[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Ответ: Fwd: [xmca] please help! - ZPD

Translated by Babelfish as follows:
Retreat on the theme: who the author of concept? Before passing to an
attempt at further development Of [l].[S].[Vygotskogo] thought and the
disclosure of the heuristic potential of this concept for the instruction
(to that, about which did not have time to write itself Leo [Semenovich]),
it would be desirable to dwell on one very fundamental question, namely -
who is the author of concept "zone of the nearest development". Possibly, to
someone this posing of the question will seem by that devised. Like it is
obvious that concept "zone of the nearest development" introduced
[L].[S].[Vygotskiy]. When you read pages 262-268 in the chapter "of the
problems of age" [7], appears sensation, that the concept is born directly
on the eyes of the reader. We attempted to show that dynamics, which makes
on five pages "of text -[rassuzhedniya]" the concept [ZBR] in the previous
analysis. However, as it is explained, far from all consider
[L].[S].[Vygotskogo] its author. In the sufficiently authoritative book Of
[n].[A].[Kureka], which is the tedious historical-scientific study,
dedicated to the crushing defeat of pedology in the 30th years in Russia, it
is in particular indicated that "[Vygotskogo] and its followers it is
sufficiently correct (have isolated we - [V].[Z].) they reproached in the
plagiarism: first of all in the adoption in the American psychologists of
the concept of the zone of the nearest development:" [15, [s].125-126]. In
contrast to all other fundamental moments of the books, in which everyone to
the united the more- less significant theses is given with the reference to
the ultimate source, here reference is absent. It does ask itself, on the
basis what Of [n].[A].[Kurek] it does assert that [L].[S].[Vygotskiy] this
concept did borrow, on top of that in the American psychologists, xwho at
that time did not have in the principle of any conceptual soil for the
appearance of a similar concept? [L].[S].[Vygotskiy] itself in two oral
reports, made it in May and December 1933. [8], [9] actually illustrate
concept [ZBR] by the experiments "American [issledovatelnitsy] of MCARTHY",
which showed: "the fact that the child knows how into 3-5 years to make only
under the management, in the collaboration is collective, into 5-7 years the
very same makes independently" [9, [s].346]. But it does not completely
follow from this that MCARTHY is the author of concept [ZBR]! This example
shows only that the fact that empirical studies confirm the picture of the
dynamics dependent on age, which escapes from concept [ZBR]. And more than
anything from this example it follows. Nevertheless, if we collect in the
Internet "[Vygotskiy] MCARTHY the zone of the nearest development", then it
is possible to find not one site, on which is asserted the same as is
written in [N].[A].[Kureka], namely that the concept [ZBR] is borrowed By
[l].[S].[Vygotskim] in American researchers. True, on some sites MCARTHY is
mentioned as researcher, but not [issledovatelnitsa], but this of component.
The main thing, that the opinion about the American authorship of concept
[ZBR] is sufficiently extended in the professional psychological
consciousness. However, from where did go this myth about the fact that
[L].[S].[Vygotskiy] did not develop and did introduce the concept [ZBR],
which logically does escape from entire motion of its
theoretical-methodological operation by construction of the mechanisms of
the development of specifically human psyche, but did borrow it in "American
psychologists"? In order to answer this question the author of this text it
was necessary to conduct the present investigation in search of the first
reference about the adoption. It turned out that man, who, apparently, first
threw reproach [L].[S].[Vygotskomu] in the adoption of concept [ZBR], was:
Eva [Izrailevna] [Rudneva], whom in its it is sad to famous - and now
already there is no doubt - to custom-made pamphlet the by the name
"theoretical distortions Of [vygotskogo]", published in 1937 wrote literally
following: "The especially sharply harmful views Of [vygotskogo] the
instruction and the development affected in the so-called theory about the
zone of the nearest development: "The theory" of the zone of the nearest
development, which [Vygotskiy] and its students issue for "the discovery",
is borrowed by it in American [issledovatelnitsy] of MCARTHY" [17, .[s].
16,17]. "From the point of view of this false theory Of [vygotskogo] school
and teacher is completely helpless to change the development of child"
[there, s. 17]. This criticism Of [l].[S].[Vygotskogo] "for the adoption of
concept [ZBR]" occurs in one row with the reproaches in the fact that it
refers to the work "of the fascist" Of [beuzemanna]", uses "bourgeois
procedures" Piaget, "he slanders the children of workers", i.e., "it blindly
" follows bourgeois psychology and so forth apparently, it is possible to
establish the paradox: in the consciousness of specialists, who were being
interested in the history of domestic psychology, in particular, by period
the 30th yr., as starting point for the charge Of [l].[S].[Vygotskogo] in
the plagiarism served clearly the custom-made work, in which the reinforced
in no way thesis "about the adoption" carried out the function of the
substantiation "of harmfulness" and "[kontrrevolyutsionnosti]" of
cultural-historical theory: It is interesting that on the American
authorship of concept [ZBR] for some reason insist precisely some domestic,
and by no means American scientists. This all the more it is strange since
according to the estimations of most American researchers the concept [ZBR]
and its relation to the instruction and the cognitive development are the
most known contribution Of [l].[S].[Vygotskogo] to psychology [19, [s].347].
Specifically, in the aspect of the fact that the authorship Of
[l].[S].[Vygotskogo] in the relation concept [ZBR] in the USSR, in Russia
was and then set under the doubt, [R].[Van] der [Veer] and [Ya].[Valsiner]
they subjected to the analysis of work [D].[Mak]-[Karti]. They note that in
the USA at that time was conducted the large number of shear studies, in
which with the aid of the tests were fixed the differences in the
development dependent on age. In the work To [d].[Mak]-[Karti], in
particular, was shown what do the children have, who bring up on Wednesday
adult, speech is developed better than in the children, who associate
predominantly with other children

Peter Smagorinsky
Professor of English Education 
Department of Language and Literacy Education
The University of Georgia
125 Aderhold Hall
Athens, GA 30602

-----Original Message-----
From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On
Behalf Of mike cole
Sent: Monday, December 14, 2009 1:39 AM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture,Activity
Subject: Fwd: Ответ: Fwd: [xmca] please help! - ZPD

Here is info on the "birth of the idea of zone of proximal
development."March 1933 it seems.


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Зарецкий Виктор <zar-victor@yandex.ru>
Date: 2009/12/7
Subject: Fwd: Ответ: Fwd: [xmca] please help! - ZPD
To: mcole@weber.ucsd.edu

Дорогой Майкл,

Борис Мещеряков переслал мне запрос из Белфаста по поводу понятия "зона
ближайшего развития" (ЗБР). Отвечаю Вам по его просьбе. Он также сказал, что
Вам можно писать по-русски

 В свое время я провел расследование и пришел к выводу, что идея о том, что
собой представляет ЗБР пришла Выготскому в ходе его выступления с
заключительным словом на конференции 23 марта 1933 года. В статье в "ВП"
(2008, No.6) я вставил кусок про анализ текстов Выготского, в которых
упоминается ЗБР как метафора и как понятие. В статье в "КИП" (2007,
No.3) этого еще не было. Уже после статьи я прочитал книгу Николая Курека,
где он пишет, что Выготский заимствовал понятие у американцев, а потом еще
обнаружил это на нескольких  сайтах. Тогда я провел расследование. Текст
занимает всего-то три страницы,  это кусок из статьи, опубликованной в "ВП".
Пока ничего нового добавить к этому не могу. ДО записных книжек Выготского я
так и не добрался. В работе Завершневой указывается, что в записных книжках
Выгосткого есть упоминания о ЗБР раньше (в 1932 г.), но она не различает,
где он употребяет ЗБР как понятие, а где как образ, метафору. А это
различение важное, для понимания того, как складывалась система
представлений Выготского.

Буду рад, если чем-то помог Вам и коллеге из Бефаста.

С уважением,
Виктор Зарецкий

03.12.09, 13:39, "Boris Meshcheryakov" :


Best regards, Boris Meshcheryakov

--- *Пт, 4.12.09, mike cole пишет:

От: mike cole
Тема: Fwd: [xmca] please help!
Кому: "Boris Meshcheryakov"
Дата: Пятница, 4 декабрь 2009, 0:21

Privet--- isho vopros.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Colette Murphy
Date: Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 12:49 PM
Subject: [xmca] please help!
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"

Dear All
Please can you help me clear up a small Vygotsky-ZPD problem I have?
I have seen several references to Vygotsky's 'first mention' of the concept
of the ZPD being 15 months before his death (eg Meira & Lerman 2001) and
which refer to van der Veer & Valsiner (1991) [Understanding Vygotsky] as
their source. I can only find in the latter text a reference to "the most
detailed description of the zone of proximal development..."
Is there another source of reference to a "first mention" of the ZPD by
I am doing some work on revisiting the ZPD in the context of science
Thansk a lot

Dr Colette Murphy
Senior Lecturer
School of Education
Queen's University
Belfast BT7 1NN

tel: 02890975953
xmca mailing list


xmca mailing list