I really like Gordon's metaphor:
>The point of this zoom lens metaphor - for me - is this. It emphasizes
>that, while the perspectives afforded by different settings of the lens
>seem to be rather different and to require different modes of explanation,
>they are all equally and simultaneously valid. What is more, they are _all_
>necessary if we are to construct satisfactory answers to the questions
>we ask about learning through participation. The metaphor also raises
>interesting questions about who chooses what to focus the camera on, at
>what depth of focus, and on what time scale.
I even wonder if this is metaphor or reflection on our methodology in
general. One question emerges from this approach is what is object of the
study and what is focus of observation and analysis? At the AERA discussion
that Gordon mentioned, I proposed that the object of study can be a
sociocultural activity while focuses can be individual contributions (or
participatory trajectories), interpersonal communication, communial
structures, meditational tools, and so on. I think that a sociocultural
activity itself is indifferent to lenses (and focuses) we use but it is not
indifferent to reasons why we decide to study it.
At the end, Gordon raise important questions:
>Does anyone have one of these cameras? I could really make use of it for
>my next classroom observation.
And I'd add one more, "Why, what for, and for whom we decide to study what
we are studying?"
Eugene Matusov
UC Santa Cruz
------------------------
Eugene Matusov
UC Santa Cruz