Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x24gv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-12T19:24:52.507Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

7 - Mapping the Territory of the Learning Sciences

from PART 2 - PRESENT

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2016

By
Martin J. Packer  and
Cody Maddox
Edited by
Michael A. Evans ,
Martin J. Packer  and
R. Keith Sawyer
Martin J. Packer
Affiliation:
University of the Andes in Bogotá, Colombia
Cody Maddox
Affiliation:
Duquesne University
Michael A. Evans
Affiliation:
North Carolina State University
Martin J. Packer
Affiliation:
Universidad de los Andes, Colombia
R. Keith Sawyer
Affiliation:
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
Get access

Summary

The Learning Sciences (LS) has become an influential approach within educational research. Its popularity has come in part from the maxim that it has taken the study of learning out of the laboratory and into real-world settings. The Learning Sciences has been described as an interdisciplinary approach to the study and the facilitation of learning in real-world settings. But what exactly is the territory of LS? In this chapter we offer an answer to this question.

By any number of measures the LS is now entering the third decade of its existence. The first LS program was founded at Northwestern in 1987 (the same year that the Institute for Research on Learning was created in Palo Alto; cf. Pea, this volume). The Journal of the Learning Sciences (JLS) published its first issue in 1991. If LS were a person we would probably say that now she is engaging in the self-examination, reflection on the past, and planning for the future, even the crisis of identity, that characterize young adulthood. Reflections on the history of LS and of JLS (as its editor-in-chief passed the baton) have being published (e.g., Kolodner, 2004, 2009), two editions of a massive Handbook have summarized the state of the art (Sawyer, 2006, 2014), and at the 2010 meeting of the International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS), for example, a workshop was convened on “Growing the Learning Sciences” to consider what to do “as the field of Learning Sciences matures.” LS is indeed “growing up” (Kolodner, 2009).

This chapter aims to make a contribution to these reflections and debates over the character of LS. We focus on the question of what and where is the territory of LS. The chapter is organized as follows. First, we describe several ways in which we mapped LS using textual materials. Here, our focus is the conceptual territory of LS. Second, we identify, and reflect on, three distinctions that seem to us to constitute the places in which LS research is conducted: the laboratory versus the real-world; formal and informal settings; and authentic and inauthentic instruction. Here, our focus is the investigative territory of LS.

Mapping the Conceptual Territory of LS

First, we obtained textual data of several different kinds. We identified LS programs to draw material from their websites.

Type
Chapter
Information
Reflections on the Learning Sciences , pp. 126 - 154
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2016

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Banks, J. A., Au, K. H., Ball, A. F., Bell, P., Gordon, E. W., Gutiérrez, K. D., et al. (2007). Learning in and out of school in diverse environments: Life-long, life-wide, life-deep. Seattle: Center for Multicultural Education, University of Washington.Google Scholar
Bell, P., Lewenstein, B., Shouse, A. W., & Feder, M. A. (Eds.). (2009). Learning science in informal environments: People, places, and pursuits. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, A. L. (1994). The advancement of learning. Educational Researcher, 23(8), 4–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins, A. (2006). Cognitive apprenticeship. In Sawyer, K. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 47–60). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Collins, A., & Bielaczyc, K. (1999). The enculturation of educational thinking. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 8(1), 129–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins, A., Joseph, D., & Bielaczyc, K. (2004). Design research: Theoretical and methodological issues. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 15–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
diSessa, A. A. (2006). A history of conceptual change research: Threads and fault lines. In Sawyer, K. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 265–282). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Greeno, J. G. (2006). Learning in activity. In Sawyer, K. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 79–96). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Greimas, A. J., & Courtes, J. (1976). The cognitive dimension of narrative discourse. New Literary History, 7(3), 433–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hofstein, A., & Rosenfeld, S. (1996). Bridging the gap between formal and informal science learning. Studies in Science Education, 28(1996), 87–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, P. W. (1968). Life in classrooms. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Kafai, Y. B. (2006). Constructionism. In Sawyer, K. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 35–46). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kolodner, J. L. (1991). The Journal of the Learning Sciences: Effecting changes in education. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 1(1), 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kolodner, J. L. (2002). The “neat” and the” scruffy” in promoting learning from analogy: We need to pay attention to both. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11(1), 139–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kolodner, J. L. (2004). The learning sciences: Past, present, and future. Educational Technology: The Magazine for Managers of Change in Education, 44(3), 37–42.Google Scholar
Kolodner, J. (2009). Note from the outgoing Editor-in-Chief. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 18(1), 1–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krajcik, J. S., & Blumenfeld, P. C. (2006). Project-based learning. In Sawyer, K. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 317–334). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Latour, B. (1983). Give me a laboratory and I will raise the world. In Knorr, K. & Mulkay, M. (Eds.), Science observed (pp. 141–170). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Google Scholar
Lave, J. (1982). A comparative approach to educational forms and learning processes. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 13(2), 181–187.Google Scholar
Lave, J., & Packer, M. (2008). Towards a social ontology of learning. In Nielsen, K., Brinkmann, S., Elmholdt, C., Tanggaard, L., Musaeus, P., & Kraft, G. (Eds.), A qualitative stance (pp. 17–46). Aarhus, Denmark: Aarhus University Press.Google Scholar
Lombardi, M. M. (2007). Authentic learning for the 21st century: An overview. Educause learning initiative, ELI Paper 1, 1–12.Google Scholar
Nathan, M. J., & Alibali, M. W. (2010). Learning sciences. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 1(3), 329–345.Google ScholarPubMed
Newmann, F. M., & Wehlage, G. G. (1993). Five standards of authentic instruction. Educational Leadership, 50(7), 8–12.Google Scholar
Packer, M. (2001a). Changing classes: Shifting the trajectory of development in school. In Packer, M. & Tappan, M. B. (Eds.), Cultural and critical perspectives on human development. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Packer, M. (2001b). The problem of transfer, and the sociocultural critique of schooling. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 10, 493–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Packer, M. J. (2001c). Changing classes: School reform and the new economy. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Packer, M. (2010). Educational research as a reflexive science of constitution. In Penuel, W. R. & O'Connor, K. (Eds.), Learning research as a human science (pp. 17–33). National Society for the Study of Education Yearbook, 109(1).Google Scholar
Packer, M. J. (2011). Schooling: Domestication or ontological construction? In Koschmann, T. (Ed.), Theories of learning and studies of instructional practice, Vol. 1 (pp. 167–188). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Packer, M., & Greco-Brooks, D. (1999). School as a site for the production of persons. Journal of Constructivist Psychology, 12, 133–149.Google Scholar
Packer, M. J., & Goicoechea, J. (2000). Sociocultural and constructivist theories of learning: Ontology, not just epistemology. Educational Psychologist, 35(4), 227–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Papert, S. (2006). Afterword: After how comes what. In Sawyer, K. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 581–586). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pintrich, P. R. (2000). Educational psychology at the millennium: A look back and a look forward. Educational Psychologist, 35(4), 221–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Resnick, L. B. (1987). Learning in school and out. Educational Researcher, 16(9), 13–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rourke, L., & Friesen, N. (2006). The learning sciences: The very idea. Educational Media International, 43(4), 271–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sawyer, K. (Ed.). (2006). The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences, 1st ed. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sawyer, K. (Ed). (2014). The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences, 2nd ed. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2006). Knowledge building: Theory, pedagogy, and technology. In Sawyer, K. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 97–115). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schoenfeld, A. H. (1999). Looking toward the 21st century: Challenges of educational theory and practice. Educational Researcher, 28(7), 4–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scribner, S. (1984). Studying working intelligence. In Lave, J. & Rogoff, B. (Eds.), Everyday cognition: Its development in social context (pp. 9–40). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Stokes, D. E. (1997). Pasteur's quadrant: Basic science and technological innovation. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
Strauss, C. (1984). Beyond “formal” versus “informal” education: Uses of psychological theory in anthropological research. Ethos, 12(3), 195–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wells, G., & Arauz, R. M. (2006). Dialogue in the classroom. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(3), 379–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wren, D. J. (1999). School culture: Exploring the hidden curriculum. Adolescence, 34(135), 593–596.Google ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×