View source

Having postulated the importance of understanding the meaning and import of his use of “artifacts” as a much broader sphere for understanding the phenomena of human psychology he turns to pivotal element in developmental and “cultural psychology” he identifies as “context.” He leads us into this area by asserting that these “artifacts” do not occur separate from the circumstance or environment, situation or “context’ in which they are found. This point has also been prevalent in the writings of Vygotsky (Mind in Society), Dewey (Experience and Education), Lewin (Field Theory), Jarvis (Human Learning) and Mezirow (Transformational Learning) each with its own significance to the particular level of analysis or area of interest to these authors. The particular significance of Cole’s approach is to deconstruct the approaches to “context” as postulated by the field of psychology. This is significant in his assertion that the meaning of an “artifact” is constructed in and by the circumstances in which it is found providing a “context” to the phenomena as well as indicting that the tendency of psychology is to use a reductionist approach which fails to integrate the influence of “context” thus obscuring or at least limiting understanding.. Primarily Cole presents two means of considering “context.” The first concept of “context” is presented as that which surrounds a situation or phenomena. He identifies this as multiple concentric circles representing different levels of context extending from the phenomena outward from the central “artifact.” These various concentric circles can be seen as layers of context however he identifies the difficultly with this approach as the lack of a temporal alignment to provide dimensions to the “context.” Without a representation of some consciousness to time one suggest that the various layers or the surrounding context preexisted and continued in during and after the point of interest thus obscuring the meaning as well as the significance of the “context.” “Context” however is not stagnant but dynamic in nature. A second approach to “context” is to represent it as that which is interwoven in the fabric of lived experience. Cole asserts that this approach provides more coherence to the parts of the instance of observation and seems to provide a more intimate relationship a qualitative relationship that is bounded not only in action but also in time reflecting more accurately the dynamic nature of the interaction.

'''Comments and questions:'''
The import is that with the view of an interwoven view of “context” rather than with the simplicity of that which surrounds, there is not only the relationship as of various part interacting but also of the fluidity of the context and overlapping of various systems that interact dynamically on a lager sphere of influence. This concept of the context extends the thoughts of Vygotsky in considering development in children and furthers the ideas of Dewey in education providing a backdrop to the importance of “context” which Cole associates with “culture.”

[[Category: Sociocultural Theory]] [[Category: Michael Cole's Cultural Psychology]]