>Hi Dewey, nice to hear from you.
>
>I think the question is, where does the discoordination come from.
>For Piaget, it was a cognitive matter, the clash of schemas. I expect for
>YE it might originate elsewhere.
>mike
Mike:
Thanks. I've been "out here" all the time, but busy.
I bet that while most know of the particularly cognitive examples of
Piaget's work, one would find on looking into Piaget's other work
that his disequilibration is driven by a more generalized sort of
"clash of schemas" than merely between cognitive schemas in the sense
of "violation of expectations" that it appeared you were describing.
As I understand it this for Piaget is the basic plan by which
learners construct their understandings of *any* aspect of their
experience.
I guess while I'm at it to be strictly careful about it for the
disequilibrated student/child/knower it can't exactly be a clash
between schemas until the person has re-equilibrated because to be in
this state of sensed "violation of expectations"/disequilibration is
to at least momentarily be without a schema through which to make
sense of experience. It's really more like a "clash of schema and
experience."
Looking back on the situation having developed a schema with which to
assimilate the experience, the learner *might* be able to discuss the
situation or think of the situation in terms of clashing schemas. A
teacher or other more experienced learner might also be able to
describe the situation as such. But for the learner embroiled in
this "violation of expectations"/disequilibration there are only
schemas which are *inadequate* until the learner resolves the
situation--clash between existing schemas and experience.
I am interested to YE's take on this.
Dewey
--+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Dewey I. Dykstra, Jr. Phone: (208)426-3105 Professor of Physics Dept: (208)426-3775 Department of Physics/MCF421/418 Fax: (208)426-4330 Boise State University dewey@mac.boisestate.edu 1910 University Drive Boise Highlanders Boise, ID 83725-1570 novice piper: GHB, Uilleann
"Now there are two theorems that form together the cardinal hinge on which the whole structure of physical science turns. These theorems are: (1) THERE IS A REAL OUTER WORLD WHICH EXISTS INDEPENDENTLY OF OUR ACT OF KNOWING, and, (2) THE REAL OUTER WORLD IS NOT DIRECTLY KNOWABLE." --M. Planck in Where Is Science Going?, 1932. (EMPHASIS in the original)
"As a result of modern research in physics, the ambition and hope, still cherished by most authorities of the last century, that physical science could offer a photographic picture and true image of reality had to be abandoned." --M. Jammer in Concepts of Force, 1957.
"If what we regard as real depends on our theory, how can we make reality the basis of our philosophy? ...But we cannot distinguish what is real about the universe without a theory...it makes no sense to ask if it corresponds to reality, because we do not know what reality is independent of a theory."--S. Hawking in Black Holes and Baby Universes, 1993.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Mar 01 2002 - 01:00:21 PST