Huong,
It's good you ask so I can try to figure this out better for myself.
With Mike's caution taken seriously, I'd not like to proceed directly to
conclusions without some others commenting. What i was doing was
interpreting the Tudge excerpt, with my own understanding of Vygotsky's
method. Further, I've been influenced by Bruner's points that the zoped has
roots in Marxist culture, especially involving 1) a division of labor and 2)
a "sharing" of consciousness. The first of Bruner's points seems to come
right close to the estrangement paper we are supposed to be reading. I have
not found direct support for Bruner's first point in the "primary (put
loosely because they are translated, edited) texts", although the division of
labor shows up explicitly in Engestrom's triangular model, which itself
definitely draws upon Marxist principles.
I think, consistent with collectivist orientation, it is difficult to
attribute things directly to Vygotsky, because there has been so much
interpretation -- but just as importantly, even the most devoted of Vygotsky
scholars admit his work was unfinished. So perhaps the theory is well framed
as a collective effort that includes a diversity of cultural/historical
circumstances outside of early 1900s Russia. Circumstances like 1960s thru
1980's Finland and California, for example. So I don't get too hung up if I
don't adhere rigidly to what the prime author wrote.
See here for Agre's account of some things:
http://www.tao.ca/writing/archives/rre/0254.html
Having tried not to paint the question into a corner, what comes to mind is
not that "more" of a teacher's role is required but that the teacher takes on
a qualitatively different role (than one would engage in by just following
some curriculum guidelines). That role is engaging in a joint effort with
the child to advance the child's development. It is a collective and
effortful undertaking. For this to be different, however, is it not also
necessary to include the psychological orientation of the adult -- because
learning-and-teaching with curriculum and with children is effortful and
collective even if the teacher has not groked the theory?
Aside, zopedalism is not inconsistent with constructivism in the following
narrow sense -- that constructivism accounts for the effort of the child in
conceptualizing the world. But with the zoped there is an interal and
effortful role for the adult, and as Mike aptly (as is expected) points out,
there is also integrally the role of mediation/culture in their interactions.
bb
On Tuesday 17 December 2002 06:36 pm, lehuon@scs.vuw.ac.nz wrote to all of us:
> Thank you Bill.
> So, Vygotsky's approach requires more of teacher's role than any
> instructional technique?
> Huong
>
> ---- Original Message ----
> From: wbarowy@attbi.com
> To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> Subject: Re: Hello
> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 17:30:01 -0500
>
> >I'd like to add that context here is a little more than what, when
> >and where.
> >One key phrase from Tudge is how the "theory as a whole" need be
> >taken into
> >account. In Tudge's statement, children's *interaction* is also
> >referenced
> >and this is an essential element that moves away from an
> >environmental
> >determinism. Vygotsky's approach is developmental-experimental, and
> >the
> >context includes the orientation of the adult as teacher/researcher
> >who
> >accounts for the actions of the children with flexibility into her
> >own
> >actions. The theory, as a whole, is part of the psychological
> >orientation of
> >the teacher, which makes a world of mediational difference from a
> >simple
> >application of systematic instruction e.g. application of curriculum
> >materials.
> >
> >And if the Vygotsky scholars disagree with this, it is sure someone
> >will speak
> >up.
> >
> >
> >bb
> >
> >On Tuesday 17 December 2002 03:41 pm, lehuon@scs.vuw.ac.nz wrote to
> >
> >all of us:
> >> Hello,
> >> Could you please help me with the word CONTEXT in the following
> >> quotation:
> >> "In fact, failure to see the connections between the zone and the
> >> theory as a whole means that it is difficult to differentiate
> >> Vygotsky's concept from any instructional technique that
> >> systematically leads children, with the help of an adult, though a
> >> number of steps in the process of learning some set of skills. The
> >> difference for Vygotsky is that the CONTEXT in which the
> >
> >interaction
> >
> >> occurs is of crucial importance." (Tudge 1990: 156)
> >> Thank you.
> >> Huong
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> VUW Student Portal - http://www.studentvuw.ac.nz
>
> VUW Student Portal - http://www.studentvuw.ac.nz
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jan 01 2003 - 01:00:07 PST