Talking: Co-constructing knowledge

Synopsis: Diverse members of the team can contribute inputs from different angles. The group gains more insight of reality.


Clear distinctions of space and time exist in people’s minds in diversity.

Getting across

The more dimensions there are, the more the requirement for a better understanding of issues and their circumstances. Diverse members of the team can contribute inputs from different angles. The multiplicity helps the collective thinking become more rounded. The group gains more insight of reality and considers creative innovations to resolve them.

Issues and problems that create obstacles to workflow arise from different situations. They may also have different contexts and run different courses. The solutions then need to be designed to fit.


Two cognitive levels

Members verbalizing their inner speech are then vital to finding these new courses of action. Our intellectual development occurs at two cognitive levels. According to social scientist Lev Vygotsky, these are:

· Actual development: where the individual is capable of independently dealing with issues and solving related problems.
· Potential development: this constitutes the "zone of proximal development" where the individual needs assistance in dealing with challenges. The interactions with others are crucial for guidance or collaboration.

Learning continues through our lifetime in the zone of proximal development. Much of it is collaborative in nature, impossible to separate from the social context. As we gain in experience and expertise, the learning consolidates as actual cognitive development.

Learning

Learning does not occur simply with the intake of book knowledge. Vygotsky argues that all cognitive functions originate in, and are products of social interactions. By interacting freely and openly, we put the knowledge to test. In the process, we are always learners.

Consolidating learning also depends significantly on the individual's internal drive to understand and promote the learning process. With this inner drive, we develop even as we age. Without it, we tend to resist change.

Collaborative learning methods diffuse the required motivation person to person. In the process, learners develop teamwork. Individual learning and successful group learning are thus mutually related. Collaborations build up an atmosphere of mutual trust, respect and acceptance within the group. The system thus builds its own culture and values in diversity.

Co-constructing

Through the social interactions, individuals in the group can receive other people’s points of view, as well as present their own. Just talking together allows them to discover new ways of communicating their thought processes.

A close knit group, even with members of different cultures, develops a common language – like slang or verbal shorthand - that bind group experiences together. From shared learning, the cognitive structures may be utilized in new or innovative ways. People become more effective in adapting to environments and to change.

Being averse to ‘conflict’ among people of the system could inhibit creative thought or prevent its expression. To discourage talking amongst the collective is to retard processes of collective learning and problem solving. Fact is we don’t construct knowledge just by ourselves, but largely ‘co-construct’ it with others in the environment.

Comments/opinions, anyone??

References for ‘Talking’ and 'Problem solving' blogposts:

Social Constructivism
Why Vygotsky?