Re: sociogensis continued

Dr. PedroR. Portes (prport01 who-is-at athena.louisville.edu)
Sun, 18 Jul 1999 20:24:29 -0400

Gordon et al,
Now that I understand the position below better (?), I seem troubled by an
implication it carries contemporarily. The dance analogy is perfect yet
reveals the problem. As a socio-motor skill, it represents one type of
learning and fits well. But what about other outcomes of learning (or
'cultural knw. skills? (ie. intellectual and cognitive skills sequence in
the curriculum)? .
It seems that the latter fit more into the "first social, then individual"
description considering that this is only part of the time/space sequence.
The individual's agency, co-participation is also related to the
transformation (idiosyncratically often) of the social (outcome, skill,
fact, idea etc).
into what is to be "internalized" from that construction zone that is
inter. And as Eva notes, the construction process goes on sometimes from
distant participation, becoming dialogical over time and again this points
to the individual's agency and participation. I think that arguing that a
given "outcome of learning x" goes from the social to the intra is indeed
the transmission model or "straw person' position most of us consider
simplistic and erroneous. But LSV went well beyond that (e.g., double
stimulation etc).
The new semantics are nice and very democratic, making all more aware
etc, but seem as context dependent as lsv's ....
this is just a gut reaction in general and not only is it aimed at this
post btw.

pedro

,At 10:48 AM 7/16/99 -0400, you wrote:
>In response to Nate and Eva:

>
>I also have problems with the "first social, then individual" way of
>expressing the co-construction, since on every occasion, however immature
>one of the participants may be, the joint activity as well as the
>participation is always both social and individual - as well as inherently
>cultural, in that it is mediated by cultural artifacts and practices.
>
>My choice of 'learning to dance' was deliberate. While it can be seen as
>learning physical skills, dancing is very much a cultural activity, with
>specific meaning/value for the participants. At the same time, to learn
>through participation with others does not require that there be explicit
>teaching. Nor is it unreasonable, in my view, to think of the dancer
>developing a personal repertoire ('internal', if you will) of ways of
>participating of which he or she can be more or less aware and able to
>reproduce and modify in solo activity, or demonstrate to others, if
>required.
>
>Dancing is also a good candidate for a universal form of cultural activity
>(in many specific forms), but not one that gets "curricularized", taught
>and tested. So it may be useful as a point of reference when we come to
>deal with those forms of cultural knowledgeable skills that attract so
>much "educational" attention.
>
>Does the above make my (current) position clearer?
>
>Gordon
>
>Gordon Wells
>gwells who-is-at oise.utoronto.ca
>http://www.oise.utoronto.ca/~gwells
>
>Visit Networks, the Online Journal for Teacher Research
>http://www.oise.utoronto.ca/~ctd/networks
>
>
>
Pedro R. Portes,
Professor of Educational %
Counseling Psychology
310 School of Education
University of Louisville
Fax 502-852-0629
Office 502-852-0630
Web at www.makingkidssmarter.com (under construction)