This qualitative study explores how individuals made meaning of their life history experiences while in dialogue with others in an online learning group that was part of a graduate course on adult development. All online discussion forum postings exchanged by the group over the 3-week assignment period were downloaded and analyzed through phenomenological thematic analysis and discourse analysis. Our goal was to better understand both what happened in this online dialogue and how it took place. Four aspects of how the participants made meaning through dialogue emerged: noticing, reinterpreting, theorizing, and questioning assumptions, each with specific speech acts. These findings expand our understandings of how individuals transform meaning through narrative and dialogue. The identification of specific aspects of meaning making and their related speech acts make a contribution to the literature on online dialogue, the power of restorying, critical reflection in public meaning making, and transformative group learning.
Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.
2.
Bakhtin, M. (1986). Speech genres and other late essays. Austin: University of Texas Press.
3.
Belenky, M., Clinchy, B., Goldberger, N., & Tarule, J. (1986). Women's ways of knowing.New York: Basic Books.
4.
Berger, P., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality. New York: Anchor Books.
5.
Bruffee, K. A. (1999). Collaborative learning: Higher education, interdependence, and the authority of knowledge (2nd ed.). Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins Press.
6.
Bruner, J. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
7.
Bruner, J. (1990). Acts of meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
8.
Cohler, B. J. (1982). Personal narrative and the life course. In P. Baltes & O. G. Brim (Eds.), Life span development and behavior (Vol. 4, pp. 205-241). New York: Academic Press.
9.
Cranton, P. (1996). Types of group learning. In S. Imel (Ed.), Learning in groups: Exploring fundamental principles, new uses, and emerging opportunities (pp. 25-32). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
10.
Dominicé, P. (2000). Learning from our lives: Using educational biographies with adults.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
11.
Geertz, C. (1979). From the native's point of view: On the nature of anthropological understanding. In P. Rabinow & W. M. Sullivan (Eds.), Interpretive social science: A reader (pp. 225-241). Berkeley: University of California Press. (Reprinted from Meaning in anthropology, pp. 221-237, by K. H. Basso & H. A. Selby, Eds., 1976, Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.)
12.
Gorsky, P., & Caspi, A. (2005). Dialogue: A theoretical framework for distance education instructional systems. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(2), 137-144.
13.
Graham, C. R., & Misanchuk, M. (2004). Computer-mediated teamwork: Benefits and challenges of using teamwork in online learning environments. In T. S. Roberts (Ed.), Online collaborative learning: Theory and practice (pp. 181-202). Hershey, PA: Idea Group.
14.
Griffiths, M. (1995). (Auto)biography and epistemology. Educational Review, 47(1), 75-85.
15.
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln,Y. S. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
16.
Habermas, J. (1971). Human interests and knowledge. Boston: Beacon Press.
17.
Harré, R., & Van Langenhove, L. (1999). The dynamics of social episodes. In R. Harré & L. Van Langenhove (Eds.), Positioning theory: Moral contexts of intentional action (pp. 1-29). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
18.
Herring, S. C. (2004). Computer-mediated discourse analysis: An approach to researching online behavior. In S. A. Barab, R. Kling, & J. H. Gray (Eds.), Designing for virtual communities in the service of learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
19.
Jonassen, D. H., & Hernandez-Serrano, J. (2002). Case-based reasoning and instructional design: Using stories to support problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(2), 65-77.
20.
Kegan, R. (1993). In over our heads: The mental demands of modern life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
21.
King, K. P. (2002). Educational technology professional development as transformational learning opportunities. Computers and Education: An International Journal, 39(3), 283-297.
22.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
23.
McDrury, J., & Alterio, M. (2003). Learning through storytelling in higher education: Using reflection and experience to improve learning. Sterling, VA: Kogan Page.
24.
Mezirow, J. (1978). Education for perspective transformation: Women's re-entry programs in community colleges. New York: Teachers College Press.
25.
Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
26.
Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in progress. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
27.
Monk, G., Winslade, J., Crocket, K., & Epston, D., (Eds.). (1997). Narrative therapy in practice: The archaeology of hope. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
28.
Moon, J. (1999). Reflection in learning and professional development. London: Kogan Page.
29.
Osguthorpe, R. T., & Graham, C. R. (2003). Blended learning environments: Definitions and directions. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 4(3), 227-233.
30.
Pawan, F., Paulus, T., Yalcin, S., & Chang, C. (2003). Online learning: Patterns of engagement and interaction among inservice teachers. Language Learning and Technology, 7(3), 119-140.
31.
Polkinghorne, D. E. (1983). Methodology for the human sciences: Systems of inquiry. Albany: State University of New York Press.
32.
Randall, W. (1996). Restorying a life: Transformative learning and adult education. In J. Birren, G. Kenyon, J.-E. Ruth, J. Schroots, & T. Svensson (Eds.), Aging and biography: Explorations in adult development (pp. 224-247). New York: Springer.
33.
Rossiter, M. (1999). A narrative approach to development: Implications for adult education. Adult Education Quarterly, 50, 56-71.
34.
Schank, R. C. (1999). Dynamic memory revisited. New York: Cambridge University Press.
35.
Schwandt, T. A. (2000). Three epistemological stances for qualitative inquiry: Interpretivism, hermeneutics, and social constructionism. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 189-213). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
36.
Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. London: Cambridge University Press.
37.
Sidorkin, A. (1999). Beyond discourse: Education, the self and dialogue. Albany: State University of New York Press.
38.
Smith, R. (2005). Working with difference in online collaborative groups. Adult Education Quarterly, 55, 182-199.
39.
Stahl, G. (2002). Contributions to a theoretical framework for CSCL. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL 2002) (pp. 62-71). Boulder, CO: Computer Supported Collaborative Learning. Retrieved January 23, 2005, from http://orgwis.gmd.de/gerry/publications/conferences/2002/cscl2002/cscl2002.pdf
40.
Stahl, G. (2003a). Meaning and interpretation in collaboration. In B. Wasson, S. Ludvigsen, & U. Hoppe (Eds.), Designing for change in networked learning environments: Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning (CSCL 2003) (pp. 523-532). Bergen, Norway: Kluwer. Retrieved January 23, 2005, from http://www.cis.drexel.edu/faculty/gerry/cscl/papers/ch20.pdf
41.
Stahl, G. (2003b). Building collaborative knowing: Elements of a social theory of learning. In J. W. Strijbos, P. Kirschner, & R. Martens (Eds.), What we know about CSCL in higher education. Amsterdam: Kluwer. Retrieved January 23, 2005, from http://orgwis.gmd.de/gerry/publications/journals/oun/oun_outline.pdf
42.
Ziegler, M., Paulus, T., & Woodside, M. (2006). Creating a climate of engagement in a blended learning environment. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 17(3), 295-318.
