Re: [xmca] Kozulin & Feuerstein and the mediated learning paradigm

[Larry Purss <lpscholar2@gmail.com>]

Carol

I intuitively share your perspective not to teach "metacognition" as a
separate topic but Alex Kozulin and Feuerstein seem to take another
perspective when considering REMEDIAL instruction.  I respect Kozulin's deep
insights as a scholar so thought it a topic worth exploring. Through the
dialectic of different perspectives  clarity may shine a few rays through
the clouds.

Larry.

On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 10:59 PM, Carol Macdonald <carolmacdon@gmail.com>wrote:

> Larry
>
> It's not a good idea to teach metacognitive strategies on their own. They
> should emerge from content learning, so there is a context for them. As you
> can see, the less able students are unable to recognise the occasions for
> the use of the metacognitive strategies, and don't recognisie that their
> cognitive strategies have led them into error. So metacogntition fails to
> kick in when there is cognitive failure. It is precisely these students
> that
> need to be led through the ZPD.  As I have said before, metacognitive
> strategy teaching has been very exciting for educational psychologists, and
> there is even a  journal called "Metacognition",  but I totally fail to
> share their enthusiasm--for one thing, nobody has done a longitudinal study
> on this type of teaching. (Actually, we should share this judgement--has
> anyone done a longitudinal study about the effects of leading learning
> through the ZPD?)
>
> Carol
>  On 25 January 2011 03:39, Larry Purss <lpscholar2@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Mike
> >
> > I know from this CHAT list  that Kozulin and Feuerstein are not accurate
> in
> > their assessment of the CHAT perspective.  The broader question I was
> > asking,  "Is it useful or helpful to try to "teach" basic cognitive
> > prerequisites or should those prerequisites be built into subject matter
> > content?" Mike, I  taught IE 20 years ago and I consider the person who
> > gained the most from this activity was myself as I became more aware of
> > basic cognitive prerequisites.  But I always thought these basic
> processes
> > could be incorporated into other school activities such as math or
> language
> > arts.  IE does help a teacher become more aware of the complexity of what
> > they are asking students to do but I've often wondered about trying to be
> > content neutral and focusing instruction on the basic cognitive
> > prerequisites which  become the object of instruction.
> >
> > I posted this comment because it clearly articulated a tension I've
> > wondered
> > about in teaching "metacognitive strategies" directly as the object of
> > activity in contrast to teaching specific content and leading students to
> > metacognitive perspectives.  If I am able to get clearer in these
> > contrasting approaches, I will be better able to talk to staffs about the
> > distinctions.
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 4:47 PM, mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Larry-- This dialogue goes back a long time and I defer to Alex K. The
> > > attribution to focus on the impact of writing on thought does not
> easily
> > > square with what i recall the conclusions of Scribner and Cole and
> > Vygotsky
> > > does not emerge from that research as the theoretical lynch pin.
> Perhaps
> > > for
> > > this reasons many of my Russian colleagues firmly disavow our
> conclusions
> > > regarding "the consequences of literacy."
> > >
> > > Perhaps Alex can be more informative.
> > > mike
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 4:28 PM, Larry Purss <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thought I would ask others to respond to the perspective of Kozulin
> and
> > > > Feuerstein's Mediated Learning Experience [MLE] paradigm and its
> > contrast
> > > > with the notion of ZPD.
> > > > In the article I've attached on page 5 the authors state,
> > > > "Both MLE and IE focus on the formation of the cognitive
> prerequisites
> > of
> > > > learning in students.  The process of acquisition of learning
> material
> > > > requires certain cognitive prerequisites beyond that of the basic
> > > functions
> > > > of perception, memory, and attention.  The student is supposed to be
> > able
> > > > to
> > > > DETECT the problem in the pool of raw data, to SELECT the relevant
> > > > parameters, to FORM hypothesis and check them, and so on.  The
> > inadequate
> > > > school performance of the student can easily stem from
> UNDERDEVELOPMENT
> > > of
> > > > these prerequisites rather than poor acquisition of specific rules or
> > > > operations.....IE serves as an operational tool that allows teachers
> to
> > > > develop these previously lacking prerequisites in a SYSTEMATIC way.
> > > > Though there is an obvious affinity between the Vygotskian notion of
> > > > learning activity and the process of the formation of cognitive
> > > > prerequisites discussed above, there is also a certain difference
> > between
> > > > the goals of MLE-based learning and learning according to the
> > Vygotskian
> > > > paradigm.  According to Feuerstein et al (1980), the acquisition of
> MLE
> > > > does
> > > > not directly depend on either CONTENT of learning or MODALITY of
> > > > interaction."
> > > >
> > > > This MLE paradigm is contrasted with Vygotsky's approach which
> > emphasizes
> > > > the modality of interection. The authors state,
> > > >
> > > > "Vygotsky (1978) and his followers (Cole and Scribner, 1974: Scribner
> > > > 1997),
> > > > on the contrary [to MLE] place considerable emphasis on changes
> > occurring
> > > > in
> > > > the child's reasoning under the influence of the acquisition of
> higher
> > > > order
> > > > symbolic tools, first of all literacy and writing.  For them, there
> is
> > a
> > > > principal distinction between interactions carried out non-verbally,
> > > > orally,
> > > > and with the help of written symbolization.  Writing externalizes
> > > thought,
> > > > takes it out of its concrete context, and makes it available for
> > > CONSCIOUS
> > > > analysis..  Literacy skills require an analytic approach.  They are
> > > > acquired
> > > > consciously and deliberately, thus shifting cognitive functions from
> > the
> > > > natural responsive mode to the cultural deliberate mode.  One may
> > > > legitimately pose the question of whether the same type of
> > > 'transcendence'
> > > > or mediation of meaning can be achieved with and without the
> experience
> > > of
> > > > literacy." (p.6)
> > > >
> > > > The authors emphasize that Vygotsky's approach highlights that each
> > > subject
> > > > in school has its own conceptual structure the acquisition of which
> > > depends
> > > > on the theoretical mode of learning proposed by Vygotskians. In
> > contrast
> > > > the
> > > > authors suggest MLE is a tool for developing the BASIC COGNITIVE
> > > > PREREQUISITES which interface with the conceptual structure of the
> > > > theoretical mode of learning subject matter, and
> > > >
> > > > "a proper borderline should be found at which the GENERAL FUNCTION
> > > promoted
> > > > by IE become absorbed and subjugated by this higher order conceptual
> > > > structure.  Vygotsky (1978) indicated that 'natural' cognitive
> > functions
> > > do
> > > > not disappear with the emergence of higher order literacy-based
> > > functions,
> > > > but become incorporated and transformed within the new conceptual
> > > systems..
> > > > One may say that, in a similar way, BASIC COGNITIVE PREREQUISITES
> > become
> > > > absorbed within the new conceptual systems.. Thus, the last outcome
> for
> > > > teacher training can be formulated as the necessity for a teacher to
> > > > distinguish BETWEEN THE GENERAL COGNITIVE PREREQUISITES and those
> > higher
> > > > order cognitive systems which alone can support conceptual learning"
> > > >
> > > > I am trying to link these notions of BASIC cognitive prerequisites
> with
> > > > Lakoff and Johnson's notions of PRIMARY METAPHORS but that is for
> > another
> > > > discussion.  I was wondering what others thought about the assumption
> > of
> > > > basic cognitive prerequisites, [not perception, or attention which
> are
> > > more
> > > > basic and general] that must be mediated PRIOR to theoretical
> > conceptual
> > > > systems of subject matter are taught.?
> > > >
> > > > I have my doubts that content can be separated and basic cognitive
> > > > prerequisites taught PRIOR to teaching conceptual systems but MLE
> > posits
> > > > these underlying basic cognitive prerequisites must be in place
> BEFORE
> > > > teaching specific theoretical subject matter
> > > >
> > > > Larry
> > > >
> > > > Larry
> > > >
> > > > __________________________________________
> > > > _____
> > > > xmca mailing list
> > > > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > > > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > > >
> > > >
> > > __________________________________________
> > > _____
> > > xmca mailing list
> > > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > >
> > __________________________________________
> > _____
> > xmca mailing list
> > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> >
>
>
>
> --
> WORK as:
> Visiting Lecturer
> Wits School of Education
> HOME (please use these details)
> 6 Andover Road
> Westdene
> Johannesburg 2092
> +27 (0)11 673 9265 <tel:+27116739265>   +27 (0)82 562 1050<tel:+27825621050>
>  __________________________________________
> _____
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca