Expansive learning actions in the meeting followed by and large the theory-predicted order, forming a mini-cycle of two main parts with iterations¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · qualitative r? · q2
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? The learning actions of the expansive cycle were taken by and large in the order predicted in the theory, though with iterations such as analyzing-modeling-analyzing-modeling. → Rantavuori 2016 q2 i? The mini-cycle was composed of two main parts: working on the problem (turns 66-324) and working on a new model (turns 325-470 and 714-787), with modeling as the turning point between them. → Rantavuori 2016 (2)

Evidence¶

Rantavuori 2016¶

Rantavuori, J., Engeström, Y., & Lipponen, L. (2016). Learning actions, objects and types of interaction: A methodological analysis of expansive learning among pre-service teachers. Frontline Learning Research. http://dx.doi.org/10.14786/flr.v4i3.174

q2 · i? · the article prints no effect size for this finding · qualitative · r?

Sequential analysis of the meeting's learning actions (Table 5). The article states the actions were "taken by and large in the order predicted in the theory" while noting iterations such as analyzing-modeling-analyzing-modeling in turns 282-324.

"Table 5 shows that the learning actions of the expansive cycle were taken by and large in the order predicted in the theory. To be sure, there were iterations, such as the sequence analyzing –> modeling –> analyzing –> modeling in turns 282–324"

Rantavuori 2016 (2)¶

Rantavuori, J., Engeström, Y., & Lipponen, L. (2016). Learning actions, objects and types of interaction: A methodological analysis of expansive learning among pre-service teachers. Frontline Learning Research. http://dx.doi.org/10.14786/flr.v4i3.174

q2 · i? · the article prints no effect size for this finding · qualitative · r?

The article's structural analysis of the meeting identifies two main parts: "working on the problem (turns 66 to 324)" and "working on a new model (turns 325 to 470 and turns 714 to 787)", with modeling a new solution as the bridging phase.

"It seems that the expansive mini-cycle was in this case composed of two main parts. We might call these (1) working on the problem (turns 66 to 324) and (2) working on a new model (turns 325 to 470 and turns 714 to 787)"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• A full assessment of a potentially expansive mini-cycle of learning calls for extending the time scale of the analysis beyond a single session — related
• Transitions and disturbances were crucial for the dynamics of expansive learning in the meeting — related
• A single meeting of self-regulating pre-service teachers contained an almost complete expansive mini-cycle of learning actions, with all expansive actions except consolidating the new practice — related
• Object formation in the meeting was iterative and non-linear: the proposed germ cell of 'making a choice' was encapsulated, not elaborated and expanded — related
• Expansive learning moved epistemically from questioning to analysis, modeling and implementation while interactionally moving from coordination to cooperation and communication, but with no mechanical correspondence between specific actions and interaction types — related
• Iterative advisory group feedback drove four framework iterations, including adding disruption and multi-level oppression — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• In the meeting, coordination was the most common type of interaction and communication the rarest, indicating reconceptualizing the script was very challenging — related