A Habermasian perspective on joint meaning making online: What does it offer and what are the difficulties?

International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning

Volumn 10, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 223-237

  Hammond, Michael ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WARWICK   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Critical theory; CSCL; Habermas; Intersubjectivity

Indexed keywords

EID: 84941336744     PISSN: 15561607     EISSN: 15561615     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11412-015-9215-1     Document Type: Article

References (84)

1. Anderson, B. (2004). Dimensions of learning and support in an online community. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 19(2), 183–190.
2. Austin, R. (2006). The role of ICT in bridge building and social inclusion: Theory, policy and practice issues. European Journal of Teacher Education, 29(2), 145–161.
3. Bamber, J., & Crowther, J. (2012). Speaking Habermas to Gramsci: Implications for the vocational preparation of community educators. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 31(2), 183–197.
4. Barak, A., Boniel-Nissim, M., & Suler, J. (2008). Fostering empowerment in online support groups. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(5), 1867–1883.
5. Barnett, R. (2004). The purposes of higher education and the changing face of academia. London Review of Education, 2(1), 61–73.
6. Barton, D. (2012). Participation, deliberate learning and discourses of learning online. Language and Education, 26(2), 139–150.
7. Beemer, J. (2006). Breaching the theoretical divide: Reassessing the ordinary and everyday in Habermas and Garfinkel. Sociological Theory, 24(1), 81–104.
8. Bonamy, J., & Haugluslaine-Charlier, B. (1995). Supporting professional learning: Beyond technological support. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 11(4), 196–202.
9. Boshier, R. (1990). Socio psychological factors in electronic networking. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 9(1), 49–64.
10. Boyd, G. (1996). Emancipative educational technology. Canadian Journal of Educational Communication, 25, 179–186.
11. Brookfield, S. (2005). Learning democratic reason: The adult education project of Jürgen Habermas. The Teachers College Record, 107(6), 1127–1168.
12. Butler, B., Sproull, L., Kiesler, S., & Kraut, R. (2002). Community effort in online groups: Who does the work and why? In S. Weisband (Ed.), Leadership at a distance: Research in technologically supported work (pp. 171–194). Oxford: Lawrence Erlbaum.
13. Cammaerts, B. (2009). Radical pluralism and free speech in online public spaces: The case of North Belgian extreme right discourses. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 12(6), 555–575.
14. Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical. Education, knowledge and action research. Lewes: Falmer.
15. Cecez-Kecmanovic, D., & Webb, C. (2000). Towards a communicative model of collaborative web-mediated learning. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 16(1), 73–85.
16. Chernela, J. (1997). The “Ideal speech moment”: Women and narrative performance in the Brazilian amazon. Feminist Studies, 23(1), 73–96.
17. Coco, A., & Short, P. (2004). History and habit in the mobilization of ICT resources. The Information Society, 20(1), 39–51.
18. Conole, G., & Dyke, M. (2004). What are the affordances of information and communication technologies? Research in Learning Technology, 12(2), 113–124.
19. De Wever, B., Schellens, T., Valcke, M., et al. (2006). Content analysis schemes to analyze transcripts of online asynchronous discussion groups: A review. Computers & Education, 46(1), 6–28.
20. Derry, S., Hmelo-Silver, C., Nagarajan, A., Chernobilsky, E., & Beitzel, B. (2006). Cognitive transfer revisited: Can we exploit new media to solve old problems on a large scale? Journal of Educational Computing Research, 35(2), 145–162.
21. Dewey, J. (1922/2007). Human nature and conduct: An introduction to social psychology. NY: Cosimo.
22. Dunn, W. E., & Lantolf, J. P. (1998). Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development and Krashen’s i + 1: Incommensurable constructs; incommensurable theories. Language Learning, 48(3), 411–442.
23. Englund, T. (2006). Introduction: Jürgen Habermas and education. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 38(5), 499–501.
24. Eve, J., & Brabazon, T. (2008). Learning to leisure? failure, flame, blame, shame, homophobia and other everyday practices in online education. The Journal of Literacy and Technology, 9(1), 36–61.
25. Ewert, G. (1991). Habermas and education: A comprehensive overview of the influence of Habermas in educational literature. Review of Educational Research, 61(3), 345–378.
26. Garrison, D. (2007). Online community of inquiry review: Social, cognitive, and teaching presence issues. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 11(1), 61–72.
27. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education. American Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 7–23.
28. Gillespie, A., Reader, T., Cornish, F., & Campbell, C. (2014). Beyond ideal speech situations: Adapting to communication asymmetries in health care. Journal of Health Psychology, 19(1), 72–78.
29. Gray, B. (2004). Informal learning in an online community of practice. Journal of Distance Education, 19(1), 20–35.
30. Gunawardena, C., Lowe, C., & Anderson, T. (1997). Analysis of a global online debate and the development of an interaction analysis model for examining social construction of knowledge in computer conferencing. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 17(4), 397–431.
31. Gunawardena, C., Hermans, M., Sanchez, D., Richmond, C., Bohley, M., & Tuttle, R. (2009). A theoretical framework for building online communities of practice with social networking tools. Educational Media International, 46(1), 3–16.
32. Habermas, J. (1972). Knowledge and human interests. London: Heinemann Educational Books.
33. Habermas, J. (1974). The public sphere: An encyclopedia article (1964). New German Critique, 3, 49–55.
34. Habermas, J. (1979). Communication and the evolution of society. Boston: Beacon.
35. Habermas, J. (1987). The philosophical discourse of modernity: Twelve lectures. Cambridge: MIT Press.
36. Habermas, J. (1990). Moral consciousness and communicative action. Cambridge: MIT Press.
37. Habermas, J. (1998). The inclusion of the other: Studies in political theory. Cambridge: MIT Press.
38. Habermas, J. (2001). Why Europe needs a constitution. New Left Review, 11, 5–26.
39. Habermas, J. (2005). Equal treatment of cultures and the limits of postmodern liberalism. Journal of Political Philosophy, 13(1), 1–28.
40. Habermas, J. (2006). Political communication in media society: Does democracy still enjoy an epistemic dimension? The impact of normative theory on empirical research. Communication Theory, 16(4), 411–426.
41. Habermas, J., & Dews, P. (1992). Autonomy and solidarity: Interviews with Jürgen Habermas. London: Verso.
42. Hansen, S., Berente, N., & Lyytinen, K. (2009). Wikipedia, critical social theory, and the possibility of rational discourse. The Information Society, 25(1), 38–59.
43. Harasim, L. (1996). Online education: The future. In T. Harrison & T. Stephen (Eds.), Computer networking and scholarly communication in the twenty-first-century university. New York: SUNY Press.
44. Harasim, L. (2000). Shift happens: Online education as a new paradigm in learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 3(1–2), 41–61.
45. Henri, F. (1992). Computer conferencing and content analysis. In A. Kaye (Ed.), Collaborative learning through computer conferencing (pp. 117–136). Berlin: Springer.
46. Hiltz, S., & Turoff, M. (1978). The network nation: Human communication via computer. Reading: MA Addison-Wesley.
47. Hiltz, R., Coppola, N., Rotter, N., Toroff, M., & Benbunan-Fich, R. (2000). Measuring the importance of collaborative learning for the effectiveness of ALN: A multi-measure. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 4(2-3), 101–119.
48. Hodgson, V., & Reynolds, M. (2005). Consensus, difference and ‘multiple communities’ in networked learning. Studies in Higher Education, 30(1), 11–24.
49. Jeffries, S. (2010) A rare interview with Jürgen Habermas, 30 April 2010, Financial Times.
50. Kent, G. (2013). Evidence of distorted communication as impetus for use of strategies to achieve ‘something like’ an ideal speech situation. The University of Wales Journal of Education, 16(1), 70–83.
51. Koschmann, T., Stahl, G., & Zemel, A. (2004). The video analyst’s manifesto: (or the implications of Garfinkel’s policies for the development of a program of video analytic research within the learning sciences). California: Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Learning Sciences.
52. Lasker, J., Sogolow, E., & Sharim, R. (2005). The role of an online community for people with a rare disease: content analysis of messages posted on a primary biliary cirrhosis mailinglist. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 7(1).
53. Lewin, K. (1951). Resolving social conflicts. Washington: American Pyschological Association.
54. Littleton, K., & Whitelock, D. (2005). The negotiation and co-construction of meaning and understanding within a postgraduate online learning community. Learning, Media and Technology, 30(2), 147–164.
55. Lukes, S. (1982). Of gods and demons: Habermas and practical reason. In J. Thompson & D. Held (Eds.), Habermas, critical debates (pp. 134–148). London: Macmillan.
56. Mason, R., & Kaye, A. (1989). Mindweave: Communication, computers and distance education. Oxford: Pergamon.
57. Matsuda, P. K. (2002). Negotiation of identity and power in a Japanese online discourse community. Computers and Composition, 19(1), 39–55.
58. McConnell, D. (1994). Managing open learning in computer supported collaborative learning environments. Studies in Higher Education, 19(3), 341–358.
59. McConnell, D. (2000). Implementing computer supported cooperative learning. London: Kogan Paul.
60. McNamee, L., Peterson, B., & Peña, J. (2010). A call to educate, participate, invoke and indict: Understanding the communication of online hate groups. Communication Monographs, 77(2), 257–280.
61. Mezirow, J. (1997). Transformative learning: Theory to practice. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 74, 5–12.
62. Morselli, F., & Boero, P. (2009). Proving as a rational behaviour: Habermas’construct of rationality as a comprehensive frame for research on the teaching and learning of proof. Lyon: Paper Presented at the Proceedings of the Sixth Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education.
63. Murphy, E. (2004). Recognising and promoting collaboration in an online asynchronous discussion. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(4), 421–431.
64. Murphy, M., & Bamber, J. (2012). Introduction: From Fromm to Lacan: Habermas and education in conversation. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 31(2), 103–107.
65. Nett, B. (2008). A community of practice among tutors enabling student participation in a seminar preparation. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3(1), 53–67.
66. Neuman, W., Bimber, B., & Hindman, M. (2011). The Internet and four dimensions of citizenship. In G. Edwards, L. Jacobs, & R. Shapiro (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of American Public Opinion and The Media (pp. 22–42).
67. Outhwaite, W. (2013). Bourdieu and Habermas: ‘Linguistic exchange’ versus ‘communicative action’? A reply to Simon Susen. Social Epistemology, 27(3-4), 247–249.
68. Pinkett, R. (2003). Community technology and community building: early results from the creating community connections project. The Information Society, 19(5), 365–379.
69. Price, V. (2009). Citizens deliberating online: Theory and some evidence. In T. Davies & S. Gangadharan (Eds.), Online deliberation: Design, research, and practice (pp. 37–58). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
70. Rheingold, H. (2008). Using participatory media and public voice to encourage civic engagement. In W. Bennett (Ed.), Civic life online: Learning how digital media can engage youth (pp. 97–118). Ma, USA: MIT Press.
71. Salmon, G., Nie, M., & Edirisingha, P. (2010). Developing a five-stage model of learning in second life. Educational Research, 52(2), 169–182.
72. Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2006). Knowledge building: Theory, pedagogy, and technology. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 97–118). New York: Cambridge University Press.
73. Schrire, S. (2006). Knowledge building in asynchronous discussion groups: Going beyond quantitative analysis. Computers & Education, 46(1), 49–70.
74. Schwarz, B., & De Groot, R. (2007). Argumentation in a changing world. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2(2-3), 297–313.
75. Stahl, G. (2005). Group cognition in computer-assisted collaborative learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(2), 79–90.
76. Stahl, G. (2011). How a virtual math team structured its problem solving. Hong Kong: Paper presented at the International Conference on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL 2011).
77. Susen, S. (2013). Bourdieusian reflections on language: Unavoidable conditions of the real speech situation. Social Epistemology, 27(3-4), 199–246.
78. Takahashi, M., Fujimoto, M., & Yamasaki, N. (2003). The active lurker: influence of an in-house online community on its outside environment. Florida: Paper Presented at the Proceedings of the 2003 International ACM SIGGROUP Conference on Supporting Group Work.
79. Thomas, A. (2005). Children online: Learning in a virtual community of practice. E-Learning and Digital Media, 2(1), 27–38.
80. Van Manen, M. (1977). Linking ways of knowing with ways of being practical. Curriculum Inquiry, 6(3), 205–228.
81. Wee, J. D., & Looi, C.-K. (2009). A model for analyzing math knowledge building in VMT. In G. Stahl (Ed.), Studying virtual math teams (pp. 475–497). New York: Springer.
82. Wegerif, R. (1998). The social dimension of asynchronous learning networks. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 2(1), 34–49.
83. Wellman, B., Boase, J., & Chen, W. (2002). The networked nature of community: Online and offline. It & Society, 1, 151–165.
84. Yukawa, J. (2006). Co-reflection in online learning: Collaborative critical thinking as narrative. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(2), 203–228.