Practical inquiry reflects an iterative process between the individual and the shared; between 'reflection and discourse, and analysis (insight) and synthesis (understanding)' (Akyol and Garrison, 2011, p.5-6). As such, learning involves sharing and justifying one's ideas in a group context.
|Critical thinking/learning cycle (Garrison, 1991, p.293)|
What could be the implications be for my analysis of the learning in the eTwinning LE? Good question! So far I have suggested having a code for metacognition in addition to the four that reflect the stages of critical thinking proposed by Garrison (1991). As this could be construed as being redundant, I may decide instead to have two codes for each of the two stages of critical thinking related to the higher levels , that is integration and resolution, to distinguish between metacognition relating to the general use of web 2.0 tools and metacognition relating to their use in teaching practice. My feeling is that if I code the forums using just the single codes, I shall fail to see this important distinction - my perception, reading the forums, is that the teachers this time took their thinking to this extra level, thinking about the consequences for their teaching practice. And it would be important to show this if I am to illustrate that competence development took place.
Akyol, Z. & Garrison, D. R. (2011) 'Assessing metacognition in an online community of inquiry', The Internet and Higher Education, In Press, Accepted Manuscript. (ONLINE - http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.01.005 - accessed 24.03.2011)
Garrison, D. R. (1991) 'Critical thinking and adult education: a conceptual model for developing critical thinking in adult learners'. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 10 (4), pp.287 - 303
Garrison, D., Anderson, T. & Archer, W. (2001) 'Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education'. American Journal of Distance Education, 15 (1), pp.7-23
Persico, D., Pozzi, F. & Sarti, L. (2010) 'Monitoring collaborative activities in computer supported collaborative learning'. Distance Education, 31 (1), pp.5 - 22