En este artículo se expone un estudio llevado a cabo con elfin de investigar el aprendizaje de los profesionales en lo relativo a la creación de nuevas formas de praxis, formas que implican el establecimiento de soluciones conjuntas que satisfagan las diversas y complejas necesidades de sus clientes. Concretamente, analizamos el aprendizaje profesional en aquellos servicios que persiguen el fomento de la inclusión social, y que lo hacen tratando que el cliente se convierta en un actor eficaz en su entorno. Para este análisis me basaré en los desarrollos recientes de la Teoría de la Actividad Histórico Cultural (Cultural Historical Activity Theory, CHAT) y de las teorías del aprendizaje en el trabajo.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
CommissionAUDIT (2002). Statements and Assessments of SEN: In need oof a review.Londres: Audit Commission.
2.
BarleyS. R.KundaG. (2001). Bringing work back in.Organization Science, 12 (1), 76–95.
3.
BentleyT. (1997). Learning to belong.Demos Collection, 12, 44–46.
CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE'S UNIT (2000). Tomorrow's Future: Building a Strategy for Children and Young People.Londres: CYPU.
6.
ColeM. (1996). Cultural Psychology: A once and future discipline.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
7.
ColeM.EngeströmY. (1993). A cultural-historical approach to distributed cognition. En SalomonG. (Ed.), Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 1–46). Nueva York: Cambridge University Press.
8.
CullenJ.HadivassiliouK.HamiltonE.KelleherJ.SommerladE.SternE. (2002). Review of current pedagogic research and practice in the fields of post-compulsory education and lifelong learning. Report submitted to the Economic and Social Research Council, February.
9.
CumellaS.WilliamsR.SangR. (1998). How Mental Health Services are Commissioned. En ThornicroftG.StrathdeeG. (Eds), Commisioning Mental Health Services (pp. 61–71). Londres: HMSO.
10.
DanielsH. (Ed.) (1996). An Introduction to Vygotsky.Londres: Routledge.
11.
DEPARTMENT FOR EDUCATION AND SKILLS (2002a). Spending Review: Investment for reform.Londres: DfES.
12.
DEPARTMENT FOR EDUCATION AND SKILLS (2002b). Safer School Partnerships: Guidance. Issued jointly by Department for Education and Skills, Home Office, Youth Justice Board, Association of Chief Education Officers and Association of Chief Police Officers (Ref: DfES/0485/2002).
13.
DiamondJ. (2001). Managing change or coping with conflict? Mapping the experience of a local regeneration partnership.Local Economy, 16 (4), 272–285.
14.
EngeströmY. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research.Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit.
15.
EngeströmR. (1995). Voice as communicative action.Mind, Culture, and Activity, 2, 192–214.
16.
EngeströmY. (1999). Innovative learning in work teams: analysing cycles of knowledge creation in practice. En EngeströmY.MiettinenR.PunamakiR (Eds.), Perspectives on Activity Theory (pp. 377–406). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
17.
EngestromY. (2001), Expansive learning at work: toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14 (1), 133–56.
18.
EngeströmY.AhonenH. (2001). On the materiality of social capital: An activity-theoretical exploration. En HasanH.GouldE.LarkinP.VrazalicL. (Eds.), Information systems and activity theory. Vol. 2: Theory and practice (pp. 55–73). Wollongong: University of Wollongong Press.
19.
EngeströmY.EngeströmR.VähäahoT. (1999) When the center does not hold: The importance of knotworking. En ChaiklinS.HedegaardM.Juul jensenU. (Eds.), Activity theory and social practice (pp. 345–374). Aarhus: Aarhus University Press.
20.
EngestromY.MiddletonD. (Eds.) (1996). Cognition and Communication at work.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
21.
FreemanM.MillerC.RossN. (2000). The impact of philosophies of teamwork on multiprofessional practice and the implications for education.Journal of Interprofessional Care, 14 (3), 237–247.
22.
KundaG. (1992). Engineering culture.Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
23.
LatourB. (1996). On interobjectivity.Mind, Culture and Activity, 3, 228–245.
24.
Leont'evA. N. (1978). Activity, consciousness, and personality.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
25.
MiddletonD.BrownS. (2000). Topologies of durability and transformation in networks at work: exploring the organisation of accountability and agency in neonatal intensive care.III Conference for Sociocultural Research, 16–20 de Julio, Campinas, Brasil.
26.
MorrisonT. (2000). Working together to safeguard children: challenges and changes for inter-agency co-ordination in child protection.Journal of Inter professional Care, 14 (4), 363–373.
27.
NixonJ.MartinJ.MckeownP.RansonS. (1997). Towards a learning profession: changing codes of occupational practice within the new management of education.British Journal of Sociology of Education, 18 (1), 5–28.
28.
PowellR. (1997). Understanding partnership: agency collaboration and the service user. En PithouseA.WilliamsonH. (Eds.), Engaging the User in Welfare Services (pp. 21–43). Birmingham: Venture Press.
29.
SeckerJ.HillK. (2001). Broadening the partnerships: experiences of working across community agencies. Journal ofInterprofessional Care, 15 (4), 341–350.
30.
SlaterP. (2002). Training for No Secrets: a strategic initiative.Social Work and Education, 21 (4), 437–448.
31.
SturgeC. (2001). A multi-agency approach to assessment.Child Psychology and Psychiatry Review, 6 (1), 16–23.
32.
VictorB.BoyntonA. C. (1998). Invented here: Maximizing your organization's internal growth and profitability.Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
