Learning

Edwards (2005a) defined learning as a process concerned with within-in the person changes, which modify the way in which the person interprets and modifies the world: how the mind looks at the world, interprets it and acts on it. Greeno (1997, in Edwards (2005b) described

Sustainability

Sustainable

Agriculture Workplace

Farmer learning and practice

17

learning as acquisition of knowledge or participation in a set of activities. Drawing on the work of Rommetveit (2003), Edwards (2005b) found it useful to see learning as being concerned with knowledge about and the search for meaning, so that participation is seen as the search for meaning, and is not limited to behaviour. Engeström (1987), who also built on the work of Vygotsky and Leont‟ev, proposed that learning is evident when an object is seen as more complex by the person acting on it because one can see more of it. For example, a farmer has learnt about the maize crop when he or she understands more about it. This could be in terms of knowing how to select the best cobs for seed, or knowing the requirements for its germination, or knowing how pollination takes places. Vygotsky‟s main contribution was that learning is not simply a cognitive phenomenon but also a socio-cultural one. Vygotsky talked of the notion of ‘turning‟ by which he meant the process in which the external social relations and socio-historical systems are transformed into mental actions, outcomes, and embodied states that are associated with notions of knowledge and skill. He developed the idea of learning as participation in social practice defined by dynamic transformations, change, and interrelationships with other social systems (Edwards, 2005a). Therefore learning can be seen as an inter-psychological or inter-mental process between individuals and social sources of knowledge. Learning that happens within the person is called intra- mental and is part of the internalization: the new learning that has been internalized will allow the learner to see the object of his or her activity differently and as more complex. This will then affect how one would relate with the object, thus externalizing what has been learnt, giving new meaning (Lave and Wenger, 1991).

Lave and Wenger (1991, in Edwards, 2005b) suggested three approaches to supporting learning: scaffolding interpretation, where a more knowledgeable other assists the learner to move to a new understanding; cultural interpretation, which is concerned with addressing the difference between everyday experiences and scientific understandings using instruction; and the collectivist/societal interpretation, which refers to the difference between “current understandings and new forms of collectively generated solutions to the contradictions embedded in the current understandings” (Edwards, 2005b, p. 5). Scaffolding and cultural interpretations of learning are concerned with internalization of the culture in which people are found using mediation tools. The collectivist/societal interpretation of learning is concerned with dealing with new problems thus emphasizing externalization and contestation of the object, and allowing people to see new problems and develop new solutions. It also fits in well with Engeström‟s idea of expansive learning, which is concerned with transferring and creating knowledge (Engeström 2001a, 2005, 2008; Warmington et al., 2005).

Illeris (2003, p. 170) explained learning as “All processes leading to permanent capacity change – whether they be physical, cognitive, emotional, or social in nature – that do not exclusively deal with biological maturation or ageing”. He further argued that there are two

18

layers of interaction in learning: between the learner and the environment; and the inner mental processes of acquisition and elaboration, through which impulses of interaction are linked to earlier learning (Illeris, 2003, p. 170). He regarded “the dialectics between the social and the individual spheres as the most central feature of learning in work life” (Illeris, 2004, p. 440).

This research had an interest in the critical and therefore drew on critical pedagogy, which has the following three inter-related processes:

…transformative critique that conceives of knowledge as socially produced, legitimated, and distributed; recognition that knowledge expresses and contributes to particular material interests; and the active negation of the objective characterization of knowledge so as to reveal their relationship with power and control. (Sawchuk (2003, p. 35)

Sawchuk, who is concerned with workplace learning, identified critical pedagogy‟s weakness as not covering workplaces. Paulo Freire‟s pedagogy of the oppressed contributed to adult learning through the concept of conscientisation. It had a special interest in understanding relations of learning grounded in specific racialized, gendered, classed, and regionalized standpoints of the developing and developed worlds. This is firmly located in Marx‟s revolutionary praxis (Sawchuk, 2003). One of the main criticisms of Freire‟s work was that conscientisation is built on the idea of the enlightened other. Sawchuk (2003) noted that Freire‟s work on conscientisation did not address the question of spontaneous self-learning, and collective forms of learning such as expansive learning.

The relevance of the above discussion to the study is that in workplaces, workers learn from each other and from their seniors and juniors through instruction and accompaniments. The learning is part of carrying out activities and is assisted by the use of conceptual and material tools that have a history and are embedded in culture. Workers also encounter new problems and seek solutions to them through individual and collective effort, from within and without the work environment, resulting in the collectivist interpretation of learning, which is expansive. One of the limitations of workplace learning, because it is often situated, is that it can be inherently conservative because it is confined to its own socio-cultural context and history (Glasser, 2007). There is therefore need to locate workplace learning in the broader macro-environment and the linkages that exist otherwise social learning will maintain „morphostasis‟ (Archer, 1998) My research interest was transformative learning within the programme concept of sustainability and change-oriented learning and I watched out for

reproducing the status quo.

In his book Mind in Society, Vygotsky (1978) discussed three main relationships between learning and development theories: development precedes learning; learning and

19

development are the same; and learning precedes and is related to development. He subscribed to the theory that learning leads to and is related to development and developed the notion of the „zone of proximal development‟ which he explained as “the distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers” (Vygotsky, 1978, p.86). Engeström (1987) took the notion of zone of proximal development further, beyond the individual to the level of an activity. In this study learning is used to denote intentional acquisition and externalisation of knowledge, skills and understanding by individuals or groups of people in ways that enhance their capacity to act and alter their contexts from the current level to the next possible level of understanding. I mainly worked with learning in relation to networked activity systems in the study.