1. Institute of Educational Research, University of Oslo15/3/13Research design and instrumentation for studiesof knowledge practicesOla ErstadInstitute of Educational Research,University of Oslo, Norway

2. Institute of Educational Research, University of Oslo25/3/13Outline1.Research orientation. Knowledge practices.2.Methodological challenges3.Research design and instrumentation4.Examples. Discussions 3. Institute of Educational Research, University of Oslo1. Research orientation. Knowledge practices.35/3/13 4. Institute of Educational Research, University of OsloResearch orientation Idiographic vs nomothetic researchNomothetic: It describes the effort to derive laws thatexplain objective phenomena in general.Idiographic: It describes the effort to understand themeaning of contingent, unique, and often subjectivephenomena. From qualitative approach to develop items for a survey, anda possible scale on learning across contexts.45/3/13 5. Institute of Educational Research, University of Oslo55/3/13Questioning the concepts of formal andinformal How learners draw on resources form different domains oflife. Funds of knowledge Digital content creation challenges the fundamental controlof information (teacher, book, assessment) Learning in motion (Nespor, 1993). Learners movebetween contexts School; a social space for learning and critical reflection. 6. Institute of Educational Research, University of Oslo65/3/13Challenging school practices Two different learning cultures Differences between subject domains Now more focus on use of technology in schools, but definedmore to enhance established pratices rather than defining new Parallel discourses: The implications of the PISA study andabout 21st century competences. 7. Institute of Educational Research, University of OsloEveryday and academic practices The things you learn in school are to do with educationand to get jobs. Youre not really using them in actualreal life. (18-year-old, Bentley, 1998) I guess I could call myself smart. I mean I can usuallyget good grades. Sometimes I worry though, that Im notequipped to achieve what I want, that Im just a taperecorder repeating back what Ive heard. I worry thatonce Im out of school and people dont keep handingme information with questions Ill be lost. (15-year-old, Bentley, 1998)75/3/13 8. Institute of Educational Research, University of OsloEveryday and academic practices Functionally, the distinction between everyday and academicthinking skills is somewhat akin to a difference betweeneffortless or incidental cognition and deliberate effortfulcognition. In general, everyday thinking skills provide themeans for interacting with our world on a day-to-day basis,involve routine scripted activities, and are executed relativelyautomatically. Problems requiring academic thinking skills, incontrast, place a far greater emphasis on precision, deliberateevaluation, accurate understanding, and predictions consistentwith the provided facts. (Reeve, Palincsar, & Brown, 1985,p. 3)85/3/13 9. Institute of Educational Research, University of OsloEveryday and academic practices The relationship between everyday and academic thinking has been centralin writings on education and learning for a long time, going back toVygotsky (1986, Thought and Language) on everyday and scientificconcepts, and Bartlett (1958, Thinking) on everyday or experimentalthinking. Both Vygotsky and Bartlett used these conceptions as a way ofdescribing conceptual development and the zone or connections betweendifferent ways of understanding, in what enhances deeper insight withindifferent areas and issues. The decontextualized nature of learning and knowledge practices inschools in many subject domains is something students have tolearn. (Lauren Resnick, 1987)95/3/13 10. Institute of Educational Research, University of OsloEveryday and academic practices Leisure is hard work. (K. Drotner, 2008) There is a growing consensus that we can come tounderstand more about learning if we document bothsimilarities and differences between learning processesinside and out of school and focus on the study of thecomplex relationships between them. [Hull & Schultz,2001].105/3/13 11. Institute of Educational Research, University of Oslo115/3/13Barton & Hamilton (1998). Ecologicalperspective on literacySix propositions that frame their concept of literacy as a social practice,and their ethnographic study:(a)Literacy is best understood as a set of social practices; these can beinferred from events that are mediated by written texts;(b)there are different literacies associated with different domains of life;(c)literacy practices are patterned by social institutions and powerrelationships, and some literacies become more dominant, visible, andinfluential than others;(d)literacy practices are purposeful and embedded in broader social goalsand cultural practices;(e)literacy is historically situated; and(f) literacy practices change, and new ones are frequently acquiredthrough processes of informal learning and sense making. 12. Institute of Educational Research, University of OsloKnowledge practicesUnderstanding knowledge practices as personal and socialpractices related to working with knowledge. (Hakkarainen,2009: 215).To investigate how teachers and students relate to knowledgecreation and knowledge building, as well as to how teacherscan integrate students knowledge practices from out ofschool in the classroom.The term knowledge is used in the broadest sense, fromwhat is explicit, or stated in official discourse, to what isimplicit, and thus informing ones activities, and, further yet,to that which underlies the competencies in specificsituations, so-called procedural knowledge (Hakkarainen,2009).125/3/13 13. Institute of Educational Research, University of Oslo135/3/13Knowledge connected - trajectories ofknowledge buildingUnderstand knowledge within a domain as negotiablerather than out there in the world, readily available forthe learner to pick up.How we grasp the connectedness and transitions betweenaspects of knowledge building along different time-scales?- Domains- Informal-Formal- Online-Offline- Number of information sources- Ontological and academic learning 14. Institute of Educational Research, University of Oslo2. Methodological challenges145/3/13 15. Institute of Educational Research, University of OsloTwo dimensions Increased focus on studying literacy as part of social prac3ces (prac3ces-events) Autonomous vs ideological Cultural contexts Local literacies The impact of technological and media developments Representa3onal means Content crea3on. User generated. Sharing, distribu3on 16. Institute of Educational Research, University of OsloMethodological challenges How do we dene literacy prac3ces in a 3me of remixing and distribu3on of content? Development of familiar methods and/or a need for new methodological approaches? How can technologies help us in collec3ng, organizing and analyzing data? 17. Institute of Educational Research, University of OsloTechnologies and methodological challenges In collec3ng data. Online communi3es. New tools for colelc3ng data In analyzing data. All that data! SoOware developments In presen3ng data Mul3modal Representa3ons and models to grasp complexity 175/3/13 18. Institute of Educational Research, University of Oslo3. Research design and instrumentation185/3/13 19. Institute of Educational Research, University of Oslo195/3/13ExampleKnowledge in Mo3on Across Contexts of Learning project. Focusing on teachers, and learners. Series of biographic presenta3ons or thema3c orienta3on? Developing a conceptual framework (tree) in Nvivo. 20. Institute of Educational Research, University of OsloPiloting phase Baseline data Diaries for Learning Lives project Longitudinal survey data on youth for Knowledge in Mo3on project. (1992-2002-2012) Reviews 205/3/13 21. Institute of Educational Research, University of OsloKnowMo The overarching research ques3ons in this project are: How do teachers handle dierences and similari3es between knowledge prac3ces in and out of school? And what are the implica3ons of connec3ng young peoples knowledge prac3ces from dierent domains for student learning and teachers didac3c strategies? 215/3/13 22. Institute of Educational Research, University of Oslo The research design Qualita3ve, longitudinal study Involving two lower secondary schools in two dierent local communi3es in one medium-sized city. The schools are selected in coopera3on with one University College, and will draw on previous collabora3on between this college and several prac3ce schools. The criteria for selec3on will be size (minimum of 80 students in each grade) and experience with integra3ng ICT in teaching. We will also aim at selec3ng communi3es that dier with respect to the socio-economic composi3on of the popula3on. 225/3/13 23. Institute of Educational Research, University of OsloSample 30 students from two classes at each school will be selected Both girls and boys, and academically strong and weakstudents Based on conversations with teachers and on grades during thefirst semester of 8th grade Select students after spending time in the classroom to get asense of the interaction235/3/13 24. Institute of Educational Research, University of Oslo2 x 2 years design The data collection (first 2,5 years)Will be conducted over two-and-a-half years,enabling the project team to follow developmentsover the course of lower secondary school, from thesecond semester of eighth grade until the end oftenth grade. Designing models and ways of working (last 2 years)The later phases will include design experimentsand the involvement of teachers in the schools andteacher education. Some overlap with the last part ofdata collection.245/3/13 25. Institute of Educational Research, University of Oslo The main focus of the observa3ons and interviews will be on iden3fying, describing and analysing learning processes in each of the specied domains. In each of the domains, we will explore the following ve dimensions of the knowledge prac3ces taking place: Ac#vi#es and Structures: What aspect of the ac3vi3es and literacy prac3ces in each domain can be dened as knowledge prac3ces? To what extent are these knowledge prac3ces structured and supported? In which ways can dierent knowledge prac3ces be characterized as formal or informal? Content: How can we understand the body of knowledge made visible by the knowledge prac3ce? What do young people as learners extract from the content of their out-of-school prac3ces as well as the use of learning resources in the classroom? Actors: Who are involved in the knowledge prac3ce, and how do the respec3ve actors contribute? What characterizes interac3on between actors in specic knowledge prac3ces? Media#on and Tools: What are the means of communica3on and collabora3on within specic knowledge prac3ces? Outcome: What is the outcome of the knowledge prac3ces in each domain? What characterizes students mo3va3on in dierent ac3vi3es? And how is this outcome nego3ated in classroom ac3vi3es? 255/3/13 26. Institute of Educational Research, University of Oslo3 domains out of school1. Families Home2. Organized Sports3. Media Use Each domain with one researcher each. One post.doc andone PhD in the classrooms at the same time as fieldworkout of school. Interaction analysis and resources/funds ofknowledge used.265/3/13 27. Institute of Educational Research, University of Oslo275/3/13Design and methods Etnogrask 3lnrming. 28. Institute of Educational Research, University of OsloMethods Questionnaire. Fieldnotes. Video observations in and out of school. Interviews (Teachers and students). Logs by teachers and students. Recordings of family conversations at dinner. Artefacts made by students?285/3/13 29. Institute of Educational Research, University of Oslo4. Examples. Data and analysis.295/3/13 30. Institute of Educational Research, University of OsloExamples. Data and analysis. From project Local Literacies and CommunitySpaces (Learning Lives). The three Ts as analytic concepts: Transitions, Transfer,Trajectories. (A focus on literacy practices and learning identities. Richpoints, Spradley) Research questions: R 1. How can we understand and follow learning across social contextsand over time? R 2. What are the funds of knowledge available to the community ofGroruddalen? R 3. What are the major challenges faced by young people engaged intransitions between levels of education?305/3/13 31. Institute of Educational Research, University of OsloPreliminary findings Transitions Some have a clear idea about decisions. Many are insecure, for different reasons. Decide last minute. Often out-of-school experiences that are important. Transfer Positionings in being a learner. Structure and strategies as learners. Content from out-of-school in different subject domains. Teachersstruggle. Trajectories Ways of engagement and participation in different contexts andactivities Many change their learning identities in moments of transitions Evolvement of literacy practices from first to last grade. More complextools and ways of working with texts.315/3/13 32. Institute of Educational Research, University of OsloSample 60 students/families divided by 3 cohorts. (Representing theschool as a timescale, how to become a learner.) Different subject domains:Cohort 1: Sessions preparing for school.Cohort 2: Norwegian, social sciences, math, project workCohort 3:Academic track: Social sciences, Advanced Math, Mediaand CommunicationVocational track: Health and skin care. Car repair.325/3/13 33. Institute of Educational Research, University of OsloA. Diaries What can such diaries tell us about knowledge practicesacross contexts? Focusing on:Spaces/places ther are during a dayActivities they are involved inThe role of technology335/3/13 34. Institute of Educational Research, University of OsloB. Fieldnote, one session What is going on here? How do you interpret the intention and acting in thissession by the teacher? How are the students engaged or dis-engaged in thecontent issues of this session? Implications?345/3/13 35. Institute of Educational Research, University of OsloC. Interviews combined with other data We start coding interviews, fieldnotes and diaries. Then add coding to other types of data to elaborateanalysis of the written data types. What is expressed in interviews as ways ofunderstanding learning identities? How are funds of knowledge expressed and for whatpurposes/what role do they have?355/3/13