Situated Learning
Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation is a seminal work in the field of socio-historical (or social constructivist) learning theory. The authors of this book -- Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger -- believe that the concept of situated learning can serve as a bridge between the learning as cognitive transformation and learning as forming an identity as a member of a community of practice. Legitimate peripheral participation describes the process by which this individual transformation occurs. It also serves as an analytic framework for investigating learning as an integral aspect of everyday activity and the process by which communities reproduce.
School
The authors very clearly state that the subject of their book is not an instructional strategy, but an analytical viewpoint on learning. In fact, the authors "decided to set aside issues of schooling." (41) Although the authors did not deal with the subject of schooling directly, the book is interspersed with enough clues to make decoding the authors tacit view of schooling a fairly easy task.
The authors begin by stating that "they do not deny that learning can take place where there is teaching," but they "do not take intentional instruction to be in itself the source or cause of learning." (40) This is not a strng endorsement of schooling.
They go on to say that:
many contemporary vocational education and union based "apprenticeship" programs implicitly reject an apprenticeship model and strive to approximate the didactic mode of schooling in their educational programs, which inevitably adds to the difficulties of implementing effective apprenticeship. (77)
In other words, modern apprenticeship practices are rendered ineffective because they are perverted into approximations of school.
During a discussion of participation as the means for community reproduction, the authors add that "problems of schooling are not, at their most fundamental level, pedagogical. Above all, they have to do with the ways in which communities of adults reproduce themselves." (100)
They conclude by saying "it is essential to give teaching and learning independant status as analytic concepts. Primary reliance on the concept of pedagogical structuring in learning research may well prevent speculation about what teaching consists of, how it is perceived, and how -- as peceived -- it effects learning. (113)
Hey Pot, this is kettle. You're black.
It's unfortunate that the authors did not lend their critical eye toward schooling for a number of reasons.
First, it would have required that the authors unpack and expose their own tacit assumption and beliefs regarding schooling.
Based on the comments above, it is easy to surmise that their view of schooling is heavily informed by the industrial revolution assembly line model where knowledge is uniformly affixed to students. This transmission model amounts to little more than a caricature of american public schooling.
Just as the authors roundly criticized apprenticeship researchers for their uninformed and stereotypical understanding of apprenticeship, I believe the authors neglect to consider the diversity of contemporary and historical forms of schooling.
It is unfortunate that the authors tacit criticism falls prey to the same sort of reductivist thinking they are quick to criticize.
Furthermore, a wealth of research into learning and schooling that does not focus on pedagogical structuring existed at the time this book was written. Dewey and Bruner wrote extensively about the value of exepriental -- as opposed to didactic -- education. Critical researchers such as Jean Anyon and Ivan Ilich delve into the hidden curriculum of schooling in great depth.
Conculsion
I would recommend this excellent book to anyone interested in education. However, I question the authors uneven treatment of educational systems.
Apprenticeship is an undoutably effective educational form. However, I think we need to guard ourselves lest we slip into nostalgic glorfication of a system that has never proven effective on a large scale.
At the same time, there is no denying that the aims of public schooling are not entirely pedagogical. Public schooling serves two purposes -- social mobility and social stability. Therefore, while it is clearly a means of reproducing an existing social structure, it alsp provides some access to advancing within that structure.
Perhaps Yucatec midwives have no choice but pursue their familial calling.
School
The authors very clearly state that the subject of their book is not an instructional strategy, but an analytical viewpoint on learning. In fact, the authors "decided to set aside issues of schooling." (41) Although the authors did not deal with the subject of schooling directly, the book is interspersed with enough clues to make decoding the authors tacit view of schooling a fairly easy task.
The authors begin by stating that "they do not deny that learning can take place where there is teaching," but they "do not take intentional instruction to be in itself the source or cause of learning." (40) This is not a strng endorsement of schooling.
They go on to say that:
many contemporary vocational education and union based "apprenticeship" programs implicitly reject an apprenticeship model and strive to approximate the didactic mode of schooling in their educational programs, which inevitably adds to the difficulties of implementing effective apprenticeship. (77)
In other words, modern apprenticeship practices are rendered ineffective because they are perverted into approximations of school.
During a discussion of participation as the means for community reproduction, the authors add that "problems of schooling are not, at their most fundamental level, pedagogical. Above all, they have to do with the ways in which communities of adults reproduce themselves." (100)
They conclude by saying "it is essential to give teaching and learning independant status as analytic concepts. Primary reliance on the concept of pedagogical structuring in learning research may well prevent speculation about what teaching consists of, how it is perceived, and how -- as peceived -- it effects learning. (113)
Hey Pot, this is kettle. You're black.
It's unfortunate that the authors did not lend their critical eye toward schooling for a number of reasons.
First, it would have required that the authors unpack and expose their own tacit assumption and beliefs regarding schooling.
Based on the comments above, it is easy to surmise that their view of schooling is heavily informed by the industrial revolution assembly line model where knowledge is uniformly affixed to students. This transmission model amounts to little more than a caricature of american public schooling.
Just as the authors roundly criticized apprenticeship researchers for their uninformed and stereotypical understanding of apprenticeship, I believe the authors neglect to consider the diversity of contemporary and historical forms of schooling.
It is unfortunate that the authors tacit criticism falls prey to the same sort of reductivist thinking they are quick to criticize.
Furthermore, a wealth of research into learning and schooling that does not focus on pedagogical structuring existed at the time this book was written. Dewey and Bruner wrote extensively about the value of exepriental -- as opposed to didactic -- education. Critical researchers such as Jean Anyon and Ivan Ilich delve into the hidden curriculum of schooling in great depth.
Conculsion
I would recommend this excellent book to anyone interested in education. However, I question the authors uneven treatment of educational systems.
Apprenticeship is an undoutably effective educational form. However, I think we need to guard ourselves lest we slip into nostalgic glorfication of a system that has never proven effective on a large scale.
At the same time, there is no denying that the aims of public schooling are not entirely pedagogical. Public schooling serves two purposes -- social mobility and social stability. Therefore, while it is clearly a means of reproducing an existing social structure, it alsp provides some access to advancing within that structure.
Perhaps Yucatec midwives have no choice but pursue their familial calling.
posted by plieb at 2:22 PM
2 Comments:
I wish I thought that there was any sign of Dewey or Bruner in contemporary public schooling, but the sad fact is that much of public schooling is even worse than in the time when this book was written. The focus on standardized testing and the struggle to meet the requirements of the Leave No Child Behind Act mean that students have an even more impoverished experience of learning in the vast majority of public schools, despite the best intentions of well-meaning teachers and administrators. There are islands of hope, it is true. But I think the book is really trying to provide a different view of how people learn, focusing on some key issues that are definitely central: identity formation is a big one. How many kids blow off learning because they don't want to be identified as a teacher's pet, or worse? I was intrigued, from an ecological point of view, with the way the environment of apprentices is so much richer as learning contexts, in terms of social structure, collaboration, and cognitive tools or resources.
Comparing apprenticeship practice favorably with undefined "didactic modes" feels like a cheap shot.
How does apprenticeship compare with smaller scale didactic modes such individual tutoring or near-peer reciprocal teaching?
Research shows the beneficial effects of smaller student to teacher ratios.
Perhaps apprencticeship compares favorably to public schooling, but is this a question of method or scale?
How might apprenticeship practice change if instituted on a large scale?
I felt somehow cheated that the authors didnt give schooling a deeper treatment.
Post a Comment
<< Home