Literacy As Hybridity: Moving Beyond Bilingualism In Urban Classrooms

Cultural Ways of Learning: Individual Traits or Repertoires of Practice Author(s): Kris D. Gutiérrez and Barbara Rogoff Source: Educational Researcher, Vol. 32, No. 5, Theme Issue: Reconceptualizing Race and Ethnicity in Educational Research, (Jun. - Jul., 2003), pp. 19-25 Published by: American Educational Research Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3699877 Accessed: 11/08/2008 19:07 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=aera. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

http://www.jstor.org

I

I

Cultural Ways of Learning: Individual Traits or Repertoires of Practice by KrisD. Gutierrez and BarbaraRogoff This articleaddresses a challengefaced by those who study cultural variationin approachesto learning:how to characterizeregularities of individuals'approaches accordingto their cultural background. We argue againstthe common approachof assumingthat regularities are static, and that general traits of individualsare attributable categoricallyto ethnicgroup membership.We suggestthat a culturalhistoricalapproachcan be used to help move beyondthis assumption by focusingresearchers'and practitioners'attention on variationsin individuals'andgroups' histories of engagementin culturalpractices because the variationsreside not as traits of individualsor collections of individuals,but as proclivitiesof people with certain histories of engagementwith specificculturalactivities.Thus, individuals' andgroups'experience in activities-not their traits-becomes the focus. Also, we note that cultural-historicalwork needs to devote more attention to researchingregularitiesin the variationsamong culturalcommunities in order to bringthese ideas to fruition.

ur article addresses the theoretical issue of how to characterize commonalities of learning approaches of individuals who are members of ethnic groups that historically have been underservedin U. S. schools (e.g., AfricanAmerican, Latino, and Native American students). We believe that a cultural-historical approach offers a way to get beyond a widespread assumption that characteristicsof cultural groups are located within individuals as "carriers"of culture-an assumption that createsproblems, especially as researchon cultural styles of ethnic (or racial) groups is applied in schools.1 In this article, after a brief discussion about how cultural styles research has helped the field think of differences rather than deficits, we use cultural-historical theory to revise this default assumption. Our article also presses cultural-historical research to make progress in characterizingcommonalities in the variations across individuals and groups.

Cultural Styles: A Way of Talking About Differences Rather Than Deficits Research on cultural learning styles first appeared in the United States at the end of the 1960s, in Lyndon Johnson's "War on Poverty" and research efforts to understand "cultural deprivation." Much of this work grew out of the critical need to ameliorate the inequitable and deplorable schooling experiences of poor Vol.32, No. 5, pp. 19-25 Educational Researcher,

and working-classstudentsin U.S. public schools-predominantlystudentsof color, many of whom were English-language learners. The culturalstyles approacharosefrom these effortsas researchersattemptedto leave behind deficit-modelthinking,in which culturalways that differfrom the practicesof dominant groupsarejudgedto be less adequatewithout examiningthem from the perspectiveof the community'sparticipants(Cole & Bruner,1971;Hilliard& Vaughn-Scott,1982;Howard& Scott, 1981; McLoyd& Randolph,1985; McShane& Berry,1986). An alternativeto the culturalstylesapproachis to deny cultural difference;however,rulingout discussionsof culturalvariation hasoftenmeantthatthe culturalpracticesof the dominantgroup are taken as the norm. Althoughdeficit-modelthinkingis still with us, the culturalstyles approachofferedan alternativeby culturalwaysof differentgroupsin termsthatare characterizing respectful,attemptingto describethem without makingvalue judgmentsthatsuggestvaluehierarchiesin culturalpractices. Work on culturallearningstyles,however,is sometimesused in ways that are overly static and categorical-in schools, in cross-culturalcomparisons,and in some of the culturalstyles work that tries to avoid or that challengesthe deficit model. Treatingculturaldifferencesas traits,in ourview,makesit harder to understandthe relationof individuallearningand the practices of culturalcommunities,and this in turn sometimeshinderseffectiveassistanceto studentlearning. Helping Students Learn: Having Styles or Participating in Practices A common objectiveacrossthe variousapproacheswe discussis the desireto increasestudentlearning.However,treatingcultural differenceas a traitleadsto a strategyof locatingcharacteristics style separatelyin the personandin the "context,"and "crossing" and context as in the AptitudeX Treatmentapproach.In educationalsettings,workon learningstyleshas often attemptedto takecontextinto accountby seekingstylematchesbetweenstudent and schoolingexperiencesor betweenstudentand teacher (Banks,1995). However,some applicationsof this approachare basedon an assumptionthat an individual's"style"is a traitthat is independentof tasksand contexts,and that is constantover time. Sucha matchingstrategydoes not accountfor change-in the individual,the activitysetting,or the community-and it assumesone style per personaccordingto the individual'sgroup categorization.We areparticularlyconcernedwith the implicationsof suchapplicationsforstudentsfromnondominantgroups. Learningstylesconstructshave been used to distinguishthe learning styles of "minority"group members and to explain 2003 |9 JUNE/JULY

"minority"studentfailure(see Foley, 1997; Kavale& Forness, 1987; Irvine& York,1995 for reviews).Forexample,individuals from one groupmay be characterized as learningholistically whereasindividualsfromanothergroupmaybe characterized as or individuals be into divided may learninganalytically cooperativeversusindividualistlearnerson the basisof membershipin a particularculturalgroup. Addressinglearningstylesas traitsalsoseemsto be a common way to prepareteachersto make the link to diversity(Guild, 1994; Matthews, 1991). Clearly,teachingto a differencethat can be labeled (e.g., learningmodalities)sounds appealingto teacherswho havelimitedresources,support,or trainingto meet the challengesof new student populations.An observationby one high school Englishas a secondlanguageteacherillustrates the applicationof a commonperceptionreportedin our studies of English-language learners: I thinkit'salsoveryimportant to include... multimedia techwe havea groupnowin schoolthatis verydiverse niquesbecause in theirlearningstrategies. Youknowmostarevisuallanguage so if yougivethemsomething learners, theycanseeortouch,they aretactile.Thatgetsto them;theycanunderstand that.(Gutierrez, & Berlin,2001) Crosland, Of course,thereis valuein usingmultipleformsof assistance, includingmedia.Our focus,however,is on the importanceand benefitof knowingaboutthe historiesandvaluedpracticesof culturalgroupsratherthan tryingto teachprescriptively according to broad,underexaminedgeneralitiesaboutgroups.In culturalhistoricalapproaches,learningis conceivedof as a processoccurringwithin ongoing activity,and not divided into separate characteristics of individualsand contexts(Cole & Engestrom, of thehistoryof a per1993;Lave,1996).Includingconsideration son'sor a group'srelatedengagementscan accountfor "dispositions"theymayhavein new circumstances. However,the crucial distinctionwe aremakingis betweenunderstandingprocesses and characteristics. Without social and locating practices the situating historiesof participantsin particularcommunities,approaches thatattributestyleto membershipin a groupmakeit difficultto accountforvariationandchangein individualsor theirpractices. Treating Cultural Differences As Individual Traits Encourages Overgeneralization The traitapproachassumesthat thereis a built-in relationship betweenlearningstyleand minoritygroupmembership.Forexample, approachesthat accommodateinstructionalpracticeto groupstylestreatwhat is "known"abouta groupas applyingto allindividualsin the group.This makesit morelikelythatgroups will be treatedas homogenous,with fixedcharacteristics carried by the collectionof individualsthatcomprisethe group. Scholarsfroma wide rangeof disciplineshavecalledattention to the problemsof"essentializing" peopleon the basisof a group labelandhaveunderlinedthe variabilitythatexistswithingroups and their practices.Scholarsexaminingculturalstyleshave argued for a moresituatedand dynamicview of the culturalpracticesof ethnicandracialgroups(Banks,1995; Gay, 1995, 2000; Irvine& York,1995; Nieto, 1999). Yet, the problemof overgeneralization persists,especiallyin schools to by attempts designlearningexperiencesthat comple20

EDUCATIONALRESEARCHER

ment the learning-styledifferencesof particularethnic groups (e.g., Dunn & Dunn, 1992; Dunn, Griggs,& Price,1993). Althoughthe workon learningstylesoftencautionsagainststereotyping and generalizingabout the cognitive styles of various groups,matchingindividuallearningstyleto a particularethnic groupmay encouragethe idea that patternsof performancederivefrom the essenceof an individualor a group.Forexample, some studiesthat contrastthe learningstylesof studentsfrom severalethnic groupsmake prescriptionsfor creatinglearning environmentsthat complementthe learning-styledifferencesof the variousethnic groupssuch as the time of day individualsof particulargroupsarereceptiveto instructionor the instructional seatingarrangementmost conduciveto particularethnicgroups (Dunn, Griggs, & Price;Dunn, Gemake,Jalali,Zenhausern, Quinn, & Spiridakis,1990; Hickson,Land,& Aikman,1994). Unfortunately,categorizationof individualsin groups has been treatedcausally,yieldingexplanationsand expectationsof individualskillsand behaviorson the basisof categorymembership, assumingthat all groupmemberssharethe sameset of experiences,skills,and interests.This hasled to a kind of tracking in which instructionis adjustedmerelyon the basisof a group categorization.2

Withina stylesapproach,a singlewayof teachingandlearning maybe usedwith a particular groupwithoutaccountingforindiwith certainpracticesor withoutprovidviduals'pastexperiences andintroduces ing instructionthatbothextendsthoseexperiences of This standsin stark newandevenunfamiliar ways doingthings. we haveobservedin rocontrastto thestrategicformsof assistance bustlearningcommunitieswherethe co-constructionof a community'svariouspracticesandindividualdevelopmentsupportthe changingnatureof participationand the formsof assistanceprovidedin joint activity.In theseclassroomcommunities,students receivemultipleformsof assistanceand participatein rigorous learningactivitiesthatextendtheirinitialapproachesto learning & Tejeda,1999; andparticipation (Gutierrez,Baquedano-Lopez, Goodman Turkanis,& Moll, Saez, & Dworin, 2001; Rogoff, have Bartlett,2001). As a result,students ongoingopportunities to assumenew rolesand learnnew approaches. There are severalexplanationsfor the sustainedcurrencyof traitapproachesas plausibleexplanationsof individualperformance.Notions of individuallearningstylesare commonplace in both publicand educationaldiscourse.Descriptionsandsubsequentmethodsof identificationof learningstylescan be easy to understandand to identifywithin the taxonomiesin inventoriesthatprovidemeasuresof individualdifferencesandresultant profiles(Price& Dunn, 1997). Furthermore,reductivenotions of cultureand culturalgroupsmay reinforcethe broadapplication of traitapproaches. BeyondReductiveApproaches Often, normativeviewsof cultureareemployedin waysthatappearbenign,especiallywhen theypurportto focuson individual differencesratherthanon deficitsin the individualor in the social group.This is an exceedinglyimportantissue as therecontinuesto be a reductivetendencyin thesocialsciencesto seekand acceptsingulareffectsto explainsocialandcognitivephenomena. of culture,the Supportedby staticor normativeunderstandings individual school to of trait performance application approaches

sometimesleadsto what Rose (1988) callsa kind of "cognitive As Roseargues: reductionism."3 A furtherproblem-sometimesinherentin the theoriesthemaresultof reductive selves,sometimes application-isthetendency andrelyon simplified to diminishcognitivecomplexity cognitive vs.oral,verbalvs. literate vs.dependent, oppositions: independent aretextbook-neat, spatial,concretevs. logical.Theseoppositions but... arenarrowandmisleading. (p.268) In some cases,the learningor cognitivestylestypologieshave a basisin observationsof averagedifferencesin some populations. In manycases,however,the typologiesareofferedsimply theirrelationshipto ascategorieswithoutresearchsubstantiating the groupsso characterizedor to their utility for practice.As Tiedeman(1989) suggested,"To date, researchevidenceis inadequateto judge [cognitivestyles'] validity or usefulnessin adaptinginstructionto individuals;some havebeen calledseriouslyinto question"(p. 599). and practiA cultural-historical approachcan help researchers of experienceof peoplewho tionerscharacterize thecommonalities shareculturalbackground,without "locating"the commonalities within individuals.However,within cultural-historical approaches,therehasnotyet beensufficientattentionto figuringout acrossindividuals'or culhow to talkand thinkaboutregularities turalcommunities' waysof doingthings.To movebeyondtheidea of traitslocatedin individualmembersof ethnicgroups,we need in how engagement to makeprogressin understanding regularities in sharedand dynamicpracticesof differentcommunitiescontributesto individuallearninganddevelopment. Conceivingof styleas an individualtraitcanleadto a strategy of individuals(or collectionsof of matchingcharacterizations of contextson the them),on the one hand,andcharacterizations other. This approachtreatscontexts as if they exist independently of the people active in creatingand maintainingthem, areunrelated andviewsindividualsasthoughtheircharacteristics to the contextsin whichtheyandtheirfamilieshaveparticipated in recentgenerations.We arguethatpeopleliveculturein a mutuallyconstitutivemannerin which it is not fruitfulto tote up theircharacteristics asif theyoccurindependentlyof culture,and of cultureas if it occursindependentlyof people. A Shift to Experience Participating in Cultural Practices We are concernedwith how researchersand practitionerscan conceiveof regularitiesin approachesto learningamongpeople of similarculturalbackgroundexperienceswithoutreifyingthose culturalpatternsandpracticesas locatedin individuals.We propose a shift from the assumptionthat regularitiesin groupsare carriedby the traitsof a collectionof individualsto a focus on people'shistoryof engagementin practicesof culturalcommunities. In cultural-historical approaches,culturaldifferencesare attributedto variationsin people'sinvolvementin commonpractices of particularculturalcommunities(Moll, 2000; Rogoff, Mistry,Goncii, & Mosier, 1993). A centraland distinguishing thesisin this approachis that the structureand developmentof humanpsychologicalprocessesemergethroughparticipationin culturallymediated,historicallydeveloping,practicalactivityinvolvingculturalpracticesand tools (Cole, 1996).

People'svariedparticipationin the practicesof dynamicculturalcommunitiescanbe distinguishedfrommembership in ethnic groups,whichoftenis treatedin an all-or-none,staticfashion (Rogoff,2003). Individualsparticipatein varyingand overlapping ways that change over their lifetimes and over historical change in a community'sorganizationand relationshipswith othercommunities(Cole, 1998;Lave,1996;Rogoff& Angelillo, 2002). As Cole and Engestrom(1993) argue,culture"isexperienced in local, face-to-faceinteractionsthat are locally constrainedand heterogeneouswith respectto both 'cultureas a whole' and the parts of the entire toolkit experiencedby any givenindividual"(p. 15). in thewaysculturalgroupsparOf course,thereareregularities in the of everydaypractices theirrespectivecommunities. ticipate However,the relativelystablecharacteristicsof these environmentsarein constanttensionwith the emergentgoalsand practicesparticipantsconstruct,which stretchand changeover time andwith otherconstraints.This conflictand tensioncontribute to thevariationandongoingchangein an individual'sanda community'spractices(Engestrom,1993; Gutierrez,2002). We believethat looking for culturalregularitieswill be more fruitful-both for researchand practice-if we focusour examinationof differenceson culturalprocessesin which individuals engage with other people in dynamic culturalcommunities, some of whichinvolveethnicor racialgroupmembershipin importantways. By culturalcommunitywe mean a coordinated group of people with some traditionsand understandingsin common,extendingacrossseveralgenerations,with variedroles andpracticesandcontinualchangeamongparticipantsaswell as transformation in the community'spractices(seeRogoff,2003). For example,peopledrawon intergenerationally conveyedconof and belief that systems cepts,ways talking, may be used and in that are often communities identifiedinternegotiatedlocally and in of their terms nally by ethnicityand race. neighbors the on varied By focusing wayspeopleparticipatein theircomcan move we munity'sactivities, awayfromthe tendencyto conflateethnicitywithculture,withassignmentto ethnicgroupsmade on the basisof immutableand often stablecharacteristics suchas or of surname birth. culture with race, country Spanish Equating ethnicity,languagepreference,or nationaloriginresultsin overly of deterministic,static,weak,and uncomplicatedunderstandings both individualsand the communitypracticesin whichtheyparticipate(Gutierrez,Asato,Santos,& Gotanda,2002). We are not arguingthat groupmembershipdefinedby ethnicity,race,and languageuse is irrelevant.These categorieshave long-standinginfluenceson the culturalpracticesin which people havethe opportunityto participate,oftenyieldingsharedcircumstances,practices,andbeliefsthatplayimportantandvaried rolesfor group members.People do not just chooseto move in and out of differentpractices,takingon new and equalparticipationin culturalcommunities. Toward a Cultural-Historical Way to Describe Cultural Regularities Froma cultural-historical perspective,we can examinepeople's usualwaysof doingthings,tryingto understandindividuals'history of involvementin the practicesof variedcommunities,in2003 |j JUNE/JULY

cludingethnicor nationalcommunitiesaswell as otherssuch as academicor religiouscommunities(Rogoff,2003). Considerthe finding that childrenwho immigratedrecentlyto the United Statesfrom ruralMexicancommunitiesmore often studiously observedongoingeventswithoutpushingadultsto explainthem than did childrenwhose familiesimmigratedfromEuropegenerationsbefore (MejiaArauz,Rogoff, & Paradise,2003). To makesenseof this difference,we may gain some understanding by examiningthe dynamicstructureof the sendingandreceiving communities'traditions.For example,the ruralMexicancommunities'frequentinclusionof childrenin a rangeof adultactivitiesmayrelateto the attentiveness of childrenwho mayhavebeen encouragedto observeand takepartin theirfamilies'workand social lives (Rogoff, Paradise,MejiaArauz,Correa-Chavez,& communities'tradition Angelillo,2003). The European-American of excludingchildrenfromadultactivities-wheretheycouldobservewhattheyaresupposedto be learning-may alsohelpus understandthe proclivityof some of thesestudentsto requestadult explanationevenin a situationthatcallsforobservation. with differExaminingculturalvariationin termsof familiarity ent practicesin dynamiccommunitiesorganizedin distinctmannersis a verydifferentapproachthan attributinga "visual"style to Mexicanchildrenor a "verbal"style to European-American middle-classchildren.We arguethatit is moreusefulto consider differencesin the children's,theirfamilies',and theircommunities' historiesof engagingin particularendeavorsorganizedin contrastingmanners.This avoidsthe implicationthat the characteristicis "builtin" to the individual(or a group)in a stable mannerthatextendsacrosstime andsituations,andit recognizes the circumstancesrelevantto an individual'slikelihoodof acting in certainways. Cultural-historical theoryleadsus to expectregularitiesin the ways culturalcommunitiesorganizetheir lives as well as variations in the waysindividualmembersof groupsparticipateand conceptualizethe meansand ends of theircommunities'activities.Forexample,TejedaandEspinoza(2002) observedthathigh school studentsfrom migrantfarmworkerbackgroundsoften used hybrid languagepracticesin sense-makingactivitiesdesigned to promotecriticalreflectionabout their coursesubject matteras well as about their life experiencesas migrants.We notedsimilarlinguisticpracticesin the learningrepertoiresof elementaryschool childrenin computer-mediated learningclubs & As (Gutierrez,Baquedano-Lopez, Alvarez,2001). with the researchof MejfaArauzet al. (2003), intentobservationand minimal question askingseemed to characterizethe participation patternsof both the elementaryschool childrenand the high school students. These descriptionsof regularitiesareusefulin understanding and literacydevelopment.However,ourreferencesto "migrants" learners"and their practicesare used as de"English-language ratherthan as categoricalclassificationof individualsor scriptors groups.We attributethe regularitiesto the students'participation in familiarculturalpracticesaswell asto theirpublicschooling experiencesthat restrictengagementand limit the use of the culturalresourcesthatarepartof theirrepertoires. We mustalso understandsuch regularitiesin light of the colonizingpractices of which they havebeen a part(Tejeda,Espinoza,& Gutierrez, 22

EDUCATIONALRESEARCHER

2003).4 A cultural-historical approachassumesthat individual and development dispositionmust be understoodin (not separatefrom)culturaland historicalcontext.In otherwords,we talk aboutpatternsof people'sapproachesto givensituationswithout reducingthe explanationto a claimthattheydo whattheydo belearners. causetheyaremigrantfarmworkersor English-language We attendto individuals'linguisticand cultural-historical repertoiresas well as to their contributionsto practicesthat connect with otheractivitiesin which they commonlyengage. RepertoiresforParticipating in Practices we mean the repertoires," By "linguisticand cultural-historical waysof engagingin activitiesstemmingfromobservingandotherwise participatingin culturalpractices.Individuals'background experiences,togetherwith theirinterests,maypreparethem for knowinghow to engagein particularformsof languageand literacyactivities,play their partin testingformats,resolveinterpersonalproblemsaccordingto specificcommunity-organized approaches,and so forth. An importantfeatureof focusingon repertoiresis encouragingpeople to developdexterityin determining which approachfrom their repertoireis appropriate underwhich circumstances(Rogoff,2003). children'srepertoiresor proclivitieswould inCharacterizing volvecharacterizing theirexperienceandinitiativein priorcultural theirrepertoires activities(Rogoff,1997). We wouldcharacterize in termsof theirfamiliaritywith engagingin particular practices on the basisof whatis knownabouttheirown andtheircommuin varynity'shistory.Forexample,studentswho haveparticipated in differ for would cultural traditions repertoires engagingin ing discussionswithauthorityfigures,answeringknown-answer questions, analyzingword problemson the basisof counterfactual premises,seekingor avoidingbeingsingledout forpraise,spontaneously helping classmates,observingongoing eventswithout adultmanagement,respondingquicklyor ponderingideasbefore that volunteeringtheircontributions,andmanyotherapproaches of individuals. aresometimestreatedas characteristics It is relevantto takeinto accountthe developmentof the culturalactivitiesaswell. To understandboth individualand communitylearningit is necessaryto examinethe natureand forms of culturalartifactsand tools used;the socialrelations,rules,and divisionof labor;and the historicaldevelopmentof individuals and communities. We would then be able to characterizea child'srepertoiresand dexterityin moving betweenapproaches appropriateto varyingactivitysettings.In the process,we would have a historicaldevelopmentalaccountof that child'sor that community'sfamiliar,value-ladenexperience,andwe would be able to speakabout the usual,customary,or even habitualapproachestakenby individuals(andcommunities)in knowncircumstances.The circumstanceswould have to be taken into account as aspects of the regularitiesdescribedand not just of individuals. "crossedwith"the independentcharacteristics A Few Suggestionsfor ProceedingWith the Idea of Repertoiresof Practice For both researchers and teachers,the traitapproachhasthe attraction of apparentsimplicity. In researchand practice,we often have to proceed on the basis of partial information. We need to

considerthe implicationsfor researchand educationalpractice when only a little culturalinformationis available.

For example, how can a teacher proceed with minimal cultural background information on which to base action? The teacher would look for students' familiarity of experience with cultural practices by seeking to understand the students' short- or longterm history. For example, a new teacher in an African-American low-income neighborhood, inspired by Carol Lee's (1993, 2001) research, may wonder if he or she can extend the students' outof-school skills in analysis of metaphor and figurative language to the analysis of literature, making use of familiarity with the practice of"signifying" (ritualized language play involving clever insults). To do so, the teacher would need some understanding of this practice and would need to check his or her assumption that these students are familiar with it, to confirm or disconfirm his or her hypothesis that these students have similar background experience with Lee's students. Rather than pigeonholing individuals into categories and teaching to the students' "traits"or attempting to replace those traits, the emphasis would be placed on helping students develop dexterity in using both familiar and new approaches. The researcher'swork, from a cultural-historical approach, is similar:focus on understandingdeveloping individualsand changing communities, making first guesses about patterns and seeking confirmation or disconfirmation to extend what is known. Researchers thus need understanding of the practices under study, including an understanding of the relationship between a community's practices and the routine practices in which an individual participates.They would check their assumptions about an individual's familiarity with the focal practice as well as seek further information about whether and how an individual might participate in the practice. The work ahead of us is to characterizethe dynamic patterns of individuals' participation in building on historical constellations of community practices,continuing and transformingacrossgenerations. In this concluding section, we offer some specific suggestions that we have found useful in moving into this approach in our research. 1. To avoid making overly general statements based on research, it helps to speak of the findings in the past tense-"The children did such and such"-rather than the continuing present-"Children do such and such" (Rogoff, 2003). Using the past tense marks the findings as statements of what was observed rather than too quickly assuming a timeless truth to what is always a situated observation. Summary statements that referto activities or situations in which observations were made are likely to help avoid generalizing too quickly about populations. Only when there is a sufficient body of research with different people under varying circumstances would more general statements be justified. 2. To ground cultural observations in the historical, dynamic processes of communities, labels that refer to researchparticipants can be treated not as categories but as narrative descriptors of the participants' backgrounds (e.g., middle class, Catholic, farming, of Armenian heritage, in California, immigrated to escape massacre, two generations ago). In other words, ethnic and other cultural descriptors may fruitfully help researchersexamine cultural practices if they are not assumed to imply an essence of the individual or group involved, and are not treated as causal entities.

3. To examine how aspects of participants' community background cluster and how they change, it helps to treat them as a constellation of factors (Rogoff & Angelillo, 2002). This contrasts with trying to isolate or "control" independent categories to determine which is the active ingredient causing an outcome or a trait. Rather than trying to hold all "factors"but one or a few constant, cultural researchrequires focus on the dynamically changing configuration of relevant aspects of people's lives. 4. To avoid overgeneralizing, statements based on single observations should be made very cautiously, limiting generalization of simple observations of test performance or behavior under restricted circumstances beyond the situations observed. The aim is to ground observations across multiple settings and communities and to assume various vantage points to understand the complexity of human activity. The intent, especially in regard to poor children and children of color, would be to identify a course of action or assistance that would help ensure student learning, ratherthan to define who a child is or that child's future potential (Berlin, 2002). We propose these suggestions to advance the conversation about how to account for both cultural regularitiesand variations, with a cultural-historicalemphasis on understanding individuals as participantsin cultural communities. We believe that attending to these issues will help move us away from oversimplified approaches to the learning, achievement, and potential of individuals and cultural groups. NOTES We aregratefulto CarolLeeforengagingus togetherin this project,for her insightful questions and comments that prompted our further thinking,and for her patienceand wit. We also appreciatethe discussionswith andcommentsof FrederickErickson,CarlosTejeda,Geneva Gay,MichaelCole, andAlfredoArtileson earlierdraftsof thisworkand JolynnAsato for her researchassistance.This work was supportedby UC ACCORD, the UC LatinoPolicyInstitute,and by the UC Santa CruzFoundationchairin psychology. 1The practiceof tryingto locateculturaldifferencewithin individuals leadsto commonplacebut ludicrousstatementssuch as referringto individualsas diverse(e.g., "Theclasshas a largeproportionof diverse students")-referring to students from educationally underserved populationsas diversewith the implication that the others are the standard-thus, normalizingthe dominantgroup.Differencecannotbe attributedto a singleside of a contrast. 2 Or, even more insidious,the presumedcharacteristic may be used to justifyrestrictingopportunities,aswith teacherswho referto a group's presumedcooperativenessto justifyplacingsome studentsin activities thattheyhavenot chosen (whileothers'preferencesaregranted),or for requiringsome childrento sharetextbooksor other materials:"Well, you see, Hispanicsare cooperativechildren.They don't mind sharing things. These other students like to work alone and independently. With Hispanicsit is all rightto have studentswork together"(Ortiz, 1988, p.79). 3 Another colleaguecreditswhat she calls "maineffectsjunkies"in partfor this tendencyin the socialsciences. 4 For example,Spanishis the firstlanguageof manyof the students in their we observe,whichis an artifactof theirinteraction/participation communities'activities.It is also an artifactof the colonizationof CentralAmericaand the U.S. Southwest.A similaranalysiscan be developed, in part,for the students'code switchingfromSpanishto English (i.e., theirparticipationin multiplecommunitiesandinstitutionsaswell as theirlanguagestatus,English-onlypolicies,andotherfactors).These 2003 |2 JUNE/JULY

arenot neutralculturalpractices.Culturaltools must be understoodin termsof the currentand historicalintent. REFERENCES Banks, J. A. (Ed.). (1995). Handbook ofresearchon multicultural education. New York: Macmillan. Berlin, D. (2002). The social constructionof deviance: Effectsof labeling on students with learning difficulties. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles. Cole, M. (1996). Culturalpsychology:A once andfuture discipline. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Cole, M. (1998). Can cultural psychology help us think about diversity? Mind, Culture, andActivity, 5(4), 291-304. Cole, M., & Bruner, J. S. (1971). Cultural differences and inferences about psychological processes. American Psychologist,26, 867-876. Cole, M., & Engestrom, Y. (1993). A cultural-historical approach to distributed cognition. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions: Psychologicaland educational considerations (pp. 1-46). New York: Cambridge University Press. Dunn, R., & Dunn, K. (1992). Teaching elementarystudents through their individual learning styles.Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Dunn, R., Gemake, J., Jalali, F., Zenhausern, R., Quinn, P., & Spiridakis, J. (1990). Cross-cultural differences in learning styles of elementaryage students from four ethnic backgrounds. Journal ofMulticultural Counselingand Development, 18, 68-93. Dunn, R., Griggs, S. A., & Price, G. E. (1993). Learning styles of Mexican-American and Anglo-American elementary school students. Journal ofMulticultural Counselingand Development, 21, 237-247. Engestrom, Y. (1993). Developmental studies of work as a test bench of activity theory: The case of primary care medical practice. In S. Chaiklin & J. Lave (Eds.), Understandingpractice:Perspectiveon activity and context (pp. 64-103). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Foley, D. (1997). Deficit thinking models based on culture: The anthropological protest. In R. Valencia (Ed.), The evolution of deficit thinking: Educational thought andpractice (pp. 113-131). Washington, DC: Falmer Press. Gay, G. (1995). Curriculum theory and multicultural education. InJ. A. Banks (Ed.), Handbook of researchon multicultural education (pp. 25-43). New York: Macmillan. Gay, G. (2000). Culturallyresponsiveteaching.New York:Teachers College Press. Guild, P. (1994). The culture/learning style connection. Educational Leadership,51(8), 16-21. Gutierrez, K. (2002). Studying cultural practices in urban learning communities. Human Development, 45(4), 312-321. Gutierrez, K., Asato, J., Santos, M., & Gotanda, N. (2002). Backlash pedagogy: Language and culture and the politics of reform. The Review ofEducation, Pedagogy,and Cultural Studies, 24(4), 335-351. Gutierrez, K., Baquedano-Lopez, P., & Alvarez, H. (2001). Literacy as hybridity: Moving beyond bilingualism in urban classrooms. In M. de la Luz Reyes & J. Halcon (Eds.), The bestfor our children: Critical perspectiveson literacyfor Latino students (pp. 122-141). New York: Teachers College Press. Gutierrez, K., Baquedano-Lopez, P., & Tejeda, C. (1999). Rethinking diversity: Hybridity and hybrid language practices in the third space. Mind, Culture, e6Activity, 6, 286-303. Gutierrez, K., Crosland, K., & Berlin, D. (2001). Reconsideringcoaching: Assistingteachers'literacypractices in the zone ofproximal development. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA. Hickson, J., Land, A. J., & Aikman, G. (1994). Learning style differences in middle school pupils from four ethnic backgrounds. School PsychologyInternational, 15, 349-359. RESEARCHER 2I1 EDUCATIONAL

Hilliard, A. G., III, & Vaughn-Scott, M. (1982). The quest for the "minority" child. In S. G. Moore & C. R. Cooper (Eds.), Theyoung child: Reviews of research(Vol. 3, pp. 175-189). Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children. Howard, A., & Scott, R. A. (1981). The study of minority groups in complex societies. In R. H. Munroe, R. L. Munroe, & B. B. Whiting (Eds.), Handbook of cross-culturalhuman development(pp. 113-152). New York: Garland. Irvine, J., & York, D. (1995). Learning styles and culturally diverse students. In J. A. Banks (Ed.), Handbook of researchon multicultural education (pp. 484-497). New York: Macmillan. Kavale, K. A., & Forness, S. R. (1987). Substance over style: Assessing the efficacy of modality testing and teaching. Exceptional Children, 56(3), 228-239. Lave, J. (1996). Teaching, as learning in practice. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 3, 149-164. Lee, C. ( 2001). Is October Brown Chinese? A cultural modeling activity system for underachieving students. American Educational ResearchJournal, 38(1), 97-141. Lee, C. D. (1993). Signijfing as a scaffoldfor literary interpretation.Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English. Matthews, D. B. (1991). Learning styles research: Implications for increasing students in teacher education programs. Journal of Instructional Psychology,18, 228-236. McLoyd, V. C., & Randolph, S. M. (1985). Seculartrends in the study of Afro-American children: A review of Child Development, 1936-1980. In A. B. Smuts & J. W. Hagen (Eds.), History and researchin child development (pp. 78-92). Monographs of the Societyfor Researchin Child Developmen, 50 (Serial No. 211). McShane, D., & Berry,J. W. (1986). Native North Americans: Indian and Inuit abilities. In J. H. Irvine & J. W. Berry (Eds.), Human abilities in cultural context (pp. 385-426). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Mejia Arauz, R., Rogoff, B., & Paradise, R. (2003). Cultural variation in childrens observationofa demonstration.Manuscript submitted for publication. Moll, L. C. (2000). Inspired by Vygotsky: Ethnographic experiments in education. In C. Lee & P. Smagorinsky (Eds.), Vygotskianperspectives on literacyresearch:Constructingmeaning throughcollaborativeinquiry (pp. 256-268). New York: Cambridge University Press. Moll, L., Saez, R., & Dworin, J. (2001). Exploring biliteracy: Two student case examples of writing as a social practice. ElementarySchool Journal, 101(4), 435-449. Nieto, S. (1999). The light in their eyes: Creating multicultural learning communities. New York: Teachers College Press. Ortiz, F. I. (1988). Hispanic-American children's experiences in classrooms. In L. Weis (Ed.), Class, race, and gender in American education (pp. 63-86). Albany, NY: SUNY Press. Price, G. E., & Dunn, R. (1997). LSIManual. Lawrence, KS: Price Systems, Inc. Rogoff, B. (1997). Evaluating development in the process of participation: Theory, methods, and practice building on each other. In E. Amsel & A. Renninger (Eds.), Change and development:Issuesof theory, application, and method (pp. 265-285). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature ofhuman development.New York: Oxford University Press. Rogoff, B., & Angelillo, C. (2002). Investigating the coordinated functioning of multifaceted cultural practices in human development. Human Development, 45, 211-225. Rogoff, B., Goodman Turkanis, C., & Bartlett, L. (2001). Learning to-

New York:Oxford gether:Childrenandadultsin a schoolcommunity. UniversityPress.

Rogoff, B., Mistry, J., Gincii, A., & Mosier, C. (1993). Guided participation in cultural activity by toddlers and caregivers. Monographsof the SocietyforResearchand Child Development,58 (7, Serial No. 236). Rogoff, B., Paradise, R., Mejia Arauz, R., Correa-Chavez, M., & Angelillo, C. (2003). Firsthand learning through intent participation. Annual Review ofPsychology,54, 175-203. Rose, M. (1988). Narrowing the mind and page: Remedial writers and cognitive reductionism. College Composition and Communication, 39(3), 267-301. Tejeda, C., & Espinoza, M. (2002). Reconceptualizingthe roleofdialogue in transformativelearning. Paper presented at meetings of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. Tejeda, C., Espinoza, M., & Gutierrez, K. (2003). Toward a decolonizing pedagogy: Social justice reconsidered. In P. Trifonas (Ed.), Pedagogy of difference:Rethinking educationfor social change (pp. 10-40). New York: Routledge. Tiedeman, J. (1989). Measures of cognitive style. Educational Psychologist, 24(3), 261-275.

AUTHORS KRIS D. GUTIERREZ is professor, University of California, Los Angeles, Graduate School of Education and Information Studies, Urban Schooling: Curriculum, Teaching, Leadership & Policy Studies, 1026 Moore Hall, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1521; [email protected]. Her research interests focus on literacy learning and culture in both formal and nonformal learning environments, and on the study of educational reform on English language learners. BARBARA ROGOFF is UCSC Foundation Professor of Psychology, University of California, Santa Cruz, 277 Social Sciences 2, Santa Cruz, CA 95064; [email protected]. Her researchfocuses on cultural supports for learning, especially learning through observation and varying participation structures.

NEW EDITORIALTEAM

Manuscriptreceived November 20, 2002 Revisionsreceived March 14, 2003 Accepted March25, 2003

FOR ER

MicheleFosterand StaffordHood FeaturesCo-Editors: Newsand CommentCo-Editors: Research SonjaLanehartand PaulSchutz BookReviewEditor:KathyNakagawa Beginning July 1, 2003, all manuscriptswill be submitted electronically to the new team.

Authorsshouldsubmitnew manuscriptsto http://www.aera.net/er. Forspecificquestionsor inquiries,send e-mailto editorsat the followingaddresses: Features([email protected]) ResearchNews and Comment ([email protected]) Book Review([email protected])

2003|I JUNE/JULY