XMCA Mail 2005_02: Re: Self-Determination theory versus SCT and

These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes, and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving.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.

Re: Self-Determination theory versus SCT and AT

thank you for your input that we also need to look at the psychological
issues. Now, I would like to add some more issues, trying to identify
what activities we might need to address, respectively research on when
it comes to e-learning systems under a sociocultural approach. Below is
a table on some activities on which I am wondering if research exists
(I hope it comes out properly - especially for those who set their mail
to just .txt - below is made in richt text):

-------------------------------------------------
|Type of Activity/ | Prescriptive | Descriptive|
|Contrasting system | System | System |
-------------------------------------------------
|Didactical: | | |
|- learning | X | X |
|- teaching | X | X |
-------------------------------------------------
|Self-control | X | |
-------------------------------------------------
|Feedback | X | X |
-------------------------------------------------
|Algorithmic | | X |
-------------------------------------------------
|Heuristic | X | X |
-------------------------------------------------
|Strategic | X | X |
-------------------------------------------------
|Computational | | X |
-------------------------------------------------
|Logical | | X |
-------------------------------------------------

Now, the interesting thing would be to know of course, what the
discrepancy means between the types of activities between prescriptive
and descriptive systems. Also, according to [1], the author claims: “…
the major notations that are used in the study of learning are learning
task, actions, goals, motives, feed-back, self-control, algorithm,
heuristic, strategies, and the like” (p. 306). These notions are equal
to learning AND teaching. Hm, by "notion" does Bedny mean ACTIVITY? In
view of all attributes except for ACTIONS and GOALS, I could agree that
the characteristics address ACTIVITY - to me, it would make sense. But
what about if not? What about "actions" and "goals"?

Also, when it comes to discussing about the underlying activities in
descriptive systems (e.g., logical, algorithmic), I can surely talk
about and be happy to discuss, but as soon as it comes to the
prescriptive system way of thinking in terms of activities - I am lost.
Lost, in view of conceptual (well, maybe more or less ok because I see
it), but surely in view of theoretical (what AT' methodological
approach would be suitable) and practical (what data, etc.) issues. So,
I would be more than happy any input.

Maybe, I should also say that my terminology of
descriptive/prescriptive or design systems is absolutely not far off
from SCT or AT terminology and philosophy e.g., Kari Kuutti (thank you
Mike!), Olav W. Bertelsen - apart from previous authors I mentioned
earlier in the cognitive domain (e.g., Simon).

> Jim, George, Lara et al---
>
> I have been too swamped with other obligations and my interest in the
> discussion article to participate properly in this thread.
>
> Reading down through your discussion and examples has been very
> intersting.
> For other reasons, today I have been reading Nardi's edited volume on
> context and
> consciousness and Hutchin's Cognition in the Wild both of which refer
> to differnt aspects
> of cultural historical activity approahces, especially in relation to
> the concept of
> distributed cognition ( see also the Pea edit volume with that titrle).
>
> It seems to me that it would be useful to dig into some of the
> literature on cultural
> psychology and distributed cognition in this discusion as well as the
> burgeoning
> lliterature on design experimentation, which overlap in important
> ways. The writings
> of Karri Kutti in that literature and others who are specifically
> worring about e-learning ought to be helpful.
>
> It appears that many people are too preoccupied with local matters to
> interact in this venu at present, bu the issues being raised ought to
> be address by al.
> mike

[1] G. Bedny and D. Meister, The Russian Theory of Activity: Current
Applications to Design and Learning, Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, 1997.

Research in e-Learning Objects, e-Learning meta data standards,
didactical activity, Systemic-Structural Activity Theory, and
Socio-cultural Theory