Collaborative Learning in a Digital Age

EDTECH 504 Boise State University Forrest Doud

Abstract
Individuals in our society continue to become more and more connected thanks to continuous advancements in the area of information and communications technology. As a result of this vast potential for the sharing of information, there has never been a better time for instructional designers to embrace learning theories that promote social minded pedagogy and harness the potential for collaborative learning afforded by technology. This paper provides an overview of social constructivist theories, collaborative learning in regards to instructional design and the ability of technology to help put social constructivist theories into practice.

Exploring Social Constructivist theories

Theoretical influences of collaborative learning mainly draw upon social constructivist approaches for learning. These types of approaches emphasize students collaborative work with their peers and active participation amongst groups (Vesisenaho et al., 2010). The social constructivist theories of distributed cognition, situated cognition, communities of practice and connectivism all build upon the core idea that learning is a dynamic process that doesnt take place in a vacuum. A learners knowledge is ultimately a product of the environment they are in, as well as the other people and tools that are in that environment. In the words of Bell (2011), theories of learning based solely on assumptions of students being taught by teachers, usually in a classroom, do not provide an adequate framework for us to think and act in the digitally saturated and connected world in which we live." In addition, Scanlon (2010) says that what we require as educational technologists are theories which provide a framework in which we can understand the complex interactions between learners, teachers and the resources they use. Modern instructional designers need to take these ideas to heart and develop instruction that is based upon distributed cognition, situated cognition, communities of practice, and connectivism.

Distributed Cognition Distributed cognition is sometimes referred to as distributed learning or distributed intelligence (Jonasson & Land, 2009). The theory of distributed cognition is built upon the idea that no one person is in possession of all the information needed to complete a task or solve a problem (Bell, 2011). According to Jonasson & Land (2009), distributed cognitions occur

naturally when individuals or groups engage collaboratively with each other in intellectual activities. It is not only people involved in the learning, but also instruments and other artifacts that play a part in a distributed cognition (Giere, 2007). These instruments today are the internet and other communication technologies. Learning environments that create distributed cognition amongst people and devices are fundamentally complex. In a distributed learning environment the needs of the individual leaner are often secondary to the needs of the system itself (Jonasson & Land, 2009). Even though the environment and mechanisms within it play a role in distributed cognition, Giere (2007) says that only people provide intentional cognitive activity to a distributed cognition system. What Giere means is that our creative activities generate change in the learning environment, which ultimately alters the ways that the environment can change us. By shaping nature and how our interactions with it are mediated, we change ourselves (Gomez et al., 2010). To summarize, Distributed Cognition proposes that knowledge resides in people, in tools such as technology, and in the environment in where people interact with said technology (Shaffer and Clinton, 2006). In this modern era dominated by information and communication technology, knowledge cannot be expected to develop solely in the mind of an individual person. Distributed Cognition demands collaborative instruction designed to take into account the fact our individual actions no longer exist in a vacuum, but are instead subject to a large system of interconnected communication technology.

Situated Cognition The central idea in situated cognition is that learning is inherently social and is shaped by interactions among people, the tools they use, the activity they engage in, and their sociocultural

environment (Bell, 2011). While very similar to distributed cognition, situated cognition differs in that it focuses more on environmental factors in the knowledge transfer and development process rather than people. Situated cognition is sometimes also referred to as embodied cognitive science (Dawson, 2010). The theory of situated cognition recognizes that you cant just focus on the person, place, or thing when designing instruction. You must take into account all aspects in and around the environment because they will affect each other in some way, regardless of whether or not you plan for them to do so (Jonasson & Land, 2009). To design instruction based on the situated cognition theory means you need to be able separate what is learned from how it is learned and used, which is highly contingent upon environmental factors. Situated cognition recognizes that most learning activities ultimately take place in a unique environment with its own culture. With such a variety of environments in which learning ultimately takes place, situated cognition must be factored into instructional design and to help offset difficulties caused by diverse learning environments. According to Dawson (2010), the mind is embedded, situated, or scaffolded, meaning that certain classes of processes take advantage of structure in the world to minimize the load on internal cognitive mechanisms. Dawson goes on to say that to the extent that cognition is both embodied and embedded, the mind can be viewed as being extended into the world; that is the boundary of the mind may not be the skull (2010). The idea that most school activity exists in a culture of its own is central to understanding many of the difficulties of learning, regardless of whether that learning is face to face or online. Overcoming this problem means using Situated Cognition theory in instructional design so that learning is carried out in conjunction with the environment rather than trying to fight it. This concept is quite distinct from many older design models that assumed information processing takes place solely inside head of the learner (Brown et al., 1988). By off-loading part

of the cognitive task onto the environment as part of the instructional design, a learner is going to automatically use his or her environment to help solve their problem and create knowledge. Communities of Practice The idea of communities of practice was created by Lave and Wenger to describe the importance of an individuals activity connecting them to a group or community, which in turn serves to legitimize their practice of the learning activity (Jonasson & Land, 2009). Communities of practice have been defined by Wenger (1998) as a natural occurrence that emerges where people in pursuit of common goals or interests are bound together by a need for the same knowledge. This theory reiterates the social constructive ideal that learning is a socially situated rather than an individual process. It is becoming increasingly accepted that the most productive learning occurs when learners engage with other learners in groups, cohorts and communities (Wenger, 1998). A learner can better achieve the creation of knowledge when his or her participation in a learning activity doesnt take place from the outside looking in, but is instead carried out within a community (Lin et al., 2011) To put this concept simply, inexperienced learners can eventually possess the knowledge of others by participating in a community of practice that is focused on the same learning goal. As mentioned previously, a tenant of social constructivist theory is that learning is not just a cognitive process, but is socially situated (Wenger, 1998). The same tenant is upheld in the communities of practice theory. Highly interactive and networked learning environments, such as communities of practice, allow for cognition to be realized (Bell & Winn, 2000). Information and communication technologies allow for learning to be a mutual engagement. Learners who participate in communities of practice and are given a common project or purpose can better construct their own meanings and knowledge as a group (Wenger, 1998). For someone learning

how to use a tool, a community can help them discover things not written out in any rules or written instructions. The occasions and conditions for use arise directly out of the context of activities of each community that uses the tool, framed by the way members of that community see the world (Brown et al., 1988). To frame this in relation to information and communication technologies, a communitys viewpoint of a learning technology, and its use of that technology, will ultimately shape how a tool is used in the learning environment. Connectivism One of the newer learning theories based on social constructivist ideals is Connectivsm. It can be considered a direct successor or evolution of previous social constructivist learning theories as it combines nearly all their ideas. Connectivism has been proposed as a learning theory for the digital age, a successor to behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism (Bell, 2011). The concept of connectivism is based upon the premise that knowledge exists out in the world, rather than in the mind of an individual, or in one location (Boitshwarelo, 2011).This theory is very similar to that of distributed cognition in that distributed learning and knowledge creation are dependent on the diverse opinions and experiences of more than one person. It also recognizes that learners have varying degrees of access to different information sources or tools. According to Siemens (2004), the major principles of connectivism are that learning and knowledge rests in diversity of opinions, a capacity to know more is more critical than what is currently a known, nurturing and maintaining connections is needed to facilitate continual learning. The central idea in connectivism is about learners connecting to a learning community and benefiting from it, because everyone involved is feeding the network with information. The learning community is a group of people learning together through continuous dialogue because of their similar interests (Boitshwarelo, 2011).

Collaboration in the Instructional Design Process

Instructional design is the practice of maximizing the effectiveness, efficiency and appeal of instruction and other learning experiences (Abrami et al., 2011). Theories of collaborative learning emphasize designing instruction and using tools which supports bringing up and sharing students unique knowledge structures and addressing their knowledge gaps (Vesisenaho et al., 2010). With these collaborative theories in perspective, it is important then to keep social constructive theories also in mind during the instructional design process. In terms of instructional design, collaboration should be a center point of how modern instructional designers manage their design process to take advantage of currently offered technology (Laurillard, 2003). Instructional design models must be adapted to integrate various types of social interactions, each with a specific purpose and intended outcome for the learners. It is also necessary to choose the appropriate technology tools that foster collaboration, communication and cognition (Abrami et al., 2011). There will be no perfect tool so the instructional design needs to choose the best technology to achieve its specific goals. Knowledge is rarely developed in isolation, and between the students initial development of ideas and the creation of their completed assignment or knowledge, there should be critique and evaluation from other students and or instructors (Starkey, 2011). A change in the approach to instructional design has been caused by the extensive access to a range of information thanks to modern information and communication technology. In the past the library, a book or a teacher were where students went to get questions answered (Rowlands et al., 2008). With the internet and other virtual sources of information this is no longer the case. Going forward, new instructional design models should take into account student interaction with these

new sources of information. Modern educational technology has a profound impact on instructional objectives, strategies, support and support systems that are part of the learning environment (Abrami et al., 2011). We now live in a fully networked world, where information can be found quickly, modified, and then disseminated again back onto the internet. The current web 2.0 applications available to teachers and learners are, ...contributing to less importance being placed on remembering facts and figures and increasing importance on the understanding of concepts, critique of information and sources, creativity, and the connections learners make (Tapscott & Williams, 2006). While understanding concepts remains an important aspect of learning, it is the critiquing, evaluating, developing, and sharing of thinking or knowledge which emerges from instructional design in the digital age (Starkey, 2011). This type of new approach to learning in a digital age is the reason why instructional designers should look toward social constructivist theories for inspiration. Tools and learning strategies rooted in social constructivist theory may work best when they are an integral feature of a course or program of study and not just something thats bolted onto more traditional instruction, or a previously completed instructional design. The true meaning of educational technology integration is when the tools are not separate from the content to be learned but are instead embedded within it (Abrami et al., 2011). Instructional designers who are up to par in their technical abilities cant rely on that alone to create the best learning materials. They will also need to understand social constructivist theories of learning in the digital age to most effectively incorporate knowledge creation, critique and sharing tools into their instruction (Starkey, 2011). In studies of teacher use of digital technologies, it has been found that the introduction of instructional technologies to teachers does not change their beliefs

about learning processes (Ertmer, 2005). Perhaps teachers need to also be educated in the areas of social constructivist learning theory. They need to develop teaching and learning practices to take advantage of everyday technologies, such as cell phones, social networking software, virtual environments, and learning management systems, which can help foster students collaboration in the learning process.

The Role of Technology in Collaborative Learning

The ideas of social constructivism and collaboration in instructional design are things that really hinge upon the concept of interaction. As a result, the early internet wasnt necessarily an environment where these types of theories or practices could flourish because web contact was mostly static in nature. In the early days the content on the internet was created by a small minority and the majority of users simply read content. According to Bell (2011),the growth of Web 2.0 services has made the read/write web more of a reality, with people becoming producers of information, whether that information is their online presence, a read count, comments, tagging of objects, a remix of someone elses content, or original content. Web 2.0 represents a collection of technologies in which the user has much greater participation than in Web 1.0: the established web technologies such as virtual learning environments (Hughes, 2009).The goal of using Web 2.0 technology in facilitating social constructivist theories is that social software and internet communication platforms allow for the possibility to create flexible, collaborative learning environments where needed instead of just using traditional computer laboratories (Vesisenaho et al., 2010). A key aspect of learning in a digitally enhanced Web 2.0 society is the ability to connect and collaborate with others beyond a constrained physical

environment (Starkey, 2011) The idea behind this is that new social software and Web 2.0 tools enable learners to connect with wider networks of people much more rapidly than using other traditional technologies such as email (Hughes, 2009). As a result, opportunities for students contacting fellow students for academic support and knowledge sharing are much greater. A learning management system such as Blackboard, WebCT, and Moodle provide an online environment rich in instructional support tools that provide opportunities for students to interact with each other, teachers, and subject matter experts through small group discussions and collaborative assignments. Discussion tools and collaborative group projects help build a sense of community (Scarnati & Garcia, 2008). According to Laurillard (2003), the core elements of an instructional process involving teachers, students and technology are that teachers and students talk to each other and exchange ideas, teachers set tasks for students, learners have opportunities to put ideas into practice, and learners need to reflect on what happens during their attempts to successfully complete tasks. Unlike the tools available in traditional classrooms, an online discussion space or other social oriented communication technology can act as a catalyst for a distributed theory of mind (Gomez et al., 2010). In traditional schools, where a large emphasis is often placed on taking standardized tests, the learning environment is designed around the condition that learning takes place only inside the head of a leaner (Gomez et al., 2010). All of these elements are things that can be easily facilitated using modern internet and communication technologies such as the learning management systems mentioned above. The tools and resources available in a completely online course create a rich, multifaceted learning environment. While engaging with course content, students are able to interact with the media, each other, and instructors while working through both self-paced and collaborative learning activities from wherever they are and at any time (Scarnati & Garcia, 2008). Teachers

can use the tools afforded by Moodle to individually design virtual classrooms using images, internet links, and technology tools that personalize the course design to a designers targeted learners. Through the use of technological learning tools, students engage in a course that is thought provoking, well integrated, and aesthetically appealing (Scarnati & Garcia, 2008). Ultimately it is less about the choice of technology to be used and more about the collaborative implementations of that technology. In addition, we must have instructional design that purposely seeks to maximize a learners knowledge construction using information and communication technologies that support social activity, interpretation and meaning making (Gomez et al., 2010).

Conclusion

Knowledge can be temporary, developmental, socially and culturally mediated. In its educational applications, social constructivism supports students active and creative engagement in learning based on communication, collaboration with others, technology tools and the learning environment. From the constructivist perspective, learning is understood as a self-regulating process of resolving inner cognitive conflicts that often become apparent through concrete experience, collaborative discourse, and cooperation (Balakrishnan et al., 2007). Instead of instructional designers providing course material that is set in stone, they need to embrace internet and communication technologies that allow learners to creating knowledge collaboratively. In this way they are not just consumers of information, but instead create and participate in the construction of knowledge, acting simultaneously as students and in a sense as

teachers (Vesisenaho et al., 2010). A process where both students and teacher have an active role in creating the learning environment with their earlier knowledge and ideas. Combining a collaborative oriented pedagogy, social constructivist learning theory and technology is a way forward to achieve a higher and better learning outcome.

Works Cited Abrami, P. C., Bernard, R. M., Bures, E. M., Borokhovski, E., &Tamim, R. M. (2011). Interaction in distance education and online learning: Using evidence and theory to improve practice. Journal Of Computing In Higher Education, 23(2-3), 82-103. Balakrishnan, M., Rossafri, M., & Soon Fook, F. (2007). Synergizing Pedagogy, Learning Theory and technology in instruction: How can it be done?. US-China Education Review , 4 (9) 46-53. Bell, F. (2011). Connectivism: Its place in theory-informed research and innovation in technology-enabled learning. International review of research in open and distance learning, 12(3), 98-118. Boitshwarelo, B. (2011). Proposing an integrated research framework for connectivism: Utilising theoretical synergies. International Review Of Research In Open & Distance Learning, 12(3), 161-179. Brown, J., Xerox Corp., P. r., BBN Labs, I. A., & And, O. (1988). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Technical Report, 481 Dawson, M. (2010). Review of "The Cambridge handbook of situated cognition". Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 51(1), 69-71. doi:10.1037/a0018346 Ertmer, P.A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration? Educational Technology, Research and Development, 53(4), 2540. Giere, R. N. (2007). Distributed cognition without distributed knowing. Social Epistemology, 21(3), 313-320. doi:10.1080/0269172070167419

Gomez, M., Schieble, M., Curwood, J., &Hassett, D. (2010). Technology, learning and instruction: distributed cognition in the secondary English classroom. Literacy, 44(1), 20 27. doi:10.1111/j.1741-4369.2010.00541.x Hughes, G. (2009). Social software: New opportunities for challenging social inequalities in learning?. Learning, Media And Technology, 34(4), 291-305. Jonassen, D., & Land, S. (2000). Theoretical foundations of learning environments. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Laurillard, D. (2003). Rethinking university teaching a conversational framework for the effective use of learning technologies, Routledge/Flamer London & New York Lin, T., Hsu, Y., & Cheng, Y. (2011). Emerging innovative teacher education from situated cognition in a web-based environment. Turkish Online Journal Of Educational Technology - TOJET, 10(2), 100-112. Rowlands, I., Nicholas, D., Huntington, P., Gunter, B., Withey, R., Dobrowolski, T., et al. (2008). Information behaviour of the researcher of the future. Scanlon, E. (2010). Technology enhanced learning in science: Interactions, affordances and design based research. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 8 Scarnati, B., & Garcia, P. (2008).The fusion of learning theory and technology in an online music history course redesign. Innovate: Journal Of Online Education, 4(2), Shaffer, D. W., & Clinton, K. A. (2006). Toolforthoughts: Reexamining thinking in the digital age. Mind, Culture &Activity, 13(4), 283300.

Siemens, G., & Conole, G. (2011). Special Issue - Connectivism: Design and delivery of social networked learning. International Review Of Research In Open & Distance Learning, 12(3), 1. Starkey, L. (2011). Evaluating learning in the 21st century: A digital age learning matrix. Technology, Pedagogy And Education, 20(1), 19-39. Tapscott, D., & Williams, A.D. (2006). Wikinomics: How mass collaboration changes everything. New York: Portfolio. Vesisenaho, M., Valtonen, T., Kukkonen, J., Havu-Nuutinen, S., Hartikainen, A., &Karkkainen, S. (2010). Blended learning with everyday technologies to activate students' collaborative learning. Science Education International, 21(4), 272-283. Wenger, E. 1998. Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. New York: Cambridge University Press.