[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Xmca-l] Re: The zone of proximal development



About what David has just written:

Seeing scaffolding as a moment in a zone of proximal learning works for me, but why is it “a rather extrreme and externalized moment"?

I like the return to freedom a lot. Can’t talk about that too much.

But I couldn’t pull up the paper he linked us up to, not a single one of the 33,000 words! What’s wrong with me?

Henry
 
> On Jul 6, 2015, at 6:42 PM, David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.c <mailto:dkellogg60@gmail.c>,om> wrote:
> 
> Ah, but is it a zone of proximal development--or just a zone of proximal
> learning? And for whom?
> 
> Henry asked--some time ago--about the difference between scaffolding and
> the zoped, and I argued that scaffolding could be seen as one moment--but a
> rather extreme and externalized moment--of a zone of proximal learning, but
> not a zone of proximal development.
> 
> The shape this problem takes in Korea is really a debate over the
> respective merits of collaboration and cooperation. The idea is that
> collaboration (which conspicuously contains the word "labor") does not
> involve the division of labor and does not involve one party making
> decisions and the other executing them, while cooperation does; ergo,
> collaboration is a kind of cell for the ideal society and cooperation is a
> cell for capitalism.
> 
> Needless to say, Vygotsky doesn't agree with this at all: almost all of his
> examples are, on the contrary, examples of highly asymmetrical divisions of
> labor (mother and child, teacher and child doing homework, experimenter and
> subject, etc.). It is only through the revolutionary graspture and radical
> restructuring and interior redecoration of the function of the decision
> maker that we get free will. So cooperation and collaboration turn out to
> be moments of the same process, but that process is, after all, a zone of
> proximal learning and not necessarily a zone of proximal development.
> 
> I guess I find it useful to distinguish between an "everyday concept" of
> the Zoped and a "scientific concept" of the Zoped. This corresponds more or
> less the distinction that Seth Chaiklin (2003) makes between the subjective
> (child by child) zoped and the objective (age cohort) zoped, except that it
> is functional and genetic in its description rather than structural.
> 
> We are presenting a longish paper on this on Saturday at a workshop in
> Kangweondo. Here's the English version!
> 
> https://www.academia.edu/13724420/Between_Lessons_The_Zone_of_Proximal_Development_in_Korean_Schools
> 
> (Warning--it's 33,000 words long, and almost all the examples are from
> Korean education!)
> 
> David Kellogg
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 8:21 AM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Annalisa,
>> Thanks for sharing! There may be a similar referendum in Puerto Rico. What
>> a world!
>> H
>> 
>>> On Jul 5, 2015, at 3:52 PM, Annalisa Aguilar <annalisa@unm.edu> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Henry,
>>> 
>>> Clever mom!
>>> 
>>> This will likely be a very memorable event for the both of them.
>>> 
>>> Actually, I found this photograph quite moving, because, well... for
>> many many reasons!
>>> 
>>> So thanks for letting me share it!
>>> 
>>> Kind regards,
>>> 
>>> Annalisa
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>>