Dewey and Vygotsky: Society, Experience, and Inquiry in Educational Practice

Author(s): Michael Glassman

Source: Educational Researcher, Vol. 30, No. 4 (May, 2001), pp. 3-14
Published by: American Educational Research Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3594354 .
Accessed: 01/11/2013 08:22
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

American Educational Research Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to Educational Researcher.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 129.49.23.145 on Fri, 1 Nov 2013 08:22:32 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Dewey and Vygotsky: Society, Experience, and Inquiry

in Educational Practice
by MichaelGlassman
JohnDewey and L.S. Vygotskysharesimilarideasconcerningthe relationshipof activityand learning/development,especiallythe roles
everyday activities and social environment play in the educational
process. However, the two theorists are far apart in their conception of the relationship between process and goals in education.
Dewey concentrates on means in education, believingthat it is the
abilityof the individualto question through experience that is most
importantfor the humancommunity.Vygotsky,while recognizing
the importanceof (especiallycultural)process in education,sees social and culturalgoals as being integratedinto social pedagogy.This
paper compares Dewey and Vygotskyon three key points that relate directlyto educationalprocesses and goals. First,the two theorists are comparedon the role of social historyandthe tools it produces. Dewey sees social history as creatinga set of malleabletools
that are of use in present circumstances.Vygotskybelievesthat tools
developed through history have a far more lasting impact on the
social community.Second, the two theorists are compared in their
conceptualizationsof experience/culture.Dewey sees experience as
helpingto form thinking,whereas Vygotsky,in his culturalhistorical
theory, posits cultureas the raw materialof thinking.Third,the two
theorists are compared on their perspectives on human inquiry.
Dewey sees the childas a free agentwho achievesgoals through her
own interest in the activity. Vygotsky suggests there should be
greater control by a mentor who creates activitythat will lead the
childtowards mastery.These differencesare then explored in terms
of how they mightimpactactualclassroomstrategiesandcurriculum.

The work of Soviet psychologistL. S. Vygotsky has had a

growing impact on education in the United States. Many of
Vygotsky'sideasthathavehad the greatestresonancefor educators,such as bringingeverydayactivitiesinto the classroomand
focusingon the importanceof socialcontextin learning,beara
strikingresemblanceto the work of John Dewey, especiallyhis
writingson education(e.g., 1912, 1916). It is somethingof a
mystery,then, that therehas beenso little discussioncomparing
the theoriesof Vygotskyand Dewey. Therehavebeen a few attemptsto mergeDeweywith Vygotsky(e.g., Rogoff,1993) or to
place Dewey within a largersocioculturalframework(Cole,
1996), but for the most parttheseworkshavenot includeddeEducational
Vol.30. No. 4, pp.3-14
Researcher,

tailed analysesof importantsimilaritiesand differences.It is

truethat Dewey is not a developmentalistin the sameway that
Vygotskyis. But his educationaltheorycomes close in spiritto
Vygotsky'smajorquestionsconcerningeducation,which were
pursuedwith the greatestvigorby thosewho followedhim (e.g.,
Davydov,1997; Leontiev1981). Thesequestionsinclude:How
andwhy does naturalhumanactivityserveas the majorimpetus
for learning?And how, throughunderstandingthatactivity,can
we promoteand guidehumanlearning?(It is importantto separatethewordactivityfromtheActivityTheoryofA. N. Leontiev,
1981, a studentandcolleagueof Vygotsky.In thispapertheterm
activityis used in its broadestpossiblesense, the state of being
activeratherthan passive.)
The similaritiesbetweenDeweyandVygotsky,however,belie
one differenceof extraordinary
import to educatorsin general,
but especiallyfor those inclinedtowardsthe use of activityas a
majorteachingstrategy.The differencerevolvesaroundthe question of how educatorsview the processof activityin relationto
the consequencesof activity.Aretheseconsequencesgoalsto be
carefullyplannedand then broughtaboutthroughactivementoringon the partof the socialinterlocutor(i.e., a moreseasoned
memberof the communitywho fosterssocialinteractionwith a
purpose)?Or are they temporarydestinationsof little educationalimportin and of themselves?
I believethat the issuesthat separatethesetwo theorists,who
see activityas beingof suchvitalimportance,could not be more
profound.It raisesthe questionof whetherteachersshouldapproachstudentsas mentorswho guideor directactivity,or facilitatorswho areableto stepbackfromchildren'sactivityandlet it
runits own course.It crossesinto suchareasasculturallyandeconomicallyheterogeneousclassrooms,and well as cultural/social
historicalattitudestowardseducation.A comparisonof Dewey
andVygotskyhighlightsstrongreasonswhy educationshouldbe
an activeand contextspecificprocess,but it alsoforceseducators
to think long and hardabouthow and why they use activityin
the classroom.
In thispaperI compareDeweyandVygotskyon threespecific
conceptualissuesthatrelatedirectlyto educationalprocessesand
goals. These issues are the roles of social history, experience/
culture,and humaninquiryin the educationalprocess.Both of
thesetheoristsbelievethat,in thecontextof educationalprocesses,
none of these issuescan standwithout the other two. The differencebetweenDewey andVygotskyinvolvesthe relationships
among these three issues.For Vygotskyhuman inquiryis embeddedwithin culture,whichis embeddedwithin socialhistory.
The educationalprocessworks,moreor less,fromthe outsidein.
MAY
22001
0
IF E3

This content downloaded from 129.49.23.145 on Fri, 1 Nov 2013 08:22:32 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

It is social history, and, most important,the tools developed

throughour socialhistorythat helps to determineour everyday
culture(Vygotsky& Luria,1993). The socialinterlocutorstands
asa mediatorbetweentoolsdevelopedthroughsocialhistoryand
individualhuman inquiry.The interlocutoruses the everyday
culture,which itself is a productof socialhistory,to guide the
thinkingof the neophyte.
Dewey would applaudVygotsky'semphasison everydayculture as the lynchpinof the educationalprocess.Dewey'snotion
of experienceis equivalentto Vygotsky'sconceptionof culture.
andNature25
(In his attemptto revisehis 1925 bookExperience
yearslater, Dewey suggestedhe could use the term culturein
However,in contrastto Vygotsky,Dewey
place of experience.)
emphasizeshumaninquiry,and the rolethat it playsin the creationof experience/culture
and, eventually,socialtool systems.I
believeDeweywould be verycautiousabouteducatorsstressing
how individualthinkingmight be embeddedwithin socialhistory.One of the majorpurposesof educationis to instillthe ability andthe desireforchangein experience,andpossibleresultant
changesin socialhistory,throughindividualinquiry.
The differencesbetweenthe two theoristsareeasilyrecognizablewhen one comparesVygotsky'sconceptionof the "zoneof
proximaldevelopment"(Rogoff & Wertsch, 1984 ) and the
Dewey-inspiredmodel of "longterm projects"(Katz& Chard,
1989, 2000). In manyways,thesetwo educationalmodelsoperationalizethe theoreticalunderpinningsof the two thinkers.The
zoneof proximaldevelopment,especiallyasit hasbeeninterpreted
in the West, focuseson the roleof the adultas socialinterlocutor
who is alsoa representative
of society.Theseadultsmentorchildrenin specific,culturallyappropriate
activity(Berk& Winsler,
1995). The roleof the educationalprocessis to preparechildren
for morecomplexactivityin the largersocialcommunity.
In long termprojectschildrenareimmersedin everydayactivities. It is expectedthat the activitiesof the childrenwill eventuallycoalescearounda topic thatis of interestto them.The topic
need not be of any relevanceto the demandsof the largersocial
community,or evenhavemeaningor interestfor the teacher.As
a matterof fact, the teachershould step back from the process
once childrendisplaya relevantinterestand act as facilitator
ratherthanmentor.It is the studentswho mustdrivethe inquiry
basedon their own goals.The childrenlearnthat they control
and areresponsiblefor inquiryin theirlives,and they determine
what goalsareimportantand the waysin which they can (orcan
not) be met (Dewey, 1916). It is a processthatwill be playedout
overand overagainoverthe courseof theirlifetimeexperience.
Afterprovidingsomehistoricalcontextforthesetwo men, the
remainderof this paper focuses primarilyon Vygotsky'sand
andhuman
Dewey'svisionsof socialhistory,experience/culture,
inquiry--conceptsthat arecentralto understandingthe differences between their approachesto the processesand goals of
education.Thesedifferencesareillustratedby examiningthe educationalmodelsof the zone of proximaldevelopmentand long
termprojects.
Dewey and Vygotsky in Historical Context
Therearehistoricallybasedexplanationsforboth the strongsimilaritiesandthe strongdifferencesbetweenDeweyandVygotsky.
Althoughit wouldprobablybe a mistaketo claimthatall,or even

most, of the similaritiesand differencesbetweenVygotskyand

Dewey havehistoricalroots,it might be an evengreatermistake
to ignorethe impactof historyon theirthinking.
Dewey'seducationalphilosophywas, in manyways,a critical
reactionto the burgeoningeducationalsystem in the United
Statesbetween1870 and 1910 (Handlin,1959). Publicschooling developedfor a numberof reasonsduringthis period, includingthe need forvocationaltrainingto meet the demandsof
the industrialrevolutionand the desireto identifyand maintain
a specificallyAmericanculture.The time frameof the development of publicschoolingin the United Statescoincidedwith the
emergenceof the progressivemovement(Popkewitz,1987), but
initially schooling did not reflect the internalvalues of that
movement(Handlin,1959). Therewas a distinctseparationbetween the school cultureand the everydaycultureof the indiwas being
vidualsforwhom the publiceducationinfrastructure
from
andEastSouthern
created(e.g., newlyarrivedimmigrants
ern Europe).
Publiceducationwashighlymechanistic(Pepper,1942),with
studentslearningsubjectscompletelydivorcedfromtheireverydayrealityin stiltedand artificialenvironments.Dewey'seducational philosophywas originallya critiqueof this dichotomous
model of education (Handlin, 1959). Dewey combined the
Hegelianideathatactivityandthoughtwerebothpartof a single
notion thatactivitymustbe unexperiencewith the pragmatist's
derstoodwithinthe momentfor its specificpurposes,and not as
a meansto an ideologicalend.The humanconditionis enhanced
when individualsengagein the everydayactivityof their social
communityin a thoughtfulandpositiveway,to the point where
they are able to change that communitythrough the force of
theirown actions.In orderfor a societyto progressit must cultivatethe individual,sometimesat the expenseof its own present
socialorganization(Dewey, 1954).
Despite the obviousemphasisof individualover socialcommunity by leadingprogressivessuch as Dewey, the progressive
movements,became
movement,and manyof the Marxist-based
politicalalliesin the United Statesduringthe earlypartof the
twentiethcentury.This mayhavebeen the resultof the two poof each
liticalmovements'havingonlya superficialunderstanding
other (Novak, 1975). At the sametime therewas a good dealof
interestin Dewey amongthoseattemptingto modernizethe educationalsystemof pre-Revolutionary
Russia,such as the "First
MoscowSettlement"(Brickman,1964;vanderVeer& Valsiner,
1991). Much of Dewey'searlyworkswere translatedinto Russian, includingSchooland Society(1900) and a 50-pagebooklet
basedon EducationandDemocracy
(1916). The combinationof
these two factorsprobablyled to a Deweyaninfluenceon early
Sovieteducatorssuchas Blonskyand the youngVygotsky.
In 1928 Deweyvisitedthe SovietUnion (althoughthe schools
wereclosedforvacationformostof the timehe wasthere).Prawat
(2001) recountshow DeweyvisitedSecondMoscowUniversity
duringthistripat the timeVygotskywasa risingyoungstarthere.
Dewey certainlymet with Blonsky,Vygotsky'scompatriot,and
Prawatt(2001) builds a fairlystrong circumstantialcase that
Deweyactuallymetwith Vygotsky.This only addsto the probabilitythat DeweyinfluencedVygotsky'searlywork.
The periodbetween1928 and 1931 led to a souringof the relationshipbetweenDewey and officialSovieteducation.In his

41 EDUCATIONALRESEARCHER

This content downloaded from 129.49.23.145 on Fri, 1 Nov 2013 08:22:32 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

subsequentarticlesabouthis 1928 visit Dewey praisedthe Soviet systemasbeingfarsuperiorto theAmericansystemin bringing the everydayworld of the child into the classroom.However, he also offered a devastatingcritiquethat in many ways
definesthe differencebetweenhis own educationalphilosophy
and Vygotsky'seducationalperspective.Dewey felt the Soviet
educationalsystemwas being used for specificpropagandapurposes, that is, the educationsystemwas being used to develop
good Sovietcitizensthatunderstoodandfit into the communist
socialorder(Dewey, 1964). Vygotskydid not see educationas
propagandabased,but he did see it as an importantand definite
tool in the developmentof the "newman"(Kozulin,1990).
Dewey'scritiquemayhavestarteda riftthatcameto fruitionin
1931 when the CentralCommitteeof the CommunistPartyofferedan officialresolutioncondemningprogressiveeducational
practices(e.g., the projectmethod)advocatedby Dewey and his
followers.What followedwas the "de-Deweyization"
of the officialeducational
systemwithintheSovietUnion (Brickman,1964).
This shorthistoryofferssome possiblereasonsfor similarities
betweenDewey andVygotsky,such as the focuson activity,the
importanceof theeverydayactivitiesof thechildin theeducational
process,and the importanceof history.The youngVygotskywas
workingwithinan educationalstructurethathadbeeninfluenced
by Dewey'sideasfor a numberof years.The importantdifferencesbetweenthe two theoristsmaybe partiallyattributedto the
divergencebetweenprogressiveeducationand Marxistideology
on keyissues,suchassociallydeterminedgoalsin activity(Novak,
1975; Popkewitz& Tabachnik,1981).
Society and History
Both Vygotskyand Dewey agreethat the human condition is
basedin social interactions.Humans are initiallysocial beings
who slowlydeveloptheirindividualselvesthroughtheirrelationships (experiences)with others.Dewey (1916) makesthe argument thathumansareonlyhumanthroughtheirsocialinterconnectednesswith eachother(andactuallysuggeststhathelplessness
is, in some ways, a positive attributebecauseit helps to foster
this interconnectedness).
The essentialquestionsthatneed to be
askedinvolvehow theseextraordinary
connectionscome about,
and how the individualbeginsto takecontrolof them (Dewey,
1925). Vygotskysuggeststhat it is the abilityto developcooperativeactivitythroughcomplexsocial relationshipsthat separatesmaturehumansfromall otheranimals(Vygotsky& Luria,
1993). Humans arebest understoodas productsof these complex relationships.
ForDewey(1916), the individualmindmustbe understoodas
a creativedevelopmentof sociallife.The socialis primaryin that
it comesfirst,whereasthe developmentof the individualfollows
as a shadowof socialrelationships.Dewey is in manywaysfollowinghis friendandmentorMead(1934). But he alsospeaksto
a largerissuethatseemsto havebeencommonin the earlypartof
the twentiethcentury(it is animportantcomponentofVygotsky's
theory as well). The generalargumentis that human beings
originallyarebornsocialcreaturesanddeveloptheirsenseof self
throughtheir social relationships.An importantdifferencebetween Dewey and Vygotskylies in how much powerthis individualorganizereventuallyhas overfuturesocialactivities.This

differenceis capturedin the way Dewey's idea of culturalinstrumentality(Eldridge,1998) compareswith Vygotsky'stheory

of culturalhistoricaldevelopment(Kozulin,1990).
ForDeweycultureandhistoryprovidea malleablesetof means
(e.g.,tools)thatcanbe usedto achieveimmediateor easilyviewed
ends (see Eldridge,1998, for an in-depthdiscussionof Dewey's
instrumentality).These tools haveworth only to the degreeto
which theycan be usedto successfullynavigatea givensituation.
ForVygotsky(Vygotsky& Luria,1993) culturalhistoryprovides
for a (relatively)morestaticset of tools and symbolsthat should
eventuallyenablemembersof a societyto move beyondpureinstrumentality,to a higherlevelof cognitiveawareness.Tools are
meansfor specific,culturallyapprovedconsequencesthat act as
way stationson the path to a sociallydefinedend. Dewey'sculturalinstrumentality
wascriticizedforitsemphasison meansover
ends in social historicaldevelopment(Eldridge,1998; Novak,
1975). Deweypositsthateducationleadsto freeinquiry,and free
inquiryleadsto a richersociety,but he lacksa descriptionof exactlywhata richersocietylookslike.Vygotsky,on the otherhand,
is susceptibleto the criticismDewey (1964) makesof the entire
Sovieteducationalsystem-that socialgoalscaneasilybe turned
into propagandathat servicesthe society.
Dewey, Tools,and Long TermProjects
It is an individual'ssocial history that provideswhat Dewey
termed"intellectualtools" (Eldridge,1998). These are the sociallydevelopedtools suchas morals,ideals,values,and customs
that serveas referencepoints for the individualas she attempts
to navigatelife situations.But theseareonlyreferencepoints,in
thattheyinformimmediateactivity,but in an atmosphereof free
inquirythey do not limit it.
The meaningof tools,in a Deweyanframework,is directlyrelatedto theirvaluein a givensituation.When the tools no longer
have pragmaticvaluethey aremodifiedor rejectedby the individualsusing them. By makingtools so dynamicDewey is suggestingthat thereare no ends beyond the processof successful
activitywithin the context of the immediatesituation-what
Deweytermedthe end-in-view(Eldridge,1998). The easiestenvironmentsin which humanscan use these "intellectualtools"
are those with the greatestdegreeof sharedsocial history (enablingindividualsto use sharedsocialends as a centralaspectof
theiractivity).This allowsmembersof the samegroupto share
likesand dislikes,to maintainthe sameattitudestowardsobjects,
to communicatewithout a disconnect.The historicallydefined
"intellectualtools"workmoreoften than not becausenew situationsandactivitiesreflectthe samesituationsandactivitiesthese
shared"intellectual
tools"werebasedon. Thoseobjectsandideas
that fall outside of the sharedhistory are consideredsuspect
and/or of little worth (Dewey, 1916). But while environments
with a high level of agreementbetweensubjectsare relatively
comfortable,they arenot beneficial.They do not engagefreeinquiry, which is the bedrock of Dewey's democraticsociety.
Dewey (1916) believesthat this is a dangeroussituation that
leadsto narrow-mindedness.
This is a majorreasonDewey (1916) posits diversityas an
importantaspectof a trueeducationalexperience.(He actually
counted diversityas a tool in education.)Dewey sees progress/
MAY2001 5
1

This content downloaded from 129.49.23.145 on Fri, 1 Nov 2013 08:22:32 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

developmentas occurringonly through an equilibration/disequilibrationprocess.Forhim, "thestateof disturbedequilibration representsneed"(Dewey, 1938, p.27). In his "theoryof inquiry"Dewey suggeststhat it is this same type of disturbed
equilibrationthat drivesexplorationof new ideas. Many humans, however,find suspendingjudgmentand reconstructing
the worlddisagreeable(Dewey, 1933). It is thereforeincumbent
on the educationalstructureto creatediverseenvironmentsthat
demand social inquiry.There is a second, relatedreasonthat
Dewey championsdiversity.Dewey echoes Mead in his argumentthatwe seeourselvesbasicallythrougha "lookingglassphenomenon"(Dewey, 1930). Humanssee themselvesin the context of the way they areviewedby others.For Dewey the raison
d'itrefor humanactivityis to makelife betterand moreworthwhile, both for themselvesand, especially,for the generalsocial
community.If humansdo not see themselvesin the contextof
socialviewsdifferentfromthemselves,they areunableto reconstructthemselvesin the faceof a problematicsociety.Unableto
changethemselves,and, therefore,unableto changethe world,
humans can become slaves to their history and their habits.
Deweyclearlyunderstandsthe problemsthatdiversitywill cause
(Dewey, 1916), and he does not believethat the problems,or
theirsolutions,will lead to a greaterabsolutegood. He believes
that the processwill lead to the processof freeinquiry,and free
inquiryitselfis good. For Dewey, then, it is not that the means
justifythe ends, but that the meansarethe ends.
The emphasison processoverproductin the causeof freeinquiryis reflectedin one of the most importanteducationalapproachesto emergefrom Deweyan-basededucationalphilosophies,longtermprojects(Katz& Chard,1989).This educational
formatstressesthe importanceof engagingchildren,as members
of communities,in projectsbasedon subjectsthatinterestthem.
It is the students,ratherthan the teacher,who choosedirection,
set goals, and determineeffort.The goal of the projectitself is
relativelyunimportantand can be changedthroughthe combined activityof the children.This is not to say that teachers
should not have an awarenessof possiblegoals, but ratherthat
they should regardthese goals as possibilitiesthat may or may
not be fulfilledby those actuallyengagedin the project(i.e., the
students).This is why I referto the teacherin Deweyaneducationalphilosophyasa facilitator.
The majorfunctionof theteacher
is to keepstudentson a stablecoursein the processof theirown
discoveries.I will use two examplesto highlightthis application
of Dewey'sphilosophicalapproachto education.The firstexample is a long-termprojectdevelopedthroughtoddler'sinterestand
activityin construction(Glassman& Whaley,2000). The second
is a kindergarten
projecton shoes(Katz& Chard,2000).
These two projectsaresimilarin that theirgoalswerenot set
throughteacherdeterminationbut developedovertime through
children'sinterests.The actualgoals (constructionfor toddlers
and understandingthe shoe businessfor kindergartenchildren)
had little social meaningoutside of the immediateactivity.In
many ways these goals were inconsequentialto the long-term
learningof the children.This is one of the reasonsthe teachers
wereableto focus on the processof education.In the construction project,a groupof toddlersin a mixed-ageclassroom(infants and toddlers)developedan interestin a nearbyconstruction site.The teachersandparentsnurturedthis interestthrough

the introductionof constructiontypematerialsandclassvisitsto

the site. The toddlersworkedwith some of the older infantsto
developtheirown constructionsitethatservedas a learningenvironmentand playground.The projecton shoestook place in a
kindergartenclassroom.The interestinitiallydevelopedas a result of discussionsof new shoessome of the childrenworeat the
beginningof the school year.A numberof questionsemerged
through children'sand teacher'sexplorationof their everyday
lives.The questionscamefromthechildren,withthe teacherplaying the roleof facilitatorby maintaininga list. Specialinterestsof
of the sales
the childrenwereidentified,suchasthe responsibilities
in
the
manner
which
the
shoes
were
and
displayed.The
person
teacherarrangeda tripto a realshoe store,andthe childreneventuallydevelopedtheirown shoestorein the classroom.
Vygotsky,Social Tools,and the Zone
ofProximal Development
Vygotskyhasmuchthe sameviewof the humanasproductof social interaction,with one importantdifference.WhereasDewey
fearsprogressive
humanthinkingbeinglost in the sharedcomfort
of commonhistory,Vygotskyis basicallyagnosticon thesubject.
This is becauseof how Vygotskyviewstools and symbolsin the
contextof development.He believestools and symbolsareused
in the serviceof culturallydefinedgoalsthat arefarbeyondthe
immediacyof Dewey'send-in-view.
Vygotskysees the socialas being of primaryinfluencein the
life of the individual,much the sameway that Dewey does. But
Vygotsky(1987) seestools and symbolsasplayinga much more
activeand determinaterole in the lives of individuals.Freeinquiryis, in manyways,eclipsedby culturallysignificantand appropriateinquiry(Vygotsky,1987).Vygotskyagreeswith Dewey
thatthe society(orpowerswithinthe society)havea vestedinterest in the developmentand maintenanceof thesetools (Vygotsky
& Luria,1993). Dewey's solution is to educatethe individual
and diversifythe socialmilieuso that thesetoolswill be brought
into question(a bottom-up/indeterminate
approach).Vygotsky
wantsto usethe educationalprocessto teachnewmembersof the
socialcommunityhow to "use"important,culturallydeveloped
tools in an effectivemanner(a top-down/determinate
approach).
This top-downapproachwasexemplifiedin VygtoskyandLuria's
researchexpeditioninto CentralAsia (Luria,1971). In a highly
controversialnaturalexperimentVygotskyand Luriaattempted
to gauge the impact of new tools on an isolated,homogenous
population.Theyhypothesizedthatthe introductionof newtools
by a strongsocialorganization(i.e., the SovietUnion)wouldlead
to the developmentof a "new"typeof citizen.
The relativeemphasison specific,culturallydeterminedproductsin activity(i.e., the abilityto usesocialtools)is in manyways
at the heartof children'slearningin thezoneofproximaldevelopmentthe title of a collectedwork by Rogoff & Wertsch, 1984.
I use two examplesfromthe Rogoffand Wertschbook to highlight the differencesbetweenlong termprojectsand the zone of
proximaldevelopmentspecifically,and the educationalphilosophies of Dewey and Vygotskyin general.I chose these two examplesboth becausetheyhaveplayedimportantrolesin current
of the zone of proximaldevelopmentand beconceptualizations
cause there is some similarityin ages of the childrenbetween
theseexamplesandthe two long termprojects(constructionand

6 1 EDUCATIONALRESEARCHER

This content downloaded from 129.49.23.145 on Fri, 1 Nov 2013 08:22:32 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

shoes)mentionedearlier.One exampledealsprimarilywith infants (4-17 monthsof age) and theirabilitiesto engagein joint
social activitywith adultsusing the culturaltool of a "jack-inthe-box"as a mediatingdevice (Rogoff, Malkin, & Gilbride,
1984). In this studythe sametwo babiesinteractedwith a numberof adultsoverthe courseof a year.The emphasiswason how
the adultsused theirinteractionsto guide the infant(s)towards
sociallyappropriateand rewardingsocialinteraction.
The secondexampleinvolveschildren'sdevelopmentof logical (mathematical)operationsthroughsocial interactionswith
theirmothers(Saxe,Gearhart,& Guberman,1984). In thisstudy
motherstaughttheirchildren(between2.5 and 5 yearsof age)a
numberreproductiongame.The goal of the gamehad a direct
relationshipto the typeof mathematicalskillsthatareconsidered
importantin the largersociety.The logicaloperationsstudyand
the "jack-in-the-box"
studyhavethreethingsin commonwhich
of the zone of proxareindicativeof currentconceptualizations
imal development:(1) There is an emphasison joint attention
betweenthe adult/mentorand the child/neophyte;(2) there is
somerecognitionon thepartof theadultof a (sociallydetermined)
goalto the activityandanattemptto setup sub-goalsto reachthat
goal;and(3) thereis a focuson the socialrelationshipbetweenthe
adult/mentorand the child/neophytein reachingthat goal.The
startingpoint for children'slearningin both of theseexamplesis
the socialtools that the childrenwill eventuallyneed to become
"socializedparticipantsin their culture"(Rogoff et. al., 1984,
to guidethe
p. 31). The adultsuse theirown experience/culture
children'sinquiry.
These two examplesof the zone of proximaldevelopment,as
well as the two earliermentioned examplesof the projectapproach,will be used throughoutthe paperto illustrate,in concreteterms,conceptualdifferencesbetweenDeweyandVygotsky.
These examplesare especiallyimportantin examiningthe two
theoristsdivergingviewpointsconcerningthe mentor/neophyte
relationshipand the adult'srolein problemsolving.
The InteractionBetweenHistoryand Tools
The role of tools in activity,and by extensionthe educational
process,is closelyrelatedto the interactionbetweenhistoryand
tool use. Dewey, as alreadymentioned,sees tools as historically
based,but only validso long as they areof use to the individual
in the immediatesituation.Historyis implicitin activity,but it
is not determinate.Vygotskyseeshistoryas playinga morepivotal role in developmentand education (Vygotsky& Luria,
1993). It is not the activitythat givesmeaningto historicalartifacts,but historicalartifactsthatgivemeaningto the activity.Social historyis embodiedin tools and symbols.These tools and
symbolshavemeaningsandserveas mediationalmarkerssetting
framesof referencefor individualthinkingin context. It is the
object'shistorywithin the socialgroupthat helps createmeaning in the mind of the child (Vygotsky,1987).
The most omnipresentand importanttool/symbolin the life
of the individualis of courselanguage.VygotskyandDeweysuggest that the child learnslanguagein socialinteractionand then
thinksin termsof thatlanguage.Vygotsky,however,goes a step
furtherthanDewey,emphasizingthe importanceof bothhistory
andcontextin the meaningeachunit (word)of thatlanguagehas
in the thinkingof the individual.Languageby itselfcreatesa con-

text for activityand, especially,for reflectivethinkingabout(the

consequencesof) that activity.In Thinkingand Speech(1987)
Vygotskytakespainsto examineboth the historicaldevelopment
of wordsovertime, how this developmentis tied to specificcircumstancesof use in activity,and the degreeto which specific
contextcan changethe meaningof the word.The meaningof a
in a poem is determinedby
specificword (e.g., "grasshopper")
the ways in which languageemergedin a particularhistorical
context(Vygotsky,1987). Changethe historicalcontext,change
the meaningof the exactsameword,and changethe meaningof
the poem.Vygotsky'stheoryof socialmeaning,then,hasa strong
connectionto the past and an investmentin the way in which
the past createsthe presentand acts as precursorfor the future.
This meansthat the mind is essentiallya livingcatalogueof historicalincidence.
Thereis littlediscussionof freeinquiryin Vygotsky'sworkbecausethe parametersof all inquiryareset by the cultureas it is
manifestedthroughits tools andsymbols.Changingthe focusof
inquiryrequiresa socialorganizationasstrongasthe existingculture that is ableto implementnew tools and symbols(e.g., the
reasoningbehindthe expeditionsto centralAsia).The adultsees
asa potentialinstrumentof amusementwhere
thejack-in-the-box
Bugs Bunnypops out and is then forcedbackin. It is assumed
that, as a resultof socialinteractions,the childwill see the jackin-the-boxthe sameway.Thereis only one way to engagein activitywith the numberreproductiongame.The motherseesit as
her responsibilityto bringthe child closerto this specificunderstandingof sociallysanctionedactivity.
Dewey is moreconcernedwith the processof historythanthe
specificgoalsa socialcommunitymightachievethroughhistory.
Therearetwo reasonsthat the processof historyis emphasized.
First,Dewey'svision of the socialis forwardlooking(Campbell,
1995): Dewey (1916, 1938) has tremendousfaithin the process
of freeinquiryto overcomeimmediateproblemsas they occur.
Second, Dewey sees the separationof processfrom goals as an
unnecessarydualism(Eldridge,1998). What is most important
is actualactivityin the moment and the way that activityleads
to specificjudgmentsthat may or may not use historicallydefinedtools. In the learningprocessthejudgmentsconcerningrelationshipbetweenactivityand consequencebecome interconnectedwith earlieractivitiesto form a body of knowledge.That
knowledgewill then come into play in subsequent,interconnectedactivities(Dewey, 1916). However,the valueof any historicallydevelopedknowledgeis dependantupon the situation.
In Dewey'sview, stressingspecificgoalsin educationcan actubecauseit mayforcestudentsto focus
allybe counter-productive
on tools that may be of little use for futureproblems,insteadof
the processnecessaryto solveproblemas theyarise.Thereis little
to be gained in a productsense from having childrendevelop
theirown constructionsite,or buildtheirownwell runshoestore
(exceptfor the few who might becomeconstructionworkersor
shoeclerks).Whatis importantin theseactivitiesis thatchildren
experiencethe way one end-in-viewbuildsupon anotherto create an evermoresatisfyingexperience.
Experience/Culture
The way in which experienceis defined sets the context for
Dewey's entire educational theory; in some important ways

7
MAY
2001

This content downloaded from 129.49.23.145 on Fri, 1 Nov 2013 08:22:32 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

experienceis synonymouswith education.As mentioned earlier, Dewey'snotion of experienceis, in manyways,parallelto

Vygotsky'snotion of culture.
Dewey'sExperienceas Culture
Dewey (1916) seesexperienceas physicalactionand the consequencesof thataction,combinedwith the judgmentof the consequencesof that action (motivations).He abhorsthe dualism
that often emergesbetweenthe actionsa persontakesand the
way this personthinksabouttheseactions.In his view they cannot be separated,in thatwherethereis no mind, thereis no way
of thinkingaboutthingsoutsideof the actualactionin which an
individualis engaged.To put it in a moreacademictone, there
is no suchthingasmethodseparatefromcontent,or contentseparatefrommethod.A simpleexamplemight be eatinga slice of
pizza.A personfromNew Yorkhasa methodof eatingpizzathat
involvesfoldingthe pizzain half and liftingit up to his mouth.
Take that personand put him in Chicagowith deep dish style
pizzaand the method necessarilymoves to knife and fork.The
contentand the methodarepartof a singleactivity.The person
fromNew Yorkmighttryto lift and fold the deepdishslice,but
judgmentsresultingfromconsequencesof the actionwouldforce
him to adjusthis action in subsequentsituations.This has importantimplicationsfor Dewey's ideasconcerningthe goals of
education.If it is impossibleto separatephysicalactivityfromits
consequences,then it is useless,andpossiblydetrimental,to plan
the physicalactivityof othersin orderto achievea specificset of
goals. The only viable goal for any activityis the end-in-view,
which is ostensiblya partof the immediateactivityratherthan
anyplan.Deweyemphasizesprocessnot only becausehe believes
processis the essentialqualityin a democraticsociety,but also
becausefroma non-dualisticperspectiveexperienceand process
areone and the samething.
Dewey (1916) emphasizesthe role of vitalexperiencein education.He initiallypositsvitalexperienceas an essentialcomponent of the educationalprocess.This vital experiencemovesbeyond simple rote habit or capriciousactivityin that it involves
consequencesfor both the individualand the environment.A
personautomaticallyrecitinga timestable(rotehabit)or avoiding cracksin the sidewalk(capriciousactivity,if you dismissthe
possibilitythat it will "breakyour mother'sback")areactivities
without educationalworth.
Worthwhile,or vital, experiencein education is activity in
which the link between action and consequenceis interconnectedwith previousand future(related)activities.The consequenceor end-in-viewis stilltied to the immediatesituation.But
the processof inquiryusedto reachthisend-in-viewnot only has
a connectionwith, but hasbeenenrichedby, previousinquiryin
someway.An importantaspectof vitalexperienceis a difficulty
or a problemthat must be solvedin a way that can leadto both
a satisfactoryconclusionand an enrichedfutureinquiry.
Dewey (1925) laterdevelopedan alternativeconceptualization basedon primaryandsecondaryexperiences,whichhasimportantimplicationsfor educatorsas well as his own ideasconcerningeducation.Primaryexperiencesare the gross,everyday
activitiesin life that have consequences.These experiencesare
broadand crudeand involvea "minimum"of reflectiveactivity.
78

Primaryexperiencehelps to createan aggregateof relatedactivitiesthatnecessarilyleadsto systematic,regulatedthinkingabout

thatactivity.Deweytermsthismorereflectiveactivitysecondary
experience.Secondaryexperienceclarifiesthe meaning of primaryexperience,organizingit so that thereis a usefulaccumulation of knowledge(Dewey, 1925). Secondaryexperiencecan
run the gamutfromjudgmentsof the relationshipbetweenaction and consequence(s)in earlyactivity,to the developmentof
hypothesesand theoriesto explainand examinelateractivities.
Thereis a bi-directionalrelationshipbetweenprimaryexperience andsecondaryexperience,in thatprimaryexperienceserves
as the basisforsecondaryexperience,but it alsoservesas testsfor
secondaryexperience.Hypothesisas "intellectualtool"servesas
an exemplarfor both vitalexperienceand secondaryexperience.
Individualsengagein interconnectedprimaryexperienceuntil
they slowlyorganizeit into a hypothesisabouthow thingswork
in the world.The developmentof the hypothesis(deductivereasoning)becomesan end-in-viewfor activity.Once the hypothesis is developedit becomesa naturalpartof inquiryinto other
problems.At firstit servesasa tool fororganizingthinkingabout
futureexperiences(inductivereasoning),and maintainsits identity as secondaryexperience.Eventuallythe boundarybetween
organizingthe experienceand the experienceitselfwill blurand
the hypothesiswill becomecompletelyintegratedinto the activity itself.
Accordingto Dewey (1916) one of the most importantroles
of educationis to teachchildrenhow to maintaintheserelationshipsbetweenexperiencesso thattheyareconstantlyboth amassing and testingnew knowledge.The teachermust use interestto
help studentsrecognizeand achieveaims, and then use aims to
developcontinuedmotivationfor engagingin activity.Particular types of thinkingare not especiallyimportantbecausethat
thinking will eventuallyneed to be reconstructedto meet the
needsof the situation(Dewey, 1916). Whatis importantis that
secondaryexperienceis derivedfromknowledgeand knowledge
is the reconstructionof secondaryexperiencethroughprimary
experience.The knowledgestorehouseis dynamicbecausesecondaryexperience(shouldbe) dynamic(primaryexperiencecontinuouslyforcingreconstructionin orderto dealwith the immediatesituation).
Socialhistorycan, to a certainextent,limit the typesof experiencespossible.But a majorpurposeof the educationalprocess
is to show that it is possiblefor experienceto move beyondsocialhistory(Dewey, 1916). In the shoeprojecttherewaslittle,if
anything,in the socialhistoryof the classroomor the childrento
suggestthata largepartof theircurriculumwould involvecreating a shoestore.One experiencegavemomentumto the nextexperience.The questioningof friendsandrelativesaboutshoesled
to the developmentof a shoe store.The developmentof a shoe
storeled to questionsconcerningspecificissuesof how exactlya
shoestoreoperates.Specificquestionsabouthow a shoestoreoperatesled to a fieldvisit to a shoe storein the community.The
childrenhadto reflecton theirinitialquestionsabouthow a shoe
storeoperatesin orderto set up theirown shoe storein the classroom.Theymergedtheirpriorexperiences
of theirshoestorewith
theirfieldtripto a communityshoestore.Justasimportantly,the
knowledgegainedfromeachprimaryexperiencebecamepartof

EDUCATIONALRESEARCHER

This content downloaded from 129.49.23.145 on Fri, 1 Nov 2013 08:22:32 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

secondaryexperienceas the childrenfollowed the naturalmomentumof theirproject.

This abilityof the teacherto step backand simplyfacilitate,
ratherthan guide or mentorthe children,can be an extraordinarilydifficulttask,especiallyas childrengrowolderand adults
become more concernedwith what studentsmust know. Long
term projects,in a reflectionof Dewey, focus on how students
can know.
Vygotsky'sCultureas Experience
If
Vygotskytakesa verysimilarapproachto experience/culture.
Dewey could haverenamedhis conceptionof experienceas culture, Vygotskymight have renamedhis conception of culture
as (Dewey's)experience.Vygotskyrecognizestwo levelsof culture, much the sameway that Dewey sees two levelsof experience. There is the culturethat emergesthrougheverydayconcepts, and there is the culturethat emergesthroughscientific
concepts(Vygotsky,1987).Everyday
concepts,theresultof everyin
have
common
with primaryexperience.It
much
dayactivity,
naturein thatit involvesboth achasthe same"doublebarreled"
tion andthe motivationforaction.Vygotsky(1987) carefullydefinesactivityas both the actionsthat humanstakeand the subtext of those actions,which aredrivenby desiredconsequences.
(Vygotskytook the idea of sub-textto action at least partially
from Stanislavsky's
workson trainingactors[Glassman1996].)
Eachtrueactivityinvolvesactionandsub-text.Vygotskydoesnot
explicitlydenythatrotehabitandcapriciousactionshavelittleor
no impacton the culturaldevelopmentof the child, but his emphasison subtextand motivationcertainlyimply this. (The relationshipbetweenactionand motivationwould becomeone of
the centralthemesof A.N. Leontiev's[1981] work on Activity
Theory.)
The relationship
betweenactionandconsequencemovesto the
internalplaneof thinkingover time. The individualbuildsthis
relationshipup throughlife experience.Such relationshipsare
basedon specifichistoricalcircumstances.
Thusa childin one culture(i.e., involvedin one set of experiences)mayseethe actionof
demandingattentionfroma socialinterlocutoras relatedto the
consequenceof gettingwhatshewants.A childfromanotherculturemaysee the sameactionasleadingto the consequencesof ostracismor punishment.Therearealsosubtle,within-culturevariations in these relationships.It is this accumulatedhistorical
experiencethat mediatesall futureactivity.The thinkingof individualsbecomesreconstructedon the basisof new situations,
but this reconstructionis stillbasedin the everydayhistoryof the
individual.
Vygotskys Scientific Conceptsas SecondaryExperience
Scientificconcepts(Vygotsky,1987) is in manywaysparallelto
Dewey's (1925) conceptualizationof secondaryexperiences.
Moreover,secondaryexperienceis a complex,multi-levelphenomenonforVygtosky.Partof the reasonfor this maybe thatit
playsa much more distinct,and possiblymore important,role
in (vital)experienceforVygotskythanit does for Dewey.At the
centerof Vygotsky'ssecondaryexperienceis his tool par excellance,language.Vygotskydoes not explicitlyposit an individual
organizingprinciplefor everydayexperience.One is not really
necessaryfor a coupleof reasons.First,while Dewey seesexperi-

ence asfocusedon the solvingof problems,Vygotsky(1978) sees

experienceas emergingthroughdirectcommunicationbetween
social interlocutorsand neophytes.At some points Vygotsky
(1997) suggeststhat trueexperiencecan only come fromthe individual'sown understandingof the world,but in his later,more
matureworkshe de-emphasizesthe individual'srelationshipto
the world,and emphasizesthe relationshipto the socialsystem.
This is most clearlyreflectedin Vygotsky's(1987, 1994) claim
thatyoungchildrenthinkin complexes."Thecomplexis founded
on factualassociationswhich can be revealedthroughdirectexperience"(Vygotsky,1994, p.220). The child at this stagedoes
not so much accumulateand reconstructthinking as an individualin buildinga body of knowledge,but acceptsknowledge
gainedthroughsocialintercourse.It is in manywaysthe socialsystem itselfthatservesas the organizingprincipleforaccumulated
thinking,or knowledge.Vygotskydoes not shareDewey'spreoccupationwith individualism.In Vygotsky'sconceptionof secondaryexperiencethereis no need for the type of individualreflection (natural,immediate,and an integralpart of activity)
exploredby Dewey.
Whilelanguageservesasan organizingprincipleforexperience,
it doesnot havethe samereflectivequalitiesas Dewey'ssecondary
experience.Languagecreatesmeaningwithin activitythrough
historyratherthan throughindividualreflectionin the moment.
This does not mean that there is no vehicle for organization
throughindividualreflectionin Vygotsky'stheory.Vygotskysuggestsindividuallygeneratedorganizingprinciplesthroughthe developmentof scientificconcepts(Vygotsky,1987). However,scieducationthana
entificconceptsaremorea goalof standardized
naturalpartof the thinkingprocess.
The zone of proximaldevelopmentseems,in someways,contools that
cernedwith establishingspecificexperiential/cultural
will eventuallyservethe child in her socialpurposes.This is not
to say that interestplaysno partin the zone of proximaldevelopment.The mentoris dependenton the child'sinterestforcontinued activity,but the mentordoes not standbackand wait for
interestto emerge.In Saxeet. al.'s (1984) descriptionof the relationshipbetweenmotherand child duringthe countinggame
it is the motherwho reachesforknowledgeaccumulatedthrough
everydayexperiencewiththechildto useasteachingstrategies(the
relationshipbetweensecondaryexperienceand primaryexperience). It is the mentorwho drawson the relationshipsbetween
primaryandsecondaryexperienceto bringimportantsocialtools,
representingthe seedsof mathematicalscientificconcepts,to the
child. Processis important,but not as importantas drawingthe
childcloserto sociallydefinedgoals.Scaffolding(Wood,Bruner,
& Ross, 1976), a term often used in conjunctionor in placeof
zoneofproximaldevelopment(e.g.,Berk& Winsler,1995),is an
descriptionof thistypeof phenomenon.The mentor
appropriate
buildsa scaffold,pieceby piece,so thatthechildcanengagein understandingand developmentof scientificconceptson herown.
Experience/Cultureand Development
For Dewey, the developmentof individuallygeneratedorganizing principlesbegins very early in life, whereasVygotskyties
them closelyto the developmentof conceptualthinkingin adolescence(1994) andsuggeststhatit is bestto waitforadolescence
to gearpedagogicalstrategiesto the developmentof individual
MAY2001

This content downloaded from 129.49.23.145 on Fri, 1 Nov 2013 08:22:32 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

9Il

mastery(1987). While Dewey sees the differencebetweenprimaryexperienceandsecondaryexperienceas relative(Campbell,

1995), Vygotskyseems to see the differencein more absolute
terms(atleastoverthe courseof an individual'shistory).Thereis
a relationshipbetweeneverydayconceptsandscientificconcepts,
but therearealsoqualitativedifferencesandstrictboundariesbetween complexivethinkingand conceptualthinking.Complexive thinkingis basedon categorizingobjectssolelyon the basisof
the immediatesituation,and conceptualthinkingis basedon a
moreabstractunderstanding.
Accordingto Vygotsky, the qualitativejump that humans
makein adolescenceto conceptualthinkingis basedon the abilityto usewordsandsignsas internalmediators.The "functional
use of wordsand signs"helpsthe adolescentby allowinghim to
take"chargeof his own psychologicalprocesses"and"masterthe
flowof his own psychologicalprocesses"so thattheiractivitycan
be directed"forthe purposeof solvingthe problemshe is faced
with"(Vygotsky,1994, p. 212). Adolescenceis the firstpoint at
which humansareableto use thinkingto maketrue individual
judgmentsconcerningtheirown activities.The developmentof
this conceptualthinkingdoes not occurnaturallythroughexperience,but is dependenton specifictypes of socialinteractions
(Vygotsky,1994).Vygotsky(1987) suggeststhe beststyleof social
interactionfor the developmentof conceptualthinkingis direct
pedagogy;the teachingof abstractideasandproblems"connected
with theprocessof growinginto the cultural,professional,
andsociallifeof adults"(Vygotsky,
1994, p. 213). Thus,developmentof
the abilityto analyze,hypothesizeabout,andtestprimaryoreverydayexperienceis actuallyseparatedfromeverydayexperience.
Therearetwo pointsto be madehere.The firstis that Dewey
would certainlyagreethathumanorganizationof primaryexperienceis mediatedthroughwordsand signsand that thereis an
importantrelationshipbetweenthe useof languageandthinking
that emergesthroughexperience(Dewey, 1925). But for Dewey
languageis more an integralpartof experiencethan a tool that
acts as a centralorganizingtheme for experience.The second
point is thatVygotskycertainlyseesa necessaryrelationshipbetweenexperiencethatresultsfromeverydayactivityand individualorganizationof thatactivity,especiallythe cumulativeimpact
of that experienceon all subsequentthinking.But the developmental aspectof his work suggestsa qualitativebreakbetween
thinking and thinkingabout thinking that could not help but
seep into his conceptualizationof education.
Human Inquiry
Both Vygotskyand Dewey see inquiryas basedin progressive
problemsolving.The individualis forcedto confrontissuesthat
arenot easilyreconciledby currentthinking.Interestis the only
truemotivationthat can forcethis type of confrontation,pushing the mind fromcomfortinto conflict.The only way to bring
stabilitybackto the situationthroughactivityis to reconstruct
thinkingabout activityso that it meets the needs of that situation. It makeslittle senseto definethe developmentof thinking
or knowledgeasa static,additiveprocess.Thinkingis something
to be usedin situationsto solveproblems.Deweyis mostadamant
on this point: The only use of thinking is the betterliving of
life. Vygotskyoffersa similar,but slightlydifferentperspective:

Thinkingleadsto greatersocialcohesionand the advancement

of the socialgroup(Vygotsky& Luria,1993).
For Dewey much of the action that we engagein duringour
lifetimesis habit.Thatis, it is doesnot requireconsciousrecognition of the relationshipbetweenactionandconsequences.This is
as it shouldbe, becauseconsciouslythinkingaboutthe activities
with which you areengagedis exhaustingand createsawkwardness in action (Dewey, 1922). Yet what allowslife to progress,
whatallowsforbetterliving,is whatoccurswhensomethinggoes
wrong,when our habits,for whateverreasons,breakdown. For
Dewey educationis basedin preparingthe student not only to
facethesemomentsof vitalexperiencewhenhabitis of little use,
but to actuallydesirethem, and to enjoythem when they occur
(Dewey, 1916).
Humans,however,arecomfortablein theirhabits.It is easier,
thoughlessworthwhile,simplynot to consciouslyengagein vital
experiences;or if it becomesnecessaryto actuallysolve a problem, not to pursuethe next problem,especiallyif therearebarriersand/orobstacles.It is interestthat drivesthe humanbeing
from habitand into worthwhilevitalexperience.This is the reason Deweyplacesinterestat the centerof the educationalprocess
(Dewey 1900, 1916). Interestis not somethingthat canbe artificiallycreatedwithinthe educationalcontext,but mustcomefrom
the interactionbetweenthe personandthe situation.Theremust
be enough interestso that the individualis able to recognizean
indeterminatesituationand be motivatedby the doubtinherent
in that particularsituation,the proverbial"forkin the road"
(Dewey, 1920).Therefollowsa processof reasoningwherebythe
individual"worksout" the problemthrougha seriesof stages
(Dewey, 1938).
Vygotskyalso saw interestas a key to the educationalprocess
(1997). Vygotskyspeaksof the importanceof instinctsin education, but in borrowingthe term"instinct"he is not reallytalking
about hereditaryanimalinstincts,but "hasin mind the child's
needsand the intimatelyassociatedrealmof the child'sinterests"
are
(Davydov,1997, p. xxxii;emphasisin originaltext)."Interests
an expressionof the child's organic needs" (Vygotsky, 1997,
p. 87). Vygotskyfroma veryearlypoint sawinterestas an inherent characteristic
of the individual,andperhapsthe primarydrivin
motivation
activity.This echoesDewey'sview of interests
ing
as children's"nativeurgenciesand needs"(Dewey, 1912, p. 23).
Interestforboththeoristsis intrinsicto the activityandnaturalto
the child. It cannotbe createdfor the childfromwithout.However,Vygotskymaintainsa very broadconceptionof interests,
suggestingthat in earlychildhoodit is interestin masteryof the
immediateenvironment;in laterchildhoodit is interestin adventure,and in puberty"interestin oneself"(Vygotsky,1997).
Vygotskyechoesone of Dewey'sideas,stating,"Inyouth, one's
eyes are alwayswide open to the world,which underscoresthe
greatermaturityof youthtowardslife"(ibid.,p. 88). Deweysuggeststhat it is in youth that we aretrulyable to find interestin
thingswith an open awareness,and thatwe lose this opennessas
we mature(Dewey, 1916).
Vygotsky'sbroadconceptionof interest,however,meansthat
the social interlocutorcan have far more controlin developing
specificsituationsthat areindeterminatefor the neophyte(but
not for the mentor,thus givingthe mentora certainamountof

10 EDUCATIONALRESEARCHER

This content downloaded from 129.49.23.145 on Fri, 1 Nov 2013 08:22:32 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

directionalcontrol).The taskis not so muchin recognizingwhat

is of interestto the child and followingthroughwith it (as it is
for Dewey). It is in creatinglearningsituationswherethe child
can recognizethe possibilitiesof his or her own possiblemastery
of the activity(movingthe situationfrom indeterminateto determinate)throughinteractionwith the socialinterlocutor.
It may be in the areaof inquirythat the differencesbetween
long termprojectsand the zone of proximaldevelopmentas educationalmodels are most apparent.The long-termprojectis
based on the idea that true doubt stems from interest.Dewey
(1938) seesdoubt as the directresultof activitywithin an indeterminatesituation(i.e., a situationthat does not havean easily
recognizedend-in-view).Initially,recognitionof an indeterminatesituationrequiresa breakingof habits(whichusuallycomes
aboutas the resultof interest).The progressiveproblemsolving
that followsis a naturaloutgrowthof vital experiencethat is no
longermovingin a determineddirectionforthe actor.Keyto the
educationalexperienceis getting the student to recognizethat
this cycle of interest-doubt-problemsolving is beneficialand
worthyof pursuit.The more the child confrontsinterestingindeterminatesituationsas the resultof her own unique experience, the moreconfidentshe becomesin her own processof inquiry. This is especiallyimportantas activitiesbecome more
complexandtherearedifficultbarriersbetweendoubtandproblem solving.The childdevelopsa senseof disciplineasa resultof
priorsuccess(Dewey, 1916; Glassman& Whaley,2000).
A long-termproject,even in toddlerhood,sets the child'sactivityon an importantlife trajectory.In the constructionproject,
describedearlier,childrenfollowedthroughon theirinitialinterestsandmadeimportantdiscoveries.Througha seriesof ends-inview,a simpleinitialinterestin a constructionsitewasturnedinto
a complexconstructionsite.The childrendevelopeda construction site playgroundfar beyond anythingthe toddlers,or the
adultsthatsurroundedthem,couldhaveinitiallycomprehended.
The shoeproject,with slightlyolderchildren,showshow complexityof experiencebeginsto enterinto inquiryby creatingbarriersthat demandmoredisciplinedproblemsolving.The initial
interestin shoeswas so amorphous,and the possibledirections
the activitiescould take so wide ranging,that maintainingthe
momentumof the projectwas probablyfragileon a numberof
occasions.The balancingof interestand disciplinein inquirybecomesa greaterchallengeforstudentsandteacherasactivitiesbecome morecomplex,makinglong termprojectsmoredifficultto
manage.A complimentarymethodologydevelopedby the Reggio
Emiliaschoolsin Italyusesdocumentationof the project(e.g.,
takingpicturesof activitiesand productsat variousstagesof the
projectand showingthem to the studentsat later,difficultjuncturesto re-energizethem)to maintaintheactivity(Rinaldi,1998).
The use of documentationallowsthe teacherto breathenew life
into a projectwithoutcontrollingits contextor direction.
The mechanismfor the zone ofproximaldevelopment
reflects
the sametype of doubt as outlinedby Dewey (1938). Thereis a
problemin immediateactivitythat is beyond the reachof currentthinking.The problemcausesdoubtand the child is forced
to work throughthis doubt, and reconstructthinking,in order
to completethe activity.The completionof the activity,achievement of the aim, potentiallycreatesa new problemto be solved.
The emphasisis on dynamicprogressratherthanstaticabilities.

However,therearetwo importantdifferencesbetweenDewey
and Vygotsky'sthinkingas far as educationis concerned.The
firstis thatDewey(1938) believesthatdoubtis discoveredby the
individualin unique,naturallyevolvingsituations.(Dewey explicitlystatesthatthe doubtmustbe the resultof the situationitself.) Problemswill necessarilyemergebecausesituationschange
and children(aswell as adults)will be forcedto confrontthem
throughthe naturalmomentumof activity(Dewey, 1916). For
Vygotskythe indeterminatesituationis the plan and productof
the mentor.Doubt is not discoveredby the individual,but sown
by the societythroughcomplementaryactionsof the socialinterlocutor. Relatedto this is Vygotsky'sidea that the socialinterlocutortakesan activerole in guidingthe thinkingof the child
throughthe zone of proximaldevelopment."Inshort,in some
way or anotherI proposethat the childrensolve the problem
with my assistance"(Vygotsky,1978, p. 86). This can be done
throughteachers'offeringof demonstrationsthat they asktheir
studentsto repeat,or throughpresentingleadingquestions.In
any casethe teacheris both guideand mentor.
The importance of the mentor/neophyte relationshipfor
humaninquiryis shownin both examplesof the zone of proximal developmentusedin thispaper.The adultsinteractingwith
the infantsand the mothersinteractingwith their childrenattempted to createdoubt throughtheir own developmentof (a
seriesof) indeterminatesituations.The adult/mentorsalsohad a
firmideaof the possibledirection(s)theywouldlikethe problem
solvingto takeonce the doubt was sown. This is importantbecausethe problemsolvingwasrelatedto the typeof problemsthe
childrenwouldhaveto dealwith in the largersocietylaterin life.
In Rogoff et. al.'s (1984) infancystudy the adultsknew the
problemthe child needed to solvewas how to use the jack-inthe-boxin a sociallyappropriatemanner.The adultsalso understood that in orderto get the child to solve this socialproblem,
some type of doubt abouta situationinvolvingthe jack-in-thebox must be established,andthat it wasin somewayincumbent
on them as adultsto do this. "Theadultmanagedthe child'sinvolvementwith thetoy evenat the earlyages"(Rogoffet.al. 1984,
p. 37). Thus, the adults "negotiatehow and at what level the
babywas to participatein the means-endbehaviorsof winding
the handleto get BugsBunnyto pop out of thejack-in-the-box"
(ibid, p. 38).
The relationshipbetweenthe interest-doubt-problem-solving
cycleandsocialexpectationsis evenmoredominantin the (mathematics)conceptualissuetask(Saxeet al., 1984). The adultsinvolvedunderstandthat the conceptsthey arehelpingtheirchildrenwith arebasiccomponentstheywill needfor laterlearning
of scientificconcepts.The adultsfeelan obligationto takea strong
handin bothinstillingdoubtandtheproblemsolvingprocessthat
followsit. Interest(andto a lesserextentdiscipline)whilecertainly
important,playsecondaryand,to a certainextent,decorousroles.
The sociallycreatedgoalwasof greatimportanceforthe mothers,
so much so that mothersof low abilitychildrenstructuredtheir
tasksdifferentlythanmothersof high abilitychildren(instituting
a numberof additionalsub-goals).In both casesthe mothersoffereddirectivesto theirchildrento get them as close to the proposedgoal as possiblewithin the contextof theirabilities.InterestinglyenoughSaxeet al. (1984) reportthatin initialunassisted

MAY
2001
1

This content downloaded from 129.49.23.145 on Fri, 1 Nov 2013 08:22:32 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

performances children not only made errors, but actually "conceptualize[d] the task quite differently than adults d[id]" (p. 22).
Nowhere was it even suggested that the children might gain more
by following through on their own conceptualizations of the task.
There are, I believe, important philosophical, political, and educational reasonsfor the differencesin how involved society should
be in a student's inquiry in the educational process. Vygotsky
(1987; Luria, 1971) believed in grand social goals for the educational processthat Dewey (1916, 1964), in many ways, disdained.
For Vygotsky "The new structures of social life-including the
industrialization of work activity, compulsory school and collective forms of everyday life-became seen as determinants of the
nascent forms of behaviorand cognition of a 'new man"' (Kozulin,
1990, p. 277). If more powerful tools can come into existence
through activity, then it is almost a moral obligation for the teacher
to act as mentor and establish the types of activities that will engender these new tools. The mentor devises cooperative activities
that will allow the child to "acquirethe 'plane of consciousness' of
the natal society" (Tharp & Gallimore, 1988, p. 30).

Conclusion
Dewey and Vygotsky are extraordinarilyclose on the importance
of everyday activity in the educational process. At the same time
they are miles apart on how and why that activity should be used
in the classroom. A careful consideration of the two theorists explodes the myth of a dichotomy between the individual and the
social in development; and yet Dewey is unrepentant in the degree to which he promotes individualism, whereas Vygotsky sees
the social organization as the central agent of change.
This crucialdifferencebetween Vygotsky and Dewey might best
be explored through a chapter where Vygotsky (1978) discusses
the interaction between learning and development. Vygotsky examines three possible relationshipsbetween learning and development: that processesof learning are independent of development,
that learning is development, and that learning and development
are "two inherently different but relatedprocesses"(ibid p. 81).
For Dewey it is education the drives development. It is a dynamic force in helping students to create their own primary experiences that will lead naturally to the secondary experiences of
inquiry and the organization of knowledge. From an education
perspective there is little to be gained by getting the child to simply exhibit the requiredproduct of activity (Dewey, 1912). What
is important is the process, and the disposition of the child in activity towards that process. This is especially true of the interest/
motivation for the activity; the desire to engage in an activity,
achieve an aim, despite obstacles and/or barriers(Dewey, 1916).
It is society, certainly, that provides the context and the immediate, superficial motivations for particular activities. But ultimately context and specific motivation are ethereal and not as
important to learning and development as the ability to harness
this motivation, so the very fact of interest becomes a motivating
force for problem solving over the entire lifetime, no matter what
the situation. This allows the child to grow into a human whose
subject is the "betterment of life" (for the self and the society),
rather than simply a member of a social group that is subject to
the needs of that group. The purpose of education is to teach innately social animals to be individuals within a society. There is

a darkerpoliticalside to Dewey'semphasison process.He believedthat, ultimately,socialand culturalgroupsestablishgoals

and end points for theirown benefit.If you acceptthe socialorganizationasthe finalarbiterforeducationgoals,individualsare
forevertrappedwithin that organization.
Vygotsky(1978) usesthe zone of proximaldevelopmentas an
alternativefor his describedthreeinteractionsbetweenlearning
and development.He seeslearningas a tool in the developmental process.The processof learningallowsthe child to fulfillher
developmentalpotential.It is thereforeimportantfor teachers/
mentorsto be a proactiveforceandtakegreatercontrolin the educationalprocess,just as they would be a proactiveforcein the
use of anyothertool (e.g.,the teacherwieldspedagogyjust asthe
builderwields a hammer).For Dewey the teacheris one of a
numberof possiblesievesthat the socialenvironmentcan pour
throughin the generaldevelopmentof activity.That is why it is
importantfor teachersto takethe less dominant,facilitatorroles
exhibitedin the bestlong termprojects.ForVygotskytheteacher/
mentorusesthe socialenvironmentto "build"activitiesthatwill
lead to mastery.Vygotskymight havejoined some of Dewey's
criticsin seeingfaithin processand freeexpressionas naivein a
complexsocialenvironment.The societyand the individualare
both moresuccessfulif educationleadsto individualandsociety
workingtogethertowardsa greatergood.
This generaldifferencebetweenVygotskyand Dewey in the
relationshipbetweenthe rolesof processand goals in learning
and developmenthighlightsthreeimportanteducationalissues:
the role of socialhistoryas opposedto individualhistoryin the
classroom;whetheror not the teachershouldtakethe generalattitudeof facilitatoror mentor;andwhetherthe sourceof change
is the individualor the socialcommunity.
Individualhistoryandsocialhistoryareboth importantin the
educationalprocess,and it is sometimesdifficultto separatethe
two, but therearedifferenceswith importantimplications.The
differencebetweenthe two types of historiesspeaksdirectlyto
the issueof diversityin the classroom.If the roleof socialhistory
is seen aspreeminentthen it is difficultto escapethe importance
of sharedhistoricalartifactsin the classroom.This includesnot
only language,but alsochildhoodtools andsymbolssuchastoys
and games.The greaterthe sharedhistorythe higherthe levelof
communicationbetweenteacherandstudentsandbetweenpeers.
This is especiallyimportantfora modelsuchas the zoneof proximal developmentwhere the mentor plays such an important
rolein establishingindeterminatesituationsthatwill both be of
interestto the studentand beneficialto the student'srolein the
largersociety.
If individualhistoryis emphasized,a diversestudentpopulation (andevendifferencesbetweenteacherandstudents)is something to be consciouslypursued,even at the expenseof initial
communicativeabilities.Ratherthan bringingin artifactsfrom
the outsideworld,teachersmightbe moreinclinedto concentrate
on the developmentof peerprojectsthatleadto self-generated
indeterminatesituations.
If clearcommunicationis pursuedand realizedthen the burden for developmentof specificactivitiesfalls squarelyon the
shouldersof the mentor(s).The mentormustfindthe rightquestions,the propersituationsthatwill allowthe studentsto achieve

RESEARCHER
121EDUCATIONAL

This content downloaded from 129.49.23.145 on Fri, 1 Nov 2013 08:22:32 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

theirpromise.Dewey'svisionof the teacherasfacilitator(1916)

is at once more distant and more immediatethan Vygotsky's
mentor.The learningsituationdevelopsthroughthe naturalsocial evolutionof activityin the child'slife. The teacher'srole is
moredistantin thatthereshouldbe littlecontrolovercontentof
specificactivities.It is more immediatebecausethe teacherdiscoversthe doubtof indeterminatesituationsalongwith the child.
Dewey makesit veryclearthat the majortaskof educationis
to developan individualthinkerout of a social being (1916).
Progressis madewhenthe individualquestionsa socialsystemshe
no longerbelievesworks.Deweyrecognizesthatthe classroomis
an inherentlysocialorganization
thatis representative
of the larger
socialcommunity.Butthe childmustrecognizeherselfasa viable
agent of changefor that socialorganization.In orderto do this
the studentmustrealizethatshehassomeelementof controlover
classroomactivity.The fact that the classroomis made up of a
numberof individualswith differentsocialhistoriesmeansthat
agencyfor changeis relativelylimited.Individualsmaydesireto
takeactivitiesin directionsthey cannot go. This is perhapsthe
most importantof all educationalexperiences;it forcesthe individualto reconstructherthinkingaboutthe situationin orderto
maintainevena partialroleas agentfor change.
For Vygotskythe classroomis also a socialorganizationthat
is representativeof the largersocialcommunity.But insteadof
the individualas agent for changein the socialorganization,it
is the socialorganization,and the largersocialcommunity,that
is the agentfor changein the individual.The purposeof education is to meldchildreninto the largersocialstructureso thatthey
becomeproductivemembersof the community.Changeof the
largersocialstructureitselfis historicalandbasedon the cumulativeeffortof thesocialgroupovertime (Vygotsky& Luria,1993).
Dewey andVygotskyleft a legacyof ideasthatcontinueto influenceeducatorsin theirattemptsto createa betterclassroom.
At the coreof this legacyis the importanceof everydayactivities
to allhumanbeings.Whetherit is the individualor the socialorganizationthat is the focus of educationalstrategies,educators
forgetthe powerandimportanceof everydayactivitiesandsocial
contextat theirperil.
REFERENCES
children's
Berk,L. E., & Winsler,A. (1995). Scaffolding
learning:Vygotskyandearlychildhoodeducation.Washington,DC: NationalAssociation for the Educationof Young Children(NAEYCResearchinto
PracticeSeries).
Brickman,W. (1964). Introduction.Impressions
ofSovietRussiaand the
world,Mexico,China, Turkey,1929 (byJohn Dewey).
revolutionary
New York:TeachersCollegePress.
Campbell,J. (1995). UnderstandingJohn
Dewey.Chicago:Open Court
Press.
Boston:HarvardUniversityPress.
Cole, M. (1996). Culturalpsychology.
Davydov,V.V. (1997). LevVygotskyand EducationalPsychology.In
L. S. Vygotskyand V. V. Davydov (Eds.), Educationalpsychology,
Trans.,pp. xxi-xxxix).BocaRaton,FL:CRCPress.
(RobertSilverman,
The
schooland society/being
threelecturesbyJohn
Dewey, J. (1900).
The
of
Press.
Dewey.Chicago:
University Chicago
andeffortin education.
Boston,MA:Houghton
Dewey,J. (1912).Interest
Mifflin.
and education.New York:FreePress.
Dewey,J. (1916). Democracy

in philosophy.New York:Holt PubDewey, J. (1920). Reconstruction

lishing.
An introductiontosocial
Dewey,J. (1922). Humannatureand conduct:
New York:Holt Publishing.
psychology.
Dewey, J. (1925). Experienceand nature.Chicago:Open Court Publishing.
Dewey, J. (1930). Individualismold and new. New York:Capricorn
Books.
Dewey,J. (1933). How we think,a restatementof the relationof reflective thinkingto the educativeprocess.Boston:D.C. Heath and Co.
Dewey,J. (1938).Logic,thetheoryofinquiry.New York:Holt Publishing.
Dewey,J. (1954). Thepublicand itsproblems.Chicago:SwallowPress.
(Originalworkpublished1927)
Dewey, J. (1964). Impressionsof SovietRussiaand the revolutionary
world,Mexico,China, Turkey,1929. New York:TeachersCollege
Press.(Originalwork published1928.)
JohnDewey'sculturalinEldridge,M. (1998). Transforming
experience:
strumentalism.
Nashville:VanderbiltUniversityPress.
Glassman,M. (1996). UnderstandingVygotsky'smotiveand goal:An
39,
explorationof the workof A. N. Leontiev.HumanDevelopment,
309-327.
Glassman,M., & Whaley,K. (2000). DynamicAims:The use of long
termprojectsin the earlychildhoodclassroomin lightof Dewey'seducationalphilosophy.EarlyChildhoodResearch
andPractice,2.
Handlin, 0. (1959). John Dewey'sChallengeto Education.Westport,
CT: GreenwoodPress.
Katz,L., & Chard,S. C. (1989). Engagingchildren'sminds:Theproject
approach.Norwood,NJ:AblexPublishing.
Katz,L., & Chard,S. C. (2000). The projectapproach:an overview.In
to earlychildhood
J. L Roopnarine&J. E. Johnson(Eds.),Approaches
education(pp. 175-190). Columbus,Ohio: Merrill.
A biography
Kozulin,A. (1990). Vygotsky'spsychology:
ofideas.New York:
HarveserWheatsheaf.
in thedevelopment
Leontiev,A. N. (1981).Problems
ofthemind.Moscow:
ProgressPress.
Luria,A. (1971). Towardsthe natureof the historicalnatureof psy6, 259-272.
chologicalprocesses.InternationalJournalofPsychology,
thestandpointofa social
Mead,G. H. (1934). Mind,selfandsocietyfrom

behaviorist.
of ChicagoPress.
University
Chicago:

Novak, G. (1975). An appraisalofJohnDewey'sphilosophy:

Pragmatism
vs.Marxism.New York:PathfinderPress.
Pepper,S. (1942). Worldhypotheses.
Berkeley:Universityof California
Press.
Popkewitz,T. (1987). The formationof schoolsubjectsand the political contextof schooling.In T. Popkewitz(Ed.), Theformationof the
schoolsubjects.
New York:The FalmerPress.
Popkewitz,T., & Tabacknik,R. (1981). Soviet and Americanpedagogicalresearch:Differencesandsimilaritiesin the two countries.In
B. R. Tabachnick,T. S. Popkewitz,B. B. Szekely(Eds.), Studying
teachingand learning:Trendsin Sovietand Americanresearch.New

York:Praeger.
in Moscow:
Prawat,R (2001). Deweymeetsthe "Mozartof Psychology"
The untoldstory.American
37, 663-696.
EducationalResearchJournal,
Rinaldi, C. (1998). Projected curriculum constructed through
An interviewwith LellaGandini.In
documentation-Progettazione:
C. Edwards,L. Gandini,& G. Forman(Eds.),Thehundredlanguages
(2nd ed.,
ofchildren:TheReggioEmiliaapproach-advanced
reflections
pp. 113-126). Greenwich,Conn.:Ablex.
Rogoff,B., Malkin,C., & Gilbride,K. (1984). Interactionwith babies
as guidancein development.In B. Rogoff& J. Wertsch(Eds.),Children'slearningin thezone ofproximaldevelopment
(pp. 31-44). San
Francisco:Jossey-Bass.

13
MAY
2001

This content downloaded from 129.49.23.145 on Fri, 1 Nov 2013 08:22:32 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Rogoff, B., & Wertsch, J. (1984). Children'slearning in the zone ofproximal development.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Rogoff, B. (1993). Children's guided participation and participatory
appropriation in social activity. In R. Wozniak & K Fischer (Eds.),

Developmentin context:Actingand thinkingin specificenvironments

(pp. 121-154). Hillsdale, NJ: Earlbaum.
Saxe, G., Gearhart, M., & Guberman, S. (1984). The social organization of early number development. In B. Rogoff & J. Wertsch (Eds.),

Children'slearningin thezone ofproximaldevelopment.

(pp.19-30).
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Tharp,R. G., & Gallimore,R. (1988). Rousingmindsto life.New York:

Cambridge University Press.

A quest
van derVeer,J., & Valsiner,J. (1991). Understanding
Vygotsky:
for synthesis.Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1997). Educationalpsychology (R. Silverman, Trans.)

Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. (Original work published 1926)
Vygotsky, L. S., & Luria, A. R. (1993). Studies on the history of behavior: Ape, primitive and child. (Victor I. Golod & Jane E. Knox.
Hillsdale, Eds. and Trans.) NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Wood, D. J., Bruner,J., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in prob-

lem solving.Journalof ChildPsychology

andPsychiatry,
17, 89-100.
AUTHOR
MICHAELGLASSMANis AssistantProfessorin the Departmentof
Human Developmentand FamilySciences,135 CampbellHall, 1781
Neil Ave., Columbus,OH 43210; [email protected]. His research
interestsincludechild developmentand earlychildhoodeducation.

Vol.I ProbVygotsky,L. S. (1987). ThecollectedworksofL.S. Vygotsky:

lems ofgeneralpsychology.R. Rieber & A. Carton (Eds.) (N. Minick,
Trans.). New York: Plenum Press. (Original work published 1934)
Vygotsky, L. S. (1994). The development of concept formation in adolescence. In R. van der Veer & J. Valsiner (Eds.), The Vygotskyreader.
Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

PRESIDENT-ELECT
INVITES SUGGESTIONS

Manuscriptreceived February7, 2000

Revisionreceived March5, 2001
Accepted March7, 2001

Teachers

The

...With

its
ON

LINE

ALL-NEW

ERSION

www.te
Thei

org
f
reSer

Theos compe
ur
for pubhi
A ne cton

ts

ieducational

on weekly
Q9linte
opportunites
als and books

otorials
to aid
anial researchers
j
cs in education
Discussionson
and ucationalresearch
Full-textarticlesfromthe TCRecord
C
printjournal
Tdl

He also welcomes suggestions about existing AERA

programsand possible new initiatives. Please write to
him at
DC 20036-3078
AERA,123017thStreet,NW,Washington,

Record

is stepping up production...

Each year, the AERA president appoints a number of

membersto committees that are importantto the association. The committees include Publications;Professional Development and Training; GovernmentRelations; Special InterestGroups;Scholars and Advocates
for GenderEquity;Scholarsof Colorin Education;Nominations;Outreachand ProfessionalLiaison; Social Justice Action; InternationalRelations;JEBSManagement;
Annual Meeting; Telecommunications;Minority Fellowship Selection; ResearchAdvisory Committee;and
seven annualawardcommittees.
This year, President-ElectRobert Linn hopes to form
many of the committees before the annual meeting in
New Orleans. He urges members to supply names, including their own, if they are interestedin serving on a
committee. Please send a resume if volunteering (or a
statementabout qualifications if nominating someone
else) and state which committees are of interest.

CoLLege

The

voice of scholarshipin education

14I EDUCATIONALRESEARCHER

This content downloaded from 129.49.23.145 on Fri, 1 Nov 2013 08:22:32 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions