基於知識翻新原則的教學研究之系統回顧 - 政大學術集成

全文

(1)國立政治大學教育學系碩士論文指導教授：洪煌堯博士. 立. 政治大. ‧ 國. 學. 基於知識翻新原則的教學研究之系統回顧. ‧. A Systematic Review of Pedagogical Design and Implementation. Nat. n. al. er. io. sit. y. based on Knowledge Building Principles. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 研究生：余英孚撰中華民國一○六年七月.

(2)

(3) ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am thankful to the many people who have supported me in this thesis writing. First, I would like to express my sincerest gratitude to my supervisor, Dr. Huang-Yao Hong for his guidance throughout the writing process. Since I joined his class, he has been provided me with guidance on how to implement knowledge building (KB) in different subject domains. It has inspired me for future pedagogical design based on knowledge building principles (KBPs). I would also like to express my sincere appreciation to the team members: Chia-Jui Yang, and Pei-Jung Li, for always being able to inspire ideas during meetings every week. Their invaluable suggestions were very important to me through the thesis writing process.. 政治大. I am also grateful to my external examiners, Dr. Tzu-Bin Lin, and Dr. Pei-Shan Tsai, for. 立. their suggestions on my academic writing in order to produce a high quality thesis. Special. ‧ 國. 學. thanks to Dr. I-Hua Chang, Dr. Mei-Shiu Chiu, Dr. Chih-Yu Chan, and Dr. Tung-Liao Cheng. ‧. for their insights on my academic writing on methodology section. I would like to thank my. sit. y. Nat. fellow coursemate, Su-Xian Lau, for generously being one of the coders in my work. Without. io. al. learning outcomes in KB studies.. er. her support, I would have faced difficulties in proceeding with the inter-coder reliability on. n. iv n C To my dear teaching assistant of Department h e n g cofhEducation, i U Ms. Chin-Chih Chueh, I. would like to thank you for your help and encouragement over these past two years. To all my dear coursemates, we had so many memorable moments together and I would like to thank you for the friendship through the years. Finally, I would like to thank to my family members, who have provided moral support for me during the past 29 years. To my lovely sisters, who have been good listeners for me when I have faced difficulties. Without you all, I would not have been able to complete this thesis. To everyone, thank you..

(4) Eng-Fu Yee Jing Tang Building, NCCU. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v.

(5) 摘要本研究之目的在針對基於知識翻新原則的教學研究進行系統回顧。本研究的分析對象為 Scopus 資料庫中，自 2001 年至 2016 年間，所蒐集之 56 篇知識翻新研究。本研究採多階層之編碼流程，再根據研究問題構思出不同層面之編碼類別，以進行描述統計分析。本研究並以 Kappa 係數特別針對學習成效編碼項目計算編碼者間信度。結果顯示在整個編碼過程中編碼者間達成之協議良好（k = 0.8）。本研究基於描述性統計分析研究，研究結果發現知識翻新研究起源於西方，但近 16 年來，大部分的知識翻新研究則多實施於東方國家。所有知識翻新研究中，十二年基礎教育學生於自然科學領域中之知識翻新研究較多。東方國家所進行的研究結果中發現，研究對象有從學習者社群的研究轉移至教師社群的研究的趨勢。換言之，東方國家的知識翻新研究多以教師為研究對象。. 政治大. 研究設計方面，個案研究是知識翻新研究中最常被採用的研究設計方式，而最常採用的. 立. 分析方法則是混合分析方法。知識翻新研究中所使用之線上學習平台則以知識論壇. ‧ 國. 學. （knowledge forum）為大宗。知識翻新原則是知識翻新研究的主要基礎，而多研究的重心則偏重在與「想法」相關的知識翻新原則上。本研究之研究結果也發現社交學習成效. ‧. 較常在知識翻新研究中被檢測。其中，知識論壇之貼文與回文互動明顯多於以統整不同. 關鍵字：教學設計、知識翻新、系統回顧. n. al. Ch. engchi. er. io. sit. y. Nat. 想法之貼文互動。. i Un. v.

(6)

(7) ABSTRACT The main purpose of this study is to conduct a systematic review of research that contains pedagogical design and implementation based on knowledge building principles (KBPs). This study includes 56 knowledge building (KB) studies selected from the Scopus database between 2001 and 2016. Multi-levels of coding procedures were employed in categorizing different analysis dimensions in order to answer the research questions. Particularly, the coding scheme regarding the dimension of the learning outcomes employed a procedure to compute the inter-coder reliability using Cohen’s kappa coefficient (k) formula with the coefficient k = 0.8.Findings mainly based on descriptive analysis revealed that KB. 政治大. studies are more frequently conducted in Eastern countries than Western countries. Most of. 立. the KB studies that involved students from K-12 levels were conducted in the natural science. ‧ 國. 學. domain. In particular, it was found that KB studies conducted in the Eastern countries are. ‧. shifting their study focus from learner communities to teacher communities. Case study was. sit. y. Nat. found to be the preferred research design in most KB studies over the past 16 years, and. io. al. er. regarding analysis, mixed methods analysis is the more popular analysis method. Moreover, more than one-half of the KB studies used Knowledge Forum (KF) as the main online. n. iv n C U likely to be employed in the KB learning platform. Of all KBPs, idea-related h e nKBPs h imost g care studies. Regarding learning outcomes, about one-half of studies fall in the social studies domain. Among these social learning outcomes, basic interaction on KF activities (build notes and post notes) was found more than higher-order interaction on KF activities (synthesize notes).. Keywords: pedagogical design, knowledge building, systematic review method.

(8)

(9) TABLE OF CONTENT CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………. 1. 1.1 Background of Study…………………………………………………….. 1 1.2 Purpose of Study…………………………………………………………. 5. 1.3 Research Questions………………………………………………………. 5. 1.4 Definition of Key Terms…………………………………………………. 5 1.5 Research Limitations……………………………………………………... 6. CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW………………………………………….. 9 2.1 Knowledge Building Pedagogy………………………………………….. 9 2.2 Knowledge Forum……………………………………………………….. 11 2.3 Knowledge Building Tools………………………………………………. 12. 政治大 2.5 Related Studies on Learning Outcomes…………………………………. 立 CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY………………………………………………… 2.4 Knowledge Building Principles………………………………………….. ‧ 國. 學. 3.1 Conceptual Factors……………………………………………………….. 16 20 25 25. 3.2 Selection of Knowledge Building Studies……………………………….. 25. ‧. 28. 3.4 Validity………………………………………………………………….... 34. y. Nat. 3.3 Coding System………………………………………………………….... 3.6 Data Analysis…………………………………………………………….. 36. n. al. er. sit. 35. io. 3.5 Inter-coder Reliability……………………………………………………. v ni. CHAPTER 4: RESULT……………………………………………………………. Ch. engchi U. 37. 4.1 Current Trend of KB Studies…………………………………………….. 37 4.2 Patterns of Research Designs and Analysis Methods……………………. 46 4.3 Patterns of Online Learning Platforms………………………………….... 49. 4.4 Patterns of Applying KBPs………………………………………………. 50 4.5 Trend of Learning Outcomes in KB Studies……………………………... 55. CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION…………………………………………………….... 59. 5.1 Conclusion……………………………………………………………….. 59. 5.2 Recommendations………………………………………………………... 62. REFERENCES……………………………………………………………………. 65 APPENDIX A: CODING DATA………………………………………………….. 77. APPENDIX B: INTER-CODER RELIABILITY PROCEDURE……………….... 85. i.

(10) LIST OF TABLES Table 2-1 Group Dynamic in KB Community…………………………………….. 11. Table 2-2 Six Scaffolds in KF……………………………………………………... 13. Table 2-3 Three Categories of KBPs with Description……………………………. 18. Table 3-1 Demographic Coding………………………………...…………………. 29. Table 3-2 Turkey as Eastern Country or Western Country Supported by Different Sources………………………………………………………………….. 30. Table 3-3 Research Design Coding………………………………...…………….... 32. Table 3-4 Online Learning Platforms Coding………………………………........... 32. Table 3-5 KBPs Coding…………………………………………………………… 33 Table 3-6 Subcategories Learning Outcomes……………………………………... 34. Table 3-7 Interpretation of Cohen’s Kappa………………………………………... 36. 政治大 Table 3-8 Data Analysis with RQs………………………………………………... 立 Table 4-1 Ranking of Countries and Distribution Frequencies in Three Time. ‧ 國. 學. Periods………………………………………………………………....... 36. 37. Table 4-2 Percentage of Education Levels of Participants and Distribution. ‧. Frequencies in Three Time Periods….………………………………….. 40. y. Nat. Table 4-3 Percentage of Participants’ Identities of Teachers in Eastern and. sit. Western Countries and Distribution Frequencies in Three Time Periods. 43. er. io. Table 4-4 Percentage of Subject Domains and Distribution Frequencies in Three. al. n. iv n C Table 4-5 Percentage of KB Studies Research h e nDesigns g c h iandUDistribution. Time Periods……………………..……………………………………... 44. Frequencies in Three Time Periods……………………………………... 46. Table 4-6 Percentage of KBPs in KB Studies and Distribution Frequencies in Three Time Periods……………………………………………………... 51. Table 4-7 Frequencies of KBPs Employed Among Conducting KB Studies Countries………………………………………………………………... 53. Table 4-8 Percentage of Learning Outcomes in KB Studies and Distribution Frequencies in Three Time Periods……………………………………... ii. 57.

(11) LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2-1 Three Categories of KBPs…………………………………………....... 17. Figure 3-1 Search Strategies Procedure……………………………………............ 26. Figure 3-2 Screenshot of Scopus Database Keyword Searching………………….. 27. Figure 3-3 Cohen’s Kappa Coefficient Formula…………………………………... 35. Figure 4-1 KB Studies Countries……………………………….…………………. 38. Figure 4-2 Trend of KB Studies Between Eastern and Western Countries in Three Time Periods………............................................................................... 38 Figure 4-3 Trend of KB Studies Among Countries Over Three Time Periods……. 39. Figure 4-4 Trend of KB Studies Among Educational Levels Over Three Time Periods…………………………………………………………………. 政治大 Educational Levels……………………………………………………. 立 Figure 4-6 Participants’ Identities Engaged in KB Studies………………………... 41. Figure 4-5 Comparison of Eastern Countries and Western Countries in. 41 42. ‧ 國. 學. Figure 4-7 Trend of KB Studies Among Participants’ Identities Over Three Time Periods…………………………………………………………………. 42. ‧. Figure 4-8 Trend of KB Studies Between Eastern Countries Teachers and. y. Nat. Western Countries Teachers over Three Time Periods……………..…. 43. sit. Figure 4-9 Trend of KB Studies Among Subject Domains Over Three Time. er. io. Periods…………………………………………………………………. al. n. iv n C Domains…..………………………………………………………….. hengchi U. 45. Figure 4-10 Comparison of Eastern Countries and Western Countries in Subject. 45. Figure 4-11 Trend of KB Studies Among Research Designs Over Three Time. Periods………………………………………………………………... 47. Figure 4-12 Analysis Methods of KB Studies……………..…..………………….. 48 Figure 4-13 Trend of KB Studies Among Analysis Methods Over Three Time Periods………………………………………………………………... 48. Figure 4-14 Online Learning Platforms in KB Studies…………………………… 49 Figure 4-15 Trend of KB Studies Among Online Learning Platforms Over Three Time Periods…………………………………………………………. 50 Figure 4-16 Trend of KB Studies Among KBPs Over Three Time Periods………. 52. Figure 4-17 Categories of KBPs in KB Studies………………………………….... 54. iii.

(12) Figure 4-18 Trend of KB Studies Among Three Categories of KBPs Over Three Time Periods……………..………………………………………....... 54 Figure 4-19 Categories of Learning Outcomes in KB Studies……………………. 55 Figure 4-20 Trend of KB Studies Among Three Categories of Learning Outcomes Over Three Time Periods……………..…………………... 56. Figure 4-21 Basic Learning Outcomes and Higher-Order Learning Outcomes in KB Studies……………………..………………….............................. 56. Figure 4-22 Trend of KB Studies Among Subcategories of Learning Outcomes Over Three Time Periods…………………..…………………............ 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. iv. i Un. v. 58.

(13) LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ANOVA. Analysis of variance. ATK. Analytic toolkit. AU. Australia. CA. Canada. CN. Mainland China. CSILE. Computer supported intentional learning environment. FI. Finland. HK. Hong Kong. ISCED. International Standard Classification of Education. IT. Italy. JP. Japan. KB. Knowledge building. KBPs. Knowledge building principles. KCA. Knowledge connection analyzer. KF. Knowledge Forum. MX. Mexico. RQ. Research question. SG. Singapore. TW. Taiwan. TR. Turkey. ‧. ‧ 國. 學 y. sit er. io. al. iv n C United Nations Educational, h e nScientific g c h iandUCultural Organization n. US. Nat. UNESCO. 立. 政治大. United States. v.

(14) CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION To introduce knowledge building (KB) pedagogical design and implementation, this chapter aims to provide a better understanding for novice teachers through introducing the history of KB. By getting to know the history of KB, novice teachers are able to construct the concept of KB. Hence, the five sections of this chapter work together to meet the goal in this study.. 1.1 Background of Study. 政治大. Knowledge building (KB) is an emergent concept in the field of learning science,. 立. especially in the late 1980s (Scardamalia & Bereiter, 2010). It is hard for learning science. ‧ 國. 學. researchers to define the term KB within a sentence. To provide a better understanding for the. ‧. KB novice, Scardamalia and Bereiter have described two unique characteristics of KB beyond constructivist learning. One of the KB characteristics is called intentionality and. y. Nat. er. io. sit. another KB characteristic is marked as community knowledge. From the constructivist perspective on intentionality, people always neglect the unconscious part of learning.. n. al. Ch. i Un. v. However, people engaging in KB have awareness about unconscious learning. In other words,. engchi. people engaging in KB have a clear direction in learning and they learn things purposefully. Regarding the community knowledge characteristic, Scardamalia and Bereiter have mentioned that contributing ideas to the community is important in the KB process rather than generating ideas alone. Due to the idea itself, diverse ideas can be sustained through community discourse. Improvable ideas can also be sustained through community discourse. Looking into KB history, it has been developed through three important stages (Scardamalia & Bereiter, 2010). The first period is related to knowledge-telling and knowledge-transforming between 1977 and 1983. During this period, writing composition among children is prevalent. Hence, Scardamalia and Bereiter have proposed a 1.

(15) knowledge-telling strategy to fulfill the information processing demands of writing. In other words, children are using this efficient strategy in writing by telling someone about something in their writing. Novice children adopt this strategy frequently until they can employ another complex strategy which is called knowledge-transforming. This strategy is a higher-order information processing that includes a cycle between writing itself and belief on knowledge. Scardamalia and Bereiter (2010) have used Wiki to differentiate knowledge-telling and knowledge-transforming. As people know that the content on Wiki was written by someone, so people record the authoritative sources and write the contents on Wiki without suspicions in the knowledge-telling context. In contrast to the. 政治大. knowledge-transforming context, people may think about the authenticity of the authoritative. 立. sources and verify the content on Wiki. To encourage students’ active writing, Scardamalia,. ‧ 國. 學. Bereiter, and Steinbach (1984) have focused on designing technology which support students. ‧. in the knowledge-transforming process.. sit. y. Nat. From knowledge-transforming to intentional learning and cognition, Scardamalia and. io. er. Bereiter (2010) have formulated two concepts for students to achieve intentional learning and. al. cognition. Higher levels of agency support students to manage beyond self-regulated learning.. n. iv n C In other words, students have intentional h cognition i U knowledge themselves. Another e n g ctohacquire concept is to try to shift existing classroom practices to intentional learning. In the traditional classroom, students are passive learners that always rely on their teachers on learning matters. Scardamalia and Bereiter have suggested that teachers can create an inquiry-based learning. environment for students to learn independently. Ng and Bereiter (1991) have pointed out that school activities seldom promote students in progressive problem solving. Thus, students have lower levels of agency in their learning. Scardamalia and Bereiter have revealed the nature of the project is obstructing students’ intentional learning. The most important reason is that students do not know why they are interested in their peers’ work. Therefore, they do 2.

(16) not have a reason to improve their ideas after handing in a project. To cope with this situation, Scardamalia and Bereiter have utilized technology called computer supported intentional learning environment (CSILE) by allowing students to provide their feedback online. Hence, students can read the comments on their work to improve their work. The third period is the transition from intentional learning to KB which started from 1988 until now (Scardamalia & Bereiter, 2010). At the beginning, KB was not distinguished from learning. Scardamalia, Bereiter, and Lamon (as cited in Scardamalia & Bereiter, 2010) distinguished KB from intentional learning in 1994. They defined intentional learning as mainly focused on improving the mental contents of the individual’s mind. KB is focused on. 政治大. improving knowledge itself and contributing it to others through collective work. During this. 立. period, CSILE has evolved to the earliest version of Knowledge Forum (KF) that supported. ‧ 國. 學. collective work value to community. Graphical notes in CSILE have developed as graphical. ‧. view in KF. Ideas from lower-level views connect to higher-level views. In other words, all. io. er. responsible for constructing community knowledge.. sit. y. Nat. higher-level views are constructed on lower-level views by students. Every student is. al. Despite KB having been developed for 30 years, there is a lack of systematic review and. n. iv n C U meta-analysis in KB studies. The search knowledge building (KB) hresults e n gwith c hthei keyword. from the Scopus database on May 16, 2017 have revealed 68 review papers, but only one KB review paper titled “Schools as knowledge-building organizations: Thirty years of design research” is matched. The main difference of both the KB review paper and the current study is the methodology selected. The former KB review paper uses a narrative review; however, the current study has adopted the systematic review method. From these reviews, both can be differentiated by the search strategy. The narrative review does not include a specific search strategy, but the systematic review has developed a detailed search strategy (Uman, 2011). Thus, there emerges an interest in conducting a systematic review in KB studies. To 3.

(17) investigate the current situation of KB pedagogy, it is useful for novice teachers to know about KB from the trend patterns of KB studies. Similar to the KB review paper conducted by Chen and Hong (2016), this study can look into the nature of research design and observe the trend of research design in KB studies. By conducting a systematic review in KB studies, KB researchers are getting to know which KB research design is employed the most. Hence, they can employ other research designs for KB studies. A systematic review is needed to explore the trend patterns of KB research designs. For novice teachers, a systematic review is an efficient way to understand the implementation of KB in schools. Scardamalia and Bereiter (2010) have suggested that KF is. 政治大. an effective online environment to foster the KB process. To examine the effectiveness of the. 立. online learning platform for fostering the KB process, a systematic review can be employed. ‧ 國. 學. to find out the learning platform patterns in KB studies.. ‧. Principle-based is one of the characteristics in KB practice (Hong, Chen, & Chai, 2016).. sit. y. Nat. Scardamalia (2002) has stressed a total of twelve knowledge building principles (KBPs). io. er. assisting novice teachers to develop customized pedagogical designs. To investigate KBPs. al. n. implemented in KB studies, a systematic review is the best choice to check out the current. i n C U situation of KBPs employed in KB studies. hengchi. v. In Malaysia, KB pedagogy is considered a new pedagogical design and implementation for innovative teaching. Although educational technology spread faster in the early 2000s, most teachers still employ traditional teaching methods to convey knowledge in the classroom. Some teachers refuse to change while others are willing to adopt innovative teaching methods, for instance KB pedagogy. By conducting a KB systematic review, this study can show teachers how KB could be applied in the classroom and how it successfully influences students’ learning. To summarize, this study is a KB related systematic review that figures out the trend 4.

(18) patterns of KB studies. Thus, this study’s findings may contribute to the understanding of teachers, students, and KB researchers. Teachers can apply and assimilate the concepts of KB in pedagogical design, while students can adopt the concepts of KB to generate ideas in solving authentic problems. KB researchers can expand their studies based on the findings of this study.. 1.2 Purpose of Study The main purpose of this study is to conduct a systematic review of research that contains pedagogical design and implementation based on knowledge building principles. 政治大. (KBPs). This study includes 56 KB studies selected from the Scopus database between 2001. 立. and 2016.. sit. y. Nat. This study aims to address the following research questions:. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. 1.3 Research Questions. io. er. RQ1: What is the overall trend of KB studies over the past 16 years?. al. RQ2: What common methodology is employed in KB studies?. n. iv n C RQ3: What kind of online learning platform h e nis gcommonly c h i Uemployed in KB studies? RQ4: What KBPs are commonly used in KB studies? RQ5: What learning outcomes are commonly examined in KB studies?. 1.4 Definition of Key Terms 1.4.1 Knowledge Building (KB) Scardamalia and Bereiter (2010) explained that KB is a collaborative process for students sustaining their ideas with community members through KB discourse on KF. This KB process often allows students to work with improvable ideas within a community. 5.

(19) 1.4.2 Systematic Review Majumder (2015) defined systematic review as a method which systematically searches, identifies, selects, appraises, and synthesizes research evidences relevant to the research questions. Boland, Cherry, and Dickson (2014) viewed the systematic review as synthesizing findings from various studies to investigate similar research questions and draw powerful conclusions supported with evidences. Green (2005) defined systematic review as a scientific method to appraise, summarize, and communicate the findings from numerous research studies. Kitchenham (2004) defined systematic review as a method of identifying, evaluating, and interpreting all relevant research studies to a specific interest topic or particular research questions.. 立. 政治大. To summarize, systematic review is a research method which systematically searches,. ‧ 國. 學. identifies, selects, appraises, and synthesizes findings from various studies relevant to. ‧. particular research questions. This study adopted the systematic review method to synthesize. y. sit. io. n. al. er. KBPs.. Nat. findings from KB studies which involve pedagogical design and implementation based on. 1.5 Research Limitations. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. Egger, Dickersin, and Smith (2008) have summarized several limitations in conducting a systematic review. One of the limitations in conducting a systematic review is related to publication bias. This study only selects published articles from the Scopus database. This study excludes data sources from conference papers, review articles, book chapters, and so forth. Thus, this study is unable to generalize the overall trend in KB studies from different sources of findings. Another limitation is that this study only selects articles published in English. Other language articles related to KB studies are excluded from the search results. In conclusion, publication bias and language bias are considered as issues of 6.

(20) conducting a systematic review in this study. Thus, this study adopted the search strategy described in Chapter 3 in order to reduce biases.. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. 7. i Un. v.

(21) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. 8. i Un. v.

(22) CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW Corresponding to the research questions mentioned in the first chapter, this chapter synthesizes all relevant knowledge building (KB) studies into five sections. The first section is related to KB pedagogy, which is followed by an online learning platform called Knowledge Forum (KF) (Section 2) and KB tools (Section 3). Section 4 introduces 12 knowledge building principles (KBPs).The final section explores the learning outcomes that have been examined in previous KB studies.. 2.1 Knowledge Building Pedagogy. 立. 政治大. Scardamalia and Bereiter (2010) defined KB as a collaborative process for students to. ‧ 國. 學. develop their ideas with community members. Hong et al. (2016) highlighted three. ‧. fundamental ideas for novice teachers in clarifying KB for constructivist learning. Through understanding these concepts (idea-centered, principle-based, and community-focused),. y. Nat. er. io. sit. novice teachers are able to implement pedagogical designs based on KBPs in their teaching. To work with KB pedagogical design, novice teachers have to understand Popper’s World 3. n. al. epistemology.. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. Popper (1978) introduced World 1 as a physical world which subdivides the physical world into non-living physical objects and biological objects. World 2 is a mental or psychological world that focuses on the world of subjective experiences. Hence, Popper distinguishes the psychological world from subconscious experiences. World 3 is a humanmind-products world, which includes languages, scientific theories, stories, and so forth. Thus, Popper distinguishes the science world from the fiction world. Bereiter (1994) noted that Popper’s World 3 emphasizes two components (knowledge as objects and education as learning to function) in World 3. In other words, students use fundamental knowledge from authoritative sources to construct the meaning of the world. Students generate their ideas 9.

(23) from personal experience to share with their peers. Being idea-centered is one of the characteristics of KB (Hong et al., 2016). To further explore this characteristic, the concepts of idea-centered and concept-based pedagogy should be clarified first. All traditional pedagogy is marked as a concept-based approach. Teachers are the authoritative source of knowledge. Hence, teachers teach concepts directly from the textbooks. In contrast, inquiry-based pedagogy is marked as an idea-centered approach. Teachers work as facilitators by providing students with scaffolds to solve authentic problems in learning. Routine expertise and adaptive expertise proposed by Hatano and Inagaki (1986) could distinguish between both concept-based and idea-centered approaches. Teachers from a. 政治大. perspective of routine expertise are concerned with the truth concept from textbooks. Hence,. 立. they convey knowledge to students directly from textbooks. However, adaptive expertise. ‧ 國. 學. teachers encourage students to tinker and adapt emergent diverse ideas rather than being. ‧. concerned with only the truth concept. Teachers in adaptive teaching believe that students are. sit. y. Nat. able to provide diverse ideas in solving authentic problems. Therefore, routine teaching. io. er. teachers should change their minds and allow students to generate ideas.. al. On the other hand, KB emphasizes a principle-based approach rather than a. n. iv n C U By employing principle-based procedure-based approach in sustaininghimprovement e n g c h ofi ideas. KB, teachers do not rely on script teaching, but rather, they customize their pedagogical design to be more flexible (Zhang, Hong, Scardamalia, Teo, & Morley, 2011). Traditional pedagogy is considered to be procedure-based, where teachers plan the script for their teaching. Although procedure-based pedagogy allows teachers to follow teaching procedures, there are many emergent situations that happen beyond the script teaching. Undeniably, procedure-based teaching is more effective for teachers who are completing a required syllabus. Unfortunately, it may restrict students’ motivation to learn. Another characteristic of KB is that it is community-focused (Hong et al., 2016). 10.

(24) Previous KB studies have proven the importance of community-focused teaching. Findings reveal that students who are active in sharing their ideas have a higher intensity of idea improvement (Hong et al., 2016). Scardamalia (2002) pointed out that every student has the responsibility for sharing ideas with other members. In addition, Hong et al. (2016) emphasized that KB is not individual-focused, but rather community-focused. Collaborative group discussion is a common way to produce diverse ideas. Zhang, Hong, and Scardamalia (2010) added the group dynamic to the KB community, as shown in Table 2-1.. Table 2-1 Group Dynamic in KB Community Low idea interaction. idea interaction. 學. ‧ 國. 立. 政治High 大. Low participant interaction. Social talk or chat. Lack of value, coherence, and utility of ideas. High participant interaction. Lack of fresh ideas or perspectives. ‧. A group of open source programmers work collaboratively and opportunistically with epistemic artifacts Note. Adapted from “Knowledge Society Network: Toward a Dynamic, Sustained Network for Building Knowledge,” by J. Zhang, H.-Y. Hong, and M. Scardamalia, 2010, Educational Theory and Practice Faculty Scholarship, 4, p.8.. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. To summarize, KB is an idea-centered practice working with principle-based pedagogical design within a community-focused environment in order to achieve community goals and sustain improvable ideas. Scardamalia (2004) suggested that Knowledge Forum (KF) can assist learners in promoting KB practice through online.. 2.2 Knowledge Forum (KF) KF is a web-based environment which focuses on learners’ ideas. Differing from traditional teaching and learning, KF provides a flexible space for learners to tinker and produce ideas collaboratively. The design of KF fully supports the implementation of a KB 11.

(25) pedagogical design based on KBPs. Scardamalia (2004) noted that KF is not only an online education environment for educators in promoting KB pedagogy. Moreover, KF can be applied in different sectors according to different age groups in a cross-cultural context. KF has two different interfaces, which consist of a web-based interface and a graphical-based interface (Chan & Chan, 2011). Based on these interfaces, learners can generate personal ideas while analyzing authentic problems within groups. In addition, Chan and Chan suggested that learners can revise their original ideas throughout KB discourse with other members in KF. There are many tools to support learners in generating ideas from authentic problems. The next section will further explore different types of KB tools available for novice teachers.. 學. ‧ 國. 立. 政治大. 2.3 Knowledge Building Tools. ‧. KB tools are designed to foster KB processes for different purposes. Most KB tools are. sit. y. Nat. embedded in KF, including scaffolds, contribution tools, social network tools, semantic. io. al. er. overlap tools, a vocabulary analyzer, and writing tools. However, some of the KB tools are. n. not embedded in KF, such as the Knowledge Connection Analyzer (KCA) and Analytic Toolkit (ATK).. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 2.3.1 Scaffolds Table 2-3 shows six kinds of scaffolds that help learners to work with their ideas. “My theory” is one of the scaffolds that assist students with organizing their personal thoughts on the emergent authentic problems based on their own prior knowledge and experiences. Learners can apply the second scaffold, called “I need to understand”, in order to clarify what is needed for sustaining improvable ideas. Hence, another scaffold called “New information” is needed to find useful information that can help learners generate better ideas. This 12.

(26) information can either be searched for online or participants can seek help from experts or their peers’ opinions. After scanning the information, learners can apply the scaffold called “This theory cannot explain”. Sometimes information cannot be used in solving authentic problems and hence, learners can use another scaffold, “A better theory”, to analyze which ideas can be used for solving particular problems. Learners can choose the scaffold of “Putting our knowledge together” by synthesizing personal ideas with supporting information in order to generate better ideas.. Table 2-2 Six Scaffolds in KF KF scaffold. 治政 Description 大立. To find useful information that can help learners generate better ideas. sit. y. Nat. n. al. er. To clarify which information cannot be used to solve authentic problems. io. This theory cannot explain. To clarify what is needed to sustain ideas improvement. ‧. New information. 學. I need to understand. To organize personal thoughts on the emergent authentic problems based on prior knowledge and experience. ‧ 國. My theory. Ch. i Un. v. A better theory. To analyze which ideas can be used to solve particular problems. Putting our knowledge together. To synthesize personal ideas with supporting information to generate better ideas. engchi. According to Yücel and Usluel (2016), scaffolds in KF play an important role in supporting learners to express their own thoughts. When they are supported by these scaffolds, learners can express their ideas in concrete ways. In addition, Yücel and Usluel also viewed that different scaffolds allow students to generate better ideas when they work collaboratively with peers. Thus, scaffolds in KF can be considered as sharing tools for exchanging information from different perspectives.. 13.

(27) 2.3.2 Contribution Tool The contribution tool is designed to measure the quantity of notes posted by learners, especially in measuring both individual and group quality of notes contributed in KF (Teplovs, Donoahue, Scardamalia, & Philip, 2007). In other words, this KB tool is focused on calculating the number of notes posted and measuring the number of views of other’s notes. Teplovs et al. mentioned that the contribution tool provides information regarding how learners contribute in a group, but this tool does not provide information on the interactions between learners.. 2.3.3 Semantic Overlap Tool. 立. 政治大. The semantic overlap tool is designed to parse the frequency of similar words that. ‧ 國. 學. appear in various notes. This tool can help teachers identify the homogeneity of ideas shared. ‧. among learners within a group (Hong, Scardamalia, Messina, & Teo, 2015). In addition,. sit. y. Nat. Hong et al. highlighted how the semantic overlap tool can examine the overlapping keywords. io. er. on learners’ notes and select evaluative criteria from various resources. In other words,. al. teachers can make use of this tool to examine the similar notes contributed by different. n. iv n C U terms of learners’ notes from learners in a group. Moreover, this toolhcan e identify n g c hthei overlap authoritative resources.. 2.3.4 Social Network Tool The social network tool is designed to track the social interactions among learners who contribute notes in KF. This tool can detect the density of social connection among group members based on the frequency of links, annotations, and references in KF (Hong et al., 2015; Teplovs et al., 2007). Hong et al. verified that if a learner is isolated by other members, that is because there is a lack of interaction. For this reason, the social network tool is 14.

(28) recognized as a powerful social interaction indicator of KB practice in KF.. 2.3.5 Vocabulary Analyzer The vocabulary analyzer is used to measure learners’ vocabulary level growth as the notes build up. This tool provides a standard vocabulary indicator to examine the status of contribution of particular words, especially when learners enter a particular vocabulary into predefined dictionaries (Hong, Scardamalia, Messina, & Teo, 2008; 2015). In other words, the vocabulary analyzer can help learners to further trace their vocabulary usage based on predefined dictionaries. In this case, English teachers can apply this tool to develop a deeper. 政治大. understanding of learners’ vocabulary performance.. 立. ‧ 國. 學. 2.3.6 Writing Tool. ‧. The writing tool is designed to measure the mean length of learners’ sentences in KF.. sit. y. Nat. Therefore, this tool helps overcome the complexity of sentences and seeks for uniqueness of. io. er. the sentences based on the length of notes contributed by learners (Teplovs et al., 2007). In. al. other words, English teachers can use this tool to examine the different types of learners’. n. iv n C writing style in KF. This tool can also provide h e n insights g c h iforUEnglish teachers to allow them to adjust their pedagogical design.. 2.3.7 Knowledge Connection Analyzer (KCA) The KCA is a separate online assessment tool that emphasizes analyzing individual roles and collective efforts of students in KF (Yang, van Aalst, & Chan, 2012). Yang et al. applied four questions to assist learners by reflecting their online discourse. For instance, “Are we a community that collaborates?”, “Are we putting our knowledge together?”, “How does the community’s knowledge develop?”, and “What is happening to my own notes?” Based on 15.

(29) these statements, Yang et al. suggested that the first three questions are related to analysis of community collective efforts while the last question is related to self-assessment on an individual’s ideas in KB. All four questions correspond to particular KBPs. For instance, the last question of KCA, “What is happening to my own notes” corresponds to the last KBP called concurrent, embedded, and transformative assessment.. 2.3.8 Analytic Toolkit (ATK) ATK is another KB tool that is designed separately from KF. Burtis (as cited in Yücel & Usluel, 2016) explained that ATK was developed to record log data from individual. 政治大. participation and community interaction during the KB process. ATK has applied various. 立. indexes to run a comprehensive database analysis in recording required log data.. ‧ 國. 學. Both the KF and KB tools introduced above have a strong connection with knowledge. ‧. building principles (KBPs). Scardamalia (2004) pointed out that KF is a web-based learning. sit. y. Nat. platform which is constructed based on KBPs. KB tools embedded in KF are developed from. io. al. er. KBPs. Yang et al. (2012) highlighted question statements that show how KCA are concerned. n. with particular KBPs. Thus, next section will introduce these KBPs in detail.. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 2.4 Knowledge Building Principles (KBPs) Scardamalia and Bereiter (2010) summarized 12 KBPs that provide a powerful theoretical framework for this study. Chen and Hong (2016) organized these 12 KBPs into three categories, as shown in Figure 2-1. Each category contains four relevant KBPs. The first category is idea-related KBPs, where learners generate ideas according to these KBPs. The second category is agent-related KBPs, where learners implement these KBPs to foster KB process. The third category is practice-related KBPs, where learners implement both idea-related and agent-related KBPs to the online and offline pedagogy environment. Table 16.

(30) 2-3 provides a detailed description of each KBP based on these categories.. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. Figure 2-1 Three Categories of KBPs Note. Adapted from “Schools as knowledge-building organizations: Thirty years of design research,” by B. Chen and H.-Y. Hong, 2016, Educational Psychologist, 51(2), p.272.. 17.

(31) Table 2-3 Three Categories of KBPs with Description Category KBP Description Learners are able to generate concrete ideas that can solve authentic problems that rely on learners understanding the world they live in. In other words, learners need to realize real life problems and generate ideas for solving authentic problems.. Improvable ideas. All ideas generated by learners are incomplete notions. Therefore, ideas are improvable when learners work collaboratively in the community.. Idea diversity. In the KB process, learners need to pay attention to diverse ideas rather than merely relying on a single idea. Diverse ideas are fundamental to knowledge innovation through distinction and recombination with others’ ideas. Subsequently, learners are able to refine ideas after comparing and contrasting ideas with other members.. 政治大. 立. ‧ 國. 學. Rise above. ‧. Learners need more comprehensive principles and higher-level formulation of problems to achieve creative KB goals. In other words, learners who work with complex and diverse problems can achieve a higher-level formulation of problems that assists them in moving beyond KB practice.. io. n. al. Ch. Agents Constructive uses of authoritative sources. sit. y. Nat Epistemic agency. Learners need to pay attention to both personal and collective responsibility for sustaining knowledge advancement. Learners provide their own personal ideas. Meanwhile, they also need to work with others’ ideas. Learners need to negotiate both their own and others’ ideas. Learners need to deal with the problems of goals, motivation, assessment, and systematic planning that are normally left to teachers.. er. Ideas. Real ideas, authentic problems. engchi. i Un. v. To understand a discipline, learners should be aware of the authoritative sources that represent the current state of knowledge and its frontiers. By respecting these sources, students should develop a critical stance toward them.. 18.

(32) KB discourse. KB discourse among community members is mainly represented in the form of knowledge sharing. Knowledge itself is refined and transformed through an intellectual discourse among community members which considers community knowledge advancement as an explicit goal.. Concurrent, embedded, and transformative assessment. Assessment is a part of knowledge advancement. It is used to identify knowledge problems embedded in the school. Community members engaging in self-reflection assessments need to be more rigorous than they do with external assessment.. Community knowledge, collective responsibility. KB is emphasized in order to produce valuable ideas shared with others. Learners have to contribute their ideas in achieving top-level goals of community. Furthermore, it brings learners knowledge growth. As a part of a community, learners have to share the collective responsibility in generating ideas among the community.. Agents. 立. 政治大. ‧ 國. 學. al. n. Symmetric knowledge advancement. er. io. sit. y. Nat. Practices. All learners are legitimate contributors to the shared goals of community. Therefore, they share the honors when they achieve goals as a member of the community. There are no separations between innovator and non-innovator since all learners are empowered to engage in knowledge innovation.. ‧. Democratizing knowledge. Ch. v. Expertise of learners is distributed within and between communities. Knowledge is not solely shared through having more expertise from multiple learners. However, it depends on the amount of participation of learners within and between communities. Distributed expertise of learners is highly valued when they collaboratively participate and exchange their ideas.. engchi. Pervasive KB. i Un. All knowledge is integrated with creative ideas, all tasks and activities are remarked as an occasion of knowledge works. Hence, knowledge innovation extends outside of the school rather than being limited to a particular occasion. Note. Adapted from “A Brief History of Knowledge Building,” by M. Scardamalia and C. Bereiter, 2010, Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 36, p.9-11.. 19.

(33) There are abundant research findings showing the effectiveness of pedagogical design and implementation based on KBPs. The three categories of learning outcomes in KB studies are presented in the next section.. 2.5 Related Studies on Learning Outcomes 2.5.1 Cognitive Domain Outcomes Cesareni, Cacciamani, and Fujita (2016) discovered significant differences between role takers and non-role takers on writing and reading activities. Results showed that role takers perform better in writing and reading compared to non-role takers in post-test. In other words,. 政治大. these results indicated that taking a role was contributed to writing and reading performances.. 立. In addition, Cesareni et al. also discovered that students with a synthesizer role were the most. ‧ 國. 學. active in the writing activities. Students with a social tutor role were the most active in the. ‧. reading activities. Both writing and reading activities showed less participation among. sit. y. Nat. students with the concept mapper role.. io. er. In the study of exploring college students’ epistemic views during their KB activities,. al. Hong, Chen, and Chai (2016) found that there were statistical positive correlation between. n. iv n C U words, college students KB activities and college students’ epistemic h e nviews. g c hIniother. engaging in group online inquiry activities had more highly developed epistemic views. In addition, Hong et al. also found that students fully involved in group KB activities often changed their epistemic view. The findings indicate that students’ World 2 epistemic view remained the same, while the World 3 epistemic view improved during group KB activities. Thus, the students proved that higher online interaction is beneficial for advancing knowledge. Hong, Chai, and Tsai (2015) examined the effect of collective story writing on students’ constructivist-oriented epistemic view of scientific theories. Results showed that there were 20.

(34) significant differences between students’ views of theory as discovered as opposed to invented during the pre- and post-tests. In other words, students’ views of theory tended to be more in favor of it being discovered rather than being invented. Hong et al. provided evidence to support the idea that students tend to view theory as something that already exists in nature. Hence, students were passively thought that all the existing theories viewed as true. However, students’ view of theory as an invented construct showed significant differences between the pre- and post-tests. Hong et al. explained that students accepted that scientific theories were invented because of other scientists proving those theories wrong. This condition was related to a deeper understanding of students’ views of theory.. 政治大. Sun, Zhang, and Scardamalia (2010) examined the differences between writing and. 立. reading notes from the same participants across four semesters, which spanned from Grade 3. ‧ 國. 學. to Grade 4. Results showed significant differences in the number of writing notes over these. ‧. four semesters. The overall number of writing notes increased from each student. However,. sit. y. Nat. results showed no significant difference in the percentage of reading notes over these four. io. er. semesters. Sun et al. had further investigated students’ epistemic complexity level with. al. writing domain-specific words and academic words. Eventually, they discovered a significant. n. iv n C positive relationship between students’h epistemic e n g ccomplexity h i U level and writing with. domain-specific words. They also found a significant positive relationship between students’ epistemic complexity level and use of academic words for optical inquiry. Pelletier, Reeve, and Halewood (2006) investigated the application of KF toward 4- to 5-year-old children’s KB and literacy development. Pelletier et al. divided these children into two groups. One was an experimental group that used electronic photo journals in KF, while another was a comparison group that used a paper format of photo journals. Results revealed that both reading and writing measurements in the experimental group showed significant changes compared to comparison group. Children who employed electronic photo journals 21.

(35) had read others’ notes and posted their ideas through KF. Children who employed the paper format of photo journals showed less motivation to read others’ notes on the photos. Pelletier et al. also found there were significant gender differences between the electronic format and paper format of photo journals. Girls tended to adopt the paper format for writing rather than their photo journals. Boys tended to adopt the electronic format for writing rather than their photo journals.. 2.5.2 Metacognitive Domain Outcomes Cesareni et al. (2016) found the differences between role-taker students and students. 政治大. without roles in the “metacognition on process and organization” and “comments” categories.. 立. Role-taker students had reflected more than their counterparts during the process and. ‧ 國. 學. organization of metacognition activities. In contrast, those students without roles contributed. ‧. more comments compared to their counterparts.. sit. y. Nat. One of the studies investigated the effect of KB on reflective assessment among students. io. er. with low academic achievement. Yang et al. (2016) found that low achieving students were. al. more capable of generating their ideas in solving authentic problems and shared their ideas. n. iv n C U with community members. Through using Analyzer (KCA) in h eKnowledge n g c h iConnection. reflective assessment, Yang et al. also discovered significant results in fostering students’ community orientation, promoting synthesis, rise above, and improvement of ideas. Thus, KCA was a powerful tool for students to promote critical thinking during their online discourse. Hong et al. (2015) found a positive relationship between reflective learning outcomes and online activities. Through contributing notes and reading others’ notes online, students showed awareness of collective knowledge improvement. Additionally, students also showed reflection on knowledge exchange as they read others’ notes. However, the results showed no 22.

(36) significant relationship between students’ individual knowledge growth and online activities. Among these reflective learning outcomes, collective knowledge improvement and knowledge exchange were reflected directly through online activities. Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, Raunio, Raami, Muukkonen, and Hakkarainen (2001) discovered five categories of design thinking that stem from the design statements in the database. Most of the design statements were represented by new information, followed by working ideas, metacomments related to design task, statements that defined design context, and general comments from other teams. Seitamaa-Hakkarainen et al. analyzed students’ design thinking with three phases of design activities. Results showed that most of the design. 政治大. thinking appeared in problem-structuring activities, followed by problem solving activities,. 立. and decision making activities. Thus, the findings indicated that students’ design thinking was. ‧ 國. 學. active during problem-structuring activities.. ‧ sit. y. Nat. 2.5.3 Social Domain Outcomes. io. er. Cesareni et al. (2016) discovered that there were significant differences between groups. al. with a higher level of participation and a lower level of participation. The former groups. n. iv n C contributed more “maintain relationship” h eandn“reflecting” g c h i Umessages while the latter groups contributed more “introducing” messages. In addition, Cesareni et al. also found that students with a social tutor role often intervened in supporting participation in a group. Motivating students to participate in a group could empower them in a way that is consistent with democratizing knowledge. Lin and Reigeluth (2016) found that Wiki-supported scaffolding for two different collaborative learning designs showed different outcomes. One of the collaborative learning designs was called small-group project-based and was another called whole-class collaborative KB. The former design provided students with opportunities for different ways 23.

(37) of learning when the scaffold had faded. However, the latter design suggested that there was failure in achieving the goal when the scaffold was removed. Findings indicated that whole-class collaborative KB was obstructed when students became autonomous learners in the learning community. Lai and Law (2006) examined patterns of interaction between students in Hong Kong and Canada during the second stage of learning. Findings indicated that students from Hong Kong tended to contribute more notes and link to others’ notes when collaborating with Canadian students. In this stage, Canadian students shared more views compared to students from Hong Kong. The depth of KB discourse was changed when Canada students joined in. 政治大. the discussion. Hong Kong students tried to focus on the discovery of dissonance and. 立. negotiate meanings rather than share information with the Canadian students.. ‧ 國. 學. Seitamaa-Hakkarainen et al. (2001) examined the degree of participation among three. ‧. different design teams. Results showed a significant degree of participation among these. sit. y. Nat. design teams, who contributed 454 design statements to the database. To further explore the. io. er. patterns of collaboration among these design teams, Seitamaa-Hakkarainen et al. analyzed. al. students’ collaborative designing processes in the online learning platform. Students in Team. n. iv n C A worked in a relatively intensive collaboration h e n gbycfocusing h i U on a shared design object in. producing sketches. Students in Team B worked in a relatively close collaboration without the appearance of a shared design object in the designing process, but with a shared design object appearing during the manufacturing process. Students in Team C worked in a relatively less collaborative environment compared to their counterparts. Students in Team C worked without a shared design object during the whole process. Hence, they produced different types of clothes. Thus, the findings indicated the nature of collaboration patterns among these design teams.. 24.

(38) CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY This study focuses on a review of KB studies from a worldwide perspective. Following the research questions stated in the introductory chapter, all KB studies articles from the Scopus database were processed by following these steps: (a) selection of KB studies using both inclusive and exclusive criteria (see below for details), (b) coding of related information for analysis, (c) analysis of the contribution patterns trends in KB studies.. 3.1 Conceptual Factors. 政治大. Five conceptual factors were examined in this study, including demographic factors,. 立. methodologies, online learning platforms, usage of KBPs, and learning outcomes in KB. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. studies.. 3.2 Selection of Knowledge Building (KB) Studies. y. Nat. er. io. sit. Figure 3-1 illustrates the four steps used for selecting KB studies articles for the systematic review. First, the Scopus database was selected as the favored searching engine in. n. al. Ch. i Un. v. this study. The main reason was that the Scopus database is identified as a comprehensive. engchi. database compared to Web of Science and Google Scholar. All results from the Web of Science and Google Scholar can be found in the Scopus database. Hence, the Scopus database was selected for searching articles related to studies of KB pedagogy. The Scopus database was searched with particular keywords and publication types for the initial search periods, which fell on November 23, 2016. This present study mainly focused on articles that were searched with the keyword of knowledge building (KB), as showed in Figure 3-2. The search resulted in 843 articles with the above-noted keyword appearing in the title, abstract, or keywords.. 25.

(39) 學. Figure 3-1 Search Strategies Procedure. ‧. ‧ 國. 立. 政治大. sit. y. Nat. The next step was to filter irrelevant articles manually. By reviewing the abstracts of. n. al. er. io. these articles, 529 articles were excluded since they defined knowledge building (KB) using a. i Un. v. different definition from the one used in this study. The filtered process resulted in 314. Ch. engchi. articles which were further assessed using the following steps and which were required to meet some inclusive and exclusive criteria for further review. The searched paper/study was included if (a) it was an article written between 2001 and 2016, (b) it was an empirical study, (c) it involved some pedagogical design in KB, and (d) it involved the use of an online learning platform. However, the selected study was excluded if (a) it was a review paper, an unpublished dissertation, or a survey, or (b) it involved gifted students or students with learning disabilities as the participants. Eventually, 56 KB studies (see Appendix A) were selected for this review.. 26.

(40) 政治大 Figure 3-2 Screenshot of Scopus Database Keyword Searching 立. ‧ 國. 學. A total of 22 journals were listed among these articles: (a) Asia Pacific Education. ‧. Review, (b) Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, (c) Australasian Journal of Educational. sit. y. Nat. Technology, (d) British Journal of Educational Technology, (e) Canadian Journal of Science,. n. al. er. io. Mathematics and Technology Education, (f) Computers and Education, (g) Early Education. i Un. v. and Development, (h) Educational Technology and Society, (i) Educational Technology. Ch. engchi. Research and Development, (j) IFIP International Federation for Information Processing, (k) Informatics in Education, (l) Instructional Science, (m) International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, (n) International Journal of Continuing Engineering Education and Life-Long Learning, (o) International Journal of Technology and Design Education, (p) Journal of Educational Computing Research, (q) Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, (r) Journal of Science Education and Technology, (s) Journal of the Learning Sciences, (t) Learning Environments Research, (u) Teachers College Record, (v) Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology.. 27.

(41) After identifying the selected articles, a coding system was designed to perform further analysis. The coding details are provided in the following section.. 3.3 Coding System 3.3.1 Bibliographic Coding Two bibliographic categories were identified in coding the 56 selected articles including (a) Study ID number, (b) Publication year. These bibliographic categories were derived from coding manual examples of meta-analysis (Lipsey & Wilson, 2001). The Study ID number was coded from the initial search that yielded 843 results. Hence, the selected article ID. 政治大. numbers were between ID1 and ID843. There were 17 articles that included the letters a, b, or. 立. c behind the Study ID number with the conditions that these articles contain (a) at least two. ‧ 國. 學. studies with participants of different education levels, or (b) at least two progressive studies. ‧. with participants of the same education level. The publication year was directly coded with. er. io. sit. y. Nat. four digits, for instance 2016.. al. iv n C Table 3-1 shows the demographic h coding includedi inUthis study. There were four items eng ch n. 3.3.2 Demographic Coding. that included the countries where KB studies were conducted, education levels of participants, identities of participants, and subject domains researched in the selected KB studies. Twelve countries were identified in this study: (a) Australia, (b) Canada, (c) Finland, (d) Hong Kong, (e) Italy, (f) Japan, (g) Mainland China, (h) Mexico, (i) Singapore, (j) Taiwan, (k) Turkey, and (l) United States. Among these countries, two categories were identified in the coding: (a) Eastern countries, (b) Western countries. During the coding of different countries, for this study we employed two important criteria for categories. One was related to regions and another one was related to culture. Among these countries, Turkey was found to be difficult 28.

(42) to categorize as either an Eastern country or a Western country, due to its complexity. From the different sources identified in Table 3-2, this study determined that Turkey was grouped in Eastern country based on culture perspective. Turkey was majority of Muslim and steeped in Middle Eastern traditions, which was closer to Eastern country (Mirabella, 2016). Education level categories were derived and modified from the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED, 2011). Eight categories of education levels were identified in the coding of this study: (a) Preschool, (b) Grade 1-6, (c) Grade 7-9, (d) Grade 10-12, (e) Undergraduate, (f) Graduate, (g) Postgraduate, (h) Not elsewhere classified. Three categories of identities of participants were identified in the coding: (a). 政治大. Pre-service teacher, (b) In-service teacher, or (c) Learner. All of the participants’ categories. 立. were derived from the selected articles.. ‧ 國. 學. Twelve categories of subject domains were identified in the coding: (a) Chinese, (b). ‧. Design, (c) English, (d) Geography, (e) History, (f) Language, (g) Mathematics, (h) Pedagogy,. sit. y. Nat. (i) Science, (j) Technology, (k) Visual Art, or (l) Not specified. All the subject domain. io. n. al. er. categories were derived from the selected articles.. Table 3-1 Demographic Coding Item. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. Category. Country. 1 Eastern country. 2 Western country. Education level. 1 Preschool 4 Grade 10-12 7 Postgraduate. 2 Grade 1-6 5 Undergraduate 9 Not elsewhere classified. 3 Grade 7-9 6 Graduate. Identities of participants. 1 Pre-service teacher. 2 In-service teacher. 3 Learner. Subject domains. 1 Chinese 4 Geography 7 Mathematics 10 Technology. 2 Design 5 History 8 Pedagogy 11 Visual Art. 3 English 6 Language 9 Science 12 Not specified. 29.

(43) Table 3-2 Turkey as Eastern Country or Western Country Supported by Different Sources Turkey is marked as country of Eastern Western Remarked The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (n.d.). X. To West and Central Asia. Internet World Stats (n.d.) International Labour Organization (n.d.). X. UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, n.d.). ‧ 國. X. Europe and Central Asia. X. UNESCO Region of Turkey considered in Europe and North America. 政治大. X. X. X. X. sit. X. n. al. er. io. Mirabella (2016). Geographic of Turkey was lying partly in Asia and Europe. y. Nat Worldatlas (n.d.). Southeastern Europe and Western Asia. ‧. Yapp and Dewdney (2017). Europe. 學. One World Nations Online (n.d.). 立. X. X. Ch. engchi. i Un. X. v. Asia Geographic of Turkey was closer to Europe, but culture of Turkey was majority of Muslim and steeped in Middle Eastern traditions. 3.3.3 Research Design Coding Table 3-3 shows the research design coding included in this study. There were two items that included research designs and analysis methods among these selected KB studies. A total of seven categories of research designs were identified in the coding of this study, which include (a) Case study, (b) Design experiment, (c) Ethnography, (d) True experiment design, 30.

(44) (e) Quasi-experiment design, (f) Exploratory study, and (g) Longitudinal study. All the research design categories were derived from the selected articles. Hence, each selected article research design was coded from the description of methodology section. However, there were 22 articles that did not clarify the research design employed. To solve the coding problem on these research designs, some solutions were proposed to be discussed with the inter-coder through face-to-face contact. In addition, three categories of analysis methods approaches were identified in the coding: (a) Quantitative analysis, (b) Qualitative analysis, and (c) Mixed methods analysis. These categories of analysis method approaches were derived from the selected articles.. 政治大. Quantitative analysis was conducted by adopting statistical methods in analyzing data, for. 立. example pre- and post-tests, correlation analysis, analysis of variance (ANOVA), and so forth.. ‧ 國. 學. Qualitative analysis was conducted by analyzing data from interviews, classroom. ‧. observations, written productions or sketches, and so forth. Mixed methods analysis was. sit. y. Nat. conducted by applying both quantitative analysis methods and qualitative analysis methods in. io. er. analyzing data. For instance, ID27b involved adopting qualitative content analysis in. al. analyzing content of discussion of learners and, ID27b also used a process of adopting t-tests. n. iv n C for comparing two groups from the level participation. h of en g c h i UQualitative findings supported by quantitative results were found in most of the KB studies that adopted mixed methods. analysis. During the coding process of analysis methods, each article was validated according to the description of the data analysis section.. 31.