Mike,
The following is the summary of the Dreier and Jean's discussion
about "learning across contexts" and my comments on that.
Learning embedded in constituting multiple contexts
Learning (or learning opportunities) is not separable from practices
of organizing, managing, and making intelligible of multiple contexts, or
division of labor.
Dreier (1995) discusses a relevant issue as learning across contexts in the
following.
.......we often participate in a particular context mainly for reasons that
are aimed at realizing goals and interests which primarily originate in and
"belong" to another context. In so doing, we make use of particular
connections that exist between these contexts, or that we and others create
and extend, and that make it possible to pursue goals and interests in one
context by taking part in another in a particular way. ....Human action has
a potential and varying cross-contextual scope, scale or reach.
(Dreier, 1995. p. 12)
Lave (1997) also emphasizes 'learning across contexts' along with Dreier.
The point is that practices such as that of psychotherapy or schooling are
aimed at transforming participation in other settings than the therapy
sessions or classroom lessons; to understand them we must investigate
ongoing practice in both, and how each is in part created in the other.
This implies a genre of ethnographic research studies of learning.
(Lave, 1997. )
I agree on many points in the above discussion. For example, certainly,
as they pointed out, psychotherapy or schooling are aimed at transforming
participation in other settings than the therapy sessions or classroom
lessons themselves.
However, this discussion will go further beyond one student's learning
across multiple contexts such as psychotherapy session, school, and home,
for example.
( I think Jean will agree on the following discussion. And probably she
implies the following things.)
Let us change the focus from a student to the other parties in
different contexts in the Dreier's example. If so, the issue will be a way
of organizing divisions of labor among the teacher, the parents and the
psychotherapist who engage in the student. For example, the focus of
analysis will be how the psychotherapist tries to collaborate with the
teacher and the parents or whether or not he/she collaborates with the
teacher and the parents.
One more point is that ways of participation of the parties are
mutually shaped. For example, oldtimers and newcomers in a practice
reciprocally constitute each other. The categories such as oldtimer and
newcomer are ways of organizing mutual participation rather than the labels
for participants in a practice. Thus, a way of participation is always
reciprocally shaped with others' ways of participation in the context. The
student's way of participating in school is interdependent on other
members' ways of participation such as teachers' and peer students' exactly
as, in the context of family, a child and parents mutually shapes
participation structure as child and as parents each other.
Following the above line of discussion, how the student goes across
contexts is dependent on how the other parties in multiple contexts
mutually organize their relation. How the student organizes the relation
among school, family and psychotherapy session is depending on how the
relation between teachers and parents is organized. At the same time, how
teachers, parents and psychotherapist can collaborate is dependent on the
student's way of integrating multiple contexts.
If so, the issue of learning across contexts or learning as trajectory
of participation can be regarded as reorganization of mutual constituting
contexts or divisions of labor and as mutual reconstruction of
participation structure. Learning is not individually accomplished but
mutually accomplished. Learning of one party is accompanied with learning
of the other party. Changing a way of participation of one side is along
with changing a way of participation of the other side. That is true in
crossing
(at the same time, mutually constituting) contexts.
(In the discussion in Tokyo, Jean rephrased "learning as trajectory of
participation" as "sequential constitution of contexts or participation"
something borrowing from Ray's terminology at his presentation.
She said the term "sequential constitution of contexts or participation
" is better than "trajectory of participation".)
Naoki Ueno,
National Institute for Educational Research, Tokyo