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

[Xmca-l] Re: The zone of proximal development

I've been reading, with some interest, Martin Packer's 2011 paper
"Schooling: Domestication or Ontological Construction" which speaks to this
issue of an asymmetrical relationship and is somewhat critical of the
long-standing CHAT assumptions with regard to this asymmetry. His paper can
be found under his papers on his academia.edu page:

I should add that I think that Nicaraguan Sign language may hold particular
potential for seeing just how creative (poietic) children can be on their
own - a case in which the end was not present in the beginning, but the
whole was present before the parts ("whole" in the very Durkheimian sense
of the whole community). That's just me musing.

Also, David, I just tried to download the piece you linked to and it says
it is missing. Any suggestions?


On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 6:42 PM, David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com> wrote:

> Ah, but is it a zone of proximal development--or just a zone of proximal
> learning? And for whom?
> Henry asked--some time ago--about the difference between scaffolding and
> the zoped, and I argued that scaffolding could be seen as one moment--but a
> rather extreme and externalized moment--of a zone of proximal learning, but
> not a zone of proximal development.
> The shape this problem takes in Korea is really a debate over the
> respective merits of collaboration and cooperation. The idea is that
> collaboration (which conspicuously contains the word "labor") does not
> involve the division of labor and does not involve one party making
> decisions and the other executing them, while cooperation does; ergo,
> collaboration is a kind of cell for the ideal society and cooperation is a
> cell for capitalism.
> Needless to say, Vygotsky doesn't agree with this at all: almost all of his
> examples are, on the contrary, examples of highly asymmetrical divisions of
> labor (mother and child, teacher and child doing homework, experimenter and
> subject, etc.). It is only through the revolutionary graspture and radical
> restructuring and interior redecoration of the function of the decision
> maker that we get free will. So cooperation and collaboration turn out to
> be moments of the same process, but that process is, after all, a zone of
> proximal learning and not necessarily a zone of proximal development.
> I guess I find it useful to distinguish between an "everyday concept" of
> the Zoped and a "scientific concept" of the Zoped. This corresponds more or
> less the distinction that Seth Chaiklin (2003) makes between the subjective
> (child by child) zoped and the objective (age cohort) zoped, except that it
> is functional and genetic in its description rather than structural.
> We are presenting a longish paper on this on Saturday at a workshop in
> Kangweondo. Here's the English version!
> https://www.academia.edu/13724420/Between_Lessons_The_Zone_of_Proximal_Development_in_Korean_Schools
> (Warning--it's 33,000 words long, and almost all the examples are from
> Korean education!)
> David Kellogg
> On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 8:21 AM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Annalisa,
> > Thanks for sharing! There may be a similar referendum in Puerto Rico.
> What
> > a world!
> > H
> >
> > > On Jul 5, 2015, at 3:52 PM, Annalisa Aguilar <annalisa@unm.edu> wrote:
> > >
> > > Henry,
> > >
> > > Clever mom!
> > >
> > > This will likely be a very memorable event for the both of them.
> > >
> > > Actually, I found this photograph quite moving, because, well... for
> > many many reasons!
> > >
> > > So thanks for letting me share it!
> > >
> > > Kind regards,
> > >
> > > Annalisa
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >

Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
Department of Anthropology
880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602