Life in the Hive: Supporting Inquiry into Complexity Within the Zone of Proximal Development

Abstract

Research into students’ understanding of complex systems typically ignores young children because of misinterpretations of young children’s competencies. Furthermore, studies that do recognize young children’s competencies tend to focus on what children can do in isolation. As an alternative, we propose an approach to designing for young children that is grounded in the notion of the Zone of Proximal Development (Vygotsky 1978) and leverages Activity Theory to design learning environments. In order to highlight the benefits of this approach, we describe our process for using Activity Theory to inform the design of new software and curricula in a way that is productive for young children to learn concepts that we might have previously considered to be “developmentally inappropriate”. As an illuminative example, we then present a discussion of the design of the BeeSign simulation software and accompanying curriculum which specifically designed from an Activity Theory perspective to engage young children in learning about complex systems (Danish 2009a, b). Furthermore, to illustrate the benefits of this approach, we will present findings from a new study where 40 first- and second-grade students participated in the BeeSign curriculum to learn about how honeybees collect nectar from a complex systems perspective. We conclude with some practical suggestions for how such an approach to using Activity Theory for research and design might be adopted by other science educators and designers.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Notes

  1. 1.

    We present a somewhat simplified description of this system here for the sake of brevity. For additional details we recommend Seeley’s (1995) excellent description of the social organization of the honeybee hive.

  2. 2.

    BeeSign can also be seen at http://www.joshuadanish.com/beesign.

References

  1. Chaiklin S (2003) The zone of proximal development in Vygotsky’s analysis of learning and instruction. In: Kozulin A, Gindis B, Ageyev VS, Miller SM (eds) Vygotsky’s educational theory in cultural context. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  2. Cole M (1996) Cultural psychology: a once and future discipline. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  3. Cole M, Engeström Y (1993) A cultural-historical approach to distributed cognition. In: Salomon G (ed) Distributed cognitions: psychological and educational considerations. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp 47–87

    Google Scholar 

  4. Danish JA (2009a) BeeSign: a computationally-mediated intervention to examine K-1 students’ representational activities in the context of teaching complex systems concepts. Unpublished Dissertation, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles

  5. Danish JA (2009b) BeeSign: a design experiment to teach kindergarten and first grade students about honeybees from a complex systems perspective. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association

  6. Danish JA (under review) BeeSign: the role of activity in shaping kindergarten and first-grade students’ engagement with honeybees collecting nectar as a complex system

  7. Engeström Y (1987) Learning by expanding: an activity—theoretical approach to developmental research. Orienta-Konsultit Oy, Helsinki

    Google Scholar 

  8. Engeström Y (1990) Learning, working and imagining: twelve studies in activity theory. Orienta-Konsultit Oy, Helsinki

    Google Scholar 

  9. Engeström Y (1999) Activity theory and individual and social transformation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

  10. Erickson F (2006) Definition and analysis of data from videotape: some research procedures and their rationales. In: Green J, Camilli G, Elmore P (eds) Handbook of complementary methods in educational research, 3rd edn. American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC

  11. Griffin P, Cole M (1984) Current activity for the future: the Zo-ped. New Dir Child Dev 23:45–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hmelo-Silver CE, Azevedo R (2006) Understanding complex systems: some core challenges. J Learn Sci 15(1):53–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Hmelo-Silver CE, Pfeffer MG (2004) Comparing expert and novice understanding of a complex system from the perspective of structures, behaviors, and functions. Cogn Sci 28(1):127–138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Hmelo-Silver CE, Marathe S, Liu L (2007) Fish swim, rocks sit, and lungs breathe: expert-novice understanding of complex systems. J Learn Sci 16(3):307–331

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Jacobson MJ, Wilensky U (2006) Complex systems in education: scientific and educational importance and implications for the learning sciences. J Learn Sci 15(1):11–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kaptelinin V, Nardi BA (2006) Acting with technology: activity theory and interaction design. MIT Press, Cambridge

  17. Metz KE (1995) Reassessment of developmental constraints on children’s science instruction. Rev Educ Res 65(2):93–127

    Google Scholar 

  18. Metz KE (1997) On the complex relation between cognitive developmental research and children’s science curricula. Rev Educ Res 67(1):151–163

    Google Scholar 

  19. NRC (1996) National science education standards. National Academy Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  20. Peppler K, Danish JA, Zaitlen B, Glosson D, Jacobs A, Phelps D (2010). BeeSim: leveraging wearable computers in participatory simulations with young children. In: Proceedings of the 9th international conference on interaction design and children. ACM, Barcelona, pp 246–249

  21. Resnick M (1996) Beyond the centralized mindset. J Learn Sci 5(1):1–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Resnick M (1999) Decentralized modeling and decentralized thinking. In: Feurzeig W, Roberts N (eds) Modeling and simulation in precollege science and mathematics. Springer, New York, pp 114–137

    Google Scholar 

  23. Resnick M, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Epistemology & Learning Research Group (1990) Overcoming the centralized mindset: towards an understanding of emergent phenomena. Epistemology and Learning Group, MIT Media Laboratory, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  24. Roth W-M (2007) On mediation: toward a cultural-historical understanding. Theory Psychol 17(5):655–680

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Sabelli NH (2006) Complexity, technology, science, and education. J Learn Sci 15(1):5–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Sandoval WA (2004) Developing learning theory by refining conjectures embodied in educational designs. Educ Psychol 39(4):213–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Seeley TD (1995) The wisdom of the hive: the social physiology of honey bee colonies. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  28. Vygotsky LS (1978) Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  29. Wertsch JV (1981) The concept of activity in soviet psychology: an introduction. In: Wertsch JV (ed) The concept of activity in soviet psychology. M.E. Sharpe, Armonk, pp 3–36

    Google Scholar 

  30. White B (1993) Thinker tools: causal models, conceptual change, and science education. Cogn Instruc 10(1):1–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Wilensky U, Reisman K (2006) Thinking like a wolf, a sheep, or a firefly: learning biology through constructing and testing computational theories—an embodied modeling approach. Cogn Instruc 24(2):171–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Wilensky U, Resnick M (1999) Thinking in levels: a dynamic systems perspective to making sense of the world. J Sci Educ Technol 8(1):3–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Wilensky U, Stroup W (2000) Networked gridlock: students enacting complex dynamic phenomena with the HubNet architecture. Paper presented at the fourth annual international conference of the learning sciences, Ann Arbor

  34. Witte SP, Haas C (2005) Research in activity: an analysis of speed bumps as mediational means. Written Commun 22(2):127–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joshua A. Danish.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Danish, J.A., Peppler, K., Phelps, D. et al. Life in the Hive: Supporting Inquiry into Complexity Within the Zone of Proximal Development. J Sci Educ Technol 20, 454–467 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-011-9313-4

Download citation

Keywords

  • Science education
  • Inquiry
  • Zone of proximal development
  • Complex systems