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¶

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? As the expansive learning process moved epistemically through its actions, it also moved interactionally from coordination to cooperation and communication. → Rantavuori 2016 q2 i? There was no mechanical correspondence between specific learning actions and specific types of interaction. → 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?

The integrated analysis (fourth analysis step combining the two frameworks) found parallel epistemic and interactional movement: the process "moved epistemically from questioning to analysis, modeling and implementation" while also "moved interactionally from coordination to cooperation and communication".

"As the expansive learning process moved epistemically from questioning to analysis, modeling and implementation, it also moved interactionally from coordination to cooperation and communication"

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?

Despite the parallel movement, the article reports "there was no mechanical correspondence between specific learning actions and specific types of interaction", qualifying how the two frameworks align in a single session.

"Yet there was no mechanical correspondence between specific learning actions and specific types of interaction"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• In the meeting, coordination was the most common type of interaction and communication the rarest, indicating reconceptualizing the script was very challenging — related
• Academic historians' epistemic processes extend well beyond source analysis and writing — related
• Transitions and disturbances were crucial for the dynamics of expansive learning in the meeting — related
• Expansive learning actions in the meeting followed by and large the theory-predicted order, forming a mini-cycle of two main parts with iterations — 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
• 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
• Writing is presented as uniquely corresponding to the features of successful learning — related
• Iterative advisory group feedback drove four framework iterations, including adding disruption and multi-level oppression — related