I will do my best to explain my thinking without muddying the already murky waters any further. In the chapter of "Thought and Language" devoted to the development of scientific concepts Vygotsky uses the example of a student having an understanding of the word brother because of the culture that student lives in. But if that student were tested about their knowledge of that word the student would probably have a difficult time providing a sound academic explanation. ON the other hand if the student were tested on a scientific idea taught in school(sorry I can't remember the exact example Vygotsky uses, my copy of the book is on my desk at work) the student would fair much better because the student would be able to provide the explanation that had been taught during course work. For the purpose of this discussion when I use the word academic I am referring to the syllogistic intellectual skills that follow the following format: if given 'so and so' then we will get 'this and that'. As has been discovered in M. Cole's vast cross-cultural studies not all people follow this line of reasoning. School can help people to formulate this sort of thinking but some people still do not grasp the conceptual aspect of such nebulous ideas even if they have had formal schooling.
How am I doing?
Phil Chappell <philchappell who-is-at mac.com>
Sent by: firstname.lastname@example.org
07/06/2005 09:56 PM ZE7
Please respond to xmca
Subject: Re: [xmca] LCA: AA Leontiev and Landolf/Thorne question
I was responding to the problem of communicative activity here, as you mention... could you elaborate on the construct "academic" that you use for "academically challenged" students? Interesting but cloudy issue.
On 06/07/2005, at 9:08 PM, ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org wrote:
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Aug 01 2005 - 01:00:58 PDT