Bases de la medicina preconcepcional

This section has explored both ‘individual’ (learning as cognition) and ‘a community’ (learning as participation) dimensions influencing the process of learning. It has been argued, however, that wider factors such as policies or cultures should be taken into account in order to understand learning (e.g. van Egmond et al., 2013). For example, Li (2005) argued that there are different cultural beliefs about learning between Eastern and Western countries and these influence individuals’ learning beliefs and their actual learning. Li argued that learning is understood as the acquisition of knowledge, intelligence and wisdom in Western countries. This understanding stems from the Socratic view which is described as a ‘mind orientation’ to learning. On the other hand, learning in Eastern countries, including Korea, has been influenced by the Confucian view which takes a more holistic view of development. From this perspective, learning is regarded not only as cognitive but also as moral and ethical development which is characterized as a ‘virtue orientation’ (Li, 2005, p. 191). Li suggested that these differences in

general beliefs about learning have influenced in both the aims of learning and the motivations of learners between Eastern and Western countries.

It has been argued that existing theories of learning – both cognitive and situated – fail to fully account for learning processes (Hodkinson & Hodkinson, 2004b; Hodkinson et al., 2007; Biesta, 2011). This is because, firstly, the existing learning theories do not take into account wider dimensions such as learning culture. Secondly, most of them take dualist approach which sees a separation between: i) mind and body; ii) individual and social; and iii) agency and structure. Lastly, there has been a tendency to focus on one dimension of learning. Hodkinson et al. (2007, 2008) developed two theories: i) the theory of learning culture and ii) the cultural theory of

learning in order to overcome these limitations above. Each theory, and the importance of

combining them, is now examined.

The theory of learning culture refers to the importance of incorporating learning culture into

the processes of understanding learning. As discussed in previous sections, it has been argued that cognitive learning theories tend to overlook the importance of situations and contexts around learning (Hager & Hodkinson, 2009). These theories place emphasis on the process of conceptual change in the mind of an individual learner. Hodkinson et al. (2008) suggested the necessity of considering a variety of scale of learning culture and its impacts on learning. The term learning culture here refers not to merely learning context; rather it is ‘social practices through which people learn’ (p. 34). Learning cultures, therefore, have shared expectations about teaching and learning and, in turn the learning cultures influence, directly or indirectly, sites in which learning takes place. In line with this, Biesta (2011, p. 203) argued for the ‘interconnectedness’ between each culture; i.e. ‘unlike learning contexts, learning cultures do not have clear boundaries, so we always need to look beyond what is immediately present’. This perspective was derived from the concept of field developed by Bourdieu (1985).

According to Bourdieu, there are various types and levels of fields which constitute culture and society, and each field is ‘interconnected’. Thus, a learning culture, as a unit of a field, is influenced by other learning cultures. For example, in order to fully understand a learning culture of the CoP which is studied in this study, it is essential to take into account a higher level of culture such as the culture of schooling or the general educational system in South Korea.

Using the theory of learning culture alone, however, cannot examine learning process holistically. Hodkinson and Hodkinson (2003) argued that Lave and Wenger’s (1991) approach might overlook ‘the significance of individual dispositions and biography in relation to community of practice development’ (p. 5). In other words, in order to understand learning generated in a CoP, not only aspects of social practice (interaction with members of a CoP) but also an individual learner’s characteristics (beliefs or dispositions) should be taken into account. In line with this, Bloomer and Hodkinson (2000) developed the concept of ‘learning career’ to examine how an individual’s dispositions towards learning changed and how this influences learning. That is, individual’s dispositions have significant influence in the learning process and should be taken into account in order to understand learning (Hodkinson & Hodkinson, 2004b).

It is also important to note that individual learners are not passive beings who are merely influenced by learning culture. That is, there are active transactions between learners and learning cultures: ‘individuals influence and are part of learning cultures just as learning cultures influence and are part of individuals’ (Hodkinson et al., 2008, p. 37). In this sense, individuals have the ability to actively construct practical knowledge embodied by transactions with environments, not just conceptual change by knowledge acquisitions. From this perspective, Hodkinson et al. (2008) argue also for the necessity of incorporating a dimension

theory of learning to complement limitations of using the theory of learning culture.

Thus, Hodkinson et al. (2007, 2008) take a holistic view about learning theory by combining two theories: the theory of learning culture refers to the influences of learning cultures, and the

cultural theory of learning which focuses on the individual learner dimension. In summary, in

order to examine learning processes in any learning location, therefore, it is essential to

integrate the learner’s dispositions (individual), a CoP (community) and learning culture (wider

context). Moreover, as examined above, each factor is interconnected.