Re: in the context of, not before

nate (schmolze who-is-at students.wisc.edu)
Thu, 20 May 1999 13:16:20 -0500

You are right, sorry. From reading Construction Zone which is the
reference I interpreted it similarly as lower being embedded and non stage
like. I assumed, wrongly, that the reference was to other material that I
had not read. It does in an ironic sort of way validate the point that
"knowledge" can be appropriated in the educational sphere is ways that are
very contradictory to the way it was originally intended, like Bruner's
work.

What Mike, Newman, Griffin actually said,

Construction Zone (155)

"We do not deny that having automized knowledge of multiplication facts
helps children learn the algorithm. We want to point out, however, that it
also works the other way. Confronting the algorithm organizes and
motivates the math facts. The facts and their organization are given,
perhaps for the first time, a clear function."

"Under conditions of an expert of an expert providing support for the
"lower level" components, the child may profit by a reversal of the
sequence. At least, it should not automatically be assumed that failure to
learn a complex algorithm indicates the need to do more rote work on the
basic skills. A reordering such that the higher level actions give
functional significance to the lower operations may be far more valuable".

Nate

----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Cole <mcole who-is-at weber.ucsd.edu>
To: <xmca who-is-at weber.ucsd.edu>
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 1999 11:00 AM
Subject: in the context of, not before

>
> Nate--
> You quote Renshaw as follows:
> This reversal of the common-sense assumption that higher-order thinking
> must be built up piecemeal by mastering lower order procedures, is
> reflected also in the work of Newman Griffin and Cole (1989). They worked
> with children on division and multiplication problems. The children who
> experienced most difficulty with division seemed to lack an understanding
> of the functional significance of the multiplication facts. Confronting
the
> division algorithm organised the multiplication facts, according to
Newman
> et al, giving the facts for the first time a clear functional
significance
> for some children. They suggest a re-ordering of curriculum content where
> higher level actions (concepts) are taught prior to lower level
operations
> (Newman Griffin and Cole, 1989, p.155).functional significance
> for some children. They suggest a re-ordering of curriculum content where
> higher level actions (concepts) are taught prior to lower level
operations
> (Newman Griffin and Cole, 1989, p.155).
>
> This passage somewhat misrepresents our views, despite the page citation.
> In that work and in our work on reading we have argued, and developed
> procedures, which embed "lower order" skills in a context which makes
clear
> the higher level goals which they enable. This is seen most clearly
perhaps
> in our work on re-mediation of reading instruction described in Cultural
> Psychology, but it is a pretty consistent strategy in our work. It is
> part of our long term unhappiness with all pedagogical strategies that
> work from "level 1"-->"level 2" assumptions which we see as generally
> pernicious.
> mike
>