Situated+Learning


 * Situated learning** is a model of learning first proposed by [|Jean Lave] and [|Etienne Wenger].

Lave argues that learning as it normally occurs is a function of the activity, context and culture in which it occurs (i.e., it is situated). This contrasts with most classroom learning activities which involve knowledge which is abstract and out of context. Social interaction is a critical component of situated learning -- learners become involved in a "community of practice" which embodies certain beliefs and behaviors to be acquired.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Situated_learning http://tip.psychology.org/lave.html

Lave, Jean, & Wenger, Etienne, **Situated Learning; Legitimate Peripheral Participation** (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991). The term "community of practice" was introduced in this book. .... "Learning itself is an improvised practice: A learning curriculum unfolds in opportunities for engagement in practice. It is not specified as a set of dictates for proper practice." p 93. http://cofpractice-biblio.wikispaces.com/Classics.%28foundational%29

shares ideas with constructionism, is constructionism a hybrid of situated learning and constructivism? closely allied with learning objects? see also [|enterprise education]

It was a pleasure to do the [|ScreenIt] PD with Vincent Trundle of ACMI 20/10/06. This was a mixed group of grade 5 students & teachers from the [|Karingal cluster] of schools.

I think that such mixed groups are well worth repeating. Though the teachers may have not learned as much, it was much less likely to become inert learning. It was "[| situated learning]"

Teachers saw first hand how a class could run, they knew what skills they would need to acquire to bring this back to school, they were much more likely to implement at school. In fact, they had no choice but to implement after seeing the kids' response.

For me, it was a good way to demonstrate my style of teaching by immersion (ie just throw the kids in the deep end and stand back). The cluster leader commented on how I showed the kids how they could create a bullet at x=0 y=0 relative and they all took it in their stride without me first having to explain the axis system.

Its a lesson for me. We promote games as a relevant and authentic context for kids but perhaps have failed to provide a relevant and authentic context for adult PD (Tony 23 Oct 06)

My understanding of situated learning is that it also involves elements that are culturally significant to the learners. eg. an example from Lave is teaching weight watchers fractions in the kitchen. Another example (from Papert and Harel) is teaching fractions using a clock, but in this case, not just an ordinary clock, but a clock made with logo on the computer screen. But then clocks are a universal part of modern culture, so how is this situated, it work work in any modern culture?

So, although I agree that the model of teaching teachers and their students together is a very good one, I'm not certain that it is "situated", although it could be argued that since this group of people self selected to attend a game making course that games provide the common cultural element. If you folow up you may in fact find that on some sites game making catches on and on other sites it doesn't and that this is due to local, situated factors, eg. the energy of a teacher, the skill of a particular student in lobbying, the curriculum expectations of the school.

I'm just trying to clarify what "situated" really means Reference: Harel, Idit and Papert, Seymour. Software Design as a Learning Environment (1990), p.22

Harel and Papert go onto explain their agreement and differences with Suchman, Lave and Brown: "//Like these researchers, we are strongly committed to the idea that no piece of knowledge stands and grows by itself. Its meaning and its efficacy depend on its being situated in a relation to supporting structures. However, we attach more weight than we think those writers do to the Society of Mind metaphor, which would also allow the situating of knowledge in internalised supporting structures, and see mental environments as supporting and interacting with knowledge in much the same way as external, physical environments//." (Bill 25 Oct, 06)

For me the big issue is that if situatedness is important then it makes it well nigh impossible for a teaching method to be transferred from one site to another, without being altered in significant ways. Situatedness implies that hard to describe and hard measure local factors do make a difference. eg. there may be a certain way that the teacher relates to students which makes the difference between success and failure of a teaching approach. It may be almost impossible to reproduce these elements at another site or even in another classroom on the same site. Local and individual factors may make a big difference.

Contrast this with the external curriculum which is never more than a blunt instrument of control over what is taught in schools

It may be best to start in a niche and grow the niche. All successful innovations start in a single place.

Will schools change from the top down or the bottom up? Or maybe they won't change in either way but be replaced by something quite different, like the horse was replaced by the car? I would favour the niche model while schools exist as they are, whilst keeping an eye out for the possibility of replacing schools with something quite different. Those who climb the ladder to change the system tend to be co-opted by the system more so than changing it. Actually I think the best thing that enlightened Principals can do is to support radicals in niches and some, to their credit, do this. (Bill 25 Oct, 06)

[|Cognitive apprenticeship] //Like traditional apprenticeships, in which the apprentice learns a trade such as// //[|tailoring]// //or// //[|woodworking]// //by working under a master teacher, cognitive apprenticeships allow the master to model behaviors in a real-world context with cognitive modeling (Bandura, 1997). By listening to the master explain exactly what she is doing and thinking as she models the skill, the apprentice can identify relevant behaviors and develop a conceptual model of the processes involved. The apprentice then attempts to imitate those behaviors with the master observing and providing// //[|coaching]////. Coaching provides assistance at the most critical level – the skill level just beyond what the learner/apprentice could accomplish by herself. Vygotsky (1978) referred to this as the Zone of Proximal Development and believed that fostering development within this zone leads to the most rapid development. The coaching process includes additional modeling as necessary, corrective feedback, and reminders, all intended to bring the apprentice’s performance closer to that of the master’s. As the apprentice becomes more skilled through the repetition of this process, the feedback and instruction provided by the master “fades” until the apprentice is, ideally, performing the skill at a close approximation of the master level (Johnson, 1992). Part of the effectiveness of the cognitive apprenticeship model comes from learning in context. Cognitive scientists maintain that the context in which learning takes place is critical (e.g., Godden & Baddeley, 1975). Based on findings such as these, Collins, Duguid, and Brown (1989) argue that cognitive apprenticeships are less effective when skills and concepts are taught independent of their real-world context and situation. As they state, “Situations might be said to co-produce knowledge through activity. Learning and cognition, it is now possible to argue, are fundamentally situated” (Brown, Collins, Duguid, Brown, 1989, p. 32). In cognitive apprenticeships, the activity being taught is modeled in real-world situations.//