1 / 26

Ben Bachmair

Ben Bachmair. Historical perspective on appropriation as a key term for a socio-cultural ecology and an educational framework for mediated learning The discussion of contexts. How to construct a theoretical frame for mobile learning? .

emily
Télécharger la présentation

Ben Bachmair

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Ben Bachmair Historical perspective on appropriation as a key term for a socio-cultural ecology and an educational framework for mediated learning The discussion of contexts

  2. How to construct a theoretical frame for mobile learning? Because of the restricted time of the symposium I am considering just one pathway way through the theoretical field. I am trying to explain appropriation by correlating - cultural products, which (a) are results of meaningful activities within the shifting society’s structures and (b) form the objective layer of a culture. - child development.

  3. The poles of appropriationare * the pre-given, culturally /socially produced world. It is the ‘product’ pole of the objectified culture, e.g. the alphabet * child development - the subject pole

  4. The interrelation of child development and and cultural products (“manifestations of the human spirit” Georg W. F. Hegel, 1807) is a theoretical result of the Enlightenment The German Idealism, mainly Wilhelm v. Humboldt (1767-1835), widened this interrelation to the concept Bildung / formation with appropriation in its centre. *Child development is constitutively based *on the appropriation of cultural products and their inherent, objectified social experiences. *Therefore child development is always in relation to the alienated counterpart of the culturally unknown, which contains the risk to distract from the cultural and personal identity.

  5. What educational questions are relevant on appropriation within the poles of cultural products and child development? One urgent issue is on the contexts of development, learning and mobile media within media convergence

  6. The recent version of the problem is the user generated context discussed among others by Paul Dourish 2004, Rose Luckin et al 2009, John Cook et al 2007. The pedagogical question was raised with the term of situated learning by Jean Lave, Etienne Wenger 1990

  7. The theoretical target of this presentation is to apply Lew Vygotsky’s concept of the “zone of proximal development” of the 1930s: *to combine user generated contexts as cultural products *with child development and *with learning of the school.

  8. Learning as docking the curriculum to proximal zones of child develop- ment

  9. The theoretical basics of appropriation within a “zone of proximal development” were depicted in the 1930s by Lew Vygotsky in the discussion with the young Jean Piaget Vygotsky, Lew (1986/ 1934). Thought and Language. Edited by Kozulin, Alex. Cambridge, MA. MIT Press Vygotsky, Lew (1978 / 1930). Mind in Society. The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Edited by Cole, Michael et al.. Cambridge, MA. Harvard University Press

  10. Vygotsky’s critique of child development just as an unfolding of inner capacities Vygotsky criticises of the concept of development in the uprising psychology of child development / the early work of Jean Piaget (1927, 1932, 1933). Development of “higher psychological functions” was seen by the young Piaget as a process of “unfolding of the child’s organically predetermined system of activities” (Vygotsky 1978/ 1930, p. 55)

  11. Critique of socialization as “mechanical displacement”: “Theoretically, socialization of thought is seen by Piaget as mechanical abolition of characteristics of the child’s thought … All that is new in development comes from … replacing the child’s own mode of thought. … The entire process of development appears as mechanical displacement of one mentality by the other. The child’s own thinking plays no constructive role in the process, being simply gradually replaced by an adult mode of reasoning.” (Vygotsky 1986 / 1934, p. 155)

  12. Vygotsky’s contrasting model:child development as *internalization of the social outside (“social speech) (1978/ 1930, p. 27) * in the line of the “child’s developmental level” * within a “zone of proximal development” to the cultural products. * The main dynamic is assimilation (1986, p 154).

  13. The school’s task is to “create the zones of proximal development” ( Vygotsky 1978/ 1930, p. 90)

  14. “We [Vygotsky] propose that an essential feature of learning is that it creates the zone of proximal development; That is, learning awakens a variety of internal developmental processes; that are able to operate only when the child is interacting with people in his environment and in cooperation with his peers. Once these processes are internalized, they become part of the child’s independent developmental achievement.”

  15. Child development and mobile contexts Mike Sharples et al. (2007; S. 223): A “central concern must be to understand how people artfully engage with their surroundings to create impromptu* sites of learning”. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impromptu *Impromptu, a Scheme-based live programming environment; *impromptu is a free-form musical composition with the character of an improvisation, usually for a solo instrument, such as piano.”)

  16. The new cultural forms of mobile and individualised mass communication as “zone of proximal development” Example for discovering such zones/ contexts Cyrill’s peer group recorded a mobile video at a railway station. The boys investigated with a mobile video the German white out drops. The public debate criticised the video on a video platform as provocation, insult and harassment of vulnerable old people

  17. Cyrill’s video as part of a self generated context Cyrill is a German migrant of the 2nd generation, 18 years old, in opposition to the society’s main stream

  18. Educational options for contexts:Docking at user generated contexts as proximal zones of development (Vygotsky 1930, 1934) Docking at the interactive context The peer group of boys in late puberty, during the night, flaneurs looking for cool fun; Occasional contact(s) to a young right wing German male adult; Nazi symbols Heavy negative reaction of the regional public and the justice

  19. Docking at the context of media convergence Cyrill’s confiscated video was part of his web performance among other on the media platform myspace.com

  20. Docking at the context /zone options of the socio-cultural milieu Cyril has a migrant background within the socio-cultural milieu of a hedonistic subculture (Sinus Sociovision): Self idealisation as an underdog, but better than the silly Germans. To investigate the real German underdogs and to have fun.

  21. The context / zone options of Cyrill’s socio-cultural milieu in terms of lifestyle and living room Sinus BC3: Hedonistic-subcultural milieu, Sinus Sociovision 2007: Report Migranten-Milieus, slide 123

  22. Developmental context/ zone options on myspace.com in terms of identity and software expertise

  23. developmental zone of self images and identity

  24. Conclusion The cultural product of user generated contexts within the individualised mass communication can be assimilated by the school for curricular learning tasks as zone of proximal development which bridges the poles ‘child development’ and ‘cultural products’ of appropriation.

More Related