‘You should collaborate, children’: a study of teachers’ design and facilitation of children’s collaboration around touchscreens

References

• Albirini, A. (2006). Teachers’ attitudes toward information and communication technologies: The case of Syrian EFL teachers. Computers & Education, 47, 373–398. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2004.10.013.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alexander, R. (2008). Towards dialogic teaching: Rethinking classroom talk (4th ed.). Thirsk: Dialogos.
   Google Scholar
• Beauchamp, G., & Kennewell, S. (2010). Interactivity in the classroom and its impact on learning. Computers & Education, 54, 759–766. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.09.033.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clough, P. (2002). Narratives and fictions in educational research. Buckingham: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Czarniawska, B. (2004). Narratives in social science research. London: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Davidsen, J., & Christiansen, E. T. (2013). The benefits of single-touch screens in intersubjective meaning making. In N. Rummel, M. Kapur, M. Nathan, & S. Puntambekar (Eds.), To see the world and a grain of sand: Learning across levels of space, time, and scale (Vol. 2, p. 10–14). Madison, WI: International Society of the Learning Sciences.
   Google Scholar
• Davidsen, J., & Christiansen, E. T. (2014). Mind the hand: A study on children’s embodied and multimodal collaborative learning around touchscreens. Designs for Learning, 7, 34–52.
   Google Scholar
• Davidsen, J., & Georgsen, M. (2010). ICT as a tool for collaboration in the classroom – Challenges and lessons learned. Designs for Learning, 3, 54–69.
   Google Scholar
• Davidsen, J., & Vanderlinde, R. (2014a). Exploring what touch-screens offer from the perspectives of children: Methodological challenges. In G. B. Gudmundsdottir & K. B. Vasbø (Eds.), Methodological challenges when exploring digital learning spaces in education (pp. 115–132). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Davidsen, J., & Vanderlinde, R. (2014b). Researchers and teachers learning together and from each other using video-based multimodal analysis. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45, 451–460. doi:10.1111/bjet.12141.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Freitas, E. (2004). Plotting intersections along the political axis: The interior voice of dissenting mathematics teachers. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 55, 259–274.
   Google Scholar
• Dede, C. (2010). Comparing frameworks for 21st century skills. In J. Bellance & R. Brandt (Eds.), 21st century skills: Rethinking how students learn (pp. 51–76). Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.
   Google Scholar
• Derry, S., Pea, R., Barron, B., Engle, R., Erickson, F., Goldman, R., … Sherin, B. (2010). Conducting video research in the learning sciences: Guidance on selection, analysis, technology, and ethics. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19, 3–53. doi:10.1080/10508400903452884.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dillenbourg, P., & Evans, M. (2011). Interactive tabletops in education. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6, 491–514.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodwin, C. (2000). Action and embodiment within situated human interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 32, 1489–1522.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodyear, P. (2005). Educational design and networked learning: Patterns, pattern languages and design practice. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 21, 82–101.
   Google Scholar
• Harris, A., Rick, J., Bonnett, V., Yuill, N., Fleck, R., Marshall, P., & Rogers, Y. (2009). Around the table: Are multiple-touch surfaces better than single-touch for children’s collaborative interactions? In Proceedings of the 9th international conference on computer supported collaborative learning – Volume 1 (pp. 335–344). International Society of the Learning Sciences. Retrieved from http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1600053.1600104
   Google Scholar
• Heritage, J. (1984). Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Higgins, S., Mercier, E., Burd, E., & Hatch, A. (2011). Multi-touch tables and the relationship with collaborative classroom pedagogies: A synthetic review. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6, 515–538. doi:10.1007/s11412-011-9131-y.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Higgins, S., Mercier, E., Burd, L., & Joyce-Gibbons, A. (2011). Multi-touch tables and collaborative learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43, 1041–1054. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01259.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kharrufa, A., Martinez-Maldonado, R., Kay, J., & Olivier, P. (2013). Extending tabletop application design to the classroom. In Proceedings of the 2013 ACM international conference on interactive tabletops and surfaces (pp. 115–124). New York, NY: ACM. doi:10.1145/2512349.2512816.
   Google Scholar
• Klerfelt, A. (2007). Gestures in conversation – The significance of gestures and utterances when children and preschool teachers create stories using the computer. Computers & Education, 48, 335–361. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2005.02.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koschmann, T., Stahl, G., & Zemel, A. (2007). The video analyst’s manifesto (or the implications of Garfinkel’s policies for studying practice within design-based research). In R. Goldman, R. Pea, B. Barron, & S. Derry (Eds.), Video research in the learning sciences (pp. 133–143). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Retrieved from http://opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1003&context=meded_books
   Google Scholar
• Luckin, R., Bligh, B., Manches, A., Ainsworth, S., Crook, C., & Noss, R. (2012). Decoding learning: The proof, promise and potential of digital education. Nesta. Retrieved from http://www.nesta.org.uk/home1/assets/features/decoding_learning_report
   Google Scholar
• Majlesi, A. R., & Broth, M. (2012). Emergent learnables in second language classroom interaction. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 1, 193–207. doi:10.1016/j.lcsi.2012.08.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mercer, N., Hennessy, S., & Warwick, P. (2010). Using interactive whiteboards to orchestrate classroom dialogue. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 19, 195–209. doi:10.1080/1475939X.2010.491230.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murphy, E. (2004). Recognising and promoting collaboration in an online asynchronous discussion. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35, 421–431.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2013). Pisa 2015 draft collaborative problem solving framework. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/Draft%20PISA%202015%20Collaborative%20Problem%20Solving%20Framework%20.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Ottestad, G. (2010). Innovative pedagogical practice with ICT in three Nordic countries – Differences and similarities. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26, 478–491. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00376.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rick, J., Marshall, P., & Yuill, N. (2011). Beyond one-size-fits-all: How interactive tabletops support collaborative learning. In Proceedings of IDC (Vol. 11). Retrieved from http://mcs.open.ac.uk/pervasive/pdfs/RickIDC2011.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Roschelle, J., & Teasley, S. D. (1995). The construction of shared knowledge in collaborative problem solving. In C. O’Malley (Ed.), Computer supported collaborative learning (pp. 69–97). Berlin: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Selwyn, N. (2011). Education and technology: Key issues and debates. London: Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• 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: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stahl, G., Ludvigsen, S., Law, N., & Cress, U. (2014). CSCL artifacts. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 9, 237–245. doi:10.1007/s11412-014-9200-0.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Streeck, J. (2008). Gesturecraft: Manufacturing understanding. Amsterdam: J. Benjamins Pub. Co.
   Google Scholar
• Streeck, J. (2013). Interaction and the living body. Journal of Pragmatics, 46, 69–90. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2012.10.010.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Streeck, J., Goodwin, C., & LeBaron, C. D. (Eds.). (2011). Embodied interaction: Language and body in the material world. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Suthers, D. D. (2006). Technology affordances for intersubjective meaning making: A research agenda for CSCL. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1, 315–337.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Twiner, A., Coffin, C., Littleton, K., & Whitelock, D. (2010). Multimodality, orchestration and participation in the context of classroom use of the interactive whiteboard: A discussion. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 19, 211–223. doi:10.1080/1475939X.2010.491232.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Undervisningsministeriet. (2010). It- og mediekompetencer i folkeskolen (foreløbiggt layout) (No. 48). Retrieved from http://www.faghæfte48.dk/index.php?id=8&lang=dk
   Google Scholar
• Van den Akker, J. J. H., Kuiper, W., & Hameyer, U. (2003). Curriculum landscapes and trends. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Vanderlinde, R., van Braak, J., & Hermans, R. (2009). Educational technology on a turning point: Curriculum implementation in Flanders and challenges for schools. Educational Technology Research and Development, 57, 573–584.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Voogt, J. & Roblin, N. P. (2012). A comparative analysis of international frameworks for 21st century competences: Implications for national curriculum policies. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 44, 299–321. doi:10.1080/00220272.2012.668938.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wertsch, J. V. (1998). Mind as action. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Westbury, I. (1998). Didaktik and curriculum studies. In B. Gundem & S. Hopmann (Eds.), Didaktik and/or curriculum: An international dialogue (pp. 47–78). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Woods, D., & Fassnacht, C. (2015). Transana professional version (version 2.61a). Retrieved from http://transana.org
   Google Scholar
• Wyatt, J. (2007). Research, narrative and fiction: Conference story. The Qualitative Report, 12, 318–331.
   Google Scholar