[Xmca-l] Re: Article on Positioning Theory
Andy Blunden
ablunden@mira.net
Sun Mar 30 22:26:58 PDT 2014
Now that you mention it, Mike, I'd say "collusion" is just a way of
characterising collaboration in the case of there being something
illegitimate about the object of the collaboration.
Andy
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Andy Blunden*
http://home.mira.net/~andy/
mike cole wrote:
> Could you consider substituting the word collusion for the word
> collaboration,
> Andy?
> mike
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 8:01 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net
> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>> wrote:
>
> Donna,
> I don't think there is a particular need to go in search of
> theories here. Positioning theory, which I gather (?) is the study
> of how people are positioned by and for collaboration, taken
> together with Vygotsky's cultural psychology and the tradition of
> acivity theory, seems quite enough for me. :) Vygotsky gave us an
> approach to how concepts are formed, through the collaborative use
> of tools and symbols, and it seems to me, that self-concept is an
> important limiting case of concept formation. I tend to see every
> collabortion as the active instantiation of a concept of "what we
> are doing together," which necessarily includes a diversity of
> actions by different individuals, and "different points of view."
>
> Andy
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *Andy Blunden*
> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/>
>
>
> Donna Kotsopoulos wrote:
>
> The idea of the positioning occurring before the collaboration
> has taken place is consistent with Gee's idea about one
> storyline infecting another - both at the group level and at
> the individual level. I believe that an individual can rewrite
> those storylines or make conscious choices to adopt a
> different version. I'm not fully familiar with this literature
> but I think the theory of mind research and "theory of self"
> here would be a useful.
> Donna Kotsopoulos, Ph.D.
> Associate Professor
> Faculty of Education & Faculty of Science, Department of
> Mathematics
> Wilfrid Laurier University
> 75 University Avenue West, BA313K
> Waterloo, Ontario, N2L 3C5
> (519) 884-0710 x 3953
> www.wlu.ca/education/dkotsopoulos
> <http://www.wlu.ca/education/dkotsopoulos>
> <http://www.wlu.ca/education/dkotsopoulos>
> www.wlu.ca/mathbrains <http://www.wlu.ca/mathbrains>
> <http://www.wlu.ca/mathbrains>
> DISCLAIMER: This e-mail and any file(s) transmitted with it,
> is intended for the exclusive use by the person(s) mentioned
> above as recipient(s). Any unauthorized distribution, copying
> or other use is strictly prohibited.
> >>> On 3/29/2014 at 8:43 PM, in message
> <53376899.7060408@mira.net
> <mailto:53376899.7060408@mira.net>>, Andy Blunden
> <ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>> wrote:
> I'm learning a lot from all this! :)
> If (in my example of the artist hiring a technician) we were
> to ask "How
> is the technician positioned as a technician and how is the artist
> positioned as an artist?" I am assuming that my reader has
> acquired the
> same concepts of "technician" and "artist", that is, that they are
> somewhat educated citizens of a society in which these "roles"
> (?) are
> meaningful.
> In other words, "positioning" is something which takes place
> to a great
> extent before the collaborators meet.
> Likewise, as Greg pointed out, the acceptable and expected
> modes of
> collaboration are also created before the kids walk into the
> classroom.
> So positioning and collaboration are cultural products which
> pre-exist
> their instantiation in any collaborative act.
> Andy
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *Andy Blunden*
> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/>
> <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/>
>
>
> Greg Thompson wrote:
> > Lynda,
> > Your email points to an interesting tension that I think is
> at the center
> > of the discussion of Donna's paper. On the one hand you note
> that
> > collaboration is hard wired, biological, and (seemingly)
> inevitable. On the
> > other hand you point out that we have to teach children to
> collaborate, and
> > collaborative classrooms can be contrasted with traditional
> education
> > (which is, by implication, not collaborative).
> >
> > I take Andy's point to be that even traditional education is
> collaborative
> > - just a different kind of collaboration from what you find in a
> > "collaborative classroom." But the kind of collaboration we
> find in
> > traditional classrooms might not be a good type of
> collaboration for
> > everyone just as the "collaborative classrooms that Donna
> describes appear
> > not to be good for everyone.
> >
> > Thus, we see two notions of collaboration. One in which
> "collaboration" is
> > everywhere (even in traditional education!) and the other in
> which it must
> > be "accomplished" or "made" by particular means - "collaborative
> > classrooms".
> >
> > That seems to me to be one of the central tensions between
> folks discussing
> > on the listserve.
> >
> > And it seems to me like there is some really important work
> still to be
> > done in laying bare this contradiction between notions of
> "collaboration"
> > and notions of "classroom collaboration".
> >
> > For example, how can we find "collaboration" in unexpected
> places (e.g.
> > "traditional education")? Similarly, how the different
> configurations of
> > "collaboration" can be differently productive for different
> children. And
> > also important, as Donna has pointed out, how might "classroom
> > collaboration" not be so "collaborative"?!
> >
> > So then with this distinction, we might say that
> "collaborative classrooms"
> > might not be a panacea, but we could hardly solve any of the
> many problems
> > that confront us without some form of "collaboration."
> >
> > That's just my two nickels worth.
> > (same as yesterday's two cents but adjusted for inflation).
> > -greg
> >
> > "But also when I am active scientifically, etc. - an
> activity which I can
> > seldom perform in direct community with others - then my
> activity is
> > social, because I perform it as a man. Not only is the
> material of my
> > activity given to me as a social product (as is even the
> language in which
> > the thinker is active): my own existence is social activity,
> and therefore
> > that which I make of myself, I make of myself for society
> and with the
> > consciousness of myself as a social being."
> > Marx, 1844, p. 298
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 12:01 PM, Stone, Lynda
> <lstone@skymail.csus.edu <mailto:lstone@skymail.csus.edu>>wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Hi Greg!
> >>
> >> Well I generally try to maintain my role as a lurker---but
> I'm dropping in
> >> to make
> >> a comment or two--hope they make sense and are of some help.
> >>
> >> Andy's point may be what is needed to shape the trajectory
> of the
> >> conversation
> >> around collaboration. Although his reason may be grounded
> in a Marxist
> >> angle, equally
> >> important is a biological one. We are hard wired to
> collaborate---we come
> >> with the
> >> ability to engage in intersubjectivity, a fundamentally
> collaborative
> >> process. So, each
> >> and every time peers, teachers and students, etc. come to
> some relatively
> >> shared
> >> understandings, feelings, or interactively enact an
> identity, and so
> >> forth, they are engaged
> >> in collaborative acts, i.e.,more than one person/child
> taking part in an
> >> event/activity. And,
> >> because events/activities come into existence through
> discourse practices
> >> and are influenced
> >> by the local culture (its historical past & connection to
> the larger
> >> culture), to understand
> >> collaboration from participants' point of view requires an
> understanding
> >> of the situation
> >> they are in and how this situation emerges over time---so,
> collaboration
> >> in educational settings
> >> is not only a way of "rethinking/restructuring" engagement
> in contrast to
> >> traditional educational
> >> practices--collaboration is itself part of a
> developmental process, just
> >> as infants learn how over
> >> time to collaborate with their parents in different cultures.
> >>
> >> So, Andy's questions: "What kinds of collaborations are
> needed at this
> >> moment? And, "how
> >> should they be configured?" can be combined with so many
> other contextual
> >> questions that can
> >> help unravel what collaboration means and how should
> collaboration be
> >> configured. For example,
> >> how do children come to value (or see as morally right)
> >> helping/coordinating behaviors? Under
> >> what circumstances to children collaborate (help) each
> other and how is
> >> this related to the social
> >> norms and expectations? I have found that the context
> shapes what
> >> collaboration means and as a
> >> consequence influences the social processes that enable
> children to
> >> cooperate (or not) with each other.
> >> An essential part of any collaboration, as Donna points
> out, is a
> >> positioning process---one that is also
> >> influenced by the meaning/definition/value/moral aspects of
> engaging in
> >> learning activity with others.
> >>
> >> There are so many other questions to be asked to figure out
> >> "collaboration"---I hope my musings
> >> on the topic contributes a bit. In any case, Donna's paper
> has certainly
> >> pushed my thinking--
> >>
> >> An appreciative lurker!
> >> -lynda
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> What KINDS of
> >>
> >>> collaborations are needed at this moment? How should they
> be configured.
> >>>
> >> On Mar 29, 2014, at 7:50 AM, Greg Thompson wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> Folks, if I may jump in here, I think that there is a
> definitional
> >>>
> >> problem
> >>
> >>> here: What is collaboration?
> >>>
> >>> Andy seems to be coming at this from the Marx's angle that
> to be human is
> >>> to collaborate (man is a zoopoliticon - humans are
> collaborative all the
> >>> way down...). I think from Andy's point would be that all
> classrooms are
> >>> collaborative. But this isn't the way that most ed
> researchers think.
> >>>
> >>> The ideology of individualism runs rampant in much
> theorizing about
> >>> education. Ed researchers start at square one that says
> that students
> >>>
> >> begin
> >>
> >>> as individuals. In this case "collaboration" is an
> activity that one must
> >>> ACTIVELY make happen in the classroom (or anywhere else
> for that matter).
> >>> "Group projects" and "collaborative classrooms" are seen
> as exceptions to
> >>> the rule of "individualized learning" that is taken as the
> norm. And in
> >>> theorizing about education, "collaborative classroom" has
> a very
> >>>
> >> particular
> >>
> >>> meaning (I'm not very familiar with this lit, but I gather
> this is true
> >>> from what Donna has told us - here and in her paper).
> >>>
> >>> I'd add that there is a counterpart in the business world
> that follows
> >>>
> >> this
> >>
> >>> same kind of thinking - it's called "working in teams."
> Again, this
> >>> involves an active and conscious decision to do something
> different from
> >>> what people normally do (i.e. "individual work") and have
> them work
> >>> together. Most folks in business know this genre/frame of
> interaction.
> >>>
> >> Some
> >>
> >>> are head over heels for it and some loathe it (one of
> Donna's points).
> >>>
> >> But
> >>
> >>> it seems to generally be accepted that "collaboration" is
> something
> >>> unnatural that one must "make" happen.
> >>>
> >>> It is this notion of "collaboration" that Donna is going
> after. And in
> >>>
> >> the
> >>
> >>> literature I'm willing to bet that people talk of
> "collaborative
> >>> classrooms" as a panacea (this is how every "new" idea in
> education is
> >>>
> >> sold
> >>
> >>> to people). Frankly, I think this makes for a very weak
> view of
> >>> collaboration - and one in need of criticism (as Donna has
> done).
> >>>
> >>> So I think that this would be a very interesting direction
> to pursue the
> >>> questions that Donna has raised in more depth: what is
> this discourse
> >>>
> >> about
> >>
> >>> "collaborative classrooms" all about? What are the fundamental
> >>>
> >> assumptions
> >>
> >>> that serve as the starting point against which
> "collaborative classrooms"
> >>> are seen as having to be "made"? And, to follow Andy's
> thinking, isn't
> >>> collaboration always already there in the classroom - in
> the class
> >>>
> >> clown's
> >>
> >>> jokes, in the passing of notes during class, the
> conspiring against the
> >>> teacher or conspiring with the teacher against another
> class or the
> >>> principal, etc. (and I bet if you looked closer, you'd
> find that even
> >>> Mitchell is involved in some pretty impressive
> collaborations in this
> >>> classroom! It's just that they won't be happening during
> those times that
> >>> are EXPLICITLY marked as "collaborative work").
> >>>
> >>> And I think this will naturally lead not to the question
> of "to
> >>>
> >> collaborate
> >>
> >>> or not to collaborate" but rather to Andy's question: What
> KINDS of
> >>> collaborations are needed at this moment? How should they
> be configured.
> >>>
> >>> Collaboration anyone?
> >>> -greg
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 5:58 AM, Donna Kotsopoulos
> <dkotsopo@wlu.ca <mailto:dkotsopo@wlu.ca>>
> >>>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>>> It's been a pleasure joining the group so thank you for this
> >>>>
> >> invitation. I
> >>
> >>>> admire the scholarly exchange and it has really stretched
> my thinking
> >>>>
> >> in a
> >>
> >>>> number of ways.
> >>>>
> >>>> Yes, for some students collaboration may not be in their
> best interest
> >>>>
> >> to
> >>
> >>>> collaborate. Our objectives as teachers to have them
> collaborate, may
> >>>>
> >> not
> >>
> >>>> be very relevant to the student or may be even harmful.
> That student
> >>>>
> >> that
> >>
> >>>> really ought to have an option has to compromise
> something in such
> >>>> instances - their emotional, social, and or intellectual well
> >>>> being/advancement, for example. That being said, any
> collaborative
> >>>>
> >> effort
> >>
> >>>> is a compromise of sort for each person. This is the very
> essence of
> >>>>
> >> human
> >>
> >>>> interaction. It's the degree and the damage from the
> compromise that
> >>>>
> >> must
> >>
> >>>> be weighted.
> >>>>
> >>>> Mitchell likely would have picked another person to work
> with if given
> >>>>
> >> the
> >>
> >>>> option to work alone or work with a partner or small
> group. I would
> >>>>
> >> surmise
> >>
> >>>> that the students he would have picked out would have
> been "nice"
> >>>>
> >> students,
> >>
> >>>> for lack of better words, than stars mathematically.
> >>>>
> >>>> Alice would have picked the cool kids to work with. She
> would have
> >>>> compromised her intellectual outcomes.
> >>>>
> >>>> Ella would have picked the smartest in the class by her
> standards, and
> >>>> then should have tried to outsmart them. Ella is another
> interesting
> >>>>
> >> case.
> >>
> >>>> Always the perpetrator in every group she was in
> regardless of the group
> >>>> membership. Ella was also the class Victorian that year.
> She would
> >>>> compromise social relationships to achieve her means to
> her end.
> >>>>
> >>>> Will would have picked those students that would have
> done the work for
> >>>> him. Learning was an easy compromise for him.
> >>>>
> >>>> Collaboration means compromise in my mind. Regardless of
> the context.
> >>>>
> >>>> d.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Donna Kotsopoulos, Ph.D.
> >>>> Associate Professor
> >>>> Faculty of Education & Faculty of Science, Department of
> Mathematics
> >>>> Wilfrid Laurier University
> >>>> 75 University Avenue West, BA313K
> >>>> Waterloo, Ontario, N2L 3C5
> >>>> (519) 884-0710 x 3953
> >>>> www.wlu.ca/education/dkotsopoulos
> <http://www.wlu.ca/education/dkotsopoulos>
> >>>> www.wlu.ca/mathbrains <http://www.wlu.ca/mathbrains>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> DISCLAIMER: This e-mail and any file(s) transmitted with
> it, is intended
> >>>> for the exclusive use by the person(s) mentioned above as
> recipient(s).
> >>>>
> >> Any
> >>
> >>>> unauthorized distribution, copying or other use is
> strictly prohibited.
> >>>>
> >>>>>>> On 3/28/2014 at 9:54 AM, in message
> <53357F22.1070109@mira.net <mailto:53357F22.1070109@mira.net>>,
> >>>>>>>
> >> Andy
> >>
> >>>> Blunden <ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Thank you, Donna, BTW, for your generous use of your time
> and energy to
> >>>> discuss these issues with XMCA-ers.
> >>>>
> >>>> I think this means then, Donna, that it cannot quite make
> sense to say
> >>>> that "for some students... collaboration may not be in
> their best
> >>>> interests", for the more appropriate posing of this
> question must be
> >>>> *what type of collaboration* is or is not in the best
> interest of this
> >>>> or that student. Which then poses the question of "What
> types of
> >>>> collaboration are there?" rather than turning to the
> detailed mechanisms
> >>>> by which a given individual is positioned in a way which
> may be damaging
> >>>> to them.
> >>>>
> >>>> What do you mean by "compromise" in this context, Donna?
> >>>>
> >>>> Andy
> >>>>
> >>>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>> *Andy Blunden*
> >>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/
> <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/> <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Donna Kotsopoulos wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> I'll try to address the recent comments in one email.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Yes, I fully agree with Andy that every human
> relationship is an
> >>>>> instance of collaboration. This should suggest that more
> realistic
> >>>>> expectations of school based collaborations are in
> order. There is
> >>>>> compromise with every human relationship and the same is
> true in
> >>>>> collaborative activities with children and schools.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Andy's point about the need for a conceptual framework
> for these types
> >>>>> of understanding such human relations and interactions
> in a school
> >>>>> setting is interesting. Such a framework would have to
> include the
> >>>>> possibility of compromise, an open lens attending to
> productive
> >>>>> silencing and what I had referred to in earlier drafts
> as productive
> >>>>> privileging (Will's case in the article), a critical
> evaluation of
> >>>>> learning and the kinds of learning that has taken place.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
> >>> Assistant Professor
> >>> Department of Anthropology
> >>> 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
> >>> Brigham Young University
> >>> Provo, UT 84602
> >>> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
More information about the xmca-l
mailing list