Reading the article, I got the impression that Yrjo assumes a difference between
learning and development. Development is .... "a relatively long-term qualitative change
in the way we relate to the world" (page 4) But in what terms we can conceive of this
"qualitative change" remained a mystery to me. The idea of a horizontal development,
for instance from the world of the deviant outsiders to the world of the normals, does
suggest change, but not - in my view - necessarely a qualitative one in terms of a
functional reorganization.
On 31 Mar 2005 at 9:36, Mike Cole wrote:
> In a prior note I proferred a definition of development as
> interfuncational reorganization
> within an organism accompanied by reorganization of organism and
> environment. This
> is distinguished from learning in my view. In earlier dicussions, we
> noted Seth Chaiklin's
> criticism of people who use the terms zone of proximal development
> (zoped) to refer
> only to learning, thereby watering down/distorting Vygotksy's ideas.
>
> Those who think of learning as changing participation in communities
> of practice may well not want to make a learning/development
> distinction (Rogoff/Lave/Wenger?).
>
> I am simply uncertain about Yrjo's views concerning breaking away and
> different
> notions of development. Sometimes it seems more Vygotskian to me,
> sometimes
> more along the horizontal dimension of participation in new
> activities/contexts.
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun May 01 2005 - 01:00:05 PDT