Exploring metaskills of knowledge-creating inquiry in higher education

Abstract

The skills of knowledge-creating inquiry are explored as a challenge for higher education. The knowledge-creation approach to learning provides a theoretical tool for addressing them: In addition to the individual and social aspects in regulation of inquiry, the knowledge-creation approach focuses on aspects related to advancing shared objects of inquiry. The development of corresponding metaskills is suggested as an important longterm goal for higher education; these pertain, simultaneously to the individual, collective, and object-oriented aspects of monitoring inquiry. Taking part in collaborative inquiry toward advancing a shared knowledge object is foreseen as a means to facilitate the development of metaskills; the present study examines one undergraduate university course in psychology with that aim. The data consisted of a database discourse and students' selfreflections after the course, examined by qualitative content analysis. Three analyses investigated discourse evolution, knowledge advancement, and the challenge of the inquiry practices. The student-groups differed markedly in their engagement in the inquiry efforts. The study gave insights concerning novel challenges evoked by knowledge-creating inquiry, relating in particular to commitment, epistemic involvement, dealing with confusion, and the iterative nature of knowledge advancement. We propose the following implication for educational practices: Although dealing with uncertainty and areas beyond one's expertise, as well as engaging in self-directed collaborative inquiry, may seem overly demanding for students, such experiences are decisive for developing one's skills in dealing with open-ended knowledge objects in a longer time frame.

The multi-layered nature of small-group learning: Productive interactions in object-oriented collaboration

“…The current findings suggest that materializing knowledge, whether in a preliminary or advanced form of elaboration, into situational objects (Jahreie 2010) serves to preserve the continuity of the process. It also aids the progressive accumulation of conceptualizations and elaborations (Muukkonen and Lakkala, 2009) and contributes to the co-construction process by freezing the generated knowledge at particular moments during the process. As stated earlier, the knowledge object drafts played a catalyzing role in the groups' interactions, and that was also expressed in how the course of the interaction changed or adjusted with time, in order ultimately to become meaningful for the co-construction of the objects.…”

Fostering Students’ Collaborative Learning Competencies and Professional Conduct in the Context of Two Gross Anatomy Courses in Veterinary Medicine

“…Collaborative learning and peer teaching has been used in many ways in various disciplines to support students' learning of challenging topics (Nnodim, 1997;Brueckner and MacPherson, 2004;Youdas et al, 2008), including anatomy (Thurman et al, 2009;Khosa et al, 2010;Salomäki et al, 2014). However, the success of group work and peer teaching depends significantly on students' ability to effectively communicate and collaborate (Allen and Boraks, 1978;Evans and Cuffe, 2009;Muukkonen and Lakkala, 2009).…”

Assessing the Development of Collaborative Knowledge Work Competence: Scales for Higher Education Course Contexts

“…Damşa et al (2010) reported on students' learning about the regulative and epistemic aspects of collaboration, particularly the benefits of shared epistemic agency in relation to the advancement of shared outcomes. Other studies (Muukkonen & Lakkala, 2009;Muukkonen, Lakkala, & Hakkarainen, 2005) have used open-ended questions to solicit students' self-evaluation of competence learning during courses. These have provided evidence of learning about domain-specific competences, e.g., designing software architecture or setting up a business plan, as well as domain-generic competences such as learning to coordinate teamwork, taking initiative, creating new knowledge, integrating theory and practice, and collaborating with work-life experts.…”

“…Prior research and available assessment instruments have primarily focused on explicating individual dimensions of generic competences, including, e.g., critical and analytical thinking (e.g., Hyytinen et al, 2015;Kember & Leung, 2009), problem-solving (Neubert, Mainert, Kretzschmar, & Greiff, 2015), self-management of learning, communication skills, and information and digital literacy (e.g., Strijbos et al, 2015;Young & Chapman, 2010). Other research has shown that there are collective dimensions to be taken into account in competence development: collaborative idea generation and knowledge production, as well as epistemic, regulative, and metacognitive competence utilized in shared knowledge advancement (Damşa, 2014;Damşa, Kirschner, Andriessen, Erkens, & Sins, 2010;Hadwin, Järvelä, & Miller, 2011;Muukkonen & Lakkala, 2009;Panadero, Kirschner, Järvelä, Malmberg, & Järvenoja, 2015). These involve dimensions of competence required in collaborative working often referred to as interpersonal, reciprocal communication, and teamwork capabilities.…”