Dewey Dykstra, Jr. wrote:
>
> >---------- Forwarded message ----------
> >Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 15:04:40 -0400 (EDT)
> >From: David Kirshner <c1474 who-is-at er.uqam.ca>
> >To: jpang who-is-at unix1.sncc.lsu.edu
> >Subject: Re: All the way with Piaget
> >
> >JeongSuk,
> >Please post the following reply to xmca.
> >
> >At 08:32 PM 5/5/98 +0900, Naoki Euno wrote:
> >>
> >>Is this paraphrasing showing that the problem of practice of reification
> >>of "mental" is just the other side of the coin of the problem of practice of
> >>reification of "objective socail" or "objective macro social structure"?
> >>
> >>Of course, this "the other side of coin" is not the solution.
> >>
> >
> >Naoki,
> >Your comment brings to my mind the recent _Educational Researcher_ article
> >(27(2), pp. 4-13, March, 1998) by Anna Sfard in which she groups together
> >sociocultural and constructivist theorizing as subscribing to the same
> >Acquisition Metaphor (AM), in contrast with other theories that
> >subscribe to the Participation Metaphor (PM):
> >
> > Finally, the dichotomy between acquisition and participation should
> > not be mistaken for the well-known distinction between individualist
> > and social perspectives on learning. ... According to the distinction
> > proposed in this article, theories that speak about reception
> > of knowledge and those that view learning as internalization
> > of socially established concepts belong to the same category
> > (AM), whereas on the individual/social axis, they must be placed
> > at opposite poles. ... It is important to understand that the two
> > distinctions were made according to different criteria: While the
> > acquisition/participation division is ontological in nature and
> > draws on two radically different answers to the question, "What
> > is this thing called learning?," the individual/social dichotomy does
> > not imply a controversy as to the definition of learning, but rather
> > rests on differing visions of the mechanisms of learning. (p. 7)
> >
> >I recommend her article as a clear and forceful analysis of
> >current upheavals in cognitive theorizing.
> >
> >David Kirshner,
> >Louisiana State University
> >cikirs who-is-at lsuvm.sncc.lsu.edu
>
> How can someone attribute "acquisition" to a position which states that
> people "construct" their own understanding? This characterization is
> certainly inappropriate for describing radical constructivism.
>
> Dewey
>
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Dewey I. Dykstra, Jr. Phone: (208)385-3105
> Professor of Physics Dept: (208)385-3775
> Department of Physics/MCF421/418 Fax: (208)385-4330
> Boise State University dykstrad who-is-at bsumail.idbsu.edu
> 1910 University Drive Boise Highlanders
> Boise, ID 83725-1570 novice piper
>
> "Physical concepts are the free creations of the human mind and
> are not, however it may seem, uniquely determined by the external
> world."--A. Einstein in The Evolution of Physics with L. Infeld,
> 1938.
> "Every [person's] world picture is and always remains a construct
> of [their] mind and cannot be proved to have any other existence."
> --E. Schrodinger in Mind and Matter, 1958.
> "Don't mistake your watermelon for the universe." --K. Amdahl in
> There Are No Electrons, 1991.
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++