[Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
mike cole
mcole@ucsd.edu
Thu Dec 1 17:24:27 PST 2016
PS-- the film has a rating of 1, the lowest I have ever seen.
Hmmmmmmm, might it have to do with the pain of the message, or is it just
bad
acting? Gotta take a look.
mike
On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 5:23 PM, mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu> wrote:
> "The measure of a man" is on Netflix, at least, Helena. I think its a
> great way to generate more discussion of neoliberalism and education that
> Margaret and Carrie's article has stirred up. I have been seeing it as the
> intensification/codification/digitalized/nanoized/ of patterns evident in
> the period dating from, say, the end of the Johnson administration. But
> quantity can convert into quality (so they say), so identifying those
> special qualities or configurations of them, would be very useful.
>
> Carrie --- Thanks for sending the suggestions for successful
> counter-examples in the form of locally implemented alternative models. It
> seems important to collect such examples in order to understand both how to
> put them together and how to sustain/diffuse them in the face of
> overwhelming pressure toward commodification
> of education.
>
> And as Alfredo wrote (but in my dialect :-)) ) , "it ain't over 'til its
> over."
>
> Helena's idea of watching a film embodying her understanding of
> neoliberalism
> seems like a way to get greater understanding of each other when
> discussing our polysemic interests.
>
> The Zuckerman article seems to speak directly into these concerns.
>
> So thanks for starting such an interesting discussion!!
>
> mike
>
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 2:44 PM, Helena Worthen <helenaworthen@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Carrie, and others on xmcc:
>>
>> I’ve been watching the term “neoliberal” float past in recent weeks. An
>> example of the ways that I’ve seen it being used is in Carrie’s most recent
>> message:
>>
>> “…. that disrupt the neoliberal model and normalized conceptions of math
>> and science, and that engage young people in the practices of the
>> disciplines in meaningful and authentic ways. Math and science in these
>> models are frameworks for engaging in and making sense of the world, and
>> students in these models are positioned as those who utilize the resources
>> and tools within these frameworks to pursue problems, questions, interests.”
>>
>> It sounds as if these frameworks - the math and science in these models -
>> are what is disrupting the neoliberal model. They enable students to make
>> sense of the world in a way that is an alternative to the neoliberal model.
>>
>> Discourse like this makes me want to suggest a film for shared viewing:
>> The Measure of a Man, directed by Stephane Brize, 2016. This film works
>> carefully and thoroughly through the whole experience of a middle-aged
>> white man who is trying to live in a country (France) that has given itself
>> away pretty entirely to neoliberalism. Each slow turn of the plot opens up
>> another dimension of how the neoliberal model is experienced by someone
>> who, under a different model, would have lived quite differently.
>> Amazingly, the film doesn’t leave out anything that I can think of. One of
>> its messages is how totalized the neoliberal model can be made in its
>> operation. There are of course sections that speak to education and
>> training.
>>
>> Has anyone else seen this film?
>>
>> Helena
>>
>>
>> Helena Worthen
>> helenaworthen@gmail.com
>> Berkeley, CA 94707
>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Dec 1, 2016, at 1:19 PM, carrie.allen@sri.com wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > Sorry to be joining this strand late, but I wanted to jump in regarding
>> other possibilities or models of learning in mathematics and science.
>> First, I want to say that our comments in this paper were not trying to
>> suggest that students in US schools are all doomed to have hollow ideas
>> about math and science and fragile identities because of it. There are
>> certainly many current models - such as in Angie Calabrese Barton’s work at
>> Michigan State University and Jessica Thompson’s and Megan Bang’s work at
>> the University of Washington that disrupt the neoliberal model and
>> normalized conceptions of math and science, and that engage young people in
>> the practices of the disciplines in meaningful and authentic ways. Math and
>> science in these models are frameworks for engaging in and making sense of
>> the world, and students in these models are positioned as those who utilize
>> the resources and tools within these frameworks to pursue problems,
>> questions, interests. Youth in these models live into more nuanced ways of
>> being mathematical or scientific, and have more sophisticated means by
>> which to imagine possible selves (and pathways). And, I’m not entirely sure
>> how to articulate it, but, in these models math and science too are
>> “living” – being shaped in use and expanded in its possibilities.
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> >
>> > CARRIE D. ALLEN, Ph.D.
>> > STEM Researcher
>> > SRI International
>> > Center for Technology in Learning
>> >
>> >
>> > (650) 859-5262
>> > Twitter: @CarrieDAllen2
>> > Skype: carrie.allen_9
>> >
>> > On 11/17/16, 7:16 PM, "xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of
>> lpscholar2@gmail.com" <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of
>> lpscholar2@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > So basically engaging in play may be foundational to learning a
>> particular disciplinary subject matter including mathematical play.
>> > This playful approach as counterpoint to formal high stakes
>> approaches. This places the scope of play (itself) at the center of our
>> inquiry.
>> > This feels intuitively to be relevant to exemplary ways of learning.
>> >
>> > Like imagination, play is not taken seriously , but may be
>> foundational or necessary for learning that is exemplary.
>> >
>> >
>> > Sent from my Windows 10 phone
>> >
>> > From: Edward Wall
>> > Sent: November 17, 2016 4:45 PM
>> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
>> >
>> > Larry
>> >
>> > There are, at least, four somewhat current possibilities (I’m
>> not sure if they should be called exemplars) as regards mathematics
>> >
>> > 1. Summerhill (and, perhaps, some other English private schools)
>> > 2. Some private schools in the US (a book was written by a teacher
>> at one. If there is any interest I’ll see if I can dig up the title).
>> > 3. The case of Louis P. Benezet in a US public school in1929
>> > 4. There is some indication that schools in Finland and the
>> Netherlands are, perhaps, a little less ‘neoliberal' (however, the evidence
>> isn’t clear)
>> >
>> > Basically in some of the above formal mathematics instruction is put
>> off until either children ask or until until fourth or fifth grade;
>> however, children engage in, you might say, mathematical play (Dewey
>> recommended something like this). This is, by the way and according to
>> some, also what a good mathematics preK program looks like. Also, this is a
>> bit as regards mathematics what the ancient Greek version of schooling for
>> the elite looked like (i.e. mathematics was put off).
>> >
>> > Ed
>> >
>> >> On Nov 17, 2016, at 3:05 PM, lpscholar2@gmail.com wrote:
>> >>
>> >> The question remains, if this neoliberal context generates
>> (hollowed-out) educational *spaces* or institutions then is it possible we
>> are able to offer exemplars of other educational places (current or
>> historical) that manifested different kinds of identity formation that were
>> not hollowed out. I speculate these exemplars would embody or incarnate
>> deeply historical and ethical orientations and practices.
>> >> If we have lost our way, are there other models (cultural imaginaries)
>> that co-generate developmental narratives that will nurture well-being?
>> >>
>> >> Exemplary models that point in a certain direction
>> >>
>> >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone
>> >>
>> >> From: Huw Lloyd
>> >> Sent: November 17, 2016 11:32 AM
>> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
>> >>
>> >> Alfredo,
>> >>
>> >> Yes, they're pathological. I am merely saying that the problems
>> inherent
>> >> in the pathology can be edifying. No, I don't think the issues can be
>> >> transcended within conventional practices. Perhaps the best that can be
>> >> achieved is that the students recognise an institutional need for "good
>> >> behaviour" and the teacher recognises an educational need for real
>> problem
>> >> solving. For "real" education, we would need something like Davydov's
>> >> system. But this is merely one view of the purpose of "education".
>> There
>> >> are many who don't seem to recognise these (and other) important
>> >> implications.
>> >>
>> >> Best,
>> >> Huw
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 17 November 2016 at 18:11, Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Huw,
>> >>>
>> >>> great comments. I like what you say, that the (institutional, social)
>> >>> process always is educational, and I agree: it develops into the
>> formation
>> >>> of habit and character. But I still wonder whether all educational
>> >>> processes lead to growth or development, or whether we rather should
>> be
>> >>> able to identify some processes as, we may call them, *pathological*
>> (or
>> >>> perhaps involutive?). There you have Bateson on double bind and
>> >>> schizophrenia, for example. Here, in the article, we have some young
>> >>> students that enter a system that generates a double bind (it was
>> Mike who
>> >>> made me aware of the connection with double bind). The question is,
>> will
>> >>> the system develop without some form of awareness *about* the double
>> bind
>> >>> that overcomes it by generating a system that does not only include
>> the
>> >>> double bind, but also its own description (thereby becoming a higher
>> order
>> >>> system, one in which participants, students and teachers, come to grow
>> >>> rather than come to stall).
>> >>>
>> >>> Alfredo
>> >>> ________________________________________
>> >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.e
>> du>
>> >>> on behalf of Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
>> >>> Sent: 17 November 2016 10:54
>> >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
>> >>>
>> >>> Alfredo,
>> >>>
>> >>> The 'zone' is always present. Whether it is recognised or not is
>> another
>> >>> matter.
>> >>> I do not think this interpretation is quite a zero sum game, because
>> there
>> >>> is always the aspect that the institutionalised process is
>> educational --
>> >>> the laws reveal themselves one way or another. So (from an Illich
>> >>> perspective) the opportunity to discover what is real remains, it just
>> >>> takes a different course.
>> >>>
>> >>> Best,
>> >>> Huw
>> >>>
>> >>> On 17 November 2016 at 07:37, Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no
>> >
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> What touches me of the article is something that perhaps relates to
>> this
>> >>>> tension that I find between David's (individualistic?) approach to
>> >>>> prolepsis in his post (David, I thought, and continue thinking, that
>> >>>> prolepsis refers to something that emerges in the relation between
>> two,
>> >>> not
>> >>>> something that either is present or absent within a person), and
>> >>> Phillip's
>> >>>> view of young people figuring out what life is all about just as all
>> we
>> >>> do.
>> >>>> And so here (and in any neoliberal school context) we have
>> wonderfully
>> >>>> beautiful young people more or less interested in science or in
>> maths,
>> >>> but
>> >>>> all eager to live a life and evolve as best as they can (whatever
>> that
>> >>> best
>> >>>> may mean for each one). And then you see how the history and context
>> that
>> >>>> they come into gives them everything they need to develop motives and
>> >>>> goals; to then make sure that the majority of them won't make it so
>> that
>> >>>> only a few privileged (or in the case of Margaret's paper none,
>> according
>> >>>> to the authors) succeed. And then what remains is not just a
>> hollowed-out
>> >>>> science and math identity, but also a hollowed-out soul that had
>> illusion
>> >>>> and now just doesn't. Not only a failure to provide opportunities to
>> >>>> learners to become anything(one) good about science and math, but
>> also a
>> >>>> robbing of other possible paths of development that may had grown in
>> >>> people
>> >>>> if they had been hanging out with some other better company. Do we
>> have a
>> >>>> term to refer to the opposite of a zone of proximal development? Not
>> just
>> >>>> the absence of it, but the strangling of it.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Alfredo
>> >>>> ________________________________________
>> >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.e
>> du>
>> >>>> on behalf of White, Phillip <Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu>
>> >>>> Sent: 17 November 2016 06:29
>> >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>> >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
>> >>>>
>> >>>> David, the examples on page 193, students 1, 2 & 3 - aren't these
>> >>> examples
>> >>>> of proleptic thought - especially for student 2, who looks at where
>> she
>> >>> is
>> >>>> "I have my own standards", a statement of the present, then a looking
>> >>> back
>> >>>> at what has happened, "I like to get straight A's". and then
>> setting a
>> >>>> target for the future, "help for like to get in college and stuff, so
>> >>> yeah,
>> >>>> I participate in a lot of stuff." ending with a reassertion of
>> present
>> >>>> activities to attain future goals.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> and there is a preponderance of the use of "I", rather than "you".
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> i'd give the young people for credit than a myopia focused merely on
>> >>> their
>> >>>> age: the business of young people is figuring out what life is all
>> about
>> >>>> and how to participate, just as adults and infants and old people
>> like me
>> >>>> do.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> i'm not convinced that your arguments are supported by the data in
>> this
>> >>>> Eisenhard / Allen paper.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> phillip
>> >>>>
>> >>>> ________________________________
>> >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.e
>> du>
>> >>>> on behalf of David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
>> >>>> Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 1:24:35 PM
>> >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>> >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Actually, Henry, I was attacking the idea that tense is an empty
>> mental
>> >>>> space. I guess I am a little like Larry: when we discuss articles I
>> have
>> >>> a
>> >>>> strong tendency to try to make them relevant to what I am doing
>> rather
>> >>> than
>> >>>> to drop what I am doing and go and discuss what everybody else is
>> >>>> discussing. So what I am doing right now is trying to make sense of
>> some
>> >>>> story-telling data where the adults are all over the map on tenses,
>> and
>> >>> the
>> >>>> kids seem to stick to one tense only. The adults are slipping in and
>> out
>> >>> of
>> >>>> mental spaces. The kids are telling stories.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I think the relevance to the article is this: When you look at the
>> way
>> >>> the
>> >>>> article frames institutional practices and figured worlds, we see
>> >>>> prolepsis--a preoccupation with the future. But when we look at what
>> the
>> >>>> kids are doing and saying it is very much in the moment. Is this
>> simply
>> >>>> because mental processes like "like" and "want" tend to take simple
>> >>> present
>> >>>> (because they are less defined than material processes)? Or is it
>> because
>> >>>> while the institutions have the near future firmly in view and the
>> >>> figured
>> >>>> worlds have irrealis in view, the business of young people is youth?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Vygotsky points out that the question the interviewer asks is very
>> much a
>> >>>> part of the data. For example, if you ask a question using "you" you
>> >>> often
>> >>>> get "you" in reply, even if you design your question to get "I".
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Q: Why do you want to kill yourself?
>> >>>> A: The same reason everybody wants to kill themselves. You want to
>> find
>> >>> out
>> >>>> if anybody really cares.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> To take another example that is probably more relevant to readers:
>> both
>> >>> the
>> >>>> Brexit vote and the American elections are clear examples of
>> statistical
>> >>>> unreliability in that if you tried to repeat the election the morning
>> >>> after
>> >>>> you would probably get an utterly different result. Take all of those
>> >>> black
>> >>>> voters and the real working class voters who voted Obama but
>> couldn't be
>> >>>> bothered for Hillary (not the imaginary "white working class voters"
>> who
>> >>>> work in imaginary industries in Iowa, rural Pennsylvania, North
>> Carolina
>> >>>> and Florida). They might well have behaved rather differently
>> knowing how
>> >>>> imminent the neo-Confederacy really was. This is usually presented as
>> >>>> "buyer's remorse," but it's more than that; the event itself would be
>> >>> part
>> >>>> of its replication. This is something that statistical models that
>> use
>> >>>> standard error of the mean cannot build in (they work on the
>> impossible
>> >>>> idea that you can repeat an event ten or twenty thousand times
>> without
>> >>> any
>> >>>> memory at all).
>> >>>>
>> >>>> In the same way, when you interview a group of students together you
>> >>> notice
>> >>>> that they tend to model answers on each other rather than on your
>> >>> question,
>> >>>> and when you interview them separately, you notice that YOU tend to
>> >>> change
>> >>>> your question according to the previous answer you received. On the
>> one
>> >>>> hand, life is not easily distracted by its own future: it is too
>> wholly
>> >>>> there in each moment of existence. On the other hand, each of these
>> >>> moments
>> >>>> includes the previous one, and therefore all the previous ones, in
>> >>> itself.
>> >>>> The past weighs like a nightmare on the brain of the living, and
>> objects
>> >>> in
>> >>>> the rear view mirror are always closer than they appear.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> David Kellogg
>> >>>> Macquarie University
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 10:23 AM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com>
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> David,
>> >>>>> I was puzzled that you found Langacker to be relevant to this topic,
>> >>> but
>> >>>>> the last paragraph of your post makes an important connection
>> between
>> >>>>> Langacker and Vygotsky: Both see speech acts as staged…interactants
>> >>> view
>> >>>>> themselves as “on stage”. I think the book by Vera and Reuben is
>> >>> largely
>> >>>>> about how differently math is “staged” by working mathematicians as
>> >>>>> contrasted with doing math in school. I think it would be
>> interesting
>> >>> to
>> >>>>> analyze how natural language and the language of math scaffold each
>> >>> other
>> >>>>> in both contexts. Word problems have been a well-used way of
>> connecting
>> >>>> the
>> >>>>> two languages; stats and graphs are commonly used in the media to
>> >>> clarify
>> >>>>> and elaborate text in articles on economics, presidential elections,
>> >>> and
>> >>>>> what not.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I would love to read your “unpublishable” on Langacker and Halliday
>> on
>> >>>>> tense. What I recall from reading Langacker is his interest in
>> “basic
>> >>>>> domains”, starting with the temporal and spatial. Somewhere he has
>> said
>> >>>>> that he believes that the temporal domain is the more basic. As
>> you’d
>> >>>>> guess, the spatial domain is especially useful in elucidating what
>> he
>> >>>> calls
>> >>>>> “things” (nouns are conceptually about things); the temporal domain
>> is
>> >>>> more
>> >>>>> closely connected to what he calls “processes” wherein he analyzes
>> >>> tense
>> >>>>> and aspect.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I think Langacker would agree that his work in cognitive grammar
>> has a
>> >>>>> long way to go in contributing to the idea that grammar is usage
>> based,
>> >>>>> rather than some autonomous module, but he is working on it. I think
>> >>>> there
>> >>>>> is a potential for connecting Halliday and Langacker, though I’m not
>> >>>> smart
>> >>>>> enough to convince you of that evidently. Somehow the connection
>> must
>> >>> be
>> >>>>> made by staying close to the data, “thick description” ethnographers
>> >>> are
>> >>>>> fond of saying. I think the article by Carrie and Margaret is
>> raising
>> >>>> this
>> >>>>> issue.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> The “hollowed out” math curriculum in the article resonates with the
>> >>>>> “potholes” you say teachers must watch out for. Some may say that
>> the
>> >>>>> hollowing out is typical even of “elite” K-12 schools. Some may say
>> >>> that
>> >>>>> this is deliberate. I would say my own experience of math in school
>> was
>> >>>>> often hollowed out, which I sensed, but didn’t discover until I got
>> to
>> >>>> the
>> >>>>> “pure math” department in the mid 60s at Univ of Texas at Austin
>> under
>> >>>> the
>> >>>>> leadership of Robert Lee Moore. He is a main protagonist in Chapter
>> 8
>> >>> of
>> >>>>> Vera’s and Reuben’s book.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I’ll end it there.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Henry
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> On Nov 15, 2016, at 1:38 PM, David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Henry:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> I just wrote another unpublishable comparing how Langacker and
>> >>>>>> Halliday treat tense, and I'm starting to come to grips with the
>> >>>>> different
>> >>>>>> theory of experience underlying the two grammars. Langacker somehow
>> >>>> sees
>> >>>>> it
>> >>>>>> as creating empty mental space (and aspect as creating space within
>> >>>>> space).
>> >>>>>> Halliday sees tense as a way of abstracting concrete doings and
>> >>>>> happenings.
>> >>>>>> Halliday's tense system is not spatial at all but temporal: it's
>> >>>>> temporally
>> >>>>>> deictic and then temporally recursive: a kind of time machine that
>> >>>>>> simultaneously transports and orients the speaker either
>> >>> proleptically
>> >>>> or
>> >>>>>> retroleptically. So for example if I say to you that this article
>> we
>> >>>> are
>> >>>>>> discussing is going to have been being discussed for two or three
>> >>> weeks
>> >>>>>> now, then "is going" is a kind of time machine that takes you into
>> >>> the
>> >>>>>> future, from which "You are Here" vantage point the article has
>> been
>> >>>>> (past)
>> >>>>>> being discussed (present). Present in the past in the future.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> And that got me thinking about theory and practice. It seems to me
>> >>> that
>> >>>>> the
>> >>>>>> they are related, but simultaneously and not sequentially. That is,
>> >>> the
>> >>>>>> output of one is not the input of the other: they are simply more
>> and
>> >>>>> less
>> >>>>>> abstract ways of looking at one and the same thing. So for example
>> in
>> >>>>> this
>> >>>>>> article the tasks of theory and practice are one and the same: the
>> >>> task
>> >>>>> of
>> >>>>>> theory is really to define as precisely as possible the domain, the
>> >>>>> scope,
>> >>>>>> the range of the inquiry into authoring math and science identities
>> >>> and
>> >>>>> the
>> >>>>>> task of practice is to ask what exactly you want to do in this
>> >>>>>> domain/scope/range--to try to understand how they are hollowed out
>> a
>> >>>>> little
>> >>>>>> better so that maybe teachers like you and me can help fill the
>> damn
>> >>>>>> potholes in a little. You can't really do the one without doing the
>> >>>>> other:
>> >>>>>> trying to decide the terrain under study without deciding some task
>> >>>> that
>> >>>>>> you want to do there is like imagining tense as empty mental space
>> >>> and
>> >>>>> not
>> >>>>>> as some actual, concrete doing or happening. Conversely, the way
>> you
>> >>>> dig
>> >>>>>> the hole depends very much on how big and where you want it.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> So there are three kinds of mental spaces in the first part of the
>> >>>>> article:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> a) institutional arrangements (e.g. "priority improvement plans",
>> >>>>>> career-academy/comprehensive school status STEM tracks, AP classes)
>> >>>>>> b) figured worlds (e.g. 'good students', and 'don't cares', or what
>> >>>>> Eckhart
>> >>>>>> and McConnell-Ginet called 'jocks', 'nerds', 'burnouts',
>> >>>> 'gangbangers')
>> >>>>>> c) authored identities (i.e. what kids say about themselves and
>> what
>> >>>> they
>> >>>>>> think about themselves)
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Now, I think it's possible to make this distinction--but they are
>> >>>>> probably
>> >>>>>> better understood not as mental spaces (in which case they really
>> do
>> >>>>>> overlap) but rather as doings (or, as is my wont, sayings).
>> Different
>> >>>>>> people are saying different things: a) is mostly the sayings of the
>> >>>>> school
>> >>>>>> boards and administrators, b) is mostly the sayings of teachers and
>> >>>>> groups
>> >>>>>> of kids, and c) is mostly the sayings of individual students. It's
>> >>>> always
>> >>>>>> tempting for a theory to focus on c), because that's where all the
>> >>> data
>> >>>>> is
>> >>>>>> and it's tempting for practice too, because if you are against what
>> >>> is
>> >>>>>> happening in a) and in b), that's where the most likely point of
>> >>>>>> intervention is.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> "But the data does suggest that the "figured worlds" are figured by
>> >>>>>> authored identities--not by institutional arrangements. Is that
>> just
>> >>> an
>> >>>>>> artefact of the warm empathy of the authors for the words (although
>> >>>> maybe
>> >>>>>> not the exact wordings) of their subjects, or is it real grounds
>> for
>> >>>>> hope?
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Marx says (beginning of the 18th Brumaire): "*Men make* their own
>> >>>>> *history*,
>> >>>>>> *but they* do *not make* it as *they* please; *they* do *not make*
>> it
>> >>>>>> under self-selected circumstances, *but* under circumstances
>> existing
>> >>>>>> already, given and transmitted from the *past*. The tradition of
>> all
>> >>>> dead
>> >>>>>> generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living."
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> It's a good theory, i.e. at once a truth and a tragedy. And it's a
>> >>>>>> theory treats time as time and not as an empty stage.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> David Kellogg
>> >>>>>> Macquarie University
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 9:39 AM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com
>> >
>> >>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> All,
>> >>>>>>> I have read only part of Margaret’s and Carrie’s article, but I
>> >>> wanted
>> >>>>> to
>> >>>>>>> jump in with a reference to a book by Vygotskian Vera John-Steiner
>> >>> and
>> >>>>> her
>> >>>>>>> mathematician husband Reuben Hersh: Loving and Hating Mathematics:
>> >>>>>>> Challenging the Mathematical Life. Huw’s point (v) which refers to
>> >>>>>>> “identities of independence and finding out sustainable within
>> these
>> >>>>>>> settings (school math classes) spent high school. Vera’s and
>> >>> Reuben’s
>> >>>>> book
>> >>>>>>> contrasts what it’s like to work and think like a real (working)
>> >>>>>>> mathematician (what I think Huw is talking about) and what we call
>> >>>>>>> mathematics in the classroom. Chapter 8 of the book "The Teaching
>> of
>> >>>>>>> Mathematics: Fierce or Friendly?” is interesting reading and could
>> >>> be
>> >>>>>>> relevant to this discussion.
>> >>>>>>> Henry
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> On Nov 13, 2016, at 2:47 PM, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com
>> >
>> >>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Dear Margaret
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> My reading has not been a particularly careful one, so I leave it
>> >>> to
>> >>>>>>>> yourselves to judge the usefulness of these points.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> i) Whether arguments can be made (for or against) a nebulous term
>> >>>>>>>> (neoliberalism) with its political associations, by arguments
>> about
>> >>>>>>>> identity that are themselves not deliberately political.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> ii) Whether it is better not to focus essentially on the place of
>> >>>>>>> identity.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> iii) Whether it is worthwhile contrasting the role/identity of
>> >>> "model
>> >>>>>>>> student" with "identities" that anyone excelling at STEM subjects
>> >>>> would
>> >>>>>>>> relate to. On this, I would point to the importance with
>> >>> identifying
>> >>>>>>> with
>> >>>>>>>> appreciations for "awareness of not knowing" and "eagerness to
>> find
>> >>>>> out"
>> >>>>>>>> (which also entails learning about what it means to know).
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> iv) Whether you detect that to the degree that an identity is
>> >>>>>>> foregrounded
>> >>>>>>>> in the actual practice of STEM work (rather than as background
>> >>> social
>> >>>>>>>> appeasement), it is being faked? That is, someone is playing at
>> the
>> >>>>> role
>> >>>>>>>> rather than actually committing themselves to finding out about
>> >>>>> unknowns.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> v) Whether, in fact, there is actually a "tiered" or varied set
>> of
>> >>>>>>>> acceptable "identities" within the settings you explored, such
>> that
>> >>>>>>>> identities of independence and finding out are sustainable within
>> >>>> these
>> >>>>>>>> settings, possibly representing a necessary fudge to deal with
>> the
>> >>>>>>>> requirements placed upon the institutions.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Best,
>> >>>>>>>> Huw
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> On 12 November 2016 at 20:30, Margaret A Eisenhart <
>> >>>>>>>> margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Hello Everyone,
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Carrie and I are newcomers to this list, and we thank you for
>> the
>> >>>>>>>>> opportunity to engage with you about our article, “Hollowed
>> Out.”
>> >>>> We
>> >>>>>>> also
>> >>>>>>>>> hope for your patience as we learn to participate in the stream
>> of
>> >>>>>>>>> thinking here!
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Given the comments so far, we are intrigued by others’ ideas
>> about
>> >>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>> link between our theory and our data. On this topic, we would
>> >>> like
>> >>>> to
>> >>>>>>>>> make clear that we did not intend to suggest that the students
>> >>> were
>> >>>>>>> making
>> >>>>>>>>> sense of their lives in the same way that we interpreted them
>> >>>> through
>> >>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>> lens of our theory. Our claim is that opportunities and figured
>> >>>> worlds
>> >>>>>>> are
>> >>>>>>>>> resources for identity and that the students' words to us
>> >>> reflected
>> >>>>>>>>> perspectives consistent with neoliberalism, with some pretty
>> >>> serious
>> >>>>>>>>> implications. Like Phillip White, we are interested in what
>> >>> theories
>> >>>>>>>>> others would use to explain the data we presented.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Like Mike Cole, we are also intrigued by the prospect of
>> >>> “exemplars”
>> >>>>> we
>> >>>>>>>>> might turn to.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> We look forward to hearing your thoughts.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Margaret Eisenhart
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> On 11/11/16, 11:35 AM, "lpscholar2@gmail.com" <
>> >>> lpscholar2@gmail.com
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> A resumption in exploring the meaning and sense (preferably
>> sens
>> >>> as
>> >>>>>>> this
>> >>>>>>>>>> term draws attention to movement and direction within meaning
>> and
>> >>>>>>> sense)
>> >>>>>>>>>> of this month’s article.
>> >>>>>>>>>> The paper begins with the title and the image of (hollowed-out)
>> >>>>> meaning
>> >>>>>>>>>> and sense that is impoverished and holds few resources for
>> >>>>> developing a
>> >>>>>>>>>> deeper sens of identity.
>> >>>>>>>>>> The article concludes with the implication that the work of
>> >>> social
>> >>>>>>>>>> justice within educational institutions is not about improving
>> >>>>>>>>>> educational outcome in neoliberal terms; the implications of
>> the
>> >>>>> study
>> >>>>>>>>>> are about *reorganizing* the identities – particulary
>> >>>>>>>>>> identities-with-standind that young people are *exposed* to,
>> can
>> >>>>>>>>>> articulate, and can act on (in school and beyond).
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> I would say this is taking an ethical stand?.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> I will now turn to page 189 and the section
>> (identity-in-context)
>> >>>> to
>> >>>>>>>>>> amplify the notion of (cultural imaginary) and (figured
>> worlds).
>> >>>>>>>>>> This imaginary being the site or location of history-in-person.
>> >>>> That
>> >>>>> is
>> >>>>>>>>>> identity is a form of legacy (or *text*) ABOUT the kind of
>> person
>> >>>> one
>> >>>>>>> is
>> >>>>>>>>>> or has become in responding to (external) circumstances.
>> >>>>>>>>>> These external circumstances are EXPERIENCED primarily in the
>> >>>>>>>>>> organization of local practices and cultural imaginaries
>> (figured
>> >>>>>>> worlds)
>> >>>>>>>>>> that circulate and *give meaning* (and sens) to local practices
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> Figured worlds are interpreted following Holland as socially
>> and
>> >>>>>>>>>> culturally *realms of interpretation* and certain players are
>> >>>>>>> recognized
>> >>>>>>>>>> as (exemplars).
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> As such cultural, social, historical, dialogical psychological
>> >>>>>>>>>> (imaginaries) are handmaidens of the imaginal *giving meaning*
>> to
>> >>>>>>> *what*
>> >>>>>>>>>> goes on in the directions we take together.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> Two key terms i highlight are (exemplars) and (direction) we
>> >>> take.
>> >>>>>>>>>> The realm of the ethical turn
>> >>>>>>>>>> What are the markers and signposts emerging in the deeper
>> ethical
>> >>>>> turn
>> >>>>>>>>>> that offers more than a hollowed-out answer.
>> >>>>>>>>>> Are there any *ghost* stories of exemplars we can turn to as
>> well
>> >>>> as
>> >>>>>>>>>> living exemplars? By ghosts i mean ancestors who continue as
>> >>>> beacons
>> >>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>>>> hope exemplifying *who* we are.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> My way into exploring the impoverished narratives of the
>> >>> neoliberal
>> >>>>>>>>>> imaginary and reawakening exemplary ancestors or ghosts from
>> >>> their
>> >>>>>>>>>> slumber to help guide us through these multiple imaginaries
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> Sent from my Windows 10 phone
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> From: mike cole
>> >>>>>>>>>> Sent: November 9, 2016 3:04 PM
>> >>>>>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>> >>>>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion
>> >>> Re-started
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> Alfredo--
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> for any who missed the initial article sent out, you might send
>> >>>> them
>> >>>>>>>>>> here:
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> http://lchc.ucsd.edu/mca/
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> I am meeting shortly with Bruce. A list of improvements to web
>> >>> site
>> >>>>>>>>>> welcome, although not clear how long they will take to
>> implement.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> mike
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 2:38 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil <
>> >>>>>>> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Dear all,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> last week I announced MCA's 3rd Issue article for discussion:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> "Hollowed Out: Meaning and Authoring of High School Math and
>> >>>> Science
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Identities in the Context of Neoliberal Reform," by Margaret
>> >>>>> Eisenhart
>> >>>>>>>>>>> and
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Carrie Allen.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> The article is open access and will continue to be so during
>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>> discussion time at this link.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks to everyone who begun the discussion early after I
>> shared
>> >>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>> link
>> >>>>>>>>>>> last week, and sorry that we sort of brought the discussion
>> to a
>> >>>>> halt
>> >>>>>>>>>>> until
>> >>>>>>>>>>> the authors were ready to discuss. I have now sent Margaret
>> and
>> >>>>> Carrie
>> >>>>>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>> posts that were produced then so that they could catch up,
>> but I
>> >>>>> also
>> >>>>>>>>>>> invited them to feel free to move on an introduce themselves
>> as
>> >>>> soon
>> >>>>>>> as
>> >>>>>>>>>>> they ??wanted.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> It is not without some doubts that one introduces a discussion
>> >>> of
>> >>>> an
>> >>>>>>>>>>> article in a moment that some US media have called as "An
>> >>> American
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Tragedy"
>> >>>>>>>>>>> and other international editorials are describing as "a dark
>> day
>> >>>> for
>> >>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>> world." But I believe that the paper may indeed offer some
>> >>> grounds
>> >>>>> for
>> >>>>>>>>>>> discuss important issues that are at stake in everyone's home
>> >>> now,
>> >>>>> as
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Mike
>> >>>>>>>>>>> recently describes in a touching post on the "local state of
>> >>> mind"
>> >>>>> and
>> >>>>>>>>>>> that
>> >>>>>>>>>>> have to do with identity and its connection to a neoliberal
>> >>>>>>>>>>> organisation of
>> >>>>>>>>>>> the economy. It is not difficult to link neoliberalism to
>> >>> Trump's
>> >>>>>>>>>>> phenomenon and how it pervades very intimate aspects of
>> everyday
>> >>>>> life.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> If this was not enough, I think the authors' background on
>> >>> women's
>> >>>>>>>>>>> scholar
>> >>>>>>>>>>> and professional careers in science is totally relevant to the
>> >>>>>>>>>>> discussions
>> >>>>>>>>>>> on gendered discourse we've been having. Now without halts, I
>> >>> hope
>> >>>>>>> this
>> >>>>>>>>>>> thread gives joys and wisdom to all.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Alfredo
>> >>>>>>>>>>> ________________________________________
>> >>>>>>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
>> >>>> <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
>> >>>>>>> edu>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Sent: 02 November 2016 01:48
>> >>>>>>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Mike and everyone! I am sure Margaret (and many of
>> those
>> >>>>> still
>> >>>>>>>>>>> reading) will be happy to be able to catch up when she joins
>> us
>> >>>> next
>> >>>>>>>>>>> week!
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Alfredo
>> >>>>>>>>>>> ________________________________________
>> >>>>>>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
>> >>>> <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
>> >>>>>>> edu>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Sent: 02 November 2016 01:32
>> >>>>>>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Gentlemen -- I believe Fernando told us that Margaret would be
>> >>>>>>>>>>> able to join this discussion next week. Just a quick glance at
>> >>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>> discussion so far indicates that there is a lot there to wade
>> >>> into
>> >>>>>>>>>>> before she has had a word.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> I am only part way through the article, expecting to have
>> until
>> >>>> next
>> >>>>>>>>>>> week
>> >>>>>>>>>>> to think about it.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> May I suggest your forbearance while this slow-poke tries to
>> >>> catch
>> >>>>> up!
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> mike
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 3:38 PM, White, Phillip
>> >>>>>>>>>>> <Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> David & Larry, everyone else ...
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> by way of introduction, Margaret and Carrie point out that
>> the
>> >>>> data
>> >>>>>>> in
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> this paper emerged through a three year study - which was the
>> >>>>>>>>>>> processes
>> >>>>>>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> how students of color, interested in STEM, responded to the
>> >>>>>>> externally
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> imposed neoliberal requirements. they framed their study
>> using
>> >>>>>>>>>>> theories
>> >>>>>>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> social practices on how identity developed in context.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> David, you reject the theories. or so i understand your
>> >>>> position.
>> >>>>> as
>> >>>>>>>>>>> you
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> write: It's that the theory
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> contradicts my own personal theories.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> are you also rejecting the data as well? it seems as if you
>> >>> are
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> suggesting this when you write: The authors find this point
>> (in
>> >>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>> case
>> >>>>>>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Lorena) somewhere between the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> beginning of the tenth and the end of the eleventh grade,
>> but I
>> >>>>> think
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> that's just because it's where they are looking.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> you reject the narrative of Lorena on the grounds that it
>> could
>> >>>> be
>> >>>>>>>>>>> traced
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> back to infancy.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> do you also reject the identical narrative found in the adult
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> practitioners within the context of the high schools? that
>> >>> this
>> >>>>>>>>>>> narrative
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> is not one of a contemporary neoliberal practice but rather
>> >>> could
>> >>>>> be
>> >>>>>>>>>>> traced
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> back to, say, the mid 1600's new england colonies, in
>> >>> particular
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> massachusettes, where the practices of public american
>> >>> education
>> >>>>>>>>>>> began?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> to explain the data that emerged from the Eisenhart/Allen
>> >>> study,
>> >>>>> what
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> theories would you have used?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> phillip
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> ________________________________
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
>> >>>>>>>>>>> <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 7:03 AM
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> To: David Kellogg; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Margaret and Carrie,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for this wonderful paper that explains the shallow
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> *hollowed-out* way of forming identity as a form of meaning
>> and
>> >>>>>>>>>>> sense. I
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> will add the French word *sens* which always includes
>> >>> *direction*
>> >>>>>>>>>>> within
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> meaning and sense.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> David, your response that what our theory makes sens of
>> depends
>> >>>> on
>> >>>>>>>>>>> where
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> we are looking makes sens to me.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> You put in question the moment when the interpersonal (you
>> and
>> >>>> me)
>> >>>>>>>>>>> way of
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> authoring sens *shifts* or turns to cultural and historical
>> >>> ways
>> >>>> of
>> >>>>>>>>>>> being
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> immersed in sens. The article refers to the
>> >>>> *historical-in-person*.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> My further comment, where I am looking) is in the description
>> >>> of
>> >>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> sociocultural as a response to *externally changing
>> >>>> circumstances*
>> >>>>>>> as
>> >>>>>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> process of *learning as becoming* (see page 190).
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> The article says:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> This process is what Lave and Wenger (1991) and other
>> >>>> Sociocultural
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> researchers have referred to as *learning as becoming,* that
>> >>> is,
>> >>>>>>>>>>> learning
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> that occurs as one becomes a certain kind of person in a
>> >>>> particular
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> context. Identities conceived in this way are not stable or
>> >>>> fixed.
>> >>>>>>> As
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> *external circumstances* affecting a person change, so too
>> may
>> >>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> identities that are produced *in response*. (Holland &
>> Skinner,
>> >>>>>>> 1997).
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> In this version of *history-in-person* the identity processes
>> >>>> that
>> >>>>>>>>>>> start
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> the process moving in a neoliberal *direction* are *external*
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> circumstances. I am not questioning this version of the
>> >>>> importance
>> >>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> external but do question if looking primarily or primordially
>> >>> to
>> >>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> external circumstances as central if we are not leaving a gap
>> >>> in
>> >>>>> our
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> notions of *sens*.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> If by looking or highlighting or illuminating the *external*
>> >>> and
>> >>>>>>>>>>> highly
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> visible acts of the actual we are leaving a gap in
>> actual*ity.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> A gap in *sens*.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> To be continued by others...
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my Windows 10 phone
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> From: David Kellogg
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: October 31, 2016 2:15 PM
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I was turning Mike's request--for a short explanation of the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Halliday/Vygotsky interface--over in my mind for a few days,
>> >>>> unsure
>> >>>>>>>>>>> where
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> to start. I usually decide these difficult "where to start"
>> >>>>> questions
>> >>>>>>>>>>> in
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> the easiest possible way, with whatever I happen to be
>> working
>> >>>> on.
>> >>>>> In
>> >>>>>>>>>>> this
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> case it's the origins of language in a one year old, a moment
>> >>>> which
>> >>>>>>> is
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> almost as mysterious to me as the origins of life or the Big
>> >>>> Bang.
>> >>>>>>> But
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> perhaps for that very reason it's not a good place to start
>> >>> (the
>> >>>>> Big
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Bang
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> always seemed to me to jump the gun a bit, not to mention the
>> >>>>> origins
>> >>>>>>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> life).
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Let me start with the "Hollowed Out" paper Alfredo just
>> >>>>> thoughtfully
>> >>>>>>>>>>> sent
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> around instead. My first impression is that this paper
>> leaves a
>> >>>>>>> really
>> >>>>>>>>>>> big
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> gap between the data and the conclusions, and that this gap
>> is
>> >>>>>>> largely
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> filled by theory. Here are some examples of what I mean:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> a) "Whereas 'subject position' is given by society,
>> >>> 'identity'
>> >>>>> is
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> self-authored, although it must be recognized by others to be
>> >>>>>>>>>>> sustained."
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> (p. 189)
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> b) "It is notable that this construction of a good student,
>> >>>> though
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> familiar, does not make any reference to personal interest,
>> >>>>>>>>>>> excitement,
>> >>>>>>>>>>> or
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> engagement in the topics or content-related activities."
>> (193)
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> c) "When students' statements such as 'I get it', 'I'm
>> >>>> confident',
>> >>>>>>>>>>> 'I'm
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> good at this', and 'I can pull this off' are interpreted in
>> >>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>> context
>> >>>>>>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> the figured world of math or science at the two schools,
>> their
>> >>>>>>>>>>> statements
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> index more than a grade. They reference a meaning system for
>> >>>> being
>> >>>>>>>>>>> good
>> >>>>>>>>>>> in
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> math or science that includes the actor identity
>> >>> characteristics
>> >>>> of
>> >>>>>>>>>>> being
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> able to grasp the subject matter easily, do the work quickly,
>> >>> do
>> >>>> it
>> >>>>>>>>>>> without
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> help from others, do it faster than others, and get an A."
>> >>> (193)
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> In each case, we are told to believe in a theory: "given by
>> >>>>> society",
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> "self-authored", "does not make any reference", "the context
>> of
>> >>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>> figured
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> world". It's not just that in each case the theory seems to
>> go
>> >>>>>>> against
>> >>>>>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> data (although it certainly does in places, such as Lowena's
>> >>>> views
>> >>>>> as
>> >>>>>>>>>>> a
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> tenth grader). I can always live with a theory that
>> contradicts
>> >>>> my
>> >>>>>>>>>>> data:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> that's what being a rationalist is all about. It's that the
>> >>>> theory
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> contradicts my own personal theories.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I don't believe that identity is self authored, and I also
>> >>> don't
>> >>>>>>>>>>> believe
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> that subject position is given by society as a whole, I think
>> >>> the
>> >>>>>>> word
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> "good" does include personal interest, excitement, and
>> >>> engagement
>> >>>>> as
>> >>>>>>>>>>> much
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> as it includes being able to grasp the subject matter easily,
>> >>> do
>> >>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>> work
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> quickly, do it without help from others, do it faster than
>> >>> others
>> >>>>> and
>> >>>>>>>>>>> get
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> an A. To me anyway, the key word in the data given in c) is
>> >>>>> actually
>> >>>>>>>>>>> "I"
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> and not "it" or "this": the students think they are talking
>> >>>> about,
>> >>>>>>> and
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> therefore probably are actually talking about, a relation
>> >>> between
>> >>>>>>>>>>> their
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> inner states and the activity at hand or between the
>> activity
>> >>> at
>> >>>>>>> hand
>> >>>>>>>>>>> and
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> the result they get; they are not invoking the figured world
>> of
>> >>>>>>>>>>> neoliberal
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> results and prospects.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> But never mind my own theories. Any gap is, after all, a good
>> >>>>>>>>>>> opportunity
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> for theory building. The authors are raising a key issue in
>> >>> both
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Vygotsky
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> and Halliday: when does an interpersonal relation become a
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> historico-cultural one? That is, when does that 'me" and
>> "you"
>> >>>>>>>>>>> relationship
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> in which I really do have the power to author my identity (I
>> >>> can
>> >>>>> make
>> >>>>>>>>>>> up
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> any name I want and, within limits, invent my own history,
>> >>>>>>>>>>> particularly
>> >>>>>>>>>>> if
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I am a backpacker) give way to a job, an address, a number
>> and
>> >>> a
>> >>>>>>> class
>> >>>>>>>>>>> over
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> which I have very little power at all? When does the
>> >>>> interpersonal
>> >>>>>>>>>>> somehow
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> become an alien ideational "identity" that confronts me like
>> a
>> >>>>>>> strange
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> ghost when I look in the mirror?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> The authors find this point (in the case of Lorena) somewhere
>> >>>>> between
>> >>>>>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> beginning of the tenth and the end of the eleventh grade,
>> but I
>> >>>>> think
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> that's just because it's where they are looking. We can
>> >>> probably
>> >>>>> find
>> >>>>>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> roots of this distinction (between the interpersonal and the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> historico-cultural) as far back as we like, right back to
>> >>>>> (Vygotsky)
>> >>>>>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> moment when the child gives up the "self-authored" language
>> at
>> >>>> one
>> >>>>>>> and
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> takes on the language recognized by others and (Halliday) the
>> >>>>> moment
>> >>>>>>>>>>> when
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> the child distinguishes between Attributive identifying
>> clauses
>> >>>>> ("I'm
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> confident", "I'm good at this"), material processes ("I can
>> >>> pull
>> >>>>> this
>> >>>>>>>>>>> off")
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> and mental ones ("I get it").
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> (To be continued...but not necessarily by me!)
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> David Kellogg
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Macquarie University
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil
>> >>>>>>>>>>> <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear xmca'ers,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I am excited to announce the next article for discussion,
>> >>> which
>> >>>> is
>> >>>>>>>>>>> now
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> available open access at the T&F MCA pages<
>> >>>> http://www.tandfonline
>> >>>>> .
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1188962>.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> After a really interesting discussion on Zaza's colourful
>> >>> paper
>> >>>>>>>>>>> (which
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> still goes on developed into a discussion on micro- and
>> >>>>>>>>>>> ontogenesis),
>> >>>>>>>>>>> we
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> will from next week be looking at an article by Margaret
>> >>>> Eisenhart
>> >>>>>>>>>>> and
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Carrie Allen from the special issue on "Reimagining Science
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Education
>> >>>>>>>>>>> in
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> the Neoliberal Global Context". I think the article, as the
>> >>>> whole
>> >>>>>>>>>>> issue,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> offers a very neat example of research trying to tie
>> together
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> cultural/economical? and developmental aspects (of identity
>> in
>> >>>>> this
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> case).
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Margaret has kindly accepted to join the discussion ?after
>> US
>> >>>>>>>>>>> elections
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> (which will surely keep the attention of many of us busy).
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Meanwhile, I
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> share the link<http://www.tandfonline.
>> >>>>> com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039
>> >>>>>>>>> .
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach
>> it
>> >>> as
>> >>>>>>>>>>> PDF.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ??Good read!
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Alfredo
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
More information about the xmca-l
mailing list