Re: [xmca] chat analysis of ritual

Date: Fri Mar 17 2006 - 08:06:52 PST

My thoughts exactly Geraldine. When discussing units of analysis in CHAT
it is very difficult to discern where the baseline is. Very behavioristic
in my thinking but still behavioristic within the gestalt of CHAT. It is
interesting that the quote I sent in my previous post was one paragraph
after your "4 for one child and by the number 1 for the other" quote.


                      Geraldine McDonald
                      <geraldine.mcdonald who-is-at cl To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <>
            > cc:
                      Sent by: Subject: Re: [xmca] chat analysis of ritual
                      xmca-bounces who-is-at weber.ucs
                      03/16/2006 08:17 PM
                      Please respond to
                      "eXtended Mind,
                      Culture, Activity"

"How can one juxtapose the words 'independent problem solving' in a
cultural theory of mediated development?" asked by Mike Cole and commented
on by bb.

If the theory is historical as well as cultural, then
historical/developmental processes of the kind of interest to LSV have
already created mental capacity which can be used, without the mediation of
adults or peers, to determine a current level for problem solving. The
tasks would still be mediated by something - maybe the task as set. Or have
I got it wrong? What have I missed?

There are two other issues which interest me. The first is that while LSV's
formulation in the famous extract appears to be directed towards mental
measurement and "levels" of development, the cultural application of this
idea has led to an emphasis on "scaffolding", particularly as promoted by
Bruner, in relation to the ZPD. A clear statement appears in Bruner's
Prologue in Volume 1 of the Collected Works. Thus the individual
measurement issue does not appear to have been pursued and interest has
become attached to pedagogical procedures involving adults and peers, a
topic which fits contemporary practices such as co-operative learning. But
if one does not know the independent level how can one judge whether the
zone can be "expressed by the number 4 for one child and by the number 1
for the other." I am not arguing for measurement - just trying to unravel

The second issue is one which someone may be able to answer. It links with
the interesting discussion of Luria using the syllogism to test peasants.
There was a comment (by Mike?) that the tests used were common in Soviet
psychology at the time. Were these tests basically IQ tests? If so, were
they attached to the normal curve. Is it tests of this kind which LSV was
thinking of with reference to independent problem solving and, if not, what
kind of measure could he have been envisaging?

xmca mailing list

xmca mailing list

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Apr 01 2006 - 01:00:13 PST