Abstract
The skills of knowledge-creating inquiry are explored as a challenge for higher education. The knowledge-creation approach to learning provides a theoretical tool for addressing them: In addition to the individual and social aspects in regulation of inquiry, the knowledge-creation approach focuses on aspects related to advancing shared objects of inquiry. The development of corresponding metaskills is suggested as an important long-term goal for higher education; these pertain, simultaneously to the individual, collective, and object-oriented aspects of monitoring inquiry. Taking part in collaborative inquiry toward advancing a shared knowledge object is foreseen as a means to facilitate the development of metaskills; the present study examines one undergraduate university course in psychology with that aim. The data consisted of a database discourse and students’ self-reflections after the course, examined by qualitative content analysis. Three analyses investigated discourse evolution, knowledge advancement, and the challenge of the inquiry practices. The student-groups differed markedly in their engagement in the inquiry efforts. The study gave insights concerning novel challenges evoked by knowledge-creating inquiry, relating in particular to commitment, epistemic involvement, dealing with confusion, and the iterative nature of knowledge advancement. We propose the following implication for educational practices: Although dealing with uncertainty and areas beyond one’s expertise, as well as engaging in self-directed collaborative inquiry, may seem overly demanding for students, such experiences are decisive for developing one’s skills in dealing with open-ended knowledge objects in a longer time frame.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Andriessen, J. (2006). Arguing to learn. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), Handbook of the learning sciences, pp. 443–459. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 1–26.
Barron, B. (2003). When smart groups fail. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12, 307–359.
Bereiter, C. (2002). Education and mind in the knowledge age. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bielaszyc, K., & Blake, P. (2006). Models of knowledge and learning. In S. Barab, K. Hay & D. Hickey (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference of the Learning Sciences 2006, pp. 50–58. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Boekarts, M., Pintrich, P. R., & Zeidner, M. (Eds.) (2000). Handbook of self-regulation. San Diego, CA: Academic.
Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141–178.
Cannon-Bowers, J. A., Tannenbaum, S. I., Salas, E., & Volpe, C. E. (1995). Defining competencies and establishing team training requirements. In R. A. Guzzo & E. Salas (Eds.), Team effectiveness and decision making in organisations, pp. 333–380. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Collins, A., Joseph, D., & Bielaszyc, K. (2004). Design Research: Theoretical and methodological issues. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 15–42.
Davidson, J. E., & Sternberg, R. J. (1998). Smart problem solving: How metacognition helps. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice, pp. 47–68. Mahwah, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Dym, C. L., Agogino, A. M., Eris, O., Frey, D. D., & Leifer, L. J. (2005). Engineering design thinking, teaching, and learning. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 103–120.
Edwards, A. (2005). Relational agency: Learning to be a resourceful practitioner. International Journal of Educational Research, 43, 168–182.
Efklides, A. (2006). Metacognition and affect: What can metacognitive experiences tell us about the learning process? Educational Research Review, 1, 3–14.
Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding. Helsinki, Finland: Orienta-Konsultit.
Enyedy, N., & Hoadley, C. M. (2006). From dialogue to monologue and back: Middle spaces in computer-mediated learning. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1, 413–439.
Goos, M., Galbraith, P., & Renshaw, P. (2002). Socially mediated metacognition: Creating collaborative zones of proximal development in small group problem solving. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 49, 193–223.
Gutwin, C., & Greenberger, S. (2004). The importance of awareness for team cognition in distributed collaboration. In E. Salas & S. Fiore (Eds.), Team cognition: Understanding the factors that drive process and performance, pp. 177–201. Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association.
Hakkarainen, K. (2003). Emergence of progressive inquiry culture in computer-supported collaborative learning. Learning Environments Research, 6, 199–220.
Hakkarainen, K., Palonen, T., Paavola, S., & Lehtinen, E. (2004). Communities of networked expertise: Professional and educational perspectives. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Jost, J. T., Kruglanski, A. W., & Nelson, T. O. (1998). Social metacognition: An expansionist review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2, 137–154.
Järvelä, S., Hurme, T-R., & Järvenoja, H. (in press). Self-regulation and motivation in computer supported collaborative learning environments. In S. Ludvigsen, A. Lund, I. Rasmussen, & R. Säljö (Eds.), Learning across sites: New tools, infrastructures and practices. Routledge.
Järvelä, S., Veermans, M., & Leinonen, P. (2008). Investigating student engagement in computer-supported inquiry: A process-oriented analysis. Social Psychology in Education, 11, 299–322.
Knorr-Cetina, K. (1997). Sociality with objects: Social relations in postsocial knowledge societies. Theory, Culture and Society, 14, 1–30.
Lahti, H. (2007). Collaboration between students and experts in a virtual design studio. Journal of Design Research, 6(4), 403–421.
Lakkala, M., Muukkonen, H., Paavola, S., & Hakkarainen, K. (2008). Designing pedagogical infrastructures in university courses for technology-enhanced collaborative inquiry. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 3(1), 33–64.
Leinonen, P., Järvelä, S., & Häkkinen, P. (2005). Conceptualizing the awareness of collaboration: A qualitative study of a global virtual team. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 14(4), 301–322.
Lin, X., Schwarz, D.L., & Hatano, G. (2005). Toward teachers' adaptive metacognition. Educational Psychologist, 40, 245–255. Available at: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title∼content=t775653642∼db=all∼tab=issueslist∼branches=40 - v40 .
Mandl, H., Grüber, H., & Renkl, A. (1996). Communities of practice toward expertise: social foundation of university instruction. In P. B. Baltes & U. M. Staudenger (Eds.), Interactive minds: Life-span perspectives on the social foundation of cognition, pp. 394–412. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Marton, F., & Trigwell, K. (2000). Variatio est mater studiorum. Higher Education Research & Development, 19, 381–395.
Meier, A., Spada, H., & Rummel, N. (2007). A rating scheme for assessing the quality of computer-supported collaboration processes. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2, 63–86.
Miettinen, R., & Virkkunen, J. (2005). Epistemic objects, artefacts and organizational change. Organization, 12, 437–456.
Muukkonen, H., Hakkarainen, K., & Lakkala, M. (1999). Collaborative technology for facilitating progressive inquiry: The Future Learning Environment tools. In C. Hoadley, & J. Roschelle (Eds.), (1999). Computer support for collaborative learning: Designing new media for a new millennium. Proceedings of CSCL 1999. Palo Alto, CA, USA. Available at: http://kn.cilt.org/cscl99/A51/A51.HTM.
Muukkonen, H., Lakkala, M., & Hakkarainen, K. (2005). Technology-mediation and tutoring: how do they shape progressive inquiry discourse? Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(4), 527–565.
Muukkonen, H., Lakkala, M., & Paavola, S. (in press). Promoting knowledge creation and object-oriented inquiry in university courses. S. Ludvigsen, A. Lund, I. Rasmussen, & R. Säljö (Eds.), Learning across sites: New tools, infrastructures and practices. Routledge.
Mäkitalo, K., Weinberger, A., Häkkinen, P., Järvelä, S., & Fischer, F. (2005). Epistemic cooperation scripts in online learning environments: fostering learning by reducing uncertainty of discourse? Computers in Human Behavior, 21, 603–622.
Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.
Paavola, S., & Hakkarainen, K. (2005). The knowledge creation metaphor–an emergent epistemological approach to learning. Science & Education, 14(6), 535–557.
Paavola, S., Lipponen, L., & Hakkarainen, K. (2004). Models of innovative knowledge communities and three metaphors of learning. Review of Educational Research, 74(4), 557–576.
Perkins, D. N. (1993). Person-plus: a distributed view of thinking and learning. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions. Psychological and educational considerations, pp. 88–110. Cambridge; UK: Cambridge University Press.
Quintana, C., Zhang, M., & Krajcik, J. (2005). A framework for supporting metacognitive aspects of online inquiry through software-based scaffolding. Educational Psychologist, 40(4), 235–244.
Sandoval, W. A., & Bell, P. (2004). Design-based research methods for studying learning in context: introduction. Educational Psychologist, 39, 199–201.
Salonen, P., Vauras, M., & Efklides, A. (2005). Social interaction—What can it tell us about metacognition and coregulation of learning? European Psychologist, 10, 199–208.
Scardamalia, M. (2002). Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. In B. Smith (Ed.), Liberal education in a knowledge society, pp. 67–98. Chicago, IL: Open Court.
Schatzki, T. (2000). Introduction: Practice theory. In T. Schatzki, K. Knorr-Cetina & E. von Savigny (Eds.), The practice turn in contemporary theory, pp. 1–14. London, UK: Routledge.
Scribner, S., & Cole, M. (1981). The psychology of literacy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P., Lahti, H., & Hakkarainen, K. (2005). Three design experiments for computer-supported collaborative design. Art, Design & Communication in Higher Education, 4(2), 101–119.
Schwarz, B. B., & De Groot, R. (2007). Argumentation in a changing world. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2, 297–313.
Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 27, 4–13.
Tuomi-Gröhn, T., & Engeström, Y. (2003). Conceptualizing transfer: From standard notions to developmental perspectives. In T. Tuomi-Gröhn & Y. Engeström (Eds.), Between school and work: New perspectives on transfer and boundary-crossing, pp. 19–38. Kidlington, UK: Elsevier Science.
Walker, D., & Nocon, H. (2007). Boundary-crossing competence: theoretical considerations and educational design. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 14(3), 178–195.
Wegerif, R. (2006). A dialogic understanding of the relationship between CSCL and teaching thinking skills. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1, 143–157.
Weinberger, A., Ertl, B., Fischer, F., & Mandl, H. (2005). Epistemic and social scripts in computer-supported collaborative learning. Instructional Science, 33(1), 1–30.
Virkkunen, J. (2006). Hybrid agency in co-configuration work. Outlines, 8, 61–75.
Zimmerman, B. J., & Tsikalas, K. E. (2005). Can computer-based learning environments (CBLEs) be used as self-regulatory tools to enhance learning? Educational Psychologist, 40, 267–271.
Acknowledgments
The first author has been supported by a grant from the Finnish Cultural Foundation in preparing this article. We thank Crina Damsa, Kai Hakkarainen, Sami Paavola, and Hal White for their useful comments and suggestions on earlier versions of this paper.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendices
Appendix A
Appendix B
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Muukkonen, H., Lakkala, M. Exploring metaskills of knowledge-creating inquiry in higher education. Computer Supported Learning 4, 187–211 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-009-9063-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-009-9063-y