>To start with, it would be helpful if we had some statements where Leontiev,
>Wertsch, and others who speak of activity as a unit of analysis talk about
>what it means to "carry its own meaning." Seems like Wenger is harking back
>to a version of context/activity as container. Perhaps someone knows Ettiene's
>email address and can ask him directly?
Great idea Mike. I sent him an email yesterday to see if I can suck him in
to the discussion.
I guess the problem for me is that I see these theoretical perspectives as
complementary, and yet proponents of each seem to disavow the other. I have
to admit it's taken me quite a while to feel really sure of myself with
regard to the Wenger stuff as a distinct perspective; the term "situated"
has been invoked in other earlier work, and certainly writ large in
ethnomethodology. But, the communities of practice idea just seems so gosh
darned compatible with cultural historical psych. -- the perspectives on
development, on tools/signs/symbols, on relationship of the individual to
the social...
Actually, the only distinction I've really understood is Eugene's
distinction between appropriation and transformation. In fact, I find quite
appealing the CoP notion of learning as a transformation of identity. But
that notion also works for me in the sense of a change in the individual's
role/place in the division of labor.
just thinking outloud...
Linda