Abstract
This article presents findings from a comparative case study of the learning experiences of two graduate students in an online action research course. The key roles played by reflection and co-reflection, an emerging concept, are identified through the use of narrative analysis. Co-reflection is a collaborative critical thinking process mediated by language, broadly construed to include all meaningful signs. Two types of co-reflection are proposed: tacit and active. Regardless of type, the evidence shows that co-reflection involves cognitive and affective interactions in synergy with relationship building. To the study of group cognition, this study contributes evidence of the potential of co-reflection as a core process. The simple, flexible software tools used in the course (wiki-style collaborative software and simple email and chat programs) effectively supported inquiry learning and co-reflection by allowing learners to freely and easily create their own web pages and to adapt the tools for their different communication and learning styles.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allen, C. (2004). Life with alacrity: Tracing the evolution of social software. Available at http://www.lifewithalacrity.com/2004/10/tracing_the_evo.html; Accessed December 1, 2005.
Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). Speech genres and other late essays. Austin, Texas: University of Texas.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
Barab, S. A., Schatz, S., & Scheckler, R. (2004). Using activity theory to conceptualize online community and using online community to conceptualize activity theory. Mind, Culture, & Activity, 11(1), 25–47.
Bereiter, C. (2002). Education and mind in the knowledge age. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Boud, D., Keogh, R., & Walker, D. (1985). Promoting reflection in learning: A model. In D. Boud, R. Keogh, & D. Walker (Eds.), Reflection: Turning experience into learning (pp. 18–40). London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Bruner, J. (1996). The culture of education. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Clark, H., & Brennan, S. E. (1991). Grounding in communication. In L. B. Resnick & J. M. Levine (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 127–149). Washington, District of Columbia: American Psychological Association.
Dewey, J. (1910/1997). How we think. Mineola, New York: Dover.
Engestrom, Y. (2001) Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14(1), 133–156.
Franzosi, R. (2004). From words to numbers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action: Volume one—Reason and the rationalization of society. Boston, Massachusetts: Beacon.
Habermas, J. (1987). The theory of communicative action: Volume two—Lifeworld and system: A critique of functionalist reason. Boston, Massachusetts: Beacon.
Heidegger, M. (1959/1971). On the way to language. New York, New York: Harper & Row.
Herman, D. (2003). Stories as a tool for thinking. In D. Herman (Ed), Narrative theory and the cognitive sciences (pp. 163–192). Stanford, California: Center for the Study of Language and Information.
Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Boston, Massachusetts: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Issroff, K., & Scanlon, E. (2002). Using technology in higher education: An activity theory perspective. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18, 77–83.
Kohler Riessman, C. (1993). Narrative analysis. Newbury Park, California: Sage.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Leont'ev, A. A. (1978). Activity, consciousness, and personality. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
McKernan, J. (1996). Curriculum action research. London: Kogan Page.
Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning to think like an adult: Core concepts of transformation theory. In J. Mezirow (Ed), Learning as transformation (pp. 3–33). San Francisco, California: Jossey-Bass.
Nardi, B. (Ed). (2001). Context and consciousness. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT.
Ricoeur, P. (1974). The conflict of interpretations: Essays in hermeneutics. Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press.
Schon, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic.
Schunk, D. H. (2000). Learning theories. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Merrill.
Stahl, G. (2006). Group cognition: Computer support for building collaborative knowledge. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT.
Suthers, D. (2005). Technology affordances for intersubjective learning: A thematic agenda for CSCL. In T. Koschmann, D. D. Suthers, & T. W. Chan (Eds.), Proceedings of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning 2005: The Next 10 Years! (pp. 662–671). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Toolan, M. J. (1988). Narrative: A critical linguistic introduction. London: Routledge.
Van Manen, M. (1977). Linking ways of knowing to ways of being practical. Curriculum Inquiry, 6(3), 205–228.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Wells, G. (1999). Dialogic inquiry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Yukawa, J. Co-reflection in online learning: Collaborative critical thinking as narrative. Computer Supported Learning 1, 203–228 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-006-8994-9
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-006-8994-9