Ripensare il contesto non come ambiente ma come azione
Dourish (2004), in a conceptual piece which acknowledges the centrality of context, attempts to move beyond a view of context as being located in positivist, phenomenological and critical theory considerations. Instead of viewing context as a representational problem, he puts forward a view of context as an interactional problem.
Dourish bases this view on four assumptions (p. 5): contextuality is a relational property that holds between objects and activities; the scope of contextual features is defined dynamically; context is particular to each occasion of activity or action; and context arises from the activity, it is actively produced, maintained and enacted in the course of the activity in hand. He raises a fundamental question which, we feel, is of central importance to an understanding of the potential of mobile technologies in learning: ‘how and why, in the course of their interactions, do people achieve and maintain a mutual understanding of the context for their actions?’ (p. 6) In his thinking, ‘context isn’t something that describes a setting; it’s something that people do. It is an achievement, rather than an observation; an outcome, rather than a premise’. ‘Context cannot be a stable, external description of the setting in which activity arises. Instead, it arises from and is sustained by the activity itself’. In other words, how, why and with whom mobile technologies are used become more constituent of context than is where and when they are used.
On a practical level, Dourish’s interactional view of context is borne out by work carried out in Finland on the active construction of experiences through mobile media. In their study, Jacucci et al. (2007) focus on the role of technology-mediated memories in constructing experiences. They observed that users expended cognitive, social and physical resources supported by mobile technologies, particular the camera function of mobile/cell phones, to foster continuity and group identity, to reflect on the self and/in relation to the group. The study identifies a number of multimedia-mediated forms of expression, in particular: staging, competition, storytelling, joking, communicating presence and portraying others. The study is not only of interest in relation to our discussion of learner-generated contexts, but also because of its detailed discussion of the role of memory in the creation of experiences and, therefore, the process of learning [pag. 44].
Pachler, N., Bachmair, B., Cook, J. (2010). Mobile Learning: A Topography, In N. Pachler (ed.) Mobile learning. Springer. Boston. 29-72.
In rete all'indirizzo: https://www.springer.com/cda/content/document/cda_downloaddocument/9781441905840-c1.pdf?SGWID=0-0-45-855506-p173900813
Dourish bases this view on four assumptions (p. 5): contextuality is a relational property that holds between objects and activities; the scope of contextual features is defined dynamically; context is particular to each occasion of activity or action; and context arises from the activity, it is actively produced, maintained and enacted in the course of the activity in hand. He raises a fundamental question which, we feel, is of central importance to an understanding of the potential of mobile technologies in learning: ‘how and why, in the course of their interactions, do people achieve and maintain a mutual understanding of the context for their actions?’ (p. 6) In his thinking, ‘context isn’t something that describes a setting; it’s something that people do. It is an achievement, rather than an observation; an outcome, rather than a premise’. ‘Context cannot be a stable, external description of the setting in which activity arises. Instead, it arises from and is sustained by the activity itself’. In other words, how, why and with whom mobile technologies are used become more constituent of context than is where and when they are used.
On a practical level, Dourish’s interactional view of context is borne out by work carried out in Finland on the active construction of experiences through mobile media. In their study, Jacucci et al. (2007) focus on the role of technology-mediated memories in constructing experiences. They observed that users expended cognitive, social and physical resources supported by mobile technologies, particular the camera function of mobile/cell phones, to foster continuity and group identity, to reflect on the self and/in relation to the group. The study identifies a number of multimedia-mediated forms of expression, in particular: staging, competition, storytelling, joking, communicating presence and portraying others. The study is not only of interest in relation to our discussion of learner-generated contexts, but also because of its detailed discussion of the role of memory in the creation of experiences and, therefore, the process of learning [pag. 44].
Pachler, N., Bachmair, B., Cook, J. (2010). Mobile Learning: A Topography, In N. Pachler (ed.) Mobile learning. Springer. Boston. 29-72.
In rete all'indirizzo: https://www.springer.com/cda/content/document/cda_downloaddocument/9781441905840-c1.pdf?SGWID=0-0-45-855506-p173900813
Commenti
Posta un commento