Lived experience as a unit of analysis for the study of learning
Résumé
To study individual features of a learning activity entangled in a material and social environment, we adopt lived experience as a fundamental unit of analysis. Defined as an ongoing process which is known "from within" by individuals, lived experience derives from the phenomenological tradition and is rooted in the enactive approach of cognition. As such, lived experience appears to be active and passive, holistic, situated in a complex temporality, and partly pre-reflective. The study of lived experience of learners requires the researcher to adopt a second-person perspective in which s/he constitutes descriptions of lived experience through a relational process. We present two second-person methods for collecting data: explicitation and self-confrontation interviews. Two case studies illustrate the implementation of these methods: the first focuses on sensorial experience in swimming lessons, and the second concerns understanding in teacher training. Endorsing lived experience as a unit of analysis allows thinking anew the consideration of the individual into socio-cultural approaches of learning. 1. Introduction: thinking anew the individual in sociocultural approaches Research examining the unit of analysis in learning and education usually contrasts two types of approaches: cognitive and sociocultural approaches (Mason, 2007; Säljö, 2009). In cognitive approaches, the unit of analysis is individual-meaning, specifically, the cognitive structures of subjects and the information processing mechanisms they perform. In sociocultural approaches, associating situated, pragmatist and cultural-historical perspectives, the unit of analysis is mostly collective-in the sense, specifically, of the situated activity constructed by several individuals in a material and social world. Strictly abided by, each of these types of approaches provides a partial view of learning (Sfard, 1998). For example, sociocultural approaches adopt theoretically an externalist conception, stating that cognition and learning occur, at least partially, outside the individual subjects. Thus, they shed light on important material, collective and social aspects of learning, such as meaning-making practices, cognitive apprenticeship or activity systems. But they also tend to understate some other aspects that are addressed by the cognitive approaches at an individual level, as for example abstraction, transfer or conceptual change. Consequently, several authors question the theoretical possibility for bridging sociocultural and cognitive approaches (among others, Alexander, 2007; Greeno, 1998; Mason, 2007). Methodologically, sociocultural approaches lead to observations consistent with the externalist statement. They often focus on manifest collective activity in authentic learning settings as informed by the analysis of video data (Derry et al., 2010; Jordan &
Origine : Fichiers produits par l'(les) auteur(s)