In der jüngeren Sozialisationstheorie wird vermehrt die Intention formuliert, die Eigenaktivität des Subjektes im Sozialisationsprozess stärker zu berücksichtigen. Zum einen wird dies mit der Formel des ‘produktiv realitätsverarbeitenden Subjektes’ auf den Begriff gebracht, zum anderen bemüht sich insbesondere die kompetenzorientierte ‘konstruktivistische Sozialisationsforschung’ dieses Programm zu verfolgen. Dabei wird jedoch ein handlungstheoretisches Subjektverständnis bemüht, das eine begriffliche Unschärfe produziert, die eine konsistente Subjekttheorie und damit eine trennscharfe Bestimmung der Eigenaktivität des Subjektes erschwert. Um dieses Problem zu lösen, wird in dem Beitrag der Vorschlag gemacht, das Subjekt erkennt-nistheoretisch bzw. -kritisch zu konzipieren. Dadurch wird ein Subjektverständnis instruiert, das die Subjekt-Objekt-Dichotomie überwindet und die Wirklichkeit als je subjektives Konstrukt begreift Der Vorteil dieses zunächst heuristischen Vorschlages liegt einerseits in der Möglichkeit einer konsistenten Subjektbestimmung und andererseits in einer forschungsanleitenden Programmatik, die einen breiteren Zugang zu individuellen Entwicklungsverläufen ermöglicht. – English: From the “individual as a productive processor of reality” to the “individual as a productive producer of reality”. A philosophical foundation of theory of socialization. In recent theory of socialisation there is an increasing awareness giving more attention to the agency of subjects itself in the process of socialization. Direct indications about that change into the focus of theory of socialization are the often used formula of the “ individual as a productive processor of reality” or the programme of the constructivist research of socialization. In both cases still many problems are produced first of all through the idea of an action-theory based subject. One of the main theses in this article is that this understanding aggravates a consistent theory of subject in theories of socialization and so an unequivocal definition of agency of subjects. To solve that problems 1 suggest to conceptualise the subject epistemologically. The consequence of this strategy will offer a comprehension of the subject that is able to overcome the subject-object-dichotomy and to recognize “reality” as a construct made by subjects in a strict sense. On the one hand the advantage of this firstly heuristic proposal is the possibility to ascertain consistently the subject. On the other hand further research may be fruitful instructed because of the broader understanding of individual development. ||

In recent theory of socialisation there is an increasing awareness giving more attention to the agency of subjects itself in the process of socialization. Direct indications about that change into the focus of theory of socialization are the often used formula of the “individual as a productive processor of reality” or the programme of the constructivist research of socialization. In both cases still many problems are produced first of all through the idea of an action-theory based subject. One of the main theses in this article is that this understanding aggravates a consistent theory of subject in theories of socialization and so an unequivocal definition of agency of subjects. To solve that problems I suggest to conceptualise the subject epistemologically. The consequence of this strategy will offer a comprehension of the subject that is able to overcome the subject-object-dichotomy and to recognize “reality” as a construct made by subjects in a strict sense. On the one hand the advantage of this firstly heuristic proposal is the possibility to ascertain consistently the subject. On the other hand further research may be fruitful instructed because of the broader understanding of individual development.

The purpose of this study was to identify knowledge construction patterns in a local learning community. Observation, documents, and semistructured interviews were employed to collect data. Twenty learners were interviewed. Data were analyzed inductively using the constant comparative method. Five major patterns – radiation, circulation, simulation, socialization, and contextualization – were generalized from an analysis of the data, and their applications in practice were discussed. These patterns concretize the ideas of social construction and emphasize the different aspects of learning in the process of constructing knowledge. The five patterns indicate how knowledge is socially constructed when learners interact with others and their surroundings. This article reveals the main factors that play significant roles in knowledge construction, such as social interactions, social relationships and social connections, knowledge relevance, and knowledge and its social entities.

Key words: knowledge constructionism, patterns, lifelong education, learning community, collective learning, sociocultural learning.

Purpose: The article deals with constructivism and media in two respects: on a general level with some aspects of the role of media in constructivism, and in particular with the role of constructivism in media socialization studies. Context: Media have been taken up as a topic in some parts of constructivist discourses. While some of the authors treat media as a subject of inquiry like other fields to which they are related – economics, society, or psychotherapy – others recognize constitutional aspects of media, too. Approach: The article focuses on various discourse threads in the German-language literature over the last decade. Various constructivist conceptions and assumptions are taken into consideration with a view to surveying their role in media socialization studies. The article will initially justify the need for reflecting on issues of modelling mediality and constructivity and their relation to each other. It points out several conceptual similarities and differences within constructivism and shows their relevance to media socialization studies. Furthermore, it provides an outline of the respective arguments and an introduction to interfaces of constructivism and media socialization. Findings: In line with different constructivist concepts, the fields of investigation are rather scattered and authors only partly pay attention to each other. This article puts some characteristics and capabilities of constructivist discourses up for debate with regard to selected aspects of media socialization. We find that contemporary media socialization studies do not refer to a single definition of media socialization or constructivism. Since the concepts discussed are published in German, it may also be seen as a benefit that they are made accessible to a wider audience.

Key words: mediality, constructivity, constructivist discourses

The insights emerging from embodied (or 4E) cognition (Newen, et al., 2018) hold considerable promise for education, but thus far have had little impact. The widespread implementation of digital technologies in classrooms presents a timely occasion to remedy this situation. The increasing abstraction entailed in the transition from pen and paper to keyboards, and from reading in print books to reading on screens, warrants supplementing extant perspectives on learning and technologies as they are currently represented in curricula and educational policy documents. This chapter helps educators to rethink and redefine the role and meaning of technology in education broadly speaking, and describes how the use of digital technologies in the acquisition of basic skills like reading and writing specifically impacts learning from an embodied perspective. Drawing on examples from Nordic school contexts, we illustrate how 4E cognition can be pursued to benefit the learning experience in our digital age. For us, as human beings, the skills of reading and writing are not innate – meaning, there is no genetic blueprint for reading or writing (Wolf et al., 2012). Whereas children normally develop the ability to speak and communicate by means of language socialization, both reading and writing require systematic training over an extended period of time to develop. Helping children learn to read and write is one of the major tasks of basic education. A recent study using functional magnetic resonance imaging found that both reading and writing are multisensory experiences (Smith et al., 2018). Yet the ongoing digitalization poses new challenges for researchers and schools concerned with students’ literacy skills. As advances in technology in classroom applications become more mainstream, the way in which children engage in reading and writing is changing. Therefore, we argue that the theory of embodied cognition (4E) should be acknowledged when considering the strengths and weaknesses of various technologies in supporting different aspects of reading (e.g., low-level processes such as letter-sound correspondences, and high-level processes such as inference-based comprehension skills) and writing.

This paper deals with personal development in its social contexts. It demonstrates how personal development works and appears in communication. Therefore there will be an analysis implemented which is based on system-theoretical propositions of the social sciences which reveals the reciprocal relation between consciousness and communication. The evidence of communication will be explained in different models and under different aspects, e.g., learning and socialization, paradoxical operations and forms of development. The constructive character of identity and reality will be discussed in its sociobiological origins. As a result “knowledge” will be redefined as an intentionally directed contingent way of perceiving and acting. It leads to the conclusion that personal development is an irreversible process which becomes evident by the expansion of personal choices in the code of truth and love as ecological criteria. Relevance: The publication demonstrates an interdisciplinary approach based on the general language of cybernetics and systems theory. The method is taken from Maturana’s way of explaining how science works and it comes to conclusions which makes evident why the constructivist paradigm may be useful for humanity and society.

Open peer commentary on the target article “Who Conceives of Society?” by Ernst von Glasersfeld. Excerpt: Von Glasersfeld claims that socialization arises from drives, interests, purposes, and inclinations (§41). These are all functions of intelligence, and none of these is a social phenomenon. The concept of society, he claims, “has to be formed by each individual by means of generalization from his or her own experiences” (§42). This sort of methodological individualism views the individual as a natural kind and society as an artificial construction. In the wake of the new sociology of science, which has demonstrated the dangers of trying to distinguish immutable facts from our descriptions of the world, methodological individualism is doubly problematic. It violates the fundamental perspective that drives sociology, and it ignores the empirical results of the new sociology of science.

Upshot: Sutter’s interactionist constructivism claims to remedy the shortcomings of radical constructivism. The author integrates radical constructivist ideas, the theory of social systems, the theory of social constitution, and developmental psychological approaches in order to understand and explain processes of individual socialization. Although this effort is ambitious and works very well in a pragmatic sense, it lacks a meta-theory for integrating theories. Moreover, the mutual criticism of these four theories is not always convincing.

In this chapter, the author attempts to analyze the phenomenon of mentoring through the prism of constructivist theory and practice. He finds that the literature of mentoring is awash with constructivist thought and processes. The author inquires briefly into the history of mentoring actually mentioning Ulysses as the mythical founder of the practice, and noted that mentoring could take place in one-to-one relationships, or in group or peer mentoring. He notes that mentoring provides socialization into a profession and provided illustrations of the different forms of mentoring. Psychological constructivism, which deals with how people learn, is the center of the process of mentoring, which essentially deals with helping beginning professionals learn their craft. The author also notes literature on stages and styles of mentoring, and then spent some time attempting to build understanding of potential processes in matching mentors and mentees.

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to assist an organization to restructure as a bi‐modal organization in order to achieve sustainability in today’s highly complex business world. Design/methodology/approach – The paper is conceptual and is based on relevant literature and the authors’ research and practice. Findings: Although fluid self‐organizing networks are the natural state for humankind, in most organizations “organizing” entails the process of autopoiesis. This process does not produce the open fluid organization that is required for success in today’s business world. While autopoiesis is taking place, informal socialization is taking place across the organization’s interpersonal networks. Under supportive conditions, this leads to the development of a bi‐modal organization where one or more open systems may emerge and co‐exist concurrently with the autopoietic system; these open systems include fluid networks and complex adaptive system. The bi‐modal organization achieves sustainability by balancing a certain amount of organization versus a certain amount of instability, leading to predictability with disorder, and planned long‐term strategy achieved through many concurrent short‐term actions. Research limitations/implications – Future research will involve an empirical study that will further examine the bi‐modal organization, its development, and its properties. Practical implications: The systems that surround a business organization now and for the foreseeable future are highly dynamic, competitive, and socially individualized, and demand a new organizational form and competencies that may only be exhibited by a bi‐modal organization based on an open system. The paper describes how an organization can restructure to become a bi‐modal organization. Social implications – The paper should help improve quality of work‐life and organizational structure. Originality/value – The paper describes a new organizational form designed to flourish in today’s complex business contexts.