[Xmca-l] Re: Nate's new webpage on Vygotsky

[mike cole]

There are several commentaries on Esther's note that take us into the
territory of mediation, direct perception of moral feelings, and other very
relevant places. But its not clear that they help a lot with Esther's
questions.

To repeat myself, and David Kellog, the link below leads to a not very long
article that discusses the notion of a zone of proximal development with
respect to both the scaffolding metaphor, "next step" approaches to the
organization of instruction, and related ideas.

Does this piece in any way address your question(s), Esther?

If people want to get  into the other related issues by all means go for
it. But could we give the topics subject headers and try to get clear about
the issues involved before moving on? I know its difficult (I find it to be
for sure) but otherwise we end up in a kind of chaining that often leaves
me more confused than when we started!)

mike

PS-- Esther -- In a prior message you asked for my email, I believe, and i
wrote to what I thought to be yours at hermes. But no answer. So, for
current reference mcole@ucsd.edu will reach me just fine.

On Sat, Sep 13, 2014 at 2:12 AM, Esther Goody <eg100@hermes.cam.ac.uk>
wrote:

> Hmmmm,
> Re scaffolding = zone of proximal development:
> Is it?/Are they?
>
> I thought zone of proximal development was in one's head ..............
> While scaffolding, a la Brunner, by definition involves at least two
> people.
>
> [Of course text-actor could be seen as scaffolding. But this leads away
> from activity. I hope Vygotsky would not have got mired in text-actor stuff
> ]
>
> I am currently obsessed by the way dialogue - real exchanges between real
> people - seems to account for aspects of cognition.
> So it is important to keep role of actors central.
>
>         Comments?
>                 Esther Goody
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:
> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Stone, Lynda
> Sent: 12 September 2014 23:42
> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Nate's new webpage on Vygotsky
>
> Hi All!
>
> I just wanted to share that I use Peg and Mike's paper in all of my
> cognitive
> development classes for both undergraduate and graduate students.  It has
> been
> extremely helpful---my students, I'm thrilled to say, develop more complex
> understandings of what
> the zoped involves.  And when I combine this article with Activity
> Theory---
> the leading activity not only makes sense to them but also allows them to
> see how the intersubjective processes through which knowledge is
> constructed
>  are influenced by multiple aspects of a context--including motives.  They
> even change their
> views about "context" and come to understand it as a dynamic phenomenon---
> okay, I share this to say that this article is particularly helpful
> because by reading it my students
> see how culture and cognition  (another paper of Mike's) are constructed in
> the zoped.  These understandings are so different from the scaffolding
> metaphor and most all of my students
> have been taught that scaffolding is equivalent to the zoped.
>
> Hope this sharing is useful---
>
> -lynda
>
>
>
>
> On Sep 10, 2014, at 2:27 PM, mike cole wrote:
>
> The paper Peg and I wrote which takes up scaffolding along with other
> metaphors can be found at   http://lchc.ucsd.edu/Mike    current activity
> for the future is the title.
>
> mike
>
> On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 11:02 AM, Henry G. Shonerd III <hshonerd@gmail.com
> <mailto:hshonerd@gmail.com>>
> wrote:
>
> I appreciate ALL of the attachments! I worry that I am not Vygotskian
> enough, and would have thought Marzano was out of the XMCA mainstream. I am
> reminded of the XMCA conversation on direct instruction a few weeks back
> wherein Lisa Delpit's Other Peoples Children (1995) is cited as supporting
> DISTAR, prototypical direct instruction. In the same book, is a chapter on
> the "Silenced Dialog". I had a fantasy that Delpit could jump right in to
> the XMCA chat. I am embarrassed to say that I tried to get in touch with
> her (she was SO nice to me when we met some years ago), but she never
> responded, maybe for no other reason than that she is super busy doing
> other things. Maybe she got the message, but didn't want to join one more
> listserve. But I am wondering what she might have transpired if she joined
> in. I am thinking distributed cognition (Hutchins) and cognitive pluralism
> (a term I know from Vera's book, Creative Collaboration). The attachments
> that Phillip sent seem to find direct instruction complementary with more
> dialogic approaches to instruction, as per the turn-over principle of
> Bruner.
> Henry
>
> On Sep 10, 2014, at 9:58 AM, "White, Phillip" <Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu
> <mailto:Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu>>
> wrote:
>
> like Henry, i find the metaphor 'scaffolding' a useful term, and at the
> same time i'm also strengthening that metaphor with Brian Cambourne's
> "conditions for learning" that lead to student engagement, as well as how
> it relates to student engagement (Marzano), Fisher's "gradual release of
> responsibility" and Lave & Wenger's "community of practice"  -  in
> combination these works (along with critical race theory and queer theory,
> identity theory, Foucault's understanding of power - an impoverished
> listing here) provide a far richer, more complex understanding of student
> learning, than "motive" in CHAT.
>
> for me, theory is a mutable impression - much like a calligraphic haiku
> - in which theoretical understanding changes over time, context,
> relationships and experiences (again, an incomplete list).
>
> i hope that there aren't too many attachments here.
>
>
> phillip
> 
> 
>
> Phillip White, PhD
> Urban Community Teacher Education Program
> Site Coordinator
> Montview Elementary, Aurora, CO
> phillip.white@ucdenver.edu<mailto:phillip.white@ucdenver.edu>
> or
> pawhite@aps.k12.co.us
> <GradualReleaseResponsibilityJan08.pdf><lave(1996)_teaching.pdf><MarzanoHighlyEngagedClassroom.pdf><Cambourne
> Conditions.doc>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Development and Evolution are both ... "processes of construction and re-
> construction in which heterogeneous resources are contingently but more or
> less reliably reassembled for each life cycle." [Oyama, Griffiths, and
> Gray, 2001]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Lynda Stone, Ph.D.
> Professor
> Dept. Child Development
> CSU Sacramento
> CSUS/UC-Links Program Director
> lstone@csus.edu<mailto:lstone@csus.edu>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4015/8201 - Release Date: 09/12/14
>
>
>


-- 

Development and Evolution are both ... "processes of construction and re-
construction in which heterogeneous resources are contingently but more or
less reliably reassembled for each life cycle." [Oyama, Griffiths, and
Gray, 2001]