Over on Designs4Learning, my friend* Roland Hachmann has recently started blogging about his PhD-project, which is part of the research program Designing for Situated Knowledge in a World of Change at the University of Southern Denmark. Roland explains that his project
… focuses on how designs for learning at the teacher education, that embrace practice (contexts) as a core element, can support transformation of knowledge. The project investigates a group of students, who move across educational and professional contexts to resituate and transform their academic knowledge and put it into use as they teach fifth graders. The project uses design based research as a methodological approach and furthermore draws upon theories from the situated and socio cultural domain, where learning is seen as a result of participation and use of artefacts situated in specific contexts.
In his project, Roland is also investigating the concept of transfer, and he recently published a very interesting post entitled Concepts of transfer and transformation in designing for situated knowledge across contexts. In this post, you’ll find some valuable ressources Roland created in collaboration with fellow PhD-student, Lea Tilde Rosenlund: a map of different transfer concepts, a presentation on transfer, and not least a bibliography of transfer literature. It’s really worth checking out!
Given that we clearly share research interests and that we, in our research project, are inspired by theories in the socio-cultural domain as well (e.g. we have used Activity Theory and boundary crossing theory for our analyses), Roland and I have discussed the possibility of sharing knowledge and perhaps collaborating in the future. For now, I’m just delighted that Roland has started blogging and sharing his thoughts with the rest of us.
Roland and I have known each other for years. We initially met at The Master Programme on ICT and Learning (MIL) at Aalborg University, where Roland first attended one of my courses in Second Life, and later I invited him to co-facilitate in another course as part of my research. Since then we have stayed in contact, and I’m happy to call him my friend :-)
In May 2015, colleagues from the Metropolitan University College and I started a research project on ICT, transfer, and boundary crossing in the Danish VET system. In a short series of blog posts I will elaborate on different aspects of the research project to set the scene. The following text is slightly revised from a paper we wrote for the Designs for Learning conference in Copenhagen, 2016 (Riis et al., 2016).
In the Danish dual VET system, students oscillate between school and workplace periods throughout their education. Making sense and use of learning in and from different contexts and experiencing continuity between school and work has long been considered a major pedagogic-didactic challenge in Danish VET research resulting in a continuous focus on the transfer phenomenon (Aarkrog, 2010). Based on a pre-study of vocational teachers’ use of ICT conducted in 2014 (Riis, Bergstedt, Rasmussen, unpublished), we noticed how the teachers attributed a transfer (and sometimes boundary crossing) potential to the use of ICT in teaching and learning processes across different contexts, leading to our current research project. The main research question investigates why and how vocational teachers understand and design for boundary crossing through the use of ICT-based artefacts.
Transfer and boundary crossing
Both in research (Lobato, 2006; Engle, 2012) and among practitioners transfer is a contested concept. In on research project, we adopt Engeström and colleagues’ concepts of vertical and horizontal learning, polycontextuality, and boundary crossing (Engeström, Engeström & Kärkkäinen, 1995; Tuomi-Gröhn, Engeström & Young, 2003), as a way of challenging the traditional notion of transfer understood mainly as a one-time and one-directional transition between a context of acquisition and that of application. As stated by Engeström et al. (ibid.), learning can be conceptualized as both a vertical and a horizontal process. In the former, focus is on learning in a single social system (e.g. in a school) often times based on a narrow, hierarchical view of knowledge and expertise. Conversely, in the latter perspective, learning is based on a broader, multidimensional view of knowledge and expertise and focus is on transitions or crossings in and between multiple social systems (e.g. in and between school and workplace). A horizontal view on learning and transfer understood as boundary crossing, seeks to find productive ways of relating intersecting dissimilar practices (Akkerman & Bakker, 2012), potentially accommodating the inherent contradictions of a dual education system.
According to Akkerman & Bakker “(…) a boundary can be seen as a sociocultural difference leading to discontinuity in action or interaction.” (2011, p. 133), and boundary crossing generally refers to an individual’s transitions and interactions across different contexts. Although discontinuity may be perceived negatively at a glance, in the third generation of CHAT, boundaries understood as contradictions in and between elements and systems, are seen as carrying potential for learning, change, and development. In any activity system, activity is object-oriented, and artefacts (signs or tools) are attributed mediating properties. Whether a mediating artefact functions as a boundary object depends on the purpose and use. In order to function as a boundary object, the artefact needs to inhabit and bridge intersecting practices (Star, 2010), which is not necessarily the case for all mediating signs and tools.
The differences and similarities between the concepts of transfer and boundary crossing are constantly challenging us, so this is something I’ll return to on several occasions.
Akkerman, S.F. & Bakker, A. (2012). Crossing boundaries between school and work during apprenticeship. Vocations and Learning. 5:153-173
Akkerman, S.F. & Bakker, A. (2011). Boundary crossing and boundary objects. Review of Educational Research. June 2011, Vol. 81, No. 2, pp. 132-169
Engle, R.A. (2012). The resurgence of research into transfer: an introduction to the final articles of the transfer stand. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21:3, 347-352.
Engeström, Y., Engeström, R. & Kärkkäinen, M. (1995). Polycontextuality and boundary crossing in expert cognition: Learning and problem solving in complex work activities. Learning and Instruction, Vol. 5. pp. 219-336.
Lobato, J. (2006). Alternative perspectives on the transfer of learning. History, issues, and challenges for future research. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(4), 431-449.
Riis, M., Bergstedt, P., Jørgensen, C.B., Koch, H.H. & Rasmussen, C.L. (2016). Challenges in designing for horizontal learning – in the Danish VET system. Short paper accepted for Designs for Learning conference, May 18.-20., 2016 in Copenhagen, Denmark at Aalborg University, http://www.designsforlearning2016.aau.dk/
Riis, M., Bergstedt, P. & Rasmussen, C.L. (unpublished). Undervisningsdifferentiering og it i de erhvervsrettede uddannelser – en eksploartiv forundersøgelse. Intern rapport udarbejdet 2014.
Star, S.L. (2010), This is not a boundary object; Reflections on the origin of the concept. Science, Technology, and Human Values, 25(5), 601-617.
Tuomi-Gröhn, T. Engeström, Y., & Young, M. (2003). From transfer to boundary crossing between school and work as a tool for developing vocational education: An introduction. In T. Tuomi-Gröhn & Y. Engeström (Eds.), Between school and work: New perspectives on transfer and boundary-crossing pp. 1–18. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Pergamon.
Aarkrog, V. (2010). Erhvervsuddannelsesforskningen i Danmark. In Størner, T. & Hansen, J.A. (red.) Erhvervspædagogik – mål, temaer og vilkår i eud’s verden. s. 73-82. Erhvervsskolernes Forlag.
As mentioned in my last blog post – years ago – I’ve been working at the Metropolitan University College since the summer of 2013. Since then, I’ve blogged in Danish only, but I’ve missed this blog and so I have decided to make a change in focus. However, it doesn’t mean that I’ve lost interest in Second Life (SL) or virtual worlds in general – they are still my favourite virtual learning environments .. by far! :-) I will continue to blog about SL occasionally, but for the past three years, I’ve been working, researching, and teaching with other technologies and media, so it makes sense to broaden my focus here.
Also my research focus has changed, meaning that I’m currently leader of a research project (2015-2017) that studies in-service vocational teachers’ use of ICT as boundary objects as a means to facilitate better connection and continuity in and between school and apprenticeship periods in the Danish dual vocational system.
So in summing up, this is just a brief post to let my readers know that change is about to happen, and I’m looking forward to sharing my thoughts, ideas, and research regarding vocational education and training (VET) combined with the use of different types of ICT in future posts.