Associate Professor, PhD Anu Kajamaa and Professor PhD, Kristiina Kumpulainen, Learning, Culture and Interventions Expert Group (http://www.helsinki.fi/leci), Faculty of Educational Sciences, University of Helsinki, Finland
Contents of the special issue
This special issue will include an editorial, five or six research papers selected by guest editors from the abstract proposals received, and an invited commentary. The requirements for acceptance are: 1) papers advance the research field dealing with young people (under 25 years old), digital mediation, and transformative agency; 2) papers demonstrate high theoretical and methodological quality; 3) authors commit to cross review one other manuscript of the special issue; and 4) non-English-speaking authors ensure their manuscripts are proofread by a native speaker. All papers will be cross reviewed by the authors in a double-blind review process following the journal’s normal review process and criteria, which will be sent to the contributors. The reviewers will be appointed and contacted by the guest editors.
Aims and scope of the special issue
The expansion of digital technologies and media, including the Internet, has resulted in major changes in the lives of many young people. New technologies and media have an impact on how young people spend their free time, how they interact and socialize with others, as well as how they discover and develop their identities in and out of educational institutions (e.g. Chaudron, 2015; Erstad & Sefton-Green, 2013; Ito, et al., 2013; Li et al., 2017).
Instead of focusing on the threats and concerns related to young people’s uncritical, passive, or consumerist engagement with the digital world and its effect on their values, habits, and identities (see e.g. Kirschner & De Bruyckere, 2017; Livingstone & Gorzig, 2012), this special issue focuses on the transformative potential of young people’s engagement with digital technologies and media in their everyday lives. Namely, it will illuminate empirical studies framed by sociocultural theorizing and cultural-historical activity theory (CHAT) that investigate how young people engage with and use digital technologies and media as agentive actors to co-author themselves and their worlds. In doing so, this special issue aims to unpack conditions and mechanisms that position young people as active, creative, and critical investigators of and with digital technologies for personal and social change across formal and everyday settings, online and off.
This special issue holds that limited research attention has been paid to young people’s transformative agency in their use of digital technologies and media. By transformative agency, we refer to young people’s tool-mediated activity that breaks away from the given or expected frame of action. Transformative agency is hence characterized by young people’s initiative and commitment to transform the context(s) of their activity for personal, academic, working life and/or civic ends (see e.g. Ito, et al, 2013; Rajala, Hilppö, Lipponen, & Kumpulainen, 2013; Stetsenko, 2008). Transformative agency holds potential for expansive learning, including the generation of new concepts, motives, and practices (e.g. Engeström, 2006; Haapasaari & Kerosuo, 2015; Sannino, 2015).
To these ends, this special issue welcomes articles examining topics, such as:
- Young people’s creativity, imagination, and play in their use of digital technologies and media, including digital play, digital storytelling, social media participation, video production, digital making, interaction with YouTube content, and coding and robotics
- Young people’s use of digital technologies and media in their networks/communities for personal and social change
- Young people as designers and curators of their personal and communal lives via the use of digital technologies and media
- Digital artifact/tool constellations and their transformative and critical use
- Young people’s civic engagement and influence mediated by the use of digital technologies and media
- Young people’s learning and identity development in the digital age
We also invite contributions that deal with other related topics. We appreciate papers establishing a dialogue between theory and practice, as well as both micro- and macro-level analysis. We are also interested in papers taking a critical stance toward young people’s transformative agency in the digital world. The papers can focus on a variety of research contexts, such as schools and other educational organizations, after-school activities, university–school collaboration, museums, libraries, and other communities of science and culture, digital platforms, the outdoors, and other contexts across everyday life.
- Abstracts to guest editors by February 15th, 2018 (max. 500 words, excluding the list of references). Contributors should submit abstracts of their paper proposal to (firstname.lastname@example.org) as an e-mail attachment (Word doc. files only). Please indicate in the title of your e-mail: “Submission for the special Issue for MCA”
- Notification of abstract acceptance and invitation to submit full paper by February 28th, 2018
- Deadline for submission of accepted full papers: September 1, 2018 (up to 8,000 words, including references). When preparing the full paper, please view the instructions for authors
- First round of reviews: between September and October 2018. The authors will receive feedback on their papers by November 1, 2018
- Revised manuscripts should be submitted to the guest editors by January 31, 2019.
- Second round of reviews: February 2019. Reviews will be conducted by the same reviewers who did the first round of reviews. The authors will receive feedback on their papers by March 1, 2019
- Final versions of the papers must be submitted to the guest editors by April 1, 2019
- Expected date of publication of the special issue: May 2019
Chaudron, S. (2015). Young children (0–8) and digital technology. A qualitative exploratory study across seven countries. European Commission. Joint Research Centre Institute for the Protection and Security of the Citizen. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. http://doi.org/10.2788/00749
Engeström, Y. (2006). Development, movement and agency: Breaking away into mycorrhizae activities. In K. Yamazumi (Ed.), Building Activity Theory in Practice: Toward the Next Generation (pp. 1–43). Kansai: Kansai University Press.
Erstad, O., & Sefton-Green, J. (2013). Digital disconnect? The ‘digital learner’ and the school. In O. Erstad & J. Sefton-Green (Eds.), Identity, community and learning lives in the digital age (pp. 87–106). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Haapasaari, A., & Kerosuo, H. (2015). Transformative agency: The challenges of sustainability in a long chain of double stimulation. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 4, 37-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2014.07.006
Ito, M., Gutiérrez, K., Livingstone, S., Penuel, B., Rhodes, J., Salen, K., Schor, J., Sefton-Green, J., & Watkins, S. G. (2013). Connected learning: An agenda for research and design. Irvine, CA: Digital Media and Learning Research Hub.
Kirschner, P. A., & De Bruyckere, P. (2017). The myths of the digital native and the multitasker. Teaching and Teacher Education, 67, 135-142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.06.001
Li, S., Hietajärvi, L., Palonen, T., Salmela-Aro, K., & Hakkarainen, K. (2017). Adolescents’ Social networks: Exploring different patterns of socio-digital participation. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 61(3), 255-274. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2015.1120236
Livingstone, S., & Gorzig, A. (Eds.) (2012). Children, risk and safety on the internet: research and policy challenges in comparative perspective. , Bristol: Policy Press.
Rajala, A., Hilppö, J., Lipponen, L., & Kumpulainen, K. (2013). Expanding the chronotopes of schooling for the promotion of students' agency. In O. Erstad, & J. Sefton-Green (Eds.), Identity, community, and learning lives in the digital age (pp. 107–125). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sannino, A. (2015). The emergence of transformative agency and double stimulation: Activitybased studies in the Vygotskian tradition. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 4, 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2014.07.001
Stetsenko, A. (2008). From relational ontology to transformative activist stance: Expanding Vygotsky’s (CHAT) project. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 3, 465–485. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-008-9111-3
Other relevant references to the theme of this special issue
Björk-Willén, P., & Aronsson, K. (2014). Preschoolers’ “animation” of computer games. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 21(4), 318-336. https://doi.org/10.1080/10749039.2014.952314
Buchholz, B., Shively, K., Peppler, K., & Wohlwend, K. (2014). Hands on, hands off: Gendered access in crafting and electronics practices. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 21(4), 278–297. https://doi.org/10.1080/10749039.2014.939762
Chaiklin, S. (2003). The zone of proximal development in Vygotsky’s analysis of learning and instruction. In A. Kozulin, B. Gindis, V. S. Ageyev, & S. M. Miller (Eds.), Vygotsky’s educational theory in cultural context (pp. 39–64). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Cole, M. (1996). Cultural psychology: a once and future discipline. Cambridge (Mass.): Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Dewey, J. (1902). The child and the curriculum. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Downing-Wilson, D., Lecusay, R., & Cole, M. (2011). Design experimentation and mutual appropriation: Two strategies for university/community collaborative after-school interventions. Theory and Psychology 21(5), 656–680. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354311414456
Engeström, Y., Kajamaa, A., Lahtinen, P., & Sannino, A. (2015). Toward a grammar of collaboration. Mind, Culture and Activity, 22(2), 92-111. https://doi.org/10.1080/10749039.2015.1024326
Fleer, M. (2014). The demands and motives afforded through digital play in early childhood activity settings. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 3, 202–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2014.02.012
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York, NY: Seabury Press.
Gibbons, A. (2015). Debating digital childhoods: Questions concerning technologies, economies and determinisms. Open Review of Educational Research, 2(1), 118–127. https://doi.org/10.1080/23265507.2015.1015940
Griffin, P. & Cole, M. (1984). Current activity for the future: The Zo-ped. In B. Rogoff, & J. Wertsch, (Eds.), Children's learning in the “zone of proximal development” (pp. 45–64). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Gutierrez, K. D., & Rogoff, B. (2003). Cultural ways of learning: Individual traits or repertoires of practice. Educational Researcher, 32(5), 19–25. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X032005019
Haapasaari, A., Engeström, Y., & Kerosuo, H. (2016). The emergence of learners’ transformative agency in a Change Laboratory intervention. Journal of Education and Work, 29(2), 232–262. https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080.2014.900168
Halverson, E. R., & Sheridan, K. (2014). The maker movement in education. Harvard Educational Review, 84(4), 495–504. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.84.4.34j1g68140382063
Hedegaard, M. (2012). Analyzing children’s learning and development in everyday settings from a cultural-historical wholeness approach. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 19, 127–138. https://doi.org/10.1080/10749039.2012.665560
Hedegaard, M., & Fleer, M. (2013). Play, leaning and children’s development: Everyday life in families and transition to school. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
House, R. (Ed.) (2011). Too much too soon: Early learning and the erosion of childhood. Stroud: Hawthorn House.
Hull, G., & Zacher, J. (2010). What Is After-School Worth? Developing Literacy and Identity Out of School. Adolescent Literacy, 3, 20-28. Retrieved from http://vue.annenberginstitute.org/sites/default/files/issues/VUE26.pdf#page=22
Ingold, T. (2013). Making: Anthropology, Archaeology, Art and Architecture. Abingdon: Routledge.
Kumpulainen, K., & Erstad, O. (2017). (Re)searching learning in and across contexts: Conceptual, methodological and empirical considerations. International Journal of Educational Research, 84, 55-57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2016.08.004
Kumpulainen, K., & Sefton-Green, J. (2014). What is connected learning and how to research it? International Journal of Learning and Media, 4(2), 7-18. doi:10.1162/IJLM_a_00091
Kumpulainen, K., & Renshaw, P. (2007). Cultures of learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 46(3), 109–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2007.09.009
Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lemke, J. (2000). Across the scales of time: artifacts, activities, and meanings in ecosocial systems. Mind, Culture and Activity, 7(4), 273–90. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327884MCA0704_03
Lemke, J., Lecusay, R., Cole, M., & Michalchik, V. (2015). Documenting and Assessing Learning in Informal and Media-Rich Environments. London, UK: The MIT Press.
Lemos M. & Cunha Jr., F.R. (2017). Facebook in Brazilian Schools: Mobilizing to Fight Back. Mind, Culture, and Activity. Pages 1-15. Published online: 04 Oct 2017. https://doi.org/10.1080/10749039.2017.1379823
Linell, P. (1998). Approaching dialogue: Talk, interaction and contexts in dialogical perspectives. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Ludvigsen, S., Lund, A., Rasmussen, I., & Säljö, R. (Eds.). (2011). Learning across sites: new tools, infrastructures and practices. Oxon, England: Routledge.
Martinez-Alvarez, P., Kajamaa, A., & Pantin, L. (forthcoming in 2018). Creating Shared Access: Bilingual Teachers and Children Using Technology to Multimodally Negotiate Understandings in Science and Language. Multiple Voices for Ethnically Diverse Exceptional Learners.
Mikkola, A., & Kumpulainen, K. (2016). Toward Hybrid Learning: Education and Learning in the Digital Age. In E. Elstad (Ed.). Educational Technology and Polycontextual Bridging (pp. 15-37). Amsterdam: Sense Publishers.
Nardi, B. (Ed.). (1996). Context and consciousness. Activity theory and human-computer interaction. Cambridge, MA: MIT press.
Peppler, K., Halverson, E., & Kafai, Y. (Eds.) (2016). Makeology: Makerspaces as learning environments (Volume 1 and 2). New York, NY: Routledge.
Roth, W. M., Tobin, K., Elmesky, R., Carambo, C., McKnight, Y. M., & Beers, J. (2004). Re/making identities in the praxis of urban schooling: A cultural historical perspective. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 11(1), 48–69. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327884mca1101_4
Steinkuehler, C. A. (2006). Massively multiplayer online videogaming as participation in a Discourse. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 13(1), 38–52. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327884mca1301_4
Stephen, C., Stevenson, O., & Adey, C. (2013). Young children engaging with technologies at home: The influence of family context. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 11(2), 149–164. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476718X12466215
Säljö, R. (1999). Learning as the use of tools: a socio-cultural perspective on the human-technology link. In K. Littleton, & P. Light (Eds.), Learning with computers: analysing productive interaction (pp. 144–163). London, England: Routledge.
Taylor, A. (2013). Reconfiguring the natures of childhood. Abingdon: Routledge. Vadeboncoeur, J. A., & Collie, R. J. (2013). Locating Social and Emotional Learning in Schooled Environments: A Vygotskian Perspective on Learning as Unified. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 20(3), 201–225. https://doi.org/10.1080/10749039.2012.755205
Vellos, R. E., & Vadeboncoeur, J. A. (2016). Rebuilding attendance practices with youth: the role of social mediation. Educational Studies, 41(1-2), 91-108. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2014.955735
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The development of higher psychological process. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Walker, D. & Nocon, H. (2007). Boundary-crossing competence: Theoretical considerations and educational design. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 14(3), 178-195. https://doi.org/10.1080/10749030701316318
Wertsch, J. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.