<p>I'm not able to directly answer your question, but I would suggest you take a look at some of the ideas association with Lev Vygotsky (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lev_Vygotsky" rel="nofollow noreferrer">wikipedia</a> is as good a place to start as any).</p>

<p>Schema theory is a relatively static idea - schemata exist as simplified internal representations of an external reality, and are symbolic, much like the memory of a computer. I'm not sure, for that reason, if there should be any term for your <code>potential "schemata/patterns/ideas" out in the world not yet encountered by the individual</code>, because a schema is nothing more than a representation (although see Plato's <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_Forms" rel="nofollow noreferrer">theory of forms</a>).</p>

<p>In Vygotskian theory (or <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural-historical_psychology" rel="nofollow noreferrer">cultural-historical psychology</a>), on the other hand, knowledge is seen as something that emerges from the interaction between a person, the people they encounter, and their broader social and cultural environment.</p>

<p>I know I can't do justice to these ideas myself, but I offer them as a starting point to better understand the concepts you're getting at in your question.</p>

<p>Sorry about all the wikipedia links.</p>

<p>A very good starting point is the following book. It should be retrievable quite easily over the Internet.</p>

<p>Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). <em>Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes</em>. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-04-07T11:03:02.700Z
What about schemata others have that I don't as an individual? That was the meaning I understood in the OP. Still, your interpretation may not be any less valid, except in as much as it's a little absurd, as you point out here. No need to apologize for using Wikipedia BTW; I get a lot of mileage out of it myself. Must say I often wish question-askers would do more of the same...
Nick Stauner
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-04-07T10:57:43.963Z
2017-04-12T18:38:06.160Z
2017-04-12T18:38:06.160Z
Eoin
<p>I don't know of separate terms to differentiate 'schema present in an individual' from 
'potential "schemata/patterns/ideas" out in the world not yet encountered by the individual', but with regard to 'schema currently being added or adjusted by an individual', I can at least offer some related terms.</p>

<ul>
<li><a href="http://psychology.about.com/od/glossaryfromatoz/g/Accommodation.htm" rel="nofollow"><em>Accommodation</em></a> is the process by which schemata are adjusted most generally.</li>
<li><p>With respect to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Marcia#The_four_identity_statuses" rel="nofollow">identity status</a>, which might be considered self-schemata, one's status is classified as in <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Marcia#Moratorium" rel="nofollow"><em>moratorium</em></a> during periods of active adjustment. I find James Marcia's theory useful often, because it differentiates individuals in terms of two factors:</p>

<ol>
<li>Whether they have a sense of personal identity</li>
<li>Whether they have attempted to scrutinize and develop their personal identities</li>
</ol>

<p>I'm only wary of dichotomizing these factors, which might be better understood as dimensions (I doubt whether anyone is truly at an absolute zero)...but that's slightly tangential, as it's somewhat easier to imagine schemata being completely stable or absent in a meaningfully dichotomous sense.</p></li>
</ul>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-04-06T20:43:25.737Z
2014-04-06T20:43:25.737Z
Nick Stauner
<p>According to WordNet 3.0, quoted at <a href="http://www.thefreedictionary.com/schema" rel="noreferrer">TheFreeDictionary.com</a>, in psychology, <em>schema</em> means "<a href="http://www.thefreedictionary.com/schema" rel="noreferrer">an internal representation of the world; an organization of concepts and actions that can be revised by new information about the world</a>".</p>

<p>Within psychology, specifically as applied to learning or education, are there terms to describe schemata at different stages of acceptance, e.g.:</p>

<ul>
<li>schema present in an individual</li>
<li>schema currently being added or adjusted by an individual</li>
<li>potential "schemata/patterns/ideas" out in the world not yet encountered by the individual</li>
</ul>

<p>Are there specialized terms to distinguish these?</p>

<cognitive-psychology><learning><terminology><ideation>
What terms describe "schema" at various stages of acceptance?
Village
# What terms describe "schema" at various stages of acceptance?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2014-02-03)

According to WordNet 3.0, quoted at [TheFreeDictionary.com](http://www.thefreedictionary.com/schema), in psychology, *schema* means "[an internal representation of the world; an organization of concepts and actions that can be revised by new information about the world](http://www.thefreedictionary.com/schema)".

Within psychology, specifically as applied to learning or education, are there terms to describe schemata at different stages of acceptance, e.g.:

* schema present in an individual
* schema currently being added or adjusted by an individual
* potential "schemata/patterns/ideas" out in the world not yet encountered by the individual

Are there specialized terms to distinguish these?

**Tags:** cognitive-psychology, learning, terminology, ideation


---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2014-04-07. Score: 2

I'm not able to directly answer your question, but I would suggest you take a look at some of the ideas association with Lev Vygotsky ([wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lev_Vygotsky) is as good a place to start as any).

Schema theory is a relatively static idea - schemata exist as simplified internal representations of an external reality, and are symbolic, much like the memory of a computer. I'm not sure, for that reason, if there should be any term for your `potential "schemata/patterns/ideas" out in the world not yet encountered by the individual`, because a schema is nothing more than a representation (although see Plato's [theory of forms](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_Forms)).

In Vygotskian theory (or [cultural-historical psychology](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural-historical_psychology)), on the other hand, knowledge is seen as something that emerges from the interaction between a person, the people they encounter, and their broader social and cultural environment.

I know I can't do justice to these ideas myself, but I offer them as a starting point to better understand the concepts you're getting at in your question.

Sorry about all the wikipedia links.

A very good starting point is the following book. It should be retrievable quite easily over the Internet.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). *Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes*. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

> **Comments:**
> **username_2**: What about schemata others have that I don't as an individual? That was the meaning I understood in the OP. Still, your interpretation may not be any less valid, except in as much as it's a little absurd, as you point out here. No need to apologize for using Wikipedia BTW; I get a lot of mileage out of it myself. Must say I often wish question-askers would do more of the same...  

---

### Answer by username_2 on 2014-04-06. Score: 2

I don't know of separate terms to differentiate 'schema present in an individual' from
'potential "schemata/patterns/ideas" out in the world not yet encountered by the individual', but with regard to 'schema currently being added or adjusted by an individual', I can at least offer some related terms.

* [*Accommodation*](http://psychology.about.com/od/glossaryfromatoz/g/Accommodation.htm) is the process by which schemata are adjusted most generally.
* With respect to [identity status](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Marcia#The_four_identity_statuses), which might be considered self-schemata, one's status is classified as in [*moratorium*](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Marcia#Moratorium) during periods of active adjustment. I find James Marcia's theory useful often, because it differentiates individuals in terms of two factors:

  1. Whether they have a sense of personal identity
  2. Whether they have attempted to scrutinize and develop their personal identities

  I'm only wary of dichotomizing these factors, which might be better understood as dimensions (I doubt whether anyone is truly at an absolute zero)...but that's slightly tangential, as it's somewhat easier to imagine schemata being completely stable or absent in a meaningfully dichotomous sense.


---

