Laboratory learning: Industry and university research as site for situated and distributed cognition

Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Conference, CSCL

Volumn , Issue PART 3, 2008, Pages 290-297

  Newstetter, Wendy ^a   Johri, Aditya ^b   Wulf, Volker ^c  

^a GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^b State University   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF SIEGEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DISTRIBUTED COGNITION; INTERACTIVE MEDIA; QUALITATIVE STUDY; UNIVERSITY RESEARCH;

BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING; RESEARCH LABORATORIES;

RESEARCH;

EID: 84880407214     PISSN: 15734552     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (46)

1. Barab, S. A., MaKinster, J., & Scheckler, R. (2003). Designing system dualities: Characterizing a web-supported teacher professional development community. Information Society 19 (3), 237-256.
2. Berger, P. L. and Luckman, T. (1967). The Social Construction of Reality. Anchor Books, New York.
3. Borgatti, S. & Cross, R. (2003). A Relational View of Information Seeking and Learning in Social Networks. Management Science, Vol. 49, No. 4, 432-445.
4. Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. (2000) The Social Life of Information, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.
5. Brown, J., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated Cognition and the Culture of Learning. Educational Researcher, 18, 32-42.
6. Bucciarelli, L. (1994). Designing engineers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
7. Castells, M. (1996). The Rise of the Network Society. Blackwell, Malden, MA.
8. Conefrey, T. (2000). Laboratory talk and women's retention rates in science. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 6(3), 251-264.
9. Cramton, C. D. (2001). The Mutual Knowledge Problem and Its Consequences for Dispersed Collaboration. Organization Science, 12(3), 346-371.
10. Collins, A. (2006). Cognitive Apprenticeship. Sawyer, K. (Ed.). The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences.
11. Dunbar, K. (1995). How scientists really reason: Scientific reasoning in real-world laboratories. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), The Nature of Insight. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
12. Edelson, D. C. & Reiser, B. J. (2006). Making Authentic Practices Accessible to Learners: Design Challenges and Strategies. Sawyer, K. (Ed.). The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences.
13. Fischer, G., Rohde, M. & Wulf, V. (2007). Community-Based Learning: The Core Competency of Residential, Research Based University. International Journal of Computer Supported Cooperative Learning, Vol. 2, No. 1, 9-40
14. Fiske, S. T., Lin, M. H., & Neuberg, S. L. (1999). The Continuum Model: Ten years later. In S. Chaiken, & Y. Trope (Eds.) Dual process theories in social psychology (pp. 231-254). New York: Guilford.
15. Fiske, S. T. & Neuberg, S. L. (1990). A Continuum of Impression Formation, From Category-Based to Individuating Processes: Influences of Information and Motivation on Attention and Interpretation. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 23, pp. 1-73.
16. Gabarro, J. (1990). The development of working relationships. In Galegher, J. and R.E. Kraut, C. Egido. Intellectual teamwork. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, 79-110.
17. Goffman, E. (1974). Frame Analysis. Harper & Row: New York.
18. Greeno, J. (2006). Learning in Activity. Sawyer, K. (Ed.). The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences.
19. Hall, R., Wright, K. & Wieckert, K. (2007). Interactive and historical processes of distributing statistical concepts through work organization. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 14(1&2), 103-127.
20. Hall, R., Stevens, R., & Torralba, A. (2002). Disrupting representational infrastructure in conversations across disciplines. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 9(3), 179-210.
21. Hutchins, E. (1991) The social organization of distributed cognition. In Resnick, L., Levine, J. & Teasley, S. (Eds.) Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition (pp. 238-287). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association Press.
22. Hunter A. B., S. L. Laursen, and E. Seymour, Jan. 2007, "Becoming a Scientist: The Role of Undergraduate Research in Students' Cognitive, Personal and Professional Development" Science Education, 91(1), 36-74.
23. Jones, C., Dirckinck-Holmfeld, L., & Lindstrom, B. (2006). A Relational, Indirect, Meso-Level Approach to CSCL Design in the Next Decade. International Journal of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, 1:35-56.
24. Kinkead, J. (2003). Learning Through Inquiry: An Overview of Undergraduate Research. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, no. 93, Spring, 5-17.
25. Kremmer, J. F., & Bringle, R. G. (1990). The effects of an intensive research experince on the careers of talented undergraduates. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 24(1), 1-5.
26. Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts. Princeton: NJ: Princeton University Press.
27. Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1990). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge University Press.
28. Lynch, M. (1985). Art and Artifact in Laboratory Science: A Study of Shop Work and Shop Talk in a Research Laboratory. London:: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
29. May, G. S. (1997). An evaluation of the research experiences for undergraduates program at Georgia Institute of Technology. Paper presented at the Frontiers in Education Conference, Pittsburgh, PA.
30. Mills, C. W. (1959). The Sociological Imagination. Grove Press: NY.
31. National Research Council (2000). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. National Academy Press: Washington, DC.
32. Morely, R. L., Havick, J. J., & May, G. S. (1998 July). An evaluation of the Georgia Tech summer undergradute program of research in electrical engineering minorities. Journal of Engineering Education, 87(3), 321-325.
33. Owen-Smith, J. (2001). Managing Laboratory Work through Skepticism: Processes of Evaluation and Control. American Sociological Review, 66, 3, 427-452.
34. Osbeck, L. M., & Nersessian, N. J. (in press). The Distribution of Representation. To appear in the Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour.
35. Pea, R. D. (1993), Practices of Distributed Intelligence and Designs for Education. In Salomon, G. (Ed.) Distributed Cognitions: Psychological and Educational Considerations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
36. Rohde, M. Klamma, R. & Wulf, V. (2005) Establishing Communities of Practice among Students and Start-Up Companies, in: Proceedings of the International Conference on Collaborative Learning (CSCL 2005), May 30 - June 4, Taipeh (Taiwan), 514-519
37. Rohde, M., Klamma, R., Jarke, M., & Wulf, V. (2007): "The Reality is our Lab: Communities of Practice in Applied Computer Science" in: Behavior and Information Technology (BIT), Vol 26, No 1, 2007, Taylor & Francis, 81-94.
38. Ryder, J., Leach, J., & Driver, R. (1999). Undergraduate science students' image of science. Jounal of Research in Teaching Science, 36, 331-346.
39. Stevens, R. (2000). Divisions of Labor in School and in the Workplace: Comparing Computer and Paper-Supported Activities Across Settings. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(4), 373-401.
40. Saxenian, A. (1994): Regional Advantage: Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128, Cambridge.
41. Shaffer, D. W. (2004). Pedagogical Praxis: The Professions as Models for Post-industrial Education. Teachers College Record, 106(7), 1401-1421.
42. Seymour E., Hunter A.B., Laursen S.L., DeAntoni T., 2004, "Establishing the benefits of research experiences for undergraduates in the sciences: First findings from a three-year study" Science Education, 88(4), 493-534.
43. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in Society. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA.
44. Wellman, B. (2002). Little Boxes, Glocalization, and Networked Individualism. In Tanabe, M. van den Besselaar, P. & Ishida, T. (Eds). Digital Cities, LNCS 2362, 10-25.
45. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge University Press.
46. Zydney, A. L., Bennett, J. S., Shahid, A., & Bauer, K. (2002). Impact of undergraduate research experience in engineering. Journal of Engineering Education, 91(2), 151-157.