Gordon,
I think point two is the area which we have the greatest disagreement, and
probally relates to the social primacy question. I think in general we are
both for an active individual, but have different ideas how such an
individual would come to be.
> 2. I do believe that the individual develops through participation in
> joint activities with other members of the culture and actively
constructs
> his/her motivations, values, identity, and resources for meaning making
in
> and through that participation.
I would never say the individual in not active in this process, but as
Foucault with his emphasis on power points out it is exactly this
activeness that allows power/knowledge to be productive. For me, agency is
not a given it is something I must strive for and teach my students to
strive for because a variety of societal forces be it schools, T.V.,or home
use motivation, values, identity etc to control. So, for me
"constructivism" is problematic because it assumes an eternal will,
motivation, personality that is not a space of tension between various
social forces. To deny the role society plays in constructing my
intentions, desires, motivations, personality etc does not make me a-social
but socially determined to the largest extent possible.
Nate