Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Although most L2 research informed by sociocultural theory (henceforth, SCT) asserts that the fundamental concepts of Vygotsky’s theory are that human mental activity is mediated by socially and culturally created artifacts (see Lantolf & Appel, 1994 and Lantolf, 2000; among others), I believe that the real key to the theory is to be found in the notion of praxis—a notion that Vygotsky appropriated from Marx and which, of course, has its origins in ancient Greek philosophy. For the Greeks, praxis had the general meaning of action as an end itself, whereas for Hegel and Marx it refers to “action which generates an object external to the subject or his [sic] acts” (Sanchez Velazquez, 1977: 1).1 The crucial feature of praxis in its contemporary understanding is the dialectic unity of consciousness (knowledge/theory) and action that results in the creation of an object. In Hegel’s philosophy the object is Ideal, while for Marx, and for Vygotsky, the object is Material. The present article emerges from an on-going project that explores the implications of praxis in Vygotsky’s theory for instructed second language development. In making the case for the importance of praxis and language education, I will first discuss the place of praxis in SCT and will then present some evidence from recently completed large-scale studies of instructed L2 learning by Negueruela (2003) and Yanez Prieto (2008) that are informed by Vygotsky’s theory. Along the way, I will also briefly consider some other, less robust, though interesting, studies inspired by Vygotsky’s theory of educational praxis. Resumen Aunque la mayoria de las investigaciones sobre la Teoria sociocultural senalan como eje central de la teoria de Vygotsky el hecho de que la actividad mental humana se encuentra mediatizada por artefactos social y culturalmente creados (vease Lantolf & Appel, 1994 y Lantolf, 2000, entre otros), considero que la clave fundamental de esta teoria se encuentra en la nocion de praxis –una nocion que Vygotsky tomo de Marx y que sin duda tiene su origen en la filosofia clasica griega. Para los griegos, la praxis tenia el significado general de “accion como un fin en si misma”, mientras que para Hegel y Marx se refiere a “la accion que genera un objeto ajeno al sujeto o sus actos” (Sanchez Velasquez, 1977: 1). La caracteristica fundamental del concepto de praxis en la actualidad es la unidad dialectica entre la conciencia (conocimiento/teoria) y la accion que resulta de la creacion de un objeto. En la filosofia de Hegel el objeto es “ideal” mientras que para Marx y Vygotsky el objeto es “material”. Este articulo surge de una investigacion actualmente en curso que explora las implicaciones de la praxis en la teoria de Vygotsky para el desarrollo de la ensenanza de la segunda lengua. Con objeto de resaltar la importancia de la praxis en la ensenanza/aprendizaje de una lengua, me centrare en primer lugar en clarificar el lugar que ocupa la praxis en la Teoria sociocultural y seguidamente presentare algunos datos tomados de estudios a gran escala llevados a cabo recientemente por Negueruela (2003), Yanez Prieto (2008), y Serrano-Lopez y Poehner (2008) sobre el aprendizaje de una L2, y enmarcados en la teoria de Vygotsky. Del mismo modo me referire a otros estudios –menos solidos aunque igualmente interesantes- inspirados en la teoria de Vygotsky.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".