Advertisement

The Anthropological Paradigm of Practice-Based Learning

  • Catherine HasseEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Springer International Handbooks of Education book series (SIHE)

Abstract

The anthropological approach to studying culture has implied observations of and participation in other people’s practices however strange and exotic they may seem. These practice-based experiences are the backbone of the anthropological profession. Anthropology has for a long time been more or less consciously entangled with defining these experiences as learning experiences and subsequently defining culture as the result of learning processes. It is, however, primarily in relation to the general focus on practice that the anthropological paradigm of practice-based learning takes shape.

The article introduces the early anthropological interests in the concept of learning as tied to teaching and culture transmission in ‘exotic’ cultures and discuss how ‘learning’ from the 1970s and onwards gradually began to establish itself as a major subfield in anthropology including cross-cultural studies of schooling ‘home and abroad’. The studies of practice and the studies of learning, however, for a long time went their separate ways. Since Margaret Mead learning theory in anthropology has been intertwined with concepts like enculturation or socialisation (Schwartz 1980, ix) but often without a clear cut definition relating learning to practice. Some anthropologists have called for an explicit exploration of the concept of learning in relation to ethnographic practices and knowledge making as well as a lentil for studying cultural transmission (e.g. Hansen 1982; Wolcott 1982). Others have made an implicit use of the concept of learning as an explanatory term pointing to the anthropologists’ journey from novice to a more experienced knower of exotic cultures (e.g. Stoller 1987; Briggs 1970). The field where anthropological learning theory has been most systematically developed is in relation to the anthropology of education, but here little has been done in terms of developing concepts of practice-based learning (see e.g. Anderson-Levitt 2012). Finally some anthropologists studied people’s everyday life ‘at home’ and found new ways of understanding culture using a cognitive rather than a practice-based learning perspective. Over time the anthropological engagements with teaching and learning have turned towards an explicit interest in learning in connection with practical activity and agency (Pelissier 1991) and most recently the concept of practice-based learning has been considered a key concept for the practice of anthropology itself (Lave 2011; Jordan 2014). This expansion has been developed in close collaboration with primarily Vygotsky- or Piaget-inspired cultural psychologists on the one hand and researchers of work-place learning on the other. More or less simultaneously a new interest in workplace practices began to appear in anthropological research but it was rarely connected to an interest in learning and cognition. These work-oriented anthropologists developed a practice-based framework of understanding workplace activities, but often without an explicit interest in connecting learning to practice. With the seminal fieldwork and subsequent publications by anthropologists like Jean Lave, Brigitte Jordan, Dorothy Holland and Ed Hutchins the interest in combining learning and practice spurred a new paradigm for studying practice-based learning through participant observation. The final section take a closer look at this last development combining theoretical issues with the future perspectives of theories on practice-based learning in the field.

Keywords

Anthropology Practice-based learning Ethnography Fieldwork Participant observation Cognitive anthropology Cultural learning Materials and materiality Cultural transmission 

References

  1. Anderson-Levitt, K. M. (2012). Introduction. Anthropologies and ethnographies of education worldwide. In K. M. Anderson-Levitt (Ed.), Anthropologies of education: A global guide to ethnographic studies of learning and schooling. Oxford: Berghahn Books.Google Scholar
  2. Astuti, R., & Bloch, M. (2012). Anthropologists as cognitive scientists. Topics in Cognitive Science, 4(3), 453–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bateson, G. (1972/1985). Social planning and the concept of deutero-learning. In Steps to an ecology of mind (pp. 127–138). San Francisco: Chandler.Google Scholar
  4. Bateson, G., & Mead, M. (1942). Balinese Character: A photographic analysis. New York: New York Academy of the Sciences.Google Scholar
  5. Bauer, J., & Gruber, H. (2007). Workplace changes and workplace learning: Advantages of an educational micro perspective. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 26(6), 675–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Billett, S. (2004). Workplace participatory practices: Conceptualising workplaces as learning environments. Journal of Workplace Learning, 16(6), 312–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Billett, S. (2010). Learning through practice. In S. Billett (Ed.), Learning through practice: Models, traditions, orientations and approaches (pp. 1–20). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Billett, S. (2011). Learning in the circumstances of work: The didactics of practice. Éducation et didactique, 5(2), 125–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bloch, M. (2005). Where did anthropology go?: Or the need for ‘human nature’. In M. Bloch (Ed.), Essays on cultural transmission. LSE monographs on social anthropology (pp. 1–20). Oxford: Berg Publishers.Google Scholar
  10. Bloch, M. (2012). Anthropology and the cognitive challenge (New departures in anthropology). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bourdieu, P. (1990). The logic of practice. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  12. Briggs, J. (1970). Never in anger: Portrait of an Eskimo family. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Bunn, S. (1999). The importance of materials. Journal of Museum Ethnography, 11, 15–28.Google Scholar
  14. Cole, M. (1996). Cultural psychology: A once and future discipline. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Cole, M., Glick, J., Gay, J., & Sharp, N. (1971). The cultural context of learning and thinking. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
  16. Czarniawska, B. (2012). Organization theory meets anthropology: A story of an encounter. Journal of Business Anthropology, 1(1), 118–140.Google Scholar
  17. D’Andrade, R. (1992). Schemas and motivation. In R. D’Andrade & C. Strauss (Eds.), Human motives and cultural models (pp. 23–44). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. D’Andrade, R. (1995). The development of cognitive anthropology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. D’Andrade, R., & Strauss, C. (Eds.). (1992). Human motives and cultural models. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Fenwick, T., & Edwards, R. (2010). Actor network theory in education. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  21. Garro, L. (2007). Effort after meaning in everyday life. In C. Casey & R. B. Edgerton (Eds.), A companion to psychological anthropology. Modernity and psychocultural change (pp. 48–71). New York: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  22. Geertz, C. (1973/1993). The interpretation of cultures. London: Fontana Press.Google Scholar
  23. Gherardi, S. (2000). Practice-based theorizing on learning and knowing. Organizations, 7(2), 211–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gherardi, S., Nicolini, D., & Strati, A. (2007). The passion for knowing. Organization, 14(3), 315–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Goodwin, M. (1993). Tactical uses of stories: Participation frameworks within boys and girls disputes. In D. Tannen (Ed.), Gender and conversational interaction (pp. 110–143). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Greenfield, P. M. (2004). Weaving generations together: Evolving creativity in the Zinacantec Maya. Santa Fe: SAR Press.Google Scholar
  27. Greenfield, P. M. (2007). Culture and learning. In C. Casey & R. B. Edgerton (Eds.), A companion to psychological anthropology. Modernity and psychocultural change (pp. 72–89).Google Scholar
  28. Hansen, J. F. (1982). From background to foreground: Toward an anthropology of learning. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 13(2), 189–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Harkness, S. (1973). Universal aspects of learning color codes: A study in two cultures. Ethos, 1(2), 175–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hasse, C. (2002). Learning physical space – The social designation of institutional culture. In FOLK temanummer “Culture of Institution/Institutions of Culture” (vol. 44, pp. 171–195). Copenhagen: Institute of Anthropology.Google Scholar
  31. Hasse, C. (2008). Cultural body learning – The social designation of institutional code-curricula. In T. M. Schilhab, M. Juelskjær, & T. Moser (Eds.), Body and LEARNING (pp. 193–215). Emdrup: The Danish School of Education Press.Google Scholar
  32. Hastrup, K., & Hervik, P. (1994). Introduction. In K. Hastrup & P. Hervik (Eds.), Social experience and anthropological knowledge (pp. 1–12). London/New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Holland, D., & Cole, M. (1995). Between discourse and schema: Reformulating a cultural-historical approach to culture and mind. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 26(4), 475–490.Google Scholar
  34. Holland, D., & Quinn, N. (Eds.). (1987). Cultural models in language and thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Holland, D., Lachicotte, W., Jr., Skinner, D., & Cain, C. (Eds.). (1998). Identity and agency in cultural worlds. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Hutchins, E. (1991). Organizing work by adaptation. Organization Science, 2(1), 14–39. Special Issue: Organizational Learning: Papers in Honor of (and by) James G. March (1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hutchins, E. (1993). Learning to navigate. In S. Chaiklin & J. Lave (Eds.), Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and context (pp. 35–63). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  39. Ingold, T. (1976). The Skolt Lapps today. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Ingold, T. (2000). The perception of the environment: Essays in livelihood, dwelling and skill. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ingold, T. (2005). Epilogue: Towards a politics of dwelling. Conservation and Society, 3(2), 501–508.Google Scholar
  42. Ingold, T. (2011a). Being alive. Essays on movement, knowledge and description. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  43. Ingold, T. (2011b). ‘Redrawing anthropology: Materials, movements, lines’. Anthropological studies of creativity and perception. Farnham: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  44. Jahoda, G. (1982). Psychology and anthropology: A psychological perspective. London: Academic.Google Scholar
  45. Jiménez, A. C. (Ed.). (2007). The anthropology of organisations: A reader. Aldershot: Ashgate/Dartmouth.Google Scholar
  46. Jordan, B. (2014) The double helix of learning: Knowledge transfer in traditional and techno-centric communities (this volume).Google Scholar
  47. Kimball, S. T. (1972). Learning a new culture. In S. T. Kimball & J. B. Watson (Eds.), Crossing cultural boundaries (pp. 182–192). San Francisco: Chandler.Google Scholar
  48. Lancy, D. F. (1980). Becoming a Blacksmith in Gbarngasuakwelle. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 11(4), 266–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Lancy, D. F., & Grove, M. A. (2011). “Getting noticed”: Middle childhood in cross-cultural perspective. Human Nature, 22(3), 281–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Lancy, D., Bock, J., & Gaskins, S. (Eds.). (2010). The anthropology of learning in childhood. Walnut Creek: AltaMira Press.Google Scholar
  51. Latour, B. (2004). How to talk about the body? The normative dimension of science studies. Body and Society, 10(2–3), 205–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Lave, J. (1977). Cognitive consequences of traditional apprenticeship training in West Africa. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 8(3), 177–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice: Mind, mathematics, culture in everyday life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Lave, J. (1993). The practice of learning. In S. Chaiklin & J. Lave (Eds.), Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and context (pp. 3–34). Cambridge: Cambridge University Pres.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Lave, J. (1997). Learning, apprenticeship, social practice. Nordisk Pedagogik, 17(3), 140–151.Google Scholar
  57. Lave, J. (2011). Apprenticeship in critical ethnographic practice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Levinson, B., & Pollack, M. (Eds.). (2011). A companion to the anthropology of education. New York: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  60. Levinson, B., Foley, D., & Holland, D. (Eds.). (1996). The cultural production of the educated person: Critical ethnographies of school and local practice. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  61. Marchand, T. H. J. (2001). Minaret building and apprenticeship in Yemen. Richmon: Curzon.Google Scholar
  62. McDermott, R. P. (1974). Achieving school failure: An anthropological approach to illiteracy and social stratification. In G. D. Spindler (Ed.), Education and cultural process. Toward an anthropology of education (pp. 82–118). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
  63. McDermott, R. P. (1993). The acquisition of a child by a learning disability. In S. Chaiklin & J. Lave (Eds.), Understanding practice. Perspectives on activity and context (pp. 269–305). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. McDermott, R. P., & Varenne, H. (1995). Culture as disability. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 26(3), 323–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Mead, M. (1928). Coming of age in Samoa. New York: William Morrow.Google Scholar
  66. Mead, M. (1935). Sex and temperament in three primitive societies. New York: William Morrow.Google Scholar
  67. Nicolini, D., Gherardi, S., & Yanow, D. (2003). Knowing in organization. A practice-based-approach. New York: M.E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
  68. Ochs, E., & Schieffelin, B. B. (1984). Language acquisition and socialization: Three developmental stories and their implications. In R. Shweder & R. Levine (Eds.), Culture theory: Essays on mind, self and emotion (pp. 276–320). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  69. Orlikowski, W. J. (2007). Sociomaterial practices: Exploring technology at work. Organization Studies, 28(9), 1435–1448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Orr, J. (1996) Talking about Machines. Ithaca, NY: Cornell UniversityGoogle Scholar
  71. Otto, T., & Bubandt, N. (Eds.). (2010). Experiments in holism: Theory and practice in contemporary anthropology. London: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  72. Pelissier, C. (1991). The anthropology of teaching and learning. Annual Review of Anthropology, 20, 75–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Quinn, N. (2005). Introduction. In N. Quinn (Ed.), Finding culture in talk: A collection of methods (pp. 1–34). New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Chapter 1.Google Scholar
  74. Rogoff, B., & Lave, J. (Eds.). (1984). Everyday cognition: Its development in social context. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  75. Sanday, P. R. (1979). The ethnographic paradigm(s). Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(4), 527–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Schwartz, T. (1980). Introduction. In T. Schwartz (Ed.), Socialization as cultural communication: Development of a theme in the work of Margaret Mead. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  77. Shore, B. (1996). Culture in mind: Cognition, culture and the problem of meaning. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  78. Shweder, R. A., & LeVine, R. A. (1984). Culture theory: Essays on mind, self and emotion. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  79. Sørensen, E. (2009). The materiality of learning technology and knowledge in educational practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  80. Spindler, G., & Spindler, L. (1982). Roger Harkes and Schönhausen: From the familiar to the strange and back. In G. Spindler (Ed.), Doing the ethnography of schooling. Educational anthropology in action. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
  81. Stoller, P. (1987). In Sorcery’s shadow: A memoir of apprenticeship among the Songhay of Niger. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  82. Strati, A. (2007). Sensible knowledge and practice-based learning. Management Learning, 38(1), 61–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Strauss, C. (1992a). Models and motives. In R. D’Andrade & C. Strauss (Eds.), Human motives and cultural models (pp. 1–20). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Strauss, C. (1992b). What makes Tony run? Schemas as motives reconsidered. In R. D’Andrade & C. Strauss (Eds.), Human motives and cultural models (pp. 191–224). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  85. Strauss, C., & Quinn, N. (1994). A cognitive/cultural anthropology. In R. Borofsky (Ed.), Assessing cultural anthropology (pp. 284–297). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  86. Strauss, C., & Quinn, N. (1997). A cognitive theory of cultural meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  87. Suchman, L. (2007). Plans and situated actions: The problem of human-machine communication. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  88. Suchman, L., Blomberg, J., Orr, J. E., & Trigg, R. (1999). Reconstructing technologies as social practice. American Behavioural Scientist, 43(3), 392–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Verran, H. (2001). Science and an African logic. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  90. Whiting, J. W. (1941). Becoming a Kwoma: Teaching and learning in a New Guinea tribe. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  91. Wolcott, H. F. (1982). The anthropology of learning. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 13(2), 83–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Wright, S. (1994). Anthropology of organizations. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  93. Yanow, D. (2006). Talking about practices: On Julian Orr’s talking about machines. Organization Studies, 27(12), 1743–1756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EducationUniversity of AarhusAarhusDenmark

Personalised recommendations