Abstract
This chapter describes five waves of learning mediated by information-communication technologies. Each wave is identified with particular pedagogies and technologies, and – critically – particular social conceptions of education that those pedagogies and technologies helped bring into being: Wave 1 – information dissemination and consumption; Wave 2 – constructivism and mind tools; Wave 3 – collaborative and social learning; Wave 4 – distributed Intelligence; and Wave 5 – eudaemonic learning. We argue that Wave 5-inspired research requires an epistemological shift, taking into account the mix of intentional and unintentional, engineered vs. accidental, and emergent vs. designed aspects of learning. We demonstrate how the research presented in this book moves toward a vision of research and design of eudaemonic learning. That is – the learning in a networked society research looks at learning as a component of how individuals and society mutually develop each other, while studying how technology helps create the conditions for such learning.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Bibliography
Aikenhead, G. S. (2005). Science education for everyday life: Evidence-based practice. New York: Teachers College.
Aristotle. (350 B. C. E./2000). Nichomachean ethics (W. D. Ross, Trans. Electronic edition ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT.
Banathy, B. H. (1996). Designing social systems in a changing world. New York: Springer.
Bang, M., Medin, D. L., & Atran, S. (2007). Cultural mosaics and mental models of nature. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104(35), 13868–13874. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0706627104
Baram-Tsabari, A., & Osborne, J. (2015). Bridging science education and science communication research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(2), 135–144.
Baram-Tsabari, A., & Segev, E. (2011). Exploring new web-based tools to identify public interest in science. Public Understanding of Science, 20(1), 130–143.
Barzilai, S., & Zohar, A. (2012). Epistemic thinking in action: Evaluating and integrating online sources. Cognition and Instruction, 30(1), 39–85.
Baxter, G., & Sommerville, I. (2011). Socio-technical systems: From design methods to systems engineering. Interacting with Computers, 23(1), 4–17.
Bevan, B., & Penuel, W. R. (Eds.). (2018). Connecting research and practice for educational improvement: Ethical and equitable approaches. New York: Routledge.
Birnhack, M., & Elkin-Koren, N. (2010). Does law matter online-empirical evidence on privacy law compliance. Michigan Telecommunications and Technology Law Review, 17, 337.
Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. (2017). The social life of information: Updated, with a new preface. Brighton, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.
Bryk, A. S., Gomez, L. M., Grunow, A., & LeMahieu, P. G. (2015). Learning to improve: How America’s Schools can get better at getting better. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
Bybee, R. W., & DeBoer, G. E. (1994). Research on goals for the science curriculum. In D. L. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 357–387). New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan.
Campbell, H. A., & Golan, O. (2011). Creating digital enclaves: Negotiation of the internet among bounded religious communities. Media, Culture & Society, 33(5), 709–724.
Carayon, P. (2006). Human factors of complex sociotechnical systems. Applied Ergonomics, 37(4), 525–535.
Clegg, C. W. (2000). Sociotechnical principles for system design. Applied Ergonomics, 31(5), 463–477.
Coburn, C. E., & Penuel, W. R. (2016). Research-practice partnerships in education: Outcomes, dynamics, and open questions. Educational Researcher, 45(1), 48.
Cole, M., & Packer, M. (2016). Design-based intervention research as the science of the doubly artificial. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 25(4), 503–530.
Dear, B. (2017). The friendly orange glow: The untold story of the PLATO System and the Dawn of Cyberculture (First ed.). New York: Pantheon Books.
Design-Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5–8, 35–37.
DiSalvo, B., Yip, J., Bonsignore, E., & DiSalvo, C. (Eds.). (2017). Participatory design for learning. New York: Routledge.
diSessa, A. (2014). A history of conceptual change research: Threads and fault lines. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (2nd. ed., pp. 88–108). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Elias, N., & Lemish, D. (2009). Spinning the web of identity: The roles of the internet in the lives of immigrant adolescents. New Media & Society, 11(4), 533–551.
Engeström, Y. (1999). Innovative learning in work teams: Analyzing cycles of knowledge creation in practice. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, & R.-L. Punamäki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 377–404). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Engeström, Y. (2002). New forms of expansive learning at work: The landscape of co-configuration. In G. Stahl (Ed.), Computer support for collaborative learning 2002 (pp. 22–23). Boulder, CO: International Society of the Learning Sciences.
Flyvbjerg, B. (2001). Making social science matter: Why social inquiry fails and how it can succeed again. (S. Sampson, Trans.). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Freire, P. (1985). The politics of education: Culture, power, and liberation. South Hadley. In Mass.: Bergin & Garvey.
Freire, P. (2011). Pedagogy of the oppressed. (M. B. Ramos, Trans. 30th Anniversary Edition ed.). New York: Continuum International Publishing Group.
Gal, E., Bauminger, N., Goren-Bar, D., Pianesi, F., Stock, O., Zancanaro, M., et al. (2009). Enhancing social communication of children with high-functioning autism through a co-located interface. AI & SOCIETY, 24(1), 75.
Gee, J. P., & Hayes, E. (2012). Nurturing affinity spaces and game-based learning. In Games, learning, and society: Learning and meaning in the digital age (Vol. 123, pp. 1–40).
Hannafin, M. J., Hannafin, K. M., Land, S. M., & Oliver, K. (1997). Grounded practice and the design of constructivist learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 45(3), 101–117.
Hiltz, S. R., & Turoff, M. (1978). The network nation: Human communication via computer. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co.
Hoadley, C. (2016, May 11). Cyberlearning and educational technology: Current R&D, future trends, and how educational institutions will need to change, Invited talk presented at Provost’s Commission on Creating the Next in Education Talk Series, Georgia Tech, Atlanta. Retrieved 1 February 2018 from http://www.provost.gatech.edu/commission-creating-next-education-speaker-series
Hod, Y., & Ben-Zvi, D. (2015). Students negotiating and designing their collaborative learning norms: A group developmental perspective in learning communities. Interactive Learning Environments, 23(5), 578–594.
Hod, Y., Ben-Zvi, D., & Bielaczyc, K. (2016). Revisiting learning communities: Innovations in theory and practice. In C. K. Looi, J. L. Polman, U. Cress, & P. Reimann (Eds.), Transforming learning, empowering learners: The international conference of the learning sciences (ICLS) (Vol. 2, pp. 1335–1337). Singapore: International Society of the Learning Sciences.
Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Jackson, M. G. (2008). Transformative learning for a new worldview: Learning to think differently. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Jonassen, D. H. (1990). Thinking technology: Toward a constructivist view of instructional design. Educational Technology, 30(9), 32–34.
Jonassen, D. H. (1996). Computers in the classroom: Mindtools for critical thinking. Eaglewoods, NJ: Merill/Prentice Hall.
Jonassen, D. H., & Marra, R. M. (1994). Concept map** and other formalisms as mindtools for representing knowledge. ALT-J, 2(1), 50–56.
Jonassen, D. H., & Rohrer-Murphy, L. (1999). Activity theory as a framework for designing constructivist learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(1), 61–79.
Kali, & Hoadley. (in press). Five waves of conceptualizing knowledge and learning for our future in a networked society. In U. Cress, C. Rosé, A. Wise, & J. Oshima (Eds.), International handbook of computer-supported collaborative learning. New York: Springer.
Kali, Y., Baram-Tsabari, A., Ben-Zvi, D., Hod, Y., Sagy, O., & Tal, T. (2017). Taking citizen science to school: Breaking the boundaries between school and society. Unpublished proposal accepted by the Israeli Science Foundation as a Fostering Meaningful Learning in Schools research center.
Kali, Y., Linn, M., & Roseman, J. E. (2008). Designing Coherent Science Education: Implications for curriculum, instruction, and policy. In Technology. New York: Teachers College Press.
Kali, Y., McKenney, S., & Sagy, O. (Eds.). (2015). Teachers as designers of technology-enhanced learning. [Special issue]. Instructional Science, 43(2), 173.
Kirschner, P., Strijbos, J.-W., Kreijns, K., & Jelle Beers, P. (2004). Designing electronic collaborative learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(3), 47–66.
Knappenberger, B. (Writer), Knappenberger, B., Braff, Z., Fink, M., Annenberg Weingarten, C. (Producers). (2014). The Internet’s own boy [Feature Film]. Participant Media. http://www.takepart.com/internets-own-boy/index.html
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
National Research Council [NRC]. (2012). A Framework For K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington DC: National Academies Press.
National Research Council [NRC]. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington DC: National Academies Press.
Nov, O., & Rafaeli, S. (2009). Measuring the premium on common knowledge in computer-mediated coordination problems. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(1), 171–174.
Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms. New York: Basic Books.
Pea, R. (1993). Practices of distributed intelligence and designs for education. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 47–87). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Penuel, W. R., Allen, A.-R., Farrell, C., & Coburn, C. E. (2015). Conceptualizing research-practice partnerships as joint work at boundaries. Journal for Education of Students at Risk (JESPAR), 20(1–2), 182–197.
Raban, D. R., & Rafaeli, S. (2007). Investigating ownership and the willingness to share information online. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(5), 2367–2382.
Rechavi, A., & Rafaeli, S. (2012, January). Knowledge and social networks in Yahoo! Answers. In System Science (HICSS), 2012 45th Hawaii international conference on (pp. 781–789). IEEE.
Roberts, D. A., & Bybee, R. W. (2014). Scientific literacy, science literacy, and science education. In N. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (Vol. II, pp. 545–558). Abingdon: Routledge.
Sannino, A., Engeström, Y., & Lemos, M. (2016). Formative interventions for expansive learning and transformative agency. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 25(4), 599–633.
Sawyer, R. K. (2014). The future of learning: Grounding educational innovation in the learning sciences. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (2nd ed., pp. 726–746). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Schejter, A. M., & Tirosh, N. (2016). A justice-based approach for new media policy: In the paths of righteousness. New York: Springer.
Simon, H. A. (1969). The sciences of the artificial. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Skinner, B. F. (1968). The technology of teaching. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Suthers, D. D., Lund, K., Rosé, C. P., Teplovs, C., & Law, N. (Eds.). (2013). Productive multivocality in the analysis of group interactions. New York: Springer.
Swartz, A. (2015). The boy who could change the world: The writings of Aaron Swartz. New York: New Press.
Tabak, I. (2004). Reconstructing context: Negotiating the tension between exogenous and endogenous educational design. Educational Psychologist, 39(4), 225–233.
Whyte, W. F., Greenwood, D. J., & Lazes, P. (1989). Participatory action research: Through practice to science in social research. American Behavioral Scientist, 32(5), 513–551.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (1998). Chapter 1: What is backward design? In G. Wiggins & J. McTighe (Eds.), Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Wild, C. J., Utts, J. M., & Horton, N. J. (2018). What is statistics? In D. Ben-Zvi, J. Garfield, & K. Makar (Eds.), The first handbook of research on statistics teaching and learning (pp. 5–36). New York: Springer.
Yerushalmy, M., & Botzer, G. (2011). Guiding mathematical inquiry in mobile settings. In Constructing knowledge for teaching secondary mathematics (pp. 191–207). New York: Springer.
Zuckerman, O., Gal-Oz, A., Tamir, N., & Kopelman-Rubin, D. (2015). Initial validation of an assistive technology to enhance executive functioning among children with ADHD. In Proceedings of the 14th international conference on interaction design and children (pp. 299–302). New York: ACM Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hoadley, C., Kali, Y. (2019). Five Waves of Conceptualizing Knowledge and Learning for Our Future in a Networked Society. In: Kali, Y., Baram-Tsabari, A., Schejter, A.M. (eds) Learning In a Networked Society. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Series, vol 17. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14610-8_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14610-8_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-14609-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-14610-8
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)