2. Stimulating knowledge building; what works?
Niek van Benthum; Aeres University of Applied Sciences Wageningen
Lia Spreeuwenberg; Aeres University of Applied Sciences Wageningen

3. What is knowledge building?
Write down your first association on what is ‘knowledge building’.

4. Conclusion Knowledge building is stimulated by a design in which:
students can start with their own authentic ideas,
students can work collaboratively in dialogue,
literature, peers and teachers provide different perspectives,
students work in a collective on collective knowledge,
continuous iterative process of theory in relation to the own context.

5. Aeres University of Applied Sciences Wageningen, the Netherlands
Bachelor programme for teacher training in agricultural vocational education.
Master programme ’Learning and Innovation’.
Two-year-parttime-programme, aiming to educate students as change agents.
During their study, all students work on the realisation of an innovation in their own context of work.
Knowledge base is provided in 7 courses in the two years of their study.
’Knowledge building’ is the key concept in the educational model.

6. Introduction
Knowledge building is an interactive learning model, mediated by shared objects, aiming to create new knowledge within a (student) community by applying a set of social practices like talk, discussion, writing, dialogue (Scardamalia & Bereiter, 2010; Paavola et al, 2004; Chan & Chan, 2011). Knowledge building puts students in a role as collaborative knowledge creators with the aim to improve ideas (De Jong, 2015; Scardamalia & Bereiter, 2014). Over the years, empirical research has demonstrated the positive effects of the ‘knowledge-building’ approach on literacy, depth of inquiry, collaboration, and knowledge-creation processes (Chan & Chan, 2011).

7. Introduction Twelve knowledge building principles:
improvable ideas; community knowledge; rise above; diversity of ideas; democratizing knowledge; epistemic agency; knowledge-building discourse; concurrent assessment; symmetrical advances; constructive uses of information; authentic problem; and pervasive knowledge building.
(Scardamalia, 2002)
The principles form a cohesive system and are intertwined (Chan & Chan, 2011).

8. Problem statement
The knowledge building concept is often misunderstood and its uses are far from consistent (Scardamalia and Bereiter, 2010).
In the master programme, less is known about students’ perceptions:
1) to what extent the design of specific courses stimulates knowledge building;
2) on what elements of the educational design stimulate knowledge building.

9. Aim study
Improve conceptual understanding on the knowledge building concept in practice.
More insight in how the specific design elements of courses in the master programme stimulate knowledge building.

10. Research questions
How do students perceive the integration of knowledge building in the design of the courses ‘Innovation in teams’ and ‘Learning’?
How to stimulate knowledge building in the design of the courses ‘Innovation in teams’ and ‘Learning’?

11. Context study
’Innovation in Teams’ aims to help students deal with the complex process of initiating and implementing innovations together with their colleagues. Course assignment: Write an individual and collective text on own innovation in relation to theory. ’Learning’ deals with the question what type of learning is expected from the stakeholders to realise the innovation. Course assignment: Write a collective underpinned theory on what learning is expected from the stakeholders in the innovation. The theory needs to be visualised in a model.

12. Methodology research question 1
A questionnaire with 10 items on a 5-point likert scale for each course. The questionnaire is based on a questionnaire on collaborative knowledge building (α = .85) of Chan & Chan (2011).
“Ideas are exchanged to improve our knowledge.”
After the questionnaire, 6 selected students are individually interviewed to get more insight in how they perceived knowledge building in relation to the course design.
Student answers in the interview are transcribed, summarized and coded on the knowledge building principles and processed in a narrative on how each student perceived knowledge building in each course.
”External teachers offered new perspectives on theory”
Constructive use of authorative sources

13. Results questionnaire research question 1
The 10 items are regarded as one scale for each course.
The total score for each course is the sum of the 10 items (min. 10 – max. 50).
Two scales:
To what extent do students perceive knowledge building in:
Mean (n=25) SD α
Course Innovation in Teams
Course Learning

14. Results interview research question 1
Innovation in teams Very useful to work collaboratively on a text on their own innovation and relate it to theory. The assignment was to ill-defined to stimulate knowledge building to the utmost. Perceived knowledge building principles: ‘Constructive use of authorative soures’ and ‘idea diversity’.

15. Results interview research question 1
Learning Course assignment and literature were that hard and complex that the students couldn’t do without each other and had to interact to build on their collaborative theory on learning. The inspiring assignment and the required transfer to the own working context resulted in fundamentally changed views on learning. Perceived knowledge building principles: constructive use of authorative sources’, ‘knowledge building discourse’, ‘improvable ideas’, ‘democratizing knowledge’, ‘real ideas’, ‘idea diversity’, ‘rise above’, ‘pervasive knowledge building’ and ‘symmetric knowledge advancement’.

16. Methodology research question 2
6 Selected students are interviewed in a semi-structured interview aiming to get more insight in how to stimulate knowledge building.
Semi-structured interview with the two lecturers of the two designated courses, to distinguish the design principles they integrated to stimulate ’knowledge building’.
The list of design principles was presented in the last part of the student interview to check whether students recognized the principles in the course design and to distinguish the activated mechanisms.

17. Results interviews and design principles for ‘innovation in teams’
Effective principles: Describing own individual authentic innovation and come to an urgent or intriguing question in relation to theory. “The iterative process of clarifying own ideas in relation to theory helped to understand theory and practice”
Title presentation • Version 1.0 • Concept
May 1, 2016

18. Results interviews and design principles for ‘learning’ (1)
Starting with own idea of ‘what is learning’
Making a collective on individual ideas of learning and instantly, sharing and exploring peers’ ideas in the collective
Building ideas/theories on learning in dialogue
“We collaboratively created ideas on existing theories with students out of other contexts and with whom I wasn’t on first instant that comfortable with”

19. Results interviews and design principles for ‘learning’ (1)
Providing literature with different perspectives on ‘what is learning’
Interpretation of literature in relation to innovation is for the student
“The literature was that hard and confusing, I really needed the others, also because the interpretation was up to us.”
Collective idea to explain individual context
“Checking whether the collective idea/theory on learning applies to your own context, forces you into a dialoque to really grasp the idea/theory.”

20. Conclusion
In ‘Innovation in teams’, students perceived limited stimulation of knowledge building and mechanisms can be characterized as ‘knowledge sharing’. Knowledge sharing refers to the transmission of knowledge between people. (Van Aalst, 2009)
In the course ‘Learning’, students were very positive on how knowledge building was stimulated.
Knowledge building is stimulated by a design in which:
students can start with their own authentic ideas,
students can work collaboratively in dialogue,
literature, peers and teachers provide different perspectives,
students work in a collective on collective knowledge,
continuous iterative process of theory in relation to the own context.

21. Thank you for your attention