A Mixed-Methods Approach to Analyze Shared Epistemic Agency in Jigsaw Instruction at Multiple Scales of Temporality

Jun Oshima
Ritsuko Oshima
Wataru Fujita

Abstract


The purpose of this study was to propose a mixed-methods approach to analyzing shared epistemic agency in jigsaw instruction from multiple temporal perspectives, and to evaluate its effectiveness by examining actual datasets. We employed a combination of socio-semantic network analysis (SSNA) and in-depth dialogical discourse analysis as a mixed-methods approach, and analyzed discourse transcripts by university students engaged in jigsaw instruction. First, we graphically depicted a quantitative measure of shared epistemic agency at the group level and identified pivotal points of discourse where students might engage in an epistemic action toward alleviating a lack of knowledge. Then, we conducted dialogical discourse analysis of the segments around the pivotal points to describe students' collaboration practices. SSNA represented the quantitative nature of shared epistemic agency with 60% accuracy and provided a new way to look at it as a distribution of pivotal points for alleviating a lack of knowledge across all processes of jigsaw group activities. The dialogical discourse analysis of the discourse segments identified by SSNA further described dialogical patterns in the shared epistemic agency and each student's contribution to them..

Full Text:

PDF

References

Aronson, E., & Patnoe, S. (2011). Cooperation in the classroom: The jigsaw method (3rd ed.). London, UK: Pinter & Martin, Ltd.

Bakhtin, M. (1981). Discourse in the novel. In M. Holquist (Ed.), The dialogic imagination (pp. 259–422). Austin, TX: University of Texas.

Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 1–26.

Bereiter, C. (2002). Education and mind in the knowledge age. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.) (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (1996). Psychological theory and the design of innovative learning environments: On procedures, principles, and systems. In L. Schauble & R. Glaser (Eds.), Innovations in learning: New environments for education (pp. 289–325). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Damşa, C. I. (2014). Shared epistemic agency and agency of individuals, collaborative groups, and research communities. In J. L. Polman, E. A. Kyza, D. K. O’Neill, I. Tabak, W. R. Penuel, A. S. Jurow, K. O'Connor, T. Lee, & L. D’Amico (Eds.), Learning and becoming in practice: The International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS) 2014, Volume 1 (pp. 440–447). Boulder, CO: International Society of the Learning Sciences.

Damşa, C. I., Kirschner, P. A., Andriessen, J. E. B., Erkens, G., & Sins, P. H. M. (2010). Shared epistemic agency – An empirical study of an emergent construct. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19(2), 143–186.

Emirbayer, M., & Mische, A. (1998). What is agency? American Journal of Sociology, 103, 962–1023.

Hmelo-Silver, C. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16(3), 235–266.

Hmelo-Silver, C., Chinn, C., Chan, C., & O’Donnell, A. (Eds.). (2013). The international handbook of collaborative learning. New York, NY: Routledge.

Inagaki, K., & Hatano, G. (1989). How people learn—The world of everyday cognition. Tokyo, Japan: Chuo-koronsha. [in Japanese].

Oshima, J., Matsuzawa, Y., Oshima, R., & Niihara, Y. (2013). Application of social network analysis to collaborative problem solving discourse: An attempt to capture dynamics of collective knowledge advancement. In D. Suthers, K. Lund, C. Rose, C. Teplovs, & N. Law (Eds.), Productive Multivocality in the Analysis of Group Interactions. New York: Springer.

Oshima, J., Oshima, R., & Fujita, W. (2016). Refinement of semantic network analysis for epistemic agency in collaboration. In Looi, C. K., Polman, J. L., Cress, U., and Reimann, P. (Eds.), Transforming Learning, Empowering Learners: The International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS) 2016 (pp. 1191–1192). Singapore: International Society of the Learning Sciences.

Oshima, J., Oshima, R., & Matsuzawa, Y. (2012). Knowledge Building Discourse Explorer: A social network analysis application for knowledge building discourse. Educational Technology Research & Development, 60, 903–921.

Paavola, S., & Hakkarainen, K. (2005). The knowledge creation metaphor—An emergent epistemological approach to learning. Science & Education, 14, 535–557.

Palonen, T., & Hakkarainen, K. (2000). Patterns of interaction in computer-supported learning: A social network analysis. In B. Fishman & S. O’Connor-Divelbliss (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference of the Learning Sciences (pp. 334–339). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Sawyer, K., Frey, R., & Brown, P. (2013a). Peer-led team learning in general chemistry. In D. Suthers, K. Lund, C. Rose, C. Teplovs, & N. Law (Eds.), Productive Multivocality in the Analysis of Group Interactions. New York: Springer.

Sawyer, K., Frey, R., & Brown, P. (2013b). Knowledge building discourse in peer-led team learning (PLTL) groups in first-year general chemistry. In D. Suthers, K. Lund, C. Rose, C. Teplovs, & N. Law (Eds.), Productive Multivocality in the Analysis of Group Interactions. New York: Springer.

Scardamalia, M. (2002). Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. In B. Smith (Ed.), Liberal education in a knowledge society (pp. 67–98). Chicago, IL: Open Court.

Scardamalia, M., Bransford, J., Kozma, B., & Quellmalz, E. (2012). New assessments and environments for knowledge building. In P. Griffin, B. McGraw, & E. Care (Eds.), Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills (pp. 231–300). New York, NY: Springer Science+Business Media.

Schwartz, D., & Okita, S. (2004). The productive agency in learning by teaching. Retrieved August 28, 2014, from http://aaalab.stanford.edu/papers/Productive_Agency_in_ Learning_by_Teaching.pdf

Stahl, G. (2006). Group cognition: Computer support for building collaborative knowledge. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

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.

Wertsch, J. (1993). Voices of the mind. Harvard: Harvard University Press.

Wertsch, V. J., Del Rio, P., & Alvarez, A. (1995). Sociocultural studies: History, action, and mediation. In J. V. Wertsch, P. del Rio, & A. Alvarez (Eds.), Sociocultural studies of mind (pp. 1–36). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.



PDF


DOI: https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2018.51.2

Share this article: