Post 4. When we use the term legitimate peripheral participation Lave is referring to this as an analytical tool to look at the learning process. So the peripheral is measured in terms of participation and non participation where one is moving towards being a participant learner, which is the sphere where the learning takes place. When one moves towards participation they are empowered and when one moves away from participation they are disempowered. In this sense, the community of practice is the location where practitioners come together. Thus Laves study on apprenticeship has shifted from a general theory of abstract principles derived from the generalities of apprenticeship case studies towards a method of learning that is empowered in terms of the practical engagement in the social context. Perhaps it would be valuable to consider our students as “practitioners” in that their place of learning is centered on the practice where concrete concepts are formed. (Lave 39-42)
Here is my dilemma as an intercultural educator, because of the history of western educational development among the Quichua, the majority of my students have a preconceived idea of formal education that encourages a passive engagement, or even a disengagement of learning the concept in the concrete setting, or even the classroom setting. There seems to be a general consensus that the teacher is the expert and they are the novice so the students learning is the teachers responsibility to teach in a high power distance setting, and participation or responsibility to learn from the student is absent.
It would be good at this point to side step and look at andragogy principles that place the responsibility of learning onto the learner, and dialogue teaching that engage the student through learning tasks and case studies as first steps of participation.
The interesting fact that apprentices in non-formal setting learn through within high power distance cultures, shows that situated learning can thrive among concrete cultures. The change needed at this point perhaps might relate more to an understanding of learning and an understanding of formal education,
Questions:
1. In your classes among indigenous groups does your student consider themselves a participant or a recipient in their act of learning?
2. Would restructuring our teaching in more concrete terms encourage your student participation?
Comments