3. Generation (social) constructivism :

1. 3. Generation (social) constructivism: CulturalHistoricalActivityTheory: CHAT

2. 3.Generations of socio-culturaltheory • 1. generation Vygotsky • 2. generation Leontjev & Luria ( Russianpsychologists) • 3. Vygotskyrevisited – adapted to the US. ( thoughfirmlyembedded in the Sovjet society made fewerexplicit references to marxism) • M. Cole, LCHC, Y. Engeström, Jean Lave and others

3. CHAT ”reinvents” Vygotsky • The separation of intellect and affect as subjects of studywas a major weakness of traditionalpsychology, since it made the thoughtprocessappear as an autonomous flow of ”thoughts” thinkingthemselves, segregated from the fullness of life, from the personalneed and interests,theinclinations and impulses of the thinker”(p. 10)

4. Whyactivity and practicetheory ? • An emphasison thedialecticalcharacter of the fundamental relations constituting human experience ( determined and determining) • A focusonexperience in the worldthatrejects the structure and dynamics of psychological test procedures as a universallyappropriatetemplate. • A shift in the boundaries of cognition and the environmentsuchthatcognition is stretchedacross mind , body, activity and setting = distributedcognition

5. Increasinginterest in CHAT(review of Educational Research 2007 77:186)

6. Tensions in education and learning • Epistemological: • Theory – praxis • Decontextualised and embodiedknowledge • Individual and social learning • Problems of transfer • CHAT offers the possibility to overcomesome of thesedividesbesidesrecovering more humane forms of education.

7. KeyConcepts in CHAT • Context ( from container to rope (weaving)) • Activity • Legitimateperipheral participation(Lave and Wenger) • Practice • Artifacts and tools • Culture • Situatedcognition, distributedcognition

8. The meaning of context • ” What is designated by the word ” situation” • is not a single objector event or set of objects and events. For weneverexperience nor form judgmentsaboutobjects and events in isolation, but only in connectionwith a contextualwhole. This latter is calleda situation. • In actualexperiencethere is neversuchisolatedsingularobjector event, an object is always a special part, phaseoraspect of an environingexperiencedworld – a situation.

9. Cognition,context & situation. • Isolatingwhat is cognized from lifecircumstances is obstructive to understandingcognition. • isolation ( typical of experimental procedures in psychological studies of cognition) gives rise to the illusion thatourknowledge of anyobject, be it ” an orange, a rock, a piece of breadorwhatever” is knowledge of the object in isolation from the situation in which it is encountered.

10. Ecology of human development ((UrieBronfenbrenner 1979) • Bronfenbrennerdescribesembedded systems startingwith the microsystem at the core and proceedingoutwardsthroughmesosystems to the macrosystem.However • While more inclusivelevels of contextmayconstrainlowerlevels, they do not causethem in a unilinearfashion.

11. Meaning of context: ” thatwhichsurrounds” le Schooldistrict country principal parents teacher International institutions teacher Learner, task, concept lesson classroom School organisation Community organisation

12. CHAT:Context as thatwhichweavestogether. • Context_ contextere(latin): ” thatwhichweavestogether”. ” Contextmightbecompared to a rope. The fibres thatmake up the ropearediscontinuous, whenyou twist themtogether ,youdon´tmakethemcontinuous, youmake the treadcontinuous… eventhough it may look in a tread as thougheach of thosepraticlesaregoing all through it, thatisn´t the case. ”

13. The meaning of context

14. Context and tools • The relevant order ofcontextwilldependcrucially upon thetoolsthroughwhichoneinteractswith the world and these in turndepend upon one´sgoals and otherconstraints in action. • The combination of goalstools and settingconstitutes the context of behavior and waysin whichcognitioncanbesaid to relate to thatcontext.

15. Mediationaltriangle of culturalhistoricalschool Artifact Object Subject

16. Artifact-mediated action • Mediated action does not replacebasicpath (subj-obj). • Culturedoes not replacebiology. • ”One does not cease to stand on the ground and look at the treewhenonepicks up an axe to chop the tree”

17. Artifact –mediated action • The incorporation of toolsinto the activitycreates a new structural relation in which the cultural and naturalroutesoperatesynergistically. • Throughactiveattempt to appropriatetheirsurroundings to theirowngoals, peopleincorporateauxilliarymeans (includingotherpeople) in to their actions, giving rise to the distinctivetriadicrelationship of subject-medium-object.

18. Practice & Habitus • The French sociologist/anthropologist Pierre Bourdieu(1977)uses the concept of habitus. • Habitus is the product of the materialconditions of existence and the set of principles for generating and structuringpractices. Habitus constitutes the (usually )unexaminedbackground set of assumptionsabout the world. Habitus is history made nature(p. 78).

19. Practice & Habitus • ” The habitus is the universalizingmediationwhichcauses an individualagent´spracticeswithouteitherexplicitreasonorsignifyingintent , to be none the less ” sensible” and ”reasonable”.(p. 79)

20. ActivityTheory ( Engeström) • Engestrømrepresents his conception of activity in a mannerthatbothincludes and enlarges upon the earlycultural-historicalpsychologistsnotions of mediation as individual action.

21. The Structure of a human activity System ( Engeström 1987) Mediating artifacts: Sense , meaning

22. YrjeEngeström • Professor of Adult Education and Director of the Center for Activity Theory and Developmental Work Research at University of Helsinki. ( Now CRADLE) • Professor of Communication at University of California, San Diego, where he served as Director of the Laboratory of Comparative Human Cognition from 1990 to 1995. Works within the framework of cultural-historical activity theory.

23. CRADLE • Welcome to the web pages of the Center for Research on Activity, Development and Learning – CRADLE. We are a multidisciplinary research unit, focused on transformations and learning in collective activity systems and individuals facing new societal, cultural and technological challenges. Our work is inspired by cultural-historical activity theory and more broadly sociocultural approaches to human development. We are a community of researchers based at University of Helsinki. • Our research is based on interplay between theory and practice. We work in close collaboration with various work organizations, educational institutions, and other communities of practice. Much of our research uses formative interventions, such as Change Laboratories. We are part of a growing international network of research groups which share a similar theoretical approach. • In our Center, we have a good number of research projects as well as a doctoral program and a Master’s program. Feel free to contact our researchers and students. Your questions and suggestions are welcome. We will be happy to give you more information. • YrjöEngeströmand Kai HakkarainenDirectors of CRADLE • http://www.helsinki.fi/cradle/index.htm • ContactEmail: yrjo.engestrom [at] helsinki.fi / Homepage >>Tel. +358 9 191 44574, fax +358 9 191 44579

24. Michael Cole • Michael Cole, Professor, Ph.d. • Cole's work focuses on the elaboration of a mediational theory of mind. He has conducted cross-cultural research on cognitive development, especially as it relates to the role of literacy and schooling. His recent research has been devoted to a longitudinal study of individual and organizational change within educational activities specially designed for afterschool hours. These systems link universities and local communities and allow a study of the dynamics of appropriation and use of new technologies and cultural-historical approaches to human development. mcole@ucsd.edu

25. The Laboratory of ComparativeHuman Cognition • The Laboratory of Comparative Human Cognition was established at UCSD in 1978. As its name implies, members of LCHC pursue research which takes differences among human beings as a starting point for understanding human mental processes. They adopt an ecological approach to our subject matter, looking at systems that include mediating tools, people, representations, institutions and activities. • Populations varying in age, culture, biological characteristics, social class, schooling, ethnicity, etc. are studied in a wide range of activity settings in various social institutions (schools, hospitals, workplaces) and countries.  • Correspondingly, we use a wide range of methods (such as participant observation, ethnography, experimentation, discourse-analysis) to bring in the role of culturally inflected collective social practices, change over time, and the cultural-historical context of the people among whom we work in the phenomena we study.  • http://lchc.ucsd.edu/ • http://lchc.ucsd.edu/mca/ ( Mind, Culture and Activity)

26. Break Jette Steensen: jest@viauc.dk

27. Critique of schooling • ”The process of schoolingseems to encourage the ideathat the ” game of School” is to learnsymbolicrules of various kindsthatthere is not supposed to bemuchcontinuitybetweenwhatoneknowsoutsideschool and whatonelearns in school. There is growingevidencethatnot onlymayschooling not contribute in a directqndobviousway to performance outsideschool, but alsothatknowledgeacquiredoutsideschool is not alwaysused to support in-schoollearning.Schooling is coming to look increasinglyisolated from the rest of whatwe do.(Resnick, 1987, p. 15)

29. 3 approaches to break the encapsulation of schoollearning • Expandedlearning as a didactical transformation of activitytheory • ” Ascending from the abstract to the concrete” (Davydov) • ”Legitimateperipheral participation ( Jean Lave & EtienneWenger) • Learning by expanding (YrjeEngström)

30. Davydov • Davydov´stheorysuggeststhat the encapsulation of schoollearning is due to an empiricist, descriptive and classificatory bias of traditionalteaching and curriculum design. • Schoolknowledgebecomes inert becauseits ”kernels” areneverdiscovered by the students and they do not get a chance to deduce, explain and master practicallyconcretephenomena and problems in the environment.

31. Davidov The methodascending from the abstract to the concrete, models Eg. The phenomenon of the phases of the moon in the context of astronomical discoveryon The student And the group A theoretical Conceptrelated Astronomical phenomena classroom Teachersteach and control Students study Code of behavior Standards of grading

32. Lave & WengercriticizesDavydov. • Davidov´stheorydoesnotpredicatequalitativechanges in therules, community and division of labourexisting in traditionalschoollearning. • Davidov´s approach mightbeconceivedclose to a narrowcognitive and scientisticidea and consequently is criticized by Lave & wenger: • ” there is noaccount of the place of learning in the broadercontextof the social world ”

33. Legitimateperipheral participationLave and Wenger • ” Therearestronggoals for learningbecauselearners as peripheral participantscandevelop in view of what the whole entreprise is about, and whatthere is to belearned. Learningitself is an improvisedpractice: a learning curriculum unfolds in opportunities for engagement in practice.”(Lave & Wenger 1991)

34. Consequences for schoollearningLave and Wenger • The logical solution wouldbe to creategoodcommunities of practicewithinschools. • The social organization of the schoolshouldbechanged so that it wouldallow for communities of practicalactivitydemonstrating Lave & wenger+s 3 maincriteria:

35. Schoollearning ( Lave & Wenger) • A. participants must have broadaccess to different parts of the activity and eventuallyproceed to full participation in coretasks. • B.Thereshouldbeabundanthorizontalinteractionbetween participants • C Technologies and structures of the community of practice must be transparent, innerworkingscanbecomeavailable for learner´sinspection.

36. Schoollearning (Lave and Wenger) • The legitimateperipheral participation approach seems to propose to solve the problem of encapsulation of schoollearning by • pushingcommunities of practice from the outsideworldinto the school.

37. Legitimateperipheral participation model Technologies of transparency and simulation,stories, tools of establishedpractice Phases of the moon in the context of practical reproduction mastery The student as a legitimate participant Community of practicewithin the school Code of behavior Standards of skill

38. Expansivelearning (y. Engeström) • The expansivelearning approach would break the encapsulation of schoollearning by a stepwisewidening of the object and context of learning. • The expandedobject of learningconsists of • the context of criticism, • the context of discovery, • and the context of application of the specificcurricularcontents under scrutiny. • This kind of expansive transition is itself a process of learningthroughself-organisation from below. The self-organisation manifests itself in the creation of networks of learningthattranscend the institutionalboundaries of the schooland turn the schoolinto a collective instrument.

39. Learning by expanding • Keyquestions: • Why not let the students themselves find out howtheirmisconceptionsaremanufactured in school ? • Why is thisbeingtaught and studied in the firstplace ? • Learners must have an opportunity to analyzecritically and systematicallytheircurrentactivity and itsinnercocntradictions.

40. Criticalanalysis • In a schoolsetting , the criticalanalysis of currentpracticecouldwell start with a hard look at textbooks and curricula in particularcontentareas. • Secondly the learners must have an opportunity to design and implement in practice a way out, a new model for theiractivity. Thismeansthat the learners must work out a new way of doingschoolwork

41. Breaking the encapsulation of learning (Resnick) • Davidov:createpowerfulintellectualtools in instructionthat students cantakeinto the outsideworld and graspitscomplexitieswith the help of thosetools. • Lave & Wenger: createcommunities of practicewithinschools and participate in communities of practiceoutsideschool. • Expansivelearning: widenstepwise the object and context of learning. The expandedobject of learningconsists of the context of criticism, discovery and application

42. Model of expansivelearningl School as a collective instrument Instruments of criticism + Lave and Davydov astronomicalphenomena i Criticism, discovery and application Team of students , teacherspractitioners + localpeople Knowledge as socially constructedpractice + Expandedstructure of learningactivity Complementarycodes of criticism, discovery and application Communitynetwork of learning classroom

43. Expandedlearning (Engeström) • The relationshipbetween • *the context of criticism, • opportunity to analyse currentactivity and innercontradictions (textbooks, schoolingetc) • * the context of discovery • Davydovianprocess of finding,modeling and using a kernelabstraction to makesense of the entiresubject matter • * the context of practical social application • Involvement in using and reproducingconcepts in releant social practiceinside and outsideschool.

44. Arguments for expansivelearning • People must become ”good adaptive learners so theycanperformeffectivelywhensituations areunpredictable and tasksdemandchange”(resnick 1987,p.18) • ”collectives of people must becomegoodexpansivelearners, so theycandesign and implementtheirown futures as theirprevalentpractices show symptoms of crisis”(Engestrøm2005,p.173) • ” The expansivelearning approach exploits the actuallyexistingconflicts and dissatisfactionamongteachers, students, parents and othersinvolved in oraffected by schoolingand invitesthem to join in a concrete transformation of the currentpractice”(Engeström 2005, p. 173)

45. Dilemmas • Informal – formal learning • Inside – outsideschool • Collaborativelearning – individuallearning • Behaviorismvscognition • Directinstructionvsconstructivism • Mentoringvsfacilitating • Learnercentred – teachercentred • Individualvs society • Elite educationvsmasseducation • Skillsvscriticalthinking

46. Bourdieu, P.(1977): Outline of a Theory of Practice. New York: Cambridge Universitypress. • Brown,J.S.,Collins,A., Duguid, P.(1989: Situatedcognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher 18, 32 – 42. • Dewey, J.(1938/1963) Experience and Education.New York. Macmillan. • Engeström, Y.(1987): Learning by expanding. Helsinki:Orienta-SonsultitOy. • Resnick,L.B.(1987) Learning in school and out. Educational Researcher 16(99, 13-20 • Gardner, H.(1990) The difficulties of school: Probablecauses, possiblecures. Daedalus 119(2), 85-113 • Lave, J. and Wenger, E(1991)Situatedlearning. Legitimateperipheral participation. Cambridge UniversityPress. • Palincsar,A.S.(1989). Lesscharteredwaters. Educational Researcher, 18(4), 5-7