Knowledge-building community model

The educational technology and digital learning wiki
Revision as of 12:59, 12 July 2006 by Kalli (talk | contribs) (expanding)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Draft

This article or section is currently under construction

In principle, someone is working on it and there should be a better version in a not so distant future.
If you want to modify this page, please discuss it with the person working on it (see the "history")

Definition

Bereiter and Scardamalia believe a knowledge-building community should be modeled after scientific research centers, where “problem redefinition at increasingly high levels is the goal, based on a fundamentally social process. Researchers benefit from the advances of others, with continual interplay of findings, not just among scientists working concurrently but from generation to generation.”(1994). Knowledge-building communities support discourses that aim to advance the knowledge of the members collectively, while supporting individual growth with the aim of producing new experts and extending expertise within the community's domain.

A KB community can engage in collecting information, supporting discourse and exchanges, encouraging a social and professional network of learners and experts and making the knowledge acquired collectively available for future use. That even children in elementary school levels can engage in knowledge-building makes the process accessible to all levels of education.

Bereiter and Scardamalia's knowledge-building model for educational contexts suggests a way to organize instruction so that student initiated contributions to the collective knowledge and peer evaluation of knowledge produced is possible. Knowledge forum is their technological response to the needs of building a KB community. At the center is the activity of "knowledge-building discourse".

Knowledge-building discourse

Knowledge-building discourse has certain characteristics outlined by Bereiter and Scardamalia (1994):

  • Focused on problems, not topics: knowledge is advanced through discussion and argumentation in the effort to understand concepts and resolve discrepencies.
  • Decentralized, open knowledge building, with a focus on collective knowledge: through constructive social interactions with others engaged in similar or related problems.
  • More knowledgeable members are engaged in the knowledge-building process, but do not delineate the limits of investigation.

that lead to clarification of ideas.




This article will be based a lot on Bereiter and Scardamalia's writings. See CSILE for the moment.



Sustaining knowledge building communities: E-learning and knowledge building environments - Blake Melnick

Sustaining knowledge building communities online requires the creation of electronic environments that support both formal and informal learning, and capture significant tasks and activities that are central to the day-to-day work of the participants. These environments must provide supports for real world activities and learning, while providing the potential for something more. That something more is knowledge building, or the production and continual improvement of ideas of value to a community (Scardamalia & Bereiter, 2003). Knowledge building is emergent; an environment that supports it must evolve from the contributions of team members and demonstrate collective knowledge advances (Scardamlia, in press). The environment must be fluid, meet the changing needs of the participants, and enable something lasting—something that will enhance the knowledge work of their local community, and potentially the knowledge work of their profession.

Examples

Wikipedia php.net macromedia developers site

Technology

  • CSILE and Knowledge Forum
  • Wikis, in particular sophisticated wikis like Mediawiki on which this one is based
  • C3MS and other kinds of portalware
  • LMSs (by repurposing the way they are intended to be used !).

References

Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1994). Computer support for knowledge-building communities. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(3), 265-283. [1]