Reflections on Points of Departure in the Development of Sociocultural and Activity Theory

doi:10.1017/CBO9780511499937.006

4 - Reflections on Points of Departure in the Development of Sociocultural and Activity Theory

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 25 August 2009

Edited by

Ed Elbers and

Harry Daniels: Affiliation:
Department of Education, University of Bath, United Kingdom
Bert van Oers: Affiliation:
Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam
Wim Wardekker: Affiliation:
Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam
Ed Elbers: Affiliation:
Universiteit Utrecht, The Netherlands
René van der Veer: Affiliation:
Universiteit Leiden

Book contents

Get access

Summary

In this chapter I attempt to clarify, elaborate, compare, and contrast sociocultural approaches to learning. After addressing the tension between accounts of mediated action and activity (or semiotic and activity-based accounts), I reflect on the notion of tool or artefact as mediator between individual and social and suggest that this requires further clarification. My next step is to address the issue of the production of tools or artefacts in contexts, asking how we understand the production of tools or artefacts in terms of the social relations that obtain in the circumstances in which they were produced. Lastly, I discuss the need to extend the analysis beyond words and ask how we can develop methodologies that enable us to explore effects of activity that is mediated by and through nonverbal means. I illustrate this section through reference to empirical work.

THE TENSION BETWEEN ACCOUNTS OF SEMIOTIC AND ACTIVITY-BASED MEDIATION

The concept of “mediation” opens the way for the development of a nondeterministic account in which mediators serve as the means by which the individual acts upon and is acted upon by social, cultural, and historical factors. There is considerable tension and debate as to the nature of such factors. Some approaches have tended to focus on semiotic means of mediation (Wertsch, 1991), whereas others have tended to focus more on activity itself (Engeström, 1993). Engeström argues that the positioning of Leontiev, one of the progenitors of activity theory, as someone who took no account of semiotic mediation was and is erroneous.

Information

Type: Chapter
Information: The Transformation of Learning
Advances in Cultural-Historical Activity Theory
, pp. 58 - 75

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511499937.006 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Bakhurst, D. (1995). Lessons from Ilyenkov. Communication Review 1 (2), 155–178.CrossRef Google Scholar

Berger, J. (1972). Ways of seeing. London: BBC Publications/Penguin.Google Scholar

Bernstein, B. (1977). Class codes and control: Vol. 3. Towards a theory of educational transmissions (2nd rev. ed.). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar

Bernstein, B. (1993). Foreword. In Daniels, H. (Ed.), Charting the agenda: Educational activity after Vygotsky (pp. xiii–xxiv). London: Routledge.CrossRef Google Scholar

Bruner, J. S. (1990). Acts of meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Cole, M. (1994). A conception of culture for a communication theory of mind. In Vocate, D. (Ed.), Intrapersonal communication: Different voices, different minds. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Cole, M. (1996). Cultural Psychology: A once and future discipline. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University.Google Scholar

Christie, F. (Ed). (1999). Pedagogy and the shaping of consciousness. London: Continuum.Google Scholar

Engeström, Y. (1990). Activity theory and individual and social transformation. Open address at the Second International Congress for Research on Activity Theory, Lahti, Finland, May 21–25.Google Scholar

Engeström, Y. (1993). Developmental studies of work as a testbench of activity theory: The case of primary care medical practice. In Chaiklin, S. & Lave, J. (Eds.), Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and practice (pp. 64–103). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Gearhart, M., & Newman, D. (1980). Learning to draw a picture: The social context of an individual activity. Discourse Processes, 3, 169–184.CrossRef Google Scholar

Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar

Hawkes, T. (1977). Structuralism and semiotics. London: Methuen.CrossRef Google Scholar

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

Ivic, I. (1989). Profiles of educators: Lev S. Vygotsky (1896–1934). Prospects, 9 (3), 427–436.CrossRef Google Scholar

Lave, J. (1993). The practice of learning. In Chaiklin, S. & Lave, J. (Eds.), Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and contest (pp. 3–34). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Lektorsky, V. A. (1999). Activity theory in a new era. In Engeström, Y., Miettinen, R., & Punamäki, R.-L. (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 65–69). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Pea, R. D. (1993). Practices of distributed intelligence and designs for education. In Salomon, G. (Ed.), Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 47–87). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Ratner, C. (1997). Cultural psychology and qualitative methodology: Theoretical and empirical considerations. London: Plenum Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Tudge, J. R. H., & Winterhoff, P. A. (1993). Vygotsky, Piaget, and Bandura: Perspectives on the relations between the social world and cognitive development. Human Development, 36, 61–81.CrossRef Google Scholar

Tul'viste, P. (1989). Education and the development of concepts: Interpreting results of experiments with adults with and without schooling. S-4, 27 (1), 5–21.Google Scholar

Veer, R., & Valsiner, J. (1991). Understanding Vygotsky: A quest for synthesis. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Vygotsky, L. S. (1981). The development of higher forms of attention. In Wertsch, J. V. (Ed.), The concept of activity in Soviet psychology (pp. 189–140). New York: Sharpe.Google Scholar

Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky: Vol. 1. Problems of general psychology. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar

Wertsch, J. V. (1985). Vygotsky and the social formation of mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Wertsch, J. V. (1998). Mind as action. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Wertsch, J. V., Rio, Del P., & Alvarez, A. (Eds.). (1995). Sociocultural studies of mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this book is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.