Web-based Learning Solutions for Communities of Practice

From ‘Collecting’ to ‘Deciding’
received by CoPs but that it also augments the
CoP’s ability to tackle data intensive and complex
problems. Future work will focus on evaluating the
synchronous collaboration features in situations of
real CoPs. Moreover, future efforts will also concentrate
on investigating additional mechanisms
that facilitate the stepwise evolution of argumentation
collaboration. In this regard the focus will be
on awareness mechanisms and ways to support
versioning of the collaboration space.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Research carried out in the context of this chapter
has been partially funded by the EU PALETTE
(Pedagogically Sustained Adaptive Learning
through the Exploitation of Tacit and Explicit
Knowledge) Integrated Project (IST FP6-2004,
Contract Number 028038).
REFERENCES
Anderson, R. (2007). What is Web 2.0? Ideas,
technologies and implications for education (Tech.
Rep.). JISC Technology and Standards Watch.
Andriessen, J., Baker, M., & Suthers, D. (2003).
Argumentation, computer support, and the
educational context of confronting cognitions.
In J. Andriessen, M. Baker, & D. Suthers (Eds.),
Arguing to learn: Confronting cognitions in
computer-supported collaborative learning
environments (pp. 1-25). Amsterdam, The Netherlands:
Kluwer.
Backingham Shum, S., MacLean, A., Forder,
J., & Hammond, N. (1993). Summarising the
evolution of design concepts within a design rationale
framework. In Adjunct Proceedings of the
InterCHI’93: ACM/IFIP Conference on Human
Factors in Computing Systems, Amsterdam, The
Netherlands (pp. 43-44).
Berners-Lee, T. (1999). Weaving the Web. London:
Orion Business Books.
Buckingham Shum, S. (1996). Design argumentation
as design rationale. In The encyclopedia of
computer science and technology (pp. 95-128).
New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc.
Buckingham Shum, S. (2008). Cohere: Towards
Web 2.0 argumentation. In . Proceedings of
COMMA, 2008, 97–108.
Conklin, J. (2005). Dialogue mapping: Building
shared understanding of wicked problems. In
Wicked problems and social complexity. New
York: John Wiley & Sons.
Conklin, J., & Begeman, M. (1989). gIBIS: A tool
for all reasons. Journal of the American Society
for Information Science American Society for Information
Science, 40(3), 200–213. doi:10.1002/
(SICI)1097-4571(198905)40:33.0.CO;2-U
Conklin, J., Selvin, A., Shum, S. B., & Sierhuis, M.
(2001). Facilitated hypertext for collective sensemaking:
15 years on from gIBIS. In Proceedings
of the Twelfth ACM Conference on Hypertext and
Hypermedia, Aarhus, Denmark (pp. 123-124).
Cox, D., & Greenberg, S. (2000). Supporting
collaborative interpretation in distributed Groupware.
In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on
Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW
‘00) (pp. 289-298).
de Moor, A., & Aakhus, M. (2006). Argumentation
support: From technologies to tools.
Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 93–98.
doi:10.1145/1118178.1118182
Debatepedia. (n.d.).
Edmonds, E., Moran, T., & Do, E. (1998). Interactive
systems for supporting the emergence
of concepts and ideas. SIGCHI Bulletin, 30(1),
62–76. doi:10.1145/280571.280581
141