Systemic Intervention for Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning

Abstract

This paper presents a systemic intervention approach as a means to overcome the methodological challenges involved in research into computer-supported collaborative learning applied to the promotion of mathematical problem-solving (CSCL-MPS) skills in schools. These challenges include how to develop an integrated analysis of several aspects of the learning process; and how to reflect on learning purposes, the context of application and participants' identities. The focus of systemic intervention is on processes for thinking through whose views and what issues and values should be considered pertinent in an analysis. Systemic intervention also advocates mixing methods from different traditions to address the purposes of multiple stakeholders. Consequently, a design for CSCL-MPS research is presented that includes several methods. This methodological design is used to analyse and reflect upon both a CSCL-MPS project with Colombian schools, and the identities of the participants in that project. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Keywords computer-supported collaborative learning; mathematical problem-solving; critical systems thinking; systemic intervention; methodological design INTRODUCTION In today's world, the use of information and communication technologies (ICTs) to assist learning processes is on the increase. One of the main purposes of ICT use in learning processes is to facilitate collaboration and, therefore, improve learning by means of sharing and distributing knowledge. This purpose has been pursued through a new educational paradigm called 'computersupported collaborative learning' (CSCL) (Lipponen, 2002;Lehtinen, 2003), which has raised fresh theoretical and methodological issues for researchers Systems Research and Behavioral Science Syst. Res. 32, 86-105 (2015) Published online 20 September 2013 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/sres.2220 because of the complexity of analysing different factors in this type of learning process. For example, research has to consider analyses at both the individual and group levels; the nature of interactions between learners; students' attitudes; technological aspects; and the school's context. Considering these factors in a coherent and reflective manner is a methodological challenge for CSCL research (Dillenbourg, 1999;Daradoumis et al., 2006;De Laat et al., 2006;Stahl et al., 2006;Arbaugh et al., 2010, Arjava, 2011Strijbos, 2011).Currently, CSCL researchers are proposing several different methodologies to analyse CSCL processes, such as the triangulation of quantitative methods (e.g. social network analysis, statistics and surveys) with qualitative methods (e.g. interviews and content analysis) (Daradoumis et al., 2006;De Laat et al., 2006;Cho et al., 2007;Rienties et al., 2009;Gress et al., 2010). Also, some analysis of the context of CSCL activities is beginning to be included alongside the analyses of processes (Arnseth and Ludvigsen, 2006;Arjava, 2011). Although these methodological developments are improving the way CSCL ...

A systems perspective on systemic innovation

“…Likewise, Lusch and Vargo (2014, p. 149), in the context of service dominant logic, argue for a broad and long view of the enterprise: “Its boundaries are largely a function of its worldview or systems view and how it tries to develop this view among a network of actors as a shared view”. Systems thinkers have been developing, using and validating philosophies, theories and methodologies for understanding and exploring boundaries in the context of practice for over fifty years (e.g., Barros‐Castro et al, 2015; Boyd et al, 2004; Churchman, 1970; Foote et al, 2007; Helfgott, 2018; Midgley, 1992b, 2000; Midgley et al, 1998, 2007; Midgley & Pinzón, 2011, 2013; Midgley & Shen, 2007; Nicholas et al, 2019; Shen & Midgley, 2007, 2015; Ufua et al, 2018; Ulrich, 1983, 1987; Velez‐Castiblanco et al, 2016), and there is a rich heritage here to draw upon.…”

Systemic Mediation: Moral Reasoning and Boundaries of Concern

“…This understanding of CST has been applied in a number of organizational, multi‐agency and community development projects (e.g. Midgley et al ., ; Gregory and Midgley, ; Midgley, ; Boyd et al ., ; Córdoba and Midgley, , ; Midgley, ; Boyd et al ., ; Foote et al ., ; Midgley et al ., ; Shen and Midgley, ; Barros‐Castro et al ., ), and it provided us with useful ideas for evolving our systemic mediation approach.…”

Anais do(a) 16º CONGRESSO BRASILEIRO DE SISTEMAS

“…Metodologicamente, usa as atividades de aplicação da SI e 36 perguntas baseadas em conceitos budistas para apoiar as atividades da SI durante o processo de intervenção. Barros-Castro et al (2015) construíram uma abordagem de intervenção baseada numa abordagem típica de SI considerando um conjunto de perguntas inter-relacionadas para promover reflexões de fronteira acerca do problema e das partes interessadas. Ufua et al (2016) desenvolveram a Systemic Lean Intervention (SLI), uma metodologia voltada a participação efetiva de partes interessadas externas no processo de intervenção para o desenvolvimento colaborativo de melhorias.…”