David-- What a fascinating re-interpretation of the example
I gave. My remarks should be interpreted to the article jim wertsch
and I wrote in hum dev on false dichtomoies between piaget and vygotsky.
The key passage I focussed on in your re-telling was this:
For constructivists, the student learns ONLY from their
engagement in the world. They do not learn from their engagement with
OTHER's ideas, as in a ZPD, except insofar as those ideas are translated
into world experiences.
Could you point me to a passage in Vygotsky where he says that a zoped
is an engagedment with others' ideas devoid of their embodiment in
joint activity?
I cannot, offhand, either to call to mind such an assertion or even imagine
the conditions under which it could be made, so I stand to learn a lot
by your rearranging my enviornment here.
What I believe I found most interesting is the critical role of other cultural
objects in he constructive behavior of the college student such that the
child was fed a partially pre-digested environment, affording coordination
of the child's existing conceptions with the alternative suggested by the
material conditions set up by student.
And, of course, that single examples have multiple interpretations in
different frameworks, is no big surprise. Seeing Piaget characterized as
a co-constructivist is the shocker for me.
mike
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Mar 01 2002 - 01:00:19 PST