Skip to main content

Greg McVerry

Using my Commonplace Book to Write an Article

4 min read

  • Did a ton of research
  • Came up with ideas as I bookmarked sources and took notes on those bookmarks
  • I jotted quick outline
  • I switched to just bookmarks
  • I looked for Blunden searching for a Blunden article, I then searched for capital and found it. Might want to consider bookmarking by author as well.
  • I got distracted by a YouTube video
  • I shut down all my chats: Slack, Twitter, IRC, Telegram.
  • I went back to my text editor to look at the my outline
  • emailed XMCA listserv for chasing down explicit and implicit knowledge
  • I got distracted by a response from twitter customer service. I hate email

Hello all,

I am carrying on my quest to rethink cognitive apprenticeships into agentive apprenticeships for my work around innovation systems:
Agentive apprenticeships defer more in centering the agency and choice in the learner in a network of shared interest where the space and tools teach much as any person.

You may recall I originally asked for ideas around knowledge brokering as it did not sit well with me. I decided to go with Knowledge Knitting as my metaphor. It is used frequently in the OER Community and amongst under represented scholars and if I can get the pictures out of my head and into words it will make sense.
But I am trying to chase down when the distinction between explicit and implicit knowledge began. It weaves through all apprenticeship research up through and including Gee's work on Affinity Spaces.
I am more trained in the cognitive narrative that dominates reading instruction today of declarative, procedural, and conditional knowledge.

Two questions:-When did the distinction between implicit and explicit knowledge begin?-Are you aware of works that describe knowing in both implicit and explicit and in declarative, procedural, and conditional knowledge.


Thurs 9:21

Fri 6:42

Monday 11:45

  • copy and pasted all the responses from the XMCA listserv to my website. Need to go back and close the blockqoutes. Known WYSWIG like most make a muck of HTML, especailly when copy pasting
  • Copy and pasted all the tweets about knowledge knitting

Monday 12:45

  • took a lunch break and had to get kids off to camp
  • open up my outline and try to spend some time drafting.

Friday June 19 10:30am

  • lost original outline and notes in text editot
  • returned to Collins, Browns , and Duguid for quick refresh
  • took notes comparing the two.

Fridat June 12:00 pm

  • went back to technical reports. examined the prompts used to improve student writing. Really we were modeling internal dialogue? What does this mean for machine readable stuff?
  • Much of the focus on strategy use, the individual, and not the space that is a key difference.
  • Notes at time

Greg McVerry

@3_DLeadership Yet in all my work studying successful models the culture never came from the top. It always took innovation and a ground swell of agency from the bottom. In fact it is opposite top down cultures resist

Greg McVerry

Exploring the History of Reading Research in 30 minutes

2 min read

bunch of religions wanted some folks to read and wouldn't let others. Books mad expensive. Literacy always been about power and reading a tool to both take and give.

then a bunch of psychologist looked into reading brought in garbage with us today from Kantian humanism, positivism, and other crap that gets education in the way of learning

Then the computer ushered in the era of information processing and people thought the brain was like a file system and you had to move stuff from short term memory to long term memory.

Skills and strategy instruction formulated.

through the 1970's-1990's reading as skill and strategies was a big thing.  Vygotsky and Piaget start to have their mark.

Metacognition becomes a thing in 19770-1978

Palisncar and Brown come with reciprocal teaching which really ushers in strategy instruction. All the studies have a ceiling effect and a lack of transfer. Shocking, when you have students practice how to summarize a text they are really good at summarizing THAT text. Give them a book on astrophysics...not so much...summarizing as strategy use did not exist.

The reading wars were a thing with bunch of folks fighting over how to teach reading between phonics and whole language. It was (is) stupid. Toxic masculinity seeping into higher ed. Shocking.

Then around 1994-1995 multicultural education became a thing for a hot minute (this was before cultural proactive pedagogy, responsive teaching, restorative justice....people were way more open with their racism then. 

Dr. Au started doing amazing work in anthropology and reading. Psychology began to look as activity theory. Post modern literary and post structural theories took root.

Folks sometimes call these socio-cultural views of learning. I stick with being human.

So from 1994-1999 everyone had to read a book with a black kid in it. Waaay important but unrelated to what Dr. Au wanted us to take away about local pracies

We started talking learner agency, inquiry and out of school literacies? What is the difference between literacy and literacies? Dunno but folks wrote books on it, naming things pays bills.

Then the web came and changed everything and nothing.

Greg McVerry

this is the innovations system I was talking about: (using agentive apprenticeship and not knowledge brokering now) but agency affects change at the macro, meso, and micro levels

Greg McVerry

Yes this! Network choice is always about agency.

Greg McVerry

Working Boundaries: From Student Resistance to Student Agency

Trainor, on the other hand, retains a stronger commitment to critical pedagogy's core concerns and contends that student resistance stems not from instructors' unethical commitment to those concerns but from teachers' inadequate attention to how critical pedagogy positions students as readers and writers. She argues that to avoid generating student resistance, "we need to be more aware of the rhetorical frames our pedagogies provide for students as they structure identity"

he answer to student resistance is to develop strategies that create mutuality between teachers and students and so support students' agency in interpreting texts and developing arguments. The most liberatory teacher, they hold, can inadvertently "reproduce traditional teacher student relations"

I think we need to move the needle away from argument

). The measure of this transformation is how extensively students and teachers share authority in directing classroom discourse and in constructing knowledge within the course

technology complicates this as new modes and tools must be tried....

Discourse seems to be the only path to mutuality in the piece. Little attention paid to the art the students create. I wonder if just being yourself online is a sense of agency or conversely if the low self-efficacy with tech hurts agency enough that we do not see knowledge gains.

Greg McVerry


Barbara J. Walker (2003) THE CULTIVATION OF STUDENT SELF- EFFICACY IN READING AND WRITING, Reading &Writing Quarterly, 19:2, 173-187, DOI: 10.1080/10573560308217

As I try to think about how agentive plays out I am returning to research on agency, efficacy and reading and writing.

Afterall when we talk tech and web with kids we really mean

same students use cognitive and metacognitive strategies to increase their understanding. Students with low self-efficacy are much less likely to use a combination of strategies such as elaboration and relating concepts.

However, according to Schunk (2003), effective learning does not require that efficacy be extremely high— simply that it be high enough to sustain engagement in present and future tasks.

First, successful learning experiences that are somewhat challenging yet can 174 B. J. Walker be accomplished are a significant means to develop self-efficacy (Pajares, 2003).

When this happens, students’ self-efficacy increase because they believe that their effort and strategy deployment produces the success.

In agentive apprenticeship these goals can mean producing change for others while building for yourself

Teachers can make task-specific comments about student success and attribute that success to using strategies that are learnable (Schunk, 2003). Likewise, positive self-attributions after completing challenging tasks influence the self-regulating behaviors of readers and writers.

Feedback and reflection improve learning which improves efficacy which improves learning. How do feedback loops and reflection work in with agentive apprenticeship? Does doing this publicly? Openly? Privately change anything?

When faced with overly challenging tasks, low efficacious students focus on an outcome of the performance (the goal) such as grades rather than learning something (Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2003).

Grades have so little to do with learning. In fact agentive apprenticeship may thrive best where exterior and extrninsic awards are minimized.

group (their friends) and intrinsically motivated to save face (Walker, 2000). Using another source of information for developing self-efficacy, students make social comparisons while observing others completing aca- demic tasks (Pajares, 2003);

Learning as social pressure and the desire to fit in may play in agentive apprenticeship even with those with high sefl efficacy. You can see this with tool adoption. though the studies cited were done in in school writing spaces.. Author should have looked for tangential research in third spaces or at least qualified this missing area in the acceptance rejection section of the lit review...

When students choose their books, topic, or response, they expend more effort on these activities.

I taught through "Democracy by Design." My students made a choice along a pre determined path usually to the conclusion I wanted. I Am okay with that. Teacher, student. Adult, child. Network, apprentice. Similar to Amy Burvall's focus on constraint

only seeing a few studies cited repeatedly many fromt he same theoretical lens. Agency and writing isn't my field . Going to need to dig deeper. Need to look at connected learning, should proably read up on Chip Bruce and Dewey and democratic education.

Greg McVerry

Knowledge Building: Theory, Pedagogy, and Technology

Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2006). Knowledge building: Theory, pedagogy, and technology. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences (pp. 97-118). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Accordingly, it involves students not only developing knowledge-building competencies but also coming to see themselves and their work as part of the civilization-wide effort to advance knowledge frontiers.

  • Knowledge advancement as a community rather than individual achievement
  • Knowledge advancement as idea improvement rather than as progress toward true or warranted belief
  • Knowledge of in contrast to knowledge about
  • Discourse as collaborative problem solving rather than as argumentation
  • Constructive use of authoritative information
  • Understanding as an emergent

Knowledge building pedagogy is based on the premise that authentic creative knowledge work can take place in school classrooms

One component of knowledge building is the creation of “epistemic artifacts,” tools that serve in the further advancement of knowledge (Sterelny, 2005).

In knowledge building, idea improvement is an explicit principle, something that guides the efforts of students and teachers rather than something that remains implicit in inquiry and learning activities

From a pragmatic standpoint, a more useful distinction is between knowledge about and knowledge of something. Knowledge about sky-diving, for instance, would consist of all the declarative knowledge you can retrieve when prompted to state what you know about sky-diving. Such knowledge could be conveniently and adequately represented in a concept net. Knowledge of sky-diving, however, implies an ability to do or to participate in the activity of sky-diving

The strong version asserts that the state of public knowledge in a community only exists in the discourse of that community, and the progress of knowledge just is the progress of knowledge-building discourse.

New conceptual structures, like crystals and ant colonies, emerge through the interaction of simpler elements that do not singly or in combination represent the new concept (Sawyer, 2003). This became evident with the rise of connectionism in the late 1980s (Bereiter, 1991). Connectionist models of learning and development characteristically generate progress from a conceptually impoverished to a conceptually richer system, sometimes by a process analogous to learning from experience and sometimes only by internal self-organization. Connectionist models are examples of the larger class of dynamic systems models, all of which attempt to deal in some rigorous way with emergent phenomena

There is no way to create higher-level organizations of information, to comment simultaneously on a number of messages, or to make a connection between a message in one thread and a message in another. Thus the possibilities for knowledge building discourse are extremely limited. In fact, our experience is that threaded discussion militates against deepening inquiry; instead, it is much more suited to rapid question-answer and assertionresponse exchanges. Although communities based on shared interests do develop in some threaded discussion forums, this technology provides little means for a group to organize its efforts around a common goal.

“epistemic agency” (Scardamalia, 2000). Although among philosophers this term denotes responsibility for one’s beliefs (Reed, 2001), we use the term more broadly: epistemic agency refers to the amount of individual or collective control people have over the whole range of components of knowledge building—goals, strategies, resources, evaluation of results, and so on

Greg McVerry

Let the liberal education program focus on the agency of the learner, let them DO school rather than pushing to DO school to them. They have suvived that hell in , don't bring it to

Greg McVerry

@Bali_Maha not going with that. My academic games we played where never set so those who went out first were those who needed most support.

Just saying we should acknowledge that some kids find agency in academic competition like they do in athletic competition.


Prev | Home | Join | ? | Next