Giuseppe Ritella and Fedela Feldia Loperfido
pp. 82 – 96, download
(https://doi.org/10.55612/s-5002-057-005)
Abstract
In this study, we examine a pedagogical activity centered around the collaborative construction of a digital community map, involving students from 4th to 7th grade. Our primary focus is to explore how engaging students in meaningful activities related to their local environment can facilitate the development of civic and social competences. Furthermore, we propose a methodology for analyzing the digital artifacts created by students, with the goal of examining the connection between the discursive actions carried out through the artifacts and different types of social and civic competences. The analysis enables us to discuss four distinct categories of artifacts: Task-oriented, Reflexive/descriptive, Critical/problematizing, and Transformative/agentic. Each category encompasses artifacts that embody a specific set of discursive actions and corresponds to different competences. We claim that identifying the discursive actions that the students perform by means of the artifacts can help teachers to assess the students’ competences during this type of pedagogical activities.
Keywords: community mapping, civic competences, trialogical learning
References
1. Campbell, D. E.: What social scientists have learned about civic education: A review of the literature, Peabody Journal of Education, 94(1), pp. 32-47 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956x.2019.1553601
2. Engeström, Y., Sannino, A., Bal, A., Lotz-Sisitka, H., Pesanayi, T., Chikunda, C., Lasama, M. F., Picinatto, A. C., Querol, M. P., Lee, Y. J.: Agentive learning for sustainability and equity: Communities, cooperatives and social movements as emerging foci of the learning sciences, Singapore: International Society of the Learning Sciences, (2016).
3. Morris, R.: Place-based learning for elementary civic action, in: Digging Deeper: Activities for enriching and expanding social studies instruction K-12, pp. 73-86, Information Age Publishing, Inc Charlotte, NC (2017).
4. Sobel, D.: Place-based education: Connecting classroom and community. Nature and listening, 4(1), pp. 1-7 (2004).
5. Van Eijck, M., & Roth, W. M.: Towards a chronotopic theory of “place” in place-based education, Cultural Studies of Science Education, 5, pp. 869-898 (2010) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-010-9278-2
6. Hall, T., Coffey, A., & Williamson, H.: Self, space and place: Youth identities and citizenship, British journal of sociology of education, 20(4), pp. 501-513 (1999) https://doi.org/10.1080/01425699995236
7. Osler, A., & Starkey, H.: Changing Citizenship: Democracy and Inclusion in Education, McGraw-Hill Education (2005)
8. Jagger, S.: “It’s More Like What You Think of Land”: Bringing Together Community and Education Through Mapping, LEARNing Landscapes, 10(1), pp. 105–124 (2016) https://doi.org/10.36510/learnland.v10i1.723
9. Gruenewald, D. A.: The Best of Both Worlds: A Critical Pedagogy of Place, Educational Researcher, 32(4), pp. 3–12 (2003) https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189×032004003
10. Schlemper, M. B., & Stewart, V. C.: Cultivating Student Citizens: Using Critical Pedagogy of Place Curriculum to Enhance Spatial Thinking, Civic Engagement, and Inquiry Through Student-Generated Topics, in Spatial Citizenship Education, pp. 88-116, Routledge (2018) https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315165356-7
11. Scheurman, G., & Newmann, F. M.: Authentic intellectual work in social studies: Putting performance before pedagogy, Social Education, 62, pp. 23-26 (1998)
12. Bujang, M.: Community-based Mapping, in Mapping Communities: Ethics, Value, Practice, edited by J. Fox, K. Suryanata and P. Hershock, pp. 87–96, Honolulu, HI: East-West Center (2005)
13. Everett, Y., & Towle, P.: Development of Rural Community Capacity Through Spatial Information Technology, Mapping Communities: Ethics, Values, Practice, pp. 73-86 (2005).
14. Literat, I.: Participatory mapping with urban youth: The visual elicitation of socio-spatial research data, Learning, Media and Technology, 38(2), pp. 198-216 (2013) https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2013.782037
15. Saipothong, P., Kojornrungrot, W., & Thomas, D.: Comparative study of participatory mapping processes in northern Thailand, in Mapping Communities: Ethics, Value, Practice, edited by J. Fox, K. Suryanata and P. Hershock, pp. 11–28, Honolulu, HI: East-West Center (2005)
16. Cronkleton, P., Albornoz, M. A., Barnes, G., Evans, K., & de Jong, W.: Social geomatics: participatory forest mapping to mediate resource conflict in the Bolivian Amazon, Human Ecology, 38, pp. 65-76 (2010) https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-009-9296-4
17. Liebermann, S., & Coulson, J.: Participatory mapping for crime prevention in South Africa-local solutions to local problems, Environment and Urbanization, 16(2), pp. 125-134 (2004) https://doi.org/10.1630/0956247042309937
18. Adam Matei, S., & Ball-Rokeach, S.: Watts, the 1965 Los Angeles riots, and the communicative construction of the fear epicenter of Los Angeles, Communication Monographs, 72(3), pp. 301-323 (2005) https://doi.org/10.1080/03637750500206557
19. Kruse, N., Behets, F. M.-T. F., Vaovola, G., Burkhardt, G., Barivelo, T., Amida, X., & Dallabetta, G.: Participatory Mapping of Sex Trade and Enumeration of Sex Workers Using Capture–Recapture Methodology in Diego-Suarez, Madagascar, Sexually Transmitted Diseases, 30(8), pp. 664–670 (2003) https://doi.org/10.1097/01.olq.0000079523.04451.82.
20. Kenreich, T. W. (2018). Rediscovering the local: collaborative, community maps for civic awareness, in Spatial citizenship education, pp. 72-87, Routledge https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315165356-6
21. Alibrandi, M., Beal, C., Thompson, A., & Wilson, A.: Reconstructing a school’s past using oral histories and GIS mapping, Social Education, 64(3), 134-140 (2000)
22. Schmidt, S. J., & Kenreich, T. W.: In a space but not of it: Uncovering racial narratives through geography, Doing race in social studies: Critical perspectives, pp. 229-252 (2015).
23. Bartos, A. E.: Children sensing place, Emotion, Space and Society, 9, pp. 89-98 (2013) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emospa.2013.02.008
24. Den Besten, O.: Local belonging and ‘geographies of emotions’: Immigrant children’s experience of their neighbourhoods in Paris and Berlin, Childhood, 17(2), pp. 181-195 (2010) https://doi.org/10.1177/0907568210365649
25. Gordon, E., Elwood, S., & Mitchell, K.: Critical spatial learning: Participatory mapping, spatial histories, and youth civic engagement, Children’s geographies, 14(5), pp. 558-572 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1080/14733285.2015.1136736
26. Elwood, S., & Mitchell, K.: Mapping children’s politics: Spatial stories, dialogic relations and political formation, Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography, 94(1), pp. 1-15 (2012) https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0467.2012.00392.x
27.Fairclough, N.: Critical discourse analysis and the marketization of public discourse: The universities, Discourse & society, 4(2), pp. 133-168 (1993) https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926593004002002
28.Paavola, S., & Hakkarainen, K.: The knowledge creation metaphor – An emergent epistemological approach to learning, Science & education, 14, pp. 535-557 (2005) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-004-5157-0
29.Sansone, N., Cesareni, D., & Ligorio, M.: The trialogical learning approach to innovate teaching, Italian Journal of Educational Technology, 24(2), pp. 82-82 (2016)
30.Sansone, N., & Grion, V.: The “Trialogical Learning & Assessment Approach”: Design principles for higher education. Qwerty-Open and Interdisciplinary Journal of Technology, Culture and Education, 17(2), 10-28 (2022) https://doi.org/10.30557/qw000055
31. Ligorio, M. B., Loperfido, F. F., Sansone, N., & Spadaro, P. F.: Blending Educational Models to Design Blended Activities, in Techniques for Fostering Collaboration in Online Learning Communities: Theoretical and Practical Perspectives, pp. 64-81, IGI Global (2011) https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-61692-898-8.ch005
32.Ritella, G., & Sansone, N.: COVID-19: Turning a huge challenge into an opportunity, Qwerty-Open and Interdisciplinary Journal of Technology, Culture and Education, 15(1), pp. 5-11 (2020) https://doi.org/10.30557/qw000024
33. Silletti, F., Ritella, G., Iacobellis, B., Semeraro, C., Episcopo, E., Cassibba, R., & Coppola, G.: Distance learning in Higher Education during the first pandemic lockdown: The point of view of students with special educational needs, Qwerty – Open and Interdisciplinary Journal of Technology, Culture and Education, 16(2), pp. 30-46 (2021) https://doi.org/10.30557/qw000042
34. Sansone, N., Ligorio, M. B., & Dillenbourg, P.: Progettare il Role Taking a sostegno del Collaborative Knowledge Building, Qwerty-Open and Interdisciplinary Journal of Technology, Culture and Education, 6(2), pp. 288-304, (2011)
35. Lipponen, L.: Towards knowledge building: From facts to explanations in primary students’ computer mediated discourse, Learning Environments Research, 3, pp. 179-199 (2000)
36. Ritella, G., & Loperfido, F. F.: Students’ self-organization of the learning environment during a blended knowledge creation course, Education Sciences, 11(10), pp. 580 (2021) https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11100580
37.Ritella, G., & Sansone, N.: Transforming the space-time of learning through interactive whiteboards: the case of a knowledge creation collaborative task, Qwerty-Open and Interdisciplinary Journal of Technology, Culture and Education, 15(1), pp. 12-30 (2020) https://doi.org/10.30557/qw000022
38. Loperfido, F. F., Dipace, A., & Alessia, S.: To play or not to play? A case study of teachers’ confidence and perception with regard to digital games at school, Italian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(2), pp. 121-138 (2019)
39. Salgado, J., & Clegg, J. W.: Dialogism and the psyche: Bakhtin and contemporary psychology, Culture & Psychology, 17(4), 421-440 (2011) https://doi.org/10.1177/1354067×11418545
40. Aktinson, P., & Hammersley, M.: Ethnography and participant observation, Strategies of Qualitative Inquiry, Thousand Oaks: Sage, pp. 248-261 (1998)
41. Engle, R. A., Conant, F. R., & Greeno, J. G.: Progressive refinement of hypotheses in video-supported research, in Video research in the learning sciences, pp. 239-254 (2007)
42. Biggs, J. B., & Collis, K. F.: Evaluating the quality of learning: The SOLO taxonomy (Structure of the Observed Learning Outcome), Academic Press (2014)
43. Ng, E., & Bereiter, C.: Three levels of goal orientation in learning, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 1(3-4), 243-271 (1991) https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.1991.9671972
44. Schubauer-Leoni, M. L., & Grossen, M.: Negotiating the meaning of questions in didactic and experimental contracts. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 8(4), pp. 451-471 (1993) https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03172700
45. Clark, A.: Multimodal map making with young children: Exploring ethnographic and participatory methods, Qualitative Research, 11(3), pp. 311-330 (2011) https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794111400532