Conference presentation of a paper: Mikhail Fominykh, Ekaterina Prasolova-Førland, Sobah Abbas Petersen, and Monica Divitini: "Work and Learning across Boundaries: Artifacts, Discourses, and Processes in a University Course," in 19th International Conference on Collaboration and Technology (CRIWG), Wellington, New Zeeland, October 30–November 01, 2013, Springer, Online ISBN: 978-3-642-41347-6, pp. 159–174. doi>10.1007/978-3-642-41347-6_12

1. Work and Learning across Boundaries:
Artifacts, Discourses, and Processes in a University Course
Mikhail Fominykh, Ekaterina Prasolova-Førland, Sobah Abbas Petersen, and Monica Divitini
Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway
19th International Conference on Collaboration
and Technology (CRIWG)
October 30–November 01, 2013
Wellington, New Zealand
1

2. Trondheim, Norway
2

3. Norwegian University of Science
and Technology NTNU
3

4. Motivation and challenges:
Learning and Cooperation
o Project group work
– significant part in university education
– often required in a workplace
o Students
– Small groups • large communities
– Collocated • distributed
– Homogeneous • diverse
o Cooperation
– Facilitation of the creative process
– Frustrations and disruptions
4

5. Goals: Improving collaboration and
learning with boundary objects
o Explorative study
– using boundary objects in a new context – university
course (collaborative activities)
– observing student cooperation across boundaries
– observing the use of cooperation technology tools
o Implications
– cooperation support across boundaries in a social
learning system, e.g. why boundary objects are
important, how to facilitate their creation and what
technologies to choose
5

6. Background: Boundary objects
and social learning systems
o Boundary objects:
– serve groups or communities in situations where each
participant has only partial knowledge and partial
control over the interpretation of an object
– perform a brokering role involving “translation,
coordination, and alignment among the perspectives of
different Communities of Practice” (Fischer, 2001)
– Artifacts, discourses, processes (Wenger, 2000)
– Organizations, communities of practice, communities of
interest
o Rarely used in pure educational settings
6

7. Study: Cooperation Technology
course
o Elective course
o Credits: ETCS 7.5
o Grade: 70% groups project + 30%
essay
o Duration: 13 weeks
o Participants: 31 fourth year master
students (seven groups 3–5)
7

8. Study: Course Activities
Task 1
Course
activities
Task 2
Task 3
Collaborative writing + Creating a language
Collaborative writing +
presentation in 3D
dictionary + a glossary f2f presentation /
virtual world
web-conferencing
Types of
Local group
collaboration
Local group + local
community
Local group +
international
Types of
boundaries
Between individuals
Between local groups
Between international
groups
Assigned
technologies
vAcademia
LingoBee
Adobe Connect, Purot
Wiki, Prezi
Main
outcomes
Handbook of
cooperation tools +
3D recordings
Language dictionary +
glossary of terms
Online media
handbook on ed. tech.
9

9. Study: Types of collaboration
Task 1
Course
activities
Task 2
Task 3
Collaborative writing + Creating a language
Collaborative writing +
presentation in 3D
dictionary + a glossary f2f presentation /
virtual world
web-conferencing
Types of
Local group
collaboration
Local group + local
community
Local group +
international
Types of
boundaries
Between individuals
Between local groups
Between international
groups
Assigned
technologies
vAcademia
LingoBee
Adobe Connect, Purot
Wiki, Prezi
Main
outcomes
Handbook of
cooperation tools +
3D recordings
Language dictionary +
glossary of terms
Online media
handbook on ed. tech.
10

10. Study: Types of boundaries
Task 1
Course
activities
Task 2
Task 3
Collaborative writing + Creating a language
Collaborative writing +
presentation in 3D
dictionary + a glossary f2f presentation /
virtual world
web-conferencing
Types of
Local group
collaboration
Local group + local
community
Local group +
international
Types of
boundaries
Between individuals
Between local groups
Between international
groups
Assigned
technologies
vAcademia
LingoBee
Adobe Connect, Purot
Wiki, Prezi
Main
outcomes
Handbook of
cooperation tools +
3D recordings
Language dictionary +
glossary of terms
Online media
handbook on ed. tech.
11

11. Study: Assigned technologies
Task 1
Course
activities
Task 2
Task 3
Collaborative writing + Creating a language
Collaborative writing +
presentation in 3D
dictionary + a glossary f2f presentation /
virtual world
web-conferencing
Types of
Local group
collaboration
Local group + local
community
Local group +
international
Types of
boundaries
Between individuals
Between local groups
Between international
groups
Assigned
technologies
vAcademia
LingoBee
Adobe Connect, Purot
Wiki, Prezi
Main
outcomes
Handbook of
cooperation tools +
3D recordings
Language dictionary +
glossary of terms
Online media
handbook on ed. tech.
12

12. Study: Main outcomes
Task 1
Course
activities
Task 2
Task 3
Collaborative writing + Creating a language
Collaborative writing +
presentation in 3D
dictionary + a glossary f2f presentation /
virtual world
web-conferencing
Types of
Local group
collaboration
Local group + local
community
Local group +
international
Types of
boundaries
Between individuals
Between local groups
Between international
groups
Assigned
technologies
vAcademia
LingoBee
Adobe Connect, Purot
Wiki, Prezi
Main
outcomes
Handbook of
cooperation tools +
3D recordings
Language dictionary +
glossary of terms
Online media
handbook on ed. tech.
13

13. Study: Data Sources and Analysis
Data sources
– direct observation of students’ activities online and
their recordings
– the virtual artifacts the students created
– user feedback: questionnaires, group reflection
notes, semi-structured interviews, and individual
essays
Data analysis
– Constant comparative method: coding with nVivo
14

14. Examples of student projects
Task 1
Main
outcomes
15
Handbook of
cooperation tools +
3D recordings
Task 2
Task 3
Language dictionary +
glossary of terms
Online media
handbook on ed. tech.

15. 16

16. e.g., http://www.vacademia.com/record/detailed/2100
17

17. 18
http://simola.org/lingobee/index.php?gid=28
http://simola.org/lingobee/index.php?gid=29

18. 19
http://cocreat.purot.net/

19. Results: Boundary objects
Boundary
objects
Seeding
Facilitating
creation
20
Shared
artifacts
Shared
discourses
Shared
processes

20. Boundary objects as artifacts
Seeded artifacts
– task description
– template for the expected outcome
– assigned tools and their repositories
Created artifacts
– additional tools used for construction
– major outcomes
21

21. Boundary objects as discourses
Seeded discourses
–
–
–
–
shared descriptions of local courses
knowing each other beforehand (local groups)
assigned LMS (only Task 1)
introductory meetings (only Task 3)
Created discourses
–
–
–
–
22
additional tools used for supporting the process
good atmosphere
similar motivation levels
gradual adoption of joint communication norms

22. Boundary objects as processes
Seeded processes
– scaffolding and tutoring
– expert reviews and peer-reviews
Created processes
–
–
–
–
23
planning and coordination
group cohesiveness
extensive use of tools for supporting the process
procedures of giving and receiving feedback between
the groups

23. Implications:
Trends and challenges (1/7)
Successful collaboration in a diverse
group requires more complex boundary
objects.
24

24. Implications:
Trends and challenges (2/7)
The lack of clear leadership in such a
group may lead to breakdowns in
collaboration and limited use of
boundary objects.
25

25. Implications:
Trends and challenges (3/7)
Initial creation of boundary objects as
artifacts will normally benefit from a
template or a pre-defined structure.
26

26. Implications:
Trends and challenges (4/7)
Boundary objects as discourses are
crucial in international, large, and
distributed groups, but challenging to
establish.
27

27. Implications:
Trends and challenges (5/7)
Creation of boundary objects as
processes requires direct external
support on both the intergroup and
international levels.
28

28. Implications:
Trends and challenges (6/7)
Cooperation technology tools may
play the role of boundary objects as
artifacts, discourses, and processes.
29

29. Implications:
Trends and challenges (7/7)
Allowing a certain degree of freedom
in constructing boundary objects
benefits both learning and group work.
30

30. Implications: Boundary objects
Boundary
objects
Seeding
Facilitating
creation
31
Shared
artifacts
Shared
discourses
Shared
processes

31. Seeding boundary objects as
shared artifacts
Observations
Implications and recommendations
Difficulties in starting collaboration in Creating initial shared artifacts to establish a
tasks 2 and 3 (using different tools common understanding between sub-groups
was a common reason)
or individuals
A single main course environment Establishing shared group spaces / tools /
(LMS) was not used too much
artifacts to mediate activities with one major
and several accompanying technological
platforms with appropriate means
32

32. Facilitating creation of boundary
objects as shared artifacts
Observations
Implications and recommendations
Use of different tools for working on Linking and annotating versions of boundary
the same documents and discussing objects across different media
them on other platforms
Use of familiar tools even if the new Providing instructions to make full use of its
tool was more effective
potentials and a list of alternatives
33

33. Seeding boundary objects as
shared discourses
Observations
Implications and recommendations
Materials about the foreign groups Introducing boundary objects in advance,
were useful, but not sufficient
including shared curriculum, study materials,
and goal descriptions
The joint meetings were useful, but Conducting
scheduled
the students struggled organizing especially in the beginning
them.
joint
activities,
Problems
with
understanding Establishing designated shared information
collaborators and explaining own spaces for reference materials
point of view across different
disciplines
34

34. Facilitating creation of boundary
objects as shared discourses
Observations
Implications and recommendations
Problems reaching a common Providing moderator
understanding of the tasks and roles meetings/negotiations
Students appreciated the presence of
tutors at the meetings.
assistance
during
Problems
starting
collaboration Conducting scheduled “ice-breaking” activities,
without knowing all the peers and especially in the beginning
their communication habits.
Communication
improved
introducing familiar tools
35
after Providing mechanisms for mapping workspaces
and social networks

35. Seeding boundary objects as
shared processes
Observations
Implications and recommendations
Problems understanding the task, Providing task descriptions with clear
especially when international sub- instructions on the process, including possible
groups were involved
roles
Problems in finding time when all
members can meet
Missing feeling of team spirit,
especially in international teams
Securing time slots when all participants can
be available for joint activities
Conducting regular activities in the designated
group spaces
Problems finding a suitable tool for Providing assistance with complex boundary
supporting collaboration in larger objects (e.g., groupware tools)
groups
36

36. Facilitating creation of boundary
objects as shared processes
Observations
Implications and recommendations
Use familiar tools for organizing the
collaborative process (those who
chose learning new tools did not
regret)
Providing designated tools that are familiar to
majority of the students to increase efficiency,
and exposing students to unknown tools to
allow them learn
Individuals (or sub-groups) had Motivating students in identifying roles and
different level of motivation, and this developing a set of rules/“working contract”
caused problems with participation
and commitment.
Problems identifying a leader
Providing assistance (e.g., assigning roles)
when no clear leaders available
37

37. Conclusions and future work
o Exploring how boundary objects
facilitate group work and learning in
educational context
–
–
Identifying learning opportunities provided by the
boundaries
Suggesting how to facilitate cooperative processes by
seeding appropriate boundary objects and supporting
their creation during group work
o Continuing exploring boundary objects
in educational settings
38

38. Thank you!
Mikhail Fominykh
mikhail.fominykh@ntnu.no
Ekaterina Prasolova-Førland
ekaterip@ntnu.no
Sobah Abbas Petersen
sap@idi.ntnu.no
Monica Divitini
divitini@idi.ntnu.no
http://www.idi.ntnu.no/~fominykh/
http://www.linkedin.com/in/fominykh
http://slideshare.net/mfominykh/
39