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 support@jstor.org.

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 regulari-
ties are static, and that general traits of individualsare attributable
categoricallyto ethnicgroup membership.We suggestthat a cultural-
historicalapproachcan 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 collec-
tions of individuals,but as proclivitiesof people with certain histo-
ries 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., African-
American, 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 assump-
tion 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 individ-
uals 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 depriva-
tion." Much of this work grew out of the critical need to amelio-
rate the inequitable and deplorable schooling experiences of poor
Vol.32, No. 5, pp. 19-25
Educational
Researcher,
and working-classstudentsin U.S. public schools-predomi-
nantlystudentsof color, many of whom were English-language
learners.
The culturalstyles approacharosefrom these effortsas re-
searchersattemptedto 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
characterizing culturalwaysof differentgroupsin termsthatare
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 prac-
tices of culturalcommunities,and this in turn sometimeshin-
derseffectiveassistanceto 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
separatelyin the personandin the "context,"and "crossing"style
and context as in the AptitudeX Treatmentapproach.In edu-
cationalsettings,workon learningstyleshas often attemptedto
takecontextinto accountby seekingstylematchesbetweenstu-
dent 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 as-
sumesone style per personaccordingto the individual'sgroup
categorization.We areparticularlyconcernedwith the implica-
tionsof 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,individu-
als from one groupmay be characterized as learningholistically
whereasindividualsfromanothergroupmaybe characterized as
learninganalytically or individuals
may be dividedinto cooper-
ativeversusindividualistlearnerson 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... multimediatech-
niquesbecause we havea groupnowin schoolthatis verydiverse
in theirlearningstrategies.
Youknowmostarevisuallanguage
so if yougivethemsomething
learners, theycanseeortouch,they
aretactile.Thatgetsto them;theycanunderstand that.(Gutierrez,
Crosland, & Berlin,2001)
Of course,thereis valuein usingmultipleformsof assistance,
includingmedia.Our focus,however,is on the importanceand
benefitof knowingaboutthe historiesandvaluedpracticesof cul-
turalgroupsratherthan tryingto teachprescriptively according
to broad,underexaminedgeneralitiesaboutgroups.In cultural-
historicalapproaches,learningis conceivedof as a processoc-
curringwithin ongoing activity,and not divided into separate
characteristics
of individualsand contexts(Cole & Engestrom,
1993;Lave,1996).Includingconsideration of thehistoryof a per-
son'sor a group'srelatedengagementscan accountfor "disposi-
tions"theymayhavein new circumstances. However,the crucial
distinctionwe aremakingis betweenunderstandingprocesses and
locatingcharacteristics.
Without situatingsocial practices the
and
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.Forex-
ample, 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 ar-
gued for a moresituatedand dynamicview of the culturalprac-
ticesof ethnicandracialgroups(Banks,1995; Gay, 1995, 2000;
Irvine& York,1995; Nieto, 1999).
Yet, the problemof overgeneralization persists,especiallyin
attempts by schoolsto designlearningexperiencesthat comple-
20 EDUCATIONALRESEARCHER
ment the learning-styledifferencesof particularethnic groups
(e.g., Dunn & Dunn, 1992; Dunn, Griggs,& Price,1993). Al-
thoughthe workon learningstylesoftencautionsagainststereo-
typing and generalizingabout the cognitive styles of various
groups,matchingindividuallearningstyleto a particularethnic
groupmay encouragethe idea that patternsof performancede-
rivefrom 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 categorymember-
ship, assumingthat all groupmemberssharethe sameset of ex-
periences,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 groupwithoutaccountingforindi-
viduals'pastexperiences with certainpracticesor withoutprovid-
ing instructionthatbothextendsthoseexperiences andintroduces
newandevenunfamiliar of
ways doingthings. This standsin stark
contrastto thestrategicformsof assistance
we haveobservedin ro-
bustlearningcommunitieswherethe co-constructionof a com-
munity'svariouspracticesandindividualdevelopmentsupportthe
changingnatureof participationand the formsof assistancepro-
videdin joint activity.In theseclassroomcommunities,students
receivemultipleformsof assistanceand participatein rigorous
learningactivitiesthatextendtheirinitialapproachesto learning
andparticipation (Gutierrez,Baquedano-Lopez, & Tejeda,1999;
Moll, Saez, & Dworin, 2001; Rogoff, Goodman Turkanis,&
Bartlett,2001). As a result,studentshaveongoingopportunities
to assumenew rolesand learnnew approaches.
There are severalexplanationsfor the sustainedcurrencyof
traitapproachesas plausibleexplanationsof individualperfor-
mance.Notions of individuallearningstylesare commonplace
in both publicand educationaldiscourse.Descriptionsandsub-
sequentmethodsof identificationof learningstylescan be easy
to understandand to identifywithin the taxonomiesin invento-
riesthatprovidemeasuresof individualdifferencesandresultant
profiles(Price& Dunn, 1997). Furthermore,reductivenotions
of cultureand culturalgroupsmay reinforcethe broadapplica-
tion of traitapproaches.
BeyondReductiveApproaches
Often, normativeviewsof cultureareemployedin waysthatap-
pearbenign,especiallywhen theypurportto focuson individual
differencesratherthanon deficitsin the individualor in the so-
cial group.This is an exceedinglyimportantissue as therecon-
tinuesto be a reductivetendencyin thesocialsciencesto seekand
acceptsingulareffectsto explainsocialandcognitivephenomena.
Supportedby staticor normativeunderstandings of culture,the
applicationof traitapproachesto individual
school performance
sometimesleadsto what Rose (1988) callsa kind of "cognitive
As Roseargues:
reductionism."3
A furtherproblem-sometimesinherentin the theoriesthem-
selves,sometimes aresultof reductive
application-isthetendency
to diminishcognitivecomplexity andrelyon simplified cognitive
oppositions:independent vs.dependent, vs.oral,verbalvs.
literate
spatial,concretevs. logical.Theseoppositionsaretextbook-neat,
but... arenarrowandmisleading. (p.268)
In some cases,the learningor cognitivestylestypologieshave
a basisin observationsof averagedifferencesin some popula-
tions. In manycases,however,the typologiesareofferedsimply
ascategorieswithoutresearchsubstantiating theirrelationshipto
the groupsso characterizedor to their utility for practice.As
Tiedeman(1989) suggested,"To date, researchevidenceis in-
adequateto judge [cognitivestyles'] validity or usefulnessin
adaptinginstructionto individuals;some havebeen calledseri-
ouslyinto question"(p. 599).
A cultural-historicalapproachcan help researchers and practi-
tionerscharacterize thecommonalities of experienceof peoplewho
shareculturalbackground,without "locating"the commonal-
ities within individuals.However,within cultural-historical ap-
proaches,therehasnotyet beensufficientattentionto figuringout
how to talkand thinkaboutregularities acrossindividuals'or cul-
turalcommunities' waysof doingthings.To movebeyondtheidea
of traitslocatedin individualmembersof ethnicgroups,we need
to makeprogressin understanding regularitiesin how engagement
in sharedand dynamicpracticesof differentcommunitiescon-
tributesto individuallearninganddevelopment.
Conceivingof styleas an individualtraitcanleadto a strategy
of matchingcharacterizations of individuals(or collectionsof
of contextson the
them),on the one hand,andcharacterizations
other. This approachtreatscontexts as if they exist indepen-
dently of the people active in creatingand maintainingthem,
andviewsindividualsasthoughtheircharacteristics areunrelated
to the contextsin whichtheyandtheirfamilieshaveparticipated
in recentgenerations.We arguethatpeopleliveculturein a mu-
tuallyconstitutivemannerin 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 pro-
pose a shift from the assumptionthat regularitiesin groupsare
carriedby the traitsof a collectionof individualsto a focus on
people'shistoryof engagementin practicesof culturalcommu-
approaches,culturaldifferencesare
nities. In cultural-historical
attributedto variationsin people'sinvolvementin commonprac-
tices of particularculturalcommunities(Moll, 2000; Rogoff,
Mistry,Goncii, & Mosier, 1993). A centraland distinguishing
thesisin this approachis that the structureand developmentof
humanpsychologicalprocessesemergethroughparticipationin
culturallymediated,historicallydeveloping,practicalactivityin-
volvingculturalpracticesand tools (Cole, 1996).
People'svariedparticipationin the practicesof dynamiccul-
turalcommunitiescanbe distinguishedfrommembership in eth-
nic groups,whichoftenis treatedin an all-or-none,staticfashion
(Rogoff,2003). Individualsparticipatein varyingand overlap-
ping 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"isexperi-
enced in local, face-to-faceinteractionsthat are locally con-
strainedand heterogeneouswith respectto both 'cultureas a
whole' and the parts of the entire toolkit experiencedby any
givenindividual"(p. 15).
Of course,thereareregularities in thewaysculturalgroupspar-
ticipatein the everydaypractices theirrespectivecommunities.
of
However,the relativelystablecharacteristicsof these environ-
mentsarein constanttensionwith the emergentgoalsand prac-
ticesparticipantsconstruct,which stretchand changeover time
andwith otherconstraints.This conflictand tensioncontribute
to thevariationandongoingchangein an individual'sanda com-
munity'spractices(Engestrom,1993; Gutierrez,2002).
We believethat looking for culturalregularitieswill be more
fruitful-both for researchand practice-if we focusour exam-
inationof differenceson culturalprocessesin which individuals
engage with other people in dynamic culturalcommunities,
some of whichinvolveethnicor racialgroupmembershipin im-
portantways. 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 conveyedcon-
of
cepts,ways talking, and belief systems that may be used and
negotiatedlocally in communities that areoften identifiedinter-
nally and by their neighbors in terms of ethnicityand race.
By focusing on the variedwayspeopleparticipatein theircom-
munity'sactivities, we can move awayfromthe tendencyto con-
flateethnicitywithculture,withassignmentto ethnicgroupsmade
on the basisof immutableand often stablecharacteristics suchas
Spanish surname or country of birth.Equating culturewith race,
ethnicity,languagepreference,or nationaloriginresultsin overly
deterministic,static,weak,and uncomplicatedunderstandings of
both individualsand the communitypracticesin whichtheypar-
ticipate(Gutierrez,Asato,Santos,& Gotanda,2002).
We are not arguingthat groupmembershipdefinedby eth-
nicity,race,and languageuse is irrelevant.These categorieshave
long-standinginfluenceson the culturalpracticesin which peo-
ple havethe opportunityto participate,oftenyieldingsharedcir-
cumstances,practices,andbeliefsthatplayimportantandvaried
rolesfor group members.People do not just chooseto move in
and out of differentpractices,takingon new and equalpartici-
pationin culturalcommunities.
Toward a Cultural-Historical Way
to Describe Cultural Regularities
Froma cultural-historicalperspective,we can examinepeople's
usualwaysof doingthings,tryingto understandindividuals'his-
tory of involvementin the practicesof variedcommunities,in-
2003 |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 familiesimmigratedfromEuropegen-
erationsbefore (MejiaArauz,Rogoff, & Paradise,2003). To
makesenseof this difference,we may gain some understanding
by examiningthe dynamicstructureof the sendingandreceiving
communities'traditions.For example,the ruralMexicancom-
munities'frequentinclusionof childrenin a rangeof adultactivi-
tiesmayrelateto the attentiveness of childrenwho mayhavebeen
encouragedto observeand takepartin theirfamilies'workand
social lives (Rogoff, Paradise,MejiaArauz,Correa-Chavez,&
Angelillo,2003). The European-American communities'tradition
of excludingchildrenfromadultactivities-wheretheycouldob-
servewhattheyaresupposedto be learning-may alsohelpus un-
derstandthe proclivityof some of thesestudentsto requestadult
explanationevenin a situationthatcallsforobservation.
Examiningculturalvariationin termsof familiarity with differ-
ent practicesin dynamiccommunitiesorganizedin distinctman-
nersis 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 theircommuni-
ties' historiesof engagingin particularendeavorsorganizedin
contrastingmanners.This avoidsthe implicationthat the char-
acteristicis "builtin" to the individual(or a group)in a stable
mannerthatextendsacrosstime andsituations,andit recognizes
the circumstancesrelevantto an individual'slikelihoodof acting
in certainways.
Cultural-historicaltheoryleadsus to expectregularitiesin the
ways culturalcommunitiesorganizetheir lives as well as varia-
tions in the waysindividualmembersof groupsparticipateand
conceptualizethe meansand ends of theircommunities'activi-
ties.Forexample,TejedaandEspinoza(2002) observedthathigh
school studentsfrom migrantfarmworkerbackgroundsoften
used hybrid languagepracticesin sense-makingactivitiesde-
signed to promotecriticalreflectionabout their coursesubject
matteras well as about their life experiencesas migrants.We
notedsimilarlinguisticpracticesin the learningrepertoiresof el-
ementaryschool childrenin computer-mediated
learningclubs
(Gutierrez,Baquedano-Lopez, Alvarez,2001). with the re-
& As
searchof MejfaArauzet al. (2003), intentobservationand min-
imal question askingseemed to characterizethe participation
patternsof both the elementaryschool childrenand the high
school students.
These descriptionsof regularitiesareusefulin understanding
literacydevelopment.However,ourreferencesto "migrants" and
"English-language learners"and their practicesare used as de-
scriptorsratherthan as categoricalclassificationof individualsor
groups.We attributethe regularitiesto the students'participa-
tion in familiarculturalpracticesaswell asto theirpublicschool-
ing 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
development dispositionmust be understoodin (not sepa-
and
ratefrom)culturaland historicalcontext.In otherwords,we talk
aboutpatternsof people'sapproachesto givensituationswithout
reducingthe explanationto a claimthattheydo whattheydo be-
causetheyaremigrantfarmworkersor English-language learners.
We attendto individuals'linguisticand cultural-historical reper-
toiresas well as to their contributionsto practicesthat connect
with otheractivitiesin which they commonlyengage.
RepertoiresforParticipating in Practices
By "linguisticand cultural-historical repertoires," we mean the
waysof engagingin activitiesstemmingfromobservingandother-
wise participatingin culturalpractices.Individuals'background
experiences,togetherwith theirinterests,maypreparethem for
knowinghow to engagein particularformsof languageand lit-
eracyactivities,play their partin testingformats,resolveinter-
personalproblemsaccordingto specificcommunity-organized
approaches,and so forth. An importantfeatureof focusingon
repertoiresis encouragingpeople to developdexterityin deter-
mining which approachfrom their repertoireis appropriate
underwhich circumstances(Rogoff,2003).
children'srepertoiresor proclivitieswould in-
Characterizing
volvecharacterizing theirexperienceandinitiativein priorcultural
activities(Rogoff,1997). We wouldcharacterize theirrepertoires
in termsof theirfamiliaritywith engagingin particular practices
on the basisof whatis knownabouttheirown andtheircommu-
nity'shistory.Forexample,studentswho haveparticipated in vary-
ing cultural traditionswould differin repertoires engagingin
for
discussionswithauthorityfigures,answeringknown-answer ques-
tions, analyzingword problemson the basisof counterfactual
premises,seekingor avoidingbeingsingledout forpraise,sponta-
neously helping classmates,observingongoing eventswithout
adultmanagement,respondingquicklyor ponderingideasbefore
volunteeringtheircontributions,andmanyotherapproaches that
aresometimestreatedas characteristics of individuals.
It is relevantto takeinto accountthe developmentof the cul-
turalactivitiesaswell. To understandboth individualand com-
munitylearningit 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 habitualap-
proachestakenby individuals(andcommunities)in knowncir-
cumstances.The circumstanceswould have to be taken into
account as aspects of the regularitiesdescribedand not just
"crossedwith"the independentcharacteristics of individuals.
A Few Suggestionsfor ProceedingWith
the Idea of Repertoiresof Practice
and teachers,the traitapproachhasthe at-
For both researchers
traction 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 long-
term 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' out-
of-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 indi-
viduals 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 chang-
ing communities, making first guesses about patterns and seek-
ing 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 in-
dividual 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 transformingacrossgen-
erations. In this concluding section, we offer some specific sug-
gestions 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 researchpartic-
ipants can be treated not as categories but as narrative de-
scriptors of the participants' backgrounds (e.g., middle class,
Catholic, farming, of Armenian heritage, in California, im-
migrated to escape massacre, two generations ago). In other
words, ethnic and other cultural descriptors may fruitfully
help researchersexamine cultural practices if they are not as-
sumed to imply an essence of the individual or group in-
volved, and are not treated as causal entities.
3. To examine how aspects of participants' community back-
ground 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 cat-
egories 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 obser-
vations should be made very cautiously, limiting generaliza-
tion of simple observations of test performance or behavior
under restricted circumstances beyond the situations ob-
served. The aim is to ground observations across multiple set-
tings 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 ap-
proaches to the learning, achievement, and potential of individu-
als 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 discus-
sionswith 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 individu-
als 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 Cen-
tralAmericaand the U.S. Southwest.A similaranalysiscan be devel-
oped, 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 educa-
tion. New York: Macmillan.
Berlin, D. (2002). The social constructionof deviance: Effectsof labeling
on students with learning difficulties. Unpublished doctoral disserta-
tion, University of California, Los Angeles.
Cole, M. (1996). Culturalpsychology:A once andfuture discipline. Cam-
bridge, 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 elementary-
age 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 ac-
tivity and context (pp. 64-103). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press.
Foley, D. (1997). Deficit thinking models based on culture: The an-
thropological protest. In R. Valencia (Ed.), The evolution of deficit
thinking: Educational thought andpractice (pp. 113-131). Washing-
ton, 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 Col-
lege Press.
Guild, P. (1994). The culture/learning style connection. Educational
Leadership,51(8), 16-21.
Gutierrez, K. (2002). Studying cultural practices in urban learning com-
munities. 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 Re-
view 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). Reconsideringcoach-
ing: Assistingteachers'literacypractices in the zone ofproximal develop-
ment. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational
Research Association, Seattle, WA.
Hickson, J., Land, A. J., & Aikman, G. (1994). Learning style differ-
ences 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 "mi-
nority" 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 stu-
dents. In J. A. Banks (Ed.), Handbook of researchon multicultural ed-
ucation (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 activ-
ity system for underachieving students. American Educational Re-
searchJournal, 38(1), 97-141.
Lee, C. D. (1993). Signijfing as a scaffoldfor literary interpretation.Ur-
bana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
Matthews, D. B. (1991). Learning styles research: Implications for in-
creasing students in teacher education programs. Journal of Instruc-
tional 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 abil-
ities 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 stu-
dent 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 class-
rooms. In L. Weis (Ed.), Class, race, and gender in American educa-
tion (pp. 63-86). Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
Price, G. E., & Dunn, R. (1997). LSIManual. Lawrence, KS: Price Sys-
tems, Inc.
Rogoff, B. (1997). Evaluating development in the process of participa-
tion: Theory, methods, and practice building on each other. In E.
Amsel & A. Renninger (Eds.), Change and development:Issuesof the-
ory, 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 func-
tioning of multifaceted cultural practices in human development.
Human Development, 45, 211-225.
Rogoff, B., Goodman Turkanis, C., & Bartlett, L. (2001). Learning to-
gether:Childrenandadultsin a schoolcommunity.
New York:Oxford
UniversityPress.

Rogoff, B., Mistry, J., Gincii, A., & Mosier, C. (1993). Guided partic-
ipation 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 participa-
tion. 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 Amer-
ican Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
Tejeda, C., Espinoza, M., & Gutierrez, K. (2003). Toward a decoloniz-
ing pedagogy: Social justice reconsidered. In P. Trifonas (Ed.), Peda-
gogy of difference:Rethinking educationfor social change (pp. 10-40).
New York: Routledge.
Tiedeman, J. (1989). Measures of cognitive style. Educational Psychol-
ogist, 24(3), 261-275.
AUTHORS
KRIS D. GUTIERREZ is professor, University of California, Los An-
geles, Graduate School of Education and Information Studies, Urban
Schooling: Curriculum, Teaching, Leadership & Policy Studies, 1026
Moore Hall, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1521; krisgu@ucla.edu. Her re-
search 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; brogoff@ucsc.edu. Her researchfocuses on cultural supports
for learning, especially learning through observation and varying par-
ticipation structures.
Manuscriptreceived November 20, 2002
Revisionsreceived March 14, 2003
Accepted March25, 2003

NEW EDITORIALTEAM FOR ER

MicheleFosterand StaffordHood
FeaturesCo-Editors:
ResearchNewsand CommentCo-Editors: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(er0406@yahoo.com)
ResearchNews and Comment (ERNews.Comments@att.net)
Book Review(erbooks@asu.edu)

2003|I
JUNE/JULY