Abstract
The paper makes two set of arguments, one, that creation of intersubjective spaces is central to children’s engagement in the classroom teaching–learning process and two and more importantly that creation of intersubjective spaces facilitates concept development in children. Using empirical data of the classroom teaching–learning processes in a Digantar school in rural Rajasthan, India, the study presents the components of intersubjective interactions that facilitate development of concepts in children. Intersubjectivity, here, is not conceptualised as a knowledge neutral, culture neutral or historicity neutral spaces but as knowledge laden spaces which provide the possibility for mutual alignment of participants’ motives. It has been argued that the multiple contact points and the nature of interaction between the teacher and learners in the school provide the possibility for investigation of the main components of intersubjective spaces in the classroom context. Negotiation of the object of activity, pedagogical interventions (such as exploratory questioning, teacher presenting herself as a non-expert, evoking classroom’s long-term trajectory), focus on epistemological underpinnings of the subject and teacher’s and children’s engagement with metaperspectives were found to be the main factors that contributed to the creation of intersubjective spaces.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Akhtar, N., & Tomasello, M. (1998). Intersubjective communication and emotion in early ontogeny. In S. Braten (Ed.), Intersubjectivity in early language learning and use (pp. 316–335). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Barnes, D. (1992). The role of talk in learning. In K. Norman (Ed.), Thinking voices: The work of the National Oracy Project (pp. 123–128). London: Hodder & Stoughton.
Chaiklin, S. (2012). A conceptual perspective for investigating motive in cultural-historical theory. In M. Hedegaard, A. Edwards, & M. Fleer (Eds.), Motives in children’s development: Cultural-historical approaches (pp. 209–224). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Coelho, N. E., & Figueiredo, L. C. (2003). Patterns of intersubjectivity in the constitution of subjectivity: Dimensions of otherness. Culture & Psychology, 9(3), 193–208.
Davydov, V. V., Zinchenko, V. P., & Talyzina, N. F. (1983). The problem of activity in the works of A.N. Leont’ev. Soviet Psychology, 21(4), 31–42.
Digantar Annual Report (2014). Edited by Vishwambhar Retrieved from http://www.digantar.org/uploads/pdf/annual%20reportsNew%20Folder/Year_2013-14.pdf.
Engeström, Y. (1990). Learning, working and imagining: Twelve studies in activity theory. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit.
Fleer, M. (2009). Understanding the dialectical relations between everyday concepts and scientific concepts within play-based programs. Research in Science Education, 39(2) 281–306.
Gardenfors, P. (2008). The role of intersubjectivity in animal and human cooperation. Biological Theory, 3(1), 51–62.
Gillespie, A., & Cornish, F. (2010). Intersubjectivity: Towards a dialogical analysis. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 40(1) 19–46.
Hedegaard, M. (2008). Principles for interpreting research protocols. In M. Hedegaard & M. Fleer (Eds.), Studying children. A cultural-historical approach (pp. 46–64). New York: Open University Press.
Hedegaard, M. (2009). Children's development from a cultural–historical approach: Children's activity in everyday local settings as foundation for their development. Mind, Culture and Activity, 16(1), 64–82.
Hedegaard, M. (2012). Motives in children’s learning and development. In M. Hedegaard, A. Edwards, & M. Fleer (Eds.), Motives in children’s development: Cultural historical approaches (pp. 9–27). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hedegaard, M., & Fleer, M. (2013). Play, learning, and children’s development everyday life in families and transition to school. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Jovchelovitch, S. (2007). Knowledge in context: Representations, community and culture. London: Routledge.
Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (2001). Multimodal discourse: The mode and media of contemporary communication. London: Edward Arnold.
Leach, J., & Scott, P. (2002). Designing and evaluating science teaching sequences: An approach drawing upon the concept of learning demand and a social constructivist perspective on learning. Studies in Science Education, 38(1), 115–142.
Lemke, J. L. (2001). Articulating communities: Sociocultural perspectives on science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(3), 296–316.
Leont’ev, A. N. (1981). The problem of activity in psychology. In J. V. Wertsch (Ed.), The concept of activity in Soviet psychology (pp. 37–71). Armonk: M. E. Sharpe.
Matusov, E. (1996). Intersubjectivity without agreement. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 3(1), 25–45.
Matusov, E. (1998). When solo activity is not privileged: The participation and internalization models of development. Human Development, 41(5–6), 326–349.
Matusov, E. (2001) Intersubjectivity as a way of informing teaching design for a community of learners classroom. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(4), 383–402.
Mercer, N. (1995). The guided construction of knowledge: Talk Amongst teachers and learners. UK: Multilingual Matters.
Mercer, N. (2008). The seeds of time: Why classroom dialogue needs a temporal analyses. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 17(1), 33–59.
Mercer, N., Wegerif, R., & Dawes, L. (1999). Children’s talk and the development of reasoning in the classroom. British Educational Research Journal, 25(1), 95–111.
Merleau-Ponty, M. (1945). Phenomenology of perception. London: Routledge.
Moll, L. C., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzalez, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms theory into practice. Qualitative Issues in Educational Research, 31(2), 132–141.
Mortimor, E. F., & Scott, P. H. (2003). Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. USA: Open University Press.
National Council of Educational Research and Training. (2005). National curriculum framework. NCERT: New Delhi.
Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66(2), 211–227.
Rommetveit, R. (1979). On the architecture of intersubjectivity. In R. Rornmetveit & R. M. Blakar (Eds.), Studies of language, thought, and verbal communication (pp. 147–161). New York: Academic Press.
Schutz, A. (1973). Collected papers I: The problem of social reality. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.
Smolka A. L. B., De Goes, M. C. R.., & Pino, A. (1995). The construction of the subject: A persistent question. In J. Werstch, P. del Rio, & A. Alvarez (Eds.), Sociocultural studies of mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Trevarthen, C., & Hubley, P. (1978). Secondary intersubjectivity: Confidence, confiding, and acts of meaning in the first year. In J. Lock (Ed.), Action, gesture and symbol (pp. 183–229). London: Academic Press.
Van Zee, E. H., & Minstrell, J. A. (1997). Reflective discourse: Developing shared understandings in a physics classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 19(2), 209–228.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wertsch, J. V. (1985a). Vygotsky and the social formation of mind. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Wertsch, J. V. (Ed.). (1985b). Culture, communication and cognition: Vygotskian perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wertsch, J.V., & Toma, C. (1991). Discourse and learning in the classroom: A socio-cultural approach. Presentation made at the University of Georgia Visiting lecturer series on 'Contructivism in Science Education'.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Vashishtha, P., Panda, M. Exploring Intersubjective Interactions: A Sociocultural Analysis of Pedagogical Practices in a Digantar School. Psychol Stud 64, 161–172 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12646-019-00487-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12646-019-00487-1