Re: B, a, and u //also Soviet influences? & ex-spurts

Dewey Dykstra, Jr. (dykstrad who-is-at varney.idbsu.edu)
Wed, 10 Apr 1996 09:45:18 -0700

Robin wrote:

>Now, back to my confusion about Vugotsky: as I understand it, the zone of
>proximal development is a more social idea than the concept of cognitive
>readiness a la Piaget. And yet, here I am being told that learning is
>generated by the learner, and teachers may or may not be able to
>structure things in such a way as to facilitate learning. I am trying
>to reconcile these notions with the very social concept of the zone of
>proximal development. What am I not understanding here?
>
> Robin

Jay already responded to this and, while representatives of the "two main
'brands' of 'constructivism'" would not always express it in the same way,
I essentially agree with him. I do not think that the two positions are
actually as mutually exclusive as some people represent them.

(I'll take this opportunity to point out that the emphasis on
_individualist_ constructivism is generally _not_ one promoted as a
self-description by those so labeled, e.g. cognitive, radical, etc.
constructivists. It is not the case that Piaget and his co-workers ignored
the social/cultural/historical aspects. They did do multi-cultural
studies. I recall one in which they participated where they compared their
observations of Swiss students and people from the 'back country' in Iran,
for example. It is also the case that later work by the Geneva group on
the role of social interaction has only recently been published in
English.)

Anyone who actually does ignore the social-cultural-historical aspects of a
learner's experience in trying to understand learning, necessarily is not
going to have an understanding that actually 'works' and is internally
consistent.

Anyone who, in fact, eschews the individual (internal) functions and the
individual ability to act autonomously will be at a loss to explain that
"people make different meanings out of what may look to us (but obviously
not to them) as 'the same' situation."

>From another thread, but related to this one maybe...soviet influences...
One might well imagine that particular political systems would not function
well with, tolerate/allow individual autonomy. Such is generally
attributed to a number of political systems and philosophies. To what
extent might the political system in which Vygotski lived have had an
effect on Vygotski's work? Is it necessary that individual autonomy be
subjugated to the social/cultural/historical when it comes to learning or
was this a consequence of the political climate in which Vygotski worked?

Do we have to be constrained in this way just because Vygotski was (if he
was) when we neither live in nor agree with that political system as it
was? Could we not find a workable 'theory' which makes use of Vygotski's
ideas without this constraint and takes into account the essence and
implications of individual autonomy and internal processes?

I am not arguing that we ignore or forget Vygotski and his followers nor am
I arguing that we ignor or forget Piaget and others of that "brand" of
constructivism either. On the contrary we need to understand them all
better in order to make the best of their contributions in formulating our
own understandings of learning.

Finally on ex-spurts Robin asks:
>Does this mean that all implications that we draw are a matter of
>personal taste, and so somehow equally valid? Or are some implications
>somehow "more valid" than others?

The problem here is with what "valid" means. I don't believe that we can
assign "truth values" to implications we draw. The point is that _we_ draw
the implications. At best _we_ can judge which implications best fit
experience, but even then _we_ are the judges. We are without a handle on
"truth" and therefore "validity." But, we do seem to have sufficiently
common exeriences that we can come to agree on explanations which seem to
fit these experiences. So, in my view, while we cannot talk about equality
of or relative validity, we can talk of implications taken-as-agreed-upon
by groups of people and hegemonies of implications.

Dewey

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dewey I. Dykstra, Jr. Phone: (208)385-3105
Professor of Physics Dept: (208)385-3775
Department of Physics/SN318 Fax: (208)385-4330
Boise State University dykstrad who-is-at varney.idbsu.edu
1910 University Drive Boise Highlanders
Boise, ID 83725-1570 novice piper
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++