[Xmca-l] Re: ZPD

[Wagner Luiz Schmit]

Thanks Marc.

On Sat, Mar 30, 2019, 06:02 Marc Clarà <marc.clara@gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Wagner,
> In my view, the ZPD is the dialectical tension between the PLD and the
> ALD. So the ZPD, in my understanding, is neither the PLD nor the ALD, but
> the dialectical tension (or distance) between the two, which is what pushes
> conceptual development through a process of self-development.
> In my view, the Social Situation of Development is what makes possible
> this dialectical tension between the PLD and the ALD. In order to enable
> this tension, the child must intellectually imitate a meaning at a level of
> generality which is beyond her ALD. This is only possible if this meaning
> is formed by others in the Social Situation of Development of the child (a
> system of social relationships involving the child). So the Social
> Situation makes the PLD available to the child; that is, the Social
> Situation offers a meaning which is formed at a level of generality in
> which the child cannot form meanings, and then the child intellectually
> imitates this meaning, and this enables a dialectical tension between the
> PLD and the ALD (a ZPD).
> All the best,
> Marc.
>
>
> Missatge de Wagner Luiz Schmit <wagner.schmit@gmail.com> del dia ds., 30
> de març 2019 a les 2:35:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> So there is only two "concepts", the actual level of development and the
>> zone or level of potential development, both measured in year because of a
>> better way to measure them, right?
>>
>> Usually I see ZPD (one concept) defined as the distance between actual
>> level of development (another concept) and potential level of development
>> (yet another concept).
>>
>> And now the Kellogg points out the measure in years, I notice that almost
>> never I saw it used this way, usually it is as if ZPD happens in a meeting,
>> a class, a play... But if it measures the development of mental functions,
>> them years make a lot more of sense.
>>
>> And what about the relationship between ZPD and Social Situation of
>> Development? I missed the point too much?
>>
>> Wagner
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 29, 2019, 18:53 David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In his introduction to the Crisis at Three (p. 283 in the English
>>> Collected Works), Vygotsky uses "the zone of its (the critical age's)
>>> proximal development" to refer to...the subsequent age level, that is,
>>> preschool. This is quite consistent with all of the other things we know
>>> about the ZPD--it is measured in years (and not months or moments), those
>>> years are developmental years and not "passport" (i.e. calendar) years, and
>>> it is a diagnostic and not a pedagogical device.
>>>
>>> Although both are measured in (develomental) years,  a "level" is not
>>> the same thing as a  "zone": the child functioning at the level of two
>>> developmental years is not the same thing as the zone of two
>>> developmental years which separates that child from the neonate. The level
>>> is the age period at which the child can function. The zone is the distance
>>> between two levels, e.g. the distance between the child at (developmental
>>> age) three and the child at (developmental) preschool age. The level is a
>>> milestone, but the zone is the distance between milestones.
>>>
>>> The real level or real zone is not the same thing as the potential zone
>>> or potential level, precisely because the internalization of a function
>>> (vraschivaniya) takes years. If we find, for example, that it is literally
>>> true that the function the child can realize with assistance today is a
>>> function that the child can realize without assistance
>>> tomorrow--literally within twenty-four hours of instruction--all we
>>> have demonstrated is that this function is part of the actual level of
>>> development and not the next, or proximal, one.
>>>
>>> This is why, in order to make the ZPD into a diagnostic and not a
>>> pedagogical tool, we need to know the pedological age levels whose zones,
>>> measured in years, it was designed to diagnose. We also need some way of
>>> diagnosing them that does not depend either on the calendar (passport
>>> years) or on the hated Binet-Simon tasks which Vygotsky used and criticized
>>> and which were later used to criticize him. These were what the ZPD was
>>> designed to replace.
>>>
>>> (It seems to me that these two problems might make good special issues
>>> for MCA! I wonder....)
>>>
>>> David Kellogg
>>> Sangmyung University
>>>
>>> New Article;
>>>
>>>  David Kellogg (2019) THE STORYTELLER’S TALE: VYGOTSKY’S
>>> ‘VRASHCHIVANIYA’, THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT AND ‘INGROWING’ IN THE
>>> WEEKEND STORIES OF KOREAN CHILDREN, British Journal of Educational
>>> Studies, DOI: 10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200
>>> <https://doi.org/10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200>
>>>
>>>
>>> Some e-prints available at:
>>>
>>>
>>> https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/GSS2cTAVAz2jaRdPIkvj/full?target=10.1080/00071005.2019.1569200
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 5:22 AM Marc Clarà <marc.clara@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dear Wagner and other colleagues,
>>>> I'll try to briefly share my interpretation about this issue. In my
>>>> understanding, the formation of a ZDP implies the intellectual (or
>>>> meaningful) imitation (p.210) by the child of a meaning that has a level of
>>>> generality at which the child cannot form meanings. For example, an adult
>>>> publicly form the "true concept" of "living being", and a child at the
>>>> stage of "complexes" forms an intellectual imitation of that meaning (which
>>>> will be a "functional equivalent" of it). So, the child forms a meaning
>>>> with a level of generality that is beyond her actual level of development.
>>>> This enables a dialectic tension between this meaning, formed through
>>>> intellectual imitation, and the meanings that the child can form
>>>> spontaneously. This dialectic tension between meanings of different levels
>>>> of generality generates a process of self-development (p.229) leading to
>>>> the structural emergence of a new level of generality (p.231), at which the
>>>> child will be now able to form meanings spontaneously.
>>>> So, when a child intellectually imitates a meaning at a level of
>>>> generality at which she cannot form meanings spontaneously, this meaning
>>>> shows the PLD of the child: the next level of generality at which the child
>>>> will be able to spontaneously form meanings. This meaning enters into a
>>>> dialectical tension with meanings that the child is already able to form
>>>> spontaneously (her ALD). This dialectical tension between the PLD and the
>>>> ALD is what pushes development and what turns the PLD of the child into her
>>>> next ALD.
>>>> I have further developed this interpretation in the following paper:
>>>>
>>>> Clarà, M. (2017). How Instruction Influences Conceptual Development:
>>>> Vygotsky’s Theory Revisited. *Educational Psychologist, 52(1), *50-62,
>>>> DOI:10.1080/00461520.2016.1221765
>>>>
>>>> (I can privately sent the manuscript if needed)
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> Marc Clarà
>>>> University of Lleida
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Missatge de Wagner Luiz Schmit <wagner.schmit@gmail.com> del dia dv.,
>>>> 29 de març 2019 a les 18:34:
>>>>
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>
>>>>> What is the difference between Zone of proximal development (ZPD) and
>>>>> Potential Level of Development (PLD)?
>>>>>
>>>>> In thinking and speech (in the collected works v1 in English) Vygotsky
>>>>> defines ZPD and in page 209. It seems to me that he writes about the PLD
>>>>> also in page 211.
>>>>>
>>>>> At page 209 PLD seems to be what children can do with the guidance of
>>>>> an adult. And that ZDP is the exact same thing.
>>>>>
>>>>> At page 211 PLD can be understood as something that can enter the ZPD,
>>>>> so not the same as ZPD, so something that children can learn soon, but can
>>>>> not do even with help now (ZPD) and surely not alone. For me this makes
>>>>> more sense, since in this case the PLD would match the Social Situation of
>>>>> Development (SSD - collected works v5 pg 198), and the ZPD would be what is
>>>>> between the PLD and the Actual Level of Development (ALD). In other words
>>>>> the ZPD is the dialectical movement towards the devir, the PLD/SSD.
>>>>>
>>>>> But at the same time in Mind in society (page 86) the same text is
>>>>> edited in a different way, stating that the PLD is what is written in page
>>>>> 209  from above, but, that the ZPD is what is between ALD and this PLD,
>>>>> i.e., what is between what children can do with help and what they can do
>>>>> alone. What exactly is this "between"?
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry if the answer seem to be obvious, but I am a bit lost here.
>>>>>
>>>>> All the best,
>>>>>
>>>>> Wagner Luiz Schmit
>>>>> UNESP - Brazil
>>>>>
>>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20190330/d46615fa/attachment.html