GMS Study with Richard and Michelle

GMS Study with Richard and Michelle Identity and gender:       Do you think these things are highly gendered?      Do you identify with these things? 

I will do a follow-up study exploring the network of these 

sensors and actuators

Follow-up study: Show me what you’ve done with this!

What got shared after Intersession? What was shared?

Network analysis: How do ideas, making spread?      Who’s high-status?

I want to think about how the artifacts serve as representations of and tools for using thought processes. (Intrapersonal back to interpersonal)

Methodology  Add the ability to star projects (put them in your library); author will not know what has been starred. This will allow me to see which students were interested in each others’ work. (Should I allow commenting on others’ work as well? Add logging:      User login      User creates artifact      User views artifacts.       User stars artifact. For a social network analysis

Meeting with Jennifer      GMS as a lab school?

Theoretical Background

Vygotskyian frame; interested in what students can do on their own, but also in participation with others. Sharing artifacts could make it easier to grow from the growth of others. See Sociocultural Approaches to Learning and Development

Read Brown and Collaborators (1992, 1993) for precedent:

(image/png)

Forman and McPhail (1993) worked on how to assess gains from collaborative learning

(image/png)

Learning artifacts as concretized gesture; embodied nonverbal semiotics

In her article, Susan Goldin-Meadow (2015) focuses on the role in cognition, learning, and devel- opment of gestures, the spontaneous hand movements that speakers produce when they talk. As Goldin- Meadow notes, the embodied cognition approach has popularized the idea that the body plays a central role in cognition. We could add that sensorimotor actions were also of particular importance for Piaget, who assumed that they constitute the foundation on which all the cognitive architecture is erected.      Goldin-Meadow, S. (2015). From action to abstraction: Gesture as a mechanism of change. Developmental Review. In press.

“gestures provide a bridge between action and representation because they are at the same time actions and abstract representations.      -> Like Papert’s gears

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice, learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Noss, R., & Hoyles, C. (1996). Windows on mathematical meanings. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

Hoyles, C., & Noss, R. (2003). What can digital technologies take from and bring to research in mathematics education? In A. Bishop, K. Clements, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick, & F. K. S. Leung (Eds.), Second international handbook of mathematics education (pp. 323–349). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

-> Possibly useful as artifacts leave their original contexts:

• Akkerman and Bakker (2011) suggest that boundary crossing can entail learning through four mechanisms: (a) identification of a boundary, (b) coordination of activity flow acknowledging diverse sites, (c) reflection on the specificities of two sites and the existence of the boundary between them and (d) transformation where actors from different sites engage in some constructive activity by crossing boundaries and addressing boundary objects. (Akkerman, S. F., & Bakker, A. (2011). Boundary crossing and boundary objects. Review of Educational Research, 81(2), 132–169.)