I think Gordon does an especially fine job of showing the interweaving of
the material and symbolic aspects of objects in this paper. On p. 45 he
write that "The materiality of the object is critical in allowing it to
become the focus of a joint activity -- something that can be sensually
perceived, handled, and acted upon. At the same time, its is the symbolic
aspect of the object that allows it to participate in students' progressive
attempts to increase their understandingg of the phenomenon under
investigation. However, it is when the two modes are combined that the
value of the the "improvable object" is most evident because its material
presenence enables the teacher to mediate between the abstract curriculum
devised by "experts" outside the classroom and the interests and competencies
of the particular students for whose "educational progress" he or she is
responsible."
The examples show this pattern clearly.
But, to end with a question. It concerns the always-difficult-for-me issue
of the meaning of "object" in describing activity. In the above summary,
what is the object? Is it the vehicle as encountered? The to-be-improved-upon
vehicle that is "beyond the horizon?" Or, perhaps, educational progress? I
assume Gordon is using object as implied by my second question, but I am
not sure. And does is the second subsumed in the third?
mike
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 01:00:07 PST