The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The practice of learning
Abstract
The problem with “context” This book grew out of the work of a two-part conference in which the participants came together to consider what we initially called “the context problem.” All of us were involved in research on socially situated activity. We were concerned about conventional limitations on various approaches to the study of activity. In particular, we wished to explore questions about the “socially constituted world” – the context of socially situated activity – that our work often seemed merely to take for granted. I had tried in previous research to understand how math activity in grocery stores involved being “in” the “store,” walking up and down “aisles,” looking at “shelves” full of cans, bottles, packages and jars of food, and other commodities. My analyses were about shoppers' activities, sometimes together, and about the relations between these activities and the distractingly material, historically constituted, subjectively selective character of space-time relations and their meaning. Both Seth Chaiklin and I knew that other people conceived of the problem in quite different terms. We decided to hold a collective inquiry into these old, but still perplexing questions (e.g., Bartlett, 1958; Goffman, 1964; Barker, 1963, 1968; Birdwhistell, 1970; and more recently Dannefer, 1991; Haraway, 1988; Rommetveit, 1987, 1988; Hanks, 1990a, 1990b; Goodwin & Duranti, 1992). The time seemed appropriate for such a project, given that theoretical approaches to the study of situated activity, and hence to its situations, had fairly recently become surprisingly diverse and increasingly informed by rich empirical research. The traditions behind the work in this book include activity theory, critical psychology, Barker's ecological psychology, cognitive anthropology, and ethnomethodological perspectives.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Knowledge, Knowledge Work and Organizations: An Overview and Interpretation
Blackler, F. (1995) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/017084069501600605 · Cited by 2,498
Deliberative Policy Analysis: Understanding Governance in the Network Society
(2003) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511490934 · Cited by 1,751
“Vygotsky’s Neglected Legacy”: Cultural-Historical Activity Theory
Roth, W.-M., & Lee, Y.-J. (2007) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654306298273 · Cited by 1,113
Learning through work: workplace affordances and individual engagement
Billett, S. (2001) · Journal of Workplace Learning · doi:10.1108/eum0000000005548 · Cited by 831
Re-Embedding Situatedness: The Importance of Power Relations in Learning Theory
Contu, A., & Willmott, H. (2003) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.14.3.283.15167 · Cited by 817
Metadata
- Authors
- Lave, J.
- Venue
- Understanding Practice
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press
- Published
- 1993-06-25
- Pages
- 3-32
- OpenAlex
- W2990940347
- Cited by
- 1,175
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 11.70
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The practice of learning. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/cbo9780511625510.002
- The paper
- Lave, J. (1993). The practice of learning. Understanding Practice. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511625510.002
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.