Frameworks+-+Progressive+Inquiry

= **Part 2: //The use of collaborative frameworks in blended learning contexts from around the globe.//** =

__**//Group Members://**__ (one member from each "seminar" Group )

 * 1) wendy sandifer (Group 3)
 * 2) Anne Hilton ( Group 4)
 * 3) Alan Grant (Group 2)
 * 4) Cher Shaw (Group 5)

__ **//Relevant Learning Intentions://** __

 * ==== Analyze the use of a specified collaborative framework in a given context.(LI 2) ====
 * ====Actively participate in a computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) experience. (LI 5)====

__**//Process://** __

 * ====Each member of your team should read the set articles on the framework that you are to become the ’expert’ in. The pdf articles can be downloaded from below. That is each member of your seminar group should be becoming an expert in a different framework. ====
 * ====Your next task is to combine your knowledge of the framework and pull it apart to identify the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and strengths (SWOT) of your framework. ====
 * ====You need to finish with a recommendation as to whether you would recommend this framework within the NZ educational environment. Why or why not? ====
 * ====At the end of this section, you should have a sound knowledge and understanding of one framework for supporting collaborative learning. You will take this knowledge and understanding back with you to your seminar group . ====

//**__What are the key features of Progressive Inquiry Framework?__** //

 * ====C21st Learning====
 * ====learning centred====
 * ====constructivism====
 * critcal thinking
 * Collaboration

multiple learning locations flexible forums higher order thinking metacognition *students self-generate their learning agenda *exposure to differing opinions, perspectives, beliefs, experiences and thinking processes * comparing, contrasting, and/or combing similar information collected in dissimilar locations poor communication time involved and timing of learning *learning task may not be clearly defined and/or complex teacher-directed learning process *In order to guide the students, teachers need to have a lot of reflective experiences of inquiry learning - inexperienced teachers may be inclined to 'massage' the process towards a preconceived outcome.
 * == **What are the strengths of the Progressive Inquiry Framework?** == || == **What are the weaknesses of Progressive Inquiry Framework?** == ||
 * *Tchr designs and implements collaborative learning
 * students are responsible for setting up goals
 * communal knowledge shared between students
 * students create new knowledge
 * develops critical thinking and problem solving skills
 * Constructivist approach emphasizes process as well as outcome, thus enabling and supporting a much more transferable range of skills for different learning both in school and beyond.
 * Learner centered constructivism || *shallow constructivism
 * could cause problems for those students who are used to a more
 * effort required to guide critical evaluation
 * requires a long process of exploring and experimenting
 * the quality of the learning process may be superficial with the less-advanced students
 * With genuine inquiry, it is often difficult to reach a resolution stage
 * lots of guidance needed at all steps during the process
 * still need mentoring
 * Still needs lots of intentional planning and modeling by teachers ||
 * == **What opportunities could the** ==

Progressive Inquiry **Framework provide?**
|| == **What are the Threats (or dangers) of utilising the** ==

Progressive Inquiry **Framework?**
|| enhance understanding and appreciation of diversity equal-status peers dialogue good modelling by facilitator
 * *expand global awareness
 * 'Big picture' skills linked to the front end of the NZC (key competencies: thinking, relating to others, participating and contributing, managing self and using language symbols and texts.)
 * Collaborative learning is good learning
 * Capitalized multipersectives - similar issues different context and country || *technology
 * Needs to be a purpose for the inquiry or students may ask 'why?' with some justification.
 * Lack of critical evaluation by students - difficulty of transferring knowledge in written form. (meaning construction etc) ||

//**__Recommendations:__**//
In a New Zealand setting, a major factor in the success or otherwise of CSCL and a progressive inquiry framework is ready access to the technology. The studies generally tend to assume that the students are able to get online and work in any class where they feel that they need to. This is, I'd dare to suggest, an uncommon situation in New Zealand secondary schools. CSCL is an exercise in utter frustration if the technology is not sufficiently available. Provided that the institution has sufficient computer access to enable the process of inquiry to run effectively, then I think it would be an excellent learning tool in the New Zealand setting, particularly if managed well and teachers are given sufficient PD in getting it up and running with their classes.