posed, a provocative statement, a different perspective from that the learner has previously been exposed to, ideas are exposed to critique, inquiry and in this way form the basis for knowledge coconstruction. This dialogic process of improving participants’ ideas has the goal of improving their disciplinary ways of representing knowledge. The process of idea improvement usually starts with proposal of ideas, comparison of different ideas or clarification of ideas that leads to discussion among participants, and through productive discourse, improvement of ideas. It is a widening spiral as the process of collaborative inquiry usually triggers other new ideas and new questions that lead to further inquiry. Focusing on authentic ideas from the participants has the advantage of developing their epistemic agency, that is, participants take ownership of their knowledge creation effort. When the participants are engaged in inquiry of an authentic problem they raised, they are naturally more motivated and are likely to invest a lot of effort to pursue the answer. Knowledge co-construction is a dialogic approach that recognizes the central role of dialogue in meaning making. The participants are engaged in productive talk that is not simply agreeing, or confrontational, but exploratory in nature. Exploratory talk (Dawes, Mercer, & Wegerif, 2003) entails active listening, being critical and constructive to others’ ideas, treating ideas as tentative and open to improvement, and aiming to collaborate rather than to compete (Walton & Macagno, 2007). Through exploratory talk, participants can build on one another’s ideas towards idea improvement, rather than trying to win or to convince others to take a particular view. The terms knowledge building, and knowledge co-construction, are sometimes used interchangeably. van Alast (2009), however, differentiates knowledge (co)construction from knowledge creation. To van Alast, knowledge construction is rooted in cognitive psychology that focuses on individual cognitive changes, whereas knowledge creation (building) implies a socio-cultural perspective of learning where knowing (Sfard, 1998) is achieved through participation in cultural practices. Knowledge creation also has the additional dimension of group processes in terms of improving the knowledge artefacts (objects) that capture the group learning. It is this socio-cultural concept of knowledge creation that the authors use when referring to knowledge building or knowledge creation. There are various ‘tools’ available to facilitate knowledge co-construction (creation), inquiry (inclusive of the collection & analysis of evidence) and dialogue, including technology enabled tools such as Knowledge Forum (Scardamalia, 2004). The following section considers how various tools can be used to facilitate pedagogical practices that support dialogical inquiry (the Map of Dialogical Inquiry) and knowledge building.
2.6 Bringing multiple ‘tools’ together We argued above, that deep understanding is developed through knowledge co-construction and dialogical inquiry and these processes are integral to each other. Wells (2002) emphasises the need for multiple iterations of dialogue, inquiry and knowledge co-construction, using the metaphor of a spiral to capture this idea. Affording multiple opportunities for learners to progressively build on each coil leads to the development of deep understanding which he labels as theoretical knowing (see Figure 2.2).
24
