These studies seemed to be well executed as a whole and were similar in many ways. First of it seemed that all of the readings saw sensemaking as something that is done with a phenomenon. This reminds me a lot of AST. Then each study categorized the progression of thought in fairly similar ways. One article used; initial ideas, building understandings, then consensus. Another article used; (1) Raise epistemic uncertainty through creating ambiguous conditions;(2) Maintain epistemic uncertainty through preventing immature disclosure and discussing alternative explanations or conflicting ideas; and (3) Reduce epistemic uncertainty through making coherent connections among current uncertainty, prior knowledge, and familiar phenomena. And the final study that i read used; Assembling a knowledge of framework, Inconsistency/reconciliation, and resolution.
The first series of sense-making was the most straight forward to me and easiest to understand but all of them seem to lend themselves to conceptual progression or conceptual ecology. Based on what we have learned so far I believe that this style of teaching would find itself directly in the middle between sociocultural/situative and cognitive learning framework. This type of learning is sociocultural because it requires discussion and it is also a cognitive style in its ability to require the recall of facts and ordering of these facts to ultimately sense-make.