Abstract
The sociocultural perspective on learning and development has met with some opposition, notably from those who find in it a lack of attention to the child’s active construction in these processes. Since, so the claim goes, this active construction is a central tenet of constructivism – whether that of Piaget or of von Glasersfeld – what is needed is a “synthesis” of constructivism with socioculturalism. Wertsch and Kazan offer such a synthesis, a “socioculturally situated constructivism” in which children learn “within the confines” of adult expertise. In this Chapter I argue that this is not an adequate account of what occurs in the Fast Plants videos. Rather, what can be observed is an ontological construction which is invisible to constructivism. In the course of their interactions together the students actively transform a sheet of paper first into a graph and then into a distribution, a public artifact and a mathematical object, which has now been reproduced in this book. An object of knowledge has been constructed and reconstructed in complex trajectories of collective activity. In at least one group this occurred without expert guidance. Differences in the teachers’ and the students’ preferred forms of representation raise questions about the definition of a single use of an artifact as appropriate, and about the definition of schooling as domestication. Learning, I suggest, is not change in subjective knowledge structures, it is transformation of known objects and of knowing subjects. Although adult authority often plays a part, it would be a mistake to see schooling as merely the socialization of novices by experts.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Bernstein, R. (1983). Beyond objectivism and relativism: Science, hermeneutics, and praxis. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Cobb, P., & Yackel, E. (1996). Constructivist, emergent, and sociocultural perspectives in the context of developmental research. Educational Psychologist, 31, 175–190.
Davydov, V. V. (1988). Problems of developmental teaching: The experience of theoretical and experimental psychological research (part 2). Soviet Education, 30, 3–83.
Dewey, J. (1916/1966). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. New York: Free Press.
diSessa, A. A., Hammer, D., Sherin, B., & Kolpakowski, T. (1991). Inventing graphing: Meta-representational expertise in children. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 10, 117–160.
Felicilda, M. (2001). A critical analysis of Wittgenstein’s philosophy of language. Diwatao, 1(1), [http://www.geocities.com/philodept/diwatao/philosophy_of_language.htm]
Greeno, J., & the middle school mathematics through applications project group. (1998). The situativity of knowing, learning, and research. American Psychologist, 53, 5–26.
Lenin, V. I. (1902/1971). What can be done? Peking: Foreign Languages Press.
Packer, M. J. (2001). Changing classes: School reform and the new economy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Packer, M. J. (2008). Is Vygotsky Relevant? Vygotsky’s Marxist psychology. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 15(1), 8–31.
Packer, M. J., & Goicoechea, J. (2000). Sociocultural and constructivist theories of learning: Ontology, not just epistemology. Educational Psychologist, 35, 227–241.
Piaget, J. (1937/1955). The construction of reality in the child. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Rotman, B. (1977). Jean Piaget: Psychologist of the real. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 27(2), 4–13.
von Glasersfeld, E. (1993). Questions and answers about radical constructivism. In K. Tobin (Ed.), The practice of constructivism in science education (pp. 23–38). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Wittgenstein, L. (1969). On certainty. San Francisco: Harper & Row.
Yaroshevsky, M. (1989). Lev Vygotsky (S. Syrovatkin, Trans.). Moscow: Progress.
Acknowledgements
Thanks are due to Tim Koschmann for feedback on a draft of this chapter, and for his invitation to an enjoyable and intellectually stimulating conference.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Packer, M.J. (2011). Schooling: Domestication or Ontological Construction?. In: Koschmann, T. (eds) Theories of Learning and Studies of Instructional Practice. Explorations in the Learning Sciences, Instructional Systems and Performance Technologies, vol 1. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-7582-9_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-7582-9_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4419-7581-2
Online ISBN: 978-1-4419-7582-9
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)