Situated Cognition Theory and Bronfenbrenner's Ecological Theory

        The inspiring question for me to focus on the relationship between Ecological Theory as a development theory  and a learning theory was "How does ecological theory explain learning in its conceptual framework?"
      
  Considering the learning theories I have learned so far, I think situated cognition theory greatly fits in the explanation Ecological Theory needs to make for the learning. In the following part of the post, I will try to explain my standing point. 

Situated Learning
 (Taken from University of South Alabama Online Learning Laboratory )

       




    Firstly, both theories see the environment as a complex, dynamic structure which has three components: learner (child), context and the process time. In a more concrete base, the dynamic subsystems of the general picture, -systems in ecological theory and communities of practice in situated learning-, and the relationship among these subsystems make it easier to understand the position of learner/child as an individual in the world surrounds him or her.

Bronfenbrenner's Ecological Theory
(Taken from Australian Institute of Family Studies)

      




    Secondly, the most strong consistency can be found in how they divide the general system into subsystems even  though it may be seen as a challenging match.The correspondence of microsystem can be the community of practice in situated learning. Therefore, the relationship between different microsystems, which is mesosystem, can be seen as the periphery of a community. In this analogy, learning, which is the result of trajectory to the center in the periphery, can be matched with the term "ecological transition" in Bronfenbrenner's theory.  





  


    However, it may be argued how situated learning constitutes the position of culture/values while ecological theory conceptualizes this as macrosystem. Jean Lave, the pioneer of this theory, puts in words the definition of learning as: "Learning, as it normally occurs, is a function of the activity, context and culture." This statement makes me interpret the culture in situated learning as the second dimension of the arrow going towards to the center of periphery.  


    While you may propose that these theories are explaining very distinct poles, I believe that there is a correspondence in how they approach to the complex general picture. Also, around the dialectical relationship between development and learning, as Bronfenbrenner argues "Every ecological transition is both a consequence and instigator of developmental processes.", a learning theory can be a framework for a developmental theory, or vice versa. This logic may  support  the rationale of seeking relationship between a developmental theory  and a learning theory, on which this post is structured.