"... I think that yes, it steers away from the zpd's original conception,
but then I would expect it to in today's
climate. Too far? That's hard to say, though I think it's well within the
bounds of what our current thinking allows as a Vygotskian interpretation."
Hi Peter and all,
First, thaks for posting your unpublished text on zpd. As I was reading it,
I made a connection with your article "Thinking and speech and protocol
analysis" in MCA, v.5, n.3, 1998, p. 157-175, p. 163 - in which you explain
that CHAT is an effort of understanding the ways through which human
cognition develops in terms, simutaneously, of cultural history (stydy of
activity as an explanatory principle) and of the very specific situation in
which subjects are interacting and taking social roles (study of activity as
object of investigation).
Also, came to my mind Vygotsky's words trying to make clear the sense of
"catarsis" in his theory of aesthetic reaction - when he explain he was not
interested on what - originally - Aristotle would want to refer with this
word, but interested in the sense he, Vygotsky, was giving to it in the
context of his theory (Psychology of Art,1978, p.263 - Barral edition).
Personally, I like very much the conception of ZPD as a "tool-and-result"
dialectical method - developed by Holzman&Newman (brazilian edition of LV
Revolutionary Scientist, 2002, p.82) "ZPD is nothing more than (...) the
place of revolutionary activity"
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Feb 01 2004 - 01:00:10 PST