This is a commentary on the Berkman Klein paper on The Youth and the Digital Economy (the full report is in the reference section of this post)

In the 21^st century context, collaboration has always taken place among the top skills in learning and thinking skills (Dede, 2010). As the complexity of the tasks rises, and the work increasingly depends on interdisciplinary and specialized knowledge, it requires collaborative skills to solve problems (Wang, 2010). Proponents for in-person classrooms and workspaces have always made the case about the need for face-to-face collaboration because this modality allows participants to overcome cognitive and organizational challenges in learning (Werker, & Ooms, W, 2020). However, the Berkman Klein paper presents a case that even in virtual space, collaboration can take place harmoniously. Using Scratch’s example of the programming learning platform, the authors outlined a framework for harmonious virtual cooperation between the digital natives.

Berkman Klein framework: Leadership, Trust and Common Ground

The Berkman Klein outlined explores the principles of effective virtual collaboration with three levers. The first lever is effective leadership, which involves unification and tasking. Since the collaboration spaces have people from various backgrounds, different skillsets and mastery levels, and diverse socio-cultural norms, the leader needs to create a shared goal and task-related skills. The second lever is trust-building, which entails both cognitive and affective trust. Digital communication in the virtual space can include casual and informal language that does not subject to rigorous syntax and spelling and a range of virtual conventions (emoji, memes, GIFs). These means cannot ordinarily take place in a traditional face-to-face setting. This lever is also closely related to the third one: establishing common ground. In their unique language, digital communication needs to develop efficiently based on a mutual understanding of the goals and tasks involved. 

Reich’s three genres of learning at scale

Using Scratch as an example, we understand how different learning and collaboration technologies have evolved with the classical and developing learning paradigms. The discussion around the effectiveness of Scratch has been that the platform allows the collaborators to have hands-on experience without physically joining hands. Another point raised in the discussion is that the platform design is so user-friendly that it attracts and holds the attention of young learners through drag-and-drop and block-building programming. These practices and designs come from a long line of evolving education theorists from Jean Piaget (father of constructivism), Seymour Papert (who popularized constructionist learning), and HGSE and MIT professors who promote and inform research following the paradigms such as Karen Brannen, Justin Reich, and Bertrand Schneider. 

Learning Paradigms	Focus	Learning at scale	Examples
Instructionism	Instructor-lead	Instructor guided learning at scale	MOOC: Coursera, EdX
Instructionism & Behaviorism	Learner-led with assisted algorithms	Adaptive Tutors and Computer-assisted Instructions (CAI)	Khan Academy, TUTOR
Constructivism & Connectivism	Peer-guided	Peer Guided learning & Networked learning community	Scratch

From theory to practice, and back to theory

Connecting to modern literature (Wenger et al., 2002) of Community of practice, similar themes centered around trust-building and effective communication. One argument arose as what is now considered private or public in the virtual collaboration space. Platforms like Scratch are so open that it is hard to determine the level of privacy and the layer of protection. While this is not a direct criticism that aims at Scratch, it raises the question: “If something is educational and non-profit, does it mean that we trust that it is good and ask no question.” Because many other platforms started with good intentions, even Facebook and Google solved a need to connect, communicate, and collaborate but have since evolved beyond the intended design. 

In addition to discussing the design of the collaborative space, we expanded on how the digital means can both widen and close the digital divides. While we established that there are many technical barriers for kids to even get the first access to collaborative platforms such as Scratch, we also explored how educators can masterfully leverage similar communication-based technology to foster collaboration. For example, a teacher can send a private message to a student in a virtual setting to encourage quiet students and naturally introduce them into a class-wide discussion. A face-to-face cannot achieve these types of individualized outcomes. 

There are ample discussions of how educators must equip students with digital and technical skills, understanding how we interact and computers. However, the examples outlined in the Berkman Klein paper focus on Ash – the Hands for Orlando project leader, who mastered social-emotional skills by establishing effective communication to incentivize community members. Berkman Klein argues that online collaboration requires a mix of technical and interpersonal skills (Lombana Bermudez A. et al.,2020). As educators plan for policies, programs, and lesson plans, do social-emotional skills precede technical skills? 

References

1. Christopher Dede. (2010). Comparing frameworks for 21st century skills. In Bellanca, J., Brandt, R. (Eds.), 21st century skills (pp. 51–76). Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.
2. Etienne Wenger, Richard McDermott, and William Snyder, Cultivating Communities of Practice (2002). Cultivating Communities of Practice: A Guide to Managing Knowledge – Seven Principles for Cultivating Communities of Practice – HBS Working Knowledge – Harvard Business School
3. Justin Reich (2020), Three genres of Learning at Scale. Failure to Disrupt: Why Technology Alone Can’t Transform Education. Harvard University Press, MA 
4. Lombana-Bermudez, Andres, Sandra Cortesi, Christian Fieseler, Urs Gasser, Alexa Hasse, Gemma Newlands, and Sarah Wu. “Youth and the Digital Economy: Exploring Youth Practices, Motivations, Skills, Pathways, and Value Creation,” Youth and Media, Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society (2020).
5. Wang, Q. (2010). Using online shared workspaces to support group collaborative learning. Computers & Education, 55(3), 1270–1276. https://doi-org.ezp-prod1.hul.harvard.edu/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.05.023
6. Werker, & Ooms, W. (2020). Substituting face-to-face contacts in academics’ collaborations: modern communication tools, proximity, and brokerage. Studies in Higher Education (Dorchester-on-Thames), 45(7), 1431–1447. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2019.1655723