Frameworks+-+Social+Cohesion

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

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

 * 1) Sue Deuchar (group 3)
 * 2) Viv Hall (Group 4)
 * 3) Mark Simpson (group 2)
 * 4) Gabi Bahler (Group 3)
 * 5) 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 Social Cohesion Framework?__** //

 * ====knowledge is constructed and gained through social negotiation with peers and tutors ====
 * ====social structure of the learning community is prescriptive and defined, used to foster cooperation and discussion among members of a learning community ====
 * ideal in contexts where student's ability to work in groups and reflect with others needs developing.
 * This link will take you to quite a good article about the design elements deemed crucial for developing rich activities that will promote social cohesiveness, communicaiton and interactivity as key pedagogical goals (GB) []
 * Cohesion, inclusion and innovation are key factor in social cohesion theories/frameworks (GB)
 * NOTE: I've focussed on the Jigsaw Framework in SWOT (VH)
 * == **What are the strengths of the Social Cohesion Framework?** == || == **What are the weaknesses of** Social Cohesion **Framework?** == ||
 * ** higher levels of critical thinking
 * engagement of all team members
 * very specific technique
 * good model for the design of online collaborative learning activities
 * Development of shared sense of knowledge development in an interdependent learning community: one for all.
 * creates a distributed intelligence
 * members co-construct knowledge
 * encourages students' active participation
 * Teacher is not the sole provider of knowledge
 * students are more likely to take ownership of the task || ** highly structured scripted activities - lacking in "free collaboration"
 * intensive process - time
 * very specific technique
 * Seems to require students that have high intrinsic motivation to begin with (fee-paying postgrads studying education)
 * need to pay particular attention to the needs of student's who may feel isolated
 * often requires a stronger teacher effort
 * == What opportunities could the **Social Cohesion** Framework provide? == || == What are the threats (or dangers) of utilising the **Social Cohesion** Framework? == ||
 * ** expert groups loosened & reformed - hence 'jigsaw' leads to shared competencies spreading throughout the learning community
 * stronger teaching effort - by either tutor or peers
 * potentially leads to creation of "community constructed" resources || ** so prescriptive it leads to lack of motivation among members
 * specific technique requires intensive 'tutor' time and small groups therefore drives cost of delivery up
 * threat of itemizing and compartmentalising learning (i.e. Student A learns X; Student B learns Y, but neither both)
 * Assigned roles can be stigmatised while self-selected roles can be limiting.
 * over-scripting the activity may cause a loss of flexibility ||
 * over-scripting the activity may cause a loss of flexibility ||

//__Recommendations:__**//
I would recommend social cohesion frameworks that encourage and facilitate the pedagogical aims of inclusiveness, communication and participation. "making meaningful connections is at the core of all learning” (Horton, 2000, p. x). (GB)

//Note -mark- : Not sure about SCF in general, but in terms of Jigsaw I'd argue it's ideal for the exact opposite context: Pozzi's statement is a comparison with Jigsaw + Case Study vs. Case Study alone in university contexts - I'd agree with that... but not in other contexts: in secondary for example, Jigsaw would surely work better in a socially motivated class than for students who are not already good at working in groups and have low intrinsic motivation.//

REFERENCES: Horton, S. (2000). //Web Teaching Guide: A practical approach to creating course web sites.// New Haven, CT.: Yale University Press.

Note: Viv

//Perhaps in the 'compulsory ed sector a framework like Jigsaw would be useful to draw together a group of learners around a project that is able to be broken down into subtasks to 'teach' them how to work in a collaborative way. The process is reminiscent of different ways of working together --- De Bono's Six Thinking Hats approach springs to mind. I feel it would fit in with Project Based learning approach, and I'm sure there would be a few ingenious Kiwi teachers that could adapt it.//

Note: Sue //This framework would be good in an adult ed situation where students have a reasonably good knowledge base but by peer interaction with likeminded experts, can build on their own knowledgebase. This knowledge building with likeminded experts could, if facilitated in the right way, increase confidence within each individual, but if facilitated in the wrong way could see some "experts" made to feel much less knowledgeable than their peers.//