ArticlePDF Available

正統的周辺参加論におけるアイデンティティ構築概念の拡張 : 実践共同体間移動を視野に入れた学習論のために

Authors:

Kotaro Takagi

Aoyama Gakuin University

Content uploaded by Kotaro Takagi

Content may be subject to copyright.

ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.

ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.

Article

教師の成長と派遣 : 「中年期の危機」を視座として

January 1970

「状況論的アプローチ」における学習概念の検討：正統的周辺参加（Legitimate Peripheral Participation）概念を中心として

January 1992

Kotaro Takagi

"Legitimate Peripheral Participation" approach (LPP) is one of the most important perspective to situated learning, which is proposed buy Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger. The purpose of this article is to draw an outline of this approach and examine its perspective to situated learning and methodology of learning study. I the LPP approach, situated learning is understood as "situated social ... [Show full abstract] practice" which presupposes dynamic relations between "community of practice" and subjects as "whole persons". By comparing with L. S. Vygotsky's theory, the basic methodology of the LPP approach was identified as an "unit of analysis method". Some problems of the LPP approach was also discussed shortly.

View full-text

Article

Investigative interviews based on psychological research findings心理学的知見を踏まえた捜査面接法

September 2015 · The Proceedings of the Annual Convention of the Japanese Psychological Association

How Do Ordinary Japanese Reach Consensus in Group Decision Making?: Identifying and Analyzing “Naïve...

March 2006 · Group Decision and Negotiation

The purpose of this study is to investigate ways in which ordinary Japanese people negotiate in a multi-party meeting. We initially gave such a way of negotiation the tentative name of “naïve negotiation”. The analysis of the conversational data reveals three structural features of naïve negotiation: (1) at the utterance level, the participants tend to claim their opinions without providing any ... [Show full abstract] overt grounds, (2) at the local consensus-building level, they tend to jump to conclusions without the full examination of proposed hypotheses, (3) at the final consensus-making level, there tends to be disjunctions between discussion units. Although these features are not necessarily seen as irrational or illogical, a naïve-negotiation style can still be a trouble-source in achieving successful consensus-making. This leads us to emphasize the necessity of developing a support system for the discussants.

View full-text