On Thu, 16 Jul 1998 dkirsh who-is-at lsu.edu wrote:
> Lest the summer get too restful, perhaps, I'll
> say a few words about my particular interest in
> appropriation. As I'm reading about the problems
> with the construct of internalization (e.g., Arievitch
> & van der Veer, 1995), I'm trying to decide to what
> extent those problems are the result of trying to
> account for what is sometimes called "scientific
> thinking" or "higher order cognitive functions" in a
> social frame. Gal'perin, for example, struggled
> (explicitly) against Cartesian dualism in his account
> of three levels of activity: "material" (in which the
> activity is carried out in the material world); "ideal
> external" (in which the activity is enacted mentally,
> but only with the support of material props); and
> "ideal internal" (in which no external props are needed).
> For Gal'perin appropriation is a more general term that
> applies to all three of these sorts of actions; but only
> this last one is characteristically human (i.e., higher
> order) activity.
>
> What I'm trying to figure out is if appropriation, which
> seems like a relatively clear solution to the internalization
> problem, achieves its clarity by providing a more general
> (less specifically human) account of learning in the ZPD.
>
> Thanks.
> David Kirshner
>
> Louisiana State University
> dkirsh who-is-at lsu.edu
>
> Arievitch, I., & van der Veer, R. (1995). Furthering
> the internalization debate: Gal'perin's contribution.
> Human Development, 38, 113-126.
>
>
>
---------------------------------
Vera P. John-Steiner
Department of Linguistics
Humanities Bldg. 526
University of New Mexico
Albuquerque, NM 87131
(505) 277-6353 or 277-4324
Internet: vygotsky who-is-at unm.edu
---------------------------------