Microculture: Difference between revisions
mNo edit summary |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
== Introduction == | == Introduction == | ||
Interpretive social research presumes that the meanings-in-action that | {{quotation|Interpretive social research presumes that the meanings-in-action that are shared by members of a set of individuals who interact recurrently through time are local in at least two senses. First, they are local in that they are distinctive to that particular set of individuals, who as they interact across time come to share certain specific local understandings and traditions--a distinctive microculture. Such microcultures are characteristic of all human groups whose members recurrently associate. These are so-called natural groups, which are the typical unit of analysis studied by fieldwork researchers}} (Erickson, 1985: 37). | ||
are shared by members of a set of individuals who interact recurrently | |||
through time are local in at least two senses. | |||
First, they are local in that | |||
they are distinctive to that particular set of individuals, who as they | |||
Such microcultures are characteristic of | |||
all human groups whose members recurrently associate. | |||
These are so-called | |||
natural groups, which are the typical unit of analysis studied by fieldwork | |||
{{quotation|The root problem in ecological psychology is conceptualization of the environment. The study of the subject’s behavior in his natural habitat is not the same as the study of natural habitats.}} (Gump, 1969:201 cited by Erickson, 1977:67). | {{quotation|The root problem in ecological psychology is conceptualization of the environment. The study of the subject’s behavior in his natural habitat is not the same as the study of natural habitats.}} (Gump, 1969:201 cited by Erickson, 1977:67). | ||
| Line 31: | Line 11: | ||
== Classroom culture == | == Classroom culture == | ||
{{quotation|Interpretive researchers presume that microcultures will differ from one classroom to the next, no matter what degree of similarity in general demographic features obtains between the two rooms, which may be located literally next door or across the hall from one another.}} (Erickson, 1985: 38). | |||
== Bibliography == | == Bibliography == | ||
| Line 38: | Line 18: | ||
Erickson, Frederick (1982). Taught Cognitive Learning in Its Immediate Environments: A Neglected Topic in the Anthropology of Education. Anthropology and Education Quarterly 13:149–180. | Erickson, Frederick (1982). Taught Cognitive Learning in Its Immediate Environments: A Neglected Topic in the Anthropology of Education. Anthropology and Education Quarterly 13:149–180. | ||
* Erickson, Frederick, (1985) Qualitative Methods in Research on Teaching. Occasional Paper No. 81. Michigan State Univ., East Lansing. Inst. for Research on Teaching. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED263203.pdf | |||
Goodenough, W. Culture, Language, and Society (Addison-Wesley Module). Reading (Mass.): Addison-Wesley, 197 1. | Goodenough, W. Culture, Language, and Society (Addison-Wesley Module). Reading (Mass.): Addison-Wesley, 197 1. | ||
Revision as of 18:55, 15 December 2016
Introduction
“Interpretive social research presumes that the meanings-in-action that are shared by members of a set of individuals who interact recurrently through time are local in at least two senses. First, they are local in that they are distinctive to that particular set of individuals, who as they interact across time come to share certain specific local understandings and traditions--a distinctive microculture. Such microcultures are characteristic of all human groups whose members recurrently associate. These are so-called natural groups, which are the typical unit of analysis studied by fieldwork researchers” (Erickson, 1985: 37).
“The root problem in ecological psychology is conceptualization of the environment. The study of the subject’s behavior in his natural habitat is not the same as the study of natural habitats.” (Gump, 1969:201 cited by Erickson, 1977:67).
“Goodenough has defined culture ideationally as “a system of standards for perceiving, believing, evaluating, and acting” (1971:41). What one has to know in order to act appropriately as a member of a given group includes knowing not only what to do oneself but also how to anticipate the actions of others.” (Erickson, 1977:64).
Classroom culture
“Interpretive researchers presume that microcultures will differ from one classroom to the next, no matter what degree of similarity in general demographic features obtains between the two rooms, which may be located literally next door or across the hall from one another.” (Erickson, 1985: 38).
Bibliography
Erickson, Frederick (1977). Some Approaches to Inquiry in School-Community Ethnography. Anthropology and Education Quarterly 8(2):58-69.
Erickson, Frederick (1982). Taught Cognitive Learning in Its Immediate Environments: A Neglected Topic in the Anthropology of Education. Anthropology and Education Quarterly 13:149–180.
- Erickson, Frederick, (1985) Qualitative Methods in Research on Teaching. Occasional Paper No. 81. Michigan State Univ., East Lansing. Inst. for Research on Teaching. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED263203.pdf
Goodenough, W. Culture, Language, and Society (Addison-Wesley Module). Reading (Mass.): Addison-Wesley, 197 1.
Mottier Lopez, L. (2016). La microculture de classe : un cadre d’analyse et d’interprétation de la régulation située des apprentissages des élèves. In S. Cartier & B. Noël (Ed.), De la métacognition à l’apprentissage autorégulé (pp. 67-78). Bruxelles : De Boeck