[Xmca-l] Re: Reflective Discourse on XMCA

[mike cole]

Yes.. I forgot that!
There is a PDF somewhere I believe, but it should be oflittle. Interest to
most mcaers.
Mike

On Wednesday, October 14, 2015, Peg Griffin <Peg.Griffin@att.net> wrote:

> Wasn't it published in Russian, Mike?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: xmca-l-bounces+peg.griffin=att.net@mailman.ucsd.edu <javascript:;>
> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces+peg.griffin <javascript:;>=att.net@mailman.ucsd.edu
> <javascript:;>] On Behalf Of mike cole
> Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2015 8:08 PM
> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> Subject: [Xmca-l] Reflective Discourse on XMCA
>
> Peg et al -- Here is a set of representations using mediational triangles
> that underpin the method we called "question asking reading." The full,
> initial, (never published) text on which this is based can be found at
>
> http://lchc.ucsd.edu/People/NEWTECHN.pdf
>
> The first triangle represents the desired endpoint of the reading pedagogy
> The second two triangles show how the child's entering, fragmentary,
> understanding is juxtaposed with the adults mature understanding-- the
> first as simple juxtaposition,the second with overlap arising from
> instructional dialogue which reduces the gap between existing and desired
> end points. The third puts time/dynamics into this representation and
> indicates how all reading comprehension involves the bridging of the gap
> between the "mediated" and "direct" routes.
>
> Directly relevant to questions of displacement, gap filling, and
> imagination, although we used none of those terms at the time.
>
> Perhaps you can fill in, Peg, if
> mike
>
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 8:49 AM, mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu <javascript:;>
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','mcole@ucsd.edu <javascript:;>');>> wrote:
>
> > That is a very useful reminder/suggestion, peg. I will look for the
> > figure and post it, perhaps with a little text for con-text.
> >
> > thanks!
> > mike
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 8:24 AM, Peg Griffin <Peg.Griffin@att.net
> <javascript:;>
> > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','Peg.Griffin@att.net <javascript:;>');>>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Mike, do you recall the juxtaposed triangles we used when we were
> >> analyzing Alejandro and Benny's reading with an adult?
> >> Here's how I recall it:
> >> Each figure had two incomplete equilateral triangles sharing a
> >> baseline, one with the apex up and the other with the apex down. The
> >> whole came out kind of like a diamond shape but, on the right side of
> >> the page, it was the sides didn't meet -- leaving the future open.
> >> The author, the teacher and the child put in what they could but
> >> where it went no-one could know...
> >>
> >> Another tidbit for the stone soup of ideas:  you wrote "a difference
> >> that does not make a difference" -- briding form linguistics
> >> terminology we might call it "allo-meanings"  (see allophones as the
> model).
> >> Peg
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: xmca-l-bounces+peg.griffin=att.net@mailman.ucsd.edu
> <javascript:;>
> >> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','att.net@mailman.ucsd.edu <javascript:;>');>
> [mailto:
> >> xmca-l-bounces+peg.griffin
> >> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','xmca-l-bounces%2Bpeg.griffin');>=
> >> att.net@mailman.ucsd.edu <javascript:;>
> >> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','att.net@mailman.ucsd.edu <javascript:;>');>]
> On Behalf
> >> Of mike cole
> >> Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2015 10:51 AM
> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Reflective Discourse on XMCA
> >>
> >> Alfredo
> >>
> >> Might it be that words are NEVER enough? That all comprehension of
> >> another's words require imagination? Its just that sometimes the gap
> >> to be filled falls within a kind of normative range that is a
> >> difference that does NOT make a difference, while others require
> >> sufficient discontinuity to require intentional/conscious effort to
> bridge in a *satisficing* way.
> >>
> >> mike
> >>
> >> On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 7:44 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil
> >> <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no <javascript:;>
> >> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','a.j.gil@iped.uio.no <javascript:;>');>>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Huw,
> >> > thanks for the reflection, it brings a very interesting distinction.
> >> > The software developers case that I mentioned is more on the
> >> > contained sense of "unknown", as you mentioned, not involving a
> >> > shift of
> >> computing paradigm.
> >> > Yet I could observe lots of work performed by the developers for
> >> > them to be able to do intelligible enough reference to the feature
> >> > thereby being designed. This work, which I glossed as "naming",
> >> > included not just (technical, specialized) names already familiar
> >> > to them, but also drawings, gesturing, and performance. So, the
> >> > words were not enough, and there was some form of imagination going
> >> > on. So the distinction you introduced makes me wonder how the
> >> > situated work taking place during a shift of
> >> > (computational) paradigm would differ with respect to the one that
> >> > I am observing, that is, involving only a "minor" innovation.
> >> >
> >> > Henry's connection with the moving from verb to noun that we
> >> > reported with respect to boundary objects is interesting here
> >> > because it brings attention to objects (materials) and their
> >> > relation to our sensitivities (bodies). I am thinking if this
> >> > connection might be of help to understand the differences between
> >> > the work that minor innovations involve and the work of producing
> major paradigm shifts.
> >> > Perhaps, more than a shift in the kind of situated social
> >> > interactions that we observe, we should (again) attend to Latour's
> >> > discussion on inter-objectivity, and see how the
> >> > material-historical arrangements in the setting set the conditions
> >> > for those shifts to occur. At the level of interaction, I can
> >> > imagine (!) that both going through a minor innovation and going
> >> > through a major shift involve some movement from not being aware of
> >> > a possibility to orienting towards that very possibility. Studying
> >> > differences there would be interesting. But I guess that the key
> >> > lies in the prior historical conditions for the innovation/shift to
> >> > emerge. Imagination may, in this account, be a form of perceiving
> >> > things that, to be so perceived, need to lend themselves to those
> >> > perceptions and apprehensions. If imagination takes place first as
> >> > performative work, and not as mental operation alone, it needs to
> >> > rely upon the possibilities of manipulation that the materials
> >> > offer. And those possibilities, of course, include
> >> possibilities of naming, of using words.
> >> >
> >> > Alfredo
> >> > ________________________________________
> >> > From: xmca-l-bounces+a.g.jornet=iped.uio.no@mailman.ucsd.edu
> <javascript:;>
> >> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','iped.uio.no@mailman.ucsd.edu
> <javascript:;>');>
> >> > <xmca-l-bounces+a.g.jornet=iped.uio.no@mailman.ucsd.edu
> <javascript:;>
> >> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','iped.uio.no@mailman.ucsd.edu
> <javascript:;>');>> on
> >> behalf of
> >> > HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com <javascript:;>
> >> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','hshonerd@gmail.com <javascript:;>');>>
> >> > Sent: 14 October 2015 01:38
> >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Reflective Discourse on XMCA
> >> >
> >> > Do I recall (and understand) correctly Alfredo’s and Rod’s article
> >> > (on boundary objects and building museum spaces) that gesture
> >> > preceded
> >> naming?
> >> > I mean that the boundary object started as
> >> > collaborative/coordinated movement. It was a perfomance before it
> >> > was a thing that could be named. A verb before it was a noun. And
> >> > does this have anything to do with Huw’s conjecture about a
> >> > continuum of kinds of projects, at one end those that replicate
> >> > (with minimal creativity) and, at the other, those that “get
> >> > outside the box”? Academic discourse tends to be very nouny,
> >> > Latinate, loaded with bound morphemes. Such discourse serves
> >> > important purposes when operating on the generalization and
> >> > abstraction side of things, amongst the experts. But boundary
> >> > objects (as observed by Alfredo and Rod) assume the project members
> >> > are strangers to one another’s way of generalizing and abstracting.
> >> > Could gesture then be “rising to the concrete” in discourse
> >> > generally? That
> >> would provide nice praxis.
> >> >
> >> > Respectfully,
> >> > Henry
> >> >
> >> > > On Oct 13, 2015, at 4:45 PM, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com
> <javascript:;>
> >> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','huw.softdesigns@gmail.com <javascript:;>
> ');>>
> >> > wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > Alfredo,
> >> > >
> >> > > I suspect the quality of the unknown thing here would need
> >> qualification.
> >> > > Experienced practitioners in software are often dealing with
> >> > to-be-designed
> >> > > artefacts, although these mostly fall into a more minor category
> >> > > of
> >> > things
> >> > > conforming to well-known conceptions or abstractions, hence they
> >> > > are usually only unknown in a rather contained sense (a bit like
> >> > > roughly knowing what kind of model you need to build out of lego).
> >> > >
> >> > > Contrary to this, computing problems entailing a new
> >> > > computational
> >> > paradigm
> >> > > would certainly throw such programmers into a genuine unknown
> >> > > (the
> >> > dawning
> >> > > realisation that one is working with a different kind of kit).
> >> > > Also,
> >> > with
> >> > > respect to requirements, the real unknowns are usually the soft
> >> > > requirements on agreeing what the problem is in the first place,
> >> > > which
> >> > will
> >> > > be largely governed by the social situation of said programmers,
> i.e.
> >> > being
> >> > > paid to get something built.
> >> > >
> >> > > Naming is very important in software in order to try to
> >> > > communicate functional intent, hence practitioners would no doubt
> >> > > be comfortable establishing agreement about naming before moving
> >> > > on.  Nonetheless you
> >> > may
> >> > > well be identifying some form of design mediation at play too.
> >> > >
> >> > > Best,
> >> > > Huw
> >> > >
> >> > > On 13 October 2015 at 23:08, Alfredo Jornet Gil
> >> > > <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no <javascript:;>
> >> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','a.j.gil@iped.uio.no <javascript:;>');>>
> >> > wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > >> Henry, all,
> >> > >>
> >> > >>
> >> > >>
> >> > >> I am at this moment going through a video database on design
> >> > >> work in a software development company, and, observing a
> >> > >> discussion between two developers who talk about features of the
> >> > >> software that are not yet developed, but which could be, ??the
> >> > >> insight came upon me that, to
> >> > possibly
> >> > >> create anything together (and there is no other way to do it
> >> > >> since one alone has not the tools/competence to do it), they had
> >> > >> to name it. So,
> >> > the
> >> > >> developers were talking about something that does not yet exist
> >> > >> but
> >> > which
> >> > >> nonetheless needs to be referred to in order for them to even
> >> > >> begin
> >> > working
> >> > >> on it. And naming something that does not yet exits does not
> >> > >> happen immediately, because they do not have a name for it.
> >> > >> Naming it takes
> >> > time
> >> > >> and space, that is, work. So, I think the notion of "displacement"
> >> > >> that
> >> > you
> >> > >> mention, if it captures this work that talking does to the
> >> > >> imagining,
> >> > very
> >> > >> relevant to what I am witnessing in my data. And, given the
> >> > >> salience of "place making" in the thread, the term "disPLACEment"
> >> > >> may be timely
> >> > here.
> >> > >>
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Alfredo
> >> > >>
> >> > >> ________________________________
> >> > >> From: HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com <javascript:;>
> >> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','hshonerd@gmail.com <javascript:;>');>>
> >> > >> Sent: 13 October 2015 23:34
> >> > >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> >> > >> Cc: Alfredo Jornet Gil; Rolf Steier; Geoffrey C. Bowker
> >> > >> Subject: Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Reflective Discourse on XMCA
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Mike,
> >> > >> In your original post on Oct 10, you  suggested that we might
> >> > >> "...come
> >> > up
> >> > >> with a deeper understanding of the interlocking issues involved".
> >> > >> As you say, each chatter will have their own response to that.
> >> > >> Mine is that I
> >> > can
> >> > >> relate the three issues to displacement, which is arguably the
> >> > >> most important property of language as a semiotic system. It is
> >> > >> the ability
> >> > of
> >> > >> with language to refer to and construe aspects of the world
> >> > >> removed in
> >> > time
> >> > >> and place (from the here and now) and to the "make believe"
> >> > ("irrealis").
> >> > >> I was reminded of this on re-reading an article by Bruno Latour
> >> > >> on Interobjectivity that Greg Thompson posted back on Aug 18.
> >> > >> Most people,
> >> > if
> >> > >> asked, think of language primarily as something for communication.
> >> > Animals
> >> > >> communicate, but, as far as we know, do not displace. (Though It
> >> > >> might
> >> > be
> >> > >> argued that animals do a better job of communicating than
> >> > >> people.!) I
> >> > would
> >> > >> like to emphasize the importance of the temporal domain, as well
> >> > >> as the spatial, with displacement.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Henry
> >> > >>
> >> > >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> It is the dilemma of psychology to deal as a natural science with an
> >> object that creates history. Ernst Boesch
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > It is the dilemma of psychology to deal as a natural science with an
> > object that creates history. Ernst Boesch
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
>
> It is the dilemma of psychology to deal as a natural science with an
> object that creates history. Ernst Boesch
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> It is the dilemma of psychology to deal as a natural science with an
> object that creates history. Ernst Boesch
>
>
>

-- 

It is the dilemma of psychology to deal as a natural science with an
object that creates history. Ernst Boesch