chapter  20
Another Candidate for Relating Knowledge Analysis and Interaction Analysis: Mitchell’s Integrative Pluralism
ByJames G. Greeno
Pages 5

In the introduction to this volume, diSessa, Levin, and Brown discuss six ways in which relations between the research programs of Knowledge Analysis and Interaction Analysis (KA and IA) could be understood. The relation that they label “micro-complementarity” seems promising to them, and I  agree. As they wrote, “IA and KA … each has a perhaps critical role in understanding particular and important issues in learning.” Examples in this volume include Azevedo and Lee’s analysis of cognition and interaction in “how model rocketeers and their communities individually and collectively know the stability of models,” diSessa, Greeno, Michaels, and O’Connor’s analysis of an episode in a clinical interview, Levin and diSessa’s account of disciplined perception, Russ, Sherin, and Lee’s account of clinical interviewing, and Umphress’ account of epistemic authority.