Ana,
It is very significant, INmynotsohumbleO, that Kant's Critqiue of Judgment, the basis of Marcuse's work (Eros and Civilization), and also much praised by Hegel, in the "lesser Logic":, had to do with what the free play of imagination might be in relation to rationality in general. What if we think of zopeds as playgrounds of the imagination?
Paul
Ana Marjanovic-Shane <ana@zmajcenter.org> wrote:
I am also working on the role of play, as you know, and its role in
learning and development.
I find, however, that "PLAY" is a very heterogeneous and slippery
concept and that many people have many different definitions. Actually,
Brian Sutton-Smith even wrote a book on the rhetoric of play
(Sutton-Smith, 1997, The Ambiguity of Play) -a very useful and well
orienting pointer to the perils of misunderstandings about what is play,
anyway.
As I understand it (and always thought that Vygotsky understood it), is
that play is imagination in action (and imagination is internalized
play). -- That is a very broad definition, though, but allows for
looking at the whole specter of imaginative activities, both
interpersonal and intrapersonal as play-like activities which may become
tool like mediators in the ZPD.
Ana
Mike Cole wrote:
> When it comes to schooling, Paul, there IS cultural-historical
> evidence that
> is pretty
> thick. Their early history casts a long light beam on the conditions
> which
> give rise to them and the ways they get incorporated in social
> practice and
> the process of human evolution on earth. Whether or not wants to call
> this a
> zoped (upward or downward) is a reasonable question to pose. And on that
> point we can have a hey-day of chatter!!
>
> I would have though that Vivian Paley also provides alternative ways to
> think about schooling, but so far as I can tell, I am the lone
> stranger on
> XMCA who thinks so on the
> basis of the chapter of her book we discussed. I am still trying to
> come to
> gripts with
> zopeds in ontogeny at present, and in particular the potential role of
> play
> as part of the design principles needed to create such potentials.
> mike
>
> On 12/17/06, Paul Dillon
wrote:
>>
>> mike,
>>
>> Perhaps schools themselves are the problem. Montesorri (and perhaps the
>> schools that came out of Rudolf Steiner) seemed to work around a concept
>> more congenial to Vygotsky's notion of zopeds. And for this after
>> school
>> programs are much more congenial, no pressure from states imposing their
>> ideological constructions. Online education approaches this but the
>> problem
>> is retention since everyone has already been trained to demand structure
>> from the outside instead of following the instrinsic joy of learning.
>>
>> Paul Dillon
>>
>> *Mike Cole * wrote:
>>
>> This nicely states my view of the fullest way to think about zopeds,
>> Aleksander:
>> it might be useful to consider concept like mutual asymmetrical
>> interaction
>> (or
>> reciprocal asymmetry or complementary asymmetry - and mutual development
>> in the zoped or both sides development) where both partners could be to
>> each other more developed partner.
>>
>> The great challenge is to arrange for such interactions in
>> institutionalized
>> school
>> settings, which is why I prefer work after school. And the problem
>> is, of
>> course,
>> much more general still.
>> mike
>> On 12/17/06, Aleksandar Baucal wrote:
>> >
>> > I share with Michael experience that teachers can learn a lot from
>> > students as well as parents from children (actualy I share this with
>> > students each time when we discuss Vygotsky's theory). Moreover, there
>> > is a anecdote that is shared among my colleagues about Math prof who
>> > tried to explain to students some topic, but he got impression that
>> they
>> > didn't understand. Than he explained them in another way, but again
>> they
>> > didn't understand. He didn't want to retreat and tried in third
>> way, and
>> > then he realized that actually he didn't understand this topic. I
>> > believe in the happy end of the anecdote, that is that prof finally
>> > understood the topic and after that he was able to help students to
>> > build their understanding :)
>> >
>> > This kind of examples seems to ask for more inclusive
>> interpretation of
>> > the zoped (that supposes asymmetric interaction where actual
>> pattern of
>> > activity of participant at the lower level is transformed through
>> joint
>> > activity with more developed participants who brings new cultural form
>> > of activity into the joint activity). Based on above examples it might
>> > be useful to consider concept like mutual asymmetrical interaction (or
>> > reciprocal asymmetry or complementary asymmetry - and mutual
>> development
>> > in the zoped or both sides development) where both partners could
>> be to
>> > each other more developed partner. For example, teacher who is more
>> > developed than student regarding to understanding of certain topic
>> from
>> > curriculum and student who is more developed that teacher regarding
>> > computer literacy and using Internet - they are searching internet
>> > together trying to build interpretation and understanding of certain
>> > natural phenomenon. It is not easy to imagine parallel example with
>> > parents and children especially in this time of fast social
>> changes. If
>> > parents and children would have just one sided asymmetric relations it
>> > would end up with confused children since tools they appropriate
>> through
>> > relationship with parents would misfit to social condition in which
>> they
>> > will be adults. Moreover, it seems that children serve as more
>> competent
>> > partner to parents when it comes to emerging forms of culture.
>> >
>> > Sasha
>> >
>> >
>> > Michael Glassman wrote:
>> > > I have been reading some of the discussion on Zoped and have been
>> > wondering more and more if Anselm Strauss' ideas on negotiated
>> ordering
>> > might have some important implications for the way some people view
>> the
>> > Zoped as a concept. Strauss suggested that the ordering in activity
>> - he
>> > did not really talk about development (he was Mead's student) - but
>> > concentrated more on the ongoing dynamic activity itself. What he
>> suggested
>> > was that the relationship between those who were in charge and knew
>> what
>> to
>> > do, and those who looked to those people in charge, was dynamic and
>> > dependent on the problems that were being faced. The hierarchy and
>> also
>> the
>> > allocation of resources (which I find interesting and possibly one of
>> the
>> > core issues) is predetermined. But in the process of the ongoing
>> activity,
>> > as the problems changed, the actual ordering within the community
>> changes to
>> > meet the problem at hand. One of his most interesting studies was
>> of an
>> > emergency room in San Francisco. While on paper and in allocation of
>> > resources doctors were the titula heads of the emergency room, when
>> crises
>> > occurred there was a reordering of roles, where the nurses became the
>> > defacto heads of the activity, and the doctors looked to the nurses
>> and
>> > understood this. I think one of the problems is that what happens is
>> that
>> > what happens in process is then not re-translated into understanding.
>> The
>> > doctors re-claim their roles as experts after the crisis and from
>> what I
>> can
>> > tell make little effort to share resources with the nurses.
>> > >
>> > > Perhaps negotiated ordering has important implications for the Zoped
>> as
>> > well (is such a concept applicable to Vygotsky? Well I continue to
>> believe
>> > that Vygotsky was reading Dewey in his early career and was influenced
>> by
>> > him - but of course even saying this gets a lot of people angry. And
>> Anselm
>> > Strauss was working from a base developed by Mead and Dewey). From
>> what
>> I
>> > have been reading, one of the things people are trying to explore is
>> this
>> > notion is that there is some sense of negotiated ordering in the Zoped
>> > where, when facing different problems, different members of a learning
>> > community take different positions in the learning/development
>> equation
>> (can
>> > we really differentiate learning from development and would we want
>> > to?). This maybe works especially well if we are looking at learning
>> from a
>> > dialectical perspective - because what needs to happen for learning to
>> occur
>> > is for something to make you question what you are thinking, to cloud
>> the
>> > issues that you were sure of. I think of Piaget and the early work he
>> did
>> > with his own children. Wasn't Piaget actually learning - in a
>> dialectical
>> > fashion - from his own children. I think of my relationship with my
>> own
>> > children and I know they did things that completely threw me for a
>> loop,
>> > completely made me re-think issues I thought were set in my mind. They
>> were
>> > creating a natural disturbance in my Zoped. But by admitting this I
>> have
>> to
>> > admit I learn from my three year old - not in a cute type way, but
>> in a
>> real
>> > way where I have to give up my mantle of expert in our relationship.
>> > >
>> > > Yet we have a great deal invested in this culture of the expert -
>> the
>> > idea that the expert teaches and the student learns. I hate to say
>> it -
>> > because I'd rather stay away from economic issues - but it is also a
>> part of
>> > our capitalist base and how we allocate resources. We pay experts more
>> > because they are experts, we hire them as consultants because they are
>> > experts, we let them act as gate keepers and decision makers because
>> they
>> > are experts. I wonder to what extent Vygotsky has been assimilated
>> in to
>> > this entire culture of experts?
>> > >
>> > > Michael
>> > >
>> > > ________________________________
>> > >
>> > > From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu on behalf of Mike Cole
>> > > Sent: Sun 12/17/2006 10:47 AM
>> > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>> > > Subject: Re: [xmca] Zopeds at the cultural historical level
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Andy-- When you write:
>> > > Hegel does not talk about "assisting" the
>> > > learning subject, but rather of subordinating them.
>> > >
>> > > I think you get near the heart of Yrjo's thought experiment in
>> > "development
>> > > as breaking away" and
>> > > socialization theories (which, heaven help us, are often the
>> implicit
>> > > theories behind talks concerning
>> > > zopeds). The adults in Yrjo's (Hoag's) story are seeking to "raise
>> > > up/normalize" the children by subordinating
>> > > them to a social order with lots of rules and strictures as the
>> means
>> to
>> > > their "development", e.g. growing up
>> > > to replicate that order. Breaking away is the only way UP as well as
>> > OUT.
>> > > But, of course, such subordination
>> > > is talked about as benevolent assistance.
>> > >
>> > > What makes it all very complicated even in the ontogentic case is
>> that
>> > > subordination and assistance are so
>> > > closely related to each other. The duality of structure? After all,
>> the
>> > core
>> > > of the method of dual stimulation,
>> > > in Vygotsky's words, is to "subordinate oneself to an external
>> stimulus"
>> > as
>> > > a means of achieving self control
>> > > "from the outside" in order to break free of local situational
>> > constraints.
>> > >
>> > > As problematic as this is at the ontogenetic, intergenerational
>> level,
>> > it
>> > > simply gets more so at the culturalhistorical
>> > > level.
>> > >
>> > > Might not institutions such as, for example, the National Academy of
>> > > Sciences, be a social instrument whereby certain
>> > > individuals are chosen to act as more knowledgable peers, who
>> society
>> > uses
>> > > as a means to its own self development?
>> > > Or, if one approves less secular social instrumentalities, the synod
>> of
>> > > bishops?
>> > >
>> > > Thoughts for a spinkly sunday morning where the sun is making its
>> > > reappearance after a too-brief visit of some rain.
>> > > mike
>> > >
>> > > On 12/17/06, Andy Blunden wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> I don't know, Hegel was theorising modernity not multiculturalism.
>> But
>> > >> according to Hegel social learning is not a process of
>> imitation, or
>> > >> civilisation "rubbing off" on people, but of the production and use
>> of
>> > the
>> > >> artefacts of a society in the production of the needs of that
>> society
>> > >> according to its laws. True, Hegel does not talk about "assisting"
>> the
>> > >> learning subject, but rather of subordinating them.
>> > >> Andy
>> > >> At 06:07 PM 15/12/2006 -0800, you wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >>> Andy,
>> > >>>
>> > >>> I totally agree with your extended analysis of Hegel. The problem
>> > is
>> > >>> that when we look at the reality of the relations that arise
>> between
>> > >>> conquered and conquerers the patterns of assimilation are really
>> quite
>> > >>> different. The conquered often "shuck and jive", move slowly,
>> > withdraw
>> > >>> into smaller and smaller universes where they preserve the core of
>> > their
>> > >>> identity prior to being conquered. Eric Wolf called this the "gods
>> > >>> beneath the altar". As I remember Benjamin's "Theses on Historical
>> > >>> Materialism", he pointed to this: histories are stopped but not
>> > >>> necessarily eliminated, these chronological frameworks within
>> which
>> > the
>> > >>> phylogenetic zopeds exist, but they are waiting to begin
>> > again. History
>> > >>> isn't unilinear, something Marx saw quite clearly in the
>> ethnological
>> > >>> studies he was undertaking at the end of his life. For Hegel,
>> history
>> > >>> was unilinear and Reason was the telos toward which everything
>> > cultural
>> > >>> and historical moved. Not so Marx.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Another important thing I remember about the hegelian master-slave
>> > >>> dialectic concerns the role of work in developing the universal
>> > essence
>> > >>> that later becomes the basis of the post-feudal civilizations.
>> Very
>> > >>> materialistic really.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> The question I think about a lot, especially in light of the
>> "andean
>> > >>> cosmovision" movements, of which Evo Morales is a happy surfer, is
>> > >>> whether the elements that have been conserved can be developed
>> again
>> > >>>
>> > >> with
>> > >>
>> > >>> their own dynamic, that the "other" way of putting the pieces
>> together
>> > >>> can become a dynamic in it's own right. There is a very advanced
>> > >>> movement down here in that direction. Right now, the City of Villa
>> el
>> > >>> Salvador, originally a "squatter's settlement" to the south of
>> Lima
>> > >>> (something very comparable to El Alto's relationship with La
>> Paz in
>> > >>> Bolivia) is hosting a "Reawaken the Native Gods (wakas)" reunion,
>> > >>> inviting shamans from the highlands to Paracas (the third most
>> > important
>> > >>> ceremonial site at the time of the Conquest) for three days to
>> pray
>> > and
>> > >>> dance and revitalize those spiritual forces. A lot of people here
>> > move
>> > >>> in that direction which isn't a simple nationalism since it is
>> > >>> pan-Andean, refers to the non-European, to another ontology as one
>> > >>>
>> > >> friend
>> > >>
>> > >>> puts it.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Like I said, I don't think Hegel sheds much light on this
>> process or
>> > >>> how the conquered manage to preserve that sense of identity in
>> codes
>> > >>>
>> > >> that
>> > >>
>> > >>> resist rational penetration.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Paul
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Andy Blunden wrote:
>> > >>> Paul, I let my contribution to this thread drop, because I wasn't
>> > sure
>> > >>>
>> > >> how
>> > >>
>> > >>> much a compare-and-contrast of Hegel's master-servant and
>> Vygotsky's
>> > >>>
>> > >> ZOPED
>> > >>
>> > >>> was useful. But anyway ...
>> > >>>
>> > >>> The essence of the master-slave dialectic is this (IMO): the
>> master
>> > >>> incorporates the material energies of the servant into its own
>> system
>> > of
>> > >>> needs and their satisfaction, so that all the artefacts of the
>> > conquered
>> > >>> subject are destroyed as artefacts and their materiality (the
>> land,
>> > >>> products, etc and the bodies of the human individuals) is
>> re-organised
>> > as
>> > >>> part of the subjectivity of the coloniser (their meaning is
>> changed),
>> > by
>> > >>> virtue of the dominated people labouring under the direction of
>> the
>> > >>>
>> > >> master,
>> > >>
>> > >>> meeting the master's needs according to the methods of the master,
>> the
>> > >>> servant's lands and bodies being redefined as resources for
>> meeting
>> > the
>> > >>> needs of the master. The servant not only loses all control of
>> their
>> > own
>> > >>> activity, but are forced into activity which they neither
>> understand
>> > nor
>> > >>> see the need for. Thus the "unhappy consciousness." But as Paul
>> says,
>> > by
>> > >>> performing the activity defined by the coloniser's subjectivity,
>> they
>> > >>> become officienados in that activity, thus arises (development
>> and)
>> > >>> self-consciousness.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> The servant's material activity mediates between the master's
>> needs
>> > >>> (consciousness) and their satisfaction in the form of culture; the
>> > >>>
>> > >> master's
>> > >>
>> > >>> culture and consciousness mediates between the slave's activity
>> and
>> > their
>> > >>> consciousness of that activity.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> The shared core of this conception with Vygotsky's ZPD is that of
>> the
>> > >>> dominant culture, represented by a dominant subject, determines
>> both
>> > the
>> > >>> activity that the 'learner' must perform and the needs being
>> > fulfilled;
>> > >>> doing without understanding leads to understanding of doing,
>> > ultimately,
>> > >>> the non-subject becomes a free and equal member of the dominant
>> > activity
>> > >>>
>> > >> an
>> > >>
>> > >>> culture by learning to reproduce it by their own activity.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> For Hegel this is the dialectic by which *self-consciousness
>> emerges*;
>> > it
>> > >>> is the dialectic relating subjective consciousness and objective
>> > >>> consciousness.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> I don't know if that help anything or not. I'm not sure.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Andy
>> > >>> At 01:45 PM 15/12/2006 -0800, you wrote:
>> > >>>
>> > >>>> mike,
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> I've just gone back to read some xmca posts -- been computer
>> deprived
>> > >>>> for a bit and stuck to using internet cabinets in Lima for very
>> brief
>> > >>>> stuff. I had erased a lot of messages but found that I hadn't
>> read
>> > the
>> > >>>> one you originally posted, to which I'm now replying, probably
>> > >>>>
>> > >> postponing
>> > >>
>> > >>>> it until I could read more carefully. Then I went to the xmca
>> website
>> > >>>>
>> > >> to
>> > >>
>> > >>>> check the thrread in detail and found it had bifurcated, someone
>> > >>>>
>> > >> posted a
>> > >>
>> > >>>> reply, changing the subject name to something about more
>> competent
>> > >>>> peers. That thread grew a lot and I haven't read all those
>> messages
>> > so
>> > >>>> I'm not sure whether the original thread concerning
>> > >>>>
>> > >> cultural-historical
>> > >>
>> > >>>> zopeds continued there.
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> The way you phrased the problem was quite clear and Andy's
>> response
>> > >>>> about conquest and colonization most interesting. resonating with
>> an
>> > >>>> earlier exchange around the book about native american
>> science. In
>> > the
>> > >>>> 1500s the conquering Europeans were arguably less culturally
>> advanced
>> > >>>>
>> > >> in
>> > >>
>> > >>>> many fields of human practices (engineering, mathematics,
>> astronomy,
>> > >>>> agriculture, institutional administration, just to mention a few)
>> > than
>> > >>>> the people they conquered. They really only had an advantage in
>> > >>>> weaponry. And there was absolutely no zoped functioning in either
>> > >>>> direction it seems, just a master-slave relation. For Hegel that
>> > >>>> relation turns into a pyrrhic victory followed by the
>> esse"Unhappy
>> > >>>> Consciousness" in which the dominated slave realizes its own
>> nce to
>> > be
>> > >>>> the negation of the Individual and the true universality of
>> > >>>>
>> > >> consciousness
>> > >>
>> > >>>> as something trans-individual. The slave realizes that s/he is
>> the
>> > >>>>
>> > >> truth
>> > >>
>> > >>>> of the Master. I always recall the scene from the movie Spartacus
>> > when
>> > >>>>
>> > >> the
>> > >>
>> > >>>> Roman general asks: Who is Spartacus? and one by one all of the
=== message truncated ===
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jan 03 2007 - 07:06:19 PST