stephanie spina wrote:
>
> Ricardo -
> Please don't apologize for your English. It is much better than some of my
> attempts to communicate in another language.
> Do you think the ZPD has to be between people? Can something else (like
> music, for example) serve as a ZPD?
Music is made by people, isn't it? But I think we can learn a lot with
animals...
> And why is the focus always on "positive" development? Doesn't a ZPD also
> hold the potential for a negative transformation?
Positive and negative are diferent sides of the same coin, I think.
Somethings can be negative to me and very positive to someone else.I
believe that cultural development must be understood acording to an
specific cultural point of view... or as a negociation between
socio-historical diferent interests...
Those are brief answers to big questions.
That's all I can say you by now.
> Stephanie
>
> On Wed, 8 Oct 1997, Ricardo Ottoni Vaz Japiassu wrote:
>
> > Mrs. Spina,
> >
> > I read your comments about Vygotsky's ZPD and I apreciate it
> > specialy because you show a "reading road" (?) that does not
> > reduce it to a technical tool of mesurement of development.
> >
> > I understand it, at least util now, as a social zone of potential
> > development that is present in every interaction between people. In
> > school education, as a "space" in which teachers and professsors can be
> > "helped" by students-childreen to grow in cultural development too.
> >
> > My english is pretty bad and I feel a lot of limitations on
> > comming out my thoughts. I hope you can understand me.
> >
> > tephanie spina wrote:
> > >
> > > I would like to explore some of the relationships between Vygotskiian
> > > theory and critical pedagogy in general, and specifically as they relate
> > > to the issues of conservatism, multiculturalism, and the host of other
> > > issues raised in the stories recently posted.
> > > My interpretation of Vygotsky may not be "mainstream" on this list - but
> > > I'd like to engage in a dialogue (not a polarizing debate) around some of
> > > these ideas (on or off list) with anyone interested. Perhaps conflict
> > > may be an appropriate starting point.
> > > Conflict, to Vygotsky, was critical to growth. For example,I do not see
> > > the ZPD as just a technique to systematically lead children from one level
> > > of skill to another. The ZPD is not a "place" or a "thing." It is not a
> > > technique for learning/teaching. It is a reorganization through conflict
> > > to create new meaning. The ZPD works by creating a tension between
> > > present and future capabilities; the intersection of external needs and
> > > internal possibilities. The dialectical character of the process has been
> > > frequently neutralized in the West where its conflictual aspects, so
> > > critical to Vygotsky's conceptualization, are glossed over, leaving no
> > > room for concepts like agency and resistance, which are central to
> > > critical pedagogy. Western views seem to have shifted Vygotsky's notion by
> > > an emphasis on the interaction between a child and adult through the
> > > process of negotiating meaning, assuming reciprocity and positive,
> > > cooperative interaction.
> > > Vygotsky's strength is his unique integration of (historical) psychology,
> > > Marxist philosophy, and social semiotic analysis to create a theory based
> > > on, in, and of culture. Critical pedagogy shares these roots and exploring
> > > this may provide insights relevant to both.
> > > Your thoughts?
> > >
> > > Stephanie
> > >
> > > Stephanie Urso Spina
> > > City University of New York
> > > sspina who-is-at email.gc.cuny.edu
> >
> >