[Xmca-l] Re: Difference between appropriation and learning transfer

[James Ma]

Hello Alfredo, personally I see neo-Vygotskians as those who don't tend to
use Vygotsky's terms but create their own, i.e. appropriate or adapt them
to their own purposes. In fact I remember Rogoff explaining Bakhtin's
appropriation that way when she came to Bristol in 2001.

Best, James

Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no> 于 2018年5月16日周三 12:34写道：

> Hi James,
>
> sorry if I go a bit off-topic because of my ignorance, but what does
> "neo-Vygotskian" mean?
>
> Alfredo Jornet
> ________________________________
> New Article in the European Journal of Engineering Education,
> "Collaborative design decision-making as social process". Free print
> available: https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/vCwCJBcyE5jMiZkZwAWR/full
>
>
> ________________________________________
> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> on behalf of James Ma <jamesma320@gmail.com>
> Sent: 16 May 2018 13:29
> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Difference between appropriation and learning
> transfer
>
> Hello Han Kim,
> Another neo-Vygotskian theorist using the term appropriation was Barbara
> Rogoff in "Apprenticeship in Thinking" (1990).
> James Wertsch also used it in "Mind as Action" (1998).
> Above all, Bakhtin's "The Dialogic Imagination" is very important.
> James
>
>
> *________________________________________________*
>
> *James Ma  Independent Scholar **https://oxford.academia.edu/JamesMa
> <https://oxford.academia.edu/JamesMa>   *
>
>
>
> On 16 May 2018 at 11:42, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Han Kim,
> >
> > Fundamentally AT is about development, not appropriation. So you might
> say
> > appropriation was appropriated (an inevitable outcome). This is from
> Luria
> > (1961): "It would not be wrong to say that the basic principle of Soviet
> > psychology is the idea of development, the proposition that such mental
> > activities as intelligent perception, purposive memory, active attention
> > and deliberate action result from a lengthy evolution in a child's actual
> > behavior."
> >
> > Development as distinct from conventional notions of learning is more
> > difficult to communicate, perhaps because it often entails development.
> > Reorganisation of the means of learning is a good starting point, which
> is
> > what the notion of transfer implicitly points to, i.e. that which is
> beyond
> > superficial learning. Probably the most succinct pointing to the
> > distinction is in the experimental work of Gal'perin.
> >
> > Best,
> > Huw
> >
> > On 15 May 2018 at 19:57, Kim, Han Gil <kim.3208@osu.edu> wrote:
> >
> > > Dear colleagues and seasoned scholars,
> > >
> > > I am looking for useful articles/books to better understand two similar
> > > concepts (appropriation and transfer of learning).
> > >
> > > 1. Appropriation, one of the central concepts of activity theory
> > > (Grossman, Smagorinsky & Valencia 1991; Leont’ev 1981; Wertsch 1991)
> > >
> > > 2. transfer of learning, especially in the area of Writing Across
> > > Curriculum/discipline and/or L2 writing (contrastive rhetoric and
> English
> > > for academic purposes).
> > >
> > > Any suggestions?
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > ----------
> > > Han Kim
> > >
> > > Lecturer in Korean (as a foreign language)
> > > Department of East Asian Languages and Literatures
> > > College of Arts and Sciences
> > >
> > > I am what I learn. If I have seen further, it is only by standing upon
> > the
> > > shoulders of giants.
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> <
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail
> >
> Virus-free.
> www.avast.com
> <
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail
> >
> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
>