Long-Term Teacher Orchestration of Technology-mediated Collaborative Inquiry

References

• Alexander, R. J. (2008). Towards dialogic teaching: Rethinking classroom talk (4th ed.). York: Dialogos.
   Google Scholar
• Angelillo, C., Rogoff, B., & Chavajay, P. (2007). Examining shared endeavors by abstracting video coding schemes. In R. Goldman, R. Pea, B. Barron & S. J. Denny (Eds.), Video research in the learning sciences (pp. 189–206). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Ash, D. (2007). Using video data to capture discontinuous science meaning making in nonschool setting. In R. Goldman, R. Pea, B. Barron & S. J. Denny (Eds.), Video research in the learning sciences (pp. 207–226). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Barker, L., & Porko, H. (2011). Conclusion: Presence and the art of improvisational teaching. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Structure and improvisation in creative teaching (pp. 279–298). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Barlex, D. (2007) Assessing capability in design and technology: The case for a minimally invasive approach. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 12(2), 49–56.
   Google Scholar
• Beghetto, R., & Kaufman, J. (2011). Teaching for creativity with disciplined improvisation. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Structure and improvisation in creative teaching (pp. 94–111). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Béguin, P., & Rabardel, P. (2000). Designing for instrument-mediated activity. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 12, 173–190.
   Google Scholar
• Bielaczyc, K. (2006). Designing social infrastructure: Critical issues in creating learning environments with technology. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(3), 301–329. doi:10.1207/s15327809jls1503_1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bielaczyc, K. (2013). Informing design research: Learning from teachers’ designs of social infrastructure. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 22(2), 258–311. doi:10.1080/10508406.2012.691925
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bybee, R. W. (2000). Teaching science as inquiry. In J. Minstrell and E. H. v. Zee (Eds.), Inquiring into inquiry learning and teaching in science (pp. 20–46). Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
   Google Scholar
• Cazden, C. B. (2001). The classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth: Heinemann.
   Google Scholar
• Chan, C. (2011). Bridging research and practice: Implementing and sustaining knowledge building in Hong Kong classrooms. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6(2), 147–186. doi:10.1007/s11412-011-9121-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chi, M. T. H. (1997). Quantifying qualitative analyses of verbal data: A practical guide. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(3), 271–315. doi:10.1207/s15327809jls0603_1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chinn, C. A., & Malhotra, B. A. (2002). Epistemologically authentic reasoning in schools: A theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks. Science Education, 86, 175–218. doi: 10.1002/sce.10001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Derry, S. J., Pea, R. D., Barron, B., Engle, R. A., Erickson, F., Goldman, R., Hall, R.,  …  Sherin, B.L. (2010). Conducting video research in the learning sciences: Guidance on selection, analysis, technology, and ethics. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19(1), 3–53. doi:10.1080/10508400903452884
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dillenbourg, P., & Jermann, P. (2007). Designing integrative scripts. In F. Fischer, I. Kollar, H. Mandl & J. M. Haake (Eds.), Scripting computer-supported collaborative learning: Cognitive, computational, and educational perspectives (pp. 275–301). New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Dillenbourg, P., Järvelä, S., & Fischer, F. (2009). The evolution of research on computer-supported collaborative learning: From design to orchestration. In N. Balacheff, S. Ludvigsen, T. de Jong, A. Lazonder & S. Barnes (Eds.), Technology-enhanced learning, principles and products (pp. 3–19). Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Dillenbourg, P. (2013). Design for classroom orchestration. Computers & Education, 69, 485–492. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.04.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dillenbourg, P. (2015). Orchestration graphs: Modelling scalable education. Lausanne: EPFL.
   Google Scholar
• Erickson, F. (2011). Taking advantage of structure to improvise in instruction; examples from elementary school classrooms. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Structure and improvisation in creative teaching (pp. 113–132). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). Five misunderstanding about case-study research. In C. Seale, G. Gobo, J. F. Gubrium, & D. Silverman (Eds.), Qualitative research practice (pp. 420–434). London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Fortus, D., Dershimer, R., Krajcik, J., Marx, R., & Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2004). Design-based science and student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 1081–1110. doi:10.1002/tea.20040
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friese, S. (2012). Qualitative data analysis with ATLAS.ti. London: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Greiffenhagen, C. (2012). Making rounds: The routine work of the teacher during collaborative learning with computers. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 7(1), 11–42. doi:10.1007/s11412-011-9134-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hakkarainen, K. (2009). A knowledge-practice perspective on technology-mediated learning. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(2), 213–231. doi:10.1007/s11412-009-9064-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hakkarainen, K. (2003). Progressive inquiry in computer-supported biology classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(10), 1072–1088. doi:10.1002/tea.10121
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hargreaves, A., & Shirley, D. (2009). The fourth way: The inspiring future for educational change. London: Corvin.
   Google Scholar
• Hedegaard, M., & Chaiklin, S. (2005). Radical-local teaching and learning. Aarhus: Aarhus University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hmelo-Silver, C., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. A. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 99–107. doi:10.1080/00461520701263368
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hmelo-Silver, C., & Barrows, H. S. (2008). Facilitating collaborative knowledge building. Cognition and Instruction, 26(1), 48–94. doi:10.1080/07370000701798495
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hmelo-Silver, C., Liu, L., & Jordan, R. (2009). Visual representations of a multidimensional coding scheme for understanding technology-mediated learning about complex natural systems. Research and Practice in technology enhanced learning, 4(3), 253–280. doi: 10.1142/S1793206809000714
   Google Scholar
• Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2003). Analyzing collaborative knowledge construction: Multiple methods for integrated understanding. Computers & Education, 41(4), 397–420. doi:http://dx.doi.org.libproxy.helsinki.fi/10.1016/j.compedu.2003.07.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hong, H., & Sullivan, F. (2009). Towards an idea-centered, principle-based design approach to support learning as knowledge creation. Educational Technology Research & Development, 57(5), 613–627. doi:10.1007/s11423-009-9122-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jurow, A., & Creighton McFadden, L. (2011). Disciplined improvisation to extend young children’s scientific thinking. In Sawyer, K. (Ed.), Structure and improvisation in creative teaching (pp. 236–251), New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kangas, K., Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P., & Hakkarainen, K. (2013). Design expert's participation in elementary students' collaborative design process. International Journal of Technology & Design Education, 23(2), 161–178. doi:10.1007/s10798-011-9172-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelle, U. (2006). Computer-assisted qualitative data analysis. In C. Seale, G. Gobo, J. Gubrium & D. Silverman (Eds.), Qualitative research practice (pp. 443–459). London: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Klette, K. (2009). Challenges in strategies for complexity reduction in video studies: Experiences from the PISA+ study. A video study of teaching and learning in Norway. In T. Janik & T. Seidel (Eds.), The power of video studies in investigating teaching and learning in the classroom (pp. 61–82). Munich: Waxmann.
   Google Scholar
• Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lehesvuori, S., Viiri, J., Rasku-Puttonen, H., Moate, J., & Helaakoski, J. (2013). Visualizing communication structures in science classrooms: Tracing cumulativity in teacher-led whole class discussions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(8), 912–939. doi:10.1002/tea.21100
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lemke, J. (2000). Across the scales of time: Artifacts, activities, and meanings in ecosocial systems. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 7(4), 273–290. doi:10.1207/S15327884MCA0704_03
   Google Scholar
• Littleton, K., & Kerawalla, L. (2012). Trajectories of inquiry learning. In K. Littleton, E. Scanlon, & M. Sharples (Eds.), Orchestrating inquiry learning (pp. 31–47). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Littleton, K., Scanlon, E., & Sharples, M. (2012). Editorial introduction: Orchestrating inquiry learning. In K. Littleton, E. Scanlon, & M. Sharples (Eds.), Orchestrating inquiry learning (pp. 1–6). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Lonchamp, J. (2012). An instrumental perspective on CSCL systems. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 7(2), 211–237. doi:10.1007/s11412-012-9141-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Looi, C., & Song, Y. (2013). Orchestration in a networked classroom: Where the teacher’s real-time enactment matters. Computers & Education, 69, 510–513. http://dx.doi.org.libproxy.helsinki.fi/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.04.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luckin, R., Plowman, L., Laurillard, D., Stratfold, M., Taylor, J., & Corbe, S. (2001). Narrative evolution: Learning from students’ talk about species variation. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 12, 100–123.
   Google Scholar
• Mercer, N. (2008). The seeds of time: Why classroom dialogue needs a temporal analysis. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 17(1), 33–59. doi:10.1080/10508400701793182
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mercer, N., & Littleton, K. (2007). Dialogue and the development of children’s thinking. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Mäkitalo, Å., Jakobsson, A., & Säljö, R. (2009). Learning to reason in the context of socioscientific problems. exploring the demands on students in “new” classroom activites. In K. Kumpulainen, C. Hmelo-Silver, & M. Cesar (Eds.), Investigating classroom interaction: Methodologies in action (pp. 7–26). Rotterdam: Sense.
   Google Scholar
• Myhill, D. (2006). Talk, talk, talk: Teaching and learning in whole class discourse. Research Papers in Education, 21(1), 19–41. doi:10.1080/02671520500445425
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Committee on a Conceptual Framework for New K-12 Science Education Standards. Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• Olson, D. (2007). The self-ascription of intention: Responsibility, obligation and self-control. Synthese, 159, 297–314. doi:10.1007/s11229-007-9209-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Puntambekar, S., Stylianou, A., & Goldstein, J. (2007). Comparing classroom enactments of an inquiry curriculum: Lessons learned from two teachers. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16(1), 81–130. doi:10.1080/10508400709336943
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rabardel, P., & Béguin, P (2005). Instrument mediated activity: From subject development to anthropocentric design. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomic Science, 6, 429–461. doi:10.1080/14639220500078179
   Google Scholar
• Ritella, G., & Hakkarainen, K. (2012). Instrumental genesis in technology-mediated learning: From double stimulation to expansive knowledge practices. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 7(2), 239–258. doi:10.1007/s11412-012-9144-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roschelle, J., Dimitriadis, Y., & Hoppe, U. (2013). Classroom orchestration: Synthesis. Computers & Education, 69, 523–526. doi:http://dx.doi.org.libproxy.helsinki.fi/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.04.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roth, W. M. (1998). Designing communities. Boston, MA: Kluwer.
   Google Scholar
• Roth, W. M. (2002). Being and becoming in classroom. Westport, CT: Ablex.
   Google Scholar
• Sahlberg, P. (2011). The fourth way of Finland. Journal of educational change, 12(2), 173–184. doi: 10.1007/s10833-011-9157-y
   Google Scholar
• Saldana, J. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Sandoval, W. (2014). Conjecture mapping: An approach to systematic educational design research. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 23(1), 18–36. doi:10.1080/10508406.2013.778204
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sawyer, R. K. (2009). The science of social emergence. In G. Trajkovski, & S. G. Collins (Eds.), Agent-based societies: Social and cultural interactions (pp. 1–16). Hershey, PA: Idea Group.
   Google Scholar
• Sawyer, R. K. (2011). What makes good teachers great? The artful balance of structure and improvisation. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Structure and improvisation in creative teaching (pp. 1–24). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sawyer, R. K. (2004). Creative teaching: Collaborative discussion as disciplined improvisation. Educational Researcher, 33(2), 12–20. doi:10.3102/0013189X033002012
   Google Scholar
• Scardamalia, M. (2002). Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. In B. Smith (Ed.), Liberal education in a knowledge society (pp. 67–98). Chicago, IL: Open Court.
   Google Scholar
• Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2006). Knowledge building: Theory, pedagogy, and technology. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 97–115). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Seale, C. (2006). Quality in qualitative research. In C. Seale, G. Gobo, J.F. Gubrium, & D. Silverman (Eds.), Qualitative research practice (pp. 379–389). London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P., Viilo, M., & Hakkarainen, K. (2010). Learning by collaborative designing: Technology-enhanced knowledge practices. International Journal of Technology & Design Education, 20(2), 109–136. doi:10.1007/s10798-008-9066-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharples, M., & Anastopoulou, S. (2012). Designing orchestration for inquiry learning. In K. Littleton, E. Scanlon, & M. Sharples (Eds.), Orchestrating inquiry learning (pp. 69–85). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Song, Y., & Looi, C. (2012). Linking teacher beliefs, practices and student inquiry-based learning in a CSCL environment: A tale of two teachers. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 7(1), 129–159. doi:10.1007/s11412-011-9133-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stahl, G. (2006). Group cognition: Computer support for building collaborative knowledge. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Viilo, M., Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P., & Hakkarainen, K. (2011). Supporting the technology-enhanced collaborative inquiry and design project: A teacher’s reflections on practices. Teachers and Teaching, 17(1), 51–72. doi:10.1080/13540602.2011.538497
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Viilo, M., Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P., & Hakkarainen, K. (in press). Balancing structure and flexibility: Teacher’s orchestration in collaborative long-term inquiry. In D. Leat (Ed.), Enquiry and project based learning: Students, schools and society. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Zhang, J., Hong, H., Scardamalia, M., Teo, C. L., & Morley, E. A. (2011). Sustaining knowledge building as a principle-based innovation at an elementary school. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 20(2), 262–307. doi:10.1080/10508406.2011.528317
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar