Abstract
The analysis of group practices can make visible the work of novices learning how to inquire in science or mathematics. These ubiquitous practices are invisibly taken for granted by adults, but can be observed and rigorously studied in adequate traces of online collaborative learning. Such an approach contrasts with traditional pre/post comparisons that miss sequential interactional processes or that reduce group phenomena to individual or social factors. The analysis of the enactment of practices by small groups in CSCL contexts can systematically inform the design, testing, and refinement of collaborative-learning software, curriculum, pedagogy, and theory. CSCL can be re-conceptualized as the design of technology to foster the adoption of group practices by student teams.




Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.References
Barron, B. (2003). When smart groups fail. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(3), 307–359.
Bourdieu, P. (1972/1995). Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cakir, M. P., Zemel, A., & Stahl, G. (2009). The joint organization of interaction within a multimodal CSCL medium. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(2), 115–149.
Cress, U. (2008). The need for considering multilevel analysis in CSCL research: An appeal for the use of more advanced statistical methods. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3(1), 69–84.
Descartes, R. (1633/1999). Discourse on method and meditations on first philosophy. New York: Hackett.
Dillenbourg, P., Baker, M., Blaye, A., & O'Malley, C. (1996). The evolution of research on collaborative learning. In P. Reimann & H. Spada (Eds.), Learning in humans and machines: Towards an interdisciplinary learning science (pp. 189–211). Oxford: Elsevier http://tecfa.unige.ch/tecfa/publicat/dil-papers-2/Dil.7.1.10.pdf.
Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Giddens, A. (1984). Elements of the theory of structuration. In The constitution of society (pp. 1–40). Oakland, CA: U of California Press.
Hammond, M. (2015). A Habermasian perspective on joint meaning making online: What does it offer and what are the difficulties? International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 10(3), 223–237.
Hutchins, E. (1996). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Jeong, H., Hmelo-Silver, C. E., & Yu, Y. (2014). An examination of CSCL methodological practices and the influence of theoretical frameworks 2005-2009. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 9(3), 305–334.
Kant, I. (1787/1999). Critique of pure reason. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kapur, M., & Kinzer, C. K. (2009). Productive failure in CSCL groups. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(1), 21–46.
Medina, R., Suthers, D. D. & Vatrapu, R. (2009). Representational practices in VMT. In G. Stahl (Ed.), Studying virtual math teams (ch. 10, pp. 185–205). New York: Springer.
Öner, D. (2016). Tracing the change in discourse in a collaborative dynamic-geometry environment: From visual to more mathematical. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 11(1), 59–88.
Reckwitz, A. (2002). Toward a theory of social practices: A development in culturalist theorizing. European Journal of Social Theory, 5, 243–263 http://est.sagepub.com/content/5/2/243.
Rogoff, B. (1995). Sociocultural activity on three planes. In B. Rogoff, J. Wertsch, P. del Rio, & A. Alvarez (Eds.), Sociocultural studies of mind (pp. 139–164). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2014). Knowledge building and knowledge creation: Theory, pedagogy and technology. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schatzki, T. R., Knorr Cetina, K., & Savigny, E. V. (Eds.). (2001). The practice turn in contemporary theory. New York: Routledge.
Schwartz, D. (1995). The emergence of abstract representations in dyad problem solving. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4(3), 321–354.
Schwarz, B., & Baker, M. (2017). Dialogue, argumentation and education: History, theory and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 27(2), 4–13.
Sfard, A. (2008). Thinking as communicating: Human development, the growth of discourses and mathematizing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Stahl, G. (1993). Interpretation in design: The problem of tacit and explicit understanding in computer support of cooperative design. Unpublished Dissertation, Ph.D., Department of Computer Science, University of Colorado. Boulder, CO. http://GerryStahl.net/elibrary/tacit.
Stahl, G. (2006a). Group cognition: Computer support for building collaborative knowledge. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Stahl, G. (2006b). Supporting group cognition in an online math community: A cognitive tool for small-group referencing in text chat. Journal of Educational Computing Research (JECR) special issue on Cognitive tools for collaborative communities, 35(2), 103–122 http://GerryStahl.net/pub/jecr.pdf.
Stahl, G. (2009). Studying virtual math teams. New York: Springer.
Stahl, G. (2012a). Ethnomethodologically informed. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 7(1), 1–10.
Stahl, G. (2012b). Traversing planes of learning. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 7(4), 467–473.
Stahl, G. (2013a). Learning across levels. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 8(1), 1–12.
Stahl, G. (2013b). Translating Euclid: Designing a human-centered mathematics. San Rafael: Morgan & Claypool Publishers.
Stahl, G. (2014). The constitution of group cognition. In L. Shapiro (Ed.), Handbook of embodied cognition (ch. 32, pp. 335–346). New York: Routledge. http://GerryStahl.net/pub/embodied.pdf.
Stahl, G. (2015). Conceptualizing the intersubjective group. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 10(3), 209–217.
Stahl, G. (2016a). Constructing dynamic triangles together: The development of mathematical group cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Stahl, G. (2016b). From intersubjectivity to group cognition. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 25(4), 355–384 http://GerryStahl.net/pub/intersubjectivity.pdf.
Stahl, G. (2016c). The group as paradigmatic unit of analysis: The contested relationship of CSCL to the learning sciences. In M. A. Evans, M. J. Packer & R. K. Sawyer (Eds.), Reflections on the learning sciences (ch. 5, pp. 76–102). New York: Cambridge University Press. http://GerryStahl.net/pub/ls.pdf.
Stahl, G., Zhou, N., Çakir, M. P. & Sarmiento-Klapper, J. W. (2011). Seeing what we mean: Co-experiencing a shared virtual world. In the Proceedings of CSCL 2011. Lulu: ISLS. Proceedings (pp. 534–541). http://GerryStahl.net/pub/cscl2011.pdf.
Suthers, D. D., Dwyer, N., Medina, R., & Vatrapu, R. (2010). A framework for conceptualizing, representing, and analyzing distributed interaction. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 5(1), 5–42.
Vygotsky, L. (1930/1978). Mind in society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research. Design and methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Zemel, A., Çakir, M. P. & Stahl, G. (2009). Understanding and analyzing chat in CSCL as reading’s work. In the Proceedings of CSCL 2009. Rhodes, Greece. http://GerryStahl.net/pub/cscl2009zemel.pdf.
Acknowledgements
Thanks to everyone who participated in the VMT project and who collaborated on the analysis of its data. Also, to the anonymous reviewers, who prompted me to elaborate several aspects and implications of this view of CSCL.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Stahl, G. Group practices: a new way of viewing CSCL. Intern. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn 12, 113–126 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-017-9251-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-017-9251-0