The roles and uses of design principles for developing the trialogical approach on learning

ALT-J: Research in Learning Technology

Volumn 19, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 233-246

  Paavola, Sami ^a   Lakkala, Minna ^a   Muukkonen, Hanni ^a   Kosonen, Kari ^a   Karlgren, Klas ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI   (Finland)

^b KAROLINSKA INSTITUTE   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Design principles; Design based research; Educational theory; Knowledge creation metaphor; Trialogical learning

Indexed keywords

EID: 84864026979     PISSN: 09687769     EISSN: 17411629     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/21567069.2011.624171     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Alexander, C. 1979. The timeless way of building. New York: Oxford University Press.
2. Bell, P., C.M. Hoadley, and M.C. Linn. 2004. Design-based research in education. In Internet environments for science education, ed. M.C. Linn, E.A. Davis, and P. Bell, 73-85. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
3. Bereiter, C. 2002. Education and mind in the knowledge age. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
4. Borchers, J.O. 2000. Interaction design patterns: Twelve theses. Paper presented at the CHI2000 Patterns Workshop, April 2-3, The Hague.
5. Design-Based Research Collective 2003. Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher 32, no. 1: 5-8.
6. Edelson, D.C. 2002. Design research: What we learn when we engage in design. Journal of the Learning Sciences 11: 105-21. (Pubitemid 36618811)
7. Engeström, Y. 1987. Learning by expanding. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit.
8. Engeström, Y. 2008. From design experiments to formative interventions. Paper presented at the ISCAR 2008 Conference, September 8-13, San Diego, CA, USA.
9. Gravemeijer, K., and P. Cobb. 2006. Design research from a learning design perspective. In Educational design research, ed. J. van den Akker, K. Gravemeijer, S. McKenney, and N. Nieveen, 17-51. London: Routledge.
10. Hakkarainen, K. 2006. Scientific challenges of KP-Lab. Working paper, KP-Lab. University of Helsinki, Finland.
11. Hakkarainen, K. 2008. Features of trialogical learning: An introduction of research and development of Knowledge-Practices Laboratory. Working paper, KP-Lab. University of Helsinki, Finland.
12. Hakkarainen, K., T. Palonen, S. Paavola, and E. Lehtinen. 2004. Communities of networked expertise: Professional and educational perspectives. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
13. Hevner, A.R. 2007. A three cycle view of design science research. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems 19, no. 2: 87-92.
14. Kali, Y. 2006. Collaborative knowledge building using a design principles database. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning 1, no. 2: 187-201. (Pubitemid 44084598)
15. Kali, Y., R. Levin-Peled, and Y.J. Dori. 2009. The role of design-principles in designing courses that promote collaborative learning in higher-education. Computers in Human Behavior 25: 1067-78.
16. Kaptelinin, V., and R. Miettinen. 2005. Perspectives on the object of activity. Mind, Culture, and Activity 12, no. 1: 1-3.
17. Kaptelinin, V., B.A. Nardi, and C. Macaulay. 1999. Methods & tools: The activity checklist: A tool for representing the "space" of context. Interactions 6, no. 4: 27-39.
18. Karlgren, K., A. Dahlström, K. Lonka, and S. Ponzer. 2007. A new educational annotation tool for supporting medical teams to improve their teamwork and communication. Paper presented at the ICEM/ILE 2007 - The International Council for Educational Media. September 20-22, Nicosia, Cyprus.
19. Knorr-Cetina, K. 2001. Objectual practice. In The practice turn in contemporary theory, ed. T.R. Schatzki, K. Knorr Cetina, and E. von Savigny, 175-88. London: Routledge.
20. KP-Lab. 2006a. Recommendations for design principles of trialogical technologies. Project deliverable D3.1, August. University of Oslo, Norway.
21. KP-Lab. 2006b. Scenarios and user requirements for KP-Labs in education. Project deliverable D8.1, August. FH OÖ Forschungs und Entwicklungs GmbH, Austria.
22. KP-Lab. 2007a. Summary of research on KP-Lab courses and technology in education. Research designs, pedagogical models, use of tools, and results of the first KP-Lab studies. Project deliverable D8.2, November. University of Helsinki, Finland; University of Utrecht, The Netherlands.
23. KP-Lab. 2007b. A collective case library about pedagogical models and related practices, v. 2. Project deliverable D9.2, November. Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel; University of Utrecht, The Netherlands.
24. KP-Lab. 2009a. Driving objectives and high-level requirements for KP-Lab technologies. Project deliverable D2.4, August. FH OÖ Forschungs und Entwicklungs GmbH, Austria; INPT, France.
25. KP-Lab. 2009b. Summary of research on knowledge practices in education supported by KP-Lab technology. An appendix. Project deliverable D8.3, September. University of Helsinki, Finland; University of Utrecht, The Netherlands.
26. KP-Lab. 2010. Report on empirical research. Project deliverable DIV.6, March. University of Helsinki, Finland.
27. Lakkala, M., S. Paavola, K. Kosonen, H. Muukkonen, M. Bauters, and H. Markkanen. 2009. Main functionalities of the knowledge practices environment (KPE) affording knowledge creation practices in education. In Computer supported collaborative learning practices: CSCL2009 Conference Proceedings, ed. C. O'Malley, D. Suthers, P. Reimann, and A. Dimitracopoulou, 297-306. Rhodes: International Society of the Learning Sciences.
28. Lakkala, L., L. Ilomäki, K. Kosonen, S. Paavola, and H. Muukkonen. 2010. Exploring the applicability of trialogical design principles for examining knowledge practices in education. In Collaborative knowledge creation: Practices, tools and concepts, ed. A. Morch, A. Moen, and S. Paavola, chapter 10. http://www.knowledgepractices.info/wiki/index.php?title=Handbook-on- Trialogical-Learning.
29. Löwy, I. 1992. The strength of loose concepts - boundary concepts, Federative experimental strategies and disciplinary growth: The case of immunology. History of Science 30, no. 4: 371-96.
30. Mahemoff, M.J., and L.J. Johnston. 1998. Principles for a usability-oriented pattern language. Paper presented at the OZCHI '98, November 30-December 4, Adelaide, Australia.
31. McKenney, S., N. Nieveen, and J. Van den Akker. 2006. Design reserach from a curriculum perspective. In Educational design research, ed. J. van den Akker, K. Gravemeijer, S. McKenney, and N. Nieveen, 67-90. London: Routledge.
32. Muukkonen-van der Meer, H. 2011. Perspectives on knowledge creating inquiry in higher education. Doctoral diss., University of Helsinki, Institute of Behavioural Sciences. In Studies in Psychology, 75. Helsinki: Helsinki University Print.
33. Nonaka, I., and H. Takeuchi. 1995. The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.
34. Paavola, S., and K. Hakkarainen. 2005. The knowledge creation metaphor - An emergent epistemological approach to learning. Science & Education 14: 535-57. (Pubitemid 41650503)
35. Paavola, S., and K. Hakkarainen. 2009. From meaning making to joint construction of knowledge practices and artefacts - A trialogical approach to CSCL. In Computer supported collaborative learning practices: CSCL2009 Conference Proceedings, ed. C. O'Malley, D. Suthers, P. Reimann, and A. Dimitracopoulou, 83-92. Rhodes: International Society of the Learning Sciences.
36. Paavola, S., L. Lipponen, and K. Hakkarainen. 2004. Models of innovative knowledge communities and three metaphors of learning. Review of Educational Research 74, no. 4: 557-76.
37. Rabardel, P., and G. Bourmaud. 2003. From computer to instrument system: A developmental perspective. Interacting with Computers 15, no. 5: 665-91.
38. Scardamalia, M. 2002. Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. In Liberal education in a knowledge society, ed. B. Smith, 67-98. Chicago, IL: Open Court.
39. Sfard, A. 1998. On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher 27: 4-13. (Pubitemid 128056715)