Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T10:07:14.024Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

7 - Knowledge Building

Theory, Pedagogy, and Technology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

Marlene Scardamalia
Affiliation:
Ontario Institute for Studies in Education
Carl Bereiter
Affiliation:
Ontario Institute for Studies in Education
R. Keith Sawyer
Affiliation:
Washington University, St Louis
Get access

Summary

There are substantial similarities between deep learning and the processes by which knowledge advances in the disciplines. During the 1960s efforts to exploit these similarities gave rise to learning by discovery, guided discovery, inquiry learning, and Science: A Process Approach (American Association for the Advancement of Science, 1967). Since these initial reform efforts, scholars have learned a great deal about how knowledge advances. A mere listing of keywords suggests the significance and diversity of ideas that have come to prominence since the 1960s: Thomas Kuhn, Imre Lakatos, sociology of science, the “Science Wars,” social constructivism, schema theory, mental models, situated cognition, explanatory coherence, the “rhetorical turn,” communities of practice, memetics, connectionism, emergence, and self-organization. Educational approaches have changed in response to some of these developments; there is a greater emphasis on collaborative rather than individual inquiry, the tentative nature of empirical laws is more often noted, and argumentation has become an important part of some approaches. But the new “knowledge of knowledge” has much larger educational implications: Ours is a knowledge-creating civilization. A growing number of “knowledge societies” (Stehr, 1994), are joined in a deliberate effort to advance all the frontiers of knowledge. Sustained knowledge advancement is seen as essential for social progress of all kinds and for the solution of societal problems. From this standpoint the fundamental task of education is to enculturate youth into this knowledge-creating civilization and to help them find a place in it.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1967). Science: A process approach. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science, Commission on Science Education. Distributed by Xerox Corporation.
Anderson, J. R. (1980). Cognitive psychology and its implications. San Francisco: W. M. Freeman.Google Scholar
Bazerman, C. (1985). Physicists reading physics: Schema-laden purposes and purpose-laden schema. Written Communication, 2, 3–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bereiter, C. (1985). Toward a solution of the learning paradox. Review of Educational Research, 55, 201–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bereiter, C. (1991). Implications of connectionism for thinking about rules. Educational Researcher, 20, 10–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bereiter, C. (1992). Referent-centered and problem-centered knowledge: Elements of an educational epistemology. Interchange, 23, 337–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bereiter, C. (1994). Implications of postmodernism for science, or, science as progressive discourse. Educational Psychologist, 29(1), 3–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bereiter, C. (2002). Education and mind in the knowledge age. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1989). Intentional learning as a goal of instruction. In Resnick, L. B. (Eds.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 361–392). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (2003). Learning to work creatively with knowledge. In Corte, E. D., Verschaffel, L., Entwistle, N., & Merriënboer, J. V. (Eds.), Powerful learning environments: Unravelling basic components and dimensions (pp. 73–78). Oxford: Elsevier Science.Google Scholar
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (in press). Models of teaching and instruction in the knowledge age. In Alexander, P. A. & Winne, P. H. (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Bereiter, C., Scardamalia, M., Cassells, C., & Hewitt, J. (1997). Postmodernism, knowledge building, and elementary science. Elementary School Journal, 97, 329–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, A. L., Day, J. D., & Jones, R. S. (1983). The development of plans for summarizing texts. Child Development, 54, 968–979.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caswell, B., & Bielaczyk, K. (2001). Knowledge Forum: Altering the relationship between students and scientific knowledge. Education, Communication & Information, 1, 281–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Catrambone, R., & Holyoak, K. J. (1989). Overcoming contextual limitations on problem-solving transfer. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15, 1147–1156.Google Scholar
Chi, M. T. H., Slotta, J. D., & deLeeuw, N. (1994). From things to processes: A theory of conceptual change for learning science concepts. Learning and Instruction, 4, 27–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coleman, E. B., Brown, A. L., & Rivkin, I. D. (1997). The effect of instructional explanations on learning from scientific texts. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6, 347–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunbar, K. (1997). How scientists think: Online creativity and conceptual change in science. In Ward, T. B., Smith, S. M., & Vaid, S. (Eds.), Conceptual structures and processes: Emergence, discovery and change (pp. 461–493). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Fodor, J. A. (1980). Fixation of belief and concept acquisition. In Piattelli-Palmerini, M. (Eds.), Language and learning: The debate between Jean Piaget and Noam Chomsky (pp. 142–149). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Grossberg, S. (1997). Principles of cortical synchronization. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 20, 689–690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lakatos, I. (1976). Proofs and refutations: The logic of mathematical discovery. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Messina, R., & Reeve, R. (2004). Knowledge building in elementary science. In Leithwood, K., McAdie, P., Bascia, N., & Rodrigue, A. (Eds.), Teaching for deep understanding: Towards the Ontario curriculum we need (pp. 94–99). Toronto: Elementary Teachers' Federation of Ontario.Google Scholar
Molenaar, P. C. M., & Maas, H. L. J. (2000). Neural constructivism or self-organization? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 783CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ohlsson, S. (1991). Young adults' understanding of evolutionary explanations: Preliminary observations (Tech. Rep. to OERI No. University of Pittsburgh, Learning Research and Development Laboratory.Google Scholar
Pascual-Leone, J. (1980). Constructive problems for constructive theories: The current relevance of Piaget's work and a critique of information-processing simulation psychology. In Kluwe, R. H. & Spada, H. (eds.), Developmental models of thinking (pp. 263–296). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Petroski, H. (1996). Invention by design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Phillips, W. A., & Singer, W. (1997). In search of common foundations for cortical computation. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 20, 657–722.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Quartz, S. R. (1993) Neural networks, nativism, and the plausibility of constructivism. Cognition, 48, 223–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ranney, M., & Schank, P. (1998). Toward an integration of the social and the scientific: Observing, modeling, and promoting the explanatory coherence of reasoning. In Reed, S. & Miller, L. (Eds.), Connectionist models of social reasoning and social behavior (pp. 245–274). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Reed, B. (2001). Epistemic agency and the intellectual virtues. Southern Journal of Philosophy, 39, 507–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rheinberger, H.- J. (1997). Toward history of epistemic things: Synthesizing proteins in the test tube. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Sawyer, R. K. (2003). Emergence in creativity and development. In Sawyer, R. K., John-Steiner, V., Moran, S., Sternberg, R., Feldman, D. H., Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Nakamura, J., Creativity and development (pp. 12–60). New York: Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sawyer, R. K. (2005). Social emergence: Societies as complex systems. New York: Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scardamalia, M. (2000). Can schools enter a Knowledge Society? In Selinger, M. and Wynn, J. (Eds.), Educational technology and the impact on teaching and learning (pp. 6–10). Abingdon: Research Machines.Google Scholar
Scardamalia, M. (2002). Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. In Smith, B. (Eds.), Liberal education in a knowledge society (pp. 76–98). Chicago: Open Court.Google Scholar
Scardamalia, M. (2003). Knowledge building environments: Extending the limits of the possible in education and knowledge work. In DiStefano, A., Rudestam, K. E., & Silverman, R. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of distributed learning (pp. 269–272). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Scardamalia, M, & Bereiter, C. (1987). Knowledge telling and knowledge transforming in written composition. In Rosenberg, S. (Ed.), Advances in applied psycholinguistics: Vol. 2. Reading, writing, and language learning (pp. 142–175). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1991). Higher levels of agency for children in knowledge-building: A challenge for the design of new knowledge media. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 1(1), 37–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1996). Adaptation and understanding: A case for new cultures of schooling. In Vosniadou, S., DeCorte, E., Glaser, R., & Mandl, H. (Eds.), International perspectives on the design of technology-supported learning environments (pp. 149–163). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2003). Knowledge building. In Encyclopedia of education (pp. 1370–1373). New York: Macmillan Reference.Google Scholar
Scardamalia, M., Bereiter, C., Hewitt, J., & Webb, J. (1996). Constructive learning from texts in biology. In Fischer, K.M, & Kirby, M. (Eds.), Relations and biology learning: The acquisition and use of knowledge structures in biology (pp. 44–64). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Scardamalia, M., Bereiter, C., & Lamon, M. (1994). The CSILE project: Trying to bring the classroom into World 3. In McGilley, K. (Eds.), Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice (pp. 201–228). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Scardamalia, M., Bereiter, C., McLean, R. S., Swallow, J., & Woodruff, E. (1989). Computer supported intentional learning environments. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 5, 51–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scardamalia, M., Bereiter, C., & Steinbach, R. (1984). Teachability of reflective processes in written composition. Cognitive Science, 8(2), 173–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, B. (Ed.). (2002). Liberal education in a knowledge society. Chicago: Open Court.Google Scholar
Stehr, N. (1994). Knowledge societies. London: Sage Publications.
Sterelny, K. 2005. Externalism, epistemic artefacts and the extended mind. In (Schantz, R., ed)The externalist challenge: New studies on cognition and intentionality. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Stone, J. E. (1996). Developmentalism: An obscure but pervasive restriction on educational improvement. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 4(8). Retrieved from http://olam.edu.asu.edu/epaa/v4n8.htmlCrossRef
Woodruff, E., & Meyer, K. (1997). Explanations from intra- and inter-group discourse: Students building knowledge in the science classroom. Research in Science Education, 27(1), 25–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • Knowledge Building
  • Edited by R. Keith Sawyer, Washington University, St Louis
  • Book: The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences
  • Online publication: 05 June 2012
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816833.008
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • Knowledge Building
  • Edited by R. Keith Sawyer, Washington University, St Louis
  • Book: The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences
  • Online publication: 05 June 2012
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816833.008
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • Knowledge Building
  • Edited by R. Keith Sawyer, Washington University, St Louis
  • Book: The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences
  • Online publication: 05 June 2012
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816833.008
Available formats
×