Thanks, Bill. What do you mean by "the 5thD field not writing outline?"
----- Original Message -----
From: "William E. Blanton" <blantonw@miami.edu>
To: <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>; <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
Sent: Saturday, January 22, 2005 2:41 PM
Subject: Re: Scaffolding
> Peg
>
> Gordon Wells has done a nice paper on the zpd. Integrate Wells's paper
with
> the 5thD field not writing outline and they yield a useful description of
> the zo-ped.
>
> Bill Blanton
>
> At 09:42 AM 1/22/2005 -0600, Peg Griffin wrote:
> >Maybe I'm scaffolding a red herring here, but ...
> >
> >I've long thought that the scaffold metaphor had a kind of closed system
> >idea at its heart that the Zo-Ped does not.
> >Any scaffold maker does the construction with a particular building in
mind,
> >right?
> >So, for a scaffolder, it is reasonable to ask "With this little bit of
help
> >will the learner do what the teacher/ assessor has in mind?" or "How
> >many/what kinds of little bits of help will get the learner to come to
the
> >known answer?"
> >
> >Contrast those with the question the Zo-Ped allows "With this little bit
of
> >help, what will the learner do?" AND "What do the learner actions in the
> >Zo-Ped tell the teacher/assessor about the learner's future so the little
> >bit of help offered next is most likely really to be helpful?"
> >The zone collaborator doesn't know where or how far the learner will go.
> >They are just societal collaborators with an investment in the next
steps.
> >
> >The creative new, the future necessary for history to be history rather
than
> >just tradition, is possible if not always realized in the Zo-Ped.
> >Recapitulation seems to be just about all there is in the scaffold.
> >
> >It is definitely a lot easier methodologically to design measures that a
lot
> >of people will accept with the scaffold questions, though. Somehow it
> >reminds me of my amazement (as an outsider to the field) about
psychologists
> >being quite clearly accepting of the idea that "IQ is whatever IQ tests
> >test."
> >
> >Peg G.
> >(Oh my, after having had that phrase "scaffolding a red herring" pop into
my
> >head, I got a full visualization of it. It's a fine image if a bit
> >slippery.)
> >
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Phil Chappell" <philchappell@mac.com>
> >To: <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> >Sent: Saturday, January 22, 2005 4:09 AM
> >Subject: Re: Scaffolding
> >
> >
> > > I've always cited Wood, D.J., J.S. Bruner, and G. Ross, The role of
> > > tutoring in problem solving, Journal of Child Psychology and
> > > Psychiatry, 1976. 17(2): p. 89-100 as the pioneering paper, Nate. Then
> > > Bruner's book (oops, there goes the memory) published not long after
> > > that.
> > >
> > > Interesting coincidence - just returned from a second language
> > > conference where scaffolding was bandied around so carelessly that it
> > > seemed to become a metaphor for any activity or learning materials
> > > applied by the teacher in teaching/learning moments.
> > >
> > > Phil
> > > On 22/01/2005, at 4:08 AM, willthereallsvpleasespeakup who-is-at nateweb.info
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Is Bruner the agreed upon "author" of scaffold in American
> > > > consciousness?
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Website: http://nateweb.info/
> > > > Blog: http://levvygotsky.blogspot.com/
> > > > Email: willthereallsvpleasespeakup who-is-at nateweb.info
> > > >
> > > > "The zone of proximal development defines those functions that have
> > > > not yet matured but are in the process of maturation, functions that
> > > > will mature tomorrow but are currently in an embryonic state. These
> > > > functions could be termed the buds or flowers of development rather
> > > > than
> > > > the "fruits" of development. The actual developmental level
> > > > characterizes mental development retrospectively, while the zone of
> > > > proximal development characterizes mental development
prospectively."
> > > > - L.S.V.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Feb 01 2005 - 01:00:05 PST