what positive or negative reinforcement can do to others. Sometimes we do not even realize that we are doing it. In online communities, we need to be a little more conscious of what we say since the reader can not hear the inflection in our voice. What may be sincere in words might just be meant sarcastically. We all need help sometimes so it is important for instructors to offer guidance when it is needed or offer "hints" to those who need a little nudge in online settings.
ReplyDeleteIpek,
ReplyDeleteFreud postulated that "Learning should be free of conflict; there should be no frustration. This does not mean that the child is conflict free. This never happens, but the learning as presented in the learning setting should not induce additional conflict" (Bull, 2006)
As you point out, in the case study, there arose considerable conflict between OH and IM -- "this (unsafe situation) would affect his/her identity development as well as learning process negatively".
Do you think the participatory programmers/ researchers should have stepped in and ended the conflict? Was this unethical on their part to allow this happen in a learning environment, given they created the situation and were embedded into the study (vs. simply observing groups)?