Embracing History through Transforming It

Abstract

This paper contrasts the notions of learning, teaching and development as these are conceptualized in two versions of constructivism: the socio-interactional one (in which Piagetian and Vygotskian insights are often merged) versus the one founded by Vygotsky and expanded in activity theory (especially by Galperin and Davydov). We reveal a broad conceptual commonality that makes these frameworks compatible at one level, but draw profound contrasts in their premises concerning history (including cultural tools) and the concept of the social. Examples of educational practices (including results of own year-long observation) are used to illustrate implications of these premises. We argue that the Vygotskian framework expanded by a dialectical view of history can be used to devise education that takes history to the fullest and yet does not fall into the traps of a conservative agenda with its two extremes of unidirectional authoritarianism or laissez-faire individualism. It is on this foundation that a coherent and unified constructivist approach committed to ideals of social justice can be construed in the future.

Intercorporeality and ethical commitment: an activity perspective on classroom interaction

“…Thus, the students in episodes 2 and 3 stay with their doubling strategies rather than spontaneously developing, as Piaget's child subjects appear to do, culturally advanced forms of mathematics. Joint practical activity, when it involves the teacher and cultural-historically marked artifacts (Bartolini Bussi & Mariotti, 2008;Vianna & Stetsenko, 2006), realizes historical collective motives that come to be reflected in the consciousness of the students as a result of joint practical activity. Thus, the ideal object of the activity, which reflects historical collective understandings, emerges for the students in and as a result of interactions with the teacher.…”

Medical Education From a Theory–Practice–Philosophy Perspective

“…Sociocultural theories are numerous and fall under the philosophical umbrellas of socioculturalism, social constructivism, 46 socio-interactional constructivism, cultural-historical, activity-based constructivism, 47 and sociocultural transformative activist stance, 48 among others. Since its introduction by Lev Vygotsky and his students (eg, Aleksei Leontiev, Alexander Zaporozhets, and Alexander Luria) in 1930s Stalinist Russia and by Jerome Bruner and Michael Cole among others in the 1970s West, the development and use of socio-cultural-historical theories has substantially expanded in all fields of education.…”

Vygotsky’s theory of method and philosophy of practice: implications for trans/formative methodology

“…The onto-epistemological status and significance of transformative social practices, as well as profound implications of this position for practically all aspects in theorizing human development and social life, need to be more fully explored and absorbed, avoiding the coupling of this radical premise, as is often the case, with the oldfashioned ideas and views. This kind of exploration has been carried out in a series of publications by the present author in advancing what has been termed the transformative activist stance (TAS, see STETSENkO, 2008, 2010, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016; for applications, see SAWCHUk & STETSENkO, 2008;VIANNA, HOUGAARD, & STETSENkO, 2014;VIANNA & STETSENkO, 2006. This work in part overlaps with several newly emerging philosophical directions including new materialism, feminist materialism, critical pedagogy, and participatory and dialogical approaches, among others.…”