Amplifying the voice of pupils: using the diamond ranking method to explore integrative and collaborative learning in home economics education in Finland

References

• Ananiadou, K., & Claro, M. (2009). 21st century skills and competences for new millennium learners in OECD countries. (OECD Education Working Papers No. 41). OECD Publishing. doi: 10.1787/218525261154
   Google Scholar
• Barnes, J. (2015). Cross-curricular learning 3−14 (3rd ed.). London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Beane, J. A. (1997). Curriculum integration: Designing the core of democratic education. New York, London: Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Beinert, C., Palojoki, P., Åbacka, G., Hardy-Johnson, P., Engeset, D., Rudjord Hillesund, E., … Nordgård Vik, F. (2020). The mismatch between teaching practices and curriculum goals in Norwegian home economics classes: A missed opportunity. Education Enquiry, 12(2), 183–201. doi:10.1080/20004508.2020.1816677
   Google Scholar
• Bragg, S. (2007). ‘But I listen to children anyway!’—Teacher perspectives on pupil voice. Educational Action Research, 15(4), 505–518. doi:10.1080/09650790701663973
   Google Scholar
• Brante, G., & Brunosson, A. (2014). To double a recipe – Interdisciplinary teaching and learning of mathematical content knowledge in a home economics setting. Education Inquiry, 5(2), 301–318. doi:10.3402/edui.v5.23925
   Google Scholar
• Braskén, M., Hemmi, K., & Kurtén, B. (2019). Implementing a multidisciplinary curriculum in a Finnish lower secondary school−The perspective of science and mathematics. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 64(3), 1–17.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, R., & Renshaw, P. (2006). Positioning students as actors and authors: A chronotopic analysis of collaborative learning activities. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 13(3), 247–259. doi:10.1207/s15327884mca1303_6
   Google Scholar
• Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical: Education knowledge and action research. London: Falmer Press.
   Google Scholar
• Clark, J. (2012). Using diamond ranking as visual cues to engage young people in the research process. Qualitative Research Journal, 12(2), 222–237. doi:10.1108/14439881211248365
   Google Scholar
• Clark, J., Laing, K., Tiplady, L., & Woolner, P. (2013). Making connections: Theory and practice of using visual methods to aid participation in research. Research Centre for Learning and Teaching, Newcastle University.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education (8th ed.). Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Croghan, R., Griffin, C., Hunter, J., & Phoenix, A. (2008). Young people’s constructions of self: Notes on the use and analysis of the photo‐elicitation methods. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 11(4), 345–356. doi:10.1080/13645570701605707
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dawes, L. (2004). Research report. International Journal of Science Education, 26(6), 677–695. doi:10.1080/0950069032000097424
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edwards, A., & D’Arcy, C. (2004). Relational agency and disposition in sociocultural accounts of learning to teach. Educational Review, 56(2), 147–155. doi:10.1080/0031910410001693236
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edwards, J. A. (2005). Exploratory talk in peer groups: Exploring the zone of proximal development. Paper presented in the Proceedings of the 4th Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (CERME 4), Sant Feliu de Guíxols, Spain, 17–21 Feb 2005. 10 pp.
   Google Scholar
• Edwards, J. A. (2009). Socio-constructivist and socio-cultural lenses on collaborative peer talk in a secondary mathematics classroom. Proceedings of the British Society for Research into Learning Mathematics, 29(1), 49–54.
   Google Scholar
• Eronen, L., Kokko, S., & Sormunen, K. (2019). Escaping the subject-based class: A Finnish case study of developing transversal competencies in a transdisciplinary course. The Curriculum Journal, 30(3), 264–278. doi:10.1080/09585176.2019.1568271
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fernández, M., Wegerif, R., Mercer, N., & Rojas-Drummond, S. (2015). Re-conceptualizing “scaffolding” and the zone of proximal development in the context of symmetrical collaborative learning. The Journal of Classroom Interaction, 50(1), 54–72.
   Google Scholar
• Finnish Advisory Board on Research Integrity. (2013). Responsible conduct of research and procedures for handling allegations of misconduct in Finland: Guidelines of the Finnish advisory board on research integrity 2012. Helsinki, Finland: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Finnish National Core Curriculum for Basic Education (FNCC). (2014). National core curriculum for basic education 2014. (No. Publications 2016:5.). Helsinki, Finland: Finnish National Board of Education.
   Google Scholar
• Gericke, N., Hudson, B., Olin-Scheller, C., & Stolare, M. (2018). Powerful knowledge, transformations and the need for empirical studies across school subjects. London Review of Education, 16(3), 428–444.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilbert, J. (2005). Catching the knowledge wave?: The knowledge society and the future of education. Wellington, NZ: NZCER Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gilbert, J. K., Bulte, A. M. W., & Pilot, A. (2011). Concept development and transfer in context-based science education. International Journal of Science Education, 33(6), 817–837. doi:10.1080/09500693.2010.493185
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greeno, J. G. (2006). Authoritative, accountable positioning and connected, general knowing: Progressive themes in understanding transfer. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(4), 537–547. doi:10.1207/s15327809jls1504_4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gresalfi, M., Martin, T., Hand, V., & Greeno, J. (2009). Constructing competence: An analysis of student participation in the activity systems of mathematics classrooms. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 70(1), 49–70. doi:10.1007/s10649-008-9141-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haapaniemi, J., Venäläinen, S., Malin, A., & Palojoki, P. (2019). Home economics education: Exploring integrative learning. Educational Research, 61(1), 87–104. doi:10.1080/00131881.2018.1564626
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hart, F., & Bond, M. (1995). Action research for health and social care: A guide to practice. Buckingham: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hipkins, R., Bolstad, R., Boyd, S., & McDowall, S. (2014). Key competencies for the future. Wellington, NZ: NZCER Press.
   Google Scholar
• Höijer, K. (2013). Contested food: The construction of home and consumer studies as a cultural space (Doctoral dissertation). Uppsala University.
   Google Scholar
• Hopkins, E. (2010). Classroom conditions for effective learning: Hearing the voice of key stage 3 pupils. Improving Schools, 13(1), 39–53. doi:10.1177/1365480209357297
   Google Scholar
• Illeris, K. (2018). A comprehensive understanding of human learning. In Contemporary theories of learning (pp. 1–14). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Janhonen-Abruquah, H., & Palojoki, P. (2015). Luova ja vastuullinen kotitalousopetus = creative and responsible home economics education. Helsinki: Helsingin yliopisto, Opettajankoulutuslaitos.
   Google Scholar
• Kemmis, S. (2006). Participatory action research and the public sphere. Educational Action Research, 14(4), 459–476. doi:10.1080/09650790600975593
   Google Scholar
• Klein, J. T. (2002). Introduction. Interdisciplinarity today: Why? What? and How? In J. T. Klein (Ed.), Interdisciplinarity education in K-12 and college: A foundation for K-16 dialogue (pp. 1–17). New York, NY: The Collage Board.
   Google Scholar
• Lattuca, L. R., Voigt, L. J., & Fath, K. Q. (2004). Does interdisciplinarity promote learning? Theoretical support and researchable questions. The Review of Higher Education, 28(1), 23–48. doi:10.1353/rhe.2004.0028
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lehtomäki, E., Janhonen-Abruquah, H., Tuomi, M., Okkolin, M., Posti-Ahokas, H., & Palojoki, P. (2014). Research to engage voices on the ground in educational development. International Journal of Educational Development, 35(C), 37–43. doi:10.1016/j.ijedudev.2013.01.003
   Google Scholar
• Lenoir, Y., Hasni, A., & Froelich, A. (2015). Curricular and didactic conceptions of interdisciplinarity in the field of education: A socio-historical perspective. Issues in Interdisciplinary Studies, 33, 39–93.
   Google Scholar
• Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Littleton, K., & Mercer, N. (2013). Interthinking: Putting talk to work. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Mansilla, V. B. (2010). Learning to synthesize: The development of interdisciplinary understanding. In R. Frodeman (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity (pp. 288–306). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mård, N., & Hilli, C. (2020). Towards a didactic model for multidisciplinary teaching - A didactic analysis of multidisciplinary cases in Finnish primary schools. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 1–16. doi:10.1080/00220272.2020.1827044
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marton, F. (2006). Sameness and difference in transfer. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(4), 499–535. doi:10.1207/s15327809jls1504_3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McPhail, G., & Rata, E. (2016). Comparing curriculum types: ‘Powerful knowledge’ and ‘21st century learning’. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 51(1), 53–68. doi:10.1007/s40841-015-0025-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mercer, N. (2004). Sociocultural discourse analysis: Analysing classroom talk as a social mode of thinking. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Professional Practice, 1(2), 137–168.
   Google Scholar
• Mercer, N. (2008). The seeds of time: Why classroom dialogue needs a temporal analysis. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 17(1), 33–59. doi:10.1080/10508400701793182
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moll, L. C. (2014). L.S. Vygotsky and education. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Niemi, K. (2020). ‘The best guess for the future?’ Teachers’ adaptation to open and flexible learning environments in Finland. Education Enquiry, 1–19. doi:10.1080/20004508.2020.1816371
   Google Scholar
• Niemi, R., & Kiilakoski, T. (2019). “I learned to cooperate with my friends and there were no quarrels”: Pupils’ experiences of participation in a multidisciplinary learning module. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 64(2), 1–15. doi:10.1080/00313831.2019.1639817
   Google Scholar
• Niemi, R., Kumpulainen, K., & Lipponen, L. (2015a). Pupils as active participants: Diamond ranking as a tool to investigate pupils’ experiences of classroom practices. European Educational Research Journal, 14(2), 138–150. doi:10.1177/1474904115571797
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Niemi, R., Kumpulainen, K., & Lipponen, L. (2018). The use of a diamond ranking and peer interviews to capture pupils’ perspectives. Improving Schools, 21(3), 240–254. doi:10.1177/1365480218774604
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Niemi, R., Kumpulainen, K., Lipponen, L., & Hilppö, J. (2015b). Pupils‘ perspectives on the lived pedagogy of the classroom. Education 3–13, 43(6), 683–699. doi:10.1080/03004279.2013.859716
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pountney, R., & McPhail, G. (2017). Researching the interdisciplinary curriculum: The need for ‘translation devices’. British Educational Research Journal, 43(6), 1068–1082. doi:10.1002/berj.3299
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Säljö, R. (2004). Oppimiskäytännöt: Sosiokulttuurinen näkökulma [Learning practices: Sociocultural perspective] (2nd rev ed.). Helsinki: WSOY.
   Google Scholar
• Shokouhi, M., & Shakouri, N. (2015). Revisiting Vygotsky’s concept of zone of proximal development: Towards a stage of proximity. International Journal of English Literature and Culture, 3(2), 60–63.
   Google Scholar
• Soller, A. (2001). Supporting social interaction in an intelligent collaborative learning system. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 12, 40–62.
   Google Scholar
• Spelt, E. J. H., Biemans, H. J. A., Tobi, H., Luning, P. A., & Mulder, M. (2009). Teaching and learning in interdisciplinary higher education: A systematic review. Educational Psychology Review, 21(4), 365–378. doi:10.1007/s10648-009-9113-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taar, J. (2017). Interthinking in Estonian home economics education (Doctoral dissertation). Helsinki University.
   Google Scholar
• Tarnanen, M., Kaukonen, V., Kostiainen, E., & Toikka, T. (2019). Mitä opin? Monilukutaitoa ja tutkivaa oppimista monialaisessa oppimiskokonaisuudessa [What did I learn? Multiliteracy skills and inquiry-based learning in interdisciplinary learning module]. Ainedidaktiikka, 3(2), 24–46. doi:10.23988/ad.81941
   Google Scholar
• UN General Assembly. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development. (No. A/RES/70/1). Retrieved from https://www.refworld.org/docid/57b6e3e44.html
   Google Scholar
• Venäläinen, S. (2010). Interaction in the multicultural classroom: Towards culturally sensitive home economics education (Doctoral dissertation). Helsinki University.
   Google Scholar
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Winebug, S., & Grossman, P. (2000). Interdisciplinary curriculum: Challenges to implementation. New York: Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Woolner, P., Clark, J., Hall, E., Tiplady, L., Thomas, U., & Wall, K. (2010). Pictures are necessary but not sufficient: Using a range of visual methods to engage users about school design. Learning Environments Research, 13(1), 1–22. doi:10.1007/s10984-009-9067-6
   Google Scholar