These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,
and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving.
Content on this site may not meet current digital accessibility standards.
If you require an alternative, accessible format of any information found on this site,
please contact Bruce Jones, bjones@ucsd.edu to request an accommodation.
These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,
and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving.
Content on this site may not meet current digital accessibility standards.
If you require an alternative, accessible format of any information found on this site,
please contact Bruce Jones, bjones@ucsd.edu to request an accommodation.
Thanks Nelson! These look wonderful!! greg On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 9:59 PM, Nelson Mok <nmok@student.unimelb.edu.au>wrote: > It may be useful to understand microgenesis and its relation to 3 other > domains: phylogenesis, ontogenesis and sociogenesis. > Microgenesis refers to development in individual cases of interaction > Phylogenesis refers to our biological inheritance that allows for a kind of > development unique to humans > Ontogenesis refers to development over an individual's lifetime > Sociogenesis refers to changes in the mediational artifacts of a culture > > They're related in that, for example, ontogenetic development provides or > limits the possibilities of microgenetic development; and microgenetic > development can accumulate to ontogenetic development. > > I don't know if there is a definitive statement of such links, but i got it > from an article by Gillespie and Cornish (2010), who draw on the work of > Duveen (who i haven't read - but i've listed some of the references below) > > One thing to note is that microgenesis is conceptualised as the object of > study, while there is a microgenetic methodology for investigating it. > > Rosenthal has a nice discussion of microgenesis but traces it back to > Werner rather than Vygotsky > > Some resources: > Duveen & Lloyd 1990 - Introduction; in Social representations and the > development of knowledge > Duveen & De Rosa 1992 - Social representations and the genesis of social > knowledge > Gillespie & Cornish 2010 - What can be said? identity as a constraint on > knowledge production > > Rosenthal 2002 - Microgenesis, immediate experience and visual processes in > reading > Siegler 2006 - Microgenetic analyses of learning. (In Kuhn & Siegler > (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Volume 2: Cognition, perception, and > language) > Wagoner 2009 - The experimental methodology of constructive microgenesis > (in Valsiner (ed), Dynamic process methodology in the social and > developmental sciences) > Wertsch 1985 - Vygotsky and the social formation of mind > > > I hope thats helpful. I'm by no means a scholar on microgenesis or the > microgenetic method - i'm new to the area (and this mailing list) myself > > > I'm curious if folks out in XMCA-land could point me in the direction of > > good papers that define/explain or use the concept of microgenesis (or > any > > of its kin terms)? > __________________________________________ > _____ > xmca mailing list > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca > -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Department of Anthropology Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson __________________________________________ _____ xmca mailing list xmca@weber.ucsd.edu http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca