Laboratory technician

In this paper I attempt to dissolve two confused ideas inherent in scientific studies of learning: That the locus of learning processes lies hidden inside the mind/brain, and also that this putatively hidden phenomenon causes learned actions. I attempt this dissolution through conceptual argument and data analysis, first by contrasting the use of the concept ‘learning’ in ordinary and scientific interaction, followed by a Wittgenstein-inspired conversation analysis of a micro-longitudinal case of learning interaction — a biochemist teaching lab techniques to a technician — in order to demonstrate that learning processes are inherently social. I conclude that the scientific view of learning processes as hidden is misconceived through its misuse of the concept “learning”. The empirical results demonstrate that learning processes are indeed public and manifest in an indefinite number of forms, and whatever may be found in the brain associated with learning are concomitant factors, not learning itself.

This study follows in the tradition of communication analysis by emphasizing how a Japanese biochemist and technician structure a scientific training activity. This emphasis contrasts with more recent studies that have applied the findings of communication analysis yet have increasingly emphasized the analysis of interactional content, at the expense of analyzing interactional structure. In this paper I focus solely on interactional structure. To this end I first describe how the participants segment the training from previous and subsequent activities. Then I demonstrate how they segment that same training into smaller units, revealing that structuring actions are convex, negotiated, and sequentially organized and should be considered as analytic units in their own right. Also, this study demonstrates, as the originators of communication analysis have established, that analysis of structunng actions yields essential insights into the entire activity.