Fostering Learning Communities in Classrooms:

A Case Study of Hong Kong Schools

Allan H. K. Yuen, Hong Kong

Abstracts
Over the past few years, curriculum innovation has been regarded as an essential strategy for educational reform throughout
the era of educational change. Because of the changing nature of the knowledge age, students need to develop ways of dealing
with complex issues and problems that require different kinds of skills and knowledge they have ever learned. Given the
advancement of information and communications technologies (ICT), a number of cases of building learning communities
in classrooms have been developed in recent years. Realizing the impact of this new learning culture, six primary schools in
Hong Kong participated in the implementation of building learning communities through science project works. During the
project, students from different schools engaged in the discussion and knowledge construction using a computer mediated
communication (CMC) platform called Knowledge Forum. The aim of this case study is to explore the role of ICT in building
learning communities and the conditions are essential to building learning communities from the different ways that students
and teachers experienced the processes of community and knowledge construction using Knowledge Forum. Through the
analysis of the interviews of students and teachers, conditions that support learning community building were emerged in
three major themes, namely, conceptions of learning, knowledge construction processes, and development of social processes.

Les communautés d’apprentissage dans les classes: une étude de cas

Durant les années passées, l’innovation dans les curricula a été considérée comme une stratégie essentielle pour toute réforme
éducative dans cette période de changement éducatif. A cause de la nature changeante des connaissances, les étudiants doivent
développer des moyens de traiter les issues et les problèmes complexes qui requièrent des compétences et des savoirs qu’ils
n’ont jamais eus. Etant donné l’avancement des technologies de l’information et de la communication (ICT-TIC), de
nombreux cas de création de communautés d’apprentissage dans les classes ont été observés pendant les années récentes.
Réalisant l’impact de cette nouvelle culture d’enseignement, 6 écoles primaires de Hong Kong ont participé à la mise en œuvre
de communautés d’apprentissage à l’occasion d’un projet en sciences. Pendant ce projet les élèves des différentes écoles se sont
engagés dans la discussion et la construction du savoir en utilisant une plateforme de CMC appelé Forum de Savoir. Le but
de cette étude de cas est d’explorer le rôle des (ICT-TIC) dans la construction de ces communautés d’apprentissage et les
conditions essentielles pour les construire à partir de la facon dont maîtres et élèves ont expérimenté les processus impliqués
dans ce Forum. Grâce à l’analyse des interviews des élèves et des maîtres, les conditions qui supportent la construction de cette
communauté sont apparues sous forme de 3 thèmes majeurs: les conceptions de l’apprentissage, la connaissance des processus
de construction et le développement des processus sociaux.

Lerngemeinschaften im Klassenzimmer: Eine Fallstudie

In den letzten Jahren ist die Curriculum-Erneuerung als eine wesentliche Strategie für Bildungsreformen in Zeiten des
Wandels in der Erziehung betrachtet worden. Wegen der Änderungen im Wissensalter müssen Studenten Handlungsweisen
für den Umgang mit komplexen Sachverhalten und Problemen entwickeln, die andere Arten von Fähigkeiten und anderes
Wissen erfordern, als sie jemals gelernt haben. Auf Grund der Fortschritte in den Informations- und
Kommunikationstechnologien (ICT) haben sich in den vergangenen Jahren eine Reihe von Lerngemeinschaften innerhalb
von Schulungsräumen entwickelt. Unter dem Eindruck der Auswirkungen dieser neuen Lernkultur wurden sechs
Grundschulen von Hongkong durch wissenschaftliche Projektarbeiten in den Aufbau von Lerngemeinschaften mit
einbezogen. Während der Projektarbeiten haben sich Studenten verschiedener anderer Schulen mit Hilfe einer Computer
gestützen Kommunikationssoftware ,,Knowledge Forum’ (CMC) in die Diskussionen und Sacherarbeitungen beteiligt. Diese
Fallstudie soll die Rolle von ICT beim Aufbau von Lerngemeinschaften sowie die wesentlichen Bedingungen, die den Aufbau
von Lerngemeinschaften fördern, erforschen. Dabei sollen auch die unterschiedlichen Wege, die Studenten und Lehrer bei
der Arbeit mit Knowledge Forum eingeschlagen haben, untersucht werden. Durch die Analyse der Interviews von Studenten

Education Media International

ISSN 0952–3987 print/ISSN 1469–5790 online © 2003 International Council for Education Media
http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
DOI: 10.1080/0952398032000092198
154 EMI 40:1/2 – COMPUTER MEDIATED COMMUNICATION

und Lehrern zeichneten sich drei Hauptthemen, die die Bildung von Lerngemeinschaften fördern, ab: die Lernkonzeption,
der Wissensaufbau und die Entwicklung der sozialen Prozesse.

Introduction
The notion of knowledge society and knowledge work has been advocated in recent years. As Drucker pointed
out, ‘the most valuable asset of a 21st century institution, whether business or non-business, will be its knowledge
workers and their productivity’ (1999, p. 79). Education, as central to a knowledge society, must produce people
who are able to create and gain advantages from the new knowledge (Bereiter, 2002). To address the demand of
knowledge society, curriculum innovation has been regarded as an essential strategy for educational reform
throughout the era of educational change over the past years.
Because of the changing nature of work and society, students need to develop ways of dealing with complex
issues and problems that require different kinds of knowledge that they have ever learned. Therefore, they need
to work and listen to others, they need to be able to learn new things from a variety of resources and people, they
need to be able to investigate questions and bring their learning back to the community. The idea of learning
communities has been introduced for more than two decades (Caverly and MacDonald, 2002). However, there
has arisen in recent years an online learning communities approach to education (Collins and Bielaczyc, 1997).
As a curriculum innovation, this approach fits with the growing emphasis on lifelong learning and knowledge
work. There is a culture of learning underlying this approach, in which students are involved in a collective effort
of understanding with an emphasis on diversity of expertise, shared objective, learning how to learn and sharing
what is learned (Bielaczyc and Collins, 1999). Given the advancement of information and communications
technologies (ICT), a number of models have been proposed to bring students and teachers together in learning
communities, such as knowledge-society, telementoring, connected-classrooms, teacher-community and shared-
passions (Collins and Bielaczyc, 1997).
Roschelle et al. (2000), drawn from findings of cognitive research on effective learning, highlighted ways of ICT
can enhance student learning by supporting the four fundamental characteristics of learning: (a) active
engagement, (b) participation in groups, (c) frequent interaction and feedback and (d) connections to real-world
context. ICT in particular the Internet technologies have been translated into a number of strategies for teaching
and learning (Jonassen et al., 1999). Computer-mediated communications (CMC) tools can provide a unique
bridge between the classroom and the world beyond (Fishman, 1999); they allow instruction to become more
authentic and students engaging in collaborative projects (Rose and Winterfeldt, 1998). CMC are being
increasingly used as resources to enhance teaching and learning (Harasim et al., 1996; Glaser and Poole, 1999).
In a study of the use of CMC tools among students, Fishman (1999) indicated that skills and experience with
computers, parental educational background, access to computers and academic self-concept are significant
predictors of student CMC activity.
‘The Internet is enabling the emergence of new mechanism of human association which are shaped by – yet also
shape – the development of this new medium of communication’ (Slevin, 2000, p. 90). Brown pointed out ‘the
most promising use of Internet is where the buoyant partnership of people and technology creates powerful new
online learning communities’ (1999, p. 19). However, the concept of community is a particularly elusive one
(Slevin, 2000). Common definitions of community have usually included three ingredients: (a) interpersonal
networks that provide sociability, social support, and social capital to their members, (b) residence in a common
locality, such as a village or neighbourhood and (c) solidary sentiments and activities (Wellman, 1999).
Communities, which were once defined by location, are coming to be defined by common interests in the
knowledge age (Collins and Bielaczyc, 1997).
Learning communities are groups of people who investigate problems and share what they learn with others in
the community, thus advancing both their individual knowledge and the community’s knowledge (Collins and
Bielaczyc, 1997). To realize these models of learning, social communication is required as human efforts are the
important elements. However, the development of a strong learning community is different from the
development of social community though ‘social communication is an essential component of educational
activity’ (Harasim et al., 1996, p. 137). Learning communities are complex systems and networks that allow
adaptation and change ( Jonassen et al., 1999). What are the processes in learning communities that advance
students’ learning experience? How does this innovation compare to the conventional pedagogy? These
questions need to be addressed.
Knowledge Forum (KF) – the second generation product of the Computer-Supported Intentional Learning
Environment (CSILE) project (Scaradamalia and Bereiter, 1991) – is a CMC platform designed to facilitate the
 Learning Communities in Hong Kong Classrooms 155

inquiry process, knowledge construction and enhance effective collaboration. KF allows users to create learning
communities. KF adopts the approach of sustained, collaborative inquiry for knowledge construction (Scardamalia
and Bereiter, 1991). The basic idea of the KF environment is that knowledge is brought into the environment and
something is done collectively to it that enhances its value. The goal is to maximize the value added to knowledge –
either the public knowledge represented in the community database or the private knowledge and skill of the
individual learner. The common feature of KF projects is that learning is seen from the perspective of participating
in a knowledge building community (Scardamalia and Bereiter, 1991).
Collaboration is an essential element in learning communities. Knowledge building in learning communities
takes the creation of knowledge as social product (Scardamalia and Bereiter, 1996). Collaborative learning
provides opportunities for students to critique, justify and, more importantly, to build knowledge as a team. A
learning community can help individual learners achieve what they cannot on their own. In addition, complex
cognitive processing is required in such collaborative project work and can serve as a catalyst for higher-order
learning.
Knowledge building, as carried on in schools, is likely to be viewed and evaluated as a learning activity (Bereiter,
2002). However, knowledge building is different from traditional learning that focuses on individual assignments
and various other individual performance of knowledge ability. The distinction between learning and knowledge
is not clear. However, the educational objective in traditional pedagogy is clearly translated into ‘some regulated
way of letting students follow their own inclination – in writing, speaking, making, or doing’ (Bereiter, 2002,
p. 267). This tends to separate teaching from learning.
In simple terms, teaching means taking responsibility for students’ learning and carrying through the actual
problem solving required to bring that learning about (Bereiter, 2002). To integrate teaching and learning with
the idea of knowledge building, educators and teachers have to understand the following: ‘(a) knowledge building
is not just a process, it is aimed at creating a product; (b) that product is some kind of conceptual artifact – for
instance, an explanation or a design or a historical account or an interpretation of a literacy work; (c) a
conceptual artifact is not something in the minds of the students; (d) it is not something material or visible, either;
and (e) it is nevertheless real and preferably something students can use’ (Bereiter, 2002, p. 295). When knowledge
building is considered as a way of learning, we need to understand teachers’ as well as students’ roles in the
knowledge building process and critical factors for community building and knowledge construction.
However, this culture of learning is not currently emphasized in schools. Realizing the impact of this new learning
culture, six primary schools in Hong Kong participated in the implementation of building learning communities
among Primary 5 students through science project works. During the project works, students from different schools
engaged in the discussion and knowledge construction using KF. However, the mere presence of technology
implementation in the classroom does not ensure effective use. There are indeed many factors influence the
implementation. The aim of this paper is to report a case study in exploring the role of ICT in building learning
communities and the conditions are essential to building learning communities from the different ways that
students and teachers experienced the processes of community and knowledge construction using KF.
Implications of building learning communities in classrooms to conventional pedagogy are also discussed.

Method
The design of this research was a case study focused on exploring the role of ICT and conditions are essential
to building learning communities from the different ways that students and teachers experienced the processes of
community and knowledge construction using KF. A case study does not attempt to ‘describe everything’ (Yin,
1998), it is rather an intensive description and analysis of a ‘bounded system’ (Smith, 1978) for the purpose of
gaining an in-depth understanding of the situation and meaning those involved. The current case study
particularly aims to depict qualitatively different ways of how students and teachers perceived various
phenomena of knowledge construction and community building on a CMC platform.
Knowledge Forum Client version 3.4 (Figure 1) was used throughout the project implementation. The central
activity of the KF community is students’ contributions to the communal knowledge bases, and contributions can
take the following forms: (a) individual note, in which students state problems, advance initial theories or improve
theories; (b) build-on, which allows students to connect new notes to existing notes; and (c) rise-above, which
allows students to summarize and synthesize a group of related notes. About eight hundred Primary 5 students
and 24 teachers from six primary schools in Hong Kong participated in inter-school science project works during
the second semester in the academic year 2001–2002. Students’ projects were around three themes, namely,
156 EMI 40:1/2 – COMPUTER MEDIATED COMMUNICATION

Figure 1 An example of Knowledge Forum view

formation of oil and coal, why there are twins, and development of a well-planned city. Using the KF, students
from different schools engaged in discussion and knowledge construction, and thus learning communities were
formed. In the post-project evaluation, 72% of students found that the KF was helpful for their learning. The 24
participated teachers also indicated positive feedback on using KF in the processes of project-based learning.
Data collection included focus group interviews of students and teachers from the six primary schools. After the
project works on the KF, thirty students from six schools were selected for group interviews, including students
with high, medium, and low participation rate of writing and reading KF notes. Eleven teachers were chosen
from six schools for group interviews. Semi-structured interviews with students and teachers were analysed to
conceptualize various categories of variations in their perception, understanding, and reflection on their
experiences in the KF learning communities.

Results
Three major themes were found from the iterative analysis of the interview data, namely, conceptions of
learning, knowledge construction processes and development of social processes. Data analysis also resulted in
the emergence of categories for these themes. Findings are summarized in Table 1.

Conceptions of learning
Conceptions of learning provide the foundation for knowledge communities. The data analysis resulted in the
emergence of three categories for conceptions of learning. In the first category of learning conception,
transmission of information, learning is perceived as a process of information transmission from teacher to
students. Teachers play an essential role of guiding students in getting information resources and students are
passive receivers, as illustrated by the following comments from a teacher and a student:
Up to now, our students can’t find resources by themselves. They need to rely on teachers. For instance, they won’t
search for relevant web resources. Instead, they will ask how web resources can be obtained from us. (Extracted from
teachers’ interview)
Under teachers’ help, we’re guided to get information resources at the very beginning. (extracted from students’
interview)
 Learning Communities in Hong Kong Classrooms 157

Table 1 Summary of findings

Themes Categories
Conceptions of learning Transmission of information
Learning with teachers
Learning with peers
Peer co-construction process Guided construction
Knowledge co-construction
Development of social processes Community building
Community acceptance

Students under this learning conception show strong preference of face-to-face learning in school and classroom
context than using the KF for discussion. Getting answers to problems from teachers were expected:
Yes, I’d rather prefer school learning. Unlike learning on KF focusing merely on one discussion topic, we learn more
in schools. And teachers can help us answer hard learning problems. (Extracted from students’ interview)
I think its’ more effective in classroom learning. Teachers can pinpoint our learning mistakes, whilst classmates can’t
confirm answers. That’s why it is better to have classroom learning than collaborative learning on KF. (extracted from
students’ interview)
Such students have no idea about how to find answers to problems. Thus, the major learning task under this
category is to find the ‘correct’ answers provided by teachers:
Yes, because teachers’ answers were more accurate than peers. (Extracted from students’ interview)
I needed to find out many webs for them, and they also searched for some. However, they always don’t understand in
particular the English web sites. So they have no idea about the answers. During the process, we needed to let them
know the answers step by step. (Extracted from teachers’ interview)
In the second category of learning conception, learning with teachers, learning is perceived as mixed processes
involving both teachers and students. Unlike the first category, these students, on one hand, would like to learn
with their peers, but, on the other hand, teachers still play an important role in helping student to get desirable
learning outcomes.
Whilst sharing with peers, we can also learn with teachers on KF. (Extracted from students’ interview)
In some case, they encountered technical terms when searching for web information. They couldn’t understand such
terms. They couldn’t know where to find out relevant web sources. That’s why we needed to help them. We had to
figure out any path for them to get desirable outcomes through discussion. Otherwise, they’d be sidetracked. (Extracted
from teachers’ interview)
Nevertheless, both teachers and students realized that KF can help student learning and teacher is not the only
source of knowledge:
Now, I realize at the beginning, we needed to guide our kids step by step. But now it is unnecessary. Once they know
how to carry out ongoing discussion on KF, they can develop further by themselves. Currently, I just read their notes
to see their progress without any interruption. (Extracted from teachers’ interview)
I think KF can help us learn. We don’t need to get answers solely from teachers. We can freely go wherever relevant
information, raise questions for consideration by ourselves. Through close investigation, we’ll find correct answers in
future. (Extracted from students’ interview)
In the third category of learning conception, learning with peers, learning is moved from teacher-directed or
textbook-based orientation towards collaborative learning. KF provides a new aspect of learning method for
students:
At first, I felt bored with other school partners as they’re unfamiliar with us. But once more KF notes were posted,
I am happy when looking at theirs and that learning atmosphere was more suitable. In classrooms, I need to open
158 EMI 40:1/2 – COMPUTER MEDIATED COMMUNICATION

textbooks strictly and forced to listen teachers’ voices. On KF, you could freely find out information and then discussed
with peers. KF is a new discovery in our learning aspects. (Extracted from students’ interview)
Through KF, we find better learning methods. What we get is fresher and the degree of our participation is greater
than before. (Extracted from students’ interview)

Such students found that learning from peers and learning with peers is an indispensable approach to learning:
When learning with senior school fellows, I can learn more things that were previously misunderstood. And I think they
can provide more accurate KF notes. (Extracted from students’ interview)
Since we discuss with school partners in a group on KF, we learn more from bright ones. (Extracted from students’
interview)
I’d like to learn with peers. Because what we get from adults (including teachers) are difficult to understand. (Extracted
from students’ interview)

Furthermore, KF can help to promote science learning and make the subject more interesting among students:
Before using KF, I was not fond of learning science. But after using it, I have greater learning interests in science.
(Extracted from students’ interview)
On KF platform, we can strengthen knowledge by mutually posing ideas. Thinking more what we gain and then work
out straightly. (Extracted from students’ interview)
In this section, variations of learning conceptions among teachers and students were presented. However, the
conception of ‘learning with peers’ could not be clearly found in teachers’ interview.

Knowledge construction processes

Knowledge construction is crucial to project works. Through the use of communal databases, knowledge is
pursued and constructed to deeper levels. The analysis of interviews resulted in the emergence of two categories
for knowledge construction processes. In the first category of knowledge construction processes, guided
construction, knowledge construction is perceived as a product of teachers’ guidance:
We (as teachers) can’t let students discuss by themselves. We need to guide them to have discussion. (Extracted from
teachers’ interview)
Some teachers realized their role have been changed from knowledge provider to providing guidance and
directions for students in the discussion:
I’ve done more things. For instance, give them guidelines. So they’ve got directions for discussion. Before, the teacher’s
role was that teachers asked questions. But now when learning science through KF, students actively learn to ask
questions whilst teachers need give them valuable help especially finding relevant web contents for them. (Extracted
from teachers’ interview)
In fact, our role is being changed. We don’t dominate learning. Knowledge sources are no longer from us or textbook,
but we’ve played a very important role. (Extracted from teachers’ interview)
KF can help students to focus their discussion in the knowledge construction process:
It must be related to twins (i.e. the project topic). We can’t write irrelevant things on KF. (Extracted from students’
interview)
Because of not seeking any information, related to other notes, we create new KF notes, focused on twins (i.e. the
project topic), and related to other existing notes. (Extracted from students’ interview)
Students found that searching information and knowledge construction are closely related:
We learn about computers when using KF. We also learn how to search information, unlike the past case of doing
projects. Now we have to search information from the Internet or library. Throughout the search process, we learn
more knowledge and thereby we gain a lot. (Extracted from students’ interview)
 Learning Communities in Hong Kong Classrooms 159

Under the category of guided construction, teachers perceived knowledge construction as students’
self-extraction from information sources or KF notes:
That’s students explored into, or searched for the most abundant information from web sources, carried out analysis,
might sum up, get new things done, and subsequently a project came out. That meant self-extraction of knowledge
from the public webs including KF. This was what we mean by knowledge construction. (Extracted from teachers’
interview)
In the second category of knowledge construction processes, peer co-construction, knowledge construction is
perceived as finding answers or having understanding of certain problems through sharing and communication
with others on the KF.
The more you pose KF notes, the more you address other problems, construct other aspects of knowledge, and find
out other related answers to the same studying problems with better understanding. This is what we mean by knowledge
construction. (Extracted from students’ interview)
In communicating with others on KF, I can figure out wrong things. (Extracted from students’ interview)
In the process of peer co-construction, students post questions or responses to the threaded discussion on KF.
Using questions as catalyst, students initiate the construction of knowledge:
Without relating others’ answers with mine on KF, we posted questions to wait for others to answer. (Extracted from
students’ interview)
What we learn from KF is more impressive, especially the structure of learning and questioning. (Extracted from
students’ interview)
In the peer co-construction process, students sometimes played the ‘devil’s advocate’ and questioned the
‘mistakes’ made by peers:
We’ll find out correct solutions and show others where they made mistakes. KF provides chances of communicating
with others. It is because the better the communications means, the more frequent they would ask you how you acquire
knowledge. It is possible to encounter incompatible viewpoints with other school partners. We’d like to investigate how
we obtain knowledge mutually. (Extracted from students’ interview)
This is why we create new notes, as we can judge which are right and wrong things on KF through discussion. Others
will pose new notes, informing me of such things. Consequently, we mutually know that new answers are correct.
(Extracted from students’ interview)
Co-operative development of shared knowledge is the focus of KF. Students learn from each other through co-
operation on the KF:
We pose notes, mutually complementary to each other on KF. (Extracted from students’ interview)
Yes, exactly. Others teach me, I teach others. This is what we learn from each other on KF. (Extracted from students’
interview)
Without co-operations, I can’t know why I have made mistakes and never know the answers. (Extracted from students’
interview)
In the peer co-construction process, students perceived the product of collaborative learning and knowledge
construction on KF is a growing process.
The product of our collaborative learning looks like a baby. At the start, we know nothing, like its innocence. In the
ongoing process of posing KF notes, the baby starts to grow up. The more we build up knowledge, the more
knowledgeable it becomes and more relationships we find. (Extracted from students’ interview)
I’ll look at KF notes. Whenever I detect others’ errors, I’ll point them out and make corrections on KF. Knowledge
grows in this way. (Extracted from students’ interview)
This section has attempted to describe the perception of students and teachers on knowledge construction. The
perception of ‘guided construction’ was common among teachers, whereas a number of students perceived the
importance of ‘co-construction’ in the knowledge construction processes.
160 EMI 40:1/2 – COMPUTER MEDIATED COMMUNICATION

Development of social processes

Within CMC learning environments, the dimensions of social interactions that mediate learning are important.
The analysis of interviews resulted in the emergence of two categories for development of social processes. In
the first category of social processes, community building, students needed to make connections by finding
similarities in background, motivation and commitment (Caverly and MacDonald, 2002). Therefore, the
communication on KF in this initial stage was limit to project group members within the same school.
I write a few KF notes. I only like to read others’ and combine others’ with my feelings towards theirs. It is because
I fear having wrong answers. (Extracted from students’ interview)
Learn from discussion. I’d like to discuss with my school partners, but not with another school’s. They’d like to have
harsh comments on ours, due to unfamiliarity. (Extracted from students’ interview)
In the second category of social processes, community acceptance, students established and developed a sense of
membership through collaboration and discussion on the KF (Caverly and MacDonald, 2002). Students found
themselves teammates of a learning community and discussed with group members from other schools.
I think KF would help us discuss with other school partners. It is more probable that we get wrong things when
discussing with our own school partners. Yet during ongoing process of discussing with unfamiliar persons, we’ll have
deeper investigation and find out the best answers together. (Extracted from students’ interview)
I think we’re a team in the learning community. I know they are outsiders. But provided that they make contributions
to KF such as posing problems, providing correct answers ands sharing good ideas, we’re team members. (Extracted
from students’ interview)
It has been shown in this section that the sense of membership is extremely important in the development of
social processes of a learning community.

Discussion
What is the role of KF in building learning communities in classrooms? It is evident that ICT tools can help
establish a collaborative learning network with abundant information resources, support asynchronous as well as
synchronous working modes and flexible learning environments. In general, CMC tools can help archive the
work of community and facilitate communication (Gilbert and Driscoll, 2002). The results of the present case
study revealed that KF supported (a) students’ active engagement, (b) participation in groups, (c) discourse among
community members and (d) open access to shared information. Following Roschellee et al. (2000), KF is not only
a CMC tool fostering knowledge construction and community building but shifting the focus of classroom
instruction to a communal approach to learning. However, difficulties faced by Hong Kong schools in adopting
the KF environment are revealed in the current case study. Technical support is the first hurdle. Teachers and
students need to be trained in knowledge and technical skills of using KF. Human as well as technical resources
are essential in particular for the installation and maintenance of the KF platform. Another major difficulty
would come from teachers. As a general observation, teachers in primary schools incline to conventional view of
teaching and learning which would minimize the possibility of building learning communities in classrooms.
What are the conditions essential to building learning communities in classrooms? Caverly and MacDonald
(2002) summarize four processes provided the foundations for an online learning community: (a) response
processes help students from non-responding to responding; (b) reasoning processes move students to deep
clarification and judgement; (c) supportive interactive processes occur when students help each other and reflects
on the community effectiveness and (d) social processes provide group cohesiveness. These processes focus on
interpersonal and group orientation of learning communities. The current case study, focused on socio-cognitive
dimensions, indicated similar findings on the essential conditions to building learning communities in classrooms:
conceptions of learning, knowledge construction processes and development of social processes, in which
conceptions of learning provided the foundation for learning communities, knowledge construction was the core
activity, and the development of social processes was the vehicle of learning communities and made knowledge
construction happened. In order to foster the culture of learning communities in schools, the current case study
reveals that school level factors are crucial, which include school culture, leadership, teacher professional
development and technical support.
Building learning communities in classrooms is no doubt a pedagogical innovation. However, the implementation
of such innovation in classrooms would pose challenges to the conventional pedagogy. These challenges are
 Learning Communities in Hong Kong Classrooms 161

certainly the barriers to fostering learning communities in schools. First, learning is perceived as the result of
individual rather than group, which is a key assumption about teaching and learning in conventional pedagogy
(Krechevsky and Stork, 2000). The notion of learning communities is opposed to such assumption where
learning is viewed as an individual pursuit, instructional activities discourage the sharing of knowledge, and the
goal is to transmit the textbook’s and teacher’s knowledge to students (Bielaczyc and Collins, 1999). The
challenge is how teachers can change this deep-rooted assumption. From the experience of the current case study,
students seemed to be more open than teachers in adopting the KF environment. Thus, the emphasis of learning
communities approach in teacher education should be considered.
Second, ‘through learning communities, students and teachers reject the notion that education is
a fragmentary act of receiving and giving compartmentalized bits knowledge’ (Howard & England-Kennedy,
2001, p. 78). In order to help students meet the challenges of a knowledge-based society, the holistic approach to
knowledge as well as education should be emphasized in school curriculum development. Learning, teaching,
and assessment should be well integrated to construct holistic learning experiences for students.
Bereiter argues there are three pillars of conventional pedagogy, ‘reduction to subject matter, reduction to
activities, and reduction to self-expression’ (2002, p. 267). Schools are always called on to teach something new.
Nevertheless, teachers often do it by relying on a standard set of reductive moves that convert the new challenge
into something they already have the tools or methods to handle. The third challenge is that how teachers avoid
the ‘pitfall of reduction’ in the implementation of learning communities in schools. Thus, teachers should have
a clear conceptual framework during their implementation of learning communities in classrooms. They need to
be aware that building learning communities in classrooms is not just another ‘new’ activity.
Effective use of ICT in classrooms is not a simple task. There are many kinds of technology and many ways of
application. The research reported in this paper is a pioneering project on building leaning communities using
KF in Hong Kong at primary level. As an initial study, the present case study aims to describe and understand
the situations of using KF in building learning communities among primary classrooms. To help inform future
development of online learning communities in classrooms, further explorations in the following issues would be
recommended: (a) how online learning communities can help and advance students’ cognitive learning; (b) how
online learning communities can integrate with the subject to make complex curriculum accessible to students;
and (c) how social engineering can improve collaboration, knowledge construction and community building.

Acknowledgements
The case study reported in this article was based on the research project ‘Building Learning Communities in
Primary Schools through Project Works and Knowledge Construction’, funded by the Quality Education Fund
under the Education and Manpower Bureau of the Hong Kong SAR Government.

References
Bereiter, C (2002) Education and Mind in the Knowledge Age, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
Bielaczyc, K and Collins, A (1999) Learning communities in classroom: advancing knowledge for a lifetime,
NASSP Bulletin, February, 4–10.
Brown, ME (1999) Beyond the first wave: a framework for online learning, Journal of Online Learning, 11, 1, 15–21.
Caverly, DC and MacDonald, L (2002) Online learning communities, Journal of Developmental Education, 25, 3,
36–37.
Collins, A and Bielaczyc, K (1997) Dreams of technology-supported learning communities, Proceedings of the Sixth
International Conference on Computer-Assisted Instruction, Taiwan.
Drucker, FP (1999) Knowledge worker productivity: the biggest challenge, California Management Review, 41, 2,
79–94.
Fishman, BJ (1999) Characteristics of students related to computer-mediated communications activities, Journal
of Research on Computing in Education, 32, 1, 73–97.
Gilbert, NJ and Driscoll, MP (2002) Collaborative knowledge building: a case study, Educational Technology Research
and Development, 50, 1, 59–79.
Glaser, RE and Poole, MJ (1999) Organic chemistry online: building collaborative learning communities through
electronic communication tools, Journal of Chemical Education, 76, 5, 699–703.
Harasim, L, Hiltz, SR, Teles, L and Turoff, M (1996) Learning Networks, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Howard, A and England-Kennedy, ES (2001) Transgressing boundaries through learning communities, Journal of
Co-operative Education, 36, 1, 76–82.
162 EMI 40:1/2 – COMPUTER MEDIATED COMMUNICATION

Jonassen, DH, Peck, KL and Wilson, BG (1999) Learning with Technology: A Constructivist Perspective, Prentice Hall,
Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Krechevsky, M and Stork, J (2000) Challenging educational assumptions: lessons from an Italian-American
collaboration, Cambridge Journal of Education, 30, 1, 57–74.
Roschelle, JM, Pea, RD, Hoadley, CM, Gordin, DN and Means, BM (2000) Changing how and what children
learn in school with computer-based technologies, The Future of Children, 10, 2, 76–101.
Rose, SA and Winterfeldt, HF (1998) Waking the sleeping giant: a learning community in social studies methods
and technology, Social Education, 62, 3, 151–152.
Scardamalia, M and Bereiter, C (1991) Higher levels of agency for children in knowledge building: A challenge
for the design of new knowledge media, The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 1, 1, 37–68.
Scardamalia, M and Bereiter, C (1996) Student communities for the advancement of knowledge, Communications
of the ACM, 39, 1, 36–37.
Slevin, J (2000) The Internet and Society, Blackwell Publishers, Malden, USA.
Smith, LM (1978) An evolving logic of participant observation, educational ethnography and other case studies.
In Shuman, L (ed.) Review of research in education, Vol. 6, Peacock, Itasca, IL, pp. 316–377.
Wellman, B (1999) The network community: an introduction. In Wellman, B (ed.) Networks in the Global Village: Life
in Contemporary Communities, Westview Press, Oxford.
Yin, RK (1998) The abridged version of case study research: design and method. In Bickman, L and Rog, DJ
(eds) Handbook of Applied Social Research Methods, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 229–259.

Biographical note
Allan H.K. Yuen, PhD, is Head of the Division of Information and Technology Studies, Faculty of Education
at the University of Hong Kong.

Address for correspondence

Allan H.K. Yuen, Faculty of Education, University of Hong Kong. Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong SAR, China; e-
mail: hkyuen@hkucc.hku.hk