Dear Kevin,
dear all,
thank you very very much for the time and effort you have taken to write to me.
You have mentioned the term 'constructivsm'. I have always thought that there was a difference between sociocultural theory and (cognitive) constructivsm:
"Although "cognitive constructivist research and practice...is mostly oriented toward understanding the individual learner" (Derry, 1996, this issue) and separates individual processes of knowledge construction from social processes of joint understanding, we think of them as connected and interdependent. The development of the mind of the child is both individual and social at the same time and is the result of a long process of developmental events (Vygotsky, 1978). A focus of sociocultural research is the study of the way that the co-construction of knowledge is internalized, appropriated, transmitted, or transformed in formal and informal learning settings" (source: http://webpages.charter.net/schmolze1/vygotsky/johnsteiner.html).
Please correct me if I am wrong, but I have obtained the same impression i.e., the importance to set constructivism apart from sociocultural theory from other resources too (e.g., http://www.cjlt.ca/content/vol29.3/cjlt29-3_art1.html). For this reason, I have emphasised on my previous postings to the list, that I would like to make a valid work under a Vygotskian and AT framework. I am sorry if my assumptions may have been incorrect.
Another issue which you address - and thank you very much for doing so - is that you say that AT is not a pedagogical approach. The curriculum (artifact) which I would like to make should entail a teaching and a learner part. So, I am exactly searching for the right mechanism to develop a curriculum which should consist of both parts (either you can say that each part is a subset or you can say that both parts are the union = the curriculum). I would like to regard this curriculum to become a generic structure, actually - of course, under the constraints of user domain etc. Yet, I do not know the mechanism and hoped that AT would provide the right way to get to the model as in the
"... AT, parametric, morphological and functional analyis of activity are also defined"
(source: http://case.glam.ac.uk/CASE/StaffPages/SteveHarris/GZBPubs/ATHist.pdf; cf. p. 192).
So, you are right that, apart from having to find out which type of activity is to be applied/appropriate at what stage of analysis and design (I ordered Bedny and Meister's book but who knows if the mechanisms are formally defined in detail), that I need to search for the correct literature to model a proper Vygotskian approach in view of the pedagogical and learning-delivery aspects (or say psychological aspects).
On a third level then, I will need to research on emotional factors, social factors, etc. to bring 'intelligence' to the construct .... but I leave this off the list now as I have even not come to the point of knowing the elements to get me working.
Sorry for this message to the list, and I will write to you off-list,
best regards,
George
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Nov 09 2004 - 11:43:01 PST