From lpscholar2@gmail.com Tue Nov 1 06:03:49 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2016 06:03:49 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> 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 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 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 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach it as PDF. > ??Good read! > > > Alfredo > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Tue Nov 1 06:35:24 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2016 06:35:24 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion In-Reply-To: <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <58189a25.9512620a.bf340.69a9@mx.google.com> I will add another perspective to *external circumstances* through the metaphor of the two sides of a coin and notions of *reversability* that put in question the relation of internal and external sens. This example comes from Merleau-Ponty through David Morris. To begin we must note something important about the ontological structure of reversability. The seer and the seen are not the reverse of one another like two opposite sides of a coin. In the coin, each side, heads or tails, is identified by information it carries on its own, on its own side of the coin, (even if each side always comes fused with an opposite flip side, even if the information on each side shares a common material substratum. In the coin, then, the operation that would *reveal* heads and tails as one another?s flip side would be a rotation (a coin flip) in a *higher-order* space *external to* their identities; or reversing heads into tails would be a matter of striking *new information* on each side of the coin *independently*. This would not entail *internal operations* of the sides or of their *interrelation*, it would work on the coin *from the outside* To work on the coins from the outside is to work from *external circumstances*. As David K says where we look generates our theories. The sociocultural as external circumstances generating sens leaves a gap. David K goes back to age 1 and lexicogrammar to fill the gap. Merleau-Ponty fills the gap with reversability and *internal sens* that is questioning working only or primarily through *external circumstances*. I expect this to be vague and misty as it is a first pass through. To be continued Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: November 1, 2016 6:03 AM To: David Kellogg; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: RE: [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 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 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 2016.1188962>? to the article (see above), and also attach it as PDF. > ??Good read! > > > Alfredo > > From Peg.Griffin@att.net Tue Nov 1 06:53:14 2016 From: Peg.Griffin@att.net (Peg Griffin) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2016 09:53:14 -0400 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: References: <1477604046100.32976@iped.uio.no> <1477637094283.80763@iped.uio.no> <1477662717568.90322@iped.uio.no> <1CF09B3A-DF07-4538-A198-FDB1B1EDE432@gmail.com> <58174c10.4223620a.cb56a.39b6@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <004801d23447$4aef6110$e0ce2330$@att.net> Hello, Maria Christina Migliore and hello again to other xmca folk: I am happy to learn from your experience based suggestions of causes about women's participation in the list. I want to pick up the thread of time. I'm old and loving it (and not just because of not particularly wanting the alternative to growing older, to use an old joke)! I like the expression "taking time." Old folks can take more time -- yes, there are still demands on it many related to gender by habit and choice, but many of us find more expertise and equanimity as we work through/with the demands. I have read and heard about bucket lists -- things people want to do before they die. Me? Not so much. I think the bucket list is like the notion "scaffolding." People use that metaphor about teaching/learning and I have objected to it because a scaffold is built to suit a particular KNOWN building. I don't believe teaching and learning are like that on their best appearances. Instead, I like the Zo-Ped (ZPD, Zone of Proximal development), better exactly because we don't know where it's going to go. I don't want people to be stuck ONLY with the thought or physical structures I know about/live with. In fact, I get great solace from knowing I can contribute to the future without it being stuck with only what I can imagine. Instead of a bucket list, I have things I want to leave behind that aren't finished when I die but that have enough threads (like those on a tea bag) that folks might later trip over it or pull on it and do something with that I do not know and cannot imagine. I know enough of the fine and horrible that have happened and might happen so that I want to contribute to enough variation in the future so that there will be a chance to support the fine in the future. So, when I just had a meeting in which educators talked about fostering critical thinking among youngsters and almost immediately after I saw a TV advertisement -- very polished, very expensive, clearly very planned -- that used correlation to imply causation to support a political candidate that I am spending time to defeat. Luckily(?), I was waiting in a bar where the TV ad was playing so I had a good martini while I waited for a tardy friend! I don't know how understanding this is gender related, but suspect there might be some relations. Peg Griffin -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Maria Cristina Migliore Sent: Monday, October 31, 2016 12:11 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse Hello to everyone, I am a woman who likes following the discussion on xmca, but has intervened into xmca discussions only once, even if I enrolled five or six years ago. I thank Mike Cole to have raised the issue of few female voices on this listserv. This is a very complex issue. I would approach this topic by referring to my own experience in this listserv. This is a typical feminist approach: starting from our own experience and avoiding generalization. I think that one of the reasons that keeps me out from contributing to the interesting debates here in this listserv is time. When I read so many posts from the same people, and some very long posts, I wonder whether these people, all men, have family responsibilities, whether they have to go shopping, cooking, cleaning, dealing with the increasing bureaucracy in our lives. I am an Italian woman, and one could learn from Italian statistics that we Italian women work for the well-being at home much longer hours than our men. I am also wondering whether the knowledge cumulated by these men can be explained by this different social division of labour between men and women. These elements, less time and less erudition, create an unbalance and some difficulties in participation. So this is my main explanation for my own rare appearance in this listserv. But of course, this adds up to the other factors already mentioned in this thread. I conclude with noticing that my feminist approach, talking about myself, seems quite the opposite to the dominant approach in this listserv, so focused on theories and abstraction. Could this be another reason to keep silent the women?s and other socially marginalized voices in this listserv, for they/we feel this terrain as foreign? I guess that if we want to hear more of these voices, we should accept a higher mixture of practice and theory thinking, and also emotions and tensions toward transformation and change, in our discussions. And I also need to learn how to write short posts! Maria-Cristina Migliore, Ph.D Senior researcher IRES-Piemonte Torino (Italia) 2016-10-31 14:49 GMT+01:00 : > I was looking through Louis Menand?s (The Metaphysical Club: A Story > of Ideas in America) and this paragraph struck a cord in this moment > of the election dynamics unfolding and the place of gender in earlier times. > > Abolitioism arose out of the *Second Great Awakening* the evangelical > revival that swept through New England and then upstate New York > between > 1800 and 1840, and that also spawned temperance, women?s rights, and > other social reform movements, along with a number of utopian and > religious sects, most famously the Mormons. The *foundations* of the > abolitionalist movement were therefore spiritual and > anti-institutional. Abolitionism was a party for people who did not > believe in parties ? a paradoxical law of attraction that turned out > to be ideally suited to Unitarian, Transcendentalist, and generally > post-Calvanist culture like New England, a culture increasingly > obsessed with the moral authority of the individual conscience. The > American Anti-Slavery Society, the movement?s organizational arm, had > relatively few members, membership in an organization being the sort > of thing that tends to compromise the *inner vision*. BUT it had many followers. > > I was struck that between 1800 and 1840 in this locale (Boston and > upstate New York) how many social reform movents (post Calvanism) > originated and unfolded to permeate American culture. Then to return > to the current election with this historical*ity in awareness. Back > and forth living presence, including women?s rights. > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: Annalisa Aguilar > Sent: October 28, 2016 2:04 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse > > I would like to post something historic that I don't think has ever > been declared by the New York times prior to a US Election: > > > http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/upshot/ > presidential-polls-forecast.html > > > It feels highly relevant to this thread, because it may shine a light > on what it feels like to see a story of a woman prevailing in very > neutral language. You will note, there is nothing about her hair, nor > her appearance, nor mention of her husband. > > > And, to Huw's (probable) liking, there's a lot of statistics that show > (I > hope) the inevitable. > > > Kind regards, > > > Annalisa > > -- Maria Cristina Migliore, Ph.D. Senior Researcher IRES Istituto Ricerche Economico Sociali del Piemonte Via Nizza, 18 10125 Torino ? Italia Tel. +39 011 6666463 cell. 348 0454272 Fax. +39 011 6696012 e-mail migliore@ires.piemonte.it skype mariacristinamigliore IRES web www.ires.piemonte.it LinkedIn Maria Cristina Migliore personal web www.mariacristinamigliore.it (Italiano) personal web www.mariacristinamigliore.it/index_e.htm (English) *Con il tuo 5 per mille all?IRES Piemonte contribuisci a migliorare la vita nella tua regione.* *Info: www.ires.piemonte.it/5xmille.html * *P* Please consider your environmental responsibility before printing this e-mail Nota di riservatezza: Il presente messaggio, corredato dei relativi allegati, contiene informazioni da considerarsi strettamente riservate ed ? destinato esclusivamente alla persona destinataria sopra indicata, la quale ? l'unica autorizzata ad usarlo, copiarlo e, sotto la propria responsabilit?, diffonderlo. Chiunque ricevesse questo messaggio per errore o comunque lo leggesse senza esserne legittimata ? pregata di rinviarlo alla mittente distruggendone l'originale. Grazie. Si prega inoltre di tenere conto che la trasmissione non pu? essere garantita senza errori e in sicurezza. This message and any files or documents attached are confidential and may also be legally privileged or protected by other legal rules. It is intended only for the individual or entity named. If you have received this email in error, please inform the sender, delete it from your system and do not copy or disclose it or its contents or use it for any purpose. Thank you. Please also note that transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free. From Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu Tue Nov 1 15:38:35 2016 From: Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu (White, Phillip) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2016 22:38:35 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion In-Reply-To: <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> , <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> Message-ID: 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 on behalf of 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 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 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 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach it as PDF. > ??Good read! > > > Alfredo > > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Tue Nov 1 17:07:07 2016 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2016 11:07:07 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Phillip, Larry: We all have pet theories, and any time there is a goodly gap left between data and conclusions, we naturally want to take them out for a run. So when Larry finds a gap we are likely to find Merleau-Ponty somewhere in the vicinity, and likewise what I was trying to do was to show how Halliday will help us link some of the language data (e.g. "I get it", "I'm confident", "I'm good at this") to some of the conclusions in a less saltationist manner. I don't reject the data at all: on the contrary, I would like to see a good deal more of it. I'm not even sure if "I get it", "I'm confident", "I'm good at this", and "I can pull this off" are actual data, because the article says "students' statements such as..."; this suggests to me that these might be made up examples, designed to represent the underlying semantics and not the actual lexicogrammar the kids used. When we look at the real data (e.g. p. 193) we notice that they don't like to use the first person pronoun very often (even in response to a question about "you); when they do use "I" it's mostly to contrast themselves to their peers and not to comment on their understandings, their internal states, or their proficiency. As Halliday says, all grammar is a theory of experience; or as Volosinov put it, every utterance is an ideological construct in miniature (Vygotsky: "the sense of a word refracts consciousness like a raindrop bends the light of the sun"). So for example English treats material objects as generalizable rather than abstractable and processes as time-bound rather than deictic, while Chinese is the other way around: objects are abstractable rather than generalized through pluralization and processes are always talked about in relation to whether they are finished yet instead of whether they are in the present or the past or the future. And on the face of it, the theory of experience that the children have in this study is not the one that the authors have. The kids are much more interested in their relations to their peers, rather than in "the person in history": it's the interpersonal rather than the sociocultural that preoccupies them at this stage. I don't reject the methodology, either. I think that if theories were generated by data then science would be both impossible (because data is essentially irrational) and unnecessary (because we could find out what we need to know with careful observation). I'm absolutely not a phenomenologist: to me, Cezanne paintings just look like they jumped the gun. I think that humans have to impose theories on data for it to make "sens", and making "sens" is very hard work. We don't do this hard work by interrogating the data; we do it by idealizing it. Very often, this idealization has a moral or artistic character rather than an observational one: a "good" theory is "good" in an ethical sens (good to live by) and in an aesthetic sens (good to look at), rather than simply an empirical one (a good fit). I think that one reason why the Russian view of things seems to get apparently disproportionate emphasis on this list is that the Russians, lacking good experimental conditions, really tended to emphasize the ethical and aesthetic side of theorization in their work. The Yanks did the opposite, and, as Margaret Eisenhart and Carrie Allen show us, they generated an unethical and ugly educational theory as a result. But you are right--I do reject the theory. On the one hand, Eisenhart and Allen are against bad things like neoliberalism and testing and they want good things like enthusiasm and intrinsically motivated learning. On the other, Eisenhart and Allen present Holland and Lave's notion of identity as "history-in-person"--a narrative, retroleptic account of the self, Brunerian and autobiographical. First of all, I am closer to Asia, and probably more sympathetic to rote, role and rule in learning; I am certainly more suspicious of touting intrinsic motivation to young people who want, need and have every right to all the goodies that go with white color jobs and more (a generation of Chinese robbed of their youth by leaders who taught them that sacrifice was its own reward). Secondly, it seems to me that "history-in-person" is really the wrong definition of "perizhivanie" for this particular data set: we need something much more proleptic. Maybe "futurology in person' or "science-fiction-in-person" would be more like it. In some ways, the indeterminacy of the Zoped that Peg writes about is simply a result of its prolepsis. I think that the reason why the Russians won the Cold War in scientific psychology is comparable to the reasons why the most interesting cooking, music and literatures all seem to come from the poorer parts of a country, the wretched areas of the earth, and the miserable moments of history. There's a very good reason why Shakespeare and Du Fu lived and thrived in bad times and sad places, where people ate meat only once a week if then, washed itchy woollen underwear once a month or so, and thought that fifty-four years old was a reasonable time to up and die. When life is hard, you make the most of what you got, and what you've got is mostly pencil and paper, words, and hope. The cheap stuff that lasts. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 9:38 AM, White, Phillip 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 > on behalf of 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 > 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 > 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 > 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach it as PDF. > > ??Good read! > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > From mcole@ucsd.edu Tue Nov 1 17:32:01 2016 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2016 17:32:01 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> Message-ID: 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 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 > on behalf of 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 > 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 > 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 > 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach it as PDF. > > ??Good read! > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Tue Nov 1 17:48:08 2016 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2016 00:48:08 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> , Message-ID: <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> 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 on behalf of mike cole 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 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 > on behalf of 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 > 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 > 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 > 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach it as PDF. > > ??Good read! > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > From annalisa@unm.edu Tue Nov 1 23:32:54 2016 From: annalisa@unm.edu (Annalisa Aguilar) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2016 06:32:54 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: <004801d23447$4aef6110$e0ce2330$@att.net> References: <1477604046100.32976@iped.uio.no> <1477637094283.80763@iped.uio.no> <1477662717568.90322@iped.uio.no> <1CF09B3A-DF07-4538-A198-FDB1B1EDE432@gmail.com> <58174c10.4223620a.cb56a.39b6@mx.google.com> , <004801d23447$4aef6110$e0ce2330$@att.net> Message-ID: Hello, It *feels,* if I might say, that we are experiencing a much more plural and nuanced discussion about the topic at hand, without the pressure. It's a fresh of breath air. :) I agree with Peg that achievement can only bring one so far (if I am reading her correctly), before long one becomes mechanized to the goal rather than the journey. Then the goal being had, the time being gone, it's hard to remember how we got there, or even why. A lot of what I think Vygtosky brings to us is a means (process) and space (zone) to afford creative gestures (development) in which it's not about me, it's not about you, it's not about me and you, or me or you, but it's about the gaps and overlaps that are created and DISCOVERED by being us being together, those fleeting instances that emerge into our consciousness in time and space, because you and I make that space in between like two flints that join and come apart, join and come apart. And then spark that flies. Those discoveries or ignitions, cannot be anticipated, nor planned. Still, they seem to appear at that very decisive moment of relaxation and play, by happenstance (Vera showed this to me). It is difficult to let discovery by happenstance (which has a similar etymology to "happiness," which is also discovered, or revealed ? depending upon your worldview) *happen* when, something Larry had referred to recently ? the "dynamic of three boys" ? takes over, (no, I don't refer to any 3 boys in particular, but rather to the dynamic), the desired outcome doesn't occur whereby everyone has equal freedom to play, and it's just the privileged or the more-dominant aspirants. So that is my nod to gender in discourse, which is the name of this here thread, isn't it. Maria Cristina points out a different cause related to the gap of presence I'd mentioned (the absence of women, and Other discussants, which I'd indicated is a huge loss we as a community experience by not having more vocal presence as presents for us all). She explains the loss as caused by a lack of time, and Alfredo adds a deeper dimension to that, a view of those who have an entirely other world over-taxed with non-professional commitments, duties centered upon personal relationships and the sacrifices required to keep them alive, and even flourishing... we hope...because that is the real food of life. I don't think they mean to say that those who post have nothing better to do, while others connected to them slave away off screen, but for me, by being more personal (as a feminist viewpoint, let us start with personal experience), there is a rich sense of them as people and who they share their lives. It palpates into a genuine connectedness and a stirring vulnerability that comes with sharing; not displaying, not competing. To reflect on what Maria Cristina says about accumulated knowledge, it is understood isn't it that any accomplished person is accomplished because of the help of others? There are no rugged individuals here are there? So does it really make sense to have the kind of mindset to win medals and laurels in competition when the rewards (and even glory) are much deeper, more lasting when done in community alongside that openness to happenstance I spoke of above. Medals tarnish and the laurels fade, and when the winter comes, all that matters is how much wood did you chop and who is left to talk with by the fire while the snow falls? It's difficult to maintain a hardboiled dialectic materialism, when the material of happenstance (or is it happiness) is nothing that comes from a jar, isn't it? And yet the instinct is to look for the object, and if not the object, the means to make that object an object (aka ontology), in order to produce it. That is a lot of work. Perhaps thankless. Maybe it has more to do with the demand than the production. Just a thought. (I am thinking about Arjun Appadurai right about now and his exploration of the social life of things). Like Peg, I don't want people to be stuck only with the thought or physical structures we know about and live with. The world is infinite expanding flowering lotus and there are as many possibilities (why settle for eating cold gruel every day, when we can fly?). Personally, I don't have a problem with long posts. To give equal short shrift to short posts, there are occasions where I have more of a problem with short posts, or posts that seem like swiss cheese. Nothing against the Swiss, or cheese, but I am hinting about the cultural references that are implicative not indicative. But perhaps this is a tall order. It's like private jokes tossed out as a means to display exclusivity (and even power). But such a kind of discourse requires a third-person, to objectify as the one who can be ignored. The one we can interrupt and dismiss. Isn't that conduct is far easier to do with short posts than long ones? With long posts, on the other hand, there is an investment to be made, and also to receive: By the one who writes (who gave the time to consider) and by the one who reads (who gives the time to reflect). Both take a lot of work, thankfully. So let the people who want to do the work dive in, and if there is not enough time, then there's not enough time. Save the thread for a rainy day. I did that very thing with Alfredo's post and subsequent ones. I am staying up late to read, and I'm investing in my reply. I regret Henry has reservations to post all those essays he's written, and I would certainly love to read them, and if you would too, then chime in. Please. I'd suggest, while wrapping up this long post and sharing my observations and metaphorical weavings, that the Second Great Awakening that Larry shared is connected to the Transcendentalists, i.e., Emerson and Thoreau, who were inspired by many things, including Vedanta, which explains the validity of morality and how it is not a human invention, but a subtle structure of laws upon which the universe unfolds (dharma). So it makes sense to me that moral concern would be the guiding light in their pursuit of freedom and individual conscience. Moral concern, freedom, and individual conscience are birds of a feather. Unless they are chased by a toddler. Good night, Annalisa From migliore@ires.piemonte.it Wed Nov 2 01:36:08 2016 From: migliore@ires.piemonte.it (Maria Cristina Migliore) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2016 09:36:08 +0100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: References: <1477604046100.32976@iped.uio.no> <1477637094283.80763@iped.uio.no> <1477662717568.90322@iped.uio.no> <1CF09B3A-DF07-4538-A198-FDB1B1EDE432@gmail.com> <58174c10.4223620a.cb56a.39b6@mx.google.com> <004801d23447$4aef6110$e0ce2330$@att.net> Message-ID: Thank you, Alfredo, for telling us your experience on combining working and living. It is interesting that we say ?work-life balance?, as work were not life, or as working were not living. I found difficulties in understanding what you ? Peg ? wanted to say. Maybe I just need time. Annalisa, you mention ?production? at a certain point of your reflections. I would like to make more explicit what I have in mind regarding gender inequality: I like to look at this latter one as an issue related to the devaluation of reproduction activities compared to the value recognized to production activities. We could discuss whether this imbalance comes from the dominant neoliberal paradigm, its focus on profit, and its corollary of trust in measuring in quantitative terms. About long posts: I like long post. Often we need long post to explain our point of view and our arguments. The problem for me is that writing a good post takes time. And I am always in a hurry trying to balance my working and living. This is a contradiction between two types of activity systems which is not investigated and theorized by CHAT, if I know enough CHAT. I am trying to develop this issue in my research work, but with a lot of difficulties because my Institute of research is not so interested in this. Maria-Cristina 2016-11-02 7:32 GMT+01:00 Annalisa Aguilar : > > Hello, > > It *feels,* if I might say, that we are experiencing a much more plural > and nuanced discussion about the topic at hand, without the pressure. It's > a fresh of breath air. :) > > I agree with Peg that achievement can only bring one so far (if I am > reading her correctly), before long one becomes mechanized to the goal > rather than the journey. Then the goal being had, the time being gone, it's > hard to remember how we got there, or even why. > > A lot of what I think Vygtosky brings to us is a means (process) and space > (zone) to afford creative gestures (development) in which it's not about > me, it's not about you, it's not about me and you, or me or you, but it's > about the gaps and overlaps that are created and DISCOVERED by being us > being together, those fleeting instances that emerge into our consciousness > in time and space, because you and I make that space in between like two > flints that join and come apart, join and come apart. And then spark that > flies. > > Those discoveries or ignitions, cannot be anticipated, nor planned. Still, > they seem to appear at that very decisive moment of relaxation and play, by > happenstance (Vera showed this to me). > > It is difficult to let discovery by happenstance (which has a similar > etymology to "happiness," which is also discovered, or revealed ? depending > upon your worldview) *happen* when, something Larry had referred to > recently ? the "dynamic of three boys" ? takes over, (no, I don't refer to > any 3 boys in particular, but rather to the dynamic), the desired outcome > doesn't occur whereby everyone has equal freedom to play, and it's just the > privileged or the more-dominant aspirants. > > So that is my nod to gender in discourse, which is the name of this here > thread, isn't it. > > Maria Cristina points out a different cause related to the gap of presence > I'd mentioned (the absence of women, and Other discussants, which I'd > indicated is a huge loss we as a community experience by not having more > vocal presence as presents for us all). She explains the loss as caused by > a lack of time, and Alfredo adds a deeper dimension to that, a view of > those who have an entirely other world over-taxed with non-professional > commitments, duties centered upon personal relationships and the sacrifices > required to keep them alive, and even flourishing... we hope...because that > is the real food of life. > > I don't think they mean to say that those who post have nothing better to > do, while others connected to them slave away off screen, but for me, by > being more personal (as a feminist viewpoint, let us start with personal > experience), there is a rich sense of them as people and who they share > their lives. It palpates into a genuine connectedness and a stirring > vulnerability that comes with sharing; not displaying, not competing. > > To reflect on what Maria Cristina says about accumulated knowledge, it is > understood isn't it that any accomplished person is accomplished because of > the help of others? There are no rugged individuals here are there? So does > it really make sense to have the kind of mindset to win medals and laurels > in competition when the rewards (and even glory) are much deeper, more > lasting when done in community alongside that openness to happenstance I > spoke of above. Medals tarnish and the laurels fade, and when the winter > comes, all that matters is how much wood did you chop and who is left to > talk with by the fire while the snow falls? > > It's difficult to maintain a hardboiled dialectic materialism, when the > material of happenstance (or is it happiness) is nothing that comes from a > jar, isn't it? And yet the instinct is to look for the object, and if not > the object, the means to make that object an object (aka ontology), in > order to produce it. That is a lot of work. Perhaps thankless. > > Maybe it has more to do with the demand than the production. Just a > thought. (I am thinking about Arjun Appadurai right about now and his > exploration of the social life of things). > > Like Peg, I don't want people to be stuck only with the thought or > physical structures we know about and live with. The world is infinite > expanding flowering lotus and there are as many possibilities (why settle > for eating cold gruel every day, when we can fly?). > > Personally, I don't have a problem with long posts. To give equal short > shrift to short posts, there are occasions where I have more of a problem > with short posts, or posts that seem like swiss cheese. Nothing against the > Swiss, or cheese, but I am hinting about the cultural references that are > implicative not indicative. But perhaps this is a tall order. > > It's like private jokes tossed out as a means to display exclusivity (and > even power). But such a kind of discourse requires a third-person, to > objectify as the one who can be ignored. The one we can interrupt and > dismiss. Isn't that conduct is far easier to do with short posts than long > ones? > > With long posts, on the other hand, there is an investment to be made, and > also to receive: By the one who writes (who gave the time to consider) and > by the one who reads (who gives the time to reflect). Both take a lot of > work, thankfully. So let the people who want to do the work dive in, and if > there is not enough time, then there's not enough time. Save the thread for > a rainy day. > > I did that very thing with Alfredo's post and subsequent ones. I am > staying up late to read, and I'm investing in my reply. I regret Henry has > reservations to post all those essays he's written, and I would certainly > love to read them, and if you would too, then chime in. Please. > > I'd suggest, while wrapping up this long post and sharing my observations > and metaphorical weavings, that the Second Great Awakening that Larry > shared is connected to the Transcendentalists, i.e., Emerson and Thoreau, > who were inspired by many things, including Vedanta, which explains the > validity of morality and how it is not a human invention, but a subtle > structure of laws upon which the universe unfolds (dharma). So it makes > sense to me that moral concern would be the guiding light in their pursuit > of freedom and individual conscience. Moral concern, freedom, and > individual conscience are birds of a feather. > > Unless they are chased by a toddler. > > Good night, > > Annalisa > > > -- Maria Cristina Migliore, Ph.D. Senior Researcher IRES Istituto Ricerche Economico Sociali del Piemonte Via Nizza, 18 10125 Torino ? Italia Tel. +39 011 6666463 cell. 348 0454272 Fax. +39 011 6696012 e-mail migliore@ires.piemonte.it skype mariacristinamigliore IRES web www.ires.piemonte.it LinkedIn Maria Cristina Migliore personal web www.mariacristinamigliore.it (Italiano) personal web www.mariacristinamigliore.it/index_e.htm (English) *Con il tuo 5 per mille all?IRES Piemonte contribuisci a migliorare la vita nella tua regione.* *Info: www.ires.piemonte.it/5xmille.html * *P* Please consider your environmental responsibility before printing this e-mail Nota di riservatezza: Il presente messaggio, corredato dei relativi allegati, contiene informazioni da considerarsi strettamente riservate ed ? destinato esclusivamente alla persona destinataria sopra indicata, la quale ? l'unica autorizzata ad usarlo, copiarlo e, sotto la propria responsabilit?, diffonderlo. Chiunque ricevesse questo messaggio per errore o comunque lo leggesse senza esserne legittimata ? pregata di rinviarlo alla mittente distruggendone l'originale. Grazie. Si prega inoltre di tenere conto che la trasmissione non pu? essere garantita senza errori e in sicurezza. This message and any files or documents attached are confidential and may also be legally privileged or protected by other legal rules. It is intended only for the individual or entity named. If you have received this email in error, please inform the sender, delete it from your system and do not copy or disclose it or its contents or use it for any purpose. Thank you. Please also note that transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free. From lpscholar2@gmail.com Wed Nov 2 08:12:38 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2016 08:12:38 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: References: <1477604046100.32976@iped.uio.no> <1477637094283.80763@iped.uio.no> <1477662717568.90322@iped.uio.no> <1CF09B3A-DF07-4538-A198-FDB1B1EDE432@gmail.com> <58174c10.4223620a.cb56a.39b6@mx.google.com> , <004801d23447$4aef6110$e0ce2330$@att.net> Message-ID: <581a026f.0f08620a.9bde9.a672@mx.google.com> I will add my commentary on this ?merging theme of gender and a lack of gender equality in participation. Maria Christina, your question of the relation of reproduction of the work of the private kilos or family realm that is in counterpart to the production, and design, and planning of our public realm and the unequal distribution of demands in each realm. You are re/searching and hoping to re/veal the actual gendered differences of this distribution of activities through a feminist lens. Peg responded with a wonderful rejoinder that made explicit what i felt but was unsure how to sensitively put in words. Peg, being an elder deeply appreciates the quality of (taking time). Peg?s desire is not about filling bucket lists, but is a place of (equanamity.) Having lived long enough to have lived through what is fine and what horrible in what we are capable of Peg turns towards reflecting upon a legacy of leaving threads and texts that others in the future may pick up that speak to the finer aspects of our human nature. Peg finds *value* in leaving an open ended legacy that may possibly speak to the future offering a legacy turned towards our finer human naturer. In this legacy i do not hear the need to be *right*, but to participate in our emerging finer nature. I also hear this orienting to our finer nature as a response to this month?s article saying that current neoliberal practices are *hollowed-out* shallow ways of engaging educational practices. Peg, as i read how you desire to leave a legacy of threads and texts, and not fulfill bucket lists, i felt a kinship as I turn to reflections of my life and legacy. I still want to plant fruit trees which I may never see bear fruit. I too want to leave a legacy of participating in our finer human nature. Annalisa, I hope this is a response without the pressure and we are (taking time). You mention fresh air and this generates an image of breath as inspiration, expiration, and reversibility. This movement that *opens* space to breath. This breath that reveals the heart of the matter and takes courage to express (takes cour or heart) Its about the *gaps and overlaps* as our finer human nature because we join, come apart, rejoin, in the breath of life. In moments of relaxation and play and breath sparks ignite that could not be anticipated (in determinate designed detail) but do have a *sens* (a sense and orientation) towards our finer human nature. Happiness happening through happenstance that is as much *passive* as *active*. Not like two sides of a coin with each side *independently* transforming or adapting but more deeply intertwined each in the other. This is my nod or gesture to gender that may have an arch?typal aspect that plays out through historicity, and awakenking us to the finer more welcoming ways of expressing our well?being-in-the-world-with-others. I will amplify one aspect of this breath and its 3 part structure: inspiration and expiration and the gap where inspiration reverses and leaps to expiration and then expiration reverses and leaps to inspiration (as counterparts) . The dance of Shiva, the breath of spirit, the each in the other, as a 3 aspect structure, including *the gap* Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Annalisa Aguilar Sent: November 1, 2016 11:35 PM To: 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse Hello, It *feels,* if I might say, that we are experiencing a much more plural and nuanced discussion about the topic at hand, without the pressure. It's a fresh of breath air. :) I agree with Peg that achievement can only bring one so far (if I am reading her correctly), before long one becomes mechanized to the goal rather than the journey. Then the goal being had, the time being gone, it's hard to remember how we got there, or even why. A lot of what I think Vygtosky brings to us is a means (process) and space (zone) to afford creative gestures (development) in which it's not about me, it's not about you, it's not about me and you, or me or you, but it's about the gaps and overlaps that are created and DISCOVERED by being us being together, those fleeting instances that emerge into our consciousness in time and space, because you and I make that space in between like two flints that join and come apart, join and come apart. And then spark that flies. Those discoveries or ignitions, cannot be anticipated, nor planned. Still, they seem to appear at that very decisive moment of relaxation and play, by happenstance (Vera showed this to me). It is difficult to let discovery by happenstance (which has a similar etymology to "happiness," which is also discovered, or revealed ? depending upon your worldview) *happen* when, something Larry had referred to recently ? the "dynamic of three boys" ? takes over, (no, I don't refer to any 3 boys in particular, but rather to the dynamic), the desired outcome doesn't occur whereby everyone has equal freedom to play, and it's just the privileged or the more-dominant aspirants. So that is my nod to gender in discourse, which is the name of this here thread, isn't it. Maria Cristina points out a different cause related to the gap of presence I'd mentioned (the absence of women, and Other discussants, which I'd indicated is a huge loss we as a community experience by not having more vocal presence as presents for us all). She explains the loss as caused by a lack of time, and Alfredo adds a deeper dimension to that, a view of those who have an entirely other world over-taxed with non-professional commitments, duties centered upon personal relationships and the sacrifices required to keep them alive, and even flourishing... we hope...because that is the real food of life. I don't think they mean to say that those who post have nothing better to do, while others connected to them slave away off screen, but for me, by being more personal (as a feminist viewpoint, let us start with personal experience), there is a rich sense of them as people and who they share their lives. It palpates into a genuine connectedness and a stirring vulnerability that comes with sharing; not displaying, not competing. To reflect on what Maria Cristina says about accumulated knowledge, it is understood isn't it that any accomplished person is accomplished because of the help of others? There are no rugged individuals here are there? So does it really make sense to have the kind of mindset to win medals and laurels in competition when the rewards (and even glory) are much deeper, more lasting when done in community alongside that openness to happenstance I spoke of above. Medals tarnish and the laurels fade, and when the winter comes, all that matters is how much wood did you chop and who is left to talk with by the fire while the snow falls? It's difficult to maintain a hardboiled dialectic materialism, when the material of happenstance (or is it happiness) is nothing that comes from a jar, isn't it? And yet the instinct is to look for the object, and if not the object, the means to make that object an object (aka ontology), in order to produce it. That is a lot of work. Perhaps thankless. Maybe it has more to do with the demand than the production. Just a thought. (I am thinking about Arjun Appadurai right about now and his exploration of the social life of things). Like Peg, I don't want people to be stuck only with the thought or physical structures we know about and live with. The world is infinite expanding flowering lotus and there are as many possibilities (why settle for eating cold gruel every day, when we can fly?). Personally, I don't have a problem with long posts. To give equal short shrift to short posts, there are occasions where I have more of a problem with short posts, or posts that seem like swiss cheese. Nothing against the Swiss, or cheese, but I am hinting about the cultural references that are implicative not indicative. But perhaps this is a tall order. It's like private jokes tossed out as a means to display exclusivity (and even power). But such a kind of discourse requires a third-person, to objectify as the one who can be ignored. The one we can interrupt and dismiss. Isn't that conduct is far easier to do with short posts than long ones? With long posts, on the other hand, there is an investment to be made, and also to receive: By the one who writes (who gave the time to consider) and by the one who reads (who gives the time to reflect). Both take a lot of work, thankfully. So let the people who want to do the work dive in, and if there is not enough time, then there's not enough time. Save the thread for a rainy day. I did that very thing with Alfredo's post and subsequent ones. I am staying up late to read, and I'm investing in my reply. I regret Henry has reservations to post all those essays he's written, and I would certainly love to read them, and if you would too, then chime in. Please. I'd suggest, while wrapping up this long post and sharing my observations and metaphorical weavings, that the Second Great Awakening that Larry shared is connected to the Transcendentalists, i.e., Emerson and Thoreau, who were inspired by many things, including Vedanta, which explains the validity of morality and how it is not a human invention, but a subtle structure of laws upon which the universe unfolds (dharma). So it makes sense to me that moral concern would be the guiding light in their pursuit of freedom and individual conscience. Moral concern, freedom, and individual conscience are birds of a feather. Unless they are chased by a toddler. Good night, Annalisa From greg.a.thompson@gmail.com Wed Nov 2 08:50:32 2016 From: greg.a.thompson@gmail.com (Greg Thompson) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2016 09:50:32 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Back to the future? (on race too) Message-ID: This past weekend, John Oliver had a nice (but terrible) piece on school (re)segregation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8yiYCHMAlM It includes a nice brief cut to Malcolm X, whose words are perhaps truer today than they were when he said them, as well as a brief clip of a horrifying town hall meeting (at 11:16) where a bunch of white parents are voicing their concerns about having poor black kids bused to their school. The white parents' words seem like they are right out of the anti-busing rhetoric of the 1970's no? And here is a more in-depth and very nice radio segment about that town hall meeting that includes the perspective of a black high school student who was at that town hall meeting. She went there to tell them that she is a good student and that these parents have nothing to fear. But after what she heard, she broke down and couldn't bring herself to speak at the mic. Here is the link to the episode of This American Life: https://m.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/562/the-problem-we-all-live-with I'd like to find a way to see my way to the fine-ness of humanity. But these days it is very difficult. -greg -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From mcole@ucsd.edu Wed Nov 2 08:58:13 2016 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2016 08:58:13 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Back to the future? (on race too) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks for posting, Greg. Time to push back with as much strength as we can. Mike On Wednesday, 2 November 2016, Greg Thompson wrote: > This past weekend, John Oliver had a nice (but terrible) piece on school > (re)segregation: > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8yiYCHMAlM > > It includes a nice brief cut to Malcolm X, whose words are perhaps truer > today than they were when he said them, as well as a brief clip of a > horrifying town hall meeting (at 11:16) where a bunch of white parents are > voicing their concerns about having poor black kids bused to their school. > The white parents' words seem like they are right out of the anti-busing > rhetoric of the 1970's no? > > And here is a more in-depth and very nice radio segment about that town > hall meeting that includes the perspective of a black high school student > who was at that town hall meeting. She went there to tell them that she is > a good student and that these parents have nothing to fear. But after what > she heard, she broke down and couldn't bring herself to speak at the mic. > Here is the link to the episode of This American Life: > https://m.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/ > 562/the-problem-we-all-live-with > > I'd like to find a way to see my way to the fine-ness of humanity. But > these days it is very difficult. > > -greg > > > -- > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > Assistant Professor > Department of Anthropology > 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > Brigham Young University > Provo, UT 84602 > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson > From mcole@ucsd.edu Wed Nov 2 08:58:13 2016 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2016 08:58:13 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Back to the future? (on race too) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks for posting, Greg. Time to push back with as much strength as we can. Mike On Wednesday, 2 November 2016, Greg Thompson wrote: > This past weekend, John Oliver had a nice (but terrible) piece on school > (re)segregation: > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8yiYCHMAlM > > It includes a nice brief cut to Malcolm X, whose words are perhaps truer > today than they were when he said them, as well as a brief clip of a > horrifying town hall meeting (at 11:16) where a bunch of white parents are > voicing their concerns about having poor black kids bused to their school. > The white parents' words seem like they are right out of the anti-busing > rhetoric of the 1970's no? > > And here is a more in-depth and very nice radio segment about that town > hall meeting that includes the perspective of a black high school student > who was at that town hall meeting. She went there to tell them that she is > a good student and that these parents have nothing to fear. But after what > she heard, she broke down and couldn't bring herself to speak at the mic. > Here is the link to the episode of This American Life: > https://m.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/ > 562/the-problem-we-all-live-with > > I'd like to find a way to see my way to the fine-ness of humanity. But > these days it is very difficult. > > -greg > > > -- > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > Assistant Professor > Department of Anthropology > 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > Brigham Young University > Provo, UT 84602 > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson > From annalisa@unm.edu Wed Nov 2 21:45:21 2016 From: annalisa@unm.edu (Annalisa Aguilar) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 04:45:21 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: <581a026f.0f08620a.9bde9.a672@mx.google.com> References: <1477604046100.32976@iped.uio.no> <1477637094283.80763@iped.uio.no> <1477662717568.90322@iped.uio.no> <1CF09B3A-DF07-4538-A198-FDB1B1EDE432@gmail.com> <58174c10.4223620a.cb56a.39b6@mx.google.com> , <004801d23447$4aef6110$e0ce2330$@att.net> , <581a026f.0f08620a.9bde9.a672@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Hello, Sometimes synchronicity is spooky. I spied this in the Guardian just now. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/nov/02/silicon-valley-sexism-diversity-valerie-aurora-frame-shift In reply to Maria-Cristina, it's difficult to have work-life balance when the division of the personal and the public worlds exists. From what is described in biased workplaces (in article above), it's necessary to have some sort of protective wall, if only to survive another day. The irony is that people become competitive in the work place because of a perceived scarcity of resources, but in technology it seems to me to be a perceived scarcity of privileges. I have never understood how sitting at a keyboard is somehow "hard work." I know it requires effort and intellectual effort in particular, but it's not like working on a farm, where solving problems with scarce resources is always the norm. Think bricolage. Maybe this perceived scarcity is the same in academia. Having a worldview that the field of knowledge is infinite, seems to be, looking from the outside. But perhaps I am unaware of the bricolage people do inside the university. I do not mean to diminish truly hard work. Anyway, these resources are culled from the public world to feed the personal world in the end, isn't that the true motivation? To protect home and hearth when we aren't talking about invading hoards on longboats shooting flaming arrows at our huts shouldn't carry that same impending fear, dread, and uncertainty. But sometimes it seems to feel that way, that people behave with that same ferocity of a struggle to the death. It is an illusion, a misperception. But this misperception has its apparent reality that creates real fear in people. As if their lives didn't matter and unbalanced equations must be attacked with quadratic solutions, to set the matter straight. Instead, a shared effort is required to permit that defensiveness, born of competition, to dissipate. In order to do that, people have to feel safe. So how is safety created in the spaces? Spaces free of ridicule and non-acceptance. Then, isn't that what every human being desires and requires to flourish? Interesting that that need has no bias. That is why I admire Aurora so much. I really think that she is on to something. Larry, rather than reversibility, I'd prefer receptivity or reciprocity. And rather than finer nature, I'd prefer true nature (with an idea that being competitive, biased, prejudiced, unethical etc, are actually artificial constructs, that when obstructions have been lifted, what is natural is to balance what is there (like homeostasis), free from hindrances. In order for us to recognize what is fullness in ourselves, fullness must already be present within us, otherwise we could not recognize it, we wouldn't have affinity toward it. So if we can remove the notion of scarcity, then the fullness of who and what we are, which is already there, will be evident. It will have an appearance of emerging from nothing, but it's really just appearing like a tree in the fog that was standing quiet all along, and all that was required was for the fog to lift. Anyway, I want to lastly add that I bring up demand over production, which Maria Cristina had shown some interest. The idea is that we have demands which actually decide production, and these demands are socially based, because we have social natures. Even if we are talking about biological demands like food and shelter, early childcare, regardless, in those cases there is a social aspect to them. Looking through the other end of the telescope, when we consider demand first rather than production, things look interestingly different. If we include things in demand in that exploration (rather than things in production), we begin to see the social life of things, we start to see how these items go in and out of commodification, where objects have auras of value that reside outside of monetary value and markets. Let's consider your dining room table. You bought it in a furniture store, or perhaps online, or from a thrift store or garage sale, maybe it was a gift. But as long as you own it, you don't consider the market value of your dining room table, or its appreciating value if say it was made by a famous furniture maker where in 20-30 years you'll see those items appraised on The Antiques Road Show; at least not until you decide you don't want to own it anymore. During that time of possession, the dining room table starts to have different value, a social value, which is determined by its demand, or should I say demand for it. It supports the family by providing a comfortable place to eat meals. A place for kids to do homework. A place to play card games. Or to cut a dress pattern from fabric, etc. All of these are domestic activities, but they have no production value in terms of tables. You only need one dining room table. Still, the table will generate value in the household, because of the activities that the table supports, even if it is to bring people together at holidays, or even if it has only sentimental value, say if the table is damaged and must be repaired, or it has been moved because the room is being painted. This description depicts the social life of the dining room table. Which is based upon its demand, not its production. Anyway, as I said previously, my debt for these thought experiments comes from Arjun Appadurai. If anyone is interested. Maria Cristina makes a great point considering work life and living life as two types of activity systems and thinking about their inherent contradictions. What comes from this tension that transcends the two? (Might this exploration echo the comparison between production and demand?) Is Maria Cristina correct that there hasn't been much discussion in this area? if so, I'd like to learn more about that. Great conversations. Thanks. Kind regards, Annalisa From jgregmcverry@gmail.com Thu Nov 3 07:12:36 2016 From: jgregmcverry@gmail.com (Greg Mcverry) Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2016 14:12:36 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: References: <1477604046100.32976@iped.uio.no> <1477637094283.80763@iped.uio.no> <1477662717568.90322@iped.uio.no> <1CF09B3A-DF07-4538-A198-FDB1B1EDE432@gmail.com> <58174c10.4223620a.cb56a.39b6@mx.google.com> <004801d23447$4aef6110$e0ce2330$@att.net> <581a026f.0f08620a.9bde9.a672@mx.google.com> Message-ID: I want to bring a call back to the idea of logic and gender. Someone in the thread noted that "academic discourse" wasn't about winning but simply prevailing logic. Anna commented back you could be logical and not be a "jerk" about it. Maybe both statements can be true. White males may not excel in this type of logic simply based on their privilege. Though I am sure privilege plays a huge role. Could it be the Western tradition of logic is itself rooted in gender inequality? It is a field a few thousand years old that was made up by white men arguing "logically" with other white men. Naturally the discourse practices would signify and reinforce membership within these circles. Exclusion of underrepresented voices has influence how the concept of "logic" has evolved. I keep thinking about "logic" and argumentation as I begin to interact with scholars outside of the US. We have put a strong emphasis on arguing in our K12 curriculum. Yet when I talk to people from other countries they note a word for "argumentative writing" or "argumentation" does not really exist in their language. Which as we know influences thought...which influences language..and both contribute to culture and activity. So could it be the gender bias that has existed in the listserv is a symptom of stressing a definition of "logic" maybe engendered. Notice the talk in our models of logic have been proving who is right and who is wrong? What translation is best for example. It is one individual "proving" he is right rather than they reaching a consensus on what is right. On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 12:47 AM Annalisa Aguilar wrote: > Hello, > > > Sometimes synchronicity is spooky. I spied this in the Guardian just now. > > > https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/nov/02/silicon-valley-sexism-diversity-valerie-aurora-frame-shift > > > In reply to Maria-Cristina, it's difficult to have work-life balance when > the division of the personal and the public worlds exists. From what is > described in biased workplaces (in article above), it's necessary to have > some sort of protective wall, if only to survive another day. > > > The irony is that people become competitive in the work place because of a > perceived scarcity of resources, but in technology it seems to me to be a > perceived scarcity of privileges. I have never understood how sitting at a > keyboard is somehow "hard work." I know it requires effort and intellectual > effort in particular, but it's not like working on a farm, where solving > problems with scarce resources is always the norm. Think bricolage. > > > Maybe this perceived scarcity is the same in academia. Having a worldview > that the field of knowledge is infinite, seems to be, looking from the > outside. But perhaps I am unaware of the bricolage people do inside the > university. I do not mean to diminish truly hard work. > > > Anyway, these resources are culled from the public world to feed the > personal world in the end, isn't that the true motivation? To protect home > and hearth when we aren't talking about invading hoards on longboats > shooting flaming arrows at our huts shouldn't carry that same impending > fear, dread, and uncertainty. But sometimes it seems to feel that way, that > people behave with that same ferocity of a struggle to the death. > > > It is an illusion, a misperception. But this misperception has its > apparent reality that creates real fear in people. As if their lives didn't > matter and unbalanced equations must be attacked with quadratic solutions, > to set the matter straight. > > > Instead, a shared effort is required to permit that defensiveness, born of > competition, to dissipate. In order to do that, people have to feel safe. > So how is safety created in the spaces? Spaces free of ridicule and > non-acceptance. Then, isn't that what every human being desires and > requires to flourish? Interesting that that need has no bias. > > > That is why I admire Aurora so much. I really think that she is on to > something. > > > Larry, rather than reversibility, I'd prefer receptivity or reciprocity. > > > And rather than finer nature, I'd prefer true nature (with an idea that > being competitive, biased, prejudiced, unethical etc, are actually > artificial constructs, that when obstructions have been lifted, what is > natural is to balance what is there (like homeostasis), free from > hindrances. > > > In order for us to recognize what is fullness in ourselves, fullness must > already be present within us, otherwise we could not recognize it, we > wouldn't have affinity toward it. So if we can remove the notion of > scarcity, then the fullness of who and what we are, which is already there, > will be evident. It will have an appearance of emerging from nothing, but > it's really just appearing like a tree in the fog that was standing quiet > all along, and all that was required was for the fog to lift. > > > Anyway, I want to lastly add that I bring up demand over production, which > Maria Cristina had shown some interest. The idea is that we have demands > which actually decide production, and these demands are socially based, > because we have social natures. Even if we are talking about biological > demands like food and shelter, early childcare, regardless, in those cases > there is a social aspect to them. > > > Looking through the other end of the telescope, when we consider demand > first rather than production, things look interestingly different. If we > include things in demand in that exploration (rather than things in > production), we begin to see the social life of things, we start to see how > these items go in and out of commodification, where objects have auras of > value that reside outside of monetary value and markets. > > > Let's consider your dining room table. You bought it in a furniture store, > or perhaps online, or from a thrift store or garage sale, maybe it was a > gift. But as long as you own it, you don't consider the market value of > your dining room table, or its appreciating value if say it was made by a > famous furniture maker where in 20-30 years you'll see those items > appraised on The Antiques Road Show; at least not until you decide you > don't want to own it anymore. During that time of possession, the dining > room table starts to have different value, a social value, which is > determined by its demand, or should I say demand for it. It supports the > family by providing a comfortable place to eat meals. A place for kids to > do homework. A place to play card games. Or to cut a dress pattern from > fabric, etc. All of these are domestic activities, but they have no > production value in terms of tables. You only need one dining room table. > Still, the table will generate value in the household, because of the > activities that the table supports, even if it is to bring people together > at holidays, or even if it has only sentimental value, say if the table is > damaged and must be repaired, or it has been moved because the room is > being painted. This description depicts the social life of the dining room > table. Which is based upon its demand, not its production. > > > Anyway, as I said previously, my debt for these thought experiments comes > from Arjun Appadurai. If anyone is interested. > > > Maria Cristina makes a great point considering work life and living life > as two types of activity systems and thinking about their inherent > contradictions. What comes from this tension that transcends the two? > (Might this exploration echo the comparison between production and demand?) > Is Maria Cristina correct that there hasn't been much discussion in this > area? if so, I'd like to learn more about that. > > > Great conversations. Thanks. > > > Kind regards, > > > Annalisa > From migliore@ires.piemonte.it Thu Nov 3 07:20:01 2016 From: migliore@ires.piemonte.it (Maria Cristina Migliore) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 15:20:01 +0100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: References: <1477662717568.90322@iped.uio.no> <1CF09B3A-DF07-4538-A198-FDB1B1EDE432@gmail.com> <58174c10.4223620a.cb56a.39b6@mx.google.com> <004801d23447$4aef6110$e0ce2330$@att.net> <581a026f.0f08620a.9bde9.a672@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <3f68de59-0c17-04fe-dd9c-1acc43000bd8@ires.piemonte.it> Hello, Thank you, Annalisa for your comments. I would like to offer an idea which comes from this book: Vaughan, Genevieve (1997). ForGiving: A Feminist Criticism of Exchange, Plain View Press Annalisa, you have based your argument on the concept of "scarsity". Genevieve Vaughan's argument is that scarsity is wanted by the capitalist market. If we look at the "reproductive activities" (this is my concept, because I want to use 'activity'; Vaughan uses the concept of "giving", that is, giving activities), we would see that there is a lot of gifts around us. Vaughan argues that women more than men experience the 'giving'. I think that we need this sort of perspective to develop our interpretation of the relationship between demands>production activities and reproductive activities. Regarding the division between private and public spaces, Annalisa, this could be seen as a patriarchal device to relegate women in the private space too. Was Carole Pateman, in The sexual contract - who argued this? So I would not use those concepts to talk about gender issues, unless in a critical way. Thank you again Annalisa for giving (ForGiving, as the title of the Vaughan's book!) me the opportunity to carry on with my reasonings. :-) Maria Cristina Migliore, Ph.D. Senior Researcher IRES Istituto Ricerche Economico Sociali del Piemonte Via Nizza, 18 10125 Torino ? Italia Tel. +39 011 6666463 cell. 348 0454272 Fax. +39 011 6696012 e-mail migliore@ires.piemonte.it skypemariacristinamigliore IRES web www.ires.piemonte.it LinkedInMaria Cristina Migliore personal web www.mariacristinamigliore.it (Italiano) personal web www.mariacristinamigliore.it/index_e.htm (English) /Con il tuo 5 per mille all?IRES Piemonte contribuisci a migliorare la vita nella tua regione./ /Info:**/*/www.ires.piemonte.it/5xmille.html /* *P*Please consider your environmental responsibility before printing this e-mail Nota di riservatezza: Il presente messaggio, corredato dei relativi allegati, contiene informazioni da considerarsi strettamente riservate ed ? destinato esclusivamente alla persona destinataria sopra indicata, la quale ? l'unica autorizzata ad usarlo, copiarlo e, sotto la propria responsabilit?, diffonderlo. Chiunque ricevesse questo messaggio per errore o comunque lo leggesse senza esserne legittimata ? pregata di rinviarlo alla mittente distruggendone l'originale. Grazie. Si prega inoltre di tenere conto che la trasmissione non pu? essere garantita senza errori e in sicurezza. This message and any files or documents attached are confidential and may also be legally privileged or protected by other legal rules. It is intended only for the individual or entity named. If you have received this email in error, please inform the sender, delete it from your system and do not copy or disclose it or its contents or use it for any purpose. Thank you. Please also note that transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free. Il 03/11/2016 05:45, Annalisa Aguilar ha scritto: > Hello, > > > Sometimes synchronicity is spooky. I spied this in the Guardian just now. > > https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/nov/02/silicon-valley-sexism-diversity-valerie-aurora-frame-shift > > > In reply to Maria-Cristina, it's difficult to have work-life balance when the division of the personal and the public worlds exists. From what is described in biased workplaces (in article above), it's necessary to have some sort of protective wall, if only to survive another day. > > > The irony is that people become competitive in the work place because of a perceived scarcity of resources, but in technology it seems to me to be a perceived scarcity of privileges. I have never understood how sitting at a keyboard is somehow "hard work." I know it requires effort and intellectual effort in particular, but it's not like working on a farm, where solving problems with scarce resources is always the norm. Think bricolage. > > > Maybe this perceived scarcity is the same in academia. Having a worldview that the field of knowledge is infinite, seems to be, looking from the outside. But perhaps I am unaware of the bricolage people do inside the university. I do not mean to diminish truly hard work. > > > Anyway, these resources are culled from the public world to feed the personal world in the end, isn't that the true motivation? To protect home and hearth when we aren't talking about invading hoards on longboats shooting flaming arrows at our huts shouldn't carry that same impending fear, dread, and uncertainty. But sometimes it seems to feel that way, that people behave with that same ferocity of a struggle to the death. > > > It is an illusion, a misperception. But this misperception has its apparent reality that creates real fear in people. As if their lives didn't matter and unbalanced equations must be attacked with quadratic solutions, to set the matter straight. > > > Instead, a shared effort is required to permit that defensiveness, born of competition, to dissipate. In order to do that, people have to feel safe. So how is safety created in the spaces? Spaces free of ridicule and non-acceptance. Then, isn't that what every human being desires and requires to flourish? Interesting that that need has no bias. > > > That is why I admire Aurora so much. I really think that she is on to something. > > > Larry, rather than reversibility, I'd prefer receptivity or reciprocity. > > > And rather than finer nature, I'd prefer true nature (with an idea that being competitive, biased, prejudiced, unethical etc, are actually artificial constructs, that when obstructions have been lifted, what is natural is to balance what is there (like homeostasis), free from hindrances. > > > In order for us to recognize what is fullness in ourselves, fullness must already be present within us, otherwise we could not recognize it, we wouldn't have affinity toward it. So if we can remove the notion of scarcity, then the fullness of who and what we are, which is already there, will be evident. It will have an appearance of emerging from nothing, but it's really just appearing like a tree in the fog that was standing quiet all along, and all that was required was for the fog to lift. > > > Anyway, I want to lastly add that I bring up demand over production, which Maria Cristina had shown some interest. The idea is that we have demands which actually decide production, and these demands are socially based, because we have social natures. Even if we are talking about biological demands like food and shelter, early childcare, regardless, in those cases there is a social aspect to them. > > > Looking through the other end of the telescope, when we consider demand first rather than production, things look interestingly different. If we include things in demand in that exploration (rather than things in production), we begin to see the social life of things, we start to see how these items go in and out of commodification, where objects have auras of value that reside outside of monetary value and markets. > > > Let's consider your dining room table. You bought it in a furniture store, or perhaps online, or from a thrift store or garage sale, maybe it was a gift. But as long as you own it, you don't consider the market value of your dining room table, or its appreciating value if say it was made by a famous furniture maker where in 20-30 years you'll see those items appraised on The Antiques Road Show; at least not until you decide you don't want to own it anymore. During that time of possession, the dining room table starts to have different value, a social value, which is determined by its demand, or should I say demand for it. It supports the family by providing a comfortable place to eat meals. A place for kids to do homework. A place to play card games. Or to cut a dress pattern from fabric, etc. All of these are domestic activities, but they have no production value in terms of tables. You only need one dining room table. Still, the table will generate value in the household, because of the activities that the table supports, even if it is to bring people together at holidays, or even if it has only sentimental value, say if the table is damaged and must be repaired, or it has been moved because the room is being painted. This description depicts the social life of the dining room table. Which is based upon its demand, not its production. > > > Anyway, as I said previously, my debt for these thought experiments comes from Arjun Appadurai. If anyone is interested. > > > Maria Cristina makes a great point considering work life and living life as two types of activity systems and thinking about their inherent contradictions. What comes from this tension that transcends the two? (Might this exploration echo the comparison between production and demand?) Is Maria Cristina correct that there hasn't been much discussion in this area? if so, I'd like to learn more about that. > > > Great conversations. Thanks. > > > Kind regards, > > > Annalisa From jennamcjenna@gmail.com Thu Nov 3 07:30:41 2016 From: jennamcjenna@gmail.com (Jacob McWilliams) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 08:30:41 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: References: <1477604046100.32976@iped.uio.no> <1477637094283.80763@iped.uio.no> <1477662717568.90322@iped.uio.no> <1CF09B3A-DF07-4538-A198-FDB1B1EDE432@gmail.com> <58174c10.4223620a.cb56a.39b6@mx.google.com> <004801d23447$4aef6110$e0ce2330$@att.net> <581a026f.0f08620a.9bde9.a672@mx.google.com> Message-ID: There's no doubt that "logic," as an outgrowth of objectivist, rationalist epistemology, is gendered--after all, if theorists wants us to believe that all _other_ epistemologies are socially constructed, then it follows that objectivism is too. And it's constructed to benefit those in power--i.e., people who think like, and commonly are, white men. Lots of feminist theorists have written about this. Donna Haraway took us on a wild ride through science's logic fetish back in the 1980s: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3178066?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents. Lots of feminists have written about this. Sadly, most folks in most academic departments are appallingly unfamiliar with their work. Sadly but unsurprisingly. Not to beat the proverbial dead horse, but several listserv members--including me--have tried to introduce this position re: logic in prior xmca threads. The position has mostly either been ignored or loudly rejected out of hand by more vocal participants on this listserv. -- Jacob McWilliams Learning Sciences & Human Development Program University of Colorado Boulder j.mcwilliams@colorado.edu On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 8:12 AM, Greg Mcverry wrote: > I want to bring a call back to the idea of logic and gender. > > Someone in the thread noted that "academic discourse" wasn't about winning > but simply prevailing logic. Anna commented back you could be logical and > not be a "jerk" about it. > > Maybe both statements can be true. > > White males may not excel in this type of logic simply based on their > privilege. Though I am sure privilege plays a huge role. > > Could it be the Western tradition of logic is itself rooted in gender > inequality? It is a field a few thousand years old that was made up by > white men arguing "logically" with other white men. Naturally the discourse > practices would signify and reinforce membership within these circles. > Exclusion of underrepresented voices has influence how the concept of > "logic" has evolved. > > I keep thinking about "logic" and argumentation as I begin to interact with > scholars outside of the US. We have put a strong emphasis on arguing in our > K12 curriculum. Yet when I talk to people from other countries they note a > word for "argumentative writing" or "argumentation" does not really exist > in their language. Which as we know influences thought...which influences > language..and both contribute to culture and activity. > > So could it be the gender bias that has existed in the listserv is a > symptom of stressing a definition of "logic" maybe engendered. Notice the > talk in our models of logic have been proving who is right and who is > wrong? What translation is best for example. > > It is one individual "proving" he is right rather than they reaching a > consensus on what is right. > > > > On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 12:47 AM Annalisa Aguilar wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > Sometimes synchronicity is spooky. I spied this in the Guardian just now. > > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/nov/02/ > silicon-valley-sexism-diversity-valerie-aurora-frame-shift > > > > > > In reply to Maria-Cristina, it's difficult to have work-life balance when > > the division of the personal and the public worlds exists. From what is > > described in biased workplaces (in article above), it's necessary to have > > some sort of protective wall, if only to survive another day. > > > > > > The irony is that people become competitive in the work place because of > a > > perceived scarcity of resources, but in technology it seems to me to be a > > perceived scarcity of privileges. I have never understood how sitting at > a > > keyboard is somehow "hard work." I know it requires effort and > intellectual > > effort in particular, but it's not like working on a farm, where solving > > problems with scarce resources is always the norm. Think bricolage. > > > > > > Maybe this perceived scarcity is the same in academia. Having a worldview > > that the field of knowledge is infinite, seems to be, looking from the > > outside. But perhaps I am unaware of the bricolage people do inside the > > university. I do not mean to diminish truly hard work. > > > > > > Anyway, these resources are culled from the public world to feed the > > personal world in the end, isn't that the true motivation? To protect > home > > and hearth when we aren't talking about invading hoards on longboats > > shooting flaming arrows at our huts shouldn't carry that same impending > > fear, dread, and uncertainty. But sometimes it seems to feel that way, > that > > people behave with that same ferocity of a struggle to the death. > > > > > > It is an illusion, a misperception. But this misperception has its > > apparent reality that creates real fear in people. As if their lives > didn't > > matter and unbalanced equations must be attacked with quadratic > solutions, > > to set the matter straight. > > > > > > Instead, a shared effort is required to permit that defensiveness, born > of > > competition, to dissipate. In order to do that, people have to feel safe. > > So how is safety created in the spaces? Spaces free of ridicule and > > non-acceptance. Then, isn't that what every human being desires and > > requires to flourish? Interesting that that need has no bias. > > > > > > That is why I admire Aurora so much. I really think that she is on to > > something. > > > > > > Larry, rather than reversibility, I'd prefer receptivity or reciprocity. > > > > > > And rather than finer nature, I'd prefer true nature (with an idea that > > being competitive, biased, prejudiced, unethical etc, are actually > > artificial constructs, that when obstructions have been lifted, what is > > natural is to balance what is there (like homeostasis), free from > > hindrances. > > > > > > In order for us to recognize what is fullness in ourselves, fullness must > > already be present within us, otherwise we could not recognize it, we > > wouldn't have affinity toward it. So if we can remove the notion of > > scarcity, then the fullness of who and what we are, which is already > there, > > will be evident. It will have an appearance of emerging from nothing, but > > it's really just appearing like a tree in the fog that was standing quiet > > all along, and all that was required was for the fog to lift. > > > > > > Anyway, I want to lastly add that I bring up demand over production, > which > > Maria Cristina had shown some interest. The idea is that we have demands > > which actually decide production, and these demands are socially based, > > because we have social natures. Even if we are talking about biological > > demands like food and shelter, early childcare, regardless, in those > cases > > there is a social aspect to them. > > > > > > Looking through the other end of the telescope, when we consider demand > > first rather than production, things look interestingly different. If we > > include things in demand in that exploration (rather than things in > > production), we begin to see the social life of things, we start to see > how > > these items go in and out of commodification, where objects have auras of > > value that reside outside of monetary value and markets. > > > > > > Let's consider your dining room table. You bought it in a furniture > store, > > or perhaps online, or from a thrift store or garage sale, maybe it was a > > gift. But as long as you own it, you don't consider the market value of > > your dining room table, or its appreciating value if say it was made by a > > famous furniture maker where in 20-30 years you'll see those items > > appraised on The Antiques Road Show; at least not until you decide you > > don't want to own it anymore. During that time of possession, the dining > > room table starts to have different value, a social value, which is > > determined by its demand, or should I say demand for it. It supports the > > family by providing a comfortable place to eat meals. A place for kids to > > do homework. A place to play card games. Or to cut a dress pattern from > > fabric, etc. All of these are domestic activities, but they have no > > production value in terms of tables. You only need one dining room table. > > Still, the table will generate value in the household, because of the > > activities that the table supports, even if it is to bring people > together > > at holidays, or even if it has only sentimental value, say if the table > is > > damaged and must be repaired, or it has been moved because the room is > > being painted. This description depicts the social life of the dining > room > > table. Which is based upon its demand, not its production. > > > > > > Anyway, as I said previously, my debt for these thought experiments comes > > from Arjun Appadurai. If anyone is interested. > > > > > > Maria Cristina makes a great point considering work life and living life > > as two types of activity systems and thinking about their inherent > > contradictions. What comes from this tension that transcends the two? > > (Might this exploration echo the comparison between production and > demand?) > > Is Maria Cristina correct that there hasn't been much discussion in this > > area? if so, I'd like to learn more about that. > > > > > > Great conversations. Thanks. > > > > > > Kind regards, > > > > > > Annalisa > > > From rein.raud@tlu.ee Thu Nov 3 08:01:35 2016 From: rein.raud@tlu.ee (Rein Raud) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 17:01:35 +0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: References: <1477604046100.32976@iped.uio.no> <1 477637094283.80763@iped.uio.no> <1477662717568.90322@iped.uio.no> <1CF09B3A-DF07-453 8-A198-FDB1B1EDE432@gmail.com> <58174c10.4223620a.cb56a.39b6@mx.google.com> <004801d234 47$4aef6110$e0ce2330$@att.net> <581a026f.0f08620a.9bde9.a672@mx.goo gle.com> Message-ID: Jacob and Greg, Please clarify what do you have in mind when saying that ?logic is gendered?. In order for that sentence (or any other) to be correct or incorrect you already need what I understand should be called ?logic?, i.e. general rules for judging an argument in a context. Does ?logic is gendered? mean that ?logic? is something that representatives of a specific gender have invented f.ex. in order to subdue other genders, or that each gender has its own logic? By the way, I don?t believe there are culture-independent genders, i.e. it means something different to have been called ?man? in ancient Greece or India than f ex in the world of today, so there is certainly a point in claiming that the system of genders is itself gendered, in other words, what cultures have ?naturalized? as divisions into genders are more often than not constructions erected by a gender group in order to dominate others. Such construction, I would argue, can only be taken down with arguments that follow a logic which itself is not gendered, because if it were, it would be a contestant in the field, not the referee. With best wishes, Rein > On 03 Nov 2016, at 16:30, Jacob McWilliams wrote: > > There's no doubt that "logic," as an outgrowth of objectivist, rationalist > epistemology, is gendered--after all, if theorists wants us to believe that > all _other_ epistemologies are socially constructed, then it follows that > objectivism is too. And it's constructed to benefit those in power--i.e., > people who think like, and commonly are, white men. > > Lots of feminist theorists have written about this. Donna Haraway took us > on a wild ride through science's logic fetish back in the 1980s: > http://www.jstor.org/stable/3178066?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents. > > Lots of feminists have written about this. Sadly, most folks in most > academic departments are appallingly unfamiliar with their work. Sadly but > unsurprisingly. > > Not to beat the proverbial dead horse, but several listserv > members--including me--have tried to introduce this position re: logic in > prior xmca threads. The position has mostly either been ignored or loudly > rejected out of hand by more vocal participants on this listserv. > > > -- > > > Jacob McWilliams > Learning Sciences & Human Development Program > University of Colorado Boulder > j.mcwilliams@colorado.edu > > > > On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 8:12 AM, Greg Mcverry wrote: > >> I want to bring a call back to the idea of logic and gender. >> >> Someone in the thread noted that "academic discourse" wasn't about winning >> but simply prevailing logic. Anna commented back you could be logical and >> not be a "jerk" about it. >> >> Maybe both statements can be true. >> >> White males may not excel in this type of logic simply based on their >> privilege. Though I am sure privilege plays a huge role. >> >> Could it be the Western tradition of logic is itself rooted in gender >> inequality? It is a field a few thousand years old that was made up by >> white men arguing "logically" with other white men. Naturally the discourse >> practices would signify and reinforce membership within these circles. >> Exclusion of underrepresented voices has influence how the concept of >> "logic" has evolved. >> >> I keep thinking about "logic" and argumentation as I begin to interact with >> scholars outside of the US. We have put a strong emphasis on arguing in our >> K12 curriculum. Yet when I talk to people from other countries they note a >> word for "argumentative writing" or "argumentation" does not really exist >> in their language. Which as we know influences thought...which influences >> language..and both contribute to culture and activity. >> >> So could it be the gender bias that has existed in the listserv is a >> symptom of stressing a definition of "logic" maybe engendered. Notice the >> talk in our models of logic have been proving who is right and who is >> wrong? What translation is best for example. >> >> It is one individual "proving" he is right rather than they reaching a >> consensus on what is right. >> >> >> >> On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 12:47 AM Annalisa Aguilar wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> >>> Sometimes synchronicity is spooky. I spied this in the Guardian just now. >>> >>> >>> https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/nov/02/ >> silicon-valley-sexism-diversity-valerie-aurora-frame-shift >>> >>> >>> In reply to Maria-Cristina, it's difficult to have work-life balance when >>> the division of the personal and the public worlds exists. From what is >>> described in biased workplaces (in article above), it's necessary to have >>> some sort of protective wall, if only to survive another day. >>> >>> >>> The irony is that people become competitive in the work place because of >> a >>> perceived scarcity of resources, but in technology it seems to me to be a >>> perceived scarcity of privileges. I have never understood how sitting at >> a >>> keyboard is somehow "hard work." I know it requires effort and >> intellectual >>> effort in particular, but it's not like working on a farm, where solving >>> problems with scarce resources is always the norm. Think bricolage. >>> >>> >>> Maybe this perceived scarcity is the same in academia. Having a worldview >>> that the field of knowledge is infinite, seems to be, looking from the >>> outside. But perhaps I am unaware of the bricolage people do inside the >>> university. I do not mean to diminish truly hard work. >>> >>> >>> Anyway, these resources are culled from the public world to feed the >>> personal world in the end, isn't that the true motivation? To protect >> home >>> and hearth when we aren't talking about invading hoards on longboats >>> shooting flaming arrows at our huts shouldn't carry that same impending >>> fear, dread, and uncertainty. But sometimes it seems to feel that way, >> that >>> people behave with that same ferocity of a struggle to the death. >>> >>> >>> It is an illusion, a misperception. But this misperception has its >>> apparent reality that creates real fear in people. As if their lives >> didn't >>> matter and unbalanced equations must be attacked with quadratic >> solutions, >>> to set the matter straight. >>> >>> >>> Instead, a shared effort is required to permit that defensiveness, born >> of >>> competition, to dissipate. In order to do that, people have to feel safe. >>> So how is safety created in the spaces? Spaces free of ridicule and >>> non-acceptance. Then, isn't that what every human being desires and >>> requires to flourish? Interesting that that need has no bias. >>> >>> >>> That is why I admire Aurora so much. I really think that she is on to >>> something. >>> >>> >>> Larry, rather than reversibility, I'd prefer receptivity or reciprocity. >>> >>> >>> And rather than finer nature, I'd prefer true nature (with an idea that >>> being competitive, biased, prejudiced, unethical etc, are actually >>> artificial constructs, that when obstructions have been lifted, what is >>> natural is to balance what is there (like homeostasis), free from >>> hindrances. >>> >>> >>> In order for us to recognize what is fullness in ourselves, fullness must >>> already be present within us, otherwise we could not recognize it, we >>> wouldn't have affinity toward it. So if we can remove the notion of >>> scarcity, then the fullness of who and what we are, which is already >> there, >>> will be evident. It will have an appearance of emerging from nothing, but >>> it's really just appearing like a tree in the fog that was standing quiet >>> all along, and all that was required was for the fog to lift. >>> >>> >>> Anyway, I want to lastly add that I bring up demand over production, >> which >>> Maria Cristina had shown some interest. The idea is that we have demands >>> which actually decide production, and these demands are socially based, >>> because we have social natures. Even if we are talking about biological >>> demands like food and shelter, early childcare, regardless, in those >> cases >>> there is a social aspect to them. >>> >>> >>> Looking through the other end of the telescope, when we consider demand >>> first rather than production, things look interestingly different. If we >>> include things in demand in that exploration (rather than things in >>> production), we begin to see the social life of things, we start to see >> how >>> these items go in and out of commodification, where objects have auras of >>> value that reside outside of monetary value and markets. >>> >>> >>> Let's consider your dining room table. You bought it in a furniture >> store, >>> or perhaps online, or from a thrift store or garage sale, maybe it was a >>> gift. But as long as you own it, you don't consider the market value of >>> your dining room table, or its appreciating value if say it was made by a >>> famous furniture maker where in 20-30 years you'll see those items >>> appraised on The Antiques Road Show; at least not until you decide you >>> don't want to own it anymore. During that time of possession, the dining >>> room table starts to have different value, a social value, which is >>> determined by its demand, or should I say demand for it. It supports the >>> family by providing a comfortable place to eat meals. A place for kids to >>> do homework. A place to play card games. Or to cut a dress pattern from >>> fabric, etc. All of these are domestic activities, but they have no >>> production value in terms of tables. You only need one dining room table. >>> Still, the table will generate value in the household, because of the >>> activities that the table supports, even if it is to bring people >> together >>> at holidays, or even if it has only sentimental value, say if the table >> is >>> damaged and must be repaired, or it has been moved because the room is >>> being painted. This description depicts the social life of the dining >> room >>> table. Which is based upon its demand, not its production. >>> >>> >>> Anyway, as I said previously, my debt for these thought experiments comes >>> from Arjun Appadurai. If anyone is interested. >>> >>> >>> Maria Cristina makes a great point considering work life and living life >>> as two types of activity systems and thinking about their inherent >>> contradictions. What comes from this tension that transcends the two? >>> (Might this exploration echo the comparison between production and >> demand?) >>> Is Maria Cristina correct that there hasn't been much discussion in this >>> area? if so, I'd like to learn more about that. >>> >>> >>> Great conversations. Thanks. >>> >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> >>> Annalisa >>> >> From glassman.13@osu.edu Thu Nov 3 08:29:09 2016 From: glassman.13@osu.edu (Glassman, Michael) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 15:29:09 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: References: <1477604046100.32976@iped.uio.no> <1477637094283.80763@iped.uio.no> <1477662717568.90322@iped.uio.no> <1CF09B3A-DF07-4538-A198-FDB1B1EDE432@gmail.com> <58174c10.4223620a.cb56a.39b6@mx.google.com> <004801d23447$4aef6110$e0ce2330$@att.net> <581a026f.0f08620a.9bde9.a672@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C571CF@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> Hi Greg, Are you making the argument that enclosed logic (logic that follows a set of predetermined feedback loops) is Western and gendered or are you saying that logic in general is Western and gendered. The dominance of the type of enclosed logic that you find in Western academics is relatively new I think (not the type of logic itself, but the dominance of this particular approach to thinking and design). It has become so dominant that we often cannot think outside of it. I think this type of logic is promoted by specific types of ideology that are male dominated. But there have been other types of logic through history that are more open - more based in experimentation and creativity, including for instance Pragmatic logic (look at Dewey), participatory logic (look at Fals Borda and Illich) and open feedback loops (look at von Foerster and Bateson). I'm not sure how gendered these logics are even though they were promoted by white males). There is also a good deal of feminist logic I believe. I agree with you closed logic is troublesome and can be debilitative to discussion. I think this list though goes through different periods. Eugene Matusov used to end his missives with the tag line, "What do you think." Mike has often taken a step back to wonder what he and everybody else is actually talking about. The list I think has been a combination over time of the different types of logic, but just like with the world at large one can come to dominate (especially the enclosed logic because dominance is one of its precepts). I think I disagree with you on argumentation in non-Western cultures (although I wonder how much argumentation actually means argumentation here). It is not that there is no word for it - it is that there is no word for it in educational paradigms - and at least people I talk to from these other cultures are not happy about this. Michael -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Greg Mcverry Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 10:13 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity ; lpscholar2@gmail.com Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse I want to bring a call back to the idea of logic and gender. Someone in the thread noted that "academic discourse" wasn't about winning but simply prevailing logic. Anna commented back you could be logical and not be a "jerk" about it. Maybe both statements can be true. White males may not excel in this type of logic simply based on their privilege. Though I am sure privilege plays a huge role. Could it be the Western tradition of logic is itself rooted in gender inequality? It is a field a few thousand years old that was made up by white men arguing "logically" with other white men. Naturally the discourse practices would signify and reinforce membership within these circles. Exclusion of underrepresented voices has influence how the concept of "logic" has evolved. I keep thinking about "logic" and argumentation as I begin to interact with scholars outside of the US. We have put a strong emphasis on arguing in our K12 curriculum. Yet when I talk to people from other countries they note a word for "argumentative writing" or "argumentation" does not really exist in their language. Which as we know influences thought...which influences language..and both contribute to culture and activity. So could it be the gender bias that has existed in the listserv is a symptom of stressing a definition of "logic" maybe engendered. Notice the talk in our models of logic have been proving who is right and who is wrong? What translation is best for example. It is one individual "proving" he is right rather than they reaching a consensus on what is right. On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 12:47 AM Annalisa Aguilar wrote: > Hello, > > > Sometimes synchronicity is spooky. I spied this in the Guardian just now. > > > https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/nov/02/silicon-valley-sexi > sm-diversity-valerie-aurora-frame-shift > > > In reply to Maria-Cristina, it's difficult to have work-life balance > when the division of the personal and the public worlds exists. From > what is described in biased workplaces (in article above), it's > necessary to have some sort of protective wall, if only to survive another day. > > > The irony is that people become competitive in the work place because > of a perceived scarcity of resources, but in technology it seems to me > to be a perceived scarcity of privileges. I have never understood how > sitting at a keyboard is somehow "hard work." I know it requires > effort and intellectual effort in particular, but it's not like > working on a farm, where solving problems with scarce resources is always the norm. Think bricolage. > > > Maybe this perceived scarcity is the same in academia. Having a > worldview that the field of knowledge is infinite, seems to be, > looking from the outside. But perhaps I am unaware of the bricolage > people do inside the university. I do not mean to diminish truly hard work. > > > Anyway, these resources are culled from the public world to feed the > personal world in the end, isn't that the true motivation? To protect > home and hearth when we aren't talking about invading hoards on > longboats shooting flaming arrows at our huts shouldn't carry that > same impending fear, dread, and uncertainty. But sometimes it seems to > feel that way, that people behave with that same ferocity of a struggle to the death. > > > It is an illusion, a misperception. But this misperception has its > apparent reality that creates real fear in people. As if their lives > didn't matter and unbalanced equations must be attacked with quadratic > solutions, to set the matter straight. > > > Instead, a shared effort is required to permit that defensiveness, > born of competition, to dissipate. In order to do that, people have to feel safe. > So how is safety created in the spaces? Spaces free of ridicule and > non-acceptance. Then, isn't that what every human being desires and > requires to flourish? Interesting that that need has no bias. > > > That is why I admire Aurora so much. I really think that she is on to > something. > > > Larry, rather than reversibility, I'd prefer receptivity or reciprocity. > > > And rather than finer nature, I'd prefer true nature (with an idea > that being competitive, biased, prejudiced, unethical etc, are > actually artificial constructs, that when obstructions have been > lifted, what is natural is to balance what is there (like > homeostasis), free from hindrances. > > > In order for us to recognize what is fullness in ourselves, fullness > must already be present within us, otherwise we could not recognize > it, we wouldn't have affinity toward it. So if we can remove the > notion of scarcity, then the fullness of who and what we are, which is > already there, will be evident. It will have an appearance of emerging > from nothing, but it's really just appearing like a tree in the fog > that was standing quiet all along, and all that was required was for the fog to lift. > > > Anyway, I want to lastly add that I bring up demand over production, > which Maria Cristina had shown some interest. The idea is that we have > demands which actually decide production, and these demands are > socially based, because we have social natures. Even if we are talking > about biological demands like food and shelter, early childcare, > regardless, in those cases there is a social aspect to them. > > > Looking through the other end of the telescope, when we consider > demand first rather than production, things look interestingly > different. If we include things in demand in that exploration (rather > than things in production), we begin to see the social life of things, > we start to see how these items go in and out of commodification, > where objects have auras of value that reside outside of monetary value and markets. > > > Let's consider your dining room table. You bought it in a furniture > store, or perhaps online, or from a thrift store or garage sale, maybe > it was a gift. But as long as you own it, you don't consider the > market value of your dining room table, or its appreciating value if > say it was made by a famous furniture maker where in 20-30 years > you'll see those items appraised on The Antiques Road Show; at least > not until you decide you don't want to own it anymore. During that > time of possession, the dining room table starts to have different > value, a social value, which is determined by its demand, or should I > say demand for it. It supports the family by providing a comfortable > place to eat meals. A place for kids to do homework. A place to play > card games. Or to cut a dress pattern from fabric, etc. All of these > are domestic activities, but they have no production value in terms of tables. You only need one dining room table. > Still, the table will generate value in the household, because of the > activities that the table supports, even if it is to bring people > together at holidays, or even if it has only sentimental value, say if > the table is damaged and must be repaired, or it has been moved > because the room is being painted. This description depicts the social > life of the dining room table. Which is based upon its demand, not its production. > > > Anyway, as I said previously, my debt for these thought experiments > comes from Arjun Appadurai. If anyone is interested. > > > Maria Cristina makes a great point considering work life and living > life as two types of activity systems and thinking about their > inherent contradictions. What comes from this tension that transcends the two? > (Might this exploration echo the comparison between production and > demand?) Is Maria Cristina correct that there hasn't been much > discussion in this area? if so, I'd like to learn more about that. > > > Great conversations. Thanks. > > > Kind regards, > > > Annalisa > From dkirsh@lsu.edu Thu Nov 3 08:47:26 2016 From: dkirsh@lsu.edu (David H Kirshner) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 15:47:26 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: References: <1477604046100.32976@iped.uio.no> <1477637094283.80763@iped.uio.no> <1477662717568.90322@iped.uio.no> <1CF09B3A-DF07-4538-A198-FDB1B1EDE432@gmail.com> <58174c10.4223620a.cb56a.39b6@mx.google.com> <004801d23447$4aef6110$e0ce2330$@att.net> <581a026f.0f08620a.9bde9.a672@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Whereas there's certainly a political dimension to the evolution of discourse forms, it's not the only one. An objectivist, rationalist epistemology became ascendant primarily because it's adaptive. Societies equipped with this discourse were able to create sciences and technologies that enabled them to prevail over other societies. To see how far removed this evolution is from gender politics we only have to look at the history of this ascendance in Europe in which tensions between epistemologies played out primarily between one group of white males empowered by religious institutions and another group of white males reflecting secular power sources. In those terms, I think we have regard first wave feminism as ameliorative. Women won the right to participate in institutions/professions guided by objectivist, rationalist epistemology. Perhaps this kind of logic is regarded as 'male' because of historical associations, or perhaps biological differences between the sexes predispose males to that kind of logic (Kimura, 1999). Whatever the reason, it seems unwise to regard the matter purely in political terms, ignoring the adaptive value discursive practices. David Kimura, D. (1999). Sex differences in the brain. Scientific American, 274, 26-31. http://www.case.edu/affil/sigmaxi/documents/D.KimuraScientificAmerican_gender-brain_.pdf -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Jacob McWilliams Sent: Thursday, November 3, 2016 9:31 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse There's no doubt that "logic," as an outgrowth of objectivist, rationalist epistemology, is gendered--after all, if theorists wants us to believe that all _other_ epistemologies are socially constructed, then it follows that objectivism is too. And it's constructed to benefit those in power--i.e., people who think like, and commonly are, white men. Lots of feminist theorists have written about this. Donna Haraway took us on a wild ride through science's logic fetish back in the 1980s: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3178066?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents. Lots of feminists have written about this. Sadly, most folks in most academic departments are appallingly unfamiliar with their work. Sadly but unsurprisingly. Not to beat the proverbial dead horse, but several listserv members--including me--have tried to introduce this position re: logic in prior xmca threads. The position has mostly either been ignored or loudly rejected out of hand by more vocal participants on this listserv. -- Jacob McWilliams Learning Sciences & Human Development Program University of Colorado Boulder j.mcwilliams@colorado.edu On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 8:12 AM, Greg Mcverry wrote: > I want to bring a call back to the idea of logic and gender. > > Someone in the thread noted that "academic discourse" wasn't about > winning but simply prevailing logic. Anna commented back you could be > logical and not be a "jerk" about it. > > Maybe both statements can be true. > > White males may not excel in this type of logic simply based on their > privilege. Though I am sure privilege plays a huge role. > > Could it be the Western tradition of logic is itself rooted in gender > inequality? It is a field a few thousand years old that was made up by > white men arguing "logically" with other white men. Naturally the > discourse practices would signify and reinforce membership within these circles. > Exclusion of underrepresented voices has influence how the concept of > "logic" has evolved. > > I keep thinking about "logic" and argumentation as I begin to interact > with scholars outside of the US. We have put a strong emphasis on > arguing in our > K12 curriculum. Yet when I talk to people from other countries they > note a word for "argumentative writing" or "argumentation" does not > really exist in their language. Which as we know influences > thought...which influences language..and both contribute to culture and activity. > > So could it be the gender bias that has existed in the listserv is a > symptom of stressing a definition of "logic" maybe engendered. Notice > the talk in our models of logic have been proving who is right and who > is wrong? What translation is best for example. > > It is one individual "proving" he is right rather than they reaching a > consensus on what is right. > > > > On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 12:47 AM Annalisa Aguilar wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > Sometimes synchronicity is spooky. I spied this in the Guardian just now. > > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/nov/02/ > silicon-valley-sexism-diversity-valerie-aurora-frame-shift > > > > > > In reply to Maria-Cristina, it's difficult to have work-life balance > > when the division of the personal and the public worlds exists. From > > what is described in biased workplaces (in article above), it's > > necessary to have some sort of protective wall, if only to survive another day. > > > > > > The irony is that people become competitive in the work place > > because of > a > > perceived scarcity of resources, but in technology it seems to me to > > be a perceived scarcity of privileges. I have never understood how > > sitting at > a > > keyboard is somehow "hard work." I know it requires effort and > intellectual > > effort in particular, but it's not like working on a farm, where > > solving problems with scarce resources is always the norm. Think bricolage. > > > > > > Maybe this perceived scarcity is the same in academia. Having a > > worldview that the field of knowledge is infinite, seems to be, > > looking from the outside. But perhaps I am unaware of the bricolage > > people do inside the university. I do not mean to diminish truly hard work. > > > > > > Anyway, these resources are culled from the public world to feed the > > personal world in the end, isn't that the true motivation? To > > protect > home > > and hearth when we aren't talking about invading hoards on longboats > > shooting flaming arrows at our huts shouldn't carry that same > > impending fear, dread, and uncertainty. But sometimes it seems to > > feel that way, > that > > people behave with that same ferocity of a struggle to the death. > > > > > > It is an illusion, a misperception. But this misperception has its > > apparent reality that creates real fear in people. As if their lives > didn't > > matter and unbalanced equations must be attacked with quadratic > solutions, > > to set the matter straight. > > > > > > Instead, a shared effort is required to permit that defensiveness, > > born > of > > competition, to dissipate. In order to do that, people have to feel safe. > > So how is safety created in the spaces? Spaces free of ridicule and > > non-acceptance. Then, isn't that what every human being desires and > > requires to flourish? Interesting that that need has no bias. > > > > > > That is why I admire Aurora so much. I really think that she is on > > to something. > > > > > > Larry, rather than reversibility, I'd prefer receptivity or reciprocity. > > > > > > And rather than finer nature, I'd prefer true nature (with an idea > > that being competitive, biased, prejudiced, unethical etc, are > > actually artificial constructs, that when obstructions have been > > lifted, what is natural is to balance what is there (like > > homeostasis), free from hindrances. > > > > > > In order for us to recognize what is fullness in ourselves, fullness > > must already be present within us, otherwise we could not recognize > > it, we wouldn't have affinity toward it. So if we can remove the > > notion of scarcity, then the fullness of who and what we are, which > > is already > there, > > will be evident. It will have an appearance of emerging from > > nothing, but it's really just appearing like a tree in the fog that > > was standing quiet all along, and all that was required was for the fog to lift. > > > > > > Anyway, I want to lastly add that I bring up demand over production, > which > > Maria Cristina had shown some interest. The idea is that we have > > demands which actually decide production, and these demands are > > socially based, because we have social natures. Even if we are > > talking about biological demands like food and shelter, early > > childcare, regardless, in those > cases > > there is a social aspect to them. > > > > > > Looking through the other end of the telescope, when we consider > > demand first rather than production, things look interestingly > > different. If we include things in demand in that exploration > > (rather than things in production), we begin to see the social life > > of things, we start to see > how > > these items go in and out of commodification, where objects have > > auras of value that reside outside of monetary value and markets. > > > > > > Let's consider your dining room table. You bought it in a furniture > store, > > or perhaps online, or from a thrift store or garage sale, maybe it > > was a gift. But as long as you own it, you don't consider the market > > value of your dining room table, or its appreciating value if say it > > was made by a famous furniture maker where in 20-30 years you'll see > > those items appraised on The Antiques Road Show; at least not until > > you decide you don't want to own it anymore. During that time of > > possession, the dining room table starts to have different value, a > > social value, which is determined by its demand, or should I say > > demand for it. It supports the family by providing a comfortable > > place to eat meals. A place for kids to do homework. A place to play > > card games. Or to cut a dress pattern from fabric, etc. All of these > > are domestic activities, but they have no production value in terms of tables. You only need one dining room table. > > Still, the table will generate value in the household, because of > > the activities that the table supports, even if it is to bring > > people > together > > at holidays, or even if it has only sentimental value, say if the > > table > is > > damaged and must be repaired, or it has been moved because the room > > is being painted. This description depicts the social life of the > > dining > room > > table. Which is based upon its demand, not its production. > > > > > > Anyway, as I said previously, my debt for these thought experiments > > comes from Arjun Appadurai. If anyone is interested. > > > > > > Maria Cristina makes a great point considering work life and living > > life as two types of activity systems and thinking about their > > inherent contradictions. What comes from this tension that transcends the two? > > (Might this exploration echo the comparison between production and > demand?) > > Is Maria Cristina correct that there hasn't been much discussion in > > this area? if so, I'd like to learn more about that. > > > > > > Great conversations. Thanks. > > > > > > Kind regards, > > > > > > Annalisa > > > From glassman.13@osu.edu Thu Nov 3 08:57:26 2016 From: glassman.13@osu.edu (Glassman, Michael) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 15:57:26 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: References: <1477604046100.32976@iped.uio.no> <1477637094283.80763@iped.uio.no> <1477662717568.90322@iped.uio.no> <1CF09B3A-DF07-4538-A198-FDB1B1EDE432@gmail.com> <58174c10.4223620a.cb56a.39b6@mx.google.com> <004801d23447$4aef6110$e0ce2330$@att.net> <581a026f.0f08620a.9bde9.a672@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C5721D@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> Hi David, I'm not sure I agree with this. I haven't sorted out all my thinking on this so I'm going to refer to Illich who I have been reading lately (caveat, I am always influenced by interesting thinker I am reading at the moment). I think his argument would be objectivist, rationalist logic is adaptive, but basically it is adaptive for those who seek dominance. It can, and often is, used as a blunt force instrument to stymie more subtle forms of human interaction and experience. Of course we must build super highways because that makes our trade more efficient. But do we necessarily want more efficient trade between specific centers of commerce? Then what happens to the local activities that combine trade with discovery and understanding at the day to day level. The argument is made we can't talk about that because it is not logical. Harkening back to Annalisa's post, the objective rationalists then throw in scarcity as a decided variable when perhaps there is no scarcity. Michael -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of David H Kirshner Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 11:47 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse Whereas there's certainly a political dimension to the evolution of discourse forms, it's not the only one. An objectivist, rationalist epistemology became ascendant primarily because it's adaptive. Societies equipped with this discourse were able to create sciences and technologies that enabled them to prevail over other societies. To see how far removed this evolution is from gender politics we only have to look at the history of this ascendance in Europe in which tensions between epistemologies played out primarily between one group of white males empowered by religious institutions and another group of white males reflecting secular power sources. In those terms, I think we have regard first wave feminism as ameliorative. Women won the right to participate in institutions/professions guided by objectivist, rationalist epistemology. Perhaps this kind of logic is regarded as 'male' because of historical associations, or perhaps biological differences between the sexes predispose males to that kind of logic (Kimura, 1999). Whatever the reason, it seems unwise to regard the matter purely in political terms, ignoring the adaptive value discursive practices. David Kimura, D. (1999). Sex differences in the brain. Scientific American, 274, 26-31. http://www.case.edu/affil/sigmaxi/documents/D.KimuraScientificAmerican_gender-brain_.pdf -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Jacob McWilliams Sent: Thursday, November 3, 2016 9:31 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse There's no doubt that "logic," as an outgrowth of objectivist, rationalist epistemology, is gendered--after all, if theorists wants us to believe that all _other_ epistemologies are socially constructed, then it follows that objectivism is too. And it's constructed to benefit those in power--i.e., people who think like, and commonly are, white men. Lots of feminist theorists have written about this. Donna Haraway took us on a wild ride through science's logic fetish back in the 1980s: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3178066?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents. Lots of feminists have written about this. Sadly, most folks in most academic departments are appallingly unfamiliar with their work. Sadly but unsurprisingly. Not to beat the proverbial dead horse, but several listserv members--including me--have tried to introduce this position re: logic in prior xmca threads. The position has mostly either been ignored or loudly rejected out of hand by more vocal participants on this listserv. -- Jacob McWilliams Learning Sciences & Human Development Program University of Colorado Boulder j.mcwilliams@colorado.edu On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 8:12 AM, Greg Mcverry wrote: > I want to bring a call back to the idea of logic and gender. > > Someone in the thread noted that "academic discourse" wasn't about > winning but simply prevailing logic. Anna commented back you could be > logical and not be a "jerk" about it. > > Maybe both statements can be true. > > White males may not excel in this type of logic simply based on their > privilege. Though I am sure privilege plays a huge role. > > Could it be the Western tradition of logic is itself rooted in gender > inequality? It is a field a few thousand years old that was made up by > white men arguing "logically" with other white men. Naturally the > discourse practices would signify and reinforce membership within these circles. > Exclusion of underrepresented voices has influence how the concept of > "logic" has evolved. > > I keep thinking about "logic" and argumentation as I begin to interact > with scholars outside of the US. We have put a strong emphasis on > arguing in our > K12 curriculum. Yet when I talk to people from other countries they > note a word for "argumentative writing" or "argumentation" does not > really exist in their language. Which as we know influences > thought...which influences language..and both contribute to culture and activity. > > So could it be the gender bias that has existed in the listserv is a > symptom of stressing a definition of "logic" maybe engendered. Notice > the talk in our models of logic have been proving who is right and who > is wrong? What translation is best for example. > > It is one individual "proving" he is right rather than they reaching a > consensus on what is right. > > > > On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 12:47 AM Annalisa Aguilar wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > Sometimes synchronicity is spooky. I spied this in the Guardian just now. > > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/nov/02/ > silicon-valley-sexism-diversity-valerie-aurora-frame-shift > > > > > > In reply to Maria-Cristina, it's difficult to have work-life balance > > when the division of the personal and the public worlds exists. From > > what is described in biased workplaces (in article above), it's > > necessary to have some sort of protective wall, if only to survive another day. > > > > > > The irony is that people become competitive in the work place > > because of > a > > perceived scarcity of resources, but in technology it seems to me to > > be a perceived scarcity of privileges. I have never understood how > > sitting at > a > > keyboard is somehow "hard work." I know it requires effort and > intellectual > > effort in particular, but it's not like working on a farm, where > > solving problems with scarce resources is always the norm. Think bricolage. > > > > > > Maybe this perceived scarcity is the same in academia. Having a > > worldview that the field of knowledge is infinite, seems to be, > > looking from the outside. But perhaps I am unaware of the bricolage > > people do inside the university. I do not mean to diminish truly hard work. > > > > > > Anyway, these resources are culled from the public world to feed the > > personal world in the end, isn't that the true motivation? To > > protect > home > > and hearth when we aren't talking about invading hoards on longboats > > shooting flaming arrows at our huts shouldn't carry that same > > impending fear, dread, and uncertainty. But sometimes it seems to > > feel that way, > that > > people behave with that same ferocity of a struggle to the death. > > > > > > It is an illusion, a misperception. But this misperception has its > > apparent reality that creates real fear in people. As if their lives > didn't > > matter and unbalanced equations must be attacked with quadratic > solutions, > > to set the matter straight. > > > > > > Instead, a shared effort is required to permit that defensiveness, > > born > of > > competition, to dissipate. In order to do that, people have to feel safe. > > So how is safety created in the spaces? Spaces free of ridicule and > > non-acceptance. Then, isn't that what every human being desires and > > requires to flourish? Interesting that that need has no bias. > > > > > > That is why I admire Aurora so much. I really think that she is on > > to something. > > > > > > Larry, rather than reversibility, I'd prefer receptivity or reciprocity. > > > > > > And rather than finer nature, I'd prefer true nature (with an idea > > that being competitive, biased, prejudiced, unethical etc, are > > actually artificial constructs, that when obstructions have been > > lifted, what is natural is to balance what is there (like > > homeostasis), free from hindrances. > > > > > > In order for us to recognize what is fullness in ourselves, fullness > > must already be present within us, otherwise we could not recognize > > it, we wouldn't have affinity toward it. So if we can remove the > > notion of scarcity, then the fullness of who and what we are, which > > is already > there, > > will be evident. It will have an appearance of emerging from > > nothing, but it's really just appearing like a tree in the fog that > > was standing quiet all along, and all that was required was for the fog to lift. > > > > > > Anyway, I want to lastly add that I bring up demand over production, > which > > Maria Cristina had shown some interest. The idea is that we have > > demands which actually decide production, and these demands are > > socially based, because we have social natures. Even if we are > > talking about biological demands like food and shelter, early > > childcare, regardless, in those > cases > > there is a social aspect to them. > > > > > > Looking through the other end of the telescope, when we consider > > demand first rather than production, things look interestingly > > different. If we include things in demand in that exploration > > (rather than things in production), we begin to see the social life > > of things, we start to see > how > > these items go in and out of commodification, where objects have > > auras of value that reside outside of monetary value and markets. > > > > > > Let's consider your dining room table. You bought it in a furniture > store, > > or perhaps online, or from a thrift store or garage sale, maybe it > > was a gift. But as long as you own it, you don't consider the market > > value of your dining room table, or its appreciating value if say it > > was made by a famous furniture maker where in 20-30 years you'll see > > those items appraised on The Antiques Road Show; at least not until > > you decide you don't want to own it anymore. During that time of > > possession, the dining room table starts to have different value, a > > social value, which is determined by its demand, or should I say > > demand for it. It supports the family by providing a comfortable > > place to eat meals. A place for kids to do homework. A place to play > > card games. Or to cut a dress pattern from fabric, etc. All of these > > are domestic activities, but they have no production value in terms of tables. You only need one dining room table. > > Still, the table will generate value in the household, because of > > the activities that the table supports, even if it is to bring > > people > together > > at holidays, or even if it has only sentimental value, say if the > > table > is > > damaged and must be repaired, or it has been moved because the room > > is being painted. This description depicts the social life of the > > dining > room > > table. Which is based upon its demand, not its production. > > > > > > Anyway, as I said previously, my debt for these thought experiments > > comes from Arjun Appadurai. If anyone is interested. > > > > > > Maria Cristina makes a great point considering work life and living > > life as two types of activity systems and thinking about their > > inherent contradictions. What comes from this tension that transcends the two? > > (Might this exploration echo the comparison between production and > demand?) > > Is Maria Cristina correct that there hasn't been much discussion in > > this area? if so, I'd like to learn more about that. > > > > > > Great conversations. Thanks. > > > > > > Kind regards, > > > > > > Annalisa > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Thu Nov 3 09:01:36 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 09:01:36 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: References: <1477604046100.32976@iped.uio.no> <1 477637094283.80763@iped.uio.no> <1477662717568.90322@iped.uio.no> <1CF09B3A-DF07-453 8-A198-FDB1B1EDE432@gmail.com> <58174c10.4223620a.cb56a.39b6@mx.google.com> <004801d234 47$4aef6110$e0ce2330$@att.net> <581a026f.0f08620a.9bde9.a672@mx.goo gle.com> Message-ID: <581b5f69.44da420a.50c17.bb2d@mx.google.com> Hi Rein, Your question opens up a direction I want to follow in your leading question. Using your insight on *ity* in previous posts (that have entered my awareness and keep returning and *resuming* a presence in my reflections). We can say we are talking about masculin*ity and feminin*ity as being expressed as generalities in our cultured words and worlds. This involves *logic* and may include logic of feminin*ity as counterparts of the logic of masculin*ity. This is a turn in the conversation. I would suggest we are possibly turning to the ethical dimension as primary. This would include the general logic of (ForGiving) and also the general logic of *hollowed-out* shallow neo-liberal general*ites. I will just repeat this is not expressing the image of two sides of the same coin. The coin image implies two *independent* sides fused in a material stratum (the coin). I hear the *ity* as interrelation, intertwining, chiasm, *each IN the other. I am wondering (with Merleau-Ponty) if this theme also expresses the 3 aspects of the play of activity-gap-passivity or the reverse as passivity-gap-activity as playing out and being expressed in the images of masculin*ity and feminin*ity. The breath of inspiration-gap-expiration or looking-gap-seeing. In the oikos realm the image of the dance of *marriage* as ethical philosophy. For our moment in history to *resume* these themes once again for the first time. The mystery of the gap Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Rein Raud Sent: November 3, 2016 8:05 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse Jacob and Greg, Please clarify what do you have in mind when saying that ?logic is gendered?. In order for that sentence (or any other) to be correct or incorrect you already need what I understand should be called ?logic?, i.e. general rules for judging an argument in a context. Does ?logic is gendered? mean that ?logic? is something that representatives of a specific gender have invented f.ex. in order to subdue other genders, or that each gender has its own logic? By the way, I don?t believe there are culture-independent genders, i.e. it means something different to have been called ?man? in ancient Greece or India than f ex in the world of today, so there is certainly a point in claiming that the system of genders is itself gendered, in other words, what cultures have ?naturalized? as divisions into genders are more often than not constructions erected by a gender group in order to dominate others. Such construction, I would argue, can only be taken down with arguments that follow a logic which itself is not gendered, because if it were, it would be a contestant in the field, not the referee. With best wishes, Rein > On 03 Nov 2016, at 16:30, Jacob McWilliams wrote: > > There's no doubt that "logic," as an outgrowth of objectivist, rationalist > epistemology, is gendered--after all, if theorists wants us to believe that > all _other_ epistemologies are socially constructed, then it follows that > objectivism is too. And it's constructed to benefit those in power--i.e., > people who think like, and commonly are, white men. > > Lots of feminist theorists have written about this. Donna Haraway took us > on a wild ride through science's logic fetish back in the 1980s: > http://www.jstor.org/stable/3178066?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents. > > Lots of feminists have written about this. Sadly, most folks in most > academic departments are appallingly unfamiliar with their work. Sadly but > unsurprisingly. > > Not to beat the proverbial dead horse, but several listserv > members--including me--have tried to introduce this position re: logic in > prior xmca threads. The position has mostly either been ignored or loudly > rejected out of hand by more vocal participants on this listserv. > > > -- > > > Jacob McWilliams > Learning Sciences & Human Development Program > University of Colorado Boulder > j.mcwilliams@colorado.edu > > > > On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 8:12 AM, Greg Mcverry wrote: > >> I want to bring a call back to the idea of logic and gender. >> >> Someone in the thread noted that "academic discourse" wasn't about winning >> but simply prevailing logic. Anna commented back you could be logical and >> not be a "jerk" about it. >> >> Maybe both statements can be true. >> >> White males may not excel in this type of logic simply based on their >> privilege. Though I am sure privilege plays a huge role. >> >> Could it be the Western tradition of logic is itself rooted in gender >> inequality? It is a field a few thousand years old that was made up by >> white men arguing "logically" with other white men. Naturally the discourse >> practices would signify and reinforce membership within these circles. >> Exclusion of underrepresented voices has influence how the concept of >> "logic" has evolved. >> >> I keep thinking about "logic" and argumentation as I begin to interact with >> scholars outside of the US. We have put a strong emphasis on arguing in our >> K12 curriculum. Yet when I talk to people from other countries they note a >> word for "argumentative writing" or "argumentation" does not really exist >> in their language. Which as we know influences thought...which influences >> language..and both contribute to culture and activity. >> >> So could it be the gender bias that has existed in the listserv is a >> symptom of stressing a definition of "logic" maybe engendered. Notice the >> talk in our models of logic have been proving who is right and who is >> wrong? What translation is best for example. >> >> It is one individual "proving" he is right rather than they reaching a >> consensus on what is right. >> >> >> >> On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 12:47 AM Annalisa Aguilar wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> >>> Sometimes synchronicity is spooky. I spied this in the Guardian just now. >>> >>> >>> https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/nov/02/ >> silicon-valley-sexism-diversity-valerie-aurora-frame-shift >>> >>> >>> In reply to Maria-Cristina, it's difficult to have work-life balance when >>> the division of the personal and the public worlds exists. From what is >>> described in biased workplaces (in article above), it's necessary to have >>> some sort of protective wall, if only to survive another day. >>> >>> >>> The irony is that people become competitive in the work place because of >> a >>> perceived scarcity of resources, but in technology it seems to me to be a >>> perceived scarcity of privileges. I have never understood how sitting at >> a >>> keyboard is somehow "hard work." I know it requires effort and >> intellectual >>> effort in particular, but it's not like working on a farm, where solving >>> problems with scarce resources is always the norm. Think bricolage. >>> >>> >>> Maybe this perceived scarcity is the same in academia. Having a worldview >>> that the field of knowledge is infinite, seems to be, looking from the >>> outside. But perhaps I am unaware of the bricolage people do inside the >>> university. I do not mean to diminish truly hard work. >>> >>> >>> Anyway, these resources are culled from the public world to feed the >>> personal world in the end, isn't that the true motivation? To protect >> home >>> and hearth when we aren't talking about invading hoards on longboats >>> shooting flaming arrows at our huts shouldn't carry that same impending >>> fear, dread, and uncertainty. But sometimes it seems to feel that way, >> that >>> people behave with that same ferocity of a struggle to the death. >>> >>> >>> It is an illusion, a misperception. But this misperception has its >>> apparent reality that creates real fear in people. As if their lives >> didn't >>> matter and unbalanced equations must be attacked with quadratic >> solutions, >>> to set the matter straight. >>> >>> >>> Instead, a shared effort is required to permit that defensiveness, born >> of >>> competition, to dissipate. In order to do that, people have to feel safe. >>> So how is safety created in the spaces? Spaces free of ridicule and >>> non-acceptance. Then, isn't that what every human being desires and >>> requires to flourish? Interesting that that need has no bias. >>> >>> >>> That is why I admire Aurora so much. I really think that she is on to >>> something. >>> >>> >>> Larry, rather than reversibility, I'd prefer receptivity or reciprocity. >>> >>> >>> And rather than finer nature, I'd prefer true nature (with an idea that >>> being competitive, biased, prejudiced, unethical etc, are actually >>> artificial constructs, that when obstructions have been lifted, what is >>> natural is to balance what is there (like homeostasis), free from >>> hindrances. >>> >>> >>> In order for us to recognize what is fullness in ourselves, fullness must >>> already be present within us, otherwise we could not recognize it, we >>> wouldn't have affinity toward it. So if we can remove the notion of >>> scarcity, then the fullness of who and what we are, which is already >> there, >>> will be evident. It will have an appearance of emerging from nothing, but >>> it's really just appearing like a tree in the fog that was standing quiet >>> all along, and all that was required was for the fog to lift. >>> >>> >>> Anyway, I want to lastly add that I bring up demand over production, >> which >>> Maria Cristina had shown some interest. The idea is that we have demands >>> which actually decide production, and these demands are socially based, >>> because we have social natures. Even if we are talking about biological >>> demands like food and shelter, early childcare, regardless, in those >> cases >>> there is a social aspect to them. >>> >>> >>> Looking through the other end of the telescope, when we consider demand >>> first rather than production, things look interestingly different. If we >>> include things in demand in that exploration (rather than things in >>> production), we begin to see the social life of things, we start to see >> how >>> these items go in and out of commodification, where objects have auras of >>> value that reside outside of monetary value and markets. >>> >>> >>> Let's consider your dining room table. You bought it in a furniture >> store, >>> or perhaps online, or from a thrift store or garage sale, maybe it was a >>> gift. But as long as you own it, you don't consider the market value of >>> your dining room table, or its appreciating value if say it was made by a >>> famous furniture maker where in 20-30 years you'll see those items >>> appraised on The Antiques Road Show; at least not until you decide you >>> don't want to own it anymore. During that time of possession, the dining >>> room table starts to have different value, a social value, which is >>> determined by its demand, or should I say demand for it. It supports the >>> family by providing a comfortable place to eat meals. A place for kids to >>> do homework. A place to play card games. Or to cut a dress pattern from >>> fabric, etc. All of these are domestic activities, but they have no >>> production value in terms of tables. You only need one dining room table. >>> Still, the table will generate value in the household, because of the >>> activities that the table supports, even if it is to bring people >> together >>> at holidays, or even if it has only sentimental value, say if the table >> is >>> damaged and must be repaired, or it has been moved because the room is >>> being painted. This description depicts the social life of the dining >> room >>> table. Which is based upon its demand, not its production. >>> >>> >>> Anyway, as I said previously, my debt for these thought experiments comes >>> from Arjun Appadurai. If anyone is interested. >>> >>> >>> Maria Cristina makes a great point considering work life and living life >>> as two types of activity systems and thinking about their inherent >>> contradictions. What comes from this tension that transcends the two? >>> (Might this exploration echo the comparison between production and >> demand?) >>> Is Maria Cristina correct that there hasn't been much discussion in this >>> area? if so, I'd like to learn more about that. >>> >>> >>> Great conversations. Thanks. >>> >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> >>> Annalisa >>> >> From smago@uga.edu Thu Nov 3 09:36:16 2016 From: smago@uga.edu (Peter Smagorinsky) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 16:36:16 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: <581b5f69.44da420a.50c17.bb2d@mx.google.com> References: <1477604046100.32976@iped.uio.no> <1 477637094283.80763@iped.uio.no> <1477662717568.90322@iped.uio.no> <1CF09B3A-DF07-453 8-A198-FDB1B1EDE432@gmail.com> <58174c10.4223620a.cb56a.39b6@mx.google.com> <004801d234 47$4aef6110$e0ce2330$@att.net> <581a026f.0f08620a.9bde9.a672@mx.goo gle.com> <581b5f69.44da420a.50c17.bb2d@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Is it perhaps telling that Mike's observation that the xmca discussion is dominated by men has largely been taken up by men? And that Jake's points have been taken up, in my view, somewhat dismissively and at abstract levels rather than at the immediate level at which the problem is located? As a White U.S. male, I consider myself more problem than solution, of which I have none other than to try to listen. But I suspect that this topic has already been shut down in terms of achieving the more equitable balance across the gender and sexuality spectrum of participation. The very problems identified as the topic of discussion appear to me to be replicated in the discussion that has followed. -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 12:02 PM To: Rein Raud ; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse Hi Rein, Your question opens up a direction I want to follow in your leading question. Using your insight on *ity* in previous posts (that have entered my awareness and keep returning and *resuming* a presence in my reflections). We can say we are talking about masculin*ity and feminin*ity as being expressed as generalities in our cultured words and worlds. This involves *logic* and may include logic of feminin*ity as counterparts of the logic of masculin*ity. This is a turn in the conversation. I would suggest we are possibly turning to the ethical dimension as primary. This would include the general logic of (ForGiving) and also the general logic of *hollowed-out* shallow neo-liberal general*ites. I will just repeat this is not expressing the image of two sides of the same coin. The coin image implies two *independent* sides fused in a material stratum (the coin). I hear the *ity* as interrelation, intertwining, chiasm, *each IN the other. I am wondering (with Merleau-Ponty) if this theme also expresses the 3 aspects of the play of activity-gap-passivity or the reverse as passivity-gap-activity as playing out and being expressed in the images of masculin*ity and feminin*ity. The breath of inspiration-gap-expiration or looking-gap-seeing. In the oikos realm the image of the dance of *marriage* as ethical philosophy. For our moment in history to *resume* these themes once again for the first time. The mystery of the gap Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Rein Raud Sent: November 3, 2016 8:05 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse Jacob and Greg, Please clarify what do you have in mind when saying that ?logic is gendered?. In order for that sentence (or any other) to be correct or incorrect you already need what I understand should be called ?logic?, i.e. general rules for judging an argument in a context. Does ?logic is gendered? mean that ?logic? is something that representatives of a specific gender have invented f.ex. in order to subdue other genders, or that each gender has its own logic? By the way, I don?t believe there are culture-independent genders, i.e. it means something different to have been called ?man? in ancient Greece or India than f ex in the world of today, so there is certainly a point in claiming that the system of genders is itself gendered, in other words, what cultures have ?naturalized? as divisions into genders are more often than not constructions erected by a gender group in order to dominate others. Such construction, I would argue, can only be taken down with arguments that follow a logic which itself is not gendered, because if it were, it would be a contestant in the field, not the referee. With best wishes, Rein > On 03 Nov 2016, at 16:30, Jacob McWilliams wrote: > > There's no doubt that "logic," as an outgrowth of objectivist, > rationalist epistemology, is gendered--after all, if theorists wants > us to believe that all _other_ epistemologies are socially > constructed, then it follows that objectivism is too. And it's > constructed to benefit those in power--i.e., people who think like, and commonly are, white men. > > Lots of feminist theorists have written about this. Donna Haraway took > us on a wild ride through science's logic fetish back in the 1980s: > http://www.jstor.org/stable/3178066?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents. > > Lots of feminists have written about this. Sadly, most folks in most > academic departments are appallingly unfamiliar with their work. Sadly > but unsurprisingly. > > Not to beat the proverbial dead horse, but several listserv > members--including me--have tried to introduce this position re: logic > in prior xmca threads. The position has mostly either been ignored or > loudly rejected out of hand by more vocal participants on this listserv. > > > -- > > > Jacob McWilliams > Learning Sciences & Human Development Program University of Colorado > Boulder j.mcwilliams@colorado.edu > > > > On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 8:12 AM, Greg Mcverry wrote: > >> I want to bring a call back to the idea of logic and gender. >> >> Someone in the thread noted that "academic discourse" wasn't about >> winning but simply prevailing logic. Anna commented back you could be >> logical and not be a "jerk" about it. >> >> Maybe both statements can be true. >> >> White males may not excel in this type of logic simply based on their >> privilege. Though I am sure privilege plays a huge role. >> >> Could it be the Western tradition of logic is itself rooted in gender >> inequality? It is a field a few thousand years old that was made up >> by white men arguing "logically" with other white men. Naturally the >> discourse practices would signify and reinforce membership within these circles. >> Exclusion of underrepresented voices has influence how the concept of >> "logic" has evolved. >> >> I keep thinking about "logic" and argumentation as I begin to >> interact with scholars outside of the US. We have put a strong >> emphasis on arguing in our >> K12 curriculum. Yet when I talk to people from other countries they >> note a word for "argumentative writing" or "argumentation" does not >> really exist in their language. Which as we know influences >> thought...which influences language..and both contribute to culture and activity. >> >> So could it be the gender bias that has existed in the listserv is a >> symptom of stressing a definition of "logic" maybe engendered. Notice >> the talk in our models of logic have been proving who is right and >> who is wrong? What translation is best for example. >> >> It is one individual "proving" he is right rather than they reaching >> a consensus on what is right. >> >> >> >> On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 12:47 AM Annalisa Aguilar wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> >>> Sometimes synchronicity is spooky. I spied this in the Guardian just now. >>> >>> >>> https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/nov/02/ >> silicon-valley-sexism-diversity-valerie-aurora-frame-shift >>> >>> >>> In reply to Maria-Cristina, it's difficult to have work-life balance >>> when the division of the personal and the public worlds exists. From >>> what is described in biased workplaces (in article above), it's >>> necessary to have some sort of protective wall, if only to survive another day. >>> >>> >>> The irony is that people become competitive in the work place >>> because of >> a >>> perceived scarcity of resources, but in technology it seems to me to >>> be a perceived scarcity of privileges. I have never understood how >>> sitting at >> a >>> keyboard is somehow "hard work." I know it requires effort and >> intellectual >>> effort in particular, but it's not like working on a farm, where >>> solving problems with scarce resources is always the norm. Think bricolage. >>> >>> >>> Maybe this perceived scarcity is the same in academia. Having a >>> worldview that the field of knowledge is infinite, seems to be, >>> looking from the outside. But perhaps I am unaware of the bricolage >>> people do inside the university. I do not mean to diminish truly hard work. >>> >>> >>> Anyway, these resources are culled from the public world to feed the >>> personal world in the end, isn't that the true motivation? To >>> protect >> home >>> and hearth when we aren't talking about invading hoards on longboats >>> shooting flaming arrows at our huts shouldn't carry that same >>> impending fear, dread, and uncertainty. But sometimes it seems to >>> feel that way, >> that >>> people behave with that same ferocity of a struggle to the death. >>> >>> >>> It is an illusion, a misperception. But this misperception has its >>> apparent reality that creates real fear in people. As if their lives >> didn't >>> matter and unbalanced equations must be attacked with quadratic >> solutions, >>> to set the matter straight. >>> >>> >>> Instead, a shared effort is required to permit that defensiveness, >>> born >> of >>> competition, to dissipate. In order to do that, people have to feel safe. >>> So how is safety created in the spaces? Spaces free of ridicule and >>> non-acceptance. Then, isn't that what every human being desires and >>> requires to flourish? Interesting that that need has no bias. >>> >>> >>> That is why I admire Aurora so much. I really think that she is on >>> to something. >>> >>> >>> Larry, rather than reversibility, I'd prefer receptivity or reciprocity. >>> >>> >>> And rather than finer nature, I'd prefer true nature (with an idea >>> that being competitive, biased, prejudiced, unethical etc, are >>> actually artificial constructs, that when obstructions have been >>> lifted, what is natural is to balance what is there (like >>> homeostasis), free from hindrances. >>> >>> >>> In order for us to recognize what is fullness in ourselves, fullness >>> must already be present within us, otherwise we could not recognize >>> it, we wouldn't have affinity toward it. So if we can remove the >>> notion of scarcity, then the fullness of who and what we are, which >>> is already >> there, >>> will be evident. It will have an appearance of emerging from >>> nothing, but it's really just appearing like a tree in the fog that >>> was standing quiet all along, and all that was required was for the fog to lift. >>> >>> >>> Anyway, I want to lastly add that I bring up demand over production, >> which >>> Maria Cristina had shown some interest. The idea is that we have >>> demands which actually decide production, and these demands are >>> socially based, because we have social natures. Even if we are >>> talking about biological demands like food and shelter, early >>> childcare, regardless, in those >> cases >>> there is a social aspect to them. >>> >>> >>> Looking through the other end of the telescope, when we consider >>> demand first rather than production, things look interestingly >>> different. If we include things in demand in that exploration >>> (rather than things in production), we begin to see the social life >>> of things, we start to see >> how >>> these items go in and out of commodification, where objects have >>> auras of value that reside outside of monetary value and markets. >>> >>> >>> Let's consider your dining room table. You bought it in a furniture >> store, >>> or perhaps online, or from a thrift store or garage sale, maybe it >>> was a gift. But as long as you own it, you don't consider the market >>> value of your dining room table, or its appreciating value if say it >>> was made by a famous furniture maker where in 20-30 years you'll see >>> those items appraised on The Antiques Road Show; at least not until >>> you decide you don't want to own it anymore. During that time of >>> possession, the dining room table starts to have different value, a >>> social value, which is determined by its demand, or should I say >>> demand for it. It supports the family by providing a comfortable >>> place to eat meals. A place for kids to do homework. A place to play >>> card games. Or to cut a dress pattern from fabric, etc. All of these >>> are domestic activities, but they have no production value in terms of tables. You only need one dining room table. >>> Still, the table will generate value in the household, because of >>> the activities that the table supports, even if it is to bring >>> people >> together >>> at holidays, or even if it has only sentimental value, say if the >>> table >> is >>> damaged and must be repaired, or it has been moved because the room >>> is being painted. This description depicts the social life of the >>> dining >> room >>> table. Which is based upon its demand, not its production. >>> >>> >>> Anyway, as I said previously, my debt for these thought experiments >>> comes from Arjun Appadurai. If anyone is interested. >>> >>> >>> Maria Cristina makes a great point considering work life and living >>> life as two types of activity systems and thinking about their >>> inherent contradictions. What comes from this tension that transcends the two? >>> (Might this exploration echo the comparison between production and >> demand?) >>> Is Maria Cristina correct that there hasn't been much discussion in >>> this area? if so, I'd like to learn more about that. >>> >>> >>> Great conversations. Thanks. >>> >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> >>> Annalisa >>> >> From smago@uga.edu Thu Nov 3 09:38:29 2016 From: smago@uga.edu (Peter Smagorinsky) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 16:38:29 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: References: <1477604046100.32976@iped.uio.no> <1 477637094283.80763@iped.uio.no> <1477662717568.90322@iped.uio.no> <1CF09B3A-DF07-453 8-A198-FDB1B1EDE432@gmail.com> <58174c10.4223620a.cb56a.39b6@mx.google.com> <004801d234 47$4aef6110$e0ce2330$@att.net> <581a026f.0f08620a.9bde9.a672@mx.goo gle.com> <581b5f69.44da420a.50c17.bb2d@mx.google.com> Message-ID: I am not a fraud; I am who I say I am. -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Peter Smagorinsky Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 12:36 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse This sender failed our fraud detection checks and may not be who they appear to be. Learn about spoofing at http://aka.ms/LearnAboutSpoofing Is it perhaps telling that Mike's observation that the xmca discussion is dominated by men has largely been taken up by men? And that Jake's points have been taken up, in my view, somewhat dismissively and at abstract levels rather than at the immediate level at which the problem is located? As a White U.S. male, I consider myself more problem than solution, of which I have none other than to try to listen. But I suspect that this topic has already been shut down in terms of achieving the more equitable balance across the gender and sexuality spectrum of participation. The very problems identified as the topic of discussion appear to me to be replicated in the discussion that has followed. -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 12:02 PM To: Rein Raud ; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse Hi Rein, Your question opens up a direction I want to follow in your leading question. Using your insight on *ity* in previous posts (that have entered my awareness and keep returning and *resuming* a presence in my reflections). We can say we are talking about masculin*ity and feminin*ity as being expressed as generalities in our cultured words and worlds. This involves *logic* and may include logic of feminin*ity as counterparts of the logic of masculin*ity. This is a turn in the conversation. I would suggest we are possibly turning to the ethical dimension as primary. This would include the general logic of (ForGiving) and also the general logic of *hollowed-out* shallow neo-liberal general*ites. I will just repeat this is not expressing the image of two sides of the same coin. The coin image implies two *independent* sides fused in a material stratum (the coin). I hear the *ity* as interrelation, intertwining, chiasm, *each IN the other. I am wondering (with Merleau-Ponty) if this theme also expresses the 3 aspects of the play of activity-gap-passivity or the reverse as passivity-gap-activity as playing out and being expressed in the images of masculin*ity and feminin*ity. The breath of inspiration-gap-expiration or looking-gap-seeing. In the oikos realm the image of the dance of *marriage* as ethical philosophy. For our moment in history to *resume* these themes once again for the first time. The mystery of the gap Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Rein Raud Sent: November 3, 2016 8:05 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse Jacob and Greg, Please clarify what do you have in mind when saying that ?logic is gendered?. In order for that sentence (or any other) to be correct or incorrect you already need what I understand should be called ?logic?, i.e. general rules for judging an argument in a context. Does ?logic is gendered? mean that ?logic? is something that representatives of a specific gender have invented f.ex. in order to subdue other genders, or that each gender has its own logic? By the way, I don?t believe there are culture-independent genders, i.e. it means something different to have been called ?man? in ancient Greece or India than f ex in the world of today, so there is certainly a point in claiming that the system of genders is itself gendered, in other words, what cultures have ?naturalized? as divisions into genders are more often than not constructions erected by a gender group in order to dominate others. Such construction, I would argue, can only be taken down with arguments that follow a logic which itself is not gendered, because if it were, it would be a contestant in the field, not the referee. With best wishes, Rein > On 03 Nov 2016, at 16:30, Jacob McWilliams wrote: > > There's no doubt that "logic," as an outgrowth of objectivist, > rationalist epistemology, is gendered--after all, if theorists wants > us to believe that all _other_ epistemologies are socially > constructed, then it follows that objectivism is too. And it's > constructed to benefit those in power--i.e., people who think like, and commonly are, white men. > > Lots of feminist theorists have written about this. Donna Haraway took > us on a wild ride through science's logic fetish back in the 1980s: > http://www.jstor.org/stable/3178066?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents. > > Lots of feminists have written about this. Sadly, most folks in most > academic departments are appallingly unfamiliar with their work. Sadly > but unsurprisingly. > > Not to beat the proverbial dead horse, but several listserv > members--including me--have tried to introduce this position re: logic > in prior xmca threads. The position has mostly either been ignored or > loudly rejected out of hand by more vocal participants on this listserv. > > > -- > > > Jacob McWilliams > Learning Sciences & Human Development Program University of Colorado > Boulder j.mcwilliams@colorado.edu > > > > On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 8:12 AM, Greg Mcverry wrote: > >> I want to bring a call back to the idea of logic and gender. >> >> Someone in the thread noted that "academic discourse" wasn't about >> winning but simply prevailing logic. Anna commented back you could be >> logical and not be a "jerk" about it. >> >> Maybe both statements can be true. >> >> White males may not excel in this type of logic simply based on their >> privilege. Though I am sure privilege plays a huge role. >> >> Could it be the Western tradition of logic is itself rooted in gender >> inequality? It is a field a few thousand years old that was made up >> by white men arguing "logically" with other white men. Naturally the >> discourse practices would signify and reinforce membership within these circles. >> Exclusion of underrepresented voices has influence how the concept of >> "logic" has evolved. >> >> I keep thinking about "logic" and argumentation as I begin to >> interact with scholars outside of the US. We have put a strong >> emphasis on arguing in our >> K12 curriculum. Yet when I talk to people from other countries they >> note a word for "argumentative writing" or "argumentation" does not >> really exist in their language. Which as we know influences >> thought...which influences language..and both contribute to culture and activity. >> >> So could it be the gender bias that has existed in the listserv is a >> symptom of stressing a definition of "logic" maybe engendered. Notice >> the talk in our models of logic have been proving who is right and >> who is wrong? What translation is best for example. >> >> It is one individual "proving" he is right rather than they reaching >> a consensus on what is right. >> >> >> >> On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 12:47 AM Annalisa Aguilar wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> >>> Sometimes synchronicity is spooky. I spied this in the Guardian just now. >>> >>> >>> https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/nov/02/ >> silicon-valley-sexism-diversity-valerie-aurora-frame-shift >>> >>> >>> In reply to Maria-Cristina, it's difficult to have work-life balance >>> when the division of the personal and the public worlds exists. From >>> what is described in biased workplaces (in article above), it's >>> necessary to have some sort of protective wall, if only to survive another day. >>> >>> >>> The irony is that people become competitive in the work place >>> because of >> a >>> perceived scarcity of resources, but in technology it seems to me to >>> be a perceived scarcity of privileges. I have never understood how >>> sitting at >> a >>> keyboard is somehow "hard work." I know it requires effort and >> intellectual >>> effort in particular, but it's not like working on a farm, where >>> solving problems with scarce resources is always the norm. Think bricolage. >>> >>> >>> Maybe this perceived scarcity is the same in academia. Having a >>> worldview that the field of knowledge is infinite, seems to be, >>> looking from the outside. But perhaps I am unaware of the bricolage >>> people do inside the university. I do not mean to diminish truly hard work. >>> >>> >>> Anyway, these resources are culled from the public world to feed the >>> personal world in the end, isn't that the true motivation? To >>> protect >> home >>> and hearth when we aren't talking about invading hoards on longboats >>> shooting flaming arrows at our huts shouldn't carry that same >>> impending fear, dread, and uncertainty. But sometimes it seems to >>> feel that way, >> that >>> people behave with that same ferocity of a struggle to the death. >>> >>> >>> It is an illusion, a misperception. But this misperception has its >>> apparent reality that creates real fear in people. As if their lives >> didn't >>> matter and unbalanced equations must be attacked with quadratic >> solutions, >>> to set the matter straight. >>> >>> >>> Instead, a shared effort is required to permit that defensiveness, >>> born >> of >>> competition, to dissipate. In order to do that, people have to feel safe. >>> So how is safety created in the spaces? Spaces free of ridicule and >>> non-acceptance. Then, isn't that what every human being desires and >>> requires to flourish? Interesting that that need has no bias. >>> >>> >>> That is why I admire Aurora so much. I really think that she is on >>> to something. >>> >>> >>> Larry, rather than reversibility, I'd prefer receptivity or reciprocity. >>> >>> >>> And rather than finer nature, I'd prefer true nature (with an idea >>> that being competitive, biased, prejudiced, unethical etc, are >>> actually artificial constructs, that when obstructions have been >>> lifted, what is natural is to balance what is there (like >>> homeostasis), free from hindrances. >>> >>> >>> In order for us to recognize what is fullness in ourselves, fullness >>> must already be present within us, otherwise we could not recognize >>> it, we wouldn't have affinity toward it. So if we can remove the >>> notion of scarcity, then the fullness of who and what we are, which >>> is already >> there, >>> will be evident. It will have an appearance of emerging from >>> nothing, but it's really just appearing like a tree in the fog that >>> was standing quiet all along, and all that was required was for the fog to lift. >>> >>> >>> Anyway, I want to lastly add that I bring up demand over production, >> which >>> Maria Cristina had shown some interest. The idea is that we have >>> demands which actually decide production, and these demands are >>> socially based, because we have social natures. Even if we are >>> talking about biological demands like food and shelter, early >>> childcare, regardless, in those >> cases >>> there is a social aspect to them. >>> >>> >>> Looking through the other end of the telescope, when we consider >>> demand first rather than production, things look interestingly >>> different. If we include things in demand in that exploration >>> (rather than things in production), we begin to see the social life >>> of things, we start to see >> how >>> these items go in and out of commodification, where objects have >>> auras of value that reside outside of monetary value and markets. >>> >>> >>> Let's consider your dining room table. You bought it in a furniture >> store, >>> or perhaps online, or from a thrift store or garage sale, maybe it >>> was a gift. But as long as you own it, you don't consider the market >>> value of your dining room table, or its appreciating value if say it >>> was made by a famous furniture maker where in 20-30 years you'll see >>> those items appraised on The Antiques Road Show; at least not until >>> you decide you don't want to own it anymore. During that time of >>> possession, the dining room table starts to have different value, a >>> social value, which is determined by its demand, or should I say >>> demand for it. It supports the family by providing a comfortable >>> place to eat meals. A place for kids to do homework. A place to play >>> card games. Or to cut a dress pattern from fabric, etc. All of these >>> are domestic activities, but they have no production value in terms of tables. You only need one dining room table. >>> Still, the table will generate value in the household, because of >>> the activities that the table supports, even if it is to bring >>> people >> together >>> at holidays, or even if it has only sentimental value, say if the >>> table >> is >>> damaged and must be repaired, or it has been moved because the room >>> is being painted. This description depicts the social life of the >>> dining >> room >>> table. Which is based upon its demand, not its production. >>> >>> >>> Anyway, as I said previously, my debt for these thought experiments >>> comes from Arjun Appadurai. If anyone is interested. >>> >>> >>> Maria Cristina makes a great point considering work life and living >>> life as two types of activity systems and thinking about their >>> inherent contradictions. What comes from this tension that transcends the two? >>> (Might this exploration echo the comparison between production and >> demand?) >>> Is Maria Cristina correct that there hasn't been much discussion in >>> this area? if so, I'd like to learn more about that. >>> >>> >>> Great conversations. Thanks. >>> >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> >>> Annalisa >>> >> From mcole@ucsd.edu Thu Nov 3 09:48:22 2016 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 09:48:22 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: References: <1477604046100.32976@iped.uio.no> <1477662717568.90322@iped.uio.no> <58174c10.4223620a.cb56a.39b6@mx.google.com> <581b5f69.44da420a.50c17.bb2d@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Which of Jake's points do you think need to be properly discussed, Peter? And if no women are interested in entering such a discussion, other than silence, which would emphasize the problem one way, there is not alternative but for male voice to be heard. Annalisa and Maria Cortina have had a discussion involving Alfredo, Phillip, and others that seems productive. I have deliberately abstained because I believe it would be doubly unproductive. So, Jake, might you repeat the issues you see being avoided? Or Peter, can bring us back to the elided point? What issues need re-considering that require our attention? mike On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > Is it perhaps telling that Mike's observation that the xmca discussion is > dominated by men has largely been taken up by men? And that Jake's points > have been taken up, in my view, somewhat dismissively and at abstract > levels rather than at the immediate level at which the problem is located? > > As a White U.S. male, I consider myself more problem than solution, of > which I have none other than to try to listen. But I suspect that this > topic has already been shut down in terms of achieving the more equitable > balance across the gender and sexuality spectrum of participation. The very > problems identified as the topic of discussion appear to me to be > replicated in the discussion that has followed. > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of lpscholar2@gmail.com > Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 12:02 PM > To: Rein Raud ; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity < > xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse > > Hi Rein, > Your question opens up a direction I want to follow in your leading > question. > Using your insight on *ity* in previous posts (that have entered my > awareness and keep returning and *resuming* a presence in my reflections). > We can say we are talking about masculin*ity and feminin*ity as being > expressed as generalities in our cultured words and worlds. > This involves *logic* and may include logic of feminin*ity as counterparts > of the logic of masculin*ity. > This is a turn in the conversation. I would suggest we are possibly > turning to the ethical dimension as primary. > This would include the general logic of (ForGiving) and also the general > logic of *hollowed-out* shallow neo-liberal general*ites. > > I will just repeat this is not expressing the image of two sides of the > same coin. The coin image implies two *independent* sides fused in a > material stratum (the coin). > I hear the *ity* as interrelation, intertwining, chiasm, *each IN the > other. > I am wondering (with Merleau-Ponty) if this theme also expresses the 3 > aspects of the play of activity-gap-passivity or the reverse as > passivity-gap-activity as playing out and being expressed in the images of > masculin*ity and feminin*ity. > The breath of inspiration-gap-expiration or looking-gap-seeing. > In the oikos realm the image of the dance of *marriage* as ethical > philosophy. > For our moment in history to *resume* these themes once again for the > first time. > The mystery of the gap > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: Rein Raud > Sent: November 3, 2016 8:05 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse > > Jacob and Greg, > > Please clarify what do you have in mind when saying that ?logic is > gendered?. In order for that sentence (or any other) to be correct or > incorrect you already need what I understand should be called ?logic?, i.e. > general rules for judging an argument in a context. Does ?logic is > gendered? mean that ?logic? is something that representatives of a specific > gender have invented f.ex. in order to subdue other genders, or that each > gender has its own logic? > > By the way, I don?t believe there are culture-independent genders, i.e. it > means something different to have been called ?man? in ancient Greece or > India than f ex in the world of today, so there is certainly a point in > claiming that the system of genders is itself gendered, in other words, > what cultures have ?naturalized? as divisions into genders are more often > than not constructions erected by a gender group in order to dominate > others. Such construction, I would argue, can only be taken down with > arguments that follow a logic which itself is not gendered, because if it > were, it would be a contestant in the field, not the referee. > > With best wishes, > > Rein > > > On 03 Nov 2016, at 16:30, Jacob McWilliams > wrote: > > > > There's no doubt that "logic," as an outgrowth of objectivist, > > rationalist epistemology, is gendered--after all, if theorists wants > > us to believe that all _other_ epistemologies are socially > > constructed, then it follows that objectivism is too. And it's > > constructed to benefit those in power--i.e., people who think like, and > commonly are, white men. > > > > Lots of feminist theorists have written about this. Donna Haraway took > > us on a wild ride through science's logic fetish back in the 1980s: > > http://www.jstor.org/stable/3178066?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents. > > > > Lots of feminists have written about this. Sadly, most folks in most > > academic departments are appallingly unfamiliar with their work. Sadly > > but unsurprisingly. > > > > Not to beat the proverbial dead horse, but several listserv > > members--including me--have tried to introduce this position re: logic > > in prior xmca threads. The position has mostly either been ignored or > > loudly rejected out of hand by more vocal participants on this listserv. > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Jacob McWilliams > > Learning Sciences & Human Development Program University of Colorado > > Boulder j.mcwilliams@colorado.edu > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 8:12 AM, Greg Mcverry > wrote: > > > >> I want to bring a call back to the idea of logic and gender. > >> > >> Someone in the thread noted that "academic discourse" wasn't about > >> winning but simply prevailing logic. Anna commented back you could be > >> logical and not be a "jerk" about it. > >> > >> Maybe both statements can be true. > >> > >> White males may not excel in this type of logic simply based on their > >> privilege. Though I am sure privilege plays a huge role. > >> > >> Could it be the Western tradition of logic is itself rooted in gender > >> inequality? It is a field a few thousand years old that was made up > >> by white men arguing "logically" with other white men. Naturally the > >> discourse practices would signify and reinforce membership within these > circles. > >> Exclusion of underrepresented voices has influence how the concept of > >> "logic" has evolved. > >> > >> I keep thinking about "logic" and argumentation as I begin to > >> interact with scholars outside of the US. We have put a strong > >> emphasis on arguing in our > >> K12 curriculum. Yet when I talk to people from other countries they > >> note a word for "argumentative writing" or "argumentation" does not > >> really exist in their language. Which as we know influences > >> thought...which influences language..and both contribute to culture and > activity. > >> > >> So could it be the gender bias that has existed in the listserv is a > >> symptom of stressing a definition of "logic" maybe engendered. Notice > >> the talk in our models of logic have been proving who is right and > >> who is wrong? What translation is best for example. > >> > >> It is one individual "proving" he is right rather than they reaching > >> a consensus on what is right. > >> > >> > >> > >> On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 12:47 AM Annalisa Aguilar > wrote: > >> > >>> Hello, > >>> > >>> > >>> Sometimes synchronicity is spooky. I spied this in the Guardian just > now. > >>> > >>> > >>> https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/nov/02/ > >> silicon-valley-sexism-diversity-valerie-aurora-frame-shift > >>> > >>> > >>> In reply to Maria-Cristina, it's difficult to have work-life balance > >>> when the division of the personal and the public worlds exists. From > >>> what is described in biased workplaces (in article above), it's > >>> necessary to have some sort of protective wall, if only to survive > another day. > >>> > >>> > >>> The irony is that people become competitive in the work place > >>> because of > >> a > >>> perceived scarcity of resources, but in technology it seems to me to > >>> be a perceived scarcity of privileges. I have never understood how > >>> sitting at > >> a > >>> keyboard is somehow "hard work." I know it requires effort and > >> intellectual > >>> effort in particular, but it's not like working on a farm, where > >>> solving problems with scarce resources is always the norm. Think > bricolage. > >>> > >>> > >>> Maybe this perceived scarcity is the same in academia. Having a > >>> worldview that the field of knowledge is infinite, seems to be, > >>> looking from the outside. But perhaps I am unaware of the bricolage > >>> people do inside the university. I do not mean to diminish truly hard > work. > >>> > >>> > >>> Anyway, these resources are culled from the public world to feed the > >>> personal world in the end, isn't that the true motivation? To > >>> protect > >> home > >>> and hearth when we aren't talking about invading hoards on longboats > >>> shooting flaming arrows at our huts shouldn't carry that same > >>> impending fear, dread, and uncertainty. But sometimes it seems to > >>> feel that way, > >> that > >>> people behave with that same ferocity of a struggle to the death. > >>> > >>> > >>> It is an illusion, a misperception. But this misperception has its > >>> apparent reality that creates real fear in people. As if their lives > >> didn't > >>> matter and unbalanced equations must be attacked with quadratic > >> solutions, > >>> to set the matter straight. > >>> > >>> > >>> Instead, a shared effort is required to permit that defensiveness, > >>> born > >> of > >>> competition, to dissipate. In order to do that, people have to feel > safe. > >>> So how is safety created in the spaces? Spaces free of ridicule and > >>> non-acceptance. Then, isn't that what every human being desires and > >>> requires to flourish? Interesting that that need has no bias. > >>> > >>> > >>> That is why I admire Aurora so much. I really think that she is on > >>> to something. > >>> > >>> > >>> Larry, rather than reversibility, I'd prefer receptivity or > reciprocity. > >>> > >>> > >>> And rather than finer nature, I'd prefer true nature (with an idea > >>> that being competitive, biased, prejudiced, unethical etc, are > >>> actually artificial constructs, that when obstructions have been > >>> lifted, what is natural is to balance what is there (like > >>> homeostasis), free from hindrances. > >>> > >>> > >>> In order for us to recognize what is fullness in ourselves, fullness > >>> must already be present within us, otherwise we could not recognize > >>> it, we wouldn't have affinity toward it. So if we can remove the > >>> notion of scarcity, then the fullness of who and what we are, which > >>> is already > >> there, > >>> will be evident. It will have an appearance of emerging from > >>> nothing, but it's really just appearing like a tree in the fog that > >>> was standing quiet all along, and all that was required was for the > fog to lift. > >>> > >>> > >>> Anyway, I want to lastly add that I bring up demand over production, > >> which > >>> Maria Cristina had shown some interest. The idea is that we have > >>> demands which actually decide production, and these demands are > >>> socially based, because we have social natures. Even if we are > >>> talking about biological demands like food and shelter, early > >>> childcare, regardless, in those > >> cases > >>> there is a social aspect to them. > >>> > >>> > >>> Looking through the other end of the telescope, when we consider > >>> demand first rather than production, things look interestingly > >>> different. If we include things in demand in that exploration > >>> (rather than things in production), we begin to see the social life > >>> of things, we start to see > >> how > >>> these items go in and out of commodification, where objects have > >>> auras of value that reside outside of monetary value and markets. > >>> > >>> > >>> Let's consider your dining room table. You bought it in a furniture > >> store, > >>> or perhaps online, or from a thrift store or garage sale, maybe it > >>> was a gift. But as long as you own it, you don't consider the market > >>> value of your dining room table, or its appreciating value if say it > >>> was made by a famous furniture maker where in 20-30 years you'll see > >>> those items appraised on The Antiques Road Show; at least not until > >>> you decide you don't want to own it anymore. During that time of > >>> possession, the dining room table starts to have different value, a > >>> social value, which is determined by its demand, or should I say > >>> demand for it. It supports the family by providing a comfortable > >>> place to eat meals. A place for kids to do homework. A place to play > >>> card games. Or to cut a dress pattern from fabric, etc. All of these > >>> are domestic activities, but they have no production value in terms of > tables. You only need one dining room table. > >>> Still, the table will generate value in the household, because of > >>> the activities that the table supports, even if it is to bring > >>> people > >> together > >>> at holidays, or even if it has only sentimental value, say if the > >>> table > >> is > >>> damaged and must be repaired, or it has been moved because the room > >>> is being painted. This description depicts the social life of the > >>> dining > >> room > >>> table. Which is based upon its demand, not its production. > >>> > >>> > >>> Anyway, as I said previously, my debt for these thought experiments > >>> comes from Arjun Appadurai. If anyone is interested. > >>> > >>> > >>> Maria Cristina makes a great point considering work life and living > >>> life as two types of activity systems and thinking about their > >>> inherent contradictions. What comes from this tension that transcends > the two? > >>> (Might this exploration echo the comparison between production and > >> demand?) > >>> Is Maria Cristina correct that there hasn't been much discussion in > >>> this area? if so, I'd like to learn more about that. > >>> > >>> > >>> Great conversations. Thanks. > >>> > >>> > >>> Kind regards, > >>> > >>> > >>> Annalisa > >>> > >> > > > > > From dkirsh@lsu.edu Thu Nov 3 09:51:54 2016 From: dkirsh@lsu.edu (David H Kirshner) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 16:51:54 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C5721D@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> References: <1477604046100.32976@iped.uio.no> <1477637094283.80763@iped.uio.no> <1477662717568.90322@iped.uio.no> <1CF09B3A-DF07-4538-A198-FDB1B1EDE432@gmail.com> <58174c10.4223620a.cb56a.39b6@mx.google.com> <004801d23447$4aef6110$e0ce2330$@att.net> <581a026f.0f08620a.9bde9.a672@mx.google.com> <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C5721D@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu> Message-ID: Michael, This seems to confuse the tool with the wielder. As a mathematician and mathematics educator, I understand that mathematics--the purest and most sustained expression of logic--is motivated not by science, but by an aesthetics of pure form. Some mathematics is created instrumentally to address some real-world need. But pure mathematics in general is exploration of form, with applications, if they are ever found, coming to the fore well after the fact--sometimes centuries later, as with conic sections which originally were studied by the Greeks for no other reason than their inherent intrigue, and only became prominent in science during the Renaissance. David -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Glassman, Michael Sent: Thursday, November 3, 2016 10:57 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse Hi David, I'm not sure I agree with this. I haven't sorted out all my thinking on this so I'm going to refer to Illich who I have been reading lately (caveat, I am always influenced by interesting thinker I am reading at the moment). I think his argument would be objectivist, rationalist logic is adaptive, but basically it is adaptive for those who seek dominance. It can, and often is, used as a blunt force instrument to stymie more subtle forms of human interaction and experience. Of course we must build super highways because that makes our trade more efficient. But do we necessarily want more efficient trade between specific centers of commerce? Then what happens to the local activities that combine trade with discovery and understanding at the day to day level. The argument is made we can't talk about that because it is not logical. Harkening back to Annalisa's post, the objective rationalists then throw in scarcity as a decided variable when perhaps there is no scarcity. Michael -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of David H Kirshner Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 11:47 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse Whereas there's certainly a political dimension to the evolution of discourse forms, it's not the only one. An objectivist, rationalist epistemology became ascendant primarily because it's adaptive. Societies equipped with this discourse were able to create sciences and technologies that enabled them to prevail over other societies. To see how far removed this evolution is from gender politics we only have to look at the history of this ascendance in Europe in which tensions between epistemologies played out primarily between one group of white males empowered by religious institutions and another group of white males reflecting secular power sources. In those terms, I think we have regard first wave feminism as ameliorative. Women won the right to participate in institutions/professions guided by objectivist, rationalist epistemology. Perhaps this kind of logic is regarded as 'male' because of historical associations, or perhaps biological differences between the sexes predispose males to that kind of logic (Kimura, 1999). Whatever the reason, it seems unwise to regard the matter purely in political terms, ignoring the adaptive value discursive practices. David Kimura, D. (1999). Sex differences in the brain. Scientific American, 274, 26-31. http://www.case.edu/affil/sigmaxi/documents/D.KimuraScientificAmerican_gender-brain_.pdf -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Jacob McWilliams Sent: Thursday, November 3, 2016 9:31 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse There's no doubt that "logic," as an outgrowth of objectivist, rationalist epistemology, is gendered--after all, if theorists wants us to believe that all _other_ epistemologies are socially constructed, then it follows that objectivism is too. And it's constructed to benefit those in power--i.e., people who think like, and commonly are, white men. Lots of feminist theorists have written about this. Donna Haraway took us on a wild ride through science's logic fetish back in the 1980s: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3178066?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents. Lots of feminists have written about this. Sadly, most folks in most academic departments are appallingly unfamiliar with their work. Sadly but unsurprisingly. Not to beat the proverbial dead horse, but several listserv members--including me--have tried to introduce this position re: logic in prior xmca threads. The position has mostly either been ignored or loudly rejected out of hand by more vocal participants on this listserv. -- Jacob McWilliams Learning Sciences & Human Development Program University of Colorado Boulder j.mcwilliams@colorado.edu On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 8:12 AM, Greg Mcverry wrote: > I want to bring a call back to the idea of logic and gender. > > Someone in the thread noted that "academic discourse" wasn't about > winning but simply prevailing logic. Anna commented back you could be > logical and not be a "jerk" about it. > > Maybe both statements can be true. > > White males may not excel in this type of logic simply based on their > privilege. Though I am sure privilege plays a huge role. > > Could it be the Western tradition of logic is itself rooted in gender > inequality? It is a field a few thousand years old that was made up by > white men arguing "logically" with other white men. Naturally the > discourse practices would signify and reinforce membership within these circles. > Exclusion of underrepresented voices has influence how the concept of > "logic" has evolved. > > I keep thinking about "logic" and argumentation as I begin to interact > with scholars outside of the US. We have put a strong emphasis on > arguing in our > K12 curriculum. Yet when I talk to people from other countries they > note a word for "argumentative writing" or "argumentation" does not > really exist in their language. Which as we know influences > thought...which influences language..and both contribute to culture and activity. > > So could it be the gender bias that has existed in the listserv is a > symptom of stressing a definition of "logic" maybe engendered. Notice > the talk in our models of logic have been proving who is right and who > is wrong? What translation is best for example. > > It is one individual "proving" he is right rather than they reaching a > consensus on what is right. > > > > On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 12:47 AM Annalisa Aguilar wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > Sometimes synchronicity is spooky. I spied this in the Guardian just now. > > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/nov/02/ > silicon-valley-sexism-diversity-valerie-aurora-frame-shift > > > > > > In reply to Maria-Cristina, it's difficult to have work-life balance > > when the division of the personal and the public worlds exists. From > > what is described in biased workplaces (in article above), it's > > necessary to have some sort of protective wall, if only to survive another day. > > > > > > The irony is that people become competitive in the work place > > because of > a > > perceived scarcity of resources, but in technology it seems to me to > > be a perceived scarcity of privileges. I have never understood how > > sitting at > a > > keyboard is somehow "hard work." I know it requires effort and > intellectual > > effort in particular, but it's not like working on a farm, where > > solving problems with scarce resources is always the norm. Think bricolage. > > > > > > Maybe this perceived scarcity is the same in academia. Having a > > worldview that the field of knowledge is infinite, seems to be, > > looking from the outside. But perhaps I am unaware of the bricolage > > people do inside the university. I do not mean to diminish truly hard work. > > > > > > Anyway, these resources are culled from the public world to feed the > > personal world in the end, isn't that the true motivation? To > > protect > home > > and hearth when we aren't talking about invading hoards on longboats > > shooting flaming arrows at our huts shouldn't carry that same > > impending fear, dread, and uncertainty. But sometimes it seems to > > feel that way, > that > > people behave with that same ferocity of a struggle to the death. > > > > > > It is an illusion, a misperception. But this misperception has its > > apparent reality that creates real fear in people. As if their lives > didn't > > matter and unbalanced equations must be attacked with quadratic > solutions, > > to set the matter straight. > > > > > > Instead, a shared effort is required to permit that defensiveness, > > born > of > > competition, to dissipate. In order to do that, people have to feel safe. > > So how is safety created in the spaces? Spaces free of ridicule and > > non-acceptance. Then, isn't that what every human being desires and > > requires to flourish? Interesting that that need has no bias. > > > > > > That is why I admire Aurora so much. I really think that she is on > > to something. > > > > > > Larry, rather than reversibility, I'd prefer receptivity or reciprocity. > > > > > > And rather than finer nature, I'd prefer true nature (with an idea > > that being competitive, biased, prejudiced, unethical etc, are > > actually artificial constructs, that when obstructions have been > > lifted, what is natural is to balance what is there (like > > homeostasis), free from hindrances. > > > > > > In order for us to recognize what is fullness in ourselves, fullness > > must already be present within us, otherwise we could not recognize > > it, we wouldn't have affinity toward it. So if we can remove the > > notion of scarcity, then the fullness of who and what we are, which > > is already > there, > > will be evident. It will have an appearance of emerging from > > nothing, but it's really just appearing like a tree in the fog that > > was standing quiet all along, and all that was required was for the fog to lift. > > > > > > Anyway, I want to lastly add that I bring up demand over production, > which > > Maria Cristina had shown some interest. The idea is that we have > > demands which actually decide production, and these demands are > > socially based, because we have social natures. Even if we are > > talking about biological demands like food and shelter, early > > childcare, regardless, in those > cases > > there is a social aspect to them. > > > > > > Looking through the other end of the telescope, when we consider > > demand first rather than production, things look interestingly > > different. If we include things in demand in that exploration > > (rather than things in production), we begin to see the social life > > of things, we start to see > how > > these items go in and out of commodification, where objects have > > auras of value that reside outside of monetary value and markets. > > > > > > Let's consider your dining room table. You bought it in a furniture > store, > > or perhaps online, or from a thrift store or garage sale, maybe it > > was a gift. But as long as you own it, you don't consider the market > > value of your dining room table, or its appreciating value if say it > > was made by a famous furniture maker where in 20-30 years you'll see > > those items appraised on The Antiques Road Show; at least not until > > you decide you don't want to own it anymore. During that time of > > possession, the dining room table starts to have different value, a > > social value, which is determined by its demand, or should I say > > demand for it. It supports the family by providing a comfortable > > place to eat meals. A place for kids to do homework. A place to play > > card games. Or to cut a dress pattern from fabric, etc. All of these > > are domestic activities, but they have no production value in terms of tables. You only need one dining room table. > > Still, the table will generate value in the household, because of > > the activities that the table supports, even if it is to bring > > people > together > > at holidays, or even if it has only sentimental value, say if the > > table > is > > damaged and must be repaired, or it has been moved because the room > > is being painted. This description depicts the social life of the > > dining > room > > table. Which is based upon its demand, not its production. > > > > > > Anyway, as I said previously, my debt for these thought experiments > > comes from Arjun Appadurai. If anyone is interested. > > > > > > Maria Cristina makes a great point considering work life and living > > life as two types of activity systems and thinking about their > > inherent contradictions. What comes from this tension that transcends the two? > > (Might this exploration echo the comparison between production and > demand?) > > Is Maria Cristina correct that there hasn't been much discussion in > > this area? if so, I'd like to learn more about that. > > > > > > Great conversations. Thanks. > > > > > > Kind regards, > > > > > > Annalisa > > > From jennamcjenna@gmail.com Thu Nov 3 10:04:13 2016 From: jennamcjenna@gmail.com (Jacob McWilliams) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 11:04:13 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: References: <1477604046100.32976@iped.uio.no> <1477662717568.90322@iped.uio.no> <58174c10.4223620a.cb56a.39b6@mx.google.com> <581b5f69.44da420a.50c17.bb2d@mx.google.com> Message-ID: It actually causes me fairly intense distress every time I decide to post to this listserv. Here's how the conversation went with my partner: me: I have made the ill-advised decision to weigh in on gender disparities on that academic listserv I've told you about. partner: Ok, as long as you remember what happened last time you tried that. me: This time will be different! partner: ha! ha! ...a few days pass... me: to follow up, I can report that the conversation went exactly as you might have expected. partner: Mostly men, and everybody wanted you to double-justify your points in order to even consider them? me: yep. partner: Let's go play outside. me: yep. I'm glad a few female-identified folks have made the decision to jump into this thread. But I'm sad that the vast majority of women, when invited, still chose to remain silent. Let's not pretend that's their fault, or their problem. Side note: Kimura's research has been widely debunked, as has the research of many others who do similar "sex-based brain differences research." See, for example, the work of Ann Fausto-Sterling and Rebecca Jordan-Young. -- Jacob McWilliams Learning Sciences and Human Development Program University of Colorado Boulder j.mcwilliams@colorado.edu On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 10:48 AM, mike cole wrote: > Which of Jake's points do you think need to be properly discussed, Peter? > And if no women are interested in entering such a discussion, > other than silence, which would emphasize the problem one way, there is not > alternative but for male voice to be heard. > > Annalisa and Maria Cortina have had a discussion involving Alfredo, > Phillip, and others that seems productive. I have deliberately abstained > because I believe it would be doubly unproductive. > > So, Jake, might you repeat the issues you see being avoided? Or Peter, can > bring us back to the elided point? > > What issues need re-considering that require our attention? > > mike > > On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > > Is it perhaps telling that Mike's observation that the xmca discussion is > > dominated by men has largely been taken up by men? And that Jake's points > > have been taken up, in my view, somewhat dismissively and at abstract > > levels rather than at the immediate level at which the problem is > located? > > > > As a White U.S. male, I consider myself more problem than solution, of > > which I have none other than to try to listen. But I suspect that this > > topic has already been shut down in terms of achieving the more equitable > > balance across the gender and sexuality spectrum of participation. The > very > > problems identified as the topic of discussion appear to me to be > > replicated in the discussion that has followed. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 12:02 PM > > To: Rein Raud ; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity < > > xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse > > > > Hi Rein, > > Your question opens up a direction I want to follow in your leading > > question. > > Using your insight on *ity* in previous posts (that have entered my > > awareness and keep returning and *resuming* a presence in my > reflections). > > We can say we are talking about masculin*ity and feminin*ity as being > > expressed as generalities in our cultured words and worlds. > > This involves *logic* and may include logic of feminin*ity as > counterparts > > of the logic of masculin*ity. > > This is a turn in the conversation. I would suggest we are possibly > > turning to the ethical dimension as primary. > > This would include the general logic of (ForGiving) and also the general > > logic of *hollowed-out* shallow neo-liberal general*ites. > > > > I will just repeat this is not expressing the image of two sides of the > > same coin. The coin image implies two *independent* sides fused in a > > material stratum (the coin). > > I hear the *ity* as interrelation, intertwining, chiasm, *each IN the > > other. > > I am wondering (with Merleau-Ponty) if this theme also expresses the 3 > > aspects of the play of activity-gap-passivity or the reverse as > > passivity-gap-activity as playing out and being expressed in the images > of > > masculin*ity and feminin*ity. > > The breath of inspiration-gap-expiration or looking-gap-seeing. > > In the oikos realm the image of the dance of *marriage* as ethical > > philosophy. > > For our moment in history to *resume* these themes once again for the > > first time. > > The mystery of the gap > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > From: Rein Raud > > Sent: November 3, 2016 8:05 AM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse > > > > Jacob and Greg, > > > > Please clarify what do you have in mind when saying that ?logic is > > gendered?. In order for that sentence (or any other) to be correct or > > incorrect you already need what I understand should be called ?logic?, > i.e. > > general rules for judging an argument in a context. Does ?logic is > > gendered? mean that ?logic? is something that representatives of a > specific > > gender have invented f.ex. in order to subdue other genders, or that each > > gender has its own logic? > > > > By the way, I don?t believe there are culture-independent genders, i.e. > it > > means something different to have been called ?man? in ancient Greece or > > India than f ex in the world of today, so there is certainly a point in > > claiming that the system of genders is itself gendered, in other words, > > what cultures have ?naturalized? as divisions into genders are more often > > than not constructions erected by a gender group in order to dominate > > others. Such construction, I would argue, can only be taken down with > > arguments that follow a logic which itself is not gendered, because if it > > were, it would be a contestant in the field, not the referee. > > > > With best wishes, > > > > Rein > > > > > On 03 Nov 2016, at 16:30, Jacob McWilliams > > wrote: > > > > > > There's no doubt that "logic," as an outgrowth of objectivist, > > > rationalist epistemology, is gendered--after all, if theorists wants > > > us to believe that all _other_ epistemologies are socially > > > constructed, then it follows that objectivism is too. And it's > > > constructed to benefit those in power--i.e., people who think like, and > > commonly are, white men. > > > > > > Lots of feminist theorists have written about this. Donna Haraway took > > > us on a wild ride through science's logic fetish back in the 1980s: > > > http://www.jstor.org/stable/3178066?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents. > > > > > > Lots of feminists have written about this. Sadly, most folks in most > > > academic departments are appallingly unfamiliar with their work. Sadly > > > but unsurprisingly. > > > > > > Not to beat the proverbial dead horse, but several listserv > > > members--including me--have tried to introduce this position re: logic > > > in prior xmca threads. The position has mostly either been ignored or > > > loudly rejected out of hand by more vocal participants on this > listserv. > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > Jacob McWilliams > > > Learning Sciences & Human Development Program University of Colorado > > > Boulder j.mcwilliams@colorado.edu > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 8:12 AM, Greg Mcverry > > wrote: > > > > > >> I want to bring a call back to the idea of logic and gender. > > >> > > >> Someone in the thread noted that "academic discourse" wasn't about > > >> winning but simply prevailing logic. Anna commented back you could be > > >> logical and not be a "jerk" about it. > > >> > > >> Maybe both statements can be true. > > >> > > >> White males may not excel in this type of logic simply based on their > > >> privilege. Though I am sure privilege plays a huge role. > > >> > > >> Could it be the Western tradition of logic is itself rooted in gender > > >> inequality? It is a field a few thousand years old that was made up > > >> by white men arguing "logically" with other white men. Naturally the > > >> discourse practices would signify and reinforce membership within > these > > circles. > > >> Exclusion of underrepresented voices has influence how the concept of > > >> "logic" has evolved. > > >> > > >> I keep thinking about "logic" and argumentation as I begin to > > >> interact with scholars outside of the US. We have put a strong > > >> emphasis on arguing in our > > >> K12 curriculum. Yet when I talk to people from other countries they > > >> note a word for "argumentative writing" or "argumentation" does not > > >> really exist in their language. Which as we know influences > > >> thought...which influences language..and both contribute to culture > and > > activity. > > >> > > >> So could it be the gender bias that has existed in the listserv is a > > >> symptom of stressing a definition of "logic" maybe engendered. Notice > > >> the talk in our models of logic have been proving who is right and > > >> who is wrong? What translation is best for example. > > >> > > >> It is one individual "proving" he is right rather than they reaching > > >> a consensus on what is right. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 12:47 AM Annalisa Aguilar > > wrote: > > >> > > >>> Hello, > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Sometimes synchronicity is spooky. I spied this in the Guardian just > > now. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/nov/02/ > > >> silicon-valley-sexism-diversity-valerie-aurora-frame-shift > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> In reply to Maria-Cristina, it's difficult to have work-life balance > > >>> when the division of the personal and the public worlds exists. From > > >>> what is described in biased workplaces (in article above), it's > > >>> necessary to have some sort of protective wall, if only to survive > > another day. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> The irony is that people become competitive in the work place > > >>> because of > > >> a > > >>> perceived scarcity of resources, but in technology it seems to me to > > >>> be a perceived scarcity of privileges. I have never understood how > > >>> sitting at > > >> a > > >>> keyboard is somehow "hard work." I know it requires effort and > > >> intellectual > > >>> effort in particular, but it's not like working on a farm, where > > >>> solving problems with scarce resources is always the norm. Think > > bricolage. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Maybe this perceived scarcity is the same in academia. Having a > > >>> worldview that the field of knowledge is infinite, seems to be, > > >>> looking from the outside. But perhaps I am unaware of the bricolage > > >>> people do inside the university. I do not mean to diminish truly hard > > work. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Anyway, these resources are culled from the public world to feed the > > >>> personal world in the end, isn't that the true motivation? To > > >>> protect > > >> home > > >>> and hearth when we aren't talking about invading hoards on longboats > > >>> shooting flaming arrows at our huts shouldn't carry that same > > >>> impending fear, dread, and uncertainty. But sometimes it seems to > > >>> feel that way, > > >> that > > >>> people behave with that same ferocity of a struggle to the death. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> It is an illusion, a misperception. But this misperception has its > > >>> apparent reality that creates real fear in people. As if their lives > > >> didn't > > >>> matter and unbalanced equations must be attacked with quadratic > > >> solutions, > > >>> to set the matter straight. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Instead, a shared effort is required to permit that defensiveness, > > >>> born > > >> of > > >>> competition, to dissipate. In order to do that, people have to feel > > safe. > > >>> So how is safety created in the spaces? Spaces free of ridicule and > > >>> non-acceptance. Then, isn't that what every human being desires and > > >>> requires to flourish? Interesting that that need has no bias. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> That is why I admire Aurora so much. I really think that she is on > > >>> to something. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Larry, rather than reversibility, I'd prefer receptivity or > > reciprocity. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> And rather than finer nature, I'd prefer true nature (with an idea > > >>> that being competitive, biased, prejudiced, unethical etc, are > > >>> actually artificial constructs, that when obstructions have been > > >>> lifted, what is natural is to balance what is there (like > > >>> homeostasis), free from hindrances. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> In order for us to recognize what is fullness in ourselves, fullness > > >>> must already be present within us, otherwise we could not recognize > > >>> it, we wouldn't have affinity toward it. So if we can remove the > > >>> notion of scarcity, then the fullness of who and what we are, which > > >>> is already > > >> there, > > >>> will be evident. It will have an appearance of emerging from > > >>> nothing, but it's really just appearing like a tree in the fog that > > >>> was standing quiet all along, and all that was required was for the > > fog to lift. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Anyway, I want to lastly add that I bring up demand over production, > > >> which > > >>> Maria Cristina had shown some interest. The idea is that we have > > >>> demands which actually decide production, and these demands are > > >>> socially based, because we have social natures. Even if we are > > >>> talking about biological demands like food and shelter, early > > >>> childcare, regardless, in those > > >> cases > > >>> there is a social aspect to them. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Looking through the other end of the telescope, when we consider > > >>> demand first rather than production, things look interestingly > > >>> different. If we include things in demand in that exploration > > >>> (rather than things in production), we begin to see the social life > > >>> of things, we start to see > > >> how > > >>> these items go in and out of commodification, where objects have > > >>> auras of value that reside outside of monetary value and markets. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Let's consider your dining room table. You bought it in a furniture > > >> store, > > >>> or perhaps online, or from a thrift store or garage sale, maybe it > > >>> was a gift. But as long as you own it, you don't consider the market > > >>> value of your dining room table, or its appreciating value if say it > > >>> was made by a famous furniture maker where in 20-30 years you'll see > > >>> those items appraised on The Antiques Road Show; at least not until > > >>> you decide you don't want to own it anymore. During that time of > > >>> possession, the dining room table starts to have different value, a > > >>> social value, which is determined by its demand, or should I say > > >>> demand for it. It supports the family by providing a comfortable > > >>> place to eat meals. A place for kids to do homework. A place to play > > >>> card games. Or to cut a dress pattern from fabric, etc. All of these > > >>> are domestic activities, but they have no production value in terms > of > > tables. You only need one dining room table. > > >>> Still, the table will generate value in the household, because of > > >>> the activities that the table supports, even if it is to bring > > >>> people > > >> together > > >>> at holidays, or even if it has only sentimental value, say if the > > >>> table > > >> is > > >>> damaged and must be repaired, or it has been moved because the room > > >>> is being painted. This description depicts the social life of the > > >>> dining > > >> room > > >>> table. Which is based upon its demand, not its production. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Anyway, as I said previously, my debt for these thought experiments > > >>> comes from Arjun Appadurai. If anyone is interested. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Maria Cristina makes a great point considering work life and living > > >>> life as two types of activity systems and thinking about their > > >>> inherent contradictions. What comes from this tension that transcends > > the two? > > >>> (Might this exploration echo the comparison between production and > > >> demand?) > > >>> Is Maria Cristina correct that there hasn't been much discussion in > > >>> this area? if so, I'd like to learn more about that. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Great conversations. Thanks. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Kind regards, > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Annalisa > > >>> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > From smago@uga.edu Thu Nov 3 10:11:13 2016 From: smago@uga.edu (Peter Smagorinsky) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 17:11:13 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: References: <1477604046100.32976@iped.uio.no> <1477662717568.90322@iped.uio.no> <58174c10.4223620a.cb56a.39b6@mx.google.com> <581b5f69.44da420a.50c17.bb2d@mx.google.com> Message-ID: In advance, in case this note gets tagged as a fraud, I hereby certify its authenticity as a product of my own construction and submission. I think that Jake's point about logics had potential, but got shut down when zir (I'm using the ungendered pronoun here, per https://genderneutralpronoun.wordpress.com/tag/ze-and-zir/) notion of logic was not accorded respect. I found the challenge to not involve an invitation to elaborate, but to put Jake's credibility on the defensive. At least, that's how it looked on my screen. I should say that Jake and I have been friends for a number of years, and so perhaps I'm being oversensitive, but I interpreted the response as one that shuts down discussion rather than promoting it. And it's still a lot of white guys dominating this discussion, which I infer is not helping to promote equitable participation. I'd disagree, Mike, that no women are interested, although that's just a guess. Rather, the first set of discussants came in very quickly and remade the discussion in their own terms. I wonder if "wait time" would have produced a different dynamic and set of participants. -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 12:48 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse Which of Jake's points do you think need to be properly discussed, Peter? And if no women are interested in entering such a discussion, other than silence, which would emphasize the problem one way, there is not alternative but for male voice to be heard. Annalisa and Maria Cortina have had a discussion involving Alfredo, Phillip, and others that seems productive. I have deliberately abstained because I believe it would be doubly unproductive. So, Jake, might you repeat the issues you see being avoided? Or Peter, can bring us back to the elided point? What issues need re-considering that require our attention? mike On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > Is it perhaps telling that Mike's observation that the xmca discussion > is dominated by men has largely been taken up by men? And that Jake's > points have been taken up, in my view, somewhat dismissively and at > abstract levels rather than at the immediate level at which the problem is located? > > As a White U.S. male, I consider myself more problem than solution, of > which I have none other than to try to listen. But I suspect that this > topic has already been shut down in terms of achieving the more > equitable balance across the gender and sexuality spectrum of > participation. The very problems identified as the topic of discussion > appear to me to be replicated in the discussion that has followed. > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of lpscholar2@gmail.com > Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 12:02 PM > To: Rein Raud ; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity < > xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse > > Hi Rein, > Your question opens up a direction I want to follow in your leading > question. > Using your insight on *ity* in previous posts (that have entered my > awareness and keep returning and *resuming* a presence in my reflections). > We can say we are talking about masculin*ity and feminin*ity as being > expressed as generalities in our cultured words and worlds. > This involves *logic* and may include logic of feminin*ity as > counterparts of the logic of masculin*ity. > This is a turn in the conversation. I would suggest we are possibly > turning to the ethical dimension as primary. > This would include the general logic of (ForGiving) and also the > general logic of *hollowed-out* shallow neo-liberal general*ites. > > I will just repeat this is not expressing the image of two sides of > the same coin. The coin image implies two *independent* sides fused in > a material stratum (the coin). > I hear the *ity* as interrelation, intertwining, chiasm, *each IN the > other. > I am wondering (with Merleau-Ponty) if this theme also expresses the 3 > aspects of the play of activity-gap-passivity or the reverse as > passivity-gap-activity as playing out and being expressed in the > images of masculin*ity and feminin*ity. > The breath of inspiration-gap-expiration or looking-gap-seeing. > In the oikos realm the image of the dance of *marriage* as ethical > philosophy. > For our moment in history to *resume* these themes once again for the > first time. > The mystery of the gap > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: Rein Raud > Sent: November 3, 2016 8:05 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse > > Jacob and Greg, > > Please clarify what do you have in mind when saying that ?logic is > gendered?. In order for that sentence (or any other) to be correct or > incorrect you already need what I understand should be called ?logic?, i.e. > general rules for judging an argument in a context. Does ?logic is > gendered? mean that ?logic? is something that representatives of a > specific gender have invented f.ex. in order to subdue other genders, > or that each gender has its own logic? > > By the way, I don?t believe there are culture-independent genders, > i.e. it means something different to have been called ?man? in ancient > Greece or India than f ex in the world of today, so there is certainly > a point in claiming that the system of genders is itself gendered, in > other words, what cultures have ?naturalized? as divisions into > genders are more often than not constructions erected by a gender > group in order to dominate others. Such construction, I would argue, > can only be taken down with arguments that follow a logic which itself > is not gendered, because if it were, it would be a contestant in the field, not the referee. > > With best wishes, > > Rein > > > On 03 Nov 2016, at 16:30, Jacob McWilliams > wrote: > > > > There's no doubt that "logic," as an outgrowth of objectivist, > > rationalist epistemology, is gendered--after all, if theorists wants > > us to believe that all _other_ epistemologies are socially > > constructed, then it follows that objectivism is too. And it's > > constructed to benefit those in power--i.e., people who think like, > > and > commonly are, white men. > > > > Lots of feminist theorists have written about this. Donna Haraway > > took us on a wild ride through science's logic fetish back in the 1980s: > > http://www.jstor.org/stable/3178066?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents. > > > > Lots of feminists have written about this. Sadly, most folks in most > > academic departments are appallingly unfamiliar with their work. > > Sadly but unsurprisingly. > > > > Not to beat the proverbial dead horse, but several listserv > > members--including me--have tried to introduce this position re: > > logic in prior xmca threads. The position has mostly either been > > ignored or loudly rejected out of hand by more vocal participants on this listserv. > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Jacob McWilliams > > Learning Sciences & Human Development Program University of Colorado > > Boulder j.mcwilliams@colorado.edu > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 8:12 AM, Greg Mcverry > > > wrote: > > > >> I want to bring a call back to the idea of logic and gender. > >> > >> Someone in the thread noted that "academic discourse" wasn't about > >> winning but simply prevailing logic. Anna commented back you could > >> be logical and not be a "jerk" about it. > >> > >> Maybe both statements can be true. > >> > >> White males may not excel in this type of logic simply based on > >> their privilege. Though I am sure privilege plays a huge role. > >> > >> Could it be the Western tradition of logic is itself rooted in > >> gender inequality? It is a field a few thousand years old that was > >> made up by white men arguing "logically" with other white men. > >> Naturally the discourse practices would signify and reinforce > >> membership within these > circles. > >> Exclusion of underrepresented voices has influence how the concept > >> of "logic" has evolved. > >> > >> I keep thinking about "logic" and argumentation as I begin to > >> interact with scholars outside of the US. We have put a strong > >> emphasis on arguing in our > >> K12 curriculum. Yet when I talk to people from other countries they > >> note a word for "argumentative writing" or "argumentation" does not > >> really exist in their language. Which as we know influences > >> thought...which influences language..and both contribute to culture > >> and > activity. > >> > >> So could it be the gender bias that has existed in the listserv is > >> a symptom of stressing a definition of "logic" maybe engendered. > >> Notice the talk in our models of logic have been proving who is > >> right and who is wrong? What translation is best for example. > >> > >> It is one individual "proving" he is right rather than they > >> reaching a consensus on what is right. > >> > >> > >> > >> On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 12:47 AM Annalisa Aguilar > wrote: > >> > >>> Hello, > >>> > >>> > >>> Sometimes synchronicity is spooky. I spied this in the Guardian > >>> just > now. > >>> > >>> > >>> https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/nov/02/ > >> silicon-valley-sexism-diversity-valerie-aurora-frame-shift > >>> > >>> > >>> In reply to Maria-Cristina, it's difficult to have work-life > >>> balance when the division of the personal and the public worlds > >>> exists. From what is described in biased workplaces (in article > >>> above), it's necessary to have some sort of protective wall, if > >>> only to survive > another day. > >>> > >>> > >>> The irony is that people become competitive in the work place > >>> because of > >> a > >>> perceived scarcity of resources, but in technology it seems to me > >>> to be a perceived scarcity of privileges. I have never understood > >>> how sitting at > >> a > >>> keyboard is somehow "hard work." I know it requires effort and > >> intellectual > >>> effort in particular, but it's not like working on a farm, where > >>> solving problems with scarce resources is always the norm. Think > bricolage. > >>> > >>> > >>> Maybe this perceived scarcity is the same in academia. Having a > >>> worldview that the field of knowledge is infinite, seems to be, > >>> looking from the outside. But perhaps I am unaware of the > >>> bricolage people do inside the university. I do not mean to > >>> diminish truly hard > work. > >>> > >>> > >>> Anyway, these resources are culled from the public world to feed > >>> the personal world in the end, isn't that the true motivation? To > >>> protect > >> home > >>> and hearth when we aren't talking about invading hoards on > >>> longboats shooting flaming arrows at our huts shouldn't carry that > >>> same impending fear, dread, and uncertainty. But sometimes it > >>> seems to feel that way, > >> that > >>> people behave with that same ferocity of a struggle to the death. > >>> > >>> > >>> It is an illusion, a misperception. But this misperception has its > >>> apparent reality that creates real fear in people. As if their > >>> lives > >> didn't > >>> matter and unbalanced equations must be attacked with quadratic > >> solutions, > >>> to set the matter straight. > >>> > >>> > >>> Instead, a shared effort is required to permit that defensiveness, > >>> born > >> of > >>> competition, to dissipate. In order to do that, people have to > >>> feel > safe. > >>> So how is safety created in the spaces? Spaces free of ridicule > >>> and non-acceptance. Then, isn't that what every human being > >>> desires and requires to flourish? Interesting that that need has no bias. > >>> > >>> > >>> That is why I admire Aurora so much. I really think that she is on > >>> to something. > >>> > >>> > >>> Larry, rather than reversibility, I'd prefer receptivity or > reciprocity. > >>> > >>> > >>> And rather than finer nature, I'd prefer true nature (with an idea > >>> that being competitive, biased, prejudiced, unethical etc, are > >>> actually artificial constructs, that when obstructions have been > >>> lifted, what is natural is to balance what is there (like > >>> homeostasis), free from hindrances. > >>> > >>> > >>> In order for us to recognize what is fullness in ourselves, > >>> fullness must already be present within us, otherwise we could not > >>> recognize it, we wouldn't have affinity toward it. So if we can > >>> remove the notion of scarcity, then the fullness of who and what > >>> we are, which is already > >> there, > >>> will be evident. It will have an appearance of emerging from > >>> nothing, but it's really just appearing like a tree in the fog > >>> that was standing quiet all along, and all that was required was > >>> for the > fog to lift. > >>> > >>> > >>> Anyway, I want to lastly add that I bring up demand over > >>> production, > >> which > >>> Maria Cristina had shown some interest. The idea is that we have > >>> demands which actually decide production, and these demands are > >>> socially based, because we have social natures. Even if we are > >>> talking about biological demands like food and shelter, early > >>> childcare, regardless, in those > >> cases > >>> there is a social aspect to them. > >>> > >>> > >>> Looking through the other end of the telescope, when we consider > >>> demand first rather than production, things look interestingly > >>> different. If we include things in demand in that exploration > >>> (rather than things in production), we begin to see the social > >>> life of things, we start to see > >> how > >>> these items go in and out of commodification, where objects have > >>> auras of value that reside outside of monetary value and markets. > >>> > >>> > >>> Let's consider your dining room table. You bought it in a > >>> furniture > >> store, > >>> or perhaps online, or from a thrift store or garage sale, maybe it > >>> was a gift. But as long as you own it, you don't consider the > >>> market value of your dining room table, or its appreciating value > >>> if say it was made by a famous furniture maker where in 20-30 > >>> years you'll see those items appraised on The Antiques Road Show; > >>> at least not until you decide you don't want to own it anymore. > >>> During that time of possession, the dining room table starts to > >>> have different value, a social value, which is determined by its > >>> demand, or should I say demand for it. It supports the family by > >>> providing a comfortable place to eat meals. A place for kids to do > >>> homework. A place to play card games. Or to cut a dress pattern > >>> from fabric, etc. All of these are domestic activities, but they > >>> have no production value in terms of > tables. You only need one dining room table. > >>> Still, the table will generate value in the household, because of > >>> the activities that the table supports, even if it is to bring > >>> people > >> together > >>> at holidays, or even if it has only sentimental value, say if the > >>> table > >> is > >>> damaged and must be repaired, or it has been moved because the > >>> room is being painted. This description depicts the social life of > >>> the dining > >> room > >>> table. Which is based upon its demand, not its production. > >>> > >>> > >>> Anyway, as I said previously, my debt for these thought > >>> experiments comes from Arjun Appadurai. If anyone is interested. > >>> > >>> > >>> Maria Cristina makes a great point considering work life and > >>> living life as two types of activity systems and thinking about > >>> their inherent contradictions. What comes from this tension that > >>> transcends > the two? > >>> (Might this exploration echo the comparison between production and > >> demand?) > >>> Is Maria Cristina correct that there hasn't been much discussion > >>> in this area? if so, I'd like to learn more about that. > >>> > >>> > >>> Great conversations. Thanks. > >>> > >>> > >>> Kind regards, > >>> > >>> > >>> Annalisa > >>> > >> > > > > > From vygotsky@unm.edu Thu Nov 3 11:19:00 2016 From: vygotsky@unm.edu (Vera John-Steiner) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 12:19:00 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: References: <1477604046100.32976@iped.uio.no> <1 477637094283.80763@iped.uio.no> <1477662717568.90322@iped.uio.no> <1CF09B3A-DF07-453 8-A198-FDB1B1EDE432@gmail.com> <58174c10.4223620a.cb56a.39b6@mx.google.com> <004801d234 47$4aef6110$e0ce2330$@att.net> <581a026f.0f08620a.9bde9.a672@mx.goo gle.com> <581b5f69.44da420a.50c17.bb2d@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <00ab01d235fe$c29c1560$47d44020$@edu> The low vocal participation of women in xmca discussions may be partly a reflection of the genre. These are solo authored messages which tend to debate theoretical interpretations. Articles in Mind, Culture and Activity show a better gender balance, they are also frequently written collaboratively. Feminist literature has emphasized relational issues as crucial in women's roles. In our own CHAT writings we have also discussed the importance of interdependence. Perhaps if we could find a way to share more and debate less we might improve the balance. In my own case, I find that I need some reflection time before I am ready to enter a debate and by the time I am ready, the topic of discussion has shifted. And then the responses are few if any. This makes me feel irrelevant. I am also of a generation of women who had to prove that we belonged in academia, and that we had something to contribute to theory. In looking over an article I wrote in 1999 on Sociocultural and Feminist Theory, I find references to studies which reveal that in problem-solving groups "females engage in more maintenance or socioemotional behaviors, while males generate more ideas(Aries,1996)." We are still engaged in shifting this balance which is why consider this discussion a healthy and helpful one. Vera -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Peter Smagorinsky Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 10:36 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse Is it perhaps telling that Mike's observation that the xmca discussion is dominated by men has largely been taken up by men? And that Jake's points have been taken up, in my view, somewhat dismissively and at abstract levels rather than at the immediate level at which the problem is located? As a White U.S. male, I consider myself more problem than solution, of which I have none other than to try to listen. But I suspect that this topic has already been shut down in terms of achieving the more equitable balance across the gender and sexuality spectrum of participation. The very problems identified as the topic of discussion appear to me to be replicated in the discussion that has followed. -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 12:02 PM To: Rein Raud ; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse Hi Rein, Your question opens up a direction I want to follow in your leading question. Using your insight on *ity* in previous posts (that have entered my awareness and keep returning and *resuming* a presence in my reflections). We can say we are talking about masculin*ity and feminin*ity as being expressed as generalities in our cultured words and worlds. This involves *logic* and may include logic of feminin*ity as counterparts of the logic of masculin*ity. This is a turn in the conversation. I would suggest we are possibly turning to the ethical dimension as primary. This would include the general logic of (ForGiving) and also the general logic of *hollowed-out* shallow neo-liberal general*ites. I will just repeat this is not expressing the image of two sides of the same coin. The coin image implies two *independent* sides fused in a material stratum (the coin). I hear the *ity* as interrelation, intertwining, chiasm, *each IN the other. I am wondering (with Merleau-Ponty) if this theme also expresses the 3 aspects of the play of activity-gap-passivity or the reverse as passivity-gap-activity as playing out and being expressed in the images of masculin*ity and feminin*ity. The breath of inspiration-gap-expiration or looking-gap-seeing. In the oikos realm the image of the dance of *marriage* as ethical philosophy. For our moment in history to *resume* these themes once again for the first time. The mystery of the gap Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Rein Raud Sent: November 3, 2016 8:05 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse Jacob and Greg, Please clarify what do you have in mind when saying that ?logic is gendered?. In order for that sentence (or any other) to be correct or incorrect you already need what I understand should be called ?logic?, i.e. general rules for judging an argument in a context. Does ?logic is gendered? mean that ?logic? is something that representatives of a specific gender have invented f.ex. in order to subdue other genders, or that each gender has its own logic? By the way, I don?t believe there are culture-independent genders, i.e. it means something different to have been called ?man? in ancient Greece or India than f ex in the world of today, so there is certainly a point in claiming that the system of genders is itself gendered, in other words, what cultures have ?naturalized? as divisions into genders are more often than not constructions erected by a gender group in order to dominate others. Such construction, I would argue, can only be taken down with arguments that follow a logic which itself is not gendered, because if it were, it would be a contestant in the field, not the referee. With best wishes, Rein > On 03 Nov 2016, at 16:30, Jacob McWilliams wrote: > > There's no doubt that "logic," as an outgrowth of objectivist, > rationalist epistemology, is gendered--after all, if theorists wants > us to believe that all _other_ epistemologies are socially > constructed, then it follows that objectivism is too. And it's > constructed to benefit those in power--i.e., people who think like, and commonly are, white men. > > Lots of feminist theorists have written about this. Donna Haraway took > us on a wild ride through science's logic fetish back in the 1980s: > http://www.jstor.org/stable/3178066?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents. > > Lots of feminists have written about this. Sadly, most folks in most > academic departments are appallingly unfamiliar with their work. Sadly > but unsurprisingly. > > Not to beat the proverbial dead horse, but several listserv > members--including me--have tried to introduce this position re: logic > in prior xmca threads. The position has mostly either been ignored or > loudly rejected out of hand by more vocal participants on this listserv. > > > -- > > > Jacob McWilliams > Learning Sciences & Human Development Program University of Colorado > Boulder j.mcwilliams@colorado.edu > > > > On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 8:12 AM, Greg Mcverry wrote: > >> I want to bring a call back to the idea of logic and gender. >> >> Someone in the thread noted that "academic discourse" wasn't about >> winning but simply prevailing logic. Anna commented back you could be >> logical and not be a "jerk" about it. >> >> Maybe both statements can be true. >> >> White males may not excel in this type of logic simply based on their >> privilege. Though I am sure privilege plays a huge role. >> >> Could it be the Western tradition of logic is itself rooted in gender >> inequality? It is a field a few thousand years old that was made up >> by white men arguing "logically" with other white men. Naturally the >> discourse practices would signify and reinforce membership within these circles. >> Exclusion of underrepresented voices has influence how the concept of >> "logic" has evolved. >> >> I keep thinking about "logic" and argumentation as I begin to >> interact with scholars outside of the US. We have put a strong >> emphasis on arguing in our >> K12 curriculum. Yet when I talk to people from other countries they >> note a word for "argumentative writing" or "argumentation" does not >> really exist in their language. Which as we know influences >> thought...which influences language..and both contribute to culture and activity. >> >> So could it be the gender bias that has existed in the listserv is a >> symptom of stressing a definition of "logic" maybe engendered. Notice >> the talk in our models of logic have been proving who is right and >> who is wrong? What translation is best for example. >> >> It is one individual "proving" he is right rather than they reaching >> a consensus on what is right. >> >> >> >> On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 12:47 AM Annalisa Aguilar wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> >>> Sometimes synchronicity is spooky. I spied this in the Guardian just now. >>> >>> >>> https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/nov/02/ >> silicon-valley-sexism-diversity-valerie-aurora-frame-shift >>> >>> >>> In reply to Maria-Cristina, it's difficult to have work-life balance >>> when the division of the personal and the public worlds exists. From >>> what is described in biased workplaces (in article above), it's >>> necessary to have some sort of protective wall, if only to survive another day. >>> >>> >>> The irony is that people become competitive in the work place >>> because of >> a >>> perceived scarcity of resources, but in technology it seems to me to >>> be a perceived scarcity of privileges. I have never understood how >>> sitting at >> a >>> keyboard is somehow "hard work." I know it requires effort and >> intellectual >>> effort in particular, but it's not like working on a farm, where >>> solving problems with scarce resources is always the norm. Think bricolage. >>> >>> >>> Maybe this perceived scarcity is the same in academia. Having a >>> worldview that the field of knowledge is infinite, seems to be, >>> looking from the outside. But perhaps I am unaware of the bricolage >>> people do inside the university. I do not mean to diminish truly hard work. >>> >>> >>> Anyway, these resources are culled from the public world to feed the >>> personal world in the end, isn't that the true motivation? To >>> protect >> home >>> and hearth when we aren't talking about invading hoards on longboats >>> shooting flaming arrows at our huts shouldn't carry that same >>> impending fear, dread, and uncertainty. But sometimes it seems to >>> feel that way, >> that >>> people behave with that same ferocity of a struggle to the death. >>> >>> >>> It is an illusion, a misperception. But this misperception has its >>> apparent reality that creates real fear in people. As if their lives >> didn't >>> matter and unbalanced equations must be attacked with quadratic >> solutions, >>> to set the matter straight. >>> >>> >>> Instead, a shared effort is required to permit that defensiveness, >>> born >> of >>> competition, to dissipate. In order to do that, people have to feel safe. >>> So how is safety created in the spaces? Spaces free of ridicule and >>> non-acceptance. Then, isn't that what every human being desires and >>> requires to flourish? Interesting that that need has no bias. >>> >>> >>> That is why I admire Aurora so much. I really think that she is on >>> to something. >>> >>> >>> Larry, rather than reversibility, I'd prefer receptivity or reciprocity. >>> >>> >>> And rather than finer nature, I'd prefer true nature (with an idea >>> that being competitive, biased, prejudiced, unethical etc, are >>> actually artificial constructs, that when obstructions have been >>> lifted, what is natural is to balance what is there (like >>> homeostasis), free from hindrances. >>> >>> >>> In order for us to recognize what is fullness in ourselves, fullness >>> must already be present within us, otherwise we could not recognize >>> it, we wouldn't have affinity toward it. So if we can remove the >>> notion of scarcity, then the fullness of who and what we are, which >>> is already >> there, >>> will be evident. It will have an appearance of emerging from >>> nothing, but it's really just appearing like a tree in the fog that >>> was standing quiet all along, and all that was required was for the fog to lift. >>> >>> >>> Anyway, I want to lastly add that I bring up demand over production, >> which >>> Maria Cristina had shown some interest. The idea is that we have >>> demands which actually decide production, and these demands are >>> socially based, because we have social natures. Even if we are >>> talking about biological demands like food and shelter, early >>> childcare, regardless, in those >> cases >>> there is a social aspect to them. >>> >>> >>> Looking through the other end of the telescope, when we consider >>> demand first rather than production, things look interestingly >>> different. If we include things in demand in that exploration >>> (rather than things in production), we begin to see the social life >>> of things, we start to see >> how >>> these items go in and out of commodification, where objects have >>> auras of value that reside outside of monetary value and markets. >>> >>> >>> Let's consider your dining room table. You bought it in a furniture >> store, >>> or perhaps online, or from a thrift store or garage sale, maybe it >>> was a gift. But as long as you own it, you don't consider the market >>> value of your dining room table, or its appreciating value if say it >>> was made by a famous furniture maker where in 20-30 years you'll see >>> those items appraised on The Antiques Road Show; at least not until >>> you decide you don't want to own it anymore. During that time of >>> possession, the dining room table starts to have different value, a >>> social value, which is determined by its demand, or should I say >>> demand for it. It supports the family by providing a comfortable >>> place to eat meals. A place for kids to do homework. A place to play >>> card games. Or to cut a dress pattern from fabric, etc. All of these >>> are domestic activities, but they have no production value in terms of tables. You only need one dining room table. >>> Still, the table will generate value in the household, because of >>> the activities that the table supports, even if it is to bring >>> people >> together >>> at holidays, or even if it has only sentimental value, say if the >>> table >> is >>> damaged and must be repaired, or it has been moved because the room >>> is being painted. This description depicts the social life of the >>> dining >> room >>> table. Which is based upon its demand, not its production. >>> >>> >>> Anyway, as I said previously, my debt for these thought experiments >>> comes from Arjun Appadurai. If anyone is interested. >>> >>> >>> Maria Cristina makes a great point considering work life and living >>> life as two types of activity systems and thinking about their >>> inherent contradictions. What comes from this tension that transcends the two? >>> (Might this exploration echo the comparison between production and >> demand?) >>> Is Maria Cristina correct that there hasn't been much discussion in >>> this area? if so, I'd like to learn more about that. >>> >>> >>> Great conversations. Thanks. >>> >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> >>> Annalisa >>> >> From mcole@ucsd.edu Thu Nov 3 11:10:17 2016 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 11:10:17 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Fwd: [COGDEVSOC] Lectureship and Readership at Keele University In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Jobs ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Jessica Wang Date: Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 11:04 AM Subject: [COGDEVSOC] Lectureship and Readership at Keele University To: cogdevsoc@lists.cogdevsoc.org *School of Psychology* *Keele University* *Vacancies* Two exciting new posts have been advertised in the rapidly growing School of Psychology at Keele University, UK. The School is committed to further expanding its high quality research and educational programmes. There are excellent research and teaching facilities and support staff. These two posts are part of a broader programme of expansion designed to further enhance the international reputation of the School. *Senior Lecturer/Reader in Cognitive Psychology/ Cognitive Neuropsychology * *Lecturer in Developmental Psychology * Informal inquiries can be made to Professor Michael Murray ( m.murray@keele.ac.uk ) Dr Jessica Wang Lecturer School of Psychology Dorothy Hodgkin Building 1.71 Keele University Keele, ST5 5BG +44(0)1782-734261 _______________________________________________ To post to the CDS listserv, send your message to: cogdevsoc@lists.cogdevsoc.org (If you belong to the listserv and have not included any large attachments, your message will be posted without moderation--so be careful!) To subscribe or unsubscribe from the listserv, visit: http://lists.cogdevsoc.org/listinfo.cgi/cogdevsoc-cogdevsoc.org From lpscholar2@gmail.com Thu Nov 3 11:32:20 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 11:32:20 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: <00ab01d235fe$c29c1560$47d44020$@edu> References: <1477604046100.32976@iped.uio.no> <1 477637094283.80763@iped.uio.no> <1477662717568.90322@iped.uio.no> <1CF09B3A-DF07-453 8-A198-FDB1B1EDE432@gmail.com> <58174c10.4223620a.cb56a.39b6@mx.google.com> <004801d234 47$4aef6110$e0ce2330$@att.net> <581a026f.0f08620a.9bde9.a672@mx.goo gle.com> <581b5f69.44da420a.50c17.bb2d@mx.google.com> <00ab01d235fe$c29c1560$47d44020$@edu> Message-ID: <581b82bd.5207620a.9f848.0978@mx.google.com> Vera, To shift the balance, if the males engaged in more maintenance and socioemotional gestures would this possibly be a way of participating in finding this balance? Peg?s finer balance? I hesitate to post, but Mike?s reply to my ears was an *invitation* for opening and entering the gap in the spirit you also are inviting. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Vera John-Steiner Sent: November 3, 2016 11:06 AM To: 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse The low vocal participation of women in xmca discussions may be partly a reflection of the genre. These are solo authored messages which tend to debate theoretical interpretations. Articles in Mind, Culture and Activity show a better gender balance, they are also frequently written collaboratively. Feminist literature has emphasized relational issues as crucial in women's roles. In our own CHAT writings we have also discussed the importance of interdependence. Perhaps if we could find a way to share more and debate less we might improve the balance. In my own case, I find that I need some reflection time before I am ready to enter a debate and by the time I am ready, the topic of discussion has shifted. And then the responses are few if any. This makes me feel irrelevant. I am also of a generation of women who had to prove that we belonged in academia, and that we had something to contribute to theory. In looking over an article I wrote in 1999 on Sociocultural and Feminist Theory, I find references to studies which reveal that in problem-solving groups "females engage in more maintenance or socioemotional behaviors, while males generate more ideas(Aries,1996)." We are still engaged in shifting this balance which is why consider this discussion a healthy and helpful one. Vera -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Peter Smagorinsky Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 10:36 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse Is it perhaps telling that Mike's observation that the xmca discussion is dominated by men has largely been taken up by men? And that Jake's points have been taken up, in my view, somewhat dismissively and at abstract levels rather than at the immediate level at which the problem is located? As a White U.S. male, I consider myself more problem than solution, of which I have none other than to try to listen. But I suspect that this topic has already been shut down in terms of achieving the more equitable balance across the gender and sexuality spectrum of participation. The very problems identified as the topic of discussion appear to me to be replicated in the discussion that has followed. -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 12:02 PM To: Rein Raud ; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse Hi Rein, Your question opens up a direction I want to follow in your leading question. Using your insight on *ity* in previous posts (that have entered my awareness and keep returning and *resuming* a presence in my reflections). We can say we are talking about masculin*ity and feminin*ity as being expressed as generalities in our cultured words and worlds. This involves *logic* and may include logic of feminin*ity as counterparts of the logic of masculin*ity. This is a turn in the conversation. I would suggest we are possibly turning to the ethical dimension as primary. This would include the general logic of (ForGiving) and also the general logic of *hollowed-out* shallow neo-liberal general*ites. I will just repeat this is not expressing the image of two sides of the same coin. The coin image implies two *independent* sides fused in a material stratum (the coin). I hear the *ity* as interrelation, intertwining, chiasm, *each IN the other. I am wondering (with Merleau-Ponty) if this theme also expresses the 3 aspects of the play of activity-gap-passivity or the reverse as passivity-gap-activity as playing out and being expressed in the images of masculin*ity and feminin*ity. The breath of inspiration-gap-expiration or looking-gap-seeing. In the oikos realm the image of the dance of *marriage* as ethical philosophy. For our moment in history to *resume* these themes once again for the first time. The mystery of the gap Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Rein Raud Sent: November 3, 2016 8:05 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse Jacob and Greg, Please clarify what do you have in mind when saying that ?logic is gendered?. In order for that sentence (or any other) to be correct or incorrect you already need what I understand should be called ?logic?, i.e. general rules for judging an argument in a context. Does ?logic is gendered? mean that ?logic? is something that representatives of a specific gender have invented f.ex. in order to subdue other genders, or that each gender has its own logic? By the way, I don?t believe there are culture-independent genders, i.e. it means something different to have been called ?man? in ancient Greece or India than f ex in the world of today, so there is certainly a point in claiming that the system of genders is itself gendered, in other words, what cultures have ?naturalized? as divisions into genders are more often than not constructions erected by a gender group in order to dominate others. Such construction, I would argue, can only be taken down with arguments that follow a logic which itself is not gendered, because if it were, it would be a contestant in the field, not the referee. With best wishes, Rein > On 03 Nov 2016, at 16:30, Jacob McWilliams wrote: > > There's no doubt that "logic," as an outgrowth of objectivist, > rationalist epistemology, is gendered--after all, if theorists wants > us to believe that all _other_ epistemologies are socially > constructed, then it follows that objectivism is too. And it's > constructed to benefit those in power--i.e., people who think like, and commonly are, white men. > > Lots of feminist theorists have written about this. Donna Haraway took > us on a wild ride through science's logic fetish back in the 1980s: > http://www.jstor.org/stable/3178066?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents. > > Lots of feminists have written about this. Sadly, most folks in most > academic departments are appallingly unfamiliar with their work. Sadly > but unsurprisingly. > > Not to beat the proverbial dead horse, but several listserv > members--including me--have tried to introduce this position re: logic > in prior xmca threads. The position has mostly either been ignored or > loudly rejected out of hand by more vocal participants on this listserv. > > > -- > > > Jacob McWilliams > Learning Sciences & Human Development Program University of Colorado > Boulder j.mcwilliams@colorado.edu > > > > On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 8:12 AM, Greg Mcverry wrote: > >> I want to bring a call back to the idea of logic and gender. >> >> Someone in the thread noted that "academic discourse" wasn't about >> winning but simply prevailing logic. Anna commented back you could be >> logical and not be a "jerk" about it. >> >> Maybe both statements can be true. >> >> White males may not excel in this type of logic simply based on their >> privilege. Though I am sure privilege plays a huge role. >> >> Could it be the Western tradition of logic is itself rooted in gender >> inequality? It is a field a few thousand years old that was made up >> by white men arguing "logically" with other white men. Naturally the >> discourse practices would signify and reinforce membership within these circles. >> Exclusion of underrepresented voices has influence how the concept of >> "logic" has evolved. >> >> I keep thinking about "logic" and argumentation as I begin to >> interact with scholars outside of the US. We have put a strong >> emphasis on arguing in our >> K12 curriculum. Yet when I talk to people from other countries they >> note a word for "argumentative writing" or "argumentation" does not >> really exist in their language. Which as we know influences >> thought...which influences language..and both contribute to culture and activity. >> >> So could it be the gender bias that has existed in the listserv is a >> symptom of stressing a definition of "logic" maybe engendered. Notice >> the talk in our models of logic have been proving who is right and >> who is wrong? What translation is best for example. >> >> It is one individual "proving" he is right rather than they reaching >> a consensus on what is right. >> >> >> >> On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 12:47 AM Annalisa Aguilar wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> >>> Sometimes synchronicity is spooky. I spied this in the Guardian just now. >>> >>> >>> https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/nov/02/ >> silicon-valley-sexism-diversity-valerie-aurora-frame-shift >>> >>> >>> In reply to Maria-Cristina, it's difficult to have work-life balance >>> when the division of the personal and the public worlds exists. From >>> what is described in biased workplaces (in article above), it's >>> necessary to have some sort of protective wall, if only to survive another day. >>> >>> >>> The irony is that people become competitive in the work place >>> because of >> a >>> perceived scarcity of resources, but in technology it seems to me to >>> be a perceived scarcity of privileges. I have never understood how >>> sitting at >> a >>> keyboard is somehow "hard work." I know it requires effort and >> intellectual >>> effort in particular, but it's not like working on a farm, where >>> solving problems with scarce resources is always the norm. Think bricolage. >>> >>> >>> Maybe this perceived scarcity is the same in academia. Having a >>> worldview that the field of knowledge is infinite, seems to be, >>> looking from the outside. But perhaps I am unaware of the bricolage >>> people do inside the university. I do not mean to diminish truly hard work. >>> >>> >>> Anyway, these resources are culled from the public world to feed the >>> personal world in the end, isn't that the true motivation? To >>> protect >> home >>> and hearth when we aren't talking about invading hoards on longboats >>> shooting flaming arrows at our huts shouldn't carry that same >>> impending fear, dread, and uncertainty. But sometimes it seems to >>> feel that way, >> that >>> people behave with that same ferocity of a struggle to the death. >>> >>> >>> It is an illusion, a misperception. But this misperception has its >>> apparent reality that creates real fear in people. As if their lives >> didn't >>> matter and unbalanced equations must be attacked with quadratic >> solutions, >>> to set the matter straight. >>> >>> >>> Instead, a shared effort is required to permit that defensiveness, >>> born >> of >>> competition, to dissipate. In order to do that, people have to feel safe. >>> So how is safety created in the spaces? Spaces free of ridicule and >>> non-acceptance. Then, isn't that what every human being desires and >>> requires to flourish? Interesting that that need has no bias. >>> >>> >>> That is why I admire Aurora so much. I really think that she is on >>> to something. >>> >>> >>> Larry, rather than reversibility, I'd prefer receptivity or reciprocity. >>> >>> >>> And rather than finer nature, I'd prefer true nature (with an idea >>> that being competitive, biased, prejudiced, unethical etc, are >>> actually artificial constructs, that when obstructions have been >>> lifted, what is natural is to balance what is there (like >>> homeostasis), free from hindrances. >>> >>> >>> In order for us to recognize what is fullness in ourselves, fullness >>> must already be present within us, otherwise we could not recognize >>> it, we wouldn't have affinity toward it. So if we can remove the >>> notion of scarcity, then the fullness of who and what we are, which >>> is already >> there, >>> will be evident. It will have an appearance of emerging from >>> nothing, but it's really just appearing like a tree in the fog that >>> was standing quiet all along, and all that was required was for the fog to lift. >>> >>> >>> Anyway, I want to lastly add that I bring up demand over production, >> which >>> Maria Cristina had shown some interest. The idea is that we have >>> demands which actually decide production, and these demands are >>> socially based, because we have social natures. Even if we are >>> talking about biological demands like food and shelter, early >>> childcare, regardless, in those >> cases >>> there is a social aspect to them. >>> >>> >>> Looking through the other end of the telescope, when we consider >>> demand first rather than production, things look interestingly >>> different. If we include things in demand in that exploration >>> (rather than things in production), we begin to see the social life >>> of things, we start to see >> how >>> these items go in and out of commodification, where objects have >>> auras of value that reside outside of monetary value and markets. >>> >>> >>> Let's consider your dining room table. You bought it in a furniture >> store, >>> or perhaps online, or from a thrift store or garage sale, maybe it >>> was a gift. But as long as you own it, you don't consider the market >>> value of your dining room table, or its appreciating value if say it >>> was made by a famous furniture maker where in 20-30 years you'll see >>> those items appraised on The Antiques Road Show; at least not until >>> you decide you don't want to own it anymore. During that time of >>> possession, the dining room table starts to have different value, a >>> social value, which is determined by its demand, or should I say >>> demand for it. It supports the family by providing a comfortable >>> place to eat meals. A place for kids to do homework. A place to play >>> card games. Or to cut a dress pattern from fabric, etc. All of these >>> are domestic activities, but they have no production value in terms of tables. You only need one dining room table. >>> Still, the table will generate value in the household, because of >>> the activities that the table supports, even if it is to bring >>> people >> together >>> at holidays, or even if it has only sentimental value, say if the >>> table >> is >>> damaged and must be repaired, or it has been moved because the room >>> is being painted. This description depicts the social life of the >>> dining >> room >>> table. Which is based upon its demand, not its production. >>> >>> >>> Anyway, as I said previously, my debt for these thought experiments >>> comes from Arjun Appadurai. If anyone is interested. >>> >>> >>> Maria Cristina makes a great point considering work life and living >>> life as two types of activity systems and thinking about their >>> inherent contradictions. What comes from this tension that transcends the two? >>> (Might this exploration echo the comparison between production and >> demand?) >>> Is Maria Cristina correct that there hasn't been much discussion in >>> this area? if so, I'd like to learn more about that. >>> >>> >>> Great conversations. Thanks. >>> >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> >>> Annalisa >>> >> From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Thu Nov 3 12:16:56 2016 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 19:16:56 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Quick | Experimental Swimlanes Message-ID: Dear all, This is a simple example of marking up emails, indicating the nature of the email. For "Quick", we have quick responses, that allow for engagement by people who may only be free to respond at the point of reading, or who may not wish to get drawn in to a longer exchange. "Swim lanes" in the subject line are dependent upon everyone actively employing some email skills in choosing the right subject lines, especially when replying -- are you replying to the whole theme or something specific, a quick reply or something more thoughtful? Best, Huw From rbeach@umn.edu Thu Nov 3 12:22:19 2016 From: rbeach@umn.edu (Richard Beach) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 14:22:19 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: <581b82bd.5207620a.9f848.0978@mx.google.com> References: <1477604046100.32976@iped.uio.no> <1 477637094283.80763@iped.uio.no> <1477662717568.90322@iped.uio.no> <1CF09B3A-DF07-453 8-A198-FDB1B1EDE432@gmail.com> <58174c10.4223620a.cb56a.39b6@mx.google.com> <004801d234 47$4aef6110$e0ce2330$@att.net> <581a026f.0f08620a.9bde9.a672@mx.goo gle.com> <581b5f69.44da420a.50c17.bb2d@mx.google.com> <00ab01d235fe$c29c1560$47d44020$@edu> <581b82bd.5207620a.9f848.0978@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <9042289A-6333-46DC-8BA2-F455EA8B4541@umn.edu> Somewhat consistent the gender differences in Vera?s research, I compared discussion responses to novels in an all-female book club and an all-male book club (2011, Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 55(2)) looking at the use of ?extended stretches? of turn-taking on single topics. I found that while the meeting times were similar for both groups, females were more likely to employ more turns per topic than males, a reflection of their willingness to interact with each other to a greater degree than was the case for males; more members of the female group were participating than for the male group. The more ?extended stretches? for both groups were often initiated by someone voicing a tentative, hypothetic, ?passing theory? (Kent, 1993) as in ?I?m not sure about this?what do you think?? with the uptake of inviting others to respond and explore that ?passing theory.? In posting to XMCA, the willingness to adopt a tentative, exploratory stance may be a factor in leading others to chime in?not sure if adopting such exploratory versus definitive stances is a gendered social practice???so there?s my own ?passing theory.? Richard Beach, Professor Emeritus of English Education, University of Minnesota rbeach@umn.edu Websites: Digital writing , Media?literacy , Teaching literature , Identity-focused ELA Teaching , Common Core?State Standards , Apps for literacy?learning , Teaching about climate change > On Nov 3, 2016, at 1:32 PM, lpscholar2@gmail.com wrote: > > Vera, > To shift the balance, if the males engaged in more maintenance and socioemotional gestures would this possibly be a way of participating in finding this balance? Peg?s finer balance? > I hesitate to post, but Mike?s reply to my ears was an *invitation* for opening and entering the gap in the spirit you also are inviting. > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: Vera John-Steiner > Sent: November 3, 2016 11:06 AM > To: 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse > > The low vocal participation of women in xmca discussions may be partly a reflection of the genre. These are solo authored messages which tend to debate theoretical interpretations. > Articles in Mind, Culture and Activity show a better gender balance, they are also frequently written collaboratively. Feminist literature has emphasized relational issues as crucial in women's roles. In our own CHAT writings we have also discussed the importance of interdependence. Perhaps if we could find a way to share more and debate less we might improve the balance. > > In my own case, I find that I need some reflection time before I am ready to enter a debate and by the time I am ready, the topic of discussion has shifted. And then the responses are few if any. This makes me feel irrelevant. I am also of a generation of women who had to prove that we belonged in academia, and that we had something to contribute to theory. In looking over an article I wrote in 1999 on Sociocultural and Feminist Theory, I find references to studies which reveal that in problem-solving groups "females engage in more maintenance or socioemotional behaviors, while males generate more ideas(Aries,1996)." We are still engaged in shifting this balance which is why consider this discussion a healthy and helpful one. > > Vera > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Peter Smagorinsky > Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 10:36 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse > > Is it perhaps telling that Mike's observation that the xmca discussion is dominated by men has largely been taken up by men? And that Jake's points have been taken up, in my view, somewhat dismissively and at abstract levels rather than at the immediate level at which the problem is located? > > As a White U.S. male, I consider myself more problem than solution, of which I have none other than to try to listen. But I suspect that this topic has already been shut down in terms of achieving the more equitable balance across the gender and sexuality spectrum of participation. The very problems identified as the topic of discussion appear to me to be replicated in the discussion that has followed. > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of lpscholar2@gmail.com > Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 12:02 PM > To: Rein Raud ; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse > > Hi Rein, > Your question opens up a direction I want to follow in your leading question. > Using your insight on *ity* in previous posts (that have entered my awareness and keep returning and *resuming* a presence in my reflections). > We can say we are talking about masculin*ity and feminin*ity as being expressed as generalities in our cultured words and worlds. > This involves *logic* and may include logic of feminin*ity as counterparts of the logic of masculin*ity. > This is a turn in the conversation. I would suggest we are possibly turning to the ethical dimension as primary. > This would include the general logic of (ForGiving) and also the general logic of *hollowed-out* shallow neo-liberal general*ites. > > I will just repeat this is not expressing the image of two sides of the same coin. The coin image implies two *independent* sides fused in a material stratum (the coin). > I hear the *ity* as interrelation, intertwining, chiasm, *each IN the other. > I am wondering (with Merleau-Ponty) if this theme also expresses the 3 aspects of the play of activity-gap-passivity or the reverse as passivity-gap-activity as playing out and being expressed in the images of masculin*ity and feminin*ity. > The breath of inspiration-gap-expiration or looking-gap-seeing. > In the oikos realm the image of the dance of *marriage* as ethical philosophy. > For our moment in history to *resume* these themes once again for the first time. > The mystery of the gap > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: Rein Raud > Sent: November 3, 2016 8:05 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse > > Jacob and Greg, > > Please clarify what do you have in mind when saying that ?logic is gendered?. In order for that sentence (or any other) to be correct or incorrect you already need what I understand should be called ?logic?, i.e. general rules for judging an argument in a context. Does ?logic is gendered? mean that ?logic? is something that representatives of a specific gender have invented f.ex. in order to subdue other genders, or that each gender has its own logic? > > By the way, I don?t believe there are culture-independent genders, i.e. it means something different to have been called ?man? in ancient Greece or India than f ex in the world of today, so there is certainly a point in claiming that the system of genders is itself gendered, in other words, what cultures have ?naturalized? as divisions into genders are more often than not constructions erected by a gender group in order to dominate others. Such construction, I would argue, can only be taken down with arguments that follow a logic which itself is not gendered, because if it were, it would be a contestant in the field, not the referee. > > With best wishes, > > Rein > >> On 03 Nov 2016, at 16:30, Jacob McWilliams wrote: >> >> There's no doubt that "logic," as an outgrowth of objectivist, >> rationalist epistemology, is gendered--after all, if theorists wants >> us to believe that all _other_ epistemologies are socially >> constructed, then it follows that objectivism is too. And it's >> constructed to benefit those in power--i.e., people who think like, and commonly are, white men. >> >> Lots of feminist theorists have written about this. Donna Haraway took >> us on a wild ride through science's logic fetish back in the 1980s: >> http://www.jstor.org/stable/3178066?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents. >> >> Lots of feminists have written about this. Sadly, most folks in most >> academic departments are appallingly unfamiliar with their work. Sadly >> but unsurprisingly. >> >> Not to beat the proverbial dead horse, but several listserv >> members--including me--have tried to introduce this position re: logic >> in prior xmca threads. The position has mostly either been ignored or >> loudly rejected out of hand by more vocal participants on this listserv. >> >> >> -- >> >> >> Jacob McWilliams >> Learning Sciences & Human Development Program University of Colorado >> Boulder j.mcwilliams@colorado.edu >> >> >> >> On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 8:12 AM, Greg Mcverry wrote: >> >>> I want to bring a call back to the idea of logic and gender. >>> >>> Someone in the thread noted that "academic discourse" wasn't about >>> winning but simply prevailing logic. Anna commented back you could be >>> logical and not be a "jerk" about it. >>> >>> Maybe both statements can be true. >>> >>> White males may not excel in this type of logic simply based on their >>> privilege. Though I am sure privilege plays a huge role. >>> >>> Could it be the Western tradition of logic is itself rooted in gender >>> inequality? It is a field a few thousand years old that was made up >>> by white men arguing "logically" with other white men. Naturally the >>> discourse practices would signify and reinforce membership within these circles. >>> Exclusion of underrepresented voices has influence how the concept of >>> "logic" has evolved. >>> >>> I keep thinking about "logic" and argumentation as I begin to >>> interact with scholars outside of the US. We have put a strong >>> emphasis on arguing in our >>> K12 curriculum. Yet when I talk to people from other countries they >>> note a word for "argumentative writing" or "argumentation" does not >>> really exist in their language. Which as we know influences >>> thought...which influences language..and both contribute to culture and activity. >>> >>> So could it be the gender bias that has existed in the listserv is a >>> symptom of stressing a definition of "logic" maybe engendered. Notice >>> the talk in our models of logic have been proving who is right and >>> who is wrong? What translation is best for example. >>> >>> It is one individual "proving" he is right rather than they reaching >>> a consensus on what is right. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 12:47 AM Annalisa Aguilar wrote: >>> >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> >>>> Sometimes synchronicity is spooky. I spied this in the Guardian just now. >>>> >>>> >>>> https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/nov/02/ >>> silicon-valley-sexism-diversity-valerie-aurora-frame-shift >>>> >>>> >>>> In reply to Maria-Cristina, it's difficult to have work-life balance >>>> when the division of the personal and the public worlds exists. From >>>> what is described in biased workplaces (in article above), it's >>>> necessary to have some sort of protective wall, if only to survive another day. >>>> >>>> >>>> The irony is that people become competitive in the work place >>>> because of >>> a >>>> perceived scarcity of resources, but in technology it seems to me to >>>> be a perceived scarcity of privileges. I have never understood how >>>> sitting at >>> a >>>> keyboard is somehow "hard work." I know it requires effort and >>> intellectual >>>> effort in particular, but it's not like working on a farm, where >>>> solving problems with scarce resources is always the norm. Think bricolage. >>>> >>>> >>>> Maybe this perceived scarcity is the same in academia. Having a >>>> worldview that the field of knowledge is infinite, seems to be, >>>> looking from the outside. But perhaps I am unaware of the bricolage >>>> people do inside the university. I do not mean to diminish truly hard work. >>>> >>>> >>>> Anyway, these resources are culled from the public world to feed the >>>> personal world in the end, isn't that the true motivation? To >>>> protect >>> home >>>> and hearth when we aren't talking about invading hoards on longboats >>>> shooting flaming arrows at our huts shouldn't carry that same >>>> impending fear, dread, and uncertainty. But sometimes it seems to >>>> feel that way, >>> that >>>> people behave with that same ferocity of a struggle to the death. >>>> >>>> >>>> It is an illusion, a misperception. But this misperception has its >>>> apparent reality that creates real fear in people. As if their lives >>> didn't >>>> matter and unbalanced equations must be attacked with quadratic >>> solutions, >>>> to set the matter straight. >>>> >>>> >>>> Instead, a shared effort is required to permit that defensiveness, >>>> born >>> of >>>> competition, to dissipate. In order to do that, people have to feel safe. >>>> So how is safety created in the spaces? Spaces free of ridicule and >>>> non-acceptance. Then, isn't that what every human being desires and >>>> requires to flourish? Interesting that that need has no bias. >>>> >>>> >>>> That is why I admire Aurora so much. I really think that she is on >>>> to something. >>>> >>>> >>>> Larry, rather than reversibility, I'd prefer receptivity or reciprocity. >>>> >>>> >>>> And rather than finer nature, I'd prefer true nature (with an idea >>>> that being competitive, biased, prejudiced, unethical etc, are >>>> actually artificial constructs, that when obstructions have been >>>> lifted, what is natural is to balance what is there (like >>>> homeostasis), free from hindrances. >>>> >>>> >>>> In order for us to recognize what is fullness in ourselves, fullness >>>> must already be present within us, otherwise we could not recognize >>>> it, we wouldn't have affinity toward it. So if we can remove the >>>> notion of scarcity, then the fullness of who and what we are, which >>>> is already >>> there, >>>> will be evident. It will have an appearance of emerging from >>>> nothing, but it's really just appearing like a tree in the fog that >>>> was standing quiet all along, and all that was required was for the fog to lift. >>>> >>>> >>>> Anyway, I want to lastly add that I bring up demand over production, >>> which >>>> Maria Cristina had shown some interest. The idea is that we have >>>> demands which actually decide production, and these demands are >>>> socially based, because we have social natures. Even if we are >>>> talking about biological demands like food and shelter, early >>>> childcare, regardless, in those >>> cases >>>> there is a social aspect to them. >>>> >>>> >>>> Looking through the other end of the telescope, when we consider >>>> demand first rather than production, things look interestingly >>>> different. If we include things in demand in that exploration >>>> (rather than things in production), we begin to see the social life >>>> of things, we start to see >>> how >>>> these items go in and out of commodification, where objects have >>>> auras of value that reside outside of monetary value and markets. >>>> >>>> >>>> Let's consider your dining room table. You bought it in a furniture >>> store, >>>> or perhaps online, or from a thrift store or garage sale, maybe it >>>> was a gift. But as long as you own it, you don't consider the market >>>> value of your dining room table, or its appreciating value if say it >>>> was made by a famous furniture maker where in 20-30 years you'll see >>>> those items appraised on The Antiques Road Show; at least not until >>>> you decide you don't want to own it anymore. During that time of >>>> possession, the dining room table starts to have different value, a >>>> social value, which is determined by its demand, or should I say >>>> demand for it. It supports the family by providing a comfortable >>>> place to eat meals. A place for kids to do homework. A place to play >>>> card games. Or to cut a dress pattern from fabric, etc. All of these >>>> are domestic activities, but they have no production value in terms of tables. You only need one dining room table. >>>> Still, the table will generate value in the household, because of >>>> the activities that the table supports, even if it is to bring >>>> people >>> together >>>> at holidays, or even if it has only sentimental value, say if the >>>> table >>> is >>>> damaged and must be repaired, or it has been moved because the room >>>> is being painted. This description depicts the social life of the >>>> dining >>> room >>>> table. Which is based upon its demand, not its production. >>>> >>>> >>>> Anyway, as I said previously, my debt for these thought experiments >>>> comes from Arjun Appadurai. If anyone is interested. >>>> >>>> >>>> Maria Cristina makes a great point considering work life and living >>>> life as two types of activity systems and thinking about their >>>> inherent contradictions. What comes from this tension that transcends the two? >>>> (Might this exploration echo the comparison between production and >>> demand?) >>>> Is Maria Cristina correct that there hasn't been much discussion in >>>> this area? if so, I'd like to learn more about that. >>>> >>>> >>>> Great conversations. Thanks. >>>> >>>> >>>> Kind regards, >>>> >>>> >>>> Annalisa >>>> >>> > > > > > > > From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Thu Nov 3 12:20:35 2016 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 19:20:35 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Slow | Experimental Swimlanes Message-ID: Dear All, For emails marked slow, we might have an expectancy of a "wait time" (kudos to Peter) of say 2 hours between emails, i.e. only reply after at least a two hour wait, with maybe up to a maximum of 5 emails a day. I am obviously making this up -- so those with this preference can perhaps indicate the tempo. And good? Best, Huw From Dana.Walker@unco.edu Thu Nov 3 12:26:54 2016 From: Dana.Walker@unco.edu (Walker, Dana) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 19:26:54 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: <00ab01d235fe$c29c1560$47d44020$@edu> References: <00ab01d235fe$c29c1560$47d44020$@edu> Message-ID: As a woman, I am grateful that the question of gender inequality and imbalanced participation has been raised in XMCA and is being seriously discussed, and not dropped, as I had feared. I am also excited about the possibility of bringing so many great minds-bodies together to try to address this conundrum of low participation among erudite and accomplished women scholars in the XMCA list serve. I am not sure why I personally do not participate in XMCA. I find the philosophical discourse intimidating, but always assume that it is because I am a novice to cultural activity theory. But when I read that Vera John-Steiner is made to feel irrelevant in the list serve due to lack of response, it seems clear that there is more going on. I would like to see us take-up Jacob?s suggestion that we consider the gendered nature of ?logic? and academic discourse, and agree that there is a woeful ignorance among academics of feminist writings on the topic ? and not just by women. (BTW, one of the current authors under discussion, Margaret Eisenhart, is a prominent feminist scholar and educational anthropologist who has co-authored two influential books: Educated in Romance: Women, Achievement, and College Culture and Women?s Science: Learning and Succeeding from the Margins). I agree with Peter that a thinking/listening/writing-speaking space (?wait time?) would help, but at the same time I would not want to create obstacles to the natural to-and-fro of conversation ? which, it is true, tends to dominated by men. Nor would I want to set rules about what should be discussed, or from which perspectives: I appreciate the richness of backgrounds, nationalities, and disciplines represented in XMCA. I do agree with Vera that sharing dialogue, in addition to debating, would be more inviting to those of us who observe from the periphery. Is there a way to create options for different types of discourse for XMCA?ers? How could we support the sharing of ideas and practices in relation to selected MCA articles, rather than simply debating abstract ideas (without taking into consideration the ways that power is always involved with the production of knowledge)? Perhaps we could think of this as a theoretically-informed learning design challenge, and call upon our tech savvy participants to help us think about alternatives to the linear list serve discussion format that lends itself to a specific genre of discourse? Perhaps the context-format itself is a large part of the problem, in shaping our discourse and dialogue in ways that are not productive for the collective. Dana On 11/3/16, 12:19 PM, "xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Vera John-Steiner" wrote: The low vocal participation of women in xmca discussions may be partly a reflection of the genre. These are solo authored messages which tend to debate theoretical interpretations. Articles in Mind, Culture and Activity show a better gender balance, they are also frequently written collaboratively. Feminist literature has emphasized relational issues as crucial in women's roles. In our own CHAT writings we have also discussed the importance of interdependence. Perhaps if we could find a way to share more and debate less we might improve the balance. In my own case, I find that I need some reflection time before I am ready to enter a debate and by the time I am ready, the topic of discussion has shifted. And then the responses are few if any. This makes me feel irrelevant. I am also of a generation of women who had to prove that we belonged in academia, and that we had something to contribute to theory. In looking over an article I wrote in 1999 on Sociocultural and Feminist Theory, I find references to studies which reveal that in problem-solving groups "females engage in more maintenance or socioemotional behaviors, while males generate more ideas(Aries,1996)." We are still engaged in shifting this balance which is why consider this discussion a healthy and helpful one. Vera -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Peter Smagorinsky Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 10:36 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse Is it perhaps telling that Mike's observation that the xmca discussion is dominated by men has largely been taken up by men? And that Jake's points have been taken up, in my view, somewhat dismissively and at abstract levels rather than at the immediate level at which the problem is located? As a White U.S. male, I consider myself more problem than solution, of which I have none other than to try to listen. But I suspect that this topic has already been shut down in terms of achieving the more equitable balance across the gender and sexuality spectrum of participation. The very problems identified as the topic of discussion appear to me to be replicated in the discussion that has followed. -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 12:02 PM To: Rein Raud ; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse Hi Rein, Your question opens up a direction I want to follow in your leading question. Using your insight on *ity* in previous posts (that have entered my awareness and keep returning and *resuming* a presence in my reflections). We can say we are talking about masculin*ity and feminin*ity as being expressed as generalities in our cultured words and worlds. This involves *logic* and may include logic of feminin*ity as counterparts of the logic of masculin*ity. This is a turn in the conversation. I would suggest we are possibly turning to the ethical dimension as primary. This would include the general logic of (ForGiving) and also the general logic of *hollowed-out* shallow neo-liberal general*ites. I will just repeat this is not expressing the image of two sides of the same coin. The coin image implies two *independent* sides fused in a material stratum (the coin). I hear the *ity* as interrelation, intertwining, chiasm, *each IN the other. I am wondering (with Merleau-Ponty) if this theme also expresses the 3 aspects of the play of activity-gap-passivity or the reverse as passivity-gap-activity as playing out and being expressed in the images of masculin*ity and feminin*ity. The breath of inspiration-gap-expiration or looking-gap-seeing. In the oikos realm the image of the dance of *marriage* as ethical philosophy. For our moment in history to *resume* these themes once again for the first time. The mystery of the gap Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Rein Raud Sent: November 3, 2016 8:05 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse Jacob and Greg, Please clarify what do you have in mind when saying that ?logic is gendered?. In order for that sentence (or any other) to be correct or incorrect you already need what I understand should be called ?logic?, i.e. general rules for judging an argument in a context. Does ?logic is gendered? mean that ?logic? is something that representatives of a specific gender have invented f.ex. in order to subdue other genders, or that each gender has its own logic? By the way, I don?t believe there are culture-independent genders, i.e. it means something different to have been called ?man? in ancient Greece or India than f ex in the world of today, so there is certainly a point in claiming that the system of genders is itself gendered, in other words, what cultures have ?naturalized? as divisions into genders are more often than not constructions erected by a gender group in order to dominate others. Such construction, I would argue, can only be taken down with arguments that follow a logic which itself is not gendered, because if it were, it would be a contestant in the field, not the referee. With best wishes, Rein > On 03 Nov 2016, at 16:30, Jacob McWilliams wrote: > > There's no doubt that "logic," as an outgrowth of objectivist, > rationalist epistemology, is gendered--after all, if theorists wants > us to believe that all _other_ epistemologies are socially > constructed, then it follows that objectivism is too. And it's > constructed to benefit those in power--i.e., people who think like, and commonly are, white men. > > Lots of feminist theorists have written about this. Donna Haraway took > us on a wild ride through science's logic fetish back in the 1980s: > http://www.jstor.org/stable/3178066?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents. > > Lots of feminists have written about this. Sadly, most folks in most > academic departments are appallingly unfamiliar with their work. Sadly > but unsurprisingly. > > Not to beat the proverbial dead horse, but several listserv > members--including me--have tried to introduce this position re: logic > in prior xmca threads. The position has mostly either been ignored or > loudly rejected out of hand by more vocal participants on this listserv. > > > -- > > > Jacob McWilliams > Learning Sciences & Human Development Program University of Colorado > Boulder j.mcwilliams@colorado.edu > > > > On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 8:12 AM, Greg Mcverry wrote: > >> I want to bring a call back to the idea of logic and gender. >> >> Someone in the thread noted that "academic discourse" wasn't about >> winning but simply prevailing logic. Anna commented back you could be >> logical and not be a "jerk" about it. >> >> Maybe both statements can be true. >> >> White males may not excel in this type of logic simply based on their >> privilege. Though I am sure privilege plays a huge role. >> >> Could it be the Western tradition of logic is itself rooted in gender >> inequality? It is a field a few thousand years old that was made up >> by white men arguing "logically" with other white men. Naturally the >> discourse practices would signify and reinforce membership within these circles. >> Exclusion of underrepresented voices has influence how the concept of >> "logic" has evolved. >> >> I keep thinking about "logic" and argumentation as I begin to >> interact with scholars outside of the US. We have put a strong >> emphasis on arguing in our >> K12 curriculum. Yet when I talk to people from other countries they >> note a word for "argumentative writing" or "argumentation" does not >> really exist in their language. Which as we know influences >> thought...which influences language..and both contribute to culture and activity. >> >> So could it be the gender bias that has existed in the listserv is a >> symptom of stressing a definition of "logic" maybe engendered. Notice >> the talk in our models of logic have been proving who is right and >> who is wrong? What translation is best for example. >> >> It is one individual "proving" he is right rather than they reaching >> a consensus on what is right. >> >> >> >> On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 12:47 AM Annalisa Aguilar wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> >>> Sometimes synchronicity is spooky. I spied this in the Guardian just now. >>> >>> >>> https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/nov/02/ >> silicon-valley-sexism-diversity-valerie-aurora-frame-shift >>> >>> >>> In reply to Maria-Cristina, it's difficult to have work-life balance >>> when the division of the personal and the public worlds exists. From >>> what is described in biased workplaces (in article above), it's >>> necessary to have some sort of protective wall, if only to survive another day. >>> >>> >>> The irony is that people become competitive in the work place >>> because of >> a >>> perceived scarcity of resources, but in technology it seems to me to >>> be a perceived scarcity of privileges. I have never understood how >>> sitting at >> a >>> keyboard is somehow "hard work." I know it requires effort and >> intellectual >>> effort in particular, but it's not like working on a farm, where >>> solving problems with scarce resources is always the norm. Think bricolage. >>> >>> >>> Maybe this perceived scarcity is the same in academia. Having a >>> worldview that the field of knowledge is infinite, seems to be, >>> looking from the outside. But perhaps I am unaware of the bricolage >>> people do inside the university. I do not mean to diminish truly hard work. >>> >>> >>> Anyway, these resources are culled from the public world to feed the >>> personal world in the end, isn't that the true motivation? To >>> protect >> home >>> and hearth when we aren't talking about invading hoards on longboats >>> shooting flaming arrows at our huts shouldn't carry that same >>> impending fear, dread, and uncertainty. But sometimes it seems to >>> feel that way, >> that >>> people behave with that same ferocity of a struggle to the death. >>> >>> >>> It is an illusion, a misperception. But this misperception has its >>> apparent reality that creates real fear in people. As if their lives >> didn't >>> matter and unbalanced equations must be attacked with quadratic >> solutions, >>> to set the matter straight. >>> >>> >>> Instead, a shared effort is required to permit that defensiveness, >>> born >> of >>> competition, to dissipate. In order to do that, people have to feel safe. >>> So how is safety created in the spaces? Spaces free of ridicule and >>> non-acceptance. Then, isn't that what every human being desires and >>> requires to flourish? Interesting that that need has no bias. >>> >>> >>> That is why I admire Aurora so much. I really think that she is on >>> to something. >>> >>> >>> Larry, rather than reversibility, I'd prefer receptivity or reciprocity. >>> >>> >>> And rather than finer nature, I'd prefer true nature (with an idea >>> that being competitive, biased, prejudiced, unethical etc, are >>> actually artificial constructs, that when obstructions have been >>> lifted, what is natural is to balance what is there (like >>> homeostasis), free from hindrances. >>> >>> >>> In order for us to recognize what is fullness in ourselves, fullness >>> must already be present within us, otherwise we could not recognize >>> it, we wouldn't have affinity toward it. So if we can remove the >>> notion of scarcity, then the fullness of who and what we are, which >>> is already >> there, >>> will be evident. It will have an appearance of emerging from >>> nothing, but it's really just appearing like a tree in the fog that >>> was standing quiet all along, and all that was required was for the fog to lift. >>> >>> >>> Anyway, I want to lastly add that I bring up demand over production, >> which >>> Maria Cristina had shown some interest. The idea is that we have >>> demands which actually decide production, and these demands are >>> socially based, because we have social natures. Even if we are >>> talking about biological demands like food and shelter, early >>> childcare, regardless, in those >> cases >>> there is a social aspect to them. >>> >>> >>> Looking through the other end of the telescope, when we consider >>> demand first rather than production, things look interestingly >>> different. If we include things in demand in that exploration >>> (rather than things in production), we begin to see the social life >>> of things, we start to see >> how >>> these items go in and out of commodification, where objects have >>> auras of value that reside outside of monetary value and markets. >>> >>> >>> Let's consider your dining room table. You bought it in a furniture >> store, >>> or perhaps online, or from a thrift store or garage sale, maybe it >>> was a gift. But as long as you own it, you don't consider the market >>> value of your dining room table, or its appreciating value if say it >>> was made by a famous furniture maker where in 20-30 years you'll see >>> those items appraised on The Antiques Road Show; at least not until >>> you decide you don't want to own it anymore. During that time of >>> possession, the dining room table starts to have different value, a >>> social value, which is determined by its demand, or should I say >>> demand for it. It supports the family by providing a comfortable >>> place to eat meals. A place for kids to do homework. A place to play >>> card games. Or to cut a dress pattern from fabric, etc. All of these >>> are domestic activities, but they have no production value in terms of tables. You only need one dining room table. >>> Still, the table will generate value in the household, because of >>> the activities that the table supports, even if it is to bring >>> people >> together >>> at holidays, or even if it has only sentimental value, say if the >>> table >> is >>> damaged and must be repaired, or it has been moved because the room >>> is being painted. This description depicts the social life of the >>> dining >> room >>> table. Which is based upon its demand, not its production. >>> >>> >>> Anyway, as I said previously, my debt for these thought experiments >>> comes from Arjun Appadurai. If anyone is interested. >>> >>> >>> Maria Cristina makes a great point considering work life and living >>> life as two types of activity systems and thinking about their >>> inherent contradictions. What comes from this tension that transcends the two? >>> (Might this exploration echo the comparison between production and >> demand?) >>> Is Maria Cristina correct that there hasn't been much discussion in >>> this area? if so, I'd like to learn more about that. >>> >>> >>> Great conversations. Thanks. >>> >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> >>> Annalisa >>> >> From helenaworthen@gmail.com Thu Nov 3 12:32:18 2016 From: helenaworthen@gmail.com (Helena Worthen) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 12:32:18 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Slow | Experimental Swimlanes In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I like this. In addition, I like talking about HOW to have a conversation. I like Richard's description of a "passing theory." I seem to remember that there was a lot of work done on that a dozen or more years ago. Does anyone have more background on this? I note that I've responded quickly (10 minutes) in a "slow" lane. How should I handle that? Helena Helena Worthen helenaworthen@gmail.com Vietnam blog: helenaworthen.wordpress.com On Nov 3, 2016, at 12:20 PM, Huw Lloyd wrote: > Dear All, > > For emails marked slow, we might have an expectancy of a "wait time" (kudos > to Peter) of say 2 hours between emails, i.e. only reply after at least a > two hour wait, with maybe up to a maximum of 5 emails a day. I am > obviously making this up -- so those with this preference can perhaps > indicate the tempo. > > And good? > > Best, > Huw From annalisa@unm.edu Thu Nov 3 12:47:58 2016 From: annalisa@unm.edu (Annalisa Aguilar) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 19:47:58 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: <581b82bd.5207620a.9f848.0978@mx.google.com> References: <00ab01d235fe$c29c1560$47d44020$@edu>, <581b82bd.5207620a.9f848.0978@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Hello, If I might comment, I think what has happened in what was being talking about, what causes gendered discourses has been reduced to questions of whether men are logical and women are illogical, and therein lie a bunch of problems and silly assumptions, if you don't mind me calling them silly. I don't recall when it was Jacob brought to the list questions and observations pertaining to logic and how it was he had been struck down from unfolding his thoughts about it, but I certainly do not want to prohibit him from speaking out about it. Perhaps he could start a special thread Just For That. I would be happy to contribute. I would suggest that we should let him moderate that thread, and respect his leadership of that thread. However, one of the developments that I am witnessing, is Maria-Cristina and Larry and I were kind of going somewhere with the weaving we were working upon, and then that development was sideswiped to return to an unpleasant memory of being a jerk and being logical (as if these are inherently intertwined behaviors). It was an interruption of sorts. I'd rather not go back over it because I don't want to descend into an essentialist discourse. That's why I would rather go back what Maria Cristina and I were unfolding, with some nice contributions from Larry. At the same time, because it merits a response, I would like to address a perfect example of what happens to logical women. Consider Hypatia. This idea that logic is gendered is ridiculous. Many women can be logical. Many men can be illogical. It's just that the basis of the inquiry, specifically, the values that the logic support are different, and that difference is based upon culture and what I will call "entrained gender." When women use logic (argumentative or otherwise) to the better of their male peers, what usually happens is that she is then castigated for her looks, or her lack of nurturing, etc. That aggressive act is an act of entrainment, where she is punished for being empowered with her own mind, and thus she is attacked and put back in her place. When she is dependent and entrained to be like Barbie or a trophy wife, to speak in high-contrast indicative terms, she is rewarded, but then punished and ridiculed for being so illogical (or even better emotional, sinful, fill in the blank). This kind of entrainment is a double bind. The various "she"s and the various shapes and sizes we come in, can't win without suffering some kind of hurtful insult, coming or going. Look at what is happening in the US election. If any of the candidates is being more logical in the context of this election, it is Hillary. if there is anyone being more irrational, emotional, and off-topic, it is Trump, and yet there are forces seeking to promote a witch hunt and that fire is being kindled by the FBI, the highest police department in the land. *There it is in living color.* Has any presidential candidate ever in the history of this country ever been threatened by the other candidate to be put in prison??? It is a typical male chauvinist tactic to threaten a woman with confinement and to attack a woman's mental state as being far from sane. That is why saying that men are logical and women are not, is a veiled statement against the mental health of a woman, because somehow there is the belief that women's bodies are not genetically or biological capable of supporting a math problem. Hope that that is clear. I would like to assert that all humans with proper education and guidance can be logical. It isn't gendered, it is just being a good thinker, a critical thinker. That is why to say that somehow logic is male is hugely insulting. So I hope that men will understand that that is a likely trigger for intelligent women, many who populate this list. Let me add that logic has typically been used as an intellectual weapon, in an adversarial mode, which has been already commented upon. But this has, as I said above, to do with the basis of the particular logical inquiry. The foundation. That basis has to do with values. If your values are to keep women in their place, whether conscious or not, then you will use logic as a weapon and indicate logic is for the male brain only. If your values are for social justice, then you will see logic as an intellectual tool to build better minds which builds better people, and subsequently builds better community and results in a more just society. Is that logical enough? Hammers can crack skulls or build houses, take your pick *based upon* what you value, and what you want to create, what kind of friends to you want to hang out with? Turkeys or eagles? Anyway, I'd like to return to the conversation with Maria Cristina and Larry, and of course anyone else interested, about demand and production, or in her view, reproduction, and I think in Larry's version, reversibility, if that is OK. But before I tie off on this topic, I also want to share how very much I appreciate Vera's post, whose tone might be representative of those women and others more prone to lurk until they are ready to contribute. Again, I hope there is an emerging safe space here, at least I'd like that to be the case. So that other women can participate and not feel irrelevant, but cherished and cared for as valuable contributors that they are. Kind regards, Annalisa From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Thu Nov 3 13:14:04 2016 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 20:14:04 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Quick | Experimental Swimlanes Message-ID: Hi Helena, I guess if the wait time was adhered to, you would either sit on your hands for two hours or edit the subject line (as I did). But point being that "slow" (or whatever you want to call it) would probably be more empathic than consciously being aware of waiting. Discussion of papers seems to have its own register, so maybe something else for that? One issue is whether it plays havoc with archives, but I guess they aren't in pristine order presently either. Bye for now, Huw On 3 November 2016 at 19:32, Helena Worthen wrote: > I like this. In addition, I like talking about HOW to have a conversation. > I like Richard's description of a "passing theory." I seem to remember that > there was a lot of work done on that a dozen or more years ago. Does anyone > have more background on this? > > I note that I've responded quickly (10 minutes) in a "slow" lane. How > should I handle that? > > Helena > > Helena Worthen > helenaworthen@gmail.com > Vietnam blog: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > On Nov 3, 2016, at 12:20 PM, Huw Lloyd wrote: > > > Dear All, > > > > For emails marked slow, we might have an expectancy of a "wait time" > (kudos > > to Peter) of say 2 hours between emails, i.e. only reply after at least a > > two hour wait, with maybe up to a maximum of 5 emails a day. I am > > obviously making this up -- so those with this preference can perhaps > > indicate the tempo. > > > > And good? > > > > Best, > > Huw > > > From jgregmcverry@gmail.com Thu Nov 3 13:13:44 2016 From: jgregmcverry@gmail.com (Greg Mcverry) Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2016 20:13:44 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: References: <00ab01d235fe$c29c1560$47d44020$@edu> <581b82bd.5207620a.9f848.0978@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Annalisa, It was I, and not Jacob, who originally brought up that the concept of "logic" has engendered roots because of the roots it had in a Western tradition that has long favored the activity of those who identify as male versus those who identify as female or other. If power influences meaning than our definiton of logic was influenced by existing structures. I was not in anyway trying to suggest the conclusion men are logical and women are illogical. I think the song quote goes, "That's right the women are smarter." What I positing, and then to which Jacob provided some research to support, was that how we as a society view an epistemological definition of "logic" and how to "make logical arguments" is rooted in the same power structures and discourse patterns that have lead to gender inequality. I didn't respond.... yet...to calls for clarifications of my thoughts about gender and etymology of logic mainly because I had to do work that pays bills (get feedback out to students) and I wasn't prepared (either with energy or knowledge) to argue subjectivity versus objectivity. It is just as hard to convince a hunter to be a vegetarian as it is to argue with someone rooted rationalism that objectivism may not exist. I am intrigued by this idea that Rein brought up that our gender fluidity changes over time and cultures. Yet I am always reminded that the Western heroes we celebrate today ...Luke Skywalker, Harry Potter, Batman and Superman...share much of the ideal male detailed in Greek and Roman mythology. Until recently female heroes were missing from our ideal. I have to disagree with David that gender differences are rooted at some biological differences. I think I may have more in common with any given female as I do with any given male. Yet as the father of three boys I can see the differences of engendered practices up close. I really don't know the answer. I think this is because we have conflated gender and sex as a binary and it isn't. I might suggest we retire this thread and split it into three: -Creating more inclusive practices on XMCA -Engendered nature of logic - the role of reproduction, deman, and production As I stated earlier listserves are awful for this kind of conversation because they work so well. I don't think the current format, while allowing for distributed thought and federated content, has all the tagging and moderation tools necessary to ensure an inclusive environment. On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 3:50 PM Annalisa Aguilar wrote: > Hello, > > > If I might comment, I think what has happened in what was being talking > about, what causes gendered discourses has been reduced to questions of > whether men are logical and women are illogical, and therein lie a bunch of > problems and silly assumptions, if you don't mind me calling them silly. > > > I don't recall when it was Jacob brought to the list questions and > observations pertaining to logic and how it was he had been struck down > from unfolding his thoughts about it, but I certainly do not want to > prohibit him from speaking out about it. Perhaps he could start a special > thread Just For That. I would be happy to contribute. I would suggest that > we should let him moderate that thread, and respect his leadership of that > thread. > > > However, one of the developments that I am witnessing, is Maria-Cristina > and Larry and I were kind of going somewhere with the weaving we were > working upon, and then that development was sideswiped to return to an > unpleasant memory of being a jerk and being logical (as if these are > inherently intertwined behaviors). It was an interruption of sorts. I'd > rather not go back over it because I don't want to descend into an > essentialist discourse. > > > That's why I would rather go back what Maria Cristina and I were > unfolding, with some nice contributions from Larry. > > > At the same time, because it merits a response, I would like to address a > perfect example of what happens to logical women. Consider Hypatia. > > > This idea that logic is gendered is ridiculous. Many women can be logical. > Many men can be illogical. It's just that the basis of the inquiry, > specifically, the values that the logic support are different, and that > difference is based upon culture and what I will call "entrained gender." > > > When women use logic (argumentative or otherwise) to the better of their > male peers, what usually happens is that she is then castigated for her > looks, or her lack of nurturing, etc. That aggressive act is an act of > entrainment, where she is punished for being empowered with her own mind, > and thus she is attacked and put back in her place. When she is dependent > and entrained to be like Barbie or a trophy wife, to speak in high-contrast > indicative terms, she is rewarded, but then punished and ridiculed for > being so illogical (or even better emotional, sinful, fill in the blank). > > > This kind of entrainment is a double bind. The various "she"s and the > various shapes and sizes we come in, can't win without suffering some kind > of hurtful insult, coming or going. > > > Look at what is happening in the US election. If any of the candidates is > being more logical in the context of this election, it is Hillary. if there > is anyone being more irrational, emotional, and off-topic, it is Trump, and > yet there are forces seeking to promote a witch hunt and that fire is being > kindled by the FBI, the highest police department in the land. *There it is > in living color.* > > > Has any presidential candidate ever in the history of this country ever > been threatened by the other candidate to be put in prison??? > > > It is a typical male chauvinist tactic to threaten a woman with > confinement and to attack a woman's mental state as being far from sane. > That is why saying that men are logical and women are not, is a veiled > statement against the mental health of a woman, because somehow there is > the belief that women's bodies are not genetically or biological capable of > supporting a math problem. Hope that that is clear. > > > I would like to assert that all humans with proper education and guidance > can be logical. It isn't gendered, it is just being a good thinker, a > critical thinker. > > > That is why to say that somehow logic is male is hugely insulting. So I > hope that men will understand that that is a likely trigger for intelligent > women, many who populate this list. > > > Let me add that logic has typically been used as an intellectual weapon, > in an adversarial mode, which has been already commented upon. But this > has, as I said above, to do with the basis of the particular logical > inquiry. The foundation. That basis has to do with values. If your values > are to keep women in their place, whether conscious or not, then you will > use logic as a weapon and indicate logic is for the male brain only. > > > If your values are for social justice, then you will see logic as an > intellectual tool to build better minds which builds better people, and > subsequently builds better community and results in a more just society. Is > that logical enough? > > > Hammers can crack skulls or build houses, take your pick *based upon* what > you value, and what you want to create, what kind of friends to you want to > hang out with? Turkeys or eagles? > > > Anyway, I'd like to return to the conversation with Maria Cristina and > Larry, and of course anyone else interested, about demand and production, > or in her view, reproduction, and I think in Larry's version, > reversibility, if that is OK. But before I tie off on this topic, I also > want to share how very much I appreciate Vera's post, whose tone might be > representative of those women and others more prone to lurk until they are > ready to contribute. Again, I hope there is an emerging safe space here, at > least I'd like that to be the case. So that other women can participate and > not feel irrelevant, but cherished and cared for as valuable contributors > that they are. > > > Kind regards, > > > Annalisa > > > From Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu Thu Nov 3 13:23:10 2016 From: Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu (White, Phillip) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 20:23:10 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: References: <1477604046100.32976@iped.uio.no> <1477637094283.80763@iped.uio.no> <1477662717568.90322@iped.uio.no> <1CF09B3A-DF07-4538-A198-FDB1B1EDE432@gmail.com> <58174c10.4223620a.cb56a.39b6@mx.google.com> <004801d23447$4aef6110$e0ce2330$@att.net> <581a026f.0f08620a.9bde9.a672@mx.google.com> <3B91542B0D4F274D871B38AA48E991F903C5721D@CIO-KRC-D1MBX04.osuad.osu.edu>, Message-ID: Bateson points out that for the blind man, his walking stick is not separate, but rather an extension of his self. the tool is not separate from the wielder. In 1984, the 30th anniversary of Brown v. Board of Education, Lani Guinier participated on a panel of mainly black alumni, at Yale Law School. Ten years earlier she had sat in this same classroom where the white male professor had always addressed the class with, ?Good morning, gentlemen?. The professor explained that to his mind his students were simply gentlemen, an asexual term. They would in due time all become Gentlemen of the bar. The male participants of the panel all described fond memories of their three years in law school. For Guinier, the law school was still not a safe space. When she gave her ten minute address, she never even acknowledged that she had attended Yale Law School. Four years later, Guinier was invited again to address young female students of color about her personal choices and she had experienced. This time she found her voice. Guinier wrote, ?Those who do not experience the world through color blindness or gender neutrality live with the peculiar sensation of always looking at one?s self through the eyes of others.? She further explains, ?A race-neutral, gender-neutered perspective is apparently enjoyed, to the extent it exists at all, by gentlemen; those with a white male perspective, those in the majority, and those gentlemen surrogates to whom the majority grants insider privileges. For self-conscious, second-sighted outsiders, multiple consciousness centers marginality and names reality.? (p 108, Critical Race Feminism; A Reader. 2nd edition. Adrien Katherine Wing, Editor. 2003.) language as a tool also carries culture. when culture is a patriarchy, language is one tool that enforces it. phillip ________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of David H Kirshner Sent: Thursday, November 3, 2016 10:51:54 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse Michael, This seems to confuse the tool with the wielder. As a mathematician and mathematics educator, I understand that mathematics--the purest and most sustained expression of logic--is motivated not by science, but by an aesthetics of pure form. Some mathematics is created instrumentally to address some real-world need. But pure mathematics in general is exploration of form, with applications, if they are ever found, coming to the fore well after the fact--sometimes centuries later, as with conic sections which originally were studied by the Greeks for no other reason than their inherent intrigue, and only became prominent in science during the Renaissance. David -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Glassman, Michael Sent: Thursday, November 3, 2016 10:57 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse Hi David, I'm not sure I agree with this. I haven't sorted out all my thinking on this so I'm going to refer to Illich who I have been reading lately (caveat, I am always influenced by interesting thinker I am reading at the moment). I think his argument would be objectivist, rationalist logic is adaptive, but basically it is adaptive for those who seek dominance. It can, and often is, used as a blunt force instrument to stymie more subtle forms of human interaction and experience. Of course we must build super highways because that makes our trade more efficient. But do we necessarily want more efficient trade between specific centers of commerce? Then what happens to the local activities that combine trade with discovery and understanding at the day to day level. The argument is made we can't talk about that because it is not logical. Harkening back to Annalisa's post, the objective rationalists then throw in scarcity as a decided variable when perhaps there is no scarcity. Michael -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of David H Kirshner Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 11:47 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse Whereas there's certainly a political dimension to the evolution of discourse forms, it's not the only one. An objectivist, rationalist epistemology became ascendant primarily because it's adaptive. Societies equipped with this discourse were able to create sciences and technologies that enabled them to prevail over other societies. To see how far removed this evolution is from gender politics we only have to look at the history of this ascendance in Europe in which tensions between epistemologies played out primarily between one group of white males empowered by religious institutions and another group of white males reflecting secular power sources. In those terms, I think we have regard first wave feminism as ameliorative. Women won the right to participate in institutions/professions guided by objectivist, rationalist epistemology. Perhaps this kind of logic is regarded as 'male' because of historical associations, or perhaps biological differences between the sexes predispose males to that kind of logic (Kimura, 1999). Whatever the reason, it seems unwise to regard the matter purely in political terms, ignoring the adaptive value discursive practices. David Kimura, D. (1999). Sex differences in the brain. Scientific American, 274, 26-31. http://www.case.edu/affil/sigmaxi/documents/D.KimuraScientificAmerican_gender-brain_.pdf -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Jacob McWilliams Sent: Thursday, November 3, 2016 9:31 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse There's no doubt that "logic," as an outgrowth of objectivist, rationalist epistemology, is gendered--after all, if theorists wants us to believe that all _other_ epistemologies are socially constructed, then it follows that objectivism is too. And it's constructed to benefit those in power--i.e., people who think like, and commonly are, white men. Lots of feminist theorists have written about this. Donna Haraway took us on a wild ride through science's logic fetish back in the 1980s: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3178066?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents. Lots of feminists have written about this. Sadly, most folks in most academic departments are appallingly unfamiliar with their work. Sadly but unsurprisingly. Not to beat the proverbial dead horse, but several listserv members--including me--have tried to introduce this position re: logic in prior xmca threads. The position has mostly either been ignored or loudly rejected out of hand by more vocal participants on this listserv. -- Jacob McWilliams Learning Sciences & Human Development Program University of Colorado Boulder j.mcwilliams@colorado.edu On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 8:12 AM, Greg Mcverry wrote: > I want to bring a call back to the idea of logic and gender. > > Someone in the thread noted that "academic discourse" wasn't about > winning but simply prevailing logic. Anna commented back you could be > logical and not be a "jerk" about it. > > Maybe both statements can be true. > > White males may not excel in this type of logic simply based on their > privilege. Though I am sure privilege plays a huge role. > > Could it be the Western tradition of logic is itself rooted in gender > inequality? It is a field a few thousand years old that was made up by > white men arguing "logically" with other white men. Naturally the > discourse practices would signify and reinforce membership within these circles. > Exclusion of underrepresented voices has influence how the concept of > "logic" has evolved. > > I keep thinking about "logic" and argumentation as I begin to interact > with scholars outside of the US. We have put a strong emphasis on > arguing in our > K12 curriculum. Yet when I talk to people from other countries they > note a word for "argumentative writing" or "argumentation" does not > really exist in their language. Which as we know influences > thought...which influences language..and both contribute to culture and activity. > > So could it be the gender bias that has existed in the listserv is a > symptom of stressing a definition of "logic" maybe engendered. Notice > the talk in our models of logic have been proving who is right and who > is wrong? What translation is best for example. > > It is one individual "proving" he is right rather than they reaching a > consensus on what is right. > > > > On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 12:47 AM Annalisa Aguilar wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > Sometimes synchronicity is spooky. I spied this in the Guardian just now. > > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/nov/02/ > silicon-valley-sexism-diversity-valerie-aurora-frame-shift > > > > > > In reply to Maria-Cristina, it's difficult to have work-life balance > > when the division of the personal and the public worlds exists. From > > what is described in biased workplaces (in article above), it's > > necessary to have some sort of protective wall, if only to survive another day. > > > > > > The irony is that people become competitive in the work place > > because of > a > > perceived scarcity of resources, but in technology it seems to me to > > be a perceived scarcity of privileges. I have never understood how > > sitting at > a > > keyboard is somehow "hard work." I know it requires effort and > intellectual > > effort in particular, but it's not like working on a farm, where > > solving problems with scarce resources is always the norm. Think bricolage. > > > > > > Maybe this perceived scarcity is the same in academia. Having a > > worldview that the field of knowledge is infinite, seems to be, > > looking from the outside. But perhaps I am unaware of the bricolage > > people do inside the university. I do not mean to diminish truly hard work. > > > > > > Anyway, these resources are culled from the public world to feed the > > personal world in the end, isn't that the true motivation? To > > protect > home > > and hearth when we aren't talking about invading hoards on longboats > > shooting flaming arrows at our huts shouldn't carry that same > > impending fear, dread, and uncertainty. But sometimes it seems to > > feel that way, > that > > people behave with that same ferocity of a struggle to the death. > > > > > > It is an illusion, a misperception. But this misperception has its > > apparent reality that creates real fear in people. As if their lives > didn't > > matter and unbalanced equations must be attacked with quadratic > solutions, > > to set the matter straight. > > > > > > Instead, a shared effort is required to permit that defensiveness, > > born > of > > competition, to dissipate. In order to do that, people have to feel safe. > > So how is safety created in the spaces? Spaces free of ridicule and > > non-acceptance. Then, isn't that what every human being desires and > > requires to flourish? Interesting that that need has no bias. > > > > > > That is why I admire Aurora so much. I really think that she is on > > to something. > > > > > > Larry, rather than reversibility, I'd prefer receptivity or reciprocity. > > > > > > And rather than finer nature, I'd prefer true nature (with an idea > > that being competitive, biased, prejudiced, unethical etc, are > > actually artificial constructs, that when obstructions have been > > lifted, what is natural is to balance what is there (like > > homeostasis), free from hindrances. > > > > > > In order for us to recognize what is fullness in ourselves, fullness > > must already be present within us, otherwise we could not recognize > > it, we wouldn't have affinity toward it. So if we can remove the > > notion of scarcity, then the fullness of who and what we are, which > > is already > there, > > will be evident. It will have an appearance of emerging from > > nothing, but it's really just appearing like a tree in the fog that > > was standing quiet all along, and all that was required was for the fog to lift. > > > > > > Anyway, I want to lastly add that I bring up demand over production, > which > > Maria Cristina had shown some interest. The idea is that we have > > demands which actually decide production, and these demands are > > socially based, because we have social natures. Even if we are > > talking about biological demands like food and shelter, early > > childcare, regardless, in those > cases > > there is a social aspect to them. > > > > > > Looking through the other end of the telescope, when we consider > > demand first rather than production, things look interestingly > > different. If we include things in demand in that exploration > > (rather than things in production), we begin to see the social life > > of things, we start to see > how > > these items go in and out of commodification, where objects have > > auras of value that reside outside of monetary value and markets. > > > > > > Let's consider your dining room table. You bought it in a furniture > store, > > or perhaps online, or from a thrift store or garage sale, maybe it > > was a gift. But as long as you own it, you don't consider the market > > value of your dining room table, or its appreciating value if say it > > was made by a famous furniture maker where in 20-30 years you'll see > > those items appraised on The Antiques Road Show; at least not until > > you decide you don't want to own it anymore. During that time of > > possession, the dining room table starts to have different value, a > > social value, which is determined by its demand, or should I say > > demand for it. It supports the family by providing a comfortable > > place to eat meals. A place for kids to do homework. A place to play > > card games. Or to cut a dress pattern from fabric, etc. All of these > > are domestic activities, but they have no production value in terms of tables. You only need one dining room table. > > Still, the table will generate value in the household, because of > > the activities that the table supports, even if it is to bring > > people > together > > at holidays, or even if it has only sentimental value, say if the > > table > is > > damaged and must be repaired, or it has been moved because the room > > is being painted. This description depicts the social life of the > > dining > room > > table. Which is based upon its demand, not its production. > > > > > > Anyway, as I said previously, my debt for these thought experiments > > comes from Arjun Appadurai. If anyone is interested. > > > > > > Maria Cristina makes a great point considering work life and living > > life as two types of activity systems and thinking about their > > inherent contradictions. What comes from this tension that transcends the two? > > (Might this exploration echo the comparison between production and > demand?) > > Is Maria Cristina correct that there hasn't been much discussion in > > this area? if so, I'd like to learn more about that. > > > > > > Great conversations. Thanks. > > > > > > Kind regards, > > > > > > Annalisa > > > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Thu Nov 3 13:24:54 2016 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 20:24:54 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Slow | Experimental Swimlanes In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: <1478204707377.21034@iped.uio.no> Huw, Helena, all, I think these are great ideas! Signalling an intended tempo may be very useful for those of us who want to follow xmca conversations, but need to manage the time we have. But the (tempo) dimension does not come without challenges. For example, it should not be only about how long time is expected between the first and the next turn, but also about how long each post is expected to be. For example, if a conversation is expected to move along quickly, then we need posts that are quick to read, and which do not require the kind of reflection that Henry was wisely recommending in a recent post. The other challenge is that, as any conversation, the list is a turn-taking unfolding structure in which every next turn is a function not only of the (intentions) of the previous one, but opens up in an unforeseeable way. Helena rightly wonders, what we do about a quick response to a Slow thread? Dana in the gender thread is surprised by the fact that the thread was being sustained rather than just dropped, another example of conversations' unforeseeable (indeed *productive*) character. I am a bit skeptical about having very clearly defined rules for each tempo modifier, specially because in doing so we may loose lots of the positive qualities that natural conversations have that for good and for bad are now present in xmca. I was therefore wondering what else we could learn from the analysis of natural conversation. And we follow the basics of what years of conversation analysis have shown is that the minimal unit in any exchange is the turn-pair. This is so because it is only as a pair that any aspect of a conversation becomes recognisable (and general) as a cultural practice. As an example, rather than slow versus quick, we may have a *request* modifier, where everyone knows is the first turn in a *request | response* pair, and where everyone understands that a request demands a quicker response rather than a long reflection (unless, of course, the request has such a long reflection as object). We may then come up with other categories, all of which pertain cultural units (e.g., invitation to reflect | reflection; job post or conference announcement (no response is expected but still may emerge), etc...) rather than elements such as slow or quick, which in natural conversation are part of a larger whole. How does this sound? Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Helena Worthen Sent: 03 November 2016 20:32 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Slow | Experimental Swimlanes I like this. In addition, I like talking about HOW to have a conversation. I like Richard's description of a "passing theory." I seem to remember that there was a lot of work done on that a dozen or more years ago. Does anyone have more background on this? I note that I've responded quickly (10 minutes) in a "slow" lane. How should I handle that? Helena Helena Worthen helenaworthen@gmail.com Vietnam blog: helenaworthen.wordpress.com On Nov 3, 2016, at 12:20 PM, Huw Lloyd wrote: > Dear All, > > For emails marked slow, we might have an expectancy of a "wait time" (kudos > to Peter) of say 2 hours between emails, i.e. only reply after at least a > two hour wait, with maybe up to a maximum of 5 emails a day. I am > obviously making this up -- so those with this preference can perhaps > indicate the tempo. > > And good? > > Best, > Huw From annalisa@unm.edu Thu Nov 3 14:27:34 2016 From: annalisa@unm.edu (Annalisa Aguilar) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 21:27:34 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: <3f68de59-0c17-04fe-dd9c-1acc43000bd8@ires.piemonte.it> References: <1477662717568.90322@iped.uio.no> <1CF09B3A-DF07-4538-A198-FDB1B1EDE432@gmail.com> <58174c10.4223620a.cb56a.39b6@mx.google.com> <004801d23447$4aef6110$e0ce2330$@att.net> <581a026f.0f08620a.9bde9.a672@mx.google.com> , <3f68de59-0c17-04fe-dd9c-1acc43000bd8@ires.piemonte.it> Message-ID: Maria Cristina, and others, I agree 200% that scarcity is a concept upon which capitalism flourishes. We know that the capitalist ideology, as it were, is used to control class, as our good friend Karl tells us. I believe there are some who want to offer that the ideology behind capitalism as inherently intertwined with control and oppression, and is somehow immoveable, but that there cannot be good done with capitalism. But perhaps capitalism is just a tool, and this ideology and its identification with scarcity is the real problem for what capitalism has historically supported. Maybe with the proper fundamental values capitalism can work for a greater good. I don't know, I just offer that thought. Perhaps I am making a heretical statement by saying that. I'm not sure where I stand, but I'm happy to explore the line of those thoughts, not because I believe in capitalism, but because I don't believe there is scarcity on this planet (unless we are talking about a lack of infinite oil reserves and forests and clean healthy oceans, then I agree). What I mean by scarcity is not so much in materials, but in innovation, in demand. I do not agree that innovation is scarce, neither is demand, and I believe that the reserves of human innovation are infinite, if we only choose to tap into them. When demand is scarce, then production diminishes. But when the grassroots demand change, production does increase, especially over time. I remember when being vegetarian was considered an oddity, and it was difficult to go grocery shopping, or to eat out at restaurants. Now it is much better for vegetarians. But that is because of demand, not production. What I think is the basis of gendered discourse, whether you believe that innovation (and its link to demand) is possible beyond being a white male. I do not mean to insult white males as representing that because they are white and male that it denotes they believe that that is true; rather, I speak to the ideology and the logic of that ideology. Let me be clear about that, for the record. I would like to offer, Maria Cristina, that what you call reproduction (if I'm understanding you), might be what I'm indicating in terms of demand. But I'm not sure. We can explore this together. When we look at the dining room table example, the table is reproducing many domestic activities in the way it is supportive to the community of the household (in Greek parlance the oikia), regardless of gender. Because we all have to eat, regardless of gender. Almost all households have dining room tables, so I hope that is not a class-ist generalization that leaves out households without dining room tables. Far from it for me to be a furniture bigot. What I am suggesting is that flipping the orientation from production to demand, we can start to see the world with less emphasis upon the colored glass of gender and race, and just think in human terms in relation to tools and the demand we have for them (outside the realm of commodities). Demand also can be a test for where gender is a dependent concept or independent one. My suggestion is not intended to dismiss the discussion of gender, but to consider how tools and their demand can indicate our values. And those values, as revealed, can in turn help to reveal what constructs the structure of gender ideologies. I believe there is a lot of work in this area in the world of anthropology, right Greg T.? (Please know, this line of inquiry is a tool intended for exploration, and not to be weaponized.) I think also this weaves well with the social reality of giving, something Maria Cristina you also include in this discussion. Much of what is given is either tools to help make a better life, or products that were created with those tools, and it is those tools that have demand, because of their social worth in the realm of giving (and not solely the realm of commerce). I also would like to acknowledge what you say about there being many gifts around us. I am of the worldview that there is much about this world for which to be grateful. There is a lot to be said for cultivating gratitude in community, over competition. Thanks, Maria Cristina, for your participation and collaboration with me. Last, I agree that the division between the private and the public, (the oikia and the agora), could be the result of patriarchy, but it could also just have to do with protecting the ones that you love from harmful adversaries. We cannot say with certainty that matriarchal societies would dissolve that barrier. Though it has an appeal, it may be too idealistic. When we identify our vulnerable selves, it usually has to do with intimate spaces, and these tend not to be on display in the agora. At the least we have been socialized this way, but could that be more the way we are wired as humans? I can't be sure so far in this line of thought. I'm open to see possibilities and other considerations. What is prohibitive to women is not that there is a division between the public and the private, but that they are not safe to travel to the agora and to mill about the public space without being insulted or threatened. If that were removed, it might be fine to have that boundary between the private and the public. Men of course are not ridiculed in the oikia to the extent that women are in the agora, and so while men might be chastised for not knowing how to bake a casserole, or how the iron a shirt, or how not to mix darks with lights in the washing machine, their lives are never threatened for not knowing these things. Iinstead their fates are relegated to a bad diet, wrinkled clothes, and grey whites, which are frequently seen as charming signifiers of bachelorhood. Certainly, their lives are enhanced for knowing how to do these tasks, if only because they can share in the housework, as Alfredo has offered in sharing his story. I am also reminded of something that was made apparent to me in an episode of the KPBS drama Indian Summers, which aired last Sunday. Without getting into the story, a theme in this episode had to do with the notion that insulting one's wife is the way for one man to deeply, albeit sinisterly, insult another man. That notion could be carried over to one's daughter I suppose, or one's mother or one's sister, even. Is this why, perhaps, women were kept back away from the agora or they were forced to be accompanied by a brother, husband, or father. And yes, we are talking about a patriarchy, but is the idea of insulting a man by insulting his wife generated by patriarchy? Women do not attack one another by insulting their husbands. Or their sons, brothers, or fathers. So I wonder if this also has to do with keeping women away from the agora. Let's keep reasoning with the seasoning of curiosity (as time permits, of course). Kind regards, Annalisa From pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu Thu Nov 3 15:04:31 2016 From: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu (Peter Feigenbaum [Staff]) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 18:04:31 -0400 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Help needed finding LSV references to *First*and *Second* Signal Systems Message-ID: Dear colleagues, As a representative of the category *Slow Responder* (I am a busy professional, a husband, a father of two, and a political activist), I am only now getting around to replying to those who responded to my earlier request for help. My apologies if my pace is too slow for a satisfying exchange. Because I was fairly vague about my reason for asking for a reference to first and second signal systems in Vygotsky's writings, I unwittingly opened the door to discussion of the differences between *signals* and *signs*. In fact, my interest is in their *similarities*, in the properties that are common to both. I am seeking the common denominator between animal stimulus-response thinking and human initiation-response thinking. Fortunately, that linkage exists precisely where David Kellogg pointed me: in Vol. 4, on p.55 of HDHMF in Vygotsky's Collected Works in English. Vygotsky is very clear when he distinguishes between *natural* signals (or signalization) and *artificial* signs (or signification). The former occurs when animals interact with the environment and their brains form conditioned reflexes, whereas the latter occurs when humans invent their own conditioned reflexes (words) and then apply those reflexes to themselves (or others) in order to master their own behavior. In essence, Vygotsky considered *signification* a special case of *signalization*. One issue I had not counted on is the historical/political one. I was unprepared for the possibility that the first and second signal systems may have been a political problem of accommodation to the authorities rather than an actual scientific problem. Thanks to Mike for pointing that out, and for pointing out A.R. Luria's fairly substantial contribution to the discussion--but especially for contacting (the wonderful and brilliant) Tanya Akhutina! I'm not quite sure how to make good use of Huw's suggestion about serial and parallel circuits, so I'll have to put that issue to the side for now. But thanks for raising it. In light of the ongoing discussion about how to create a more gender-sensitive and gender-balanced dialogue on this listserv, I would like to invite anyone who is lurking (or very busy) to contribute any useful information you may have about my request *in your own good time*. These problems are complicated, and I'm learning to be patient. Thanks to all. In solidarity, Peter On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 6:55 PM, mike cole wrote: > Peter -- Concerning your initial question. I obtained the following answer > from Tanya Akhutina. > > ????, > ?????? ??????? ? ?????? ?????????? ??????? ? 1932 ?. ?????????????? > ?????????? ? ??? ????? ????? ?????? ? 33 ? 34 ?????. ? ????? ?????????? ? > ?????????? ?? ?????. > ??? - ?????? ????, ?? ?????? ??? ??? ????????. ?? ???? ?????? ????? ????? > ???????????, ??????? ???, ?????? ???? ?.?.??????????. ?? ???????????? ? > ??????? ????? ?????????? ?????? ???? ????? ???????? ? ????? ?????? ?? ???. > 144: " ?.?. ????????? ???? ?????????? ??????, ? ? ??? ??????? ?????????? > ??????? ? ??????? ??????? ???????????????? ????? ???? ????????, ?? ??? ?? > ????? ??????, ??????? ?? ??? ?????, ?????????? ?? ?????? ????????? ?????". > > Roughly, > Mike, > Pavlov wrote about the second signal system in 1932. Correspondingly, > references/rememberances to it had to wait until 1933-34. Such references/ > rememberances in Vygotsky I do not recall. > > ARL was another case, he was obligated to speak in this way. Olga Sergeevna > Vinogradova, a student of ARL's [with whom I conducted research in the > winter of 1962/63-mc] is cited by Lena Luria [Luria's daughter] in her book > on p. 144 "A.R. new the teachings of Pavlov perfectly, and in his lectures > he changed the lexicon and the beauty of a straightforward psychological > language was replaced, but none the less the knowledge which he gave us > remained on the the level of real science." > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 3:42 PM, mike cole wrote: > > > It seems that side-by-side translations of the two documents merit > > archival publication, David. JREEP is an obvious repository. In addition > to > > which at present we have a good deal more evidence about children, chess > > boards, and the issues vexing Vygotsky than he had access to. The > > non/difficult chronology of the texts complicates an already complicated > > process of interpretation as we have long witnessed here. > > > > Perhaps as a separate thread, it would be nice to put together a > > discussion of the core linkages between Vygotsky and Halliday in your > > work..... one of those chains of discussion that come and go. Perhaps a > > mini-course devoted to the following, to me, essential idea: > > > > It seems to me that ALL of these are signalization systems (not > > signifying systems, because they do not have lexicogrammar and cannot > > convey ideal values) > > > > Providing a "cheat sheet" for autodidacts, might it be possible to create > > some > > "field of interest" in the xmca discussion for dealing with this idea? > > > > I have in no way forgotten the issue of the relation of microgenesis and > > ontogenesis. It seems another "key point" as most of us go about using > CHAT > > ideas in the course of the teaching/learning activities that pay the > bread > > and butter. As matters stand, I offer Franklin in the blocks as an > example > > of microgenesis in a preschool classroom involving play as an example of > a > > zone of proximal development where childre are a head taller than > > themselves. That discussion is for the microgenesis/ontogenesis thread > if I > > recall. > > > > I would be VERY interested to learn of ways that feminist, queer theory, > > critical disability studies theory, neurodiversity theory, and others can > > help me to understand these categories and the theories that purport to > > account for them. > > > > If they need to be re-thought, might as well be here. Ain't goin nowhere. > > > > mike > > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 2:28 PM, David Kellogg > > wrote: > > > >> I'm working with two versions of one of Vygotsky's last lectures (the > >> second version is given exactly five days before he was brought home > with > >> a > >> throat haemorrhage to die, the first about a year earlier). There are > >> passages that are almost word for word repetitions. There are passages > >> that > >> are semantically the same and but quite differently worded (the earlier > >> Vygotsky is quite modest and tentative; the later Vygotsky is much more > >> critical and also more confident). Then there are passages that say > pretty > >> much the opposite of what was said a year earlier: for example, in the > >> early lecture Vygotsky says that a child faced with a chessboard who > >> doesn't know how to play will see it structurally and sort the pieces by > >> color (black pieces on black squares, white on white) but in the later > >> lecture it is the child who does know how to play who sees it > >> structurally, > >> because the child sees a black knight in a "structure" with a white > pawn. > >> He's a genius, and geniuses tend to think things over a lot, turning > them > >> this way and that, and never looking at anything as final, not even when > >> they are about to die. > >> > >> HDHMF has to be read the same way. Vygotsky cannot quite seem to make up > >> his mind whether there are three stages of higher behavior (instinct, > >> habit, intelligence) or four different stages of higher behavior > >> (instinct, > >> habit, intelligence, and freedom). In Chapter Four, he very clearly > argues > >> for four or more, but in Chapter Five, which may have been written much > >> earlier, he argues for three but then three paragraphs later considers > it > >> safer to begin as Thorndike does with two levels (unconditional and > >> conditional responses). So "signal" vs. "signification" could just be > seen > >> as the difference between unconditional and conditional responses, or it > >> could be seen as the difference between instinct and intelligence, or it > >> could be seen as two poles with an almost infinite number of genetic > >> variations in between. I prefer the latter view, but I recognize that > >> Vygotsky has to package things pretty differently for different > audiences, > >> and we are not one of the audiences that he has foremost in his mind. > >> > >> Take bacteria. Bacteria are apparently capable of quorum sensing: that > is, > >> bacteria don't multiply when there are no other bacteria around, they do > >> when there are some but not too many, and they don't when there are too > >> many. Now, take ants. Ants have a system of finding new nests that > >> involves > >> scouting for potential sites. If the site is extremely good, they go > back > >> and take other ants there quickly, but if it is not so good they tend to > >> dawdle a little, with the result that the best site gets more ants, and > at > >> a certain point the whole nest "decides" to move there. Now, take > >> bees. Like ants, bees go scouting. The scouts come back and they dance; > >> the > >> dances attract more or fewer onlookers, and when a quorum is reached, > the > >> hive moves. It seems to me that ALL of these are signalization systems > >> (not > >> signifying systems, because they do not have lexicogrammar and cannot > >> convey ideal values) but the difference between the ant system and the > >> bee > >> system is as big as the difference between the bee system and early > child > >> language. For ants, the scouting and decision making are not > >> differentiated, but for bees they are distinct moments--so the ant > system > >> involves a simple signal system and the bee system involves a second > >> signal > >> system. > >> > >> David Kellogg > >> Macquarie University > >> > >> On Sun, Oct 30, 2016 at 3:45 AM, wrote: > >> > >> > In this discussion The center of this relational exploration is > between > >> > signalization AND signification and my question goes back to the place > >> of > >> > the general term *gesturing*. > >> > Is this signalization or is this phenomena signification. > >> > The act creating actual*ity (sens) which always includes tendency or > >> > orientation towards or away from something. > >> > The act is gestural acts and implies *each in the other*. > >> > > >> > The relation of gestural receiving and responding and this phenomena > in > >> > relation to signalization and signification. > >> > > >> > > >> > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > >> > > >> > From: Huw Lloyd > >> > Sent: October 29, 2016 9:01 AM > >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: XMCA-ers: Help needed finding LSV references to > >> > *First*and *Second* Signal Systems > >> > > >> > Peter, > >> > > >> > If by signalisation you mean use of signs to influence behaviour in > >> terms > >> > of operational criteria and speech, then yes this is so. It has been > >> > studied quite systematically, but is perhaps less well known. I can > >> > elaborate on this if this is your drift. > >> > > >> > Best, > >> > Huw > >> > > >> > > >> > On 28 October 2016 at 22:43, Peter Feigenbaum [Staff] < > >> > pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu> wrote: > >> > > >> > > David, > >> > > > >> > > As usual, your suggestions are both helpful and erudite. Thanks for > >> the > >> > > poignant references to Vygotsky and to Marx. Although Soviet > academic > >> > > politics may have complicated the issue, there does seem to be some > >> > > substance to the argument that the nervous systems of animals and > the > >> > > speech communication systems of humans share the common property of > >> > > *signalization*. Personally, I think there's a lot more to this > topic > >> > than > >> > > meets the eye--or, better yet, there's a lot of opportunity here for > >> > > developing the problem further. > >> > > > >> > > Once again, I owe an intellectual debt to the participants of this > >> > > listserv! > >> > > > >> > > Cheers, > >> > > Peter > >> > > > >> > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 5:10 PM, David Kellogg < > dkellogg60@gmail.com> > >> > > wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > Peter: > >> > > > > >> > > > I think Mike's right. The "second signal system" was an attempt to > >> > > preserve > >> > > > the idea of higher psychological functions in an atmosphere that > was > >> > not > >> > > > that different from what was going on in America at the same time > >> (and > >> > > > which Mike experienced first hand in both places). When I read > >> > Belyayev's > >> > > > work on foreign language teaching, he talks a lot about the > "second > >> > > signal > >> > > > system". There, are, however, two places in Vygotsky which MIGHT > >> > provide > >> > > > some support, if you wanted to make the case that the "second > signal > >> > > > system" is not completely incompatible with Vygotsky. > >> > > > > >> > > > One is Chapter Two of the History of the Development of the Higher > >> > Mental > >> > > > functions. See below. Starting around paragraph 142, Vygotsky > likens > >> > > > Pavlov's model of the brain as a telephone exchange. The problem, > of > >> > > > course, is that back then telephone exchanges did require human > >> > operators > >> > > > to make the connection! > >> > > > > >> > > > The other is the discussion of "second order symbolism" in the > work > >> of > >> > > > Delacroix, which you can find in Chapter Six of Thinking and > Speech > >> and > >> > > > also in Chapter 7 of HDHMF (fifth para). This is a very different > >> > > > notion--it's the idea that writing is a set of symbols for > speaking. > >> > > > > >> > > > David Kellogg > >> > > > Macquarie University > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >From HDHMF, Chapter Two, Research Method > >> > > > > >> > > > We know that, as Pavlov says, ?the most general bases of higher > >> nervous > >> > > > activity are ascribed to the large hemispheres, the same in both > >> higher > >> > > > animals and in people, and for this reason even elementary > >> phenomena of > >> > > > this activity must be identical in the one and in the other in > both > >> > > normal > >> > > > and pathological cases? (1951, p. 15). Actually, this can scarcely > >> be > >> > > > disputed. But as soon as we go from the elementary phenomena of > >> higher > >> > > > nervous activity to the complex, to the higher phenomena within > this > >> > > higher > >> > > > ? in the physiological sense ? activity, then two different > >> > > methodological > >> > > > paths for studying the specific uniqueness of human higher > behavior > >> > open > >> > > > before us. > >> > > > > >> > > > One is the path to further study of complication, enrichment, and > >> > > > differentiation of the same phenomena that experimental study > >> > ascertains > >> > > in > >> > > > animals. Here, on this path, the greatest restraint must be > >> observed. > >> > In > >> > > > transferring information on higher nervous activity of animals to > >> > higher > >> > > > activity of man, we must constantly check the factual similarities > >> in > >> > the > >> > > > function of organs in man and animals, but in general the > principle > >> > > itself > >> > > > of the research remains the same as it was in the study of > animals. > >> > This > >> > > is > >> > > > the path of physiological study. > >> > > > > >> > > > True, this circumstance is of major significance and in the area > of > >> > > > physiological study of behavior, in a comparative study of man and > >> > > animals, > >> > > > we must not put the function of the heart, stomach, and other > organs > >> > > which > >> > > > are so similar to that of man on the same plane with higher > nervous > >> > > > activity. In the words of I. P. Pavlov, ?It is specifically this > >> > activity > >> > > > that so strikingly sets man apart from the rank of animals, that > >> places > >> > > man > >> > > > immeasurably above the whole animal world? (ibid. p. 414). And we > >> might > >> > > > expect that along the path of physiological research we will find > a > >> > > > specific qualitative difference in human activity. Let us recall > the > >> > > words > >> > > > of Pavlov cited above on the quantitative and qualitative > >> > incomparability > >> > > > of the word with conditioned stimuli of animals. Even in the plan > of > >> > > strict > >> > > > physiological consideration, ?the grandiose signalistics of > speech? > >> > > stands > >> > > > outside the whole other mass of stimuli, the ?multicapaciousness > of > >> the > >> > > > word? places it in a unique position. > >> > > > > >> > > > The other path is the path of psychological research. From the > very > >> > > > beginning, it proposes to seek the specific uniqueness of human > >> > behavior > >> > > > which does take us beyond the initial point. The specific > >> uniqueness is > >> > > > considered not only in its subsequent complexity and development, > >> > > > quantitative and qualitative refinement of the cerebral > hemispheres, > >> > but > >> > > > primarily in the social nature of man and in a new method of > >> > adaptation, > >> > > as > >> > > > compared with animals, that sets man apart. The main difference > >> between > >> > > the > >> > > > behavior of man and of animals consists not only in that the human > >> > brain > >> > > is > >> > > > immeasurably above the brain of the dog and that the higher > nervous > >> > > > activity ?so strikingly sets man apart from the rank of animals,? > >> but > >> > > most > >> > > > of all, because it is the brain of a social being and because the > >> laws > >> > of > >> > > > higher nervous activity of man are manifested and act in the human > >> > > > personality. > >> > > > > >> > > > But let us return again to the ?most general bases of higher > nervous > >> > > > activity, related to the cerebral hemispheres,? and identical in > >> higher > >> > > > animals and man. We think that it is in this point that we can > >> disclose > >> > > > with definitive clarity the difference of which we speak. The most > >> > > general > >> > > > basis of behavior, identical in man and animals, is > *signalization.* > >> > > Pavlov > >> > > > said, ?So the basic and most general activity of the cerebral > >> > hemispheres > >> > > > is signaling with an infinite number of signals and with > changeable > >> > > > signalization? (ibid., p. 30). As is known, this is the most > general > >> > > > formulation of the whole idea of conditioned reflexes that lies at > >> the > >> > > base > >> > > > of the physiology of higher nervous activity. > >> > > > > >> > > > But human behavior is distinguished exactly in that it creates > >> > artificial > >> > > > signaling stimuli, primarily the grandiose signalization of > speech, > >> and > >> > > in > >> > > > this way masters the signaling activity of the cerebral > >> hemispheres. If > >> > > the > >> > > > basic and most general activity of the cerebral hemispheres in > >> animals > >> > > and > >> > > > in man is signalization, then the basic and most general activity > of > >> > man > >> > > > that differentiates man from animals in the first place, from the > >> > aspect > >> > > of > >> > > > psychology, is *signification,* that is, creation and use of > signs. > >> We > >> > > are > >> > > > using this word in its most literal sense and precise meaning. > >> > > > Signification is the creation and use of signs, that is, > artificial > >> > > > signals. > >> > > > > >> > > > We will consider more closely this new principle of activity. It > >> must > >> > not > >> > > > in any sense be contrasted with the principle of signalization. > >> > > Changeable > >> > > > signalization that results in the formation of temporary, > >> conditional, > >> > > > special connections between the organism and the environment is an > >> > > > indispensable, biological prerequisite of the higher activity that > >> we > >> > > > arbitrarily call signification and is its base. The system of > >> > connections > >> > > > that is established in the brain of an animal is a copy or > >> reflection > >> > of > >> > > > natural connections between ?all kinds of agents of nature? that > >> signal > >> > > the > >> > > > arrival of immediately favorable or destructive phenomena. > >> > > > > >> > > > It is very obvious that such signalization ? a reflection of the > >> > natural > >> > > > connection of phenomena, wholly created by natural conditions ? > >> cannot > >> > be > >> > > > an adequate basis of human behavior. For human adaptation, an > active > >> > > > *change > >> > > > in the nature of man *is essential. It is the basis of all human > >> > history. > >> > > > It necessarily presupposes an active change in man?s behavior. > >> > ?Affecting > >> > > > the environment by this movement and changing it, he changes his > own > >> > > nature > >> > > > at the same time,? says Marx. ?He develops forces asleep in it and > >> > > subjects > >> > > > the play of these forces to his own will? (K. Marx and F. Engels, > >> > > > *Collected > >> > > > Works,* Vol. 23, pp. 188-189 > >> > > > >> > > > 3A__www.marxists.org_archive_marx_works_1867-2Dc1_ch07.htm- > >> > > > 23forces&d=DQIFaQ&c=aqMfXOEvEJQh2iQMCb7Wy8l0sPnURk > cqADc2guUW8IM&r= > >> > > > mXj3yhpYNklTxyN3KioIJ0ECmPHilpf4N2p9PBMATWs&m= > >> > cxiDdHmIrHosSMq59vJlZ4j-S- > >> > > > 4h5DSiLaMzqzi2yNA&s=J3sZBxFP1DTk3B8MLGJTyEw- > RZmpA347cJfMSUrwSa4&e= > >> >). > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 7:50 AM, Peter Feigenbaum [Staff] < > >> > > > pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu> wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > Mike, > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Thanks for the Luria references. From a cursory reading of the > >> > > relevant > >> > > > > passages in the Luria & Yudovich book, and judging by some of > the > >> > other > >> > > > > sources you listed, I get the impression that there hasn't been > >> much > >> > > > > theoretical *fleshing out* of the structures of the second > signal > >> > > system. > >> > > > > I hope that the concept of a first and second signal system is > not > >> > > just a > >> > > > > political argument, but instead has some real substance. I find > it > >> > hard > >> > > > to > >> > > > > imagine that our *animal* (stimulus-response) system of thinking > >> is > >> > > > > developmentally unrelated to our *human* (conversational > >> > > > > initiation-response) system of thinking. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > If anyone else knows of any passages from Vygotsky related to > this > >> > > topic, > >> > > > > please don't hold back! > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Much obliged. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > In solidarity, > >> > > > > Peter > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 1:56 PM, mike cole > >> wrote: > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Peter-- If you google Luria "second signal system" you will > >> come up > >> > > > with > >> > > > > > several references. There is a copy at luria.ucsd.edu of his > >> > little > >> > > > book > >> > > > > > with Yudovich on twins that uses that language. > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > It is not online (so far as i know), but Luria's article on > >> "Speech > >> > > > > > development and the formation of mental processes" in Cole and > >> > > > > > Maltzman, *Handbook > >> > > > > > of Soviet Psychology. *Basic Books, 1969 uses this term a lot. > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > I believe you will find an upsurge of usage associated with > the > >> > late > >> > > > > > 1940's-50's when Vygotskians were under severe attack, there > >> were > >> > > > special > >> > > > > > "Pavlov sessions" where they had to recant their errors, and > the > >> > use > >> > > of > >> > > > > > first and second signal system by Pavlov > >> > > > > > allowed them a life line to orthodoxy. > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > mike > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Peter Feigenbaum [Staff] < > >> > > > > > pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu> wrote: > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Dear colleagues, > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > I don't wish to detract in any way from the very serious and > >> > > > absolutely > >> > > > > > > necessary discussion about male sensitivity (or should I say > >> > > > > > insensitivity) > >> > > > > > > to the voices of the women inhabiting this list, but I sure > >> could > >> > > use > >> > > > > > your > >> > > > > > > collective help with a small matter of scholarship. I am > >> trying > >> > to > >> > > > > locate > >> > > > > > > any passages in LSV's Collected Works in English in which he > >> > refers > >> > > > to > >> > > > > > the > >> > > > > > > *first* and *second* signal systems. > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > My understanding is that Vygotsky considers the first signal > >> > system > >> > > > as > >> > > > > > the > >> > > > > > > biologically inherited stimulus-response (S-R) system of > >> reflexes > >> > > as > >> > > > > > > described by Pavlov, whereas the second signal system refers > >> to > >> > the > >> > > > > > > culturally inherited system of initiation-response that is > >> > > particular > >> > > > > to > >> > > > > > > human conversational activity. I am working with the > >> hypothesis > >> > > that, > >> > > > > in > >> > > > > > > ontogenetic development, the first signal system becomes > >> > > > *domesticated* > >> > > > > > by, > >> > > > > > > and ultimately subordinated to, the second signal system. > That > >> > is, > >> > > > the > >> > > > > > S-R > >> > > > > > > form of thinking becomes developmentally transformed into > the > >> > > > > > > Initiation-Response form of thinking that is characteristic > >> of a > >> > > > person > >> > > > > > > performing a listening-speaking turn in conversation. > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > If any of the wonderful scholars on this list could help > point > >> > this > >> > > > > poor, > >> > > > > > > stumbling colleague > >> > > > > > > in the right direction, I would be most grateful. > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Warm wishes to all, > >> > > > > > > Peter > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > p.s. -- Let me take this opportunity to express my heartfelt > >> > thanks > >> > > > to > >> > > > > > Mike > >> > > > > > > for creating this list in the first place, and with it the > >> > > > opportunity > >> > > > > > for > >> > > > > > > Vygotskian scholars the world over to share and discuss our > >> ideas > >> > > in > >> > > > an > >> > > > > > > open and honest forum. For my part, I pledge to do my level > >> best > >> > to > >> > > > > raise > >> > > > > > > my own consciousness where it is deficient so that my > >> > participation > >> > > > in > >> > > > > > this > >> > > > > > > forum will be as inclusive and respectful to all of its > >> > > participants > >> > > > as > >> > > > > > is > >> > > > > > > humanly possible. > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > -- > >> > > > > > > Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. > >> > > > > > > Director, > >> > > > > > > Office of Institutional Research > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > provos/office_of_institutio/index.asp> > >> > > > > > > Fordham University > >> > > > > > > Thebaud Hall-202 > >> > > > > > > Bronx, NY 10458 > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Phone: (718) 817-2243 > >> > > > > > > Fax: (718) 817-3817 > >> > > > > > > email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > -- > >> > > > > Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. > >> > > > > Director, > >> > > > > Office of Institutional Research > >> > > > > > >> > > > provos/office_of_institutio/index.asp> > >> > > > > Fordham University > >> > > > > Thebaud Hall-202 > >> > > > > Bronx, NY 10458 > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Phone: (718) 817-2243 > >> > > > > Fax: (718) 817-3817 > >> > > > > email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > -- > >> > > Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. > >> > > Director, > >> > > Office of Institutional Research > >> > > >> > > office_of_institutio/index.asp> > >> > > Fordham University > >> > > Thebaud Hall-202 > >> > > Bronx, NY 10458 > >> > > > >> > > Phone: (718) 817-2243 > >> > > Fax: (718) 817-3817 > >> > > email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > -- Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. Director, Office of Institutional Research Fordham University Thebaud Hall-202 Bronx, NY 10458 Phone: (718) 817-2243 Fax: (718) 817-3817 email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu From mpacker@uniandes.edu.co Thu Nov 3 15:22:33 2016 From: mpacker@uniandes.edu.co (Martin John Packer) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 22:22:33 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: References: <00ab01d235fe$c29c1560$47d44020$@edu> <581b82bd.5207620a.9f848.0978@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <07DF9F14-5F3D-4236-B349-A01996997C47@uniandes.edu.co> Am I crazy (or perhaps ?blokey), but isn?t Jacob in fact Jenna? Martin > On Nov 3, 2016, at 3:13 PM, Greg Mcverry wrote: > > Annalisa, > > It was I, and not Jacob, who originally brought up that the concept of > "logic" has engendered roots because of the roots it had in a Western > tradition that has long favored the activity of those who identify as male > versus those who identify as female or other. > > If power influences meaning than our definiton of logic was influenced by > existing structures. > > I was not in anyway trying to suggest the conclusion men are logical and > women are illogical. I think the song quote goes, "That's right the women > are smarter." > > What I positing, and then to which Jacob provided some research to support, > was that how we as a society view an epistemological definition of "logic" > and how to "make logical arguments" is rooted in the same power structures > and discourse patterns that have lead to gender inequality. > > I didn't respond.... yet...to calls for clarifications of my thoughts about > gender and etymology of logic mainly because I had to do work that pays > bills (get feedback out to students) and I wasn't prepared (either with > energy or knowledge) to argue subjectivity versus objectivity. > > It is just as hard to convince a hunter to be a vegetarian as it is to > argue with someone rooted rationalism that objectivism may not exist. > > I am intrigued by this idea that Rein brought up that our gender fluidity > changes over time and cultures. Yet I am always reminded that the Western > heroes we celebrate today ...Luke Skywalker, Harry Potter, Batman and > Superman...share much of the ideal male detailed in Greek and Roman > mythology. Until recently female heroes were missing from our ideal. > > I have to disagree with David that gender differences are rooted at some > biological differences. I think I may have more in common with any given > female as I do with any given male. Yet as the father of three boys I can > see the differences of engendered practices up close. I really don't know > the answer. I think this is because we have conflated gender and sex as a > binary and it isn't. > > I might suggest we retire this thread and split it into three: > -Creating more inclusive practices on XMCA > -Engendered nature of logic > - the role of reproduction, deman, and production > > As I stated earlier listserves are awful for this kind of conversation > because they work so well. I don't think the current format, while allowing > for distributed thought and federated content, has all the tagging and > moderation tools necessary to ensure an inclusive environment. > > > On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 3:50 PM Annalisa Aguilar wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> >> If I might comment, I think what has happened in what was being talking >> about, what causes gendered discourses has been reduced to questions of >> whether men are logical and women are illogical, and therein lie a bunch of >> problems and silly assumptions, if you don't mind me calling them silly. >> >> >> I don't recall when it was Jacob brought to the list questions and >> observations pertaining to logic and how it was he had been struck down >> from unfolding his thoughts about it, but I certainly do not want to >> prohibit him from speaking out about it. Perhaps he could start a special >> thread Just For That. I would be happy to contribute. I would suggest that >> we should let him moderate that thread, and respect his leadership of that >> thread. >> >> >> However, one of the developments that I am witnessing, is Maria-Cristina >> and Larry and I were kind of going somewhere with the weaving we were >> working upon, and then that development was sideswiped to return to an >> unpleasant memory of being a jerk and being logical (as if these are >> inherently intertwined behaviors). It was an interruption of sorts. I'd >> rather not go back over it because I don't want to descend into an >> essentialist discourse. >> >> >> That's why I would rather go back what Maria Cristina and I were >> unfolding, with some nice contributions from Larry. >> >> >> At the same time, because it merits a response, I would like to address a >> perfect example of what happens to logical women. Consider Hypatia. >> >> >> This idea that logic is gendered is ridiculous. Many women can be logical. >> Many men can be illogical. It's just that the basis of the inquiry, >> specifically, the values that the logic support are different, and that >> difference is based upon culture and what I will call "entrained gender." >> >> >> When women use logic (argumentative or otherwise) to the better of their >> male peers, what usually happens is that she is then castigated for her >> looks, or her lack of nurturing, etc. That aggressive act is an act of >> entrainment, where she is punished for being empowered with her own mind, >> and thus she is attacked and put back in her place. When she is dependent >> and entrained to be like Barbie or a trophy wife, to speak in high-contrast >> indicative terms, she is rewarded, but then punished and ridiculed for >> being so illogical (or even better emotional, sinful, fill in the blank). >> >> >> This kind of entrainment is a double bind. The various "she"s and the >> various shapes and sizes we come in, can't win without suffering some kind >> of hurtful insult, coming or going. >> >> >> Look at what is happening in the US election. If any of the candidates is >> being more logical in the context of this election, it is Hillary. if there >> is anyone being more irrational, emotional, and off-topic, it is Trump, and >> yet there are forces seeking to promote a witch hunt and that fire is being >> kindled by the FBI, the highest police department in the land. *There it is >> in living color.* >> >> >> Has any presidential candidate ever in the history of this country ever >> been threatened by the other candidate to be put in prison??? >> >> >> It is a typical male chauvinist tactic to threaten a woman with >> confinement and to attack a woman's mental state as being far from sane. >> That is why saying that men are logical and women are not, is a veiled >> statement against the mental health of a woman, because somehow there is >> the belief that women's bodies are not genetically or biological capable of >> supporting a math problem. Hope that that is clear. >> >> >> I would like to assert that all humans with proper education and guidance >> can be logical. It isn't gendered, it is just being a good thinker, a >> critical thinker. >> >> >> That is why to say that somehow logic is male is hugely insulting. So I >> hope that men will understand that that is a likely trigger for intelligent >> women, many who populate this list. >> >> >> Let me add that logic has typically been used as an intellectual weapon, >> in an adversarial mode, which has been already commented upon. But this >> has, as I said above, to do with the basis of the particular logical >> inquiry. The foundation. That basis has to do with values. If your values >> are to keep women in their place, whether conscious or not, then you will >> use logic as a weapon and indicate logic is for the male brain only. >> >> >> If your values are for social justice, then you will see logic as an >> intellectual tool to build better minds which builds better people, and >> subsequently builds better community and results in a more just society. Is >> that logical enough? >> >> >> Hammers can crack skulls or build houses, take your pick *based upon* what >> you value, and what you want to create, what kind of friends to you want to >> hang out with? Turkeys or eagles? >> >> >> Anyway, I'd like to return to the conversation with Maria Cristina and >> Larry, and of course anyone else interested, about demand and production, >> or in her view, reproduction, and I think in Larry's version, >> reversibility, if that is OK. But before I tie off on this topic, I also >> want to share how very much I appreciate Vera's post, whose tone might be >> representative of those women and others more prone to lurk until they are >> ready to contribute. Again, I hope there is an emerging safe space here, at >> least I'd like that to be the case. So that other women can participate and >> not feel irrelevant, but cherished and cared for as valuable contributors >> that they are. >> >> >> Kind regards, >> >> >> Annalisa >> >> >> From mpacker@uniandes.edu.co Thu Nov 3 16:47:48 2016 From: mpacker@uniandes.edu.co (Martin John Packer) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 23:47:48 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: <07DF9F14-5F3D-4236-B349-A01996997C47@uniandes.edu.co> References: <00ab01d235fe$c29c1560$47d44020$@edu> <581b82bd.5207620a.9f848.0978@mx.google.com> <07DF9F14-5F3D-4236-B349-A01996997C47@uniandes.edu.co> Message-ID: Oh, I see I am just slow to catch up! :) Martin > On Nov 3, 2016, at 5:22 PM, Martin John Packer wrote: > > Am I crazy (or perhaps ?blokey), but isn?t Jacob in fact Jenna? > > Martin > >> On Nov 3, 2016, at 3:13 PM, Greg Mcverry wrote: >> >> Annalisa, >> >> It was I, and not Jacob, who originally brought up that the concept of >> "logic" has engendered roots because of the roots it had in a Western >> tradition that has long favored the activity of those who identify as male >> versus those who identify as female or other. >> >> If power influences meaning than our definiton of logic was influenced by >> existing structures. >> >> I was not in anyway trying to suggest the conclusion men are logical and >> women are illogical. I think the song quote goes, "That's right the women >> are smarter." >> >> What I positing, and then to which Jacob provided some research to support, >> was that how we as a society view an epistemological definition of "logic" >> and how to "make logical arguments" is rooted in the same power structures >> and discourse patterns that have lead to gender inequality. >> >> I didn't respond.... yet...to calls for clarifications of my thoughts about >> gender and etymology of logic mainly because I had to do work that pays >> bills (get feedback out to students) and I wasn't prepared (either with >> energy or knowledge) to argue subjectivity versus objectivity. >> >> It is just as hard to convince a hunter to be a vegetarian as it is to >> argue with someone rooted rationalism that objectivism may not exist. >> >> I am intrigued by this idea that Rein brought up that our gender fluidity >> changes over time and cultures. Yet I am always reminded that the Western >> heroes we celebrate today ...Luke Skywalker, Harry Potter, Batman and >> Superman...share much of the ideal male detailed in Greek and Roman >> mythology. Until recently female heroes were missing from our ideal. >> >> I have to disagree with David that gender differences are rooted at some >> biological differences. I think I may have more in common with any given >> female as I do with any given male. Yet as the father of three boys I can >> see the differences of engendered practices up close. I really don't know >> the answer. I think this is because we have conflated gender and sex as a >> binary and it isn't. >> >> I might suggest we retire this thread and split it into three: >> -Creating more inclusive practices on XMCA >> -Engendered nature of logic >> - the role of reproduction, deman, and production >> >> As I stated earlier listserves are awful for this kind of conversation >> because they work so well. I don't think the current format, while allowing >> for distributed thought and federated content, has all the tagging and >> moderation tools necessary to ensure an inclusive environment. >> >> >> On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 3:50 PM Annalisa Aguilar wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> >>> If I might comment, I think what has happened in what was being talking >>> about, what causes gendered discourses has been reduced to questions of >>> whether men are logical and women are illogical, and therein lie a bunch of >>> problems and silly assumptions, if you don't mind me calling them silly. >>> >>> >>> I don't recall when it was Jacob brought to the list questions and >>> observations pertaining to logic and how it was he had been struck down >>> from unfolding his thoughts about it, but I certainly do not want to >>> prohibit him from speaking out about it. Perhaps he could start a special >>> thread Just For That. I would be happy to contribute. I would suggest that >>> we should let him moderate that thread, and respect his leadership of that >>> thread. >>> >>> >>> However, one of the developments that I am witnessing, is Maria-Cristina >>> and Larry and I were kind of going somewhere with the weaving we were >>> working upon, and then that development was sideswiped to return to an >>> unpleasant memory of being a jerk and being logical (as if these are >>> inherently intertwined behaviors). It was an interruption of sorts. I'd >>> rather not go back over it because I don't want to descend into an >>> essentialist discourse. >>> >>> >>> That's why I would rather go back what Maria Cristina and I were >>> unfolding, with some nice contributions from Larry. >>> >>> >>> At the same time, because it merits a response, I would like to address a >>> perfect example of what happens to logical women. Consider Hypatia. >>> >>> >>> This idea that logic is gendered is ridiculous. Many women can be logical. >>> Many men can be illogical. It's just that the basis of the inquiry, >>> specifically, the values that the logic support are different, and that >>> difference is based upon culture and what I will call "entrained gender." >>> >>> >>> When women use logic (argumentative or otherwise) to the better of their >>> male peers, what usually happens is that she is then castigated for her >>> looks, or her lack of nurturing, etc. That aggressive act is an act of >>> entrainment, where she is punished for being empowered with her own mind, >>> and thus she is attacked and put back in her place. When she is dependent >>> and entrained to be like Barbie or a trophy wife, to speak in high-contrast >>> indicative terms, she is rewarded, but then punished and ridiculed for >>> being so illogical (or even better emotional, sinful, fill in the blank). >>> >>> >>> This kind of entrainment is a double bind. The various "she"s and the >>> various shapes and sizes we come in, can't win without suffering some kind >>> of hurtful insult, coming or going. >>> >>> >>> Look at what is happening in the US election. If any of the candidates is >>> being more logical in the context of this election, it is Hillary. if there >>> is anyone being more irrational, emotional, and off-topic, it is Trump, and >>> yet there are forces seeking to promote a witch hunt and that fire is being >>> kindled by the FBI, the highest police department in the land. *There it is >>> in living color.* >>> >>> >>> Has any presidential candidate ever in the history of this country ever >>> been threatened by the other candidate to be put in prison??? >>> >>> >>> It is a typical male chauvinist tactic to threaten a woman with >>> confinement and to attack a woman's mental state as being far from sane. >>> That is why saying that men are logical and women are not, is a veiled >>> statement against the mental health of a woman, because somehow there is >>> the belief that women's bodies are not genetically or biological capable of >>> supporting a math problem. Hope that that is clear. >>> >>> >>> I would like to assert that all humans with proper education and guidance >>> can be logical. It isn't gendered, it is just being a good thinker, a >>> critical thinker. >>> >>> >>> That is why to say that somehow logic is male is hugely insulting. So I >>> hope that men will understand that that is a likely trigger for intelligent >>> women, many who populate this list. >>> >>> >>> Let me add that logic has typically been used as an intellectual weapon, >>> in an adversarial mode, which has been already commented upon. But this >>> has, as I said above, to do with the basis of the particular logical >>> inquiry. The foundation. That basis has to do with values. If your values >>> are to keep women in their place, whether conscious or not, then you will >>> use logic as a weapon and indicate logic is for the male brain only. >>> >>> >>> If your values are for social justice, then you will see logic as an >>> intellectual tool to build better minds which builds better people, and >>> subsequently builds better community and results in a more just society. Is >>> that logical enough? >>> >>> >>> Hammers can crack skulls or build houses, take your pick *based upon* what >>> you value, and what you want to create, what kind of friends to you want to >>> hang out with? Turkeys or eagles? >>> >>> >>> Anyway, I'd like to return to the conversation with Maria Cristina and >>> Larry, and of course anyone else interested, about demand and production, >>> or in her view, reproduction, and I think in Larry's version, >>> reversibility, if that is OK. But before I tie off on this topic, I also >>> want to share how very much I appreciate Vera's post, whose tone might be >>> representative of those women and others more prone to lurk until they are >>> ready to contribute. Again, I hope there is an emerging safe space here, at >>> least I'd like that to be the case. So that other women can participate and >>> not feel irrelevant, but cherished and cared for as valuable contributors >>> that they are. >>> >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> >>> Annalisa >>> >>> >>> > > Martin From dkellogg60@gmail.com Thu Nov 3 21:24:39 2016 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 15:24:39 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Help needed finding LSV references to *First*and *Second* Signal Systems In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Peter: (Maybe both Peters?) Sometimes I think the best we husbands, fathers, and political activists can really do to promote gender equality in intellectual discourse is not to maintain a respectful male silence but rather to use our own booming baritones to amplify outstanding thinkers whose voices are in danger of being lost precisely because they were more soprano, or because they belonged to women born on the wrong side of the planet, or both. I am thinking of Ruqaiya Hasan, who is in imminent danger of being lost, even to feminist writers, in the cacaphony of Bourdieu, Baudrillard, Lyotard, Habermas, Foucault, Derrida, Lacan, and even Freud, none of whom had anything to say about Vygotsky (and, not coincidentally, all of whom are lesser sociolinguists than she was). Ruqaiya was an appreciative but also very critical reader of Vygotsky. Sometimes, when I am reading her thoughts on Vygotsky I feel like she is holding the book upside down, but then when I read it again I find that I am the one standing on my head. For example, one of the great advantages that Hasan finds in Vygotsky is not that he distinguishes between the higher and lower psychological functions. As far as Ruqaiya was concerned there was a bit too much of that around, and there still is. Instead, Ruqaiya finds that Vygotsky's strength is being able to link them together, precisely through his studies of children, including the biological and the social in a single complex unit of analysis (e.g. phonology AND lexicogrammar in a single dimension, which Vygotsky calls "phasal"). Ruqaiya doesn't mean that "signalization" is tied to "signification"--she is too much of a linguist and too much of a dialectician not to see the huge gap between them. But she does think that the word values (or, as she would prefer it, the "wording values") that are the bases for signification are Whorfian, Sapirian social co-generalizations. These are biological in the sense that they are huntable, gatherable, herdable, farmable, reproducible. They are also, in materialized form, edible and wearable: they are often made out of economic interests: they are exchange values, like the exchange value of any commodity they evolve from use values based in adapting the environment to human needs. Take a look at this. I think it is probably literally the last public lecture Vygotsky ever gave, and as far as I know it's never been translated into any language (except now Korean). I'm including the Russian because my own Russian is...well, lousy, and I keep hoping some of the Russophones on the list may catch some errors before it goes to press in February. In it, Vygotsky is trying to show exactly what Ruqaiya was talking about: the way in which the child goes from "non-co-generalized" thinking to co-generalized thinking. It's not a step. It's not a leap. It's a whole set of leaps, some of which depend on parents, professionals, and political activists. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 9:04 AM, Peter Feigenbaum [Staff] < pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu> wrote: > Dear colleagues, > > As a representative of the category *Slow Responder* (I am a busy > professional, a husband, a father of two, and a political activist), I am > only now getting around to replying to those who responded to my earlier > request for help. My apologies if my pace is too slow for a satisfying > exchange. > > Because I was fairly vague about my reason for asking for a reference to > first and second signal systems in Vygotsky's writings, I unwittingly > opened the door to discussion of the differences between *signals* and > *signs*. In fact, my interest is in their *similarities*, in the properties > that are common to both. I am seeking the common denominator between animal > stimulus-response thinking and human initiation-response thinking. > Fortunately, that linkage exists precisely where David Kellogg pointed me: > in Vol. 4, on p.55 of HDHMF in Vygotsky's Collected Works in English. > > Vygotsky is very clear when he distinguishes between *natural* signals (or > signalization) and *artificial* signs (or signification). The former occurs > when animals interact with the environment and their brains form > conditioned reflexes, whereas the latter occurs when humans invent their > own conditioned reflexes (words) and then apply those reflexes to > themselves (or others) in order to master their own behavior. In essence, > Vygotsky considered *signification* a special case of *signalization*. > > One issue I had not counted on is the historical/political one. I was > unprepared for the possibility that the first and second signal systems may > have been a political problem of accommodation to the authorities rather > than an actual scientific problem. Thanks to Mike for pointing that out, > and for pointing out A.R. Luria's fairly substantial contribution to the > discussion--but especially for contacting (the wonderful and brilliant) > Tanya Akhutina! > > I'm not quite sure how to make good use of Huw's suggestion about serial > and parallel circuits, so I'll have to put that issue to the side for now. > But thanks for raising it. > > In light of the ongoing discussion about how to create a more > gender-sensitive and gender-balanced dialogue on this listserv, I would > like to invite anyone who is lurking (or very busy) to contribute any > useful information you may have about my request *in your own good time*. > These problems are complicated, and I'm learning to be patient. > > Thanks to all. > > In solidarity, > Peter > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 6:55 PM, mike cole wrote: > > > Peter -- Concerning your initial question. I obtained the following > answer > > from Tanya Akhutina. > > > > ????, > > ?????? ??????? ? ?????? ?????????? ??????? ? 1932 ?. ?????????????? > > ?????????? ? ??? ????? ????? ?????? ? 33 ? 34 ?????. ? ????? ?????????? ? > > ?????????? ?? ?????. > > ??? - ?????? ????, ?? ?????? ??? ??? ????????. ?? ???? ?????? ????? ????? > > ???????????, ??????? ???, ?????? ???? ?.?.??????????. ?? ???????????? ? > > ??????? ????? ?????????? ?????? ???? ????? ???????? ? ????? ?????? ?? > ???. > > 144: " ?.?. ????????? ???? ?????????? ??????, ? ? ??? ??????? ?????????? > > ??????? ? ??????? ??????? ???????????????? ????? ???? ????????, ?? ??? ?? > > ????? ??????, ??????? ?? ??? ?????, ?????????? ?? ?????? ????????? > ?????". > > > > Roughly, > > Mike, > > Pavlov wrote about the second signal system in 1932. Correspondingly, > > references/rememberances to it had to wait until 1933-34. Such > references/ > > rememberances in Vygotsky I do not recall. > > > > ARL was another case, he was obligated to speak in this way. Olga > Sergeevna > > Vinogradova, a student of ARL's [with whom I conducted research in the > > winter of 1962/63-mc] is cited by Lena Luria [Luria's daughter] in her > book > > on p. 144 "A.R. new the teachings of Pavlov perfectly, and in his > lectures > > he changed the lexicon and the beauty of a straightforward psychological > > language was replaced, but none the less the knowledge which he gave us > > remained on the the level of real science." > > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 3:42 PM, mike cole wrote: > > > > > It seems that side-by-side translations of the two documents merit > > > archival publication, David. JREEP is an obvious repository. In > addition > > to > > > which at present we have a good deal more evidence about children, > chess > > > boards, and the issues vexing Vygotsky than he had access to. The > > > non/difficult chronology of the texts complicates an already > complicated > > > process of interpretation as we have long witnessed here. > > > > > > Perhaps as a separate thread, it would be nice to put together a > > > discussion of the core linkages between Vygotsky and Halliday in your > > > work..... one of those chains of discussion that come and go. Perhaps a > > > mini-course devoted to the following, to me, essential idea: > > > > > > It seems to me that ALL of these are signalization systems (not > > > signifying systems, because they do not have lexicogrammar and cannot > > > convey ideal values) > > > > > > Providing a "cheat sheet" for autodidacts, might it be possible to > create > > > some > > > "field of interest" in the xmca discussion for dealing with this idea? > > > > > > I have in no way forgotten the issue of the relation of microgenesis > and > > > ontogenesis. It seems another "key point" as most of us go about using > > CHAT > > > ideas in the course of the teaching/learning activities that pay the > > bread > > > and butter. As matters stand, I offer Franklin in the blocks as an > > example > > > of microgenesis in a preschool classroom involving play as an example > of > > a > > > zone of proximal development where childre are a head taller than > > > themselves. That discussion is for the microgenesis/ontogenesis thread > > if I > > > recall. > > > > > > I would be VERY interested to learn of ways that feminist, queer > theory, > > > critical disability studies theory, neurodiversity theory, and others > can > > > help me to understand these categories and the theories that purport to > > > account for them. > > > > > > If they need to be re-thought, might as well be here. Ain't goin > nowhere. > > > > > > mike > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 2:28 PM, David Kellogg > > > wrote: > > > > > >> I'm working with two versions of one of Vygotsky's last lectures (the > > >> second version is given exactly five days before he was brought home > > with > > >> a > > >> throat haemorrhage to die, the first about a year earlier). There are > > >> passages that are almost word for word repetitions. There are passages > > >> that > > >> are semantically the same and but quite differently worded (the > earlier > > >> Vygotsky is quite modest and tentative; the later Vygotsky is much > more > > >> critical and also more confident). Then there are passages that say > > pretty > > >> much the opposite of what was said a year earlier: for example, in the > > >> early lecture Vygotsky says that a child faced with a chessboard who > > >> doesn't know how to play will see it structurally and sort the pieces > by > > >> color (black pieces on black squares, white on white) but in the later > > >> lecture it is the child who does know how to play who sees it > > >> structurally, > > >> because the child sees a black knight in a "structure" with a white > > pawn. > > >> He's a genius, and geniuses tend to think things over a lot, turning > > them > > >> this way and that, and never looking at anything as final, not even > when > > >> they are about to die. > > >> > > >> HDHMF has to be read the same way. Vygotsky cannot quite seem to make > up > > >> his mind whether there are three stages of higher behavior (instinct, > > >> habit, intelligence) or four different stages of higher behavior > > >> (instinct, > > >> habit, intelligence, and freedom). In Chapter Four, he very clearly > > argues > > >> for four or more, but in Chapter Five, which may have been written > much > > >> earlier, he argues for three but then three paragraphs later considers > > it > > >> safer to begin as Thorndike does with two levels (unconditional and > > >> conditional responses). So "signal" vs. "signification" could just be > > seen > > >> as the difference between unconditional and conditional responses, or > it > > >> could be seen as the difference between instinct and intelligence, or > it > > >> could be seen as two poles with an almost infinite number of genetic > > >> variations in between. I prefer the latter view, but I recognize that > > >> Vygotsky has to package things pretty differently for different > > audiences, > > >> and we are not one of the audiences that he has foremost in his mind. > > >> > > >> Take bacteria. Bacteria are apparently capable of quorum sensing: that > > is, > > >> bacteria don't multiply when there are no other bacteria around, they > do > > >> when there are some but not too many, and they don't when there are > too > > >> many. Now, take ants. Ants have a system of finding new nests that > > >> involves > > >> scouting for potential sites. If the site is extremely good, they go > > back > > >> and take other ants there quickly, but if it is not so good they tend > to > > >> dawdle a little, with the result that the best site gets more ants, > and > > at > > >> a certain point the whole nest "decides" to move there. Now, take > > >> bees. Like ants, bees go scouting. The scouts come back and they > dance; > > >> the > > >> dances attract more or fewer onlookers, and when a quorum is reached, > > the > > >> hive moves. It seems to me that ALL of these are signalization systems > > >> (not > > >> signifying systems, because they do not have lexicogrammar and cannot > > >> convey ideal values) but the difference between the ant system and > the > > >> bee > > >> system is as big as the difference between the bee system and early > > child > > >> language. For ants, the scouting and decision making are not > > >> differentiated, but for bees they are distinct moments--so the ant > > system > > >> involves a simple signal system and the bee system involves a second > > >> signal > > >> system. > > >> > > >> David Kellogg > > >> Macquarie University > > >> > > >> On Sun, Oct 30, 2016 at 3:45 AM, wrote: > > >> > > >> > In this discussion The center of this relational exploration is > > between > > >> > signalization AND signification and my question goes back to the > place > > >> of > > >> > the general term *gesturing*. > > >> > Is this signalization or is this phenomena signification. > > >> > The act creating actual*ity (sens) which always includes tendency or > > >> > orientation towards or away from something. > > >> > The act is gestural acts and implies *each in the other*. > > >> > > > >> > The relation of gestural receiving and responding and this phenomena > > in > > >> > relation to signalization and signification. > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > >> > > > >> > From: Huw Lloyd > > >> > Sent: October 29, 2016 9:01 AM > > >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: XMCA-ers: Help needed finding LSV references > to > > >> > *First*and *Second* Signal Systems > > >> > > > >> > Peter, > > >> > > > >> > If by signalisation you mean use of signs to influence behaviour in > > >> terms > > >> > of operational criteria and speech, then yes this is so. It has > been > > >> > studied quite systematically, but is perhaps less well known. I can > > >> > elaborate on this if this is your drift. > > >> > > > >> > Best, > > >> > Huw > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > On 28 October 2016 at 22:43, Peter Feigenbaum [Staff] < > > >> > pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu> wrote: > > >> > > > >> > > David, > > >> > > > > >> > > As usual, your suggestions are both helpful and erudite. Thanks > for > > >> the > > >> > > poignant references to Vygotsky and to Marx. Although Soviet > > academic > > >> > > politics may have complicated the issue, there does seem to be > some > > >> > > substance to the argument that the nervous systems of animals and > > the > > >> > > speech communication systems of humans share the common property > of > > >> > > *signalization*. Personally, I think there's a lot more to this > > topic > > >> > than > > >> > > meets the eye--or, better yet, there's a lot of opportunity here > for > > >> > > developing the problem further. > > >> > > > > >> > > Once again, I owe an intellectual debt to the participants of this > > >> > > listserv! > > >> > > > > >> > > Cheers, > > >> > > Peter > > >> > > > > >> > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 5:10 PM, David Kellogg < > > dkellogg60@gmail.com> > > >> > > wrote: > > >> > > > > >> > > > Peter: > > >> > > > > > >> > > > I think Mike's right. The "second signal system" was an attempt > to > > >> > > preserve > > >> > > > the idea of higher psychological functions in an atmosphere that > > was > > >> > not > > >> > > > that different from what was going on in America at the same > time > > >> (and > > >> > > > which Mike experienced first hand in both places). When I read > > >> > Belyayev's > > >> > > > work on foreign language teaching, he talks a lot about the > > "second > > >> > > signal > > >> > > > system". There, are, however, two places in Vygotsky which MIGHT > > >> > provide > > >> > > > some support, if you wanted to make the case that the "second > > signal > > >> > > > system" is not completely incompatible with Vygotsky. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > One is Chapter Two of the History of the Development of the > Higher > > >> > Mental > > >> > > > functions. See below. Starting around paragraph 142, Vygotsky > > likens > > >> > > > Pavlov's model of the brain as a telephone exchange. The > problem, > > of > > >> > > > course, is that back then telephone exchanges did require human > > >> > operators > > >> > > > to make the connection! > > >> > > > > > >> > > > The other is the discussion of "second order symbolism" in the > > work > > >> of > > >> > > > Delacroix, which you can find in Chapter Six of Thinking and > > Speech > > >> and > > >> > > > also in Chapter 7 of HDHMF (fifth para). This is a very > different > > >> > > > notion--it's the idea that writing is a set of symbols for > > speaking. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > David Kellogg > > >> > > > Macquarie University > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >From HDHMF, Chapter Two, Research Method > > >> > > > > > >> > > > We know that, as Pavlov says, ?the most general bases of higher > > >> nervous > > >> > > > activity are ascribed to the large hemispheres, the same in both > > >> higher > > >> > > > animals and in people, and for this reason even elementary > > >> phenomena of > > >> > > > this activity must be identical in the one and in the other in > > both > > >> > > normal > > >> > > > and pathological cases? (1951, p. 15). Actually, this can > scarcely > > >> be > > >> > > > disputed. But as soon as we go from the elementary phenomena of > > >> higher > > >> > > > nervous activity to the complex, to the higher phenomena within > > this > > >> > > higher > > >> > > > ? in the physiological sense ? activity, then two different > > >> > > methodological > > >> > > > paths for studying the specific uniqueness of human higher > > behavior > > >> > open > > >> > > > before us. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > One is the path to further study of complication, enrichment, > and > > >> > > > differentiation of the same phenomena that experimental study > > >> > ascertains > > >> > > in > > >> > > > animals. Here, on this path, the greatest restraint must be > > >> observed. > > >> > In > > >> > > > transferring information on higher nervous activity of animals > to > > >> > higher > > >> > > > activity of man, we must constantly check the factual > similarities > > >> in > > >> > the > > >> > > > function of organs in man and animals, but in general the > > principle > > >> > > itself > > >> > > > of the research remains the same as it was in the study of > > animals. > > >> > This > > >> > > is > > >> > > > the path of physiological study. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > True, this circumstance is of major significance and in the area > > of > > >> > > > physiological study of behavior, in a comparative study of man > and > > >> > > animals, > > >> > > > we must not put the function of the heart, stomach, and other > > organs > > >> > > which > > >> > > > are so similar to that of man on the same plane with higher > > nervous > > >> > > > activity. In the words of I. P. Pavlov, ?It is specifically this > > >> > activity > > >> > > > that so strikingly sets man apart from the rank of animals, that > > >> places > > >> > > man > > >> > > > immeasurably above the whole animal world? (ibid. p. 414). And > we > > >> might > > >> > > > expect that along the path of physiological research we will > find > > a > > >> > > > specific qualitative difference in human activity. Let us recall > > the > > >> > > words > > >> > > > of Pavlov cited above on the quantitative and qualitative > > >> > incomparability > > >> > > > of the word with conditioned stimuli of animals. Even in the > plan > > of > > >> > > strict > > >> > > > physiological consideration, ?the grandiose signalistics of > > speech? > > >> > > stands > > >> > > > outside the whole other mass of stimuli, the ?multicapaciousness > > of > > >> the > > >> > > > word? places it in a unique position. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > The other path is the path of psychological research. From the > > very > > >> > > > beginning, it proposes to seek the specific uniqueness of human > > >> > behavior > > >> > > > which does take us beyond the initial point. The specific > > >> uniqueness is > > >> > > > considered not only in its subsequent complexity and > development, > > >> > > > quantitative and qualitative refinement of the cerebral > > hemispheres, > > >> > but > > >> > > > primarily in the social nature of man and in a new method of > > >> > adaptation, > > >> > > as > > >> > > > compared with animals, that sets man apart. The main difference > > >> between > > >> > > the > > >> > > > behavior of man and of animals consists not only in that the > human > > >> > brain > > >> > > is > > >> > > > immeasurably above the brain of the dog and that the higher > > nervous > > >> > > > activity ?so strikingly sets man apart from the rank of > animals,? > > >> but > > >> > > most > > >> > > > of all, because it is the brain of a social being and because > the > > >> laws > > >> > of > > >> > > > higher nervous activity of man are manifested and act in the > human > > >> > > > personality. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > But let us return again to the ?most general bases of higher > > nervous > > >> > > > activity, related to the cerebral hemispheres,? and identical in > > >> higher > > >> > > > animals and man. We think that it is in this point that we can > > >> disclose > > >> > > > with definitive clarity the difference of which we speak. The > most > > >> > > general > > >> > > > basis of behavior, identical in man and animals, is > > *signalization.* > > >> > > Pavlov > > >> > > > said, ?So the basic and most general activity of the cerebral > > >> > hemispheres > > >> > > > is signaling with an infinite number of signals and with > > changeable > > >> > > > signalization? (ibid., p. 30). As is known, this is the most > > general > > >> > > > formulation of the whole idea of conditioned reflexes that lies > at > > >> the > > >> > > base > > >> > > > of the physiology of higher nervous activity. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > But human behavior is distinguished exactly in that it creates > > >> > artificial > > >> > > > signaling stimuli, primarily the grandiose signalization of > > speech, > > >> and > > >> > > in > > >> > > > this way masters the signaling activity of the cerebral > > >> hemispheres. If > > >> > > the > > >> > > > basic and most general activity of the cerebral hemispheres in > > >> animals > > >> > > and > > >> > > > in man is signalization, then the basic and most general > activity > > of > > >> > man > > >> > > > that differentiates man from animals in the first place, from > the > > >> > aspect > > >> > > of > > >> > > > psychology, is *signification,* that is, creation and use of > > signs. > > >> We > > >> > > are > > >> > > > using this word in its most literal sense and precise meaning. > > >> > > > Signification is the creation and use of signs, that is, > > artificial > > >> > > > signals. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > We will consider more closely this new principle of activity. It > > >> must > > >> > not > > >> > > > in any sense be contrasted with the principle of signalization. > > >> > > Changeable > > >> > > > signalization that results in the formation of temporary, > > >> conditional, > > >> > > > special connections between the organism and the environment is > an > > >> > > > indispensable, biological prerequisite of the higher activity > that > > >> we > > >> > > > arbitrarily call signification and is its base. The system of > > >> > connections > > >> > > > that is established in the brain of an animal is a copy or > > >> reflection > > >> > of > > >> > > > natural connections between ?all kinds of agents of nature? that > > >> signal > > >> > > the > > >> > > > arrival of immediately favorable or destructive phenomena. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > It is very obvious that such signalization ? a reflection of the > > >> > natural > > >> > > > connection of phenomena, wholly created by natural conditions ? > > >> cannot > > >> > be > > >> > > > an adequate basis of human behavior. For human adaptation, an > > active > > >> > > > *change > > >> > > > in the nature of man *is essential. It is the basis of all human > > >> > history. > > >> > > > It necessarily presupposes an active change in man?s behavior. > > >> > ?Affecting > > >> > > > the environment by this movement and changing it, he changes his > > own > > >> > > nature > > >> > > > at the same time,? says Marx. ?He develops forces asleep in it > and > > >> > > subjects > > >> > > > the play of these forces to his own will? (K. Marx and F. > Engels, > > >> > > > *Collected > > >> > > > Works,* Vol. 23, pp. 188-189 > > >> > > > > >> > > > 3A__www.marxists.org_archive_marx_works_1867-2Dc1_ch07.htm- > > >> > > > 23forces&d=DQIFaQ&c=aqMfXOEvEJQh2iQMCb7Wy8l0sPnURk > > cqADc2guUW8IM&r= > > >> > > > mXj3yhpYNklTxyN3KioIJ0ECmPHilpf4N2p9PBMATWs&m= > > >> > cxiDdHmIrHosSMq59vJlZ4j-S- > > >> > > > 4h5DSiLaMzqzi2yNA&s=J3sZBxFP1DTk3B8MLGJTyEw- > > RZmpA347cJfMSUrwSa4&e= > > >> >). > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 7:50 AM, Peter Feigenbaum [Staff] < > > >> > > > pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu> wrote: > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Mike, > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Thanks for the Luria references. From a cursory reading of > the > > >> > > relevant > > >> > > > > passages in the Luria & Yudovich book, and judging by some of > > the > > >> > other > > >> > > > > sources you listed, I get the impression that there hasn't > been > > >> much > > >> > > > > theoretical *fleshing out* of the structures of the second > > signal > > >> > > system. > > >> > > > > I hope that the concept of a first and second signal system is > > not > > >> > > just a > > >> > > > > political argument, but instead has some real substance. I > find > > it > > >> > hard > > >> > > > to > > >> > > > > imagine that our *animal* (stimulus-response) system of > thinking > > >> is > > >> > > > > developmentally unrelated to our *human* (conversational > > >> > > > > initiation-response) system of thinking. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > If anyone else knows of any passages from Vygotsky related to > > this > > >> > > topic, > > >> > > > > please don't hold back! > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Much obliged. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > In solidarity, > > >> > > > > Peter > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 1:56 PM, mike cole > > >> wrote: > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Peter-- If you google Luria "second signal system" you will > > >> come up > > >> > > > with > > >> > > > > > several references. There is a copy at luria.ucsd.edu of > his > > >> > little > > >> > > > book > > >> > > > > > with Yudovich on twins that uses that language. > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > It is not online (so far as i know), but Luria's article on > > >> "Speech > > >> > > > > > development and the formation of mental processes" in Cole > and > > >> > > > > > Maltzman, *Handbook > > >> > > > > > of Soviet Psychology. *Basic Books, 1969 uses this term a > lot. > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > I believe you will find an upsurge of usage associated with > > the > > >> > late > > >> > > > > > 1940's-50's when Vygotskians were under severe attack, there > > >> were > > >> > > > special > > >> > > > > > "Pavlov sessions" where they had to recant their errors, and > > the > > >> > use > > >> > > of > > >> > > > > > first and second signal system by Pavlov > > >> > > > > > allowed them a life line to orthodoxy. > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > mike > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Peter Feigenbaum [Staff] < > > >> > > > > > pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu> wrote: > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Dear colleagues, > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > I don't wish to detract in any way from the very serious > and > > >> > > > absolutely > > >> > > > > > > necessary discussion about male sensitivity (or should I > say > > >> > > > > > insensitivity) > > >> > > > > > > to the voices of the women inhabiting this list, but I > sure > > >> could > > >> > > use > > >> > > > > > your > > >> > > > > > > collective help with a small matter of scholarship. I am > > >> trying > > >> > to > > >> > > > > locate > > >> > > > > > > any passages in LSV's Collected Works in English in which > he > > >> > refers > > >> > > > to > > >> > > > > > the > > >> > > > > > > *first* and *second* signal systems. > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > My understanding is that Vygotsky considers the first > signal > > >> > system > > >> > > > as > > >> > > > > > the > > >> > > > > > > biologically inherited stimulus-response (S-R) system of > > >> reflexes > > >> > > as > > >> > > > > > > described by Pavlov, whereas the second signal system > refers > > >> to > > >> > the > > >> > > > > > > culturally inherited system of initiation-response that is > > >> > > particular > > >> > > > > to > > >> > > > > > > human conversational activity. I am working with the > > >> hypothesis > > >> > > that, > > >> > > > > in > > >> > > > > > > ontogenetic development, the first signal system becomes > > >> > > > *domesticated* > > >> > > > > > by, > > >> > > > > > > and ultimately subordinated to, the second signal system. > > That > > >> > is, > > >> > > > the > > >> > > > > > S-R > > >> > > > > > > form of thinking becomes developmentally transformed into > > the > > >> > > > > > > Initiation-Response form of thinking that is > characteristic > > >> of a > > >> > > > person > > >> > > > > > > performing a listening-speaking turn in conversation. > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > If any of the wonderful scholars on this list could help > > point > > >> > this > > >> > > > > poor, > > >> > > > > > > stumbling colleague > > >> > > > > > > in the right direction, I would be most grateful. > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Warm wishes to all, > > >> > > > > > > Peter > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > p.s. -- Let me take this opportunity to express my > heartfelt > > >> > thanks > > >> > > > to > > >> > > > > > Mike > > >> > > > > > > for creating this list in the first place, and with it the > > >> > > > opportunity > > >> > > > > > for > > >> > > > > > > Vygotskian scholars the world over to share and discuss > our > > >> ideas > > >> > > in > > >> > > > an > > >> > > > > > > open and honest forum. For my part, I pledge to do my > level > > >> best > > >> > to > > >> > > > > raise > > >> > > > > > > my own consciousness where it is deficient so that my > > >> > participation > > >> > > > in > > >> > > > > > this > > >> > > > > > > forum will be as inclusive and respectful to all of its > > >> > > participants > > >> > > > as > > >> > > > > > is > > >> > > > > > > humanly possible. > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > -- > > >> > > > > > > Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. > > >> > > > > > > Director, > > >> > > > > > > Office of Institutional Research > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > provos/office_of_institutio/index.asp> > > >> > > > > > > Fordham University > > >> > > > > > > Thebaud Hall-202 > > >> > > > > > > Bronx, NY 10458 > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Phone: (718) 817-2243 > > >> > > > > > > Fax: (718) 817-3817 > > >> > > > > > > email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > -- > > >> > > > > Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. > > >> > > > > Director, > > >> > > > > Office of Institutional Research > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > provos/office_of_institutio/index.asp> > > >> > > > > Fordham University > > >> > > > > Thebaud Hall-202 > > >> > > > > Bronx, NY 10458 > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Phone: (718) 817-2243 > > >> > > > > Fax: (718) 817-3817 > > >> > > > > email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > -- > > >> > > Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. > > >> > > Director, > > >> > > Office of Institutional Research > > >> > > > >> > > office_of_institutio/index.asp> > > >> > > Fordham University > > >> > > Thebaud Hall-202 > > >> > > Bronx, NY 10458 > > >> > > > > >> > > Phone: (718) 817-2243 > > >> > > Fax: (718) 817-3817 > > >> > > email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. > Director, > Office of Institutional Research > provos/office_of_institutio/index.asp> > Fordham University > Thebaud Hall-202 > Bronx, NY 10458 > > Phone: (718) 817-2243 > Fax: (718) 817-3817 > email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Thinking in the School Child.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 695524 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20161104/0a7bb801/attachment-0001.bin From annalisa@unm.edu Thu Nov 3 22:27:32 2016 From: annalisa@unm.edu (Annalisa Aguilar) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 05:27:32 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: References: <00ab01d235fe$c29c1560$47d44020$@edu> <581b82bd.5207620a.9f848.0978@mx.google.com> , Message-ID: Hi, About logic: to Greg M., Actually, I thought it was Jacob who discussed logic in gendered discourse. Unless you brought it up a long time ago in the group he references. I was under the impression that he had attempted to bring it up a few times in the past. Or am I mistaken? In his reply on timestamped Nov 03, 08:30:41 he stated: "Not to beat the proverbial dead horse, but several listserv members--including me--have tried to introduce this position re: logic in prior xmca threads. The position has mostly either been ignored or loudly rejected out of hand by more vocal participants on this listserv." So I was responding to that paragraph. I am not clear about Jacob's position but my position is that logic is an intellectual tool, just like intuition can be an emotional tool. Insight might be a combination of both logic and intuition. But nothing about logic makes it male, as I see it, no matter how much men might assert that to be the case. Logic is reasoning in a particular way with the mind, and any human can partake in it if one wants. You can't perform logic with your elbows and knees. Counting has a logic. So does self-preservation. What one does with logic has to do with one's values. If your values are for a pure race, for example, you can certainly use logic to rationalize activities that purify race however you might want to define it. Does that make logic a tool to create meaning that is essentially determined by power? Or is it just abuse of logic to assert one's power (over others, which is actually being powerless, since one who is truly powerful does not require power over others), which at its basis, is meaningless? Also, I don't think that Rein was saying gender is fluid. He said it is constructed: "... in other words, what cultures have "naturalized" as divisions into genders are more often than not constructions erected by a gender group in order to dominate others. Such construction, I would argue, can only be taken down with arguments that follow a logic which itself is not gendered, because if it were, it would be a contestant in the field, not the referee." I believe if I read him as he wanted to be read, I think he's saying that logic is not gendered, which I agree with. The fact that we can say "a logic" means the application of that logic has a boundary, but it doesn't mean that this logic is different than that logic. It means if I use a hammer on a house, I can also use it to bash in skulls. The tool is the same, the application is different, as are the values motivating its use. The boundaries are the objectives for using the logic, not the logic itself. Of course we can bicker over the forms of mallets, claw hammers, or rocks for hitting things and their differences, but the activity of hammering is the same. The values, motivations, and objectives are different, which offer the boundary, however the activity remains the same despite those boundaries. Logic isn't a Western invention, by the way. It's very much part of human cognition. Rationalism I suppose could be Western, but I reserve the right to be wrong about that. Kind regards, Annalisa From R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk Fri Nov 4 02:30:29 2016 From: R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk (Rod Parker-Rees) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 09:30:29 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] What are we doing here? Message-ID: I am an interested but time-poor lurker on the margins of xmca but the ripples stirred by Mike's decision to reduce his pastoral contribution to our community have made me question how different participants understand what kind of activity we are engaging in here. It seems to me that each of us may understand the social form of what we are doing in different ways. For some it is like a conversation and we feel disappointed or hurt if our contributions are met with silence or if the chain moves on in a different direction. For others we are a working group, collaborating to develop a practical and ethical theoretical model. For others we are something like a conference, where thoughts and ideas can be put before others for their consideration and response - and I am sure there are many other ways in which different people understand their participation differently. Does this matter? Would xmca be 'better' if it was more consistent, more coherent, more tightly and predictably governed by shared social understandings? While more explicit regulation (protocols for labelling streams and posts and for timing of responses etc.) might help to make our activity feel more inclusive and more sharable it may also introduce new kinds of discomfort. What I have found interesting in my time around the margins of xmca is the challenge of sustaining conversations without all the non-verbal feedback which we rely on when we talk with people. When 'wordings' float off into the ether, cast off from the body and personhood of their speakers or writers they become objects which can be scrutinised and revisited and this can be a reason for 'lurkers' to feel reluctant about contributing. What we are doing is not a conversation. Nor is it even a forum, in the sense of people taking turns to orate before a crowd, because contributors often get very little phatic feedback from the lurkers and may have very little sense of how their arguments have been understood or received. But we are moved by our understandings of what it is and is not OK to do, which come from other kinds of interactions. Can I say something if I have not been part of what has gone before? Should I respond or stay quiet? What should I do if I am annoyed or angered by something someone else has contributed? I am already getting anxious about how what I have said might be interpreted by others and feeling I have had a long enough turn but I would be really interested to hear what others think about why we are here! I have found what people do here very helpful but I do feel uneasy about risking contributions! All the best, Rod ________________________________ [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif] This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on it. If you have received this email in error please let the sender know immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University accepts no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan emails and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept responsibility for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless accompanied by an official order form. From R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk Fri Nov 4 06:50:45 2016 From: R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk (Rod Parker-Rees) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 13:50:45 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Help needed finding LSV references to *First*and *Second* Signal Systems In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Many thanks for sending the lecture, David. I think the passage where V underlines the distinction between 'co-generalized' and non co-generalized' thinking is intriguing: "From the psychological point of view, the transition from sensation to thinking signifies in the first place a transition from a non-co-generalized to a co-generalized reflection of reality in consciousness". Is there an etymological connection between the Russian words ??????? and ????????? and the word for teaching/learning which I know as 'obuchenie'? I teach a module which is grandly entitled 'Understanding Understanding', the main focus of which is on the social nature of understanding (etymologically 'standing among' rather than standing under!) - how we don't understand something unless we know something of what it means to other people. I think this was understood centuries ago and it informs the etymology of words like conscience and consciousness (con-scientia - co-knowing) and concepts (what is known together). So when V writes here about co-generalized thinking is he using the same terms as he used in Thinking and Speech (I believe) to contrast spontaneous and 'scientific' or 'schooled' concepts? I have always read this as an argument that the 'private' and the 'public' cannot be understood in isolation - the spontaneous concepts bring 'colour and vitality' and significance to the abstract scientific concepts which provide structure and sharability for the spontaneous concepts. Is there something you can recommend as a way in to Hasan's work? All the best, Rod -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of David Kellogg Sent: 04 November 2016 04:25 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Help needed finding LSV references to *First*and *Second* Signal Systems Peter: (Maybe both Peters?) Sometimes I think the best we husbands, fathers, and political activists can really do to promote gender equality in intellectual discourse is not to maintain a respectful male silence but rather to use our own booming baritones to amplify outstanding thinkers whose voices are in danger of being lost precisely because they were more soprano, or because they belonged to women born on the wrong side of the planet, or both. I am thinking of Ruqaiya Hasan, who is in imminent danger of being lost, even to feminist writers, in the cacaphony of Bourdieu, Baudrillard, Lyotard, Habermas, Foucault, Derrida, Lacan, and even Freud, none of whom had anything to say about Vygotsky (and, not coincidentally, all of whom are lesser sociolinguists than she was). Ruqaiya was an appreciative but also very critical reader of Vygotsky. Sometimes, when I am reading her thoughts on Vygotsky I feel like she is holding the book upside down, but then when I read it again I find that I am the one standing on my head. For example, one of the great advantages that Hasan finds in Vygotsky is not that he distinguishes between the higher and lower psychological functions. As far as Ruqaiya was concerned there was a bit too much of that around, and there still is. Instead, Ruqaiya finds that Vygotsky's strength is being able to link them together, precisely through his studies of children, including the biological and the social in a single complex unit of analysis (e.g. phonology AND lexicogrammar in a single dimension, which Vygotsky calls "phasal"). Ruqaiya doesn't mean that "signalization" is tied to "signification"--she is too much of a linguist and too much of a dialectician not to see the huge gap between them. But she does think that the word values (or, as she would prefer it, the "wording values") that are the bases for signification are Whorfian, Sapirian social co-generalizations. These are biological in the sense that they are huntable, gatherable, herdable, farmable, reproducible. They are also, in materialized form, edible and wearable: they are often made out of economic interests: they are exchange values, like the exchange value of any commodity they evolve from use values based in adapting the environment to human needs. Take a look at this. I think it is probably literally the last public lecture Vygotsky ever gave, and as far as I know it's never been translated into any language (except now Korean). I'm including the Russian because my own Russian is...well, lousy, and I keep hoping some of the Russophones on the list may catch some errors before it goes to press in February. In it, Vygotsky is trying to show exactly what Ruqaiya was talking about: the way in which the child goes from "non-co-generalized" thinking to co-generalized thinking. It's not a step. It's not a leap. It's a whole set of leaps, some of which depend on parents, professionals, and political activists. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 9:04 AM, Peter Feigenbaum [Staff] < pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu> wrote: > Dear colleagues, > > As a representative of the category *Slow Responder* (I am a busy > professional, a husband, a father of two, and a political activist), I > am only now getting around to replying to those who responded to my > earlier request for help. My apologies if my pace is too slow for a > satisfying exchange. > > Because I was fairly vague about my reason for asking for a reference > to first and second signal systems in Vygotsky's writings, I > unwittingly opened the door to discussion of the differences between > *signals* and *signs*. In fact, my interest is in their > *similarities*, in the properties that are common to both. I am > seeking the common denominator between animal stimulus-response thinking and human initiation-response thinking. > Fortunately, that linkage exists precisely where David Kellogg pointed me: > in Vol. 4, on p.55 of HDHMF in Vygotsky's Collected Works in English. > > Vygotsky is very clear when he distinguishes between *natural* signals > (or > signalization) and *artificial* signs (or signification). The former > occurs when animals interact with the environment and their brains > form conditioned reflexes, whereas the latter occurs when humans > invent their own conditioned reflexes (words) and then apply those > reflexes to themselves (or others) in order to master their own > behavior. In essence, Vygotsky considered *signification* a special case of *signalization*. > > One issue I had not counted on is the historical/political one. I was > unprepared for the possibility that the first and second signal > systems may have been a political problem of accommodation to the > authorities rather than an actual scientific problem. Thanks to Mike > for pointing that out, and for pointing out A.R. Luria's fairly > substantial contribution to the discussion--but especially for > contacting (the wonderful and brilliant) Tanya Akhutina! > > I'm not quite sure how to make good use of Huw's suggestion about > serial and parallel circuits, so I'll have to put that issue to the side for now. > But thanks for raising it. > > In light of the ongoing discussion about how to create a more > gender-sensitive and gender-balanced dialogue on this listserv, I > would like to invite anyone who is lurking (or very busy) to > contribute any useful information you may have about my request *in your own good time*. > These problems are complicated, and I'm learning to be patient. > > Thanks to all. > > In solidarity, > Peter > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 6:55 PM, mike cole wrote: > > > Peter -- Concerning your initial question. I obtained the following > answer > > from Tanya Akhutina. > > > > ????, > > ?????? ??????? ? ?????? ?????????? ??????? ? 1932 ?. ?????????????? > > ?????????? ? ??? ????? ????? ?????? ? 33 ? 34 ?????. ? ????? > > ?????????? ? ?????????? ?? ?????. > > ??? - ?????? ????, ?? ?????? ??? ??? ????????. ?? ???? ?????? ????? > > ????? ???????????, ??????? ???, ?????? ???? ?.?.??????????. ?? > > ???????????? ? ??????? ????? ?????????? ?????? ???? ????? ???????? ? > > ????? ?????? ?? > ???. > > 144: " ?.?. ????????? ???? ?????????? ??????, ? ? ??? ??????? > > ?????????? ??????? ? ??????? ??????? ???????????????? ????? ???? > > ????????, ?? ??? ?? ????? ??????, ??????? ?? ??? ?????, ?????????? > > ?? ?????? ????????? > ?????". > > > > Roughly, > > Mike, > > Pavlov wrote about the second signal system in 1932. > > Correspondingly, references/rememberances to it had to wait until > > 1933-34. Such > references/ > > rememberances in Vygotsky I do not recall. > > > > ARL was another case, he was obligated to speak in this way. Olga > Sergeevna > > Vinogradova, a student of ARL's [with whom I conducted research in > > the winter of 1962/63-mc] is cited by Lena Luria [Luria's daughter] > > in her > book > > on p. 144 "A.R. new the teachings of Pavlov perfectly, and in his > lectures > > he changed the lexicon and the beauty of a straightforward > > psychological language was replaced, but none the less the knowledge > > which he gave us remained on the the level of real science." > > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 3:42 PM, mike cole wrote: > > > > > It seems that side-by-side translations of the two documents merit > > > archival publication, David. JREEP is an obvious repository. In > addition > > to > > > which at present we have a good deal more evidence about children, > chess > > > boards, and the issues vexing Vygotsky than he had access to. The > > > non/difficult chronology of the texts complicates an already > complicated > > > process of interpretation as we have long witnessed here. > > > > > > Perhaps as a separate thread, it would be nice to put together a > > > discussion of the core linkages between Vygotsky and Halliday in > > > your work..... one of those chains of discussion that come and go. > > > Perhaps a mini-course devoted to the following, to me, essential idea: > > > > > > It seems to me that ALL of these are signalization systems (not > > > signifying systems, because they do not have lexicogrammar and > > > cannot convey ideal values) > > > > > > Providing a "cheat sheet" for autodidacts, might it be possible to > create > > > some > > > "field of interest" in the xmca discussion for dealing with this idea? > > > > > > I have in no way forgotten the issue of the relation of > > > microgenesis > and > > > ontogenesis. It seems another "key point" as most of us go about > > > using > > CHAT > > > ideas in the course of the teaching/learning activities that pay > > > the > > bread > > > and butter. As matters stand, I offer Franklin in the blocks as an > > example > > > of microgenesis in a preschool classroom involving play as an > > > example > of > > a > > > zone of proximal development where childre are a head taller than > > > themselves. That discussion is for the microgenesis/ontogenesis > > > thread > > if I > > > recall. > > > > > > I would be VERY interested to learn of ways that feminist, queer > theory, > > > critical disability studies theory, neurodiversity theory, and > > > others > can > > > help me to understand these categories and the theories that > > > purport to account for them. > > > > > > If they need to be re-thought, might as well be here. Ain't goin > nowhere. > > > > > > mike > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 2:28 PM, David Kellogg > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > >> I'm working with two versions of one of Vygotsky's last lectures > > >> (the second version is given exactly five days before he was > > >> brought home > > with > > >> a > > >> throat haemorrhage to die, the first about a year earlier). There > > >> are passages that are almost word for word repetitions. There are > > >> passages that are semantically the same and but quite differently > > >> worded (the > earlier > > >> Vygotsky is quite modest and tentative; the later Vygotsky is > > >> much > more > > >> critical and also more confident). Then there are passages that > > >> say > > pretty > > >> much the opposite of what was said a year earlier: for example, > > >> in the early lecture Vygotsky says that a child faced with a > > >> chessboard who doesn't know how to play will see it structurally > > >> and sort the pieces > by > > >> color (black pieces on black squares, white on white) but in the > > >> later lecture it is the child who does know how to play who sees > > >> it structurally, because the child sees a black knight in a > > >> "structure" with a white > > pawn. > > >> He's a genius, and geniuses tend to think things over a lot, > > >> turning > > them > > >> this way and that, and never looking at anything as final, not > > >> even > when > > >> they are about to die. > > >> > > >> HDHMF has to be read the same way. Vygotsky cannot quite seem to > > >> make > up > > >> his mind whether there are three stages of higher behavior > > >> (instinct, habit, intelligence) or four different stages of > > >> higher behavior (instinct, habit, intelligence, and freedom). In > > >> Chapter Four, he very clearly > > argues > > >> for four or more, but in Chapter Five, which may have been > > >> written > much > > >> earlier, he argues for three but then three paragraphs later > > >> considers > > it > > >> safer to begin as Thorndike does with two levels (unconditional > > >> and conditional responses). So "signal" vs. "signification" could > > >> just be > > seen > > >> as the difference between unconditional and conditional > > >> responses, or > it > > >> could be seen as the difference between instinct and > > >> intelligence, or > it > > >> could be seen as two poles with an almost infinite number of > > >> genetic variations in between. I prefer the latter view, but I > > >> recognize that Vygotsky has to package things pretty differently > > >> for different > > audiences, > > >> and we are not one of the audiences that he has foremost in his mind. > > >> > > >> Take bacteria. Bacteria are apparently capable of quorum sensing: > > >> that > > is, > > >> bacteria don't multiply when there are no other bacteria around, > > >> they > do > > >> when there are some but not too many, and they don't when there > > >> are > too > > >> many. Now, take ants. Ants have a system of finding new nests > > >> that involves scouting for potential sites. If the site is > > >> extremely good, they go > > back > > >> and take other ants there quickly, but if it is not so good they > > >> tend > to > > >> dawdle a little, with the result that the best site gets more > > >> ants, > and > > at > > >> a certain point the whole nest "decides" to move there. Now, take > > >> bees. Like ants, bees go scouting. The scouts come back and they > dance; > > >> the > > >> dances attract more or fewer onlookers, and when a quorum is > > >> reached, > > the > > >> hive moves. It seems to me that ALL of these are signalization > > >> systems (not signifying systems, because they do not have > > >> lexicogrammar and cannot convey ideal values) but the difference > > >> between the ant system and > the > > >> bee > > >> system is as big as the difference between the bee system and > > >> early > > child > > >> language. For ants, the scouting and decision making are not > > >> differentiated, but for bees they are distinct moments--so the > > >> ant > > system > > >> involves a simple signal system and the bee system involves a > > >> second signal system. > > >> > > >> David Kellogg > > >> Macquarie University > > >> > > >> On Sun, Oct 30, 2016 at 3:45 AM, wrote: > > >> > > >> > In this discussion The center of this relational exploration is > > between > > >> > signalization AND signification and my question goes back to > > >> > the > place > > >> of > > >> > the general term *gesturing*. > > >> > Is this signalization or is this phenomena signification. > > >> > The act creating actual*ity (sens) which always includes > > >> > tendency or orientation towards or away from something. > > >> > The act is gestural acts and implies *each in the other*. > > >> > > > >> > The relation of gestural receiving and responding and this > > >> > phenomena > > in > > >> > relation to signalization and signification. > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > >> > > > >> > From: Huw Lloyd > > >> > Sent: October 29, 2016 9:01 AM > > >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: XMCA-ers: Help needed finding LSV > > >> > references > to > > >> > *First*and *Second* Signal Systems > > >> > > > >> > Peter, > > >> > > > >> > If by signalisation you mean use of signs to influence > > >> > behaviour in > > >> terms > > >> > of operational criteria and speech, then yes this is so. It > > >> > has > been > > >> > studied quite systematically, but is perhaps less well known. I > > >> > can elaborate on this if this is your drift. > > >> > > > >> > Best, > > >> > Huw > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > On 28 October 2016 at 22:43, Peter Feigenbaum [Staff] < > > >> > pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu> wrote: > > >> > > > >> > > David, > > >> > > > > >> > > As usual, your suggestions are both helpful and erudite. > > >> > > Thanks > for > > >> the > > >> > > poignant references to Vygotsky and to Marx. Although Soviet > > academic > > >> > > politics may have complicated the issue, there does seem to > > >> > > be > some > > >> > > substance to the argument that the nervous systems of animals > > >> > > and > > the > > >> > > speech communication systems of humans share the common > > >> > > property > of > > >> > > *signalization*. Personally, I think there's a lot more to > > >> > > this > > topic > > >> > than > > >> > > meets the eye--or, better yet, there's a lot of opportunity > > >> > > here > for > > >> > > developing the problem further. > > >> > > > > >> > > Once again, I owe an intellectual debt to the participants of > > >> > > this listserv! > > >> > > > > >> > > Cheers, > > >> > > Peter > > >> > > > > >> > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 5:10 PM, David Kellogg < > > dkellogg60@gmail.com> > > >> > > wrote: > > >> > > > > >> > > > Peter: > > >> > > > > > >> > > > I think Mike's right. The "second signal system" was an > > >> > > > attempt > to > > >> > > preserve > > >> > > > the idea of higher psychological functions in an atmosphere > > >> > > > that > > was > > >> > not > > >> > > > that different from what was going on in America at the > > >> > > > same > time > > >> (and > > >> > > > which Mike experienced first hand in both places). When I > > >> > > > read > > >> > Belyayev's > > >> > > > work on foreign language teaching, he talks a lot about the > > "second > > >> > > signal > > >> > > > system". There, are, however, two places in Vygotsky which > > >> > > > MIGHT > > >> > provide > > >> > > > some support, if you wanted to make the case that the > > >> > > > "second > > signal > > >> > > > system" is not completely incompatible with Vygotsky. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > One is Chapter Two of the History of the Development of the > Higher > > >> > Mental > > >> > > > functions. See below. Starting around paragraph 142, > > >> > > > Vygotsky > > likens > > >> > > > Pavlov's model of the brain as a telephone exchange. The > problem, > > of > > >> > > > course, is that back then telephone exchanges did require > > >> > > > human > > >> > operators > > >> > > > to make the connection! > > >> > > > > > >> > > > The other is the discussion of "second order symbolism" in > > >> > > > the > > work > > >> of > > >> > > > Delacroix, which you can find in Chapter Six of Thinking > > >> > > > and > > Speech > > >> and > > >> > > > also in Chapter 7 of HDHMF (fifth para). This is a very > different > > >> > > > notion--it's the idea that writing is a set of symbols for > > speaking. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > David Kellogg > > >> > > > Macquarie University > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >From HDHMF, Chapter Two, Research Method > > >> > > > > > >> > > > We know that, as Pavlov says, ?the most general bases of > > >> > > > higher > > >> nervous > > >> > > > activity are ascribed to the large hemispheres, the same in > > >> > > > both > > >> higher > > >> > > > animals and in people, and for this reason even elementary > > >> phenomena of > > >> > > > this activity must be identical in the one and in the other > > >> > > > in > > both > > >> > > normal > > >> > > > and pathological cases? (1951, p. 15). Actually, this can > scarcely > > >> be > > >> > > > disputed. But as soon as we go from the elementary > > >> > > > phenomena of > > >> higher > > >> > > > nervous activity to the complex, to the higher phenomena > > >> > > > within > > this > > >> > > higher > > >> > > > ? in the physiological sense ? activity, then two different > > >> > > methodological > > >> > > > paths for studying the specific uniqueness of human higher > > behavior > > >> > open > > >> > > > before us. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > One is the path to further study of complication, > > >> > > > enrichment, > and > > >> > > > differentiation of the same phenomena that experimental > > >> > > > study > > >> > ascertains > > >> > > in > > >> > > > animals. Here, on this path, the greatest restraint must be > > >> observed. > > >> > In > > >> > > > transferring information on higher nervous activity of > > >> > > > animals > to > > >> > higher > > >> > > > activity of man, we must constantly check the factual > similarities > > >> in > > >> > the > > >> > > > function of organs in man and animals, but in general the > > principle > > >> > > itself > > >> > > > of the research remains the same as it was in the study of > > animals. > > >> > This > > >> > > is > > >> > > > the path of physiological study. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > True, this circumstance is of major significance and in the > > >> > > > area > > of > > >> > > > physiological study of behavior, in a comparative study of > > >> > > > man > and > > >> > > animals, > > >> > > > we must not put the function of the heart, stomach, and > > >> > > > other > > organs > > >> > > which > > >> > > > are so similar to that of man on the same plane with higher > > nervous > > >> > > > activity. In the words of I. P. Pavlov, ?It is specifically > > >> > > > this > > >> > activity > > >> > > > that so strikingly sets man apart from the rank of animals, > > >> > > > that > > >> places > > >> > > man > > >> > > > immeasurably above the whole animal world? (ibid. p. 414). > > >> > > > And > we > > >> might > > >> > > > expect that along the path of physiological research we > > >> > > > will > find > > a > > >> > > > specific qualitative difference in human activity. Let us > > >> > > > recall > > the > > >> > > words > > >> > > > of Pavlov cited above on the quantitative and qualitative > > >> > incomparability > > >> > > > of the word with conditioned stimuli of animals. Even in > > >> > > > the > plan > > of > > >> > > strict > > >> > > > physiological consideration, ?the grandiose signalistics of > > speech? > > >> > > stands > > >> > > > outside the whole other mass of stimuli, the > > >> > > > ?multicapaciousness > > of > > >> the > > >> > > > word? places it in a unique position. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > The other path is the path of psychological research. From > > >> > > > the > > very > > >> > > > beginning, it proposes to seek the specific uniqueness of > > >> > > > human > > >> > behavior > > >> > > > which does take us beyond the initial point. The specific > > >> uniqueness is > > >> > > > considered not only in its subsequent complexity and > development, > > >> > > > quantitative and qualitative refinement of the cerebral > > hemispheres, > > >> > but > > >> > > > primarily in the social nature of man and in a new method > > >> > > > of > > >> > adaptation, > > >> > > as > > >> > > > compared with animals, that sets man apart. The main > > >> > > > difference > > >> between > > >> > > the > > >> > > > behavior of man and of animals consists not only in that > > >> > > > the > human > > >> > brain > > >> > > is > > >> > > > immeasurably above the brain of the dog and that the higher > > nervous > > >> > > > activity ?so strikingly sets man apart from the rank of > animals,? > > >> but > > >> > > most > > >> > > > of all, because it is the brain of a social being and > > >> > > > because > the > > >> laws > > >> > of > > >> > > > higher nervous activity of man are manifested and act in > > >> > > > the > human > > >> > > > personality. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > But let us return again to the ?most general bases of > > >> > > > higher > > nervous > > >> > > > activity, related to the cerebral hemispheres,? and > > >> > > > identical in > > >> higher > > >> > > > animals and man. We think that it is in this point that we > > >> > > > can > > >> disclose > > >> > > > with definitive clarity the difference of which we speak. > > >> > > > The > most > > >> > > general > > >> > > > basis of behavior, identical in man and animals, is > > *signalization.* > > >> > > Pavlov > > >> > > > said, ?So the basic and most general activity of the > > >> > > > cerebral > > >> > hemispheres > > >> > > > is signaling with an infinite number of signals and with > > changeable > > >> > > > signalization? (ibid., p. 30). As is known, this is the > > >> > > > most > > general > > >> > > > formulation of the whole idea of conditioned reflexes that > > >> > > > lies > at > > >> the > > >> > > base > > >> > > > of the physiology of higher nervous activity. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > But human behavior is distinguished exactly in that it > > >> > > > creates > > >> > artificial > > >> > > > signaling stimuli, primarily the grandiose signalization of > > speech, > > >> and > > >> > > in > > >> > > > this way masters the signaling activity of the cerebral > > >> hemispheres. If > > >> > > the > > >> > > > basic and most general activity of the cerebral hemispheres > > >> > > > in > > >> animals > > >> > > and > > >> > > > in man is signalization, then the basic and most general > activity > > of > > >> > man > > >> > > > that differentiates man from animals in the first place, > > >> > > > from > the > > >> > aspect > > >> > > of > > >> > > > psychology, is *signification,* that is, creation and use > > >> > > > of > > signs. > > >> We > > >> > > are > > >> > > > using this word in its most literal sense and precise meaning. > > >> > > > Signification is the creation and use of signs, that is, > > artificial > > >> > > > signals. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > We will consider more closely this new principle of > > >> > > > activity. It > > >> must > > >> > not > > >> > > > in any sense be contrasted with the principle of signalization. > > >> > > Changeable > > >> > > > signalization that results in the formation of temporary, > > >> conditional, > > >> > > > special connections between the organism and the > > >> > > > environment is > an > > >> > > > indispensable, biological prerequisite of the higher > > >> > > > activity > that > > >> we > > >> > > > arbitrarily call signification and is its base. The system > > >> > > > of > > >> > connections > > >> > > > that is established in the brain of an animal is a copy or > > >> reflection > > >> > of > > >> > > > natural connections between ?all kinds of agents of nature? > > >> > > > that > > >> signal > > >> > > the > > >> > > > arrival of immediately favorable or destructive phenomena. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > It is very obvious that such signalization ? a reflection > > >> > > > of the > > >> > natural > > >> > > > connection of phenomena, wholly created by natural > > >> > > > conditions ? > > >> cannot > > >> > be > > >> > > > an adequate basis of human behavior. For human adaptation, > > >> > > > an > > active > > >> > > > *change > > >> > > > in the nature of man *is essential. It is the basis of all > > >> > > > human > > >> > history. > > >> > > > It necessarily presupposes an active change in man?s behavior. > > >> > ?Affecting > > >> > > > the environment by this movement and changing it, he > > >> > > > changes his > > own > > >> > > nature > > >> > > > at the same time,? says Marx. ?He develops forces asleep in > > >> > > > it > and > > >> > > subjects > > >> > > > the play of these forces to his own will? (K. Marx and F. > Engels, > > >> > > > *Collected > > >> > > > Works,* Vol. 23, pp. 188-189 > > >> > > > > >> > > > 3A__www.marxists.org_archive_marx_works_1867-2Dc1_ch07.htm- > > >> > > > 23forces&d=DQIFaQ&c=aqMfXOEvEJQh2iQMCb7Wy8l0sPnURk > > cqADc2guUW8IM&r= > > >> > > > mXj3yhpYNklTxyN3KioIJ0ECmPHilpf4N2p9PBMATWs&m= > > >> > cxiDdHmIrHosSMq59vJlZ4j-S- > > >> > > > 4h5DSiLaMzqzi2yNA&s=J3sZBxFP1DTk3B8MLGJTyEw- > > RZmpA347cJfMSUrwSa4&e= > > >> >). > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 7:50 AM, Peter Feigenbaum [Staff] < > > >> > > > pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu> wrote: > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Mike, > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Thanks for the Luria references. From a cursory reading > > >> > > > > of > the > > >> > > relevant > > >> > > > > passages in the Luria & Yudovich book, and judging by > > >> > > > > some of > > the > > >> > other > > >> > > > > sources you listed, I get the impression that there > > >> > > > > hasn't > been > > >> much > > >> > > > > theoretical *fleshing out* of the structures of the > > >> > > > > second > > signal > > >> > > system. > > >> > > > > I hope that the concept of a first and second signal > > >> > > > > system is > > not > > >> > > just a > > >> > > > > political argument, but instead has some real substance. > > >> > > > > I > find > > it > > >> > hard > > >> > > > to > > >> > > > > imagine that our *animal* (stimulus-response) system of > thinking > > >> is > > >> > > > > developmentally unrelated to our *human* (conversational > > >> > > > > initiation-response) system of thinking. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > If anyone else knows of any passages from Vygotsky > > >> > > > > related to > > this > > >> > > topic, > > >> > > > > please don't hold back! > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Much obliged. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > In solidarity, > > >> > > > > Peter > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 1:56 PM, mike cole > > >> > > > > > > >> wrote: > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Peter-- If you google Luria "second signal system" you > > >> > > > > > will > > >> come up > > >> > > > with > > >> > > > > > several references. There is a copy at luria.ucsd.edu > > >> > > > > > of > his > > >> > little > > >> > > > book > > >> > > > > > with Yudovich on twins that uses that language. > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > It is not online (so far as i know), but Luria's > > >> > > > > > article on > > >> "Speech > > >> > > > > > development and the formation of mental processes" in > > >> > > > > > Cole > and > > >> > > > > > Maltzman, *Handbook > > >> > > > > > of Soviet Psychology. *Basic Books, 1969 uses this term > > >> > > > > > a > lot. > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > I believe you will find an upsurge of usage associated > > >> > > > > > with > > the > > >> > late > > >> > > > > > 1940's-50's when Vygotskians were under severe attack, > > >> > > > > > there > > >> were > > >> > > > special > > >> > > > > > "Pavlov sessions" where they had to recant their > > >> > > > > > errors, and > > the > > >> > use > > >> > > of > > >> > > > > > first and second signal system by Pavlov allowed them a > > >> > > > > > life line to orthodoxy. > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > mike > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Peter Feigenbaum > > >> > > > > > [Staff] < pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu> wrote: > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Dear colleagues, > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > I don't wish to detract in any way from the very > > >> > > > > > > serious > and > > >> > > > absolutely > > >> > > > > > > necessary discussion about male sensitivity (or > > >> > > > > > > should I > say > > >> > > > > > insensitivity) > > >> > > > > > > to the voices of the women inhabiting this list, but > > >> > > > > > > I > sure > > >> could > > >> > > use > > >> > > > > > your > > >> > > > > > > collective help with a small matter of scholarship. I > > >> > > > > > > am > > >> trying > > >> > to > > >> > > > > locate > > >> > > > > > > any passages in LSV's Collected Works in English in > > >> > > > > > > which > he > > >> > refers > > >> > > > to > > >> > > > > > the > > >> > > > > > > *first* and *second* signal systems. > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > My understanding is that Vygotsky considers the first > signal > > >> > system > > >> > > > as > > >> > > > > > the > > >> > > > > > > biologically inherited stimulus-response (S-R) system > > >> > > > > > > of > > >> reflexes > > >> > > as > > >> > > > > > > described by Pavlov, whereas the second signal system > refers > > >> to > > >> > the > > >> > > > > > > culturally inherited system of initiation-response > > >> > > > > > > that is > > >> > > particular > > >> > > > > to > > >> > > > > > > human conversational activity. I am working with the > > >> hypothesis > > >> > > that, > > >> > > > > in > > >> > > > > > > ontogenetic development, the first signal system > > >> > > > > > > becomes > > >> > > > *domesticated* > > >> > > > > > by, > > >> > > > > > > and ultimately subordinated to, the second signal system. > > That > > >> > is, > > >> > > > the > > >> > > > > > S-R > > >> > > > > > > form of thinking becomes developmentally transformed > > >> > > > > > > into > > the > > >> > > > > > > Initiation-Response form of thinking that is > characteristic > > >> of a > > >> > > > person > > >> > > > > > > performing a listening-speaking turn in conversation. > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > If any of the wonderful scholars on this list could > > >> > > > > > > help > > point > > >> > this > > >> > > > > poor, > > >> > > > > > > stumbling colleague > > >> > > > > > > in the right direction, I would be most grateful. > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Warm wishes to all, > > >> > > > > > > Peter > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > p.s. -- Let me take this opportunity to express my > heartfelt > > >> > thanks > > >> > > > to > > >> > > > > > Mike > > >> > > > > > > for creating this list in the first place, and with > > >> > > > > > > it the > > >> > > > opportunity > > >> > > > > > for > > >> > > > > > > Vygotskian scholars the world over to share and > > >> > > > > > > discuss > our > > >> ideas > > >> > > in > > >> > > > an > > >> > > > > > > open and honest forum. For my part, I pledge to do my > level > > >> best > > >> > to > > >> > > > > raise > > >> > > > > > > my own consciousness where it is deficient so that my > > >> > participation > > >> > > > in > > >> > > > > > this > > >> > > > > > > forum will be as inclusive and respectful to all of > > >> > > > > > > its > > >> > > participants > > >> > > > as > > >> > > > > > is > > >> > > > > > > humanly possible. > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > -- > > >> > > > > > > Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. > > >> > > > > > > Director, > > >> > > > > > > Office of Institutional Research > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > provos/office_of_institutio/index.asp> > > >> > > > > > > Fordham University > > >> > > > > > > Thebaud Hall-202 > > >> > > > > > > Bronx, NY 10458 > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Phone: (718) 817-2243 > > >> > > > > > > Fax: (718) 817-3817 > > >> > > > > > > email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > -- > > >> > > > > Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. > > >> > > > > Director, > > >> > > > > Office of Institutional Research > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > provos/office_of_institutio/index.asp> > > >> > > > > Fordham University > > >> > > > > Thebaud Hall-202 > > >> > > > > Bronx, NY 10458 > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Phone: (718) 817-2243 > > >> > > > > Fax: (718) 817-3817 > > >> > > > > email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > -- > > >> > > Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. > > >> > > Director, > > >> > > Office of Institutional Research > > >> > > > >> > > office_of_institutio/index.asp> Fordham University Thebaud > > >> > > Hall-202 Bronx, NY 10458 > > >> > > > > >> > > Phone: (718) 817-2243 > > >> > > Fax: (718) 817-3817 > > >> > > email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. > Director, > Office of Institutional Research > provos/office_of_institutio/index.asp> > Fordham University > Thebaud Hall-202 > Bronx, NY 10458 > > Phone: (718) 817-2243 > Fax: (718) 817-3817 > email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu > ________________________________ [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif] This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on it. If you have received this email in error please let the sender know immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University accepts no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan emails and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept responsibility for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless accompanied by an official order form. From dkirsh@lsu.edu Fri Nov 4 08:29:36 2016 From: dkirsh@lsu.edu (David H Kirshner) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 15:29:36 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: References: <00ab01d235fe$c29c1560$47d44020$@edu> <581b82bd.5207620a.9f848.0978@mx.google.com> , Message-ID: Annalisa, Recognizing that Jacob and others may see it differently, I agree with you that logic is not gendered. I do disagree, though, with your final statement that "Logic isn't a Western invention, by the way. It's very much part of human cognition." What I think is sustainable is the position that reasoning is very much a part of human cognition. But one of the results that cognitive scientists have clearly established is that human reasoning, in general, is associative, not logical. Our conceptual structures are associatively linked, meaning that concepts conjure up other, related concepts. Our reasoning is a kind of juggling of these linked concepts. One of the classical studies that established this perspective concerns Margie the bank teller: Margie is bright, single, 31 year old, outspoken, and concerned with issues of social justice. What is more likely A) Margie is a bank teller, or B) Margie is a bank teller and Margie is a feminist. (If you're not familiar with this problem, take a moment to answer it.) ... The logical analysis holds that Margie is more likely to be a bank teller than both a bank teller and a feminist because choice A includes the possibility that Margie is a bank teller and a feminist as well as the possibility that Margie is a bank teller and not a feminist, but choice B includes only one of those possibilities. But the vast majority of subjects tested select choice B, which the cognitive psychologists take as indicating that we are guided by our associations to people like Margie rather than by the logical conditions of the problem. In my view, logic as a discursive form--a technology of thought--is a Western invention. Whether it is identified as "male" because of historical association or biological predisposition, I don't know, and I should add, I don't care. (Jacob, the science of biologically based sex differences in cognition has not been "debunked." Rather, feminist scholars have rightly pointed out that the data are inconclusive, and that prior assertions of biologically based sex differences in cognition over-interpret the scientific results.) Neither history nor biology is determinative, and logic is too important a part of our cultural legacy to deny any individual or group the opportunity to master it. David -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Annalisa Aguilar Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 12:28 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity ; Vera John-Steiner Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse Hi, About logic: to Greg M., Actually, I thought it was Jacob who discussed logic in gendered discourse. Unless you brought it up a long time ago in the group he references. I was under the impression that he had attempted to bring it up a few times in the past. Or am I mistaken? In his reply on timestamped Nov 03, 08:30:41 he stated: "Not to beat the proverbial dead horse, but several listserv members--including me--have tried to introduce this position re: logic in prior xmca threads. The position has mostly either been ignored or loudly rejected out of hand by more vocal participants on this listserv." So I was responding to that paragraph. I am not clear about Jacob's position but my position is that logic is an intellectual tool, just like intuition can be an emotional tool. Insight might be a combination of both logic and intuition. But nothing about logic makes it male, as I see it, no matter how much men might assert that to be the case. Logic is reasoning in a particular way with the mind, and any human can partake in it if one wants. You can't perform logic with your elbows and knees. Counting has a logic. So does self-preservation. What one does with logic has to do with one's values. If your values are for a pure race, for example, you can certainly use logic to rationalize activities that purify race however you might want to define it. Does that make logic a tool to create meaning that is essentially determined by power? Or is it just abuse of logic to assert one's power (over others, which is actually being powerless, since one who is truly powerful does not require power over others), which at its basis, is meaningless? Also, I don't think that Rein was saying gender is fluid. He said it is constructed: "... in other words, what cultures have "naturalized" as divisions into genders are more often than not constructions erected by a gender group in order to dominate others. Such construction, I would argue, can only be taken down with arguments that follow a logic which itself is not gendered, because if it were, it would be a contestant in the field, not the referee." I believe if I read him as he wanted to be read, I think he's saying that logic is not gendered, which I agree with. The fact that we can say "a logic" means the application of that logic has a boundary, but it doesn't mean that this logic is different than that logic. It means if I use a hammer on a house, I can also use it to bash in skulls. The tool is the same, the application is different, as are the values motivating its use. The boundaries are the objectives for using the logic, not the logic itself. Of course we can bicker over the forms of mallets, claw hammers, or rocks for hitting things and their differences, but the activity of hammering is the same. The values, motivations, and objectives are different, which offer the boundary, however the activity remains the same despite those boundaries. Logic isn't a Western invention, by the way. It's very much part of human cognition. Rationalism I suppose could be Western, but I reserve the right to be wrong about that. Kind regards, Annalisa From lpscholar2@gmail.com Fri Nov 4 08:32:48 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 08:32:48 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Help needed finding LSV references to *First*and*Second* Signal Systems In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <581caa2a.45cf620a.17f97.4b8b@mx.google.com> On the first page of David?s translation he say Vugotsky asks how ?onsciousness and free will are internally linked because the answer that the common cause of this linking through *unsuccessful adaptations to the environment* - are a *purely external link*. Vygotsky?s alternative answer is that both consciousness and free will come into view through co-generalization -that is through word *values* (implying sens which always has a direction of action toward actual*ity). Thesw word values are shared in communication. They are *internally linked* through their shared co-generated and co-generating (which resumes the temporally co-generated) *intellectualization* This intellectualization with its *internal moment* of sens contrasts with the notion that sens is a purely external link of consciousness through adaptation to the environment. I will add these alternatives contrast *worlds* and *environment* Apology for jumping in quickly but i hope it is relevant to the exploration of gender equality. I will start a new thread. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Rod Parker-Rees Sent: November 4, 2016 6:52 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Help needed finding LSV references to *First*and*Second* Signal Systems Many thanks for sending the lecture, David. I think the passage where V underlines the distinction between 'co-generalized' and non co-generalized' thinking is intriguing: "From the psychological point of view, the transition from sensation to thinking signifies in the first place a transition from a non-co-generalized to a co-generalized reflection of reality in consciousness". Is there an etymological connection between the Russian words ??????? and ????????? and the word for teaching/learning which I know as 'obuchenie'? I teach a module which is grandly entitled 'Understanding Understanding', the main focus of which is on the social nature of understanding (etymologically 'standing among' rather than standing under!) - how we don't understand something unless we know something of what it means to other people. I think this was understood centuries ago and it informs the etymology of words like conscience and consciousness (con-scientia - co-knowing) and concepts (what is known together). So when V writes here about co-generalized thinking is he using the same terms as he used in Thinking and Speech (I believe) to contrast spontaneous and 'scientific' or 'schooled' concepts? I have always read this as an argument that the 'private' and the 'public' cannot be understood in isolation - the spontaneous concepts bring 'colour and vitality' and significance to the abstract scientific concepts which provide structure and sharability for the spontaneous concepts. Is there something you can recommend as a way in to Hasan's work? All the best, Rod -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of David Kellogg Sent: 04 November 2016 04:25 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Help needed finding LSV references to *First*and *Second* Signal Systems Peter: (Maybe both Peters?) Sometimes I think the best we husbands, fathers, and political activists can really do to promote gender equality in intellectual discourse is not to maintain a respectful male silence but rather to use our own booming baritones to amplify outstanding thinkers whose voices are in danger of being lost precisely because they were more soprano, or because they belonged to women born on the wrong side of the planet, or both. I am thinking of Ruqaiya Hasan, who is in imminent danger of being lost, even to feminist writers, in the cacaphony of Bourdieu, Baudrillard, Lyotard, Habermas, Foucault, Derrida, Lacan, and even Freud, none of whom had anything to say about Vygotsky (and, not coincidentally, all of whom are lesser sociolinguists than she was). Ruqaiya was an appreciative but also very critical reader of Vygotsky. Sometimes, when I am reading her thoughts on Vygotsky I feel like she is holding the book upside down, but then when I read it again I find that I am the one standing on my head. For example, one of the great advantages that Hasan finds in Vygotsky is not that he distinguishes between the higher and lower psychological functions. As far as Ruqaiya was concerned there was a bit too much of that around, and there still is. Instead, Ruqaiya finds that Vygotsky's strength is being able to link them together, precisely through his studies of children, including the biological and the social in a single complex unit of analysis (e.g. phonology AND lexicogrammar in a single dimension, which Vygotsky calls "phasal"). Ruqaiya doesn't mean that "signalization" is tied to "signification"--she is too much of a linguist and too much of a dialectician not to see the huge gap between them. But she does think that the word values (or, as she would prefer it, the "wording values") that are the bases for signification are Whorfian, Sapirian social co-generalizations. These are biological in the sense that they are huntable, gatherable, herdable, farmable, reproducible. They are also, in materialized form, edible and wearable: they are often made out of economic interests: they are exchange values, like the exchange value of any commodity they evolve from use values based in adapting the environment to human needs. Take a look at this. I think it is probably literally the last public lecture Vygotsky ever gave, and as far as I know it's never been translated into any language (except now Korean). I'm including the Russian because my own Russian is...well, lousy, and I keep hoping some of the Russophones on the list may catch some errors before it goes to press in February. In it, Vygotsky is trying to show exactly what Ruqaiya was talking about: the way in which the child goes from "non-co-generalized" thinking to co-generalized thinking. It's not a step. It's not a leap. It's a whole set of leaps, some of which depend on parents, professionals, and political activists. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 9:04 AM, Peter Feigenbaum [Staff] < pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu> wrote: > Dear colleagues, > > As a representative of the category *Slow Responder* (I am a busy > professional, a husband, a father of two, and a political activist), I > am only now getting around to replying to those who responded to my > earlier request for help. My apologies if my pace is too slow for a > satisfying exchange. > > Because I was fairly vague about my reason for asking for a reference > to first and second signal systems in Vygotsky's writings, I > unwittingly opened the door to discussion of the differences between > *signals* and *signs*. In fact, my interest is in their > *similarities*, in the properties that are common to both. I am > seeking the common denominator between animal stimulus-response thinking and human initiation-response thinking. > Fortunately, that linkage exists precisely where David Kellogg pointed me: > in Vol. 4, on p.55 of HDHMF in Vygotsky's Collected Works in English. > > Vygotsky is very clear when he distinguishes between *natural* signals > (or > signalization) and *artificial* signs (or signification). The former > occurs when animals interact with the environment and their brains > form conditioned reflexes, whereas the latter occurs when humans > invent their own conditioned reflexes (words) and then apply those > reflexes to themselves (or others) in order to master their own > behavior. In essence, Vygotsky considered *signification* a special case of *signalization*. > > One issue I had not counted on is the historical/political one. I was > unprepared for the possibility that the first and second signal > systems may have been a political problem of accommodation to the > authorities rather than an actual scientific problem. Thanks to Mike > for pointing that out, and for pointing out A.R. Luria's fairly > substantial contribution to the discussion--but especially for > contacting (the wonderful and brilliant) Tanya Akhutina! > > I'm not quite sure how to make good use of Huw's suggestion about > serial and parallel circuits, so I'll have to put that issue to the side for now. > But thanks for raising it. > > In light of the ongoing discussion about how to create a more > gender-sensitive and gender-balanced dialogue on this listserv, I > would like to invite anyone who is lurking (or very busy) to > contribute any useful information you may have about my request *in your own good time*. > These problems are complicated, and I'm learning to be patient. > > Thanks to all. > > In solidarity, > Peter > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 6:55 PM, mike cole wrote: > > > Peter -- Concerning your initial question. I obtained the following > answer > > from Tanya Akhutina. > > > > ????, > > ?????? ??????? ? ?????? ?????????? ??????? ? 1932 ?. ?????????????? > > ?????????? ? ??? ????? ????? ?????? ? 33 ? 34 ?????. ? ????? > > ?????????? ? ?????????? ?? ?????. > > ??? - ?????? ????, ?? ?????? ??? ??? ????????. ?? ???? ?????? ????? > > ????? ???????????, ??????? ???, ?????? ???? ?.?.??????????. ?? > > ???????????? ? ??????? ????? ?????????? ?????? ???? ????? ???????? ? > > ????? ?????? ?? > ???. > > 144: " ?.?. ????????? ???? ?????????? ??????, ? ? ??? ??????? > > ?????????? ??????? ? ??????? ??????? ???????????????? ????? ???? > > ????????, ?? ??? ?? ????? ??????, ??????? ?? ??? ?????, ?????????? > > ?? ?????? ????????? > ?????". > > > > Roughly, > > Mike, > > Pavlov wrote about the second signal system in 1932. > > Correspondingly, references/rememberances to it had to wait until > > 1933-34. Such > references/ > > rememberances in Vygotsky I do not recall. > > > > ARL was another case, he was obligated to speak in this way. Olga > Sergeevna > > Vinogradova, a student of ARL's [with whom I conducted research in > > the winter of 1962/63-mc] is cited by Lena Luria [Luria's daughter] > > in her > book > > on p. 144 "A.R. new the teachings of Pavlov perfectly, and in his > lectures > > he changed the lexicon and the beauty of a straightforward > > psychological language was replaced, but none the less the knowledge > > which he gave us remained on the the level of real science." > > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 3:42 PM, mike cole wrote: > > > > > It seems that side-by-side translations of the two documents merit > > > archival publication, David. JREEP is an obvious repository. In > addition > > to > > > which at present we have a good deal more evidence about children, > chess > > > boards, and the issues vexing Vygotsky than he had access to. The > > > non/difficult chronology of the texts complicates an already > complicated > > > process of interpretation as we have long witnessed here. > > > > > > Perhaps as a separate thread, it would be nice to put together a > > > discussion of the core linkages between Vygotsky and Halliday in > > > your work..... one of those chains of discussion that come and go. > > > Perhaps a mini-course devoted to the following, to me, essential idea: > > > > > > It seems to me that ALL of these are signalization systems (not > > > signifying systems, because they do not have lexicogrammar and > > > cannot convey ideal values) > > > > > > Providing a "cheat sheet" for autodidacts, might it be possible to > create > > > some > > > "field of interest" in the xmca discussion for dealing with this idea? > > > > > > I have in no way forgotten the issue of the relation of > > > microgenesis > and > > > ontogenesis. It seems another "key point" as most of us go about > > > using > > CHAT > > > ideas in the course of the teaching/learning activities that pay > > > the > > bread > > > and butter. As matters stand, I offer Franklin in the blocks as an > > example > > > of microgenesis in a preschool classroom involving play as an > > > example > of > > a > > > zone of proximal development where childre are a head taller than > > > themselves. That discussion is for the microgenesis/ontogenesis > > > thread > > if I > > > recall. > > > > > > I would be VERY interested to learn of ways that feminist, queer > theory, > > > critical disability studies theory, neurodiversity theory, and > > > others > can > > > help me to understand these categories and the theories that > > > purport to account for them. > > > > > > If they need to be re-thought, might as well be here. Ain't goin > nowhere. > > > > > > mike > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 2:28 PM, David Kellogg > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > >> I'm working with two versions of one of Vygotsky's last lectures > > >> (the second version is given exactly five days before he was > > >> brought home > > with > > >> a > > >> throat haemorrhage to die, the first about a year earlier). There > > >> are passages that are almost word for word repetitions. There are > > >> passages that are semantically the same and but quite differently > > >> worded (the > earlier > > >> Vygotsky is quite modest and tentative; the later Vygotsky is > > >> much > more > > >> critical and also more confident). Then there are passages that > > >> say > > pretty > > >> much the opposite of what was said a year earlier: for example, > > >> in the early lecture Vygotsky says that a child faced with a > > >> chessboard who doesn't know how to play will see it structurally > > >> and sort the pieces > by > > >> color (black pieces on black squares, white on white) but in the > > >> later lecture it is the child who does know how to play who sees > > >> it structurally, because the child sees a black knight in a > > >> "structure" with a white > > pawn. > > >> He's a genius, and geniuses tend to think things over a lot, > > >> turning > > them > > >> this way and that, and never looking at anything as final, not > > >> even > when > > >> they are about to die. > > >> > > >> HDHMF has to be read the same way. Vygotsky cannot quite seem to > > >> make > up > > >> his mind whether there are three stages of higher behavior > > >> (instinct, habit, intelligence) or four different stages of > > >> higher behavior (instinct, habit, intelligence, and freedom). In > > >> Chapter Four, he very clearly > > argues > > >> for four or more, but in Chapter Five, which may have been > > >> written > much > > >> earlier, he argues for three but then three paragraphs later > > >> considers > > it > > >> safer to begin as Thorndike does with two levels (unconditional > > >> and conditional responses). So "signal" vs. "signification" could > > >> just be > > seen > > >> as the difference between unconditional and conditional > > >> responses, or > it > > >> could be seen as the difference between instinct and > > >> intelligence, or > it > > >> could be seen as two poles with an almost infinite number of > > >> genetic variations in between. I prefer the latter view, but I > > >> recognize that Vygotsky has to package things pretty differently > > >> for different > > audiences, > > >> and we are not one of the audiences that he has foremost in his mind. > > >> > > >> Take bacteria. Bacteria are apparently capable of quorum sensing: > > >> that > > is, > > >> bacteria don't multiply when there are no other bacteria around, > > >> they > do > > >> when there are some but not too many, and they don't when there > > >> are > too > > >> many. Now, take ants. Ants have a system of finding new nests > > >> that involves scouting for potential sites. If the site is > > >> extremely good, they go > > back > > >> and take other ants there quickly, but if it is not so good they > > >> tend > to > > >> dawdle a little, with the result that the best site gets more > > >> ants, > and > > at > > >> a certain point the whole nest "decides" to move there. Now, take > > >> bees. Like ants, bees go scouting. The scouts come back and they > dance; > > >> the > > >> dances attract more or fewer onlookers, and when a quorum is > > >> reached, > > the > > >> hive moves. It seems to me that ALL of these are signalization > > >> systems (not signifying systems, because they do not have > > >> lexicogrammar and cannot convey ideal values) but the difference > > >> between the ant system and > the > > >> bee > > >> system is as big as the difference between the bee system and > > >> early > > child > > >> language. For ants, the scouting and decision making are not > > >> differentiated, but for bees they are distinct moments--so the > > >> ant > > system > > >> involves a simple signal system and the bee system involves a > > >> second signal system. > > >> > > >> David Kellogg > > >> Macquarie University > > >> > > >> On Sun, Oct 30, 2016 at 3:45 AM, wrote: > > >> > > >> > In this discussion The center of this relational exploration is > > between > > >> > signalization AND signification and my question goes back to > > >> > the > place > > >> of > > >> > the general term *gesturing*. > > >> > Is this signalization or is this phenomena signification. > > >> > The act creating actual*ity (sens) which always includes > > >> > tendency or orientation towards or away from something. > > >> > The act is gestural acts and implies *each in the other*. > > >> > > > >> > The relation of gestural receiving and responding and this > > >> > phenomena > > in > > >> > relation to signalization and signification. > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > >> > > > >> > From: Huw Lloyd > > >> > Sent: October 29, 2016 9:01 AM > > >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: XMCA-ers: Help needed finding LSV > > >> > references > to > > >> > *First*and *Second* Signal Systems > > >> > > > >> > Peter, > > >> > > > >> > If by signalisation you mean use of signs to influence > > >> > behaviour in > > >> terms > > >> > of operational criteria and speech, then yes this is so. It > > >> > has > been > > >> > studied quite systematically, but is perhaps less well known. I > > >> > can elaborate on this if this is your drift. > > >> > > > >> > Best, > > >> > Huw > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > On 28 October 2016 at 22:43, Peter Feigenbaum [Staff] < > > >> > pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu> wrote: > > >> > > > >> > > David, > > >> > > > > >> > > As usual, your suggestions are both helpful and erudite. > > >> > > Thanks > for > > >> the > > >> > > poignant references to Vygotsky and to Marx. Although Soviet > > academic > > >> > > politics may have complicated the issue, there does seem to > > >> > > be > some > > >> > > substance to the argument that the nervous systems of animals > > >> > > and > > the > > >> > > speech communication systems of humans share the common > > >> > > property > of > > >> > > *signalization*. Personally, I think there's a lot more to > > >> > > this > > topic > > >> > than > > >> > > meets the eye--or, better yet, there's a lot of opportunity > > >> > > here > for > > >> > > developing the problem further. > > >> > > > > >> > > Once again, I owe an intellectual debt to the participants of > > >> > > this listserv! > > >> > > > > >> > > Cheers, > > >> > > Peter > > >> > > > > >> > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 5:10 PM, David Kellogg < > > dkellogg60@gmail.com> > > >> > > wrote: > > >> > > > > >> > > > Peter: > > >> > > > > > >> > > > I think Mike's right. The "second signal system" was an > > >> > > > attempt > to > > >> > > preserve > > >> > > > the idea of higher psychological functions in an atmosphere > > >> > > > that > > was > > >> > not > > >> > > > that different from what was going on in America at the > > >> > > > same > time > > >> (and > > >> > > > which Mike experienced first hand in both places). When I > > >> > > > read > > >> > Belyayev's > > >> > > > work on foreign language teaching, he talks a lot about the > > "second > > >> > > signal > > >> > > > system". There, are, however, two places in Vygotsky which > > >> > > > MIGHT > > >> > provide > > >> > > > some support, if you wanted to make the case that the > > >> > > > "second > > signal > > >> > > > system" is not completely incompatible with Vygotsky. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > One is Chapter Two of the History of the Development of the > Higher > > >> > Mental > > >> > > > functions. See below. Starting around paragraph 142, > > >> > > > Vygotsky > > likens > > >> > > > Pavlov's model of the brain as a telephone exchange. The > problem, > > of > > >> > > > course, is that back then telephone exchanges did require > > >> > > > human > > >> > operators > > >> > > > to make the connection! > > >> > > > > > >> > > > The other is the discussion of "second order symbolism" in > > >> > > > the > > work > > >> of > > >> > > > Delacroix, which you can find in Chapter Six of Thinking > > >> > > > and > > Speech > > >> and > > >> > > > also in Chapter 7 of HDHMF (fifth para). This is a very > different > > >> > > > notion--it's the idea that writing is a set of symbols for > > speaking. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > David Kellogg > > >> > > > Macquarie University > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >From HDHMF, Chapter Two, Research Method > > >> > > > > > >> > > > We know that, as Pavlov says, ?the most general bases of > > >> > > > higher > > >> nervous > > >> > > > activity are ascribed to the large hemispheres, the same in > > >> > > > both > > >> higher > > >> > > > animals and in people, and for this reason even elementary > > >> phenomena of > > >> > > > this activity must be identical in the one and in the other > > >> > > > in > > both > > >> > > normal > > >> > > > and pathological cases? (1951, p. 15). Actually, this can > scarcely > > >> be > > >> > > > disputed. But as soon as we go from the elementary > > >> > > > phenomena of > > >> higher > > >> > > > nervous activity to the complex, to the higher phenomena > > >> > > > within > > this > > >> > > higher > > >> > > > ? in the physiological sense ? activity, then two different > > >> > > methodological > > >> > > > paths for studying the specific uniqueness of human higher > > behavior > > >> > open > > >> > > > before us. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > One is the path to further study of complication, > > >> > > > enrichment, > and > > >> > > > differentiation of the same phenomena that experimental > > >> > > > study > > >> > ascertains > > >> > > in > > >> > > > animals. Here, on this path, the greatest restraint must be > > >> observed. > > >> > In > > >> > > > transferring information on higher nervous activity of > > >> > > > animals > to > > >> > higher > > >> > > > activity of man, we must constantly check the factual > similarities > > >> in > > >> > the > > >> > > > function of organs in man and animals, but in general the > > principle > > >> > > itself > > >> > > > of the research remains the same as it was in the study of > > animals. > > >> > This > > >> > > is > > >> > > > the path of physiological study. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > True, this circumstance is of major significance and in the > > >> > > > area > > of > > >> > > > physiological study of behavior, in a comparative study of > > >> > > > man > and > > >> > > animals, > > >> > > > we must not put the function of the heart, stomach, and > > >> > > > other > > organs > > >> > > which > > >> > > > are so similar to that of man on the same plane with higher > > nervous > > >> > > > activity. In the words of I. P. Pavlov, ?It is specifically > > >> > > > this > > >> > activity > > >> > > > that so strikingly sets man apart from the rank of animals, > > >> > > > that > > >> places > > >> > > man > > >> > > > immeasurably above the whole animal world? (ibid. p. 414). > > >> > > > And > we > > >> might > > >> > > > expect that along the path of physiological research we > > >> > > > will > find > > a > > >> > > > specific qualitative difference in human activity. Let us > > >> > > > recall > > the > > >> > > words > > >> > > > of Pavlov cited above on the quantitative and qualitative > > >> > incomparability > > >> > > > of the word with conditioned stimuli of animals. Even in > > >> > > > the > plan > > of > > >> > > strict > > >> > > > physiological consideration, ?the grandiose signalistics of > > speech? > > >> > > stands > > >> > > > outside the whole other mass of stimuli, the > > >> > > > ?multicapaciousness > > of > > >> the > > >> > > > word? places it in a unique position. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > The other path is the path of psychological research. From > > >> > > > the > > very > > >> > > > beginning, it proposes to seek the specific uniqueness of > > >> > > > human > > >> > behavior > > >> > > > which does take us beyond the initial point. The specific > > >> uniqueness is > > >> > > > considered not only in its subsequent complexity and > development, > > >> > > > quantitative and qualitative refinement of the cerebral > > hemispheres, > > >> > but > > >> > > > primarily in the social nature of man and in a new method > > >> > > > of > > >> > adaptation, > > >> > > as > > >> > > > compared with animals, that sets man apart. The main > > >> > > > difference > > >> between > > >> > > the > > >> > > > behavior of man and of animals consists not only in that > > >> > > > the > human > > >> > brain > > >> > > is > > >> > > > immeasurably above the brain of the dog and that the higher > > nervous > > >> > > > activity ?so strikingly sets man apart from the rank of > animals,? > > >> but > > >> > > most > > >> > > > of all, because it is the brain of a social being and > > >> > > > because > the > > >> laws > > >> > of > > >> > > > higher nervous activity of man are manifested and act in > > >> > > > the > human > > >> > > > personality. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > But let us return again to the ?most general bases of > > >> > > > higher > > nervous > > >> > > > activity, related to the cerebral hemispheres,? and > > >> > > > identical in > > >> higher > > >> > > > animals and man. We think that it is in this point that we > > >> > > > can > > >> disclose > > >> > > > with definitive clarity the difference of which we speak. > > >> > > > The > most > > >> > > general > > >> > > > basis of behavior, identical in man and animals, is > > *signalization.* > > >> > > Pavlov > > >> > > > said, ?So the basic and most general activity of the > > >> > > > cerebral > > >> > hemispheres > > >> > > > is signaling with an infinite number of signals and with > > changeable > > >> > > > signalization? (ibid., p. 30). As is known, this is the > > >> > > > most > > general > > >> > > > formulation of the whole idea of conditioned reflexes that > > >> > > > lies > at > > >> the > > >> > > base > > >> > > > of the physiology of higher nervous activity. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > But human behavior is distinguished exactly in that it > > >> > > > creates > > >> > artificial > > >> > > > signaling stimuli, primarily the grandiose signalization of > > speech, > > >> and > > >> > > in > > >> > > > this way masters the signaling activity of the cerebral > > >> hemispheres. If > > >> > > the > > >> > > > basic and most general activity of the cerebral hemispheres > > >> > > > in > > >> animals > > >> > > and > > >> > > > in man is signalization, then the basic and most general > activity > > of > > >> > man > > >> > > > that differentiates man from animals in the first place, > > >> > > > from > the > > >> > aspect > > >> > > of > > >> > > > psychology, is *signification,* that is, creation and use > > >> > > > of > > signs. > > >> We > > >> > > are > > >> > > > using this word in its most literal sense and precise meaning. > > >> > > > Signification is the creation and use of signs, that is, > > artificial > > >> > > > signals. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > We will consider more closely this new principle of > > >> > > > activity. It > > >> must > > >> > not > > >> > > > in any sense be contrasted with the principle of signalization. > > >> > > Changeable > > >> > > > signalization that results in the formation of temporary, > > >> conditional, > > >> > > > special connections between the organism and the > > >> > > > environment is > an > > >> > > > indispensable, biological prerequisite of the higher > > >> > > > activity > that > > >> we > > >> > > > arbitrarily call signification and is its base. The system > > >> > > > of > > >> > connections > > >> > > > that is established in the brain of an animal is a copy or > > >> reflection > > >> > of > > >> > > > natural connections between ?all kinds of agents of nature? > > >> > > > that > > >> signal > > >> > > the > > >> > > > arrival of immediately favorable or destructive phenomena. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > It is very obvious that such signalization ? a reflection > > >> > > > of the > > >> > natural > > >> > > > connection of phenomena, wholly created by natural > > >> > > > conditions ? > > >> cannot > > >> > be > > >> > > > an adequate basis of human behavior. For human adaptation, > > >> > > > an > > active > > >> > > > *change > > >> > > > in the nature of man *is essential. It is the basis of all > > >> > > > human > > >> > history. > > >> > > > It necessarily presupposes an active change in man?s behavior. > > >> > ?Affecting > > >> > > > the environment by this movement and changing it, he > > >> > > > changes his > > own > > >> > > nature > > >> > > > at the same time,? says Marx. ?He develops forces asleep in > > >> > > > it > and > > >> > > subjects > > >> > > > the play of these forces to his own will? (K. Marx and F. > Engels, > > >> > > > *Collected > > >> > > > Works,* Vol. 23, pp. 188-189 > > >> > > > > >> > > > 3A__www.marxists.org_archive_marx_works_1867-2Dc1_ch07.htm- > > >> > > > 23forces&d=DQIFaQ&c=aqMfXOEvEJQh2iQMCb7Wy8l0sPnURk > > cqADc2guUW8IM&r= > > >> > > > mXj3yhpYNklTxyN3KioIJ0ECmPHilpf4N2p9PBMATWs&m= > > >> > cxiDdHmIrHosSMq59vJlZ4j-S- > > >> > > > 4h5DSiLaMzqzi2yNA&s=J3sZBxFP1DTk3B8MLGJTyEw- > > RZmpA347cJfMSUrwSa4&e= > > >> >). > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 7:50 AM, Peter Feigenbaum [Staff] < > > >> > > > pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu> wrote: > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Mike, > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Thanks for the Luria references. From a cursory reading > > >> > > > > of > the > > >> > > relevant > > >> > > > > passages in the Luria & Yudovich book, and judging by > > >> > > > > some of > > the > > >> > other > > >> > > > > sources you listed, I get the impression that there > > >> > > > > hasn't > been > > >> much > > >> > > > > theoretical *fleshing out* of the structures of the > > >> > > > > second > > signal > > >> > > system. > > >> > > > > I hope that the concept of a first and second signal > > >> > > > > system is > > not > > >> > > just a > > >> > > > > political argument, but instead has some real substance. > > >> > > > > I > find > > it > > >> > hard > > >> > > > to > > >> > > > > imagine that our *animal* (stimulus-response) system of > thinking > > >> is > > >> > > > > developmentally unrelated to our *human* (conversational > > >> > > > > initiation-response) system of thinking. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > If anyone else knows of any passages from Vygotsky > > >> > > > > related to > > this > > >> > > topic, > > >> > > > > please don't hold back! > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Much obliged. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > In solidarity, > > >> > > > > Peter > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 1:56 PM, mike cole > > >> > > > > > > >> wrote: > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Peter-- If you google Luria "second signal system" you > > >> > > > > > will > > >> come up > > >> > > > with > > >> > > > > > several references. There is a copy at luria.ucsd.edu > > >> > > > > > of > his > > >> > little > > >> > > > book > > >> > > > > > with Yudovich on twins that uses that language. > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > It is not online (so far as i know), but Luria's > > >> > > > > > article on > > >> "Speech > > >> > > > > > development and the formation of mental processes" in > > >> > > > > > Cole > and > > >> > > > > > Maltzman, *Handbook > > >> > > > > > of Soviet Psychology. *Basic Books, 1969 uses this term > > >> > > > > > a > lot. > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > I believe you will find an upsurge of usage associated > > >> > > > > > with > > the > > >> > late > > >> > > > > > 1940's-50's when Vygotskians were under severe attack, > > >> > > > > > there > > >> were > > >> > > > special > > >> > > > > > "Pavlov sessions" where they had to recant their > > >> > > > > > errors, and > > the > > >> > use > > >> > > of > > >> > > > > > first and second signal system by Pavlov allowed them a > > >> > > > > > life line to orthodoxy. > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > mike > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Peter Feigenbaum > > >> > > > > > [Staff] < pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu> wrote: > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Dear colleagues, > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > I don't wish to detract in any way from the very > > >> > > > > > > serious > and > > >> > > > absolutely > > >> > > > > > > necessary discussion about male sensitivity (or > > >> > > > > > > should I > say > > >> > > > > > insensitivity) > > >> > > > > > > to the voices of the women inhabiting this list, but > > >> > > > > > > I > sure > > >> could > > >> > > use > > >> > > > > > your > > >> > > > > > > collective help with a small matter of scholarship. I > > >> > > > > > > am > > >> trying > > >> > to > > >> > > > > locate > > >> > > > > > > any passages in LSV's Collected Works in English in > > >> > > > > > > which > he > > >> > refers > > >> > > > to > > >> > > > > > the > > >> > > > > > > *first* and *second* signal systems. > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > My understanding is that Vygotsky considers the first > signal > > >> > system > > >> > > > as > > >> > > > > > the > > >> > > > > > > biologically inherited stimulus-response (S-R) system > > >> > > > > > > of > > >> reflexes > > >> > > as > > >> > > > > > > described by Pavlov, whereas the second signal system > refers > > >> to > > >> > the > > >> > > > > > > culturally inherited system of initiation-response > > >> > > > > > > that is > > >> > > particular > > >> > > > > to > > >> > > > > > > human conversational activity. I am working with the > > >> hypothesis > > >> > > that, > > >> > > > > in > > >> > > > > > > ontogenetic development, the first signal system > > >> > > > > > > becomes > > >> > > > *domesticated* > > >> > > > > > by, > > >> > > > > > > and ultimately subordinated to, the second signal system. > > That > > >> > is, > > >> > > > the > > >> > > > > > S-R > > >> > > > > > > form of thinking becomes developmentally transformed > > >> > > > > > > into > > the > > >> > > > > > > Initiation-Response form of thinking that is > characteristic > > >> of a > > >> > > > person > > >> > > > > > > performing a listening-speaking turn in conversation. > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > If any of the wonderful scholars on this list could > > >> > > > > > > help > > point > > >> > this > > >> > > > > poor, > > >> > > > > > > stumbling colleague > > >> > > > > > > in the right direction, I would be most grateful. > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Warm wishes to all, > > >> > > > > > > Peter > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > p.s. -- Let me take this opportunity to express my > heartfelt > > >> > thanks > > >> > > > to > > >> > > > > > Mike > > >> > > > > > > for creating this list in the first place, and with > > >> > > > > > > it the > > >> > > > opportunity > > >> > > > > > for > > >> > > > > > > Vygotskian scholars the world over to share and > > >> > > > > > > discuss > our > > >> ideas > > >> > > in > > >> > > > an > > >> > > > > > > open and honest forum. For my part, I pledge to do my > level > > >> best > > >> > to > > >> > > > > raise > > >> > > > > > > my own consciousness where it is deficient so that my > > >> > participation > > >> > > > in > > >> > > > > > this > > >> > > > > > > forum will be as inclusive and respectful to all of > > >> > > > > > > its > > >> > > participants > > >> > > > as > > >> > > > > > is > > >> > > > > > > humanly possible. > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > -- > > >> > > > > > > Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. > > >> > > > > > > Director, > > >> > > > > > > Office of Institutional Research > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > provos/office_of_institutio/index.asp> > > >> > > > > > > Fordham University > > >> > > > > > > Thebaud Hall-202 > > >> > > > > > > Bronx, NY 10458 > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Phone: (718) 817-2243 > > >> > > > > > > Fax: (718) 817-3817 > > >> > > > > > > email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > -- > > >> > > > > Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. > > >> > > > > Director, > > >> > > > > Office of Institutional Research > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > provos/office_of_institutio/index.asp> > > >> > > > > Fordham University > > >> > > > > Thebaud Hall-202 > > >> > > > > Bronx, NY 10458 > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Phone: (718) 817-2243 > > >> > > > > Fax: (718) 817-3817 > > >> > > > > email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > -- > > >> > > Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. > > >> > > Director, > > >> > > Office of Institutional Research > > >> > > > >> > > office_of_institutio/index.asp> Fordham University Thebaud > > >> > > Hall-202 Bronx, NY 10458 > > >> > > > > >> > > Phone: (718) 817-2243 > > >> > > Fax: (718) 817-3817 > > >> > > email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. > Director, > Office of Institutional Research > provos/office_of_institutio/index.asp> > Fordham University > Thebaud Hall-202 > Bronx, NY 10458 > > Phone: (718) 817-2243 > Fax: (718) 817-3817 > email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu > ________________________________ [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif] This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on it. If you have received this email in error please let the sender know immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University accepts no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan emails and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept responsibility for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless accompanied by an official order form. From mcole@ucsd.edu Fri Nov 4 08:43:38 2016 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 08:43:38 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: References: <00ab01d235fe$c29c1560$47d44020$@edu> <581b82bd.5207620a.9f848.0978@mx.google.com> Message-ID: David-- Is this equivalent to what Vygotsky referred to as chaining? But one of the results that cognitive scientists have clearly established is that human reasoning, in general, is associative, not logical. Our conceptual structures are associatively linked, meaning that concepts conjure up other, related concepts. Our reasoning is a kind of juggling of these linked concepts. Unsure. mike On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 8:29 AM, David H Kirshner wrote: > Annalisa, > > Recognizing that Jacob and others may see it differently, I agree with you > that logic is not gendered. > I do disagree, though, with your final statement that "Logic isn't a > Western invention, by the way. It's very much part of human cognition." > > What I think is sustainable is the position that reasoning is very much a > part of human cognition. But one of the results that cognitive scientists > have clearly established is that human reasoning, in general, is > associative, not logical. Our conceptual structures are associatively > linked, meaning that concepts conjure up other, related concepts. Our > reasoning is a kind of juggling of these linked concepts. > > One of the classical studies that established this perspective concerns > Margie the bank teller: > > Margie is bright, single, 31 year old, outspoken, and concerned with > issues of social justice. > What is more likely > > A) Margie is a bank teller, or > B) Margie is a bank teller and Margie is a feminist. > > (If you're not familiar with this problem, take a moment to answer it.) > ... > > > The logical analysis holds that Margie is more likely to be a bank teller > than both a bank teller and a feminist because choice A includes the > possibility that Margie is a bank teller and a feminist as well as the > possibility that Margie is a bank teller and not a feminist, but choice B > includes only one of those possibilities. > > But the vast majority of subjects tested select choice B, which the > cognitive psychologists take as indicating that we are guided by our > associations to people like Margie rather than by the logical conditions of > the problem. > > In my view, logic as a discursive form--a technology of thought--is a > Western invention. Whether it is identified as "male" because of historical > association or biological predisposition, I don't know, and I should add, I > don't care. (Jacob, the science of biologically based sex differences in > cognition has not been "debunked." Rather, feminist scholars have rightly > pointed out that the data are inconclusive, and that prior assertions of > biologically based sex differences in cognition over-interpret the > scientific results.) Neither history nor biology is determinative, and > logic is too important a part of our cultural legacy to deny any individual > or group the opportunity to master it. > > David > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Annalisa Aguilar > Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 12:28 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity ; Vera > John-Steiner > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse > > Hi, > > About logic: to Greg M., Actually, I thought it was Jacob who discussed > logic in gendered discourse. Unless you brought it up a long time ago in > the group he references. I was under the impression that he had attempted > to bring it up a few times in the past. Or am I mistaken? > > In his reply on timestamped Nov 03, 08:30:41 he stated: > > "Not to beat the proverbial dead horse, but several listserv > members--including me--have tried to introduce this position re: logic in > prior xmca threads. The position has mostly either been ignored or loudly > rejected out of hand by more vocal participants on this listserv." > > So I was responding to that paragraph. > > I am not clear about Jacob's position but my position is that logic is an > intellectual tool, just like intuition can be an emotional tool. Insight > might be a combination of both logic and intuition. But nothing about logic > makes it male, as I see it, no matter how much men might assert that to be > the case. > > Logic is reasoning in a particular way with the mind, and any human can > partake in it if one wants. You can't perform logic with your elbows and > knees. Counting has a logic. So does self-preservation. > > What one does with logic has to do with one's values. If your values are > for a pure race, for example, you can certainly use logic to rationalize > activities that purify race however you might want to define it. Does that > make logic a tool to create meaning that is essentially determined by > power? Or is it just abuse of logic to assert one's power (over others, > which is actually being powerless, since one who is truly powerful does not > require power over others), which at its basis, is meaningless? > > Also, I don't think that Rein was saying gender is fluid. He said it is > constructed: > > "... in other words, what cultures have "naturalized" as divisions into > genders are more often than not constructions erected by a gender group in > order to dominate others. Such construction, I would argue, can only be > taken down with arguments that follow a logic which itself is not gendered, > because if it were, it would be a contestant in the field, not the referee." > > I believe if I read him as he wanted to be read, I think he's saying that > logic is not gendered, which I agree with. The fact that we can say "a > logic" means the application of that logic has a boundary, but it doesn't > mean that this logic is different than that logic. It means if I use a > hammer on a house, I can also use it to bash in skulls. The tool is the > same, the application is different, as are the values motivating its use. > The boundaries are the objectives for using the logic, not the logic > itself. Of course we can bicker over the forms of mallets, claw hammers, or > rocks for hitting things and their differences, but the activity of > hammering is the same. The values, motivations, and objectives are > different, which offer the boundary, however the activity remains the same > despite those boundaries. > > Logic isn't a Western invention, by the way. It's very much part of human > cognition. Rationalism I suppose could be Western, but I reserve the right > to be wrong about that. > > Kind regards, > > > Annalisa > > From boblake@georgiasouthern.edu Fri Nov 4 09:05:30 2016 From: boblake@georgiasouthern.edu (Robert Lake) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 12:05:30 -0400 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: References: <00ab01d235fe$c29c1560$47d44020$@edu> <581b82bd.5207620a.9f848.0978@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Hi Mike, David, Annalisa and Everyone, Tricia Kress ( U Mass Boston) and I are researching these topics for a book on social imagination we are writing so this thread is very timely. I am also thinking about Mark Turner's notion of "conceptual blending" in connection to "chaining" and associative reasoning. see http://markturner.org/blending.html Could it be that this is in evidence in "preliterate" cultures and predates "Western" thought a la Plato, Aristotle not to mention Descartes and the boys? This is a sincere, non rhetorical question. *Robert Lake* On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 11:43 AM, mike cole wrote: > David-- > > Is this equivalent to what Vygotsky referred to as chaining? > > But one of the results that cognitive scientists have clearly established > is that human reasoning, in general, is associative, not logical. Our > conceptual structures are associatively linked, meaning that concepts > conjure up other, related concepts. Our reasoning is a kind of juggling of > these linked concepts. > > Unsure. > > mike > > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 8:29 AM, David H Kirshner wrote: > > > Annalisa, > > > > Recognizing that Jacob and others may see it differently, I agree with > you > > that logic is not gendered. > > I do disagree, though, with your final statement that "Logic isn't a > > Western invention, by the way. It's very much part of human cognition." > > > > What I think is sustainable is the position that reasoning is very much a > > part of human cognition. But one of the results that cognitive scientists > > have clearly established is that human reasoning, in general, is > > associative, not logical. Our conceptual structures are associatively > > linked, meaning that concepts conjure up other, related concepts. Our > > reasoning is a kind of juggling of these linked concepts. > > > > One of the classical studies that established this perspective concerns > > Margie the bank teller: > > > > Margie is bright, single, 31 year old, outspoken, and concerned with > > issues of social justice. > > What is more likely > > > > A) Margie is a bank teller, or > > B) Margie is a bank teller and Margie is a feminist. > > > > (If you're not familiar with this problem, take a moment to answer it.) > > ... > > > > > > The logical analysis holds that Margie is more likely to be a bank teller > > than both a bank teller and a feminist because choice A includes the > > possibility that Margie is a bank teller and a feminist as well as the > > possibility that Margie is a bank teller and not a feminist, but choice B > > includes only one of those possibilities. > > > > But the vast majority of subjects tested select choice B, which the > > cognitive psychologists take as indicating that we are guided by our > > associations to people like Margie rather than by the logical conditions > of > > the problem. > > > > In my view, logic as a discursive form--a technology of thought--is a > > Western invention. Whether it is identified as "male" because of > historical > > association or biological predisposition, I don't know, and I should > add, I > > don't care. (Jacob, the science of biologically based sex differences in > > cognition has not been "debunked." Rather, feminist scholars have rightly > > pointed out that the data are inconclusive, and that prior assertions of > > biologically based sex differences in cognition over-interpret the > > scientific results.) Neither history nor biology is determinative, and > > logic is too important a part of our cultural legacy to deny any > individual > > or group the opportunity to master it. > > > > David > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Annalisa Aguilar > > Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 12:28 AM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity ; Vera > > John-Steiner > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse > > > > Hi, > > > > About logic: to Greg M., Actually, I thought it was Jacob who discussed > > logic in gendered discourse. Unless you brought it up a long time ago in > > the group he references. I was under the impression that he had attempted > > to bring it up a few times in the past. Or am I mistaken? > > > > In his reply on timestamped Nov 03, 08:30:41 he stated: > > > > "Not to beat the proverbial dead horse, but several listserv > > members--including me--have tried to introduce this position re: logic in > > prior xmca threads. The position has mostly either been ignored or loudly > > rejected out of hand by more vocal participants on this listserv." > > > > So I was responding to that paragraph. > > > > I am not clear about Jacob's position but my position is that logic is an > > intellectual tool, just like intuition can be an emotional tool. Insight > > might be a combination of both logic and intuition. But nothing about > logic > > makes it male, as I see it, no matter how much men might assert that to > be > > the case. > > > > Logic is reasoning in a particular way with the mind, and any human can > > partake in it if one wants. You can't perform logic with your elbows and > > knees. Counting has a logic. So does self-preservation. > > > > What one does with logic has to do with one's values. If your values are > > for a pure race, for example, you can certainly use logic to rationalize > > activities that purify race however you might want to define it. Does > that > > make logic a tool to create meaning that is essentially determined by > > power? Or is it just abuse of logic to assert one's power (over others, > > which is actually being powerless, since one who is truly powerful does > not > > require power over others), which at its basis, is meaningless? > > > > Also, I don't think that Rein was saying gender is fluid. He said it is > > constructed: > > > > "... in other words, what cultures have "naturalized" as divisions into > > genders are more often than not constructions erected by a gender group > in > > order to dominate others. Such construction, I would argue, can only be > > taken down with arguments that follow a logic which itself is not > gendered, > > because if it were, it would be a contestant in the field, not the > referee." > > > > I believe if I read him as he wanted to be read, I think he's saying that > > logic is not gendered, which I agree with. The fact that we can say "a > > logic" means the application of that logic has a boundary, but it doesn't > > mean that this logic is different than that logic. It means if I use a > > hammer on a house, I can also use it to bash in skulls. The tool is the > > same, the application is different, as are the values motivating its use. > > The boundaries are the objectives for using the logic, not the logic > > itself. Of course we can bicker over the forms of mallets, claw hammers, > or > > rocks for hitting things and their differences, but the activity of > > hammering is the same. The values, motivations, and objectives are > > different, which offer the boundary, however the activity remains the > same > > despite those boundaries. > > > > Logic isn't a Western invention, by the way. It's very much part of human > > cognition. Rationalism I suppose could be Western, but I reserve the > right > > to be wrong about that. > > > > Kind regards, > > > > > > Annalisa > > > > > -- Robert Lake Ed.D. Associate Professor Social Foundations of Education Dept. of Curriculum, Foundations, and Reading Georgia Southern University P. O. Box 8144, Statesboro, GA 30460 Secretary/Treasurer-AERA- Paulo Freire Special Interest Group Webpage: https://georgiasouthern.academia.edu/RobertLake*Democracy must be born anew in every generation, and education is its midwife.* John Dewey-*Democracy and Education*,1916, p. 139 From dkirsh@lsu.edu Fri Nov 4 09:50:58 2016 From: dkirsh@lsu.edu (David H Kirshner) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 16:50:58 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: References: <00ab01d235fe$c29c1560$47d44020$@edu> <581b82bd.5207620a.9f848.0978@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Mike, In Bruner's prolog to the Collected Works (1987), he states: For Vygotsky, becoming human implies the "centralizing" or cerebralization of mental processes -- whether in development, in cultural history, or in phylogenesis. ... Processes go inward, and they are thereby made amenable to interaction with other processes. ... The existence of autonomous processes is a sign of immaturity, of pathology, or phylogenetic primitiveness. Perception operating on its own, for example, yields the symptomatology of mental subnormality. Through interaction, human mental processes become ordered, systemic, logical, and goal oriented. By the achievement of generative order we become free of the immediacy of sensation, free of the chaining of associations, capable of applying logic to practical application. (p. 15) If this is the Vygotskyan interpretation of chaining you're referring to, then yes, this would be the same concept of associative reasoning used by cognitive psychologists. But if Bruner has this right, Vygotsky, in keeping with Annalisa's interpretation, understood logic as not quite natural, but as normative for humans. Cognitive psychologists see associative reasoning as normative, with logic an esoteric accomplishment. I should add that even though actual logical reasoning is an esoteric accomplishment, (incorrect) logic-like forms imbue reasoning in literate societies. Logical inference is governed by two principles: Modus ponens asserts that given the conditional, if p then q, and the antecedent, p, one may deduce the truth of the consequent, q. (i.e., p --> q, and p, deduce q) and Modus tolens asserts that given the conditional, if p then q, and denial of the consequent, not q, one may deduce denial of the antecedent, not q. (i.e., p --> q, and ~q, deduce ~p) But logical misapplications are widespread in literate cultures: Asserting the conditional, if p then q, and the consequent, q, people incorrectly deduce the antecedent, p. (i.e., p --> q, and q, deduce p) and Asserting the conditional, if p then q, and denial of the antecedent, not p, people incorrectly deduce denial of the consequent, not q. (i.e., p --> q, and ~p, deduce ~q) (See Evans, 1982.) Evans, J. St. B. T. (1982). The psychology of deductive reasoning. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. David -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 10:44 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse David-- Is this equivalent to what Vygotsky referred to as chaining? But one of the results that cognitive scientists have clearly established is that human reasoning, in general, is associative, not logical. Our conceptual structures are associatively linked, meaning that concepts conjure up other, related concepts. Our reasoning is a kind of juggling of these linked concepts. Unsure. mike On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 8:29 AM, David H Kirshner wrote: > Annalisa, > > Recognizing that Jacob and others may see it differently, I agree with > you that logic is not gendered. > I do disagree, though, with your final statement that "Logic isn't a > Western invention, by the way. It's very much part of human cognition." > > What I think is sustainable is the position that reasoning is very > much a part of human cognition. But one of the results that cognitive > scientists have clearly established is that human reasoning, in > general, is associative, not logical. Our conceptual structures are > associatively linked, meaning that concepts conjure up other, related > concepts. Our reasoning is a kind of juggling of these linked concepts. > > One of the classical studies that established this perspective > concerns Margie the bank teller: > > Margie is bright, single, 31 year old, outspoken, and concerned with > issues of social justice. > What is more likely > > A) Margie is a bank teller, or > B) Margie is a bank teller and Margie is a feminist. > > (If you're not familiar with this problem, take a moment to answer > it.) ... > > > The logical analysis holds that Margie is more likely to be a bank > teller than both a bank teller and a feminist because choice A > includes the possibility that Margie is a bank teller and a feminist > as well as the possibility that Margie is a bank teller and not a > feminist, but choice B includes only one of those possibilities. > > But the vast majority of subjects tested select choice B, which the > cognitive psychologists take as indicating that we are guided by our > associations to people like Margie rather than by the logical > conditions of the problem. > > In my view, logic as a discursive form--a technology of thought--is a > Western invention. Whether it is identified as "male" because of > historical association or biological predisposition, I don't know, and > I should add, I don't care. (Jacob, the science of biologically based > sex differences in cognition has not been "debunked." Rather, feminist > scholars have rightly pointed out that the data are inconclusive, and > that prior assertions of biologically based sex differences in > cognition over-interpret the scientific results.) Neither history nor > biology is determinative, and logic is too important a part of our > cultural legacy to deny any individual or group the opportunity to master it. > > David > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Annalisa Aguilar > Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 12:28 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity ; Vera > John-Steiner > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse > > Hi, > > About logic: to Greg M., Actually, I thought it was Jacob who > discussed logic in gendered discourse. Unless you brought it up a long > time ago in the group he references. I was under the impression that > he had attempted to bring it up a few times in the past. Or am I mistaken? > > In his reply on timestamped Nov 03, 08:30:41 he stated: > > "Not to beat the proverbial dead horse, but several listserv > members--including me--have tried to introduce this position re: logic > in prior xmca threads. The position has mostly either been ignored or > loudly rejected out of hand by more vocal participants on this listserv." > > So I was responding to that paragraph. > > I am not clear about Jacob's position but my position is that logic is > an intellectual tool, just like intuition can be an emotional tool. > Insight might be a combination of both logic and intuition. But > nothing about logic makes it male, as I see it, no matter how much men > might assert that to be the case. > > Logic is reasoning in a particular way with the mind, and any human > can partake in it if one wants. You can't perform logic with your > elbows and knees. Counting has a logic. So does self-preservation. > > What one does with logic has to do with one's values. If your values > are for a pure race, for example, you can certainly use logic to > rationalize activities that purify race however you might want to > define it. Does that make logic a tool to create meaning that is > essentially determined by power? Or is it just abuse of logic to > assert one's power (over others, which is actually being powerless, > since one who is truly powerful does not require power over others), which at its basis, is meaningless? > > Also, I don't think that Rein was saying gender is fluid. He said it > is > constructed: > > "... in other words, what cultures have "naturalized" as divisions > into genders are more often than not constructions erected by a gender > group in order to dominate others. Such construction, I would argue, > can only be taken down with arguments that follow a logic which itself > is not gendered, because if it were, it would be a contestant in the field, not the referee." > > I believe if I read him as he wanted to be read, I think he's saying > that logic is not gendered, which I agree with. The fact that we can > say "a logic" means the application of that logic has a boundary, but > it doesn't mean that this logic is different than that logic. It means > if I use a hammer on a house, I can also use it to bash in skulls. The > tool is the same, the application is different, as are the values motivating its use. > The boundaries are the objectives for using the logic, not the logic > itself. Of course we can bicker over the forms of mallets, claw > hammers, or rocks for hitting things and their differences, but the > activity of hammering is the same. The values, motivations, and > objectives are different, which offer the boundary, however the > activity remains the same despite those boundaries. > > Logic isn't a Western invention, by the way. It's very much part of > human cognition. Rationalism I suppose could be Western, but I reserve > the right to be wrong about that. > > Kind regards, > > > Annalisa > > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Fri Nov 4 09:58:52 2016 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 16:58:52 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: References: <00ab01d235fe$c29c1560$47d44020$@edu> <581b82bd.5207620a.9f848.0978@mx.google.com> , , Message-ID: <1478278731285.71377@iped.uio.no> David, all, your post just reminds me of one of G. Bateson's arguments concerning logic, and which might be of relevance to this aspect of this thread. It seems that there is some concern in the discussion concerning the status of logic (as more or less defined tool that can be applied differently depending on the objectives, or as some form of reasoning that is in nature (not just objectives) different from others, and the product of Western history. Bateson made a distinction between (it was David's syllogism that sparked the connection) "Syllogisms in Barbara" and "Syllogisms in Grass". Syllogisms in Barbara are those one can find in classical logic: Men die; Socrates is a man; Socrates will die. "The basic structure of this little monster," Bateson writes, "is built upon classification. The predicate 'will die' is attached to Socrates by identifying him as a member of a class whose members share that predicate" (Bateson & Bateson, 1987, p. 26). In contrasts, Syllogism in Grass are the "'logic' o metaphor", and go like this: Grass die; Men die; Men are grass. This syllogisms, Bateson writes, "are the very stuff of which natural history is made." In Bateson (and I believe this would be in agreement with much of what a Marxist psychology would argue for), there is not one grand, exclusive logic that belongs to the human brain (cognition). He goes on to argue that biological forms have historically evolved in terms of syllogisms in grass. "Biological data make sense?are connected?by syllogisms in grass." In Bateson, thus, logic is a form of organisation; and a form of organisation not of things, but of processes of growth (and it is here where I think Bateson and Vygotsky make a good match). I think Bateson's distinction is interesting here because it allows nuancing the discussion on logic and gender. I believe that gendered facts exist and come to affect our lives both in terms of syllogisms of Barbara (formal logic), and in terms of syllogisms of grass (metaphor). However, I think that the former, which entails work of classification, need to be enforced and sustained by external means (e.g., institutions), as (feminist) researchers such as S. L. Star so convincingly showed in their research. They offer a frame for asking: what are the external measures being taken so that the classification system in which men get listed under some privileged categories, is being made effective? Most interesting, how are the two logics connected in developmental processes so that we sometime are able to draw syllogisms of the form: - women are human, - men are human, - women and men are equal. but still fall so often into perceptions, feelings, behaviours, etc ... that seem to mess all this up? It seems that changing our epistemology at the deeper level takes more than classical logic. Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of David H Kirshner Sent: 04 November 2016 16:29 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse Annalisa, Recognizing that Jacob and others may see it differently, I agree with you that logic is not gendered. I do disagree, though, with your final statement that "Logic isn't a Western invention, by the way. It's very much part of human cognition." What I think is sustainable is the position that reasoning is very much a part of human cognition. But one of the results that cognitive scientists have clearly established is that human reasoning, in general, is associative, not logical. Our conceptual structures are associatively linked, meaning that concepts conjure up other, related concepts. Our reasoning is a kind of juggling of these linked concepts. One of the classical studies that established this perspective concerns Margie the bank teller: Margie is bright, single, 31 year old, outspoken, and concerned with issues of social justice. What is more likely A) Margie is a bank teller, or B) Margie is a bank teller and Margie is a feminist. (If you're not familiar with this problem, take a moment to answer it.) ... The logical analysis holds that Margie is more likely to be a bank teller than both a bank teller and a feminist because choice A includes the possibility that Margie is a bank teller and a feminist as well as the possibility that Margie is a bank teller and not a feminist, but choice B includes only one of those possibilities. But the vast majority of subjects tested select choice B, which the cognitive psychologists take as indicating that we are guided by our associations to people like Margie rather than by the logical conditions of the problem. In my view, logic as a discursive form--a technology of thought--is a Western invention. Whether it is identified as "male" because of historical association or biological predisposition, I don't know, and I should add, I don't care. (Jacob, the science of biologically based sex differences in cognition has not been "debunked." Rather, feminist scholars have rightly pointed out that the data are inconclusive, and that prior assertions of biologically based sex differences in cognition over-interpret the scientific results.) Neither history nor biology is determinative, and logic is too important a part of our cultural legacy to deny any individual or group the opportunity to master it. David -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Annalisa Aguilar Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 12:28 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity ; Vera John-Steiner Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse Hi, About logic: to Greg M., Actually, I thought it was Jacob who discussed logic in gendered discourse. Unless you brought it up a long time ago in the group he references. I was under the impression that he had attempted to bring it up a few times in the past. Or am I mistaken? In his reply on timestamped Nov 03, 08:30:41 he stated: "Not to beat the proverbial dead horse, but several listserv members--including me--have tried to introduce this position re: logic in prior xmca threads. The position has mostly either been ignored or loudly rejected out of hand by more vocal participants on this listserv." So I was responding to that paragraph. I am not clear about Jacob's position but my position is that logic is an intellectual tool, just like intuition can be an emotional tool. Insight might be a combination of both logic and intuition. But nothing about logic makes it male, as I see it, no matter how much men might assert that to be the case. Logic is reasoning in a particular way with the mind, and any human can partake in it if one wants. You can't perform logic with your elbows and knees. Counting has a logic. So does self-preservation. What one does with logic has to do with one's values. If your values are for a pure race, for example, you can certainly use logic to rationalize activities that purify race however you might want to define it. Does that make logic a tool to create meaning that is essentially determined by power? Or is it just abuse of logic to assert one's power (over others, which is actually being powerless, since one who is truly powerful does not require power over others), which at its basis, is meaningless? Also, I don't think that Rein was saying gender is fluid. He said it is constructed: "... in other words, what cultures have "naturalized" as divisions into genders are more often than not constructions erected by a gender group in order to dominate others. Such construction, I would argue, can only be taken down with arguments that follow a logic which itself is not gendered, because if it were, it would be a contestant in the field, not the referee." I believe if I read him as he wanted to be read, I think he's saying that logic is not gendered, which I agree with. The fact that we can say "a logic" means the application of that logic has a boundary, but it doesn't mean that this logic is different than that logic. It means if I use a hammer on a house, I can also use it to bash in skulls. The tool is the same, the application is different, as are the values motivating its use. The boundaries are the objectives for using the logic, not the logic itself. Of course we can bicker over the forms of mallets, claw hammers, or rocks for hitting things and their differences, but the activity of hammering is the same. The values, motivations, and objectives are different, which offer the boundary, however the activity remains the same despite those boundaries. Logic isn't a Western invention, by the way. It's very much part of human cognition. Rationalism I suppose could be Western, but I reserve the right to be wrong about that. Kind regards, Annalisa From mcole@ucsd.edu Fri Nov 4 10:02:38 2016 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 10:02:38 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: References: <00ab01d235fe$c29c1560$47d44020$@edu> <581b82bd.5207620a.9f848.0978@mx.google.com> Message-ID: We are breaking the slow rule, David. to keep it short. If you focus on the terms "*capable of applying logic* to practical application, and then ask "under what conditions is this capability realized in practice" the answer could great heterogeneity of human experience vis a vis its logical status. Two ways of making the same point vis a vis processes, and yes conceptual blends and other similar approaches are pointing in the same direction. mike PS- This is also a short circuit here to Robert's note concerning the universality of the "chaining" mechanism. On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 9:50 AM, David H Kirshner wrote: > Mike, > > In Bruner's prolog to the Collected Works (1987), he states: > > For Vygotsky, becoming human implies the "centralizing" or cerebralization > of mental processes -- whether in development, in cultural history, or in > phylogenesis. ... Processes go inward, and they are thereby made amenable > to interaction with other processes. ... The existence of autonomous > processes is a sign of immaturity, of pathology, or phylogenetic > primitiveness. Perception operating on its own, for example, yields the > symptomatology of mental subnormality. Through interaction, human mental > processes become ordered, systemic, logical, and goal oriented. By the > achievement of generative order we become free of the immediacy of > sensation, free of the chaining of associations, capable of applying logic > to practical application. (p. 15) > > If this is the Vygotskyan interpretation of chaining you're referring to, > then yes, this would be the same concept of associative reasoning used by > cognitive psychologists. But if Bruner has this right, Vygotsky, in keeping > with Annalisa's interpretation, understood logic as not quite natural, but > as normative for humans. Cognitive psychologists see associative reasoning > as normative, with logic an esoteric accomplishment. > > I should add that even though actual logical reasoning is an esoteric > accomplishment, (incorrect) logic-like forms imbue reasoning in literate > societies. Logical inference is governed by two principles: > > Modus ponens asserts that given the conditional, if p then q, and the > antecedent, p, one may deduce the truth of the consequent, q. (i.e., p > --> q, and p, deduce q) and > > Modus tolens asserts that given the conditional, if p then q, and denial > of the consequent, not q, one may deduce denial of the antecedent, not q. > (i.e., p --> q, and ~q, deduce ~p) > > But logical misapplications are widespread in literate cultures: > > Asserting the conditional, if p then q, and the consequent, q, people > incorrectly deduce the antecedent, p. (i.e., p --> q, and q, deduce p) > and > > Asserting the conditional, if p then q, and denial of the antecedent, not > p, people incorrectly deduce denial of the consequent, not q. (i.e., p > --> q, and ~p, deduce ~q) (See Evans, 1982.) > > Evans, J. St. B. T. (1982). The psychology of deductive reasoning. London: > Routledge & Kegan Paul. > > David > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole > Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 10:44 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse > > David-- > > Is this equivalent to what Vygotsky referred to as chaining? > > But one of the results that cognitive scientists have clearly established > is that human reasoning, in general, is associative, not logical. Our > conceptual structures are associatively linked, meaning that concepts > conjure up other, related concepts. Our reasoning is a kind of juggling of > these linked concepts. > > Unsure. > > mike > > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 8:29 AM, David H Kirshner wrote: > > > Annalisa, > > > > Recognizing that Jacob and others may see it differently, I agree with > > you that logic is not gendered. > > I do disagree, though, with your final statement that "Logic isn't a > > Western invention, by the way. It's very much part of human cognition." > > > > What I think is sustainable is the position that reasoning is very > > much a part of human cognition. But one of the results that cognitive > > scientists have clearly established is that human reasoning, in > > general, is associative, not logical. Our conceptual structures are > > associatively linked, meaning that concepts conjure up other, related > > concepts. Our reasoning is a kind of juggling of these linked concepts. > > > > One of the classical studies that established this perspective > > concerns Margie the bank teller: > > > > Margie is bright, single, 31 year old, outspoken, and concerned with > > issues of social justice. > > What is more likely > > > > A) Margie is a bank teller, or > > B) Margie is a bank teller and Margie is a feminist. > > > > (If you're not familiar with this problem, take a moment to answer > > it.) ... > > > > > > The logical analysis holds that Margie is more likely to be a bank > > teller than both a bank teller and a feminist because choice A > > includes the possibility that Margie is a bank teller and a feminist > > as well as the possibility that Margie is a bank teller and not a > > feminist, but choice B includes only one of those possibilities. > > > > But the vast majority of subjects tested select choice B, which the > > cognitive psychologists take as indicating that we are guided by our > > associations to people like Margie rather than by the logical > > conditions of the problem. > > > > In my view, logic as a discursive form--a technology of thought--is a > > Western invention. Whether it is identified as "male" because of > > historical association or biological predisposition, I don't know, and > > I should add, I don't care. (Jacob, the science of biologically based > > sex differences in cognition has not been "debunked." Rather, feminist > > scholars have rightly pointed out that the data are inconclusive, and > > that prior assertions of biologically based sex differences in > > cognition over-interpret the scientific results.) Neither history nor > > biology is determinative, and logic is too important a part of our > > cultural legacy to deny any individual or group the opportunity to > master it. > > > > David > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Annalisa Aguilar > > Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 12:28 AM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity ; Vera > > John-Steiner > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse > > > > Hi, > > > > About logic: to Greg M., Actually, I thought it was Jacob who > > discussed logic in gendered discourse. Unless you brought it up a long > > time ago in the group he references. I was under the impression that > > he had attempted to bring it up a few times in the past. Or am I > mistaken? > > > > In his reply on timestamped Nov 03, 08:30:41 he stated: > > > > "Not to beat the proverbial dead horse, but several listserv > > members--including me--have tried to introduce this position re: logic > > in prior xmca threads. The position has mostly either been ignored or > > loudly rejected out of hand by more vocal participants on this listserv." > > > > So I was responding to that paragraph. > > > > I am not clear about Jacob's position but my position is that logic is > > an intellectual tool, just like intuition can be an emotional tool. > > Insight might be a combination of both logic and intuition. But > > nothing about logic makes it male, as I see it, no matter how much men > > might assert that to be the case. > > > > Logic is reasoning in a particular way with the mind, and any human > > can partake in it if one wants. You can't perform logic with your > > elbows and knees. Counting has a logic. So does self-preservation. > > > > What one does with logic has to do with one's values. If your values > > are for a pure race, for example, you can certainly use logic to > > rationalize activities that purify race however you might want to > > define it. Does that make logic a tool to create meaning that is > > essentially determined by power? Or is it just abuse of logic to > > assert one's power (over others, which is actually being powerless, > > since one who is truly powerful does not require power over others), > which at its basis, is meaningless? > > > > Also, I don't think that Rein was saying gender is fluid. He said it > > is > > constructed: > > > > "... in other words, what cultures have "naturalized" as divisions > > into genders are more often than not constructions erected by a gender > > group in order to dominate others. Such construction, I would argue, > > can only be taken down with arguments that follow a logic which itself > > is not gendered, because if it were, it would be a contestant in the > field, not the referee." > > > > I believe if I read him as he wanted to be read, I think he's saying > > that logic is not gendered, which I agree with. The fact that we can > > say "a logic" means the application of that logic has a boundary, but > > it doesn't mean that this logic is different than that logic. It means > > if I use a hammer on a house, I can also use it to bash in skulls. The > > tool is the same, the application is different, as are the values > motivating its use. > > The boundaries are the objectives for using the logic, not the logic > > itself. Of course we can bicker over the forms of mallets, claw > > hammers, or rocks for hitting things and their differences, but the > > activity of hammering is the same. The values, motivations, and > > objectives are different, which offer the boundary, however the > > activity remains the same despite those boundaries. > > > > Logic isn't a Western invention, by the way. It's very much part of > > human cognition. Rationalism I suppose could be Western, but I reserve > > the right to be wrong about that. > > > > Kind regards, > > > > > > Annalisa > > > > > > From helenaworthen@gmail.com Fri Nov 4 10:18:31 2016 From: helenaworthen@gmail.com (Helena Worthen) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 10:18:31 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6B2C5457-8B44-4DF9-A6A3-6101ED3C1AC6@gmail.com> This is a good contribution. Thanks -- H Helena Worthen helenaworthen@gmail.com Vietnam blog: helenaworthen.wordpress.com On Nov 4, 2016, at 2:30 AM, Rod Parker-Rees wrote: > I am an interested but time-poor lurker on the margins of xmca but the ripples stirred by Mike's decision to reduce his pastoral contribution to our community have made me question how different participants understand what kind of activity we are engaging in here. > > It seems to me that each of us may understand the social form of what we are doing in different ways. For some it is like a conversation and we feel disappointed or hurt if our contributions are met with silence or if the chain moves on in a different direction. For others we are a working group, collaborating to develop a practical and ethical theoretical model. For others we are something like a conference, where thoughts and ideas can be put before others for their consideration and response - and I am sure there are many other ways in which different people understand their participation differently. > > Does this matter? Would xmca be 'better' if it was more consistent, more coherent, more tightly and predictably governed by shared social understandings? While more explicit regulation (protocols for labelling streams and posts and for timing of responses etc.) might help to make our activity feel more inclusive and more sharable it may also introduce new kinds of discomfort. > > What I have found interesting in my time around the margins of xmca is the challenge of sustaining conversations without all the non-verbal feedback which we rely on when we talk with people. When 'wordings' float off into the ether, cast off from the body and personhood of their speakers or writers they become objects which can be scrutinised and revisited and this can be a reason for 'lurkers' to feel reluctant about contributing. What we are doing is not a conversation. Nor is it even a forum, in the sense of people taking turns to orate before a crowd, because contributors often get very little phatic feedback from the lurkers and may have very little sense of how their arguments have been understood or received. But we are moved by our understandings of what it is and is not OK to do, which come from other kinds of interactions. Can I say something if I have not been part of what has gone before? Should I respond or stay quiet? What should I do if I am annoyed or angered by something someone else has contributed? > > I am already getting anxious about how what I have said might be interpreted by others and feeling I have had a long enough turn but I would be really interested to hear what others think about why we are here! > > I have found what people do here very helpful but I do feel uneasy about risking contributions! > > All the best, > > Rod > ________________________________ > [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif] > > This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on it. If you have received this email in error please let the sender know immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University accepts no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan emails and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept responsibility for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless accompanied by an official order form. > From rein.raud@tlu.ee Fri Nov 4 12:23:53 2016 From: rein.raud@tlu.ee (Rein Raud) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 21:23:53 +0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: logic & gender In-Reply-To: <1478278731285.71377@iped.uio.no> References: <00ab01d235fe$c29c1560$47d44020$@edu> <581b82bd.5207620a.9f848.09 78@mx.google.com> <1478278731285.71377@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Just a short remark to those who consider logic to be a Western invention: the Prior Analytics of Aristotle (384-322 BCE) is indeed the first extant systematic exposition of syllogistic reasoning, but this is because the work of the Indian scholar Medhatithi Gautama (6th century BCE) has not survived. The Mahabharata refers to two schools of Indian logic in 5th century BCE. The oldest part of the Nyayasutras, which are extant, also come from 6th century BCE, even though their present form is estimated to date from 2nd century CE. These present a highly developed form of logic that continued to evolve and flourish in India as a separate discipline that crossed worldview-boundaries, thus Buddhist logicians studied Brahmanist works and vice versa. Unfortunately, not much from the School of Names survives from China, which was roughly cotemporaneous with Aristotle. Gongsun Longzi (325-250 BCE) is probably the best-known representative. There are also some later developments, but not so significant as in India or the West, which starts to catch up with India from the times of Frege, but not necessarily earlier.The absence of other civilizations in our syllabi does not mean they did not exist. With best wishes, Rein Raud From jgregmcverry@gmail.com Fri Nov 4 12:35:27 2016 From: jgregmcverry@gmail.com (Greg Mcverry) Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2016 19:35:27 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: logic & gender In-Reply-To: References: <00ab01d235fe$c29c1560$47d44020$@edu> <1478278731285.71377@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Wow Rein, Thanks for a great post. I can't wait to dig in. I still think my original position, which was more a point to ponder than a position, is slightly misconstrued. I was not saying men are logical and women are not. Nor was I saying logic was a western invention. I was trying to get at the way we do the work of logic in acadamia is steeped in Western rationalism. Since this model developed in the hands of privilege the gendered practices of our society have been reinforced in this work. I want to make sure thank you, David, and Annalisa...plus everyone else for pushing my thinking on this important issue. On Fri, Nov 4, 2016, 3:27 PM Rein Raud wrote: > Just a short remark to those who consider logic to be a Western invention: > the Prior Analytics of Aristotle (384-322 BCE) is indeed the first extant > systematic exposition of syllogistic reasoning, but this is because the > work of the Indian scholar Medhatithi Gautama (6th century BCE) has not > survived. The Mahabharata refers to two schools of Indian logic in 5th > century BCE. The oldest part of the Nyayasutras, which are extant, also > come from 6th century BCE, even though their present form is estimated to > date from 2nd century CE. These present a highly developed form of logic > that continued to evolve and flourish in India as a separate discipline > that crossed worldview-boundaries, thus Buddhist logicians studied > Brahmanist works and vice versa. Unfortunately, not much from the School of > Names survives from China, which was roughly cotemporaneous with Aristotle. > Gongsun Longzi (325-250 BCE) is probably the best-known representative. > There are also some later developments, but not so significant as in India > or the West, which starts to catch up with India from the times of Frege, > but not necessarily earlier.The absence of other civilizations in our > syllabi does not mean they did not exist. > > With best wishes, > > Rein Raud > From greg.a.thompson@gmail.com Fri Nov 4 12:57:57 2016 From: greg.a.thompson@gmail.com (Greg Thompson) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 13:57:57 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? In-Reply-To: <6B2C5457-8B44-4DF9-A6A3-6101ED3C1AC6@gmail.com> References: <6B2C5457-8B44-4DF9-A6A3-6101ED3C1AC6@gmail.com> Message-ID: Great question Rod! As to the answer, as John Cage was fond of saying: "no why, just here." Okay, fair enough. But it seems like the question deserves a more thoughtful answer than this. I suppose if I were entirely honest, I find this to be a nice place to hang out and learn and occasionally I try to use the listserve to put something out there in the interest of getting some feedback to help develop it. I've had much more success with the former than the latter. I do wonder what the mission statement of this listserve would be if there were such a thing. It seems like we don't engage with MCA nearly as much as we should if that were to be the goal of the listserve. Other than that, I would guess that the mission statement would be something like: it's a place for people who are interested in CHAT to hang out and talk about stuff that they care about (sometimes CHAT and MCA related, sometimes not). Is that too cynical? Or is that just about right? Perhaps someone else can give a better statement of what the listserve is "about"? (and I hate to even get into the question of what it SHOULD be - I'd rather live it and see what works that deliberate about what that life should look like, but, sure, there is some value in doing the former). Thanks for your question/contribution Rod. Right to the point. -greg On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Helena Worthen wrote: > This is a good contribution. Thanks -- H > > Helena Worthen > helenaworthen@gmail.com > Vietnam blog: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > On Nov 4, 2016, at 2:30 AM, Rod Parker-Rees wrote: > > > I am an interested but time-poor lurker on the margins of xmca but the > ripples stirred by Mike's decision to reduce his pastoral contribution to > our community have made me question how different participants understand > what kind of activity we are engaging in here. > > > > It seems to me that each of us may understand the social form of what we > are doing in different ways. For some it is like a conversation and we feel > disappointed or hurt if our contributions are met with silence or if the > chain moves on in a different direction. For others we are a working group, > collaborating to develop a practical and ethical theoretical model. For > others we are something like a conference, where thoughts and ideas can be > put before others for their consideration and response - and I am sure > there are many other ways in which different people understand their > participation differently. > > > > Does this matter? Would xmca be 'better' if it was more consistent, more > coherent, more tightly and predictably governed by shared social > understandings? While more explicit regulation (protocols for labelling > streams and posts and for timing of responses etc.) might help to make our > activity feel more inclusive and more sharable it may also introduce new > kinds of discomfort. > > > > What I have found interesting in my time around the margins of xmca is > the challenge of sustaining conversations without all the non-verbal > feedback which we rely on when we talk with people. When 'wordings' float > off into the ether, cast off from the body and personhood of their speakers > or writers they become objects which can be scrutinised and revisited and > this can be a reason for 'lurkers' to feel reluctant about contributing. > What we are doing is not a conversation. Nor is it even a forum, in the > sense of people taking turns to orate before a crowd, because contributors > often get very little phatic feedback from the lurkers and may have very > little sense of how their arguments have been understood or received. But > we are moved by our understandings of what it is and is not OK to do, which > come from other kinds of interactions. Can I say something if I have not > been part of what has gone before? Should I respond or stay quiet? What > should I do if I am annoyed or angered by something someone else has > contributed? > > > > I am already getting anxious about how what I have said might be > interpreted by others and feeling I have had a long enough turn but I would > be really interested to hear what others think about why we are here! > > > > I have found what people do here very helpful but I do feel uneasy about > risking contributions! > > > > All the best, > > > > Rod > > ________________________________ > > [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif] //www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass> > > > > This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely > for the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the > intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the > information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on it. > If you have received this email in error please let the sender know > immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not > necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University accepts > no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan emails > and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept responsibility > for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its > attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless accompanied > by an official order form. > > > > > -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From lpscholar2@gmail.com Fri Nov 4 13:04:42 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 13:04:42 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: logic & gender In-Reply-To: References: <00ab01d235fe$c29c1560$47d44020$@edu> <581b82bd.5207620a.9f848.09 78@mx.google.com> <1478278731285.71377@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <581ce9e3.8fdf620a.73175.9d0c@mx.google.com> Rein, Just curious. You have mentioned you have a new book coming to market soon. Will this topic of me various kinds of logic be included in this book? Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Rein Raud Sent: November 4, 2016 12:27 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: logic & gender Just a short remark to those who consider logic to be a Western invention: the Prior Analytics of Aristotle (384-322 BCE) is indeed the first extant systematic exposition of syllogistic reasoning, but this is because the work of the Indian scholar Medhatithi Gautama (6th century BCE) has not survived. The Mahabharata refers to two schools of Indian logic in 5th century BCE. The oldest part of the Nyayasutras, which are extant, also come from 6th century BCE, even though their present form is estimated to date from 2nd century CE. These present a highly developed form of logic that continued to evolve and flourish in India as a separate discipline that crossed worldview-boundaries, thus Buddhist logicians studied Brahmanist works and vice versa. Unfortunately, not much from the School of Names survives from China, which was roughly cotemporaneous with Aristotle. Gongsun Longzi (325-250 BCE) is probably the best-known representative. There are also some later developments, but not so significant as in India or the West, which starts to catch up with India from the times of Frege, but not necessarily earlier.The absence of other civilizations in our syllabi does not mean they did not exist. With best wishes, Rein Raud From annalisa@unm.edu Fri Nov 4 13:06:48 2016 From: annalisa@unm.edu (Annalisa Aguilar) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 20:06:48 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: References: <00ab01d235fe$c29c1560$47d44020$@edu> <581b82bd.5207620a.9f848.0978@mx.google.com> , Message-ID: Hello, There is the presence of logic in Eastern cultures. So logic was not invented in the West. It is true that basic thinking is associative, and logic is learned. But once learned, it is a part of human cognition. That's why I say it is not done with elbows and knees. The problem with the form of Western logic, as I see it, is that it doesn't seem to take into account The Total, or if you prefer, The Context. There is no logical means in the West of dealing with contexts and wholes. What I cherish about Vygotsky is that he was attempting to deal with that problem (i.e., the problem with the environment). That is why we have the issues we do with class, with climate change, and even perhaps impending epidemics and food shortages ? based on the way we produce our food and administer medicine. Western logic (if you want to say "by invention") considers only the particular. That is the Cartesian way, but it is not the only way. Unfortunately that particular way and its particular application is frequently administered in harmful ways, and the motivation for those harmful ways is informed by the underlying values of the people using the logic. There have been, are, and will be beneficial uses of Western logic for doing lots good, but like any tool, it can be abused. The problems that we face have nothing to do with an exercise of too much logic (I'd offer it's too little and in the wrong way). It is the absence of using that logic in a nourishing manner, a way that is not harmful, and is compassionate. I'm not sure why anyone would want to disagree with that. Also, I would like to know for clarification what is meant by "chaining" in the context of this thread. It seems the word is used in different ways, so I was hoping it might be explained more explicitly. I know I'm not the only one trying to understand that. I think I know, but I would like clarification. If it isn't an imposition. Kind regards, Annalisa ________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of mike cole Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 9:43 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse David-- Is this equivalent to what Vygotsky referred to as chaining? But one of the results that cognitive scientists have clearly established is that human reasoning, in general, is associative, not logical. Our conceptual structures are associatively linked, meaning that concepts conjure up other, related concepts. Our reasoning is a kind of juggling of these linked concepts. Unsure. mike On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 8:29 AM, David H Kirshner wrote: > Annalisa, > > Recognizing that Jacob and others may see it differently, I agree with you > that logic is not gendered. > I do disagree, though, with your final statement that "Logic isn't a > Western invention, by the way. It's very much part of human cognition." > > What I think is sustainable is the position that reasoning is very much a > part of human cognition. But one of the results that cognitive scientists > have clearly established is that human reasoning, in general, is > associative, not logical. Our conceptual structures are associatively > linked, meaning that concepts conjure up other, related concepts. Our > reasoning is a kind of juggling of these linked concepts. > > One of the classical studies that established this perspective concerns > Margie the bank teller: > > Margie is bright, single, 31 year old, outspoken, and concerned with > issues of social justice. > What is more likely > > A) Margie is a bank teller, or > B) Margie is a bank teller and Margie is a feminist. > > (If you're not familiar with this problem, take a moment to answer it.) > ... > > > The logical analysis holds that Margie is more likely to be a bank teller > than both a bank teller and a feminist because choice A includes the > possibility that Margie is a bank teller and a feminist as well as the > possibility that Margie is a bank teller and not a feminist, but choice B > includes only one of those possibilities. > > But the vast majority of subjects tested select choice B, which the > cognitive psychologists take as indicating that we are guided by our > associations to people like Margie rather than by the logical conditions of > the problem. > > In my view, logic as a discursive form--a technology of thought--is a > Western invention. Whether it is identified as "male" because of historical > association or biological predisposition, I don't know, and I should add, I > don't care. (Jacob, the science of biologically based sex differences in > cognition has not been "debunked." Rather, feminist scholars have rightly > pointed out that the data are inconclusive, and that prior assertions of > biologically based sex differences in cognition over-interpret the > scientific results.) Neither history nor biology is determinative, and > logic is too important a part of our cultural legacy to deny any individual > or group the opportunity to master it. > > David > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Annalisa Aguilar > Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 12:28 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity ; Vera > John-Steiner > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse > > Hi, > > About logic: to Greg M., Actually, I thought it was Jacob who discussed > logic in gendered discourse. Unless you brought it up a long time ago in > the group he references. I was under the impression that he had attempted > to bring it up a few times in the past. Or am I mistaken? > > In his reply on timestamped Nov 03, 08:30:41 he stated: > > "Not to beat the proverbial dead horse, but several listserv > members--including me--have tried to introduce this position re: logic in > prior xmca threads. The position has mostly either been ignored or loudly > rejected out of hand by more vocal participants on this listserv." > > So I was responding to that paragraph. > > I am not clear about Jacob's position but my position is that logic is an > intellectual tool, just like intuition can be an emotional tool. Insight > might be a combination of both logic and intuition. But nothing about logic > makes it male, as I see it, no matter how much men might assert that to be > the case. > > Logic is reasoning in a particular way with the mind, and any human can > partake in it if one wants. You can't perform logic with your elbows and > knees. Counting has a logic. So does self-preservation. > > What one does with logic has to do with one's values. If your values are > for a pure race, for example, you can certainly use logic to rationalize > activities that purify race however you might want to define it. Does that > make logic a tool to create meaning that is essentially determined by > power? Or is it just abuse of logic to assert one's power (over others, > which is actually being powerless, since one who is truly powerful does not > require power over others), which at its basis, is meaningless? > > Also, I don't think that Rein was saying gender is fluid. He said it is > constructed: > > "... in other words, what cultures have "naturalized" as divisions into > genders are more often than not constructions erected by a gender group in > order to dominate others. Such construction, I would argue, can only be > taken down with arguments that follow a logic which itself is not gendered, > because if it were, it would be a contestant in the field, not the referee." > > I believe if I read him as he wanted to be read, I think he's saying that > logic is not gendered, which I agree with. The fact that we can say "a > logic" means the application of that logic has a boundary, but it doesn't > mean that this logic is different than that logic. It means if I use a > hammer on a house, I can also use it to bash in skulls. The tool is the > same, the application is different, as are the values motivating its use. > The boundaries are the objectives for using the logic, not the logic > itself. Of course we can bicker over the forms of mallets, claw hammers, or > rocks for hitting things and their differences, but the activity of > hammering is the same. The values, motivations, and objectives are > different, which offer the boundary, however the activity remains the same > despite those boundaries. > > Logic isn't a Western invention, by the way. It's very much part of human > cognition. Rationalism I suppose could be Western, but I reserve the right > to be wrong about that. > > Kind regards, > > > Annalisa > > From rein.raud@tlu.ee Fri Nov 4 13:15:30 2016 From: rein.raud@tlu.ee (Rein Raud) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 22:15:30 +0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: logic & gender In-Reply-To: <581ce9e3.8fdf620a.73175.9d0c@mx.google.com> References: <00ab01d235fe$c29c1560$47d44020$@edu> <581b82bd.5207620a.9f848.09 78@mx.google.com> <1478278731285.71377@iped.uio.no> <581ce9e3.8fdf620a.73175.9d0c@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <2AB8625F-B4C4-4AA6-A7F1-4D6538754B3B@tlu.ee> No, Larry, the one that has recently come out, entitled ?Meaning in Action: Outline of an Integral Theory of Culture? (Polity Books) - the introduction and outline can be read here - is a synthesis of different approaches to culture, and it has many examples from Asian cultures, but no discussion of these logics. I am working on a book though, which has been commissioned by Wiley/Blackwell as a college coursebook, entitled ?Introduction to Asian Worldviews?, where these will be discussed in detail, but this won?t be out for a couple of years yet. Best wishes, Rein > On 04 Nov 2016, at 22:04, wrote: > > Rein, > Just curious. You have mentioned you have a new book coming to market soon. Will this topic of me various kinds of logic be included in this book? > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: Rein Raud > Sent: November 4, 2016 12:27 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: logic & gender > > Just a short remark to those who consider logic to be a Western invention: the Prior Analytics of Aristotle (384-322 BCE) is indeed the first extant systematic exposition of syllogistic reasoning, but this is because the work of the Indian scholar Medhatithi Gautama (6th century BCE) has not survived. The Mahabharata refers to two schools of Indian logic in 5th century BCE. The oldest part of the Nyayasutras, which are extant, also come from 6th century BCE, even though their present form is estimated to date from 2nd century CE. These present a highly developed form of logic that continued to evolve and flourish in India as a separate discipline that crossed worldview-boundaries, thus Buddhist logicians studied Brahmanist works and vice versa. Unfortunately, not much from the School of Names survives from China, which was roughly cotemporaneous with Aristotle. Gongsun Longzi (325-250 BCE) is probably the best-known representative. There are also some later developments, but not so significant as in India or the West, which starts to catch up with India from the times of Frege, but not necessarily earlier.The absence of other civilizations in our syllabi does not mean they did not exist. > > With best wishes, > > Rein Raud From R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk Fri Nov 4 13:22:16 2016 From: R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk (Rod Parker-Rees) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 20:22:16 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? In-Reply-To: References: <6B2C5457-8B44-4DF9-A6A3-6101ED3C1AC6@gmail.com> Message-ID: Thanks Helen and Greg, I certainly like the opportunity to hang out with interesting people but I think it is probably inevitable in this sort of set up that wires can get crossed when people feel they are engaging in different kinds of activities. I suspect that what has kept this group going is that every now and then people stand back and take stock of how it is working and that allows people to realise that it works in different ways (and feels different) for different people. This has made me wonder how often other forms of communication (even where only two people are involved) can involve different people having very different understandings about what they are doing and sometimes this doesn't matter but sometimes it does. I hope we can keep it going. All the best, Rod -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Greg Thompson Sent: 04 November 2016 19:58 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? Great question Rod! As to the answer, as John Cage was fond of saying: "no why, just here." Okay, fair enough. But it seems like the question deserves a more thoughtful answer than this. I suppose if I were entirely honest, I find this to be a nice place to hang out and learn and occasionally I try to use the listserve to put something out there in the interest of getting some feedback to help develop it. I've had much more success with the former than the latter. I do wonder what the mission statement of this listserve would be if there were such a thing. It seems like we don't engage with MCA nearly as much as we should if that were to be the goal of the listserve. Other than that, I would guess that the mission statement would be something like: it's a place for people who are interested in CHAT to hang out and talk about stuff that they care about (sometimes CHAT and MCA related, sometimes not). Is that too cynical? Or is that just about right? Perhaps someone else can give a better statement of what the listserve is "about"? (and I hate to even get into the question of what it SHOULD be - I'd rather live it and see what works that deliberate about what that life should look like, but, sure, there is some value in doing the former). Thanks for your question/contribution Rod. Right to the point. -greg On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Helena Worthen wrote: > This is a good contribution. Thanks -- H > > Helena Worthen > helenaworthen@gmail.com > Vietnam blog: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > On Nov 4, 2016, at 2:30 AM, Rod Parker-Rees wrote: > > > I am an interested but time-poor lurker on the margins of xmca but > > the > ripples stirred by Mike's decision to reduce his pastoral contribution > to our community have made me question how different participants > understand what kind of activity we are engaging in here. > > > > It seems to me that each of us may understand the social form of > > what we > are doing in different ways. For some it is like a conversation and we > feel disappointed or hurt if our contributions are met with silence or > if the chain moves on in a different direction. For others we are a > working group, collaborating to develop a practical and ethical > theoretical model. For others we are something like a conference, > where thoughts and ideas can be put before others for their > consideration and response - and I am sure there are many other ways > in which different people understand their participation differently. > > > > Does this matter? Would xmca be 'better' if it was more consistent, > > more > coherent, more tightly and predictably governed by shared social > understandings? While more explicit regulation (protocols for > labelling streams and posts and for timing of responses etc.) might > help to make our activity feel more inclusive and more sharable it may > also introduce new kinds of discomfort. > > > > What I have found interesting in my time around the margins of xmca > > is > the challenge of sustaining conversations without all the non-verbal > feedback which we rely on when we talk with people. When 'wordings' > float off into the ether, cast off from the body and personhood of > their speakers or writers they become objects which can be scrutinised > and revisited and this can be a reason for 'lurkers' to feel reluctant about contributing. > What we are doing is not a conversation. Nor is it even a forum, in > the sense of people taking turns to orate before a crowd, because > contributors often get very little phatic feedback from the lurkers > and may have very little sense of how their arguments have been > understood or received. But we are moved by our understandings of what > it is and is not OK to do, which come from other kinds of > interactions. Can I say something if I have not been part of what has > gone before? Should I respond or stay quiet? What should I do if I am > annoyed or angered by something someone else has contributed? > > > > I am already getting anxious about how what I have said might be > interpreted by others and feeling I have had a long enough turn but I > would be really interested to hear what others think about why we are here! > > > > I have found what people do here very helpful but I do feel uneasy > > about > risking contributions! > > > > All the best, > > > > Rod > > ________________________________ > > [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif] //www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass> > > > > This email and any files with it are confidential and intended > > solely > for the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not > the intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the > information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on it. > If you have received this email in error please let the sender know > immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not > necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University > accepts no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to > scan emails and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept > responsibility for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this > email or its attachments constitutes an order for goods or services > unless accompanied by an official order form. > > > > > -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson ________________________________ [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif] This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on it. If you have received this email in error please let the sender know immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University accepts no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan emails and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept responsibility for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless accompanied by an official order form. From greg.a.thompson@gmail.com Fri Nov 4 13:29:53 2016 From: greg.a.thompson@gmail.com (Greg Thompson) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 14:29:53 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: References: <00ab01d235fe$c29c1560$47d44020$@edu> <581b82bd.5207620a.9f848.0978@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Vera (and others), Yes, I agree that the pace of the listserve often goes at breakneck speeds. I can't keep up. As a result, I am left with the options of either not responding (ever) or failing to read everything and responding ignorantly (I chose the latter this time). I have heard some folks kick around the possibility of spinning off topics and I wonder if there might be a way to do this productively. I'm not sure that the current approach of just threading conversations is enough to provide a quiet enough space for productive (i.e., productive for everyone) conversations to happen. I think this thread is a case and point - it feels like there are three or four different directions that are spinning off into and one wonders how to respond to all at the same time. We might ask: How do we resolve this in natural conversation such as at a cocktail party? We form smaller groups with people that can slow down and discuss an idea in more depth while also naturally blocking out the sound from surrounding conversations. Such groups are seldom bigger than 6 or 7 active participants (one huge advantage of list serves is that these conversations are not lost to history but exist in an archive that people can go back to and learn from if they want to). In cocktail party conversation, it seems that anytime we get groups larger than this it quickly takes on the nature of lecture - with just one or a couple people acting as "lecturers" (or, more commonly, "joke tellers") and the rest acting as audience. I'm trying to think of cases that differ, in particular some kind of ideal of democratic participation. Zucotti Park put to use that fabulous idea of "the people's microphone," but that was only using the people's voices in service of what one person had to say (Goffman's "author", the rest were just using their voices as "animators"). It had a neat effect but didn't seem as if all voices (i.e. authors) were equally heard. This suggests to me that there is something about the cacophony of voices on a listserve that, while delightfully democratic, might be too difficult to practically manage. And so I find the idea of enabling spin-off conversations an appealing idea. How to do that with a listserve? I have no idea... Any tech folks out there savvy enough to suggest a solution? -greg On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 2:06 PM, Annalisa Aguilar wrote: > > Hello, > > There is the presence of logic in Eastern cultures. So logic was not > invented in the West. > > It is true that basic thinking is associative, and logic is learned. But > once learned, it is a part of human cognition. That's why I say it is not > done with elbows and knees. The problem with the form of Western logic, as > I see it, is that it doesn't seem to take into account The Total, or if you > prefer, The Context. There is no logical means in the West of dealing with > contexts and wholes. What I cherish about Vygotsky is that he was > attempting to deal with that problem (i.e., the problem with the > environment). > > That is why we have the issues we do with class, with climate change, and > even perhaps impending epidemics and food shortages ? based on the way we > produce our food and administer medicine. Western logic (if you want to say > "by invention") considers only the particular. That is the Cartesian way, > but it is not the only way. Unfortunately that particular way and its > particular application is frequently administered in harmful ways, and the > motivation for those harmful ways is informed by the underlying values of > the people using the logic. There have been, are, and will be beneficial > uses of Western logic for doing lots good, but like any tool, it can be > abused. > > The problems that we face have nothing to do with an exercise of too much > logic (I'd offer it's too little and in the wrong way). It is the absence > of using that logic in a nourishing manner, a way that is not harmful, and > is compassionate. > > I'm not sure why anyone would want to disagree with that. > > Also, I would like to know for clarification what is meant by "chaining" > in the context of this thread. It seems the word is used in different ways, > so I was hoping it might be explained more explicitly. I know I'm not the > only one trying to understand that. I think I know, but I would like > clarification. If it isn't an imposition. > > Kind regards, > > Annalisa > > ________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of mike cole > Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 9:43 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse > > David-- > > Is this equivalent to what Vygotsky referred to as chaining? > > But one of the results that cognitive scientists have clearly established > is that human reasoning, in general, is associative, not logical. Our > conceptual structures are associatively linked, meaning that concepts > conjure up other, related concepts. Our reasoning is a kind of juggling of > these linked concepts. > > Unsure. > > mike > > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 8:29 AM, David H Kirshner wrote: > > > Annalisa, > > > > Recognizing that Jacob and others may see it differently, I agree with > you > > that logic is not gendered. > > I do disagree, though, with your final statement that "Logic isn't a > > Western invention, by the way. It's very much part of human cognition." > > > > What I think is sustainable is the position that reasoning is very much a > > part of human cognition. But one of the results that cognitive scientists > > have clearly established is that human reasoning, in general, is > > associative, not logical. Our conceptual structures are associatively > > linked, meaning that concepts conjure up other, related concepts. Our > > reasoning is a kind of juggling of these linked concepts. > > > > One of the classical studies that established this perspective concerns > > Margie the bank teller: > > > > Margie is bright, single, 31 year old, outspoken, and concerned with > > issues of social justice. > > What is more likely > > > > A) Margie is a bank teller, or > > B) Margie is a bank teller and Margie is a feminist. > > > > (If you're not familiar with this problem, take a moment to answer it.) > > ... > > > > > > The logical analysis holds that Margie is more likely to be a bank teller > > than both a bank teller and a feminist because choice A includes the > > possibility that Margie is a bank teller and a feminist as well as the > > possibility that Margie is a bank teller and not a feminist, but choice B > > includes only one of those possibilities. > > > > But the vast majority of subjects tested select choice B, which the > > cognitive psychologists take as indicating that we are guided by our > > associations to people like Margie rather than by the logical conditions > of > > the problem. > > > > In my view, logic as a discursive form--a technology of thought--is a > > Western invention. Whether it is identified as "male" because of > historical > > association or biological predisposition, I don't know, and I should > add, I > > don't care. (Jacob, the science of biologically based sex differences in > > cognition has not been "debunked." Rather, feminist scholars have rightly > > pointed out that the data are inconclusive, and that prior assertions of > > biologically based sex differences in cognition over-interpret the > > scientific results.) Neither history nor biology is determinative, and > > logic is too important a part of our cultural legacy to deny any > individual > > or group the opportunity to master it. > > > > David > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Annalisa Aguilar > > Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 12:28 AM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity ; Vera > > John-Steiner > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse > > > > Hi, > > > > About logic: to Greg M., Actually, I thought it was Jacob who discussed > > logic in gendered discourse. Unless you brought it up a long time ago in > > the group he references. I was under the impression that he had attempted > > to bring it up a few times in the past. Or am I mistaken? > > > > In his reply on timestamped Nov 03, 08:30:41 he stated: > > > > "Not to beat the proverbial dead horse, but several listserv > > members--including me--have tried to introduce this position re: logic in > > prior xmca threads. The position has mostly either been ignored or loudly > > rejected out of hand by more vocal participants on this listserv." > > > > So I was responding to that paragraph. > > > > I am not clear about Jacob's position but my position is that logic is an > > intellectual tool, just like intuition can be an emotional tool. Insight > > might be a combination of both logic and intuition. But nothing about > logic > > makes it male, as I see it, no matter how much men might assert that to > be > > the case. > > > > Logic is reasoning in a particular way with the mind, and any human can > > partake in it if one wants. You can't perform logic with your elbows and > > knees. Counting has a logic. So does self-preservation. > > > > What one does with logic has to do with one's values. If your values are > > for a pure race, for example, you can certainly use logic to rationalize > > activities that purify race however you might want to define it. Does > that > > make logic a tool to create meaning that is essentially determined by > > power? Or is it just abuse of logic to assert one's power (over others, > > which is actually being powerless, since one who is truly powerful does > not > > require power over others), which at its basis, is meaningless? > > > > Also, I don't think that Rein was saying gender is fluid. He said it is > > constructed: > > > > "... in other words, what cultures have "naturalized" as divisions into > > genders are more often than not constructions erected by a gender group > in > > order to dominate others. Such construction, I would argue, can only be > > taken down with arguments that follow a logic which itself is not > gendered, > > because if it were, it would be a contestant in the field, not the > referee." > > > > I believe if I read him as he wanted to be read, I think he's saying that > > logic is not gendered, which I agree with. The fact that we can say "a > > logic" means the application of that logic has a boundary, but it doesn't > > mean that this logic is different than that logic. It means if I use a > > hammer on a house, I can also use it to bash in skulls. The tool is the > > same, the application is different, as are the values motivating its use. > > The boundaries are the objectives for using the logic, not the logic > > itself. Of course we can bicker over the forms of mallets, claw hammers, > or > > rocks for hitting things and their differences, but the activity of > > hammering is the same. The values, motivations, and objectives are > > different, which offer the boundary, however the activity remains the > same > > despite those boundaries. > > > > Logic isn't a Western invention, by the way. It's very much part of human > > cognition. Rationalism I suppose could be Western, but I reserve the > right > > to be wrong about that. > > > > Kind regards, > > > > > > Annalisa > > > > > -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From annalisa@unm.edu Fri Nov 4 13:36:05 2016 From: annalisa@unm.edu (Annalisa Aguilar) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 20:36:05 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: logic & gender In-Reply-To: References: <00ab01d235fe$c29c1560$47d44020$@edu> <581b82bd.5207620a.9f848.09 78@mx.google.com> <1478278731285.71377@iped.uio.no>, Message-ID: Thank you, Rein, for the scholarly specifics. To others, I don't mean to sound pedantic. It's just that it's important that we understand that we in the West are the only smart people on the planet. And that we are, by being modern, not more intelligent than the Ancients. There is a great deal of work from the Ancients, not just on logic, but also on the mind. There's lifetimes required to study it all. Still, because it is not covered in Western academia in the sense of general survey, say as is done with Ancient Greek literature and philosophy, it means unless you are a specialist there is little examples of cross-pollination that can allow us appreciate how it is that we are standing on the shoulders of Giants. That's why I am a fan of Arjun Appadurai. He's very aware of Marxist thought, and from what I sense an appreciation of Vedic values, and he's also quite savvy about media studies. He has been the only example I've been able to find (so far) of this cross-pollination, but I'm hoping there will in time be others. There are many Vedanta concepts that have filtered into the West, and the more I learn about it, I almost want to say it's the genesis of human knowledge, or at least the means of human knowledge, but I would sound very biased or chauvinist; I don't have enough historical scholarship to support my assertion. So it is my intuition and I hope it would be received and appreciated in that light. Where there's smoke, there's fire. Also, I would like to make a distinction between Brahmanist and Vedanta. They are not the same things, though there is cultural overlap. "Brahmanist" in my experience is a term Buddhists use. I've never heard that word in any other context. In fact Hinduism is not a real word either. It is just some term applied to the people of India generated by a king in Afghanistan, I think. Religious Hindus do not separate their spiritual life from every day life, and some are more religious than others, but the term that they apply to themselves is "Sanatana Dharma" which loosely translates to "protectors of Dharma." Dharma is a difficult word to translate into English, and the word has a different significance in Buddhism. But roughly, it means the order of the universe, but also following the order of the universe, which is basically to remain in harmony and to protect harmony. I don't mean at all to give any appearance of expertise in the is area, just sharing my limited understanding. It's hard to explain how one can protect harmony, but perhaps it has more to do with protecting the knowledge that reveals how to appreciate that harmony. So it has to do with passing down a tradition to posterity, a tradition whose core is knowledge. Anyway, my main point is that the Ancients knew a lot, even logic. We shouldn't dismiss them so easily. There's a lot that can be harvested from their understandings that would benefit us today. But as far as logic goes, I remain steadfast that logic is a tool and that it has to do with our values and our dedication not to harm others, as well as allowing any human alive the space and resources required to flourish. Even children require safe places to play. Kind regards, Annalisa From greg.a.thompson@gmail.com Fri Nov 4 13:37:39 2016 From: greg.a.thompson@gmail.com (Greg Thompson) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 14:37:39 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? In-Reply-To: References: <6B2C5457-8B44-4DF9-A6A3-6101ED3C1AC6@gmail.com> Message-ID: Yes, I'm with you on that too Rod. I think that's why social media can get so nasty so often. It is a chilly medium that is a highly denuded form of communication. (e.g., when I said "I'm with you on that too", was I alluding to other times when I'm not "with you"? Some could interpret it that way (btw, that's not what I meant!!)). I marvel that there is so much that gets done on this listserve in spite of this fact. Also makes me wonder why so many people put so much stock in literacy as being a massively transformative capacity. Seems a more base form of communication than any form of oral communication I've ever experienced (even the phone gives you prosody!). -greg On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 2:22 PM, Rod Parker-Rees < R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk> wrote: > Thanks Helen and Greg, > > I certainly like the opportunity to hang out with interesting people but I > think it is probably inevitable in this sort of set up that wires can get > crossed when people feel they are engaging in different kinds of activities. > I suspect that what has kept this group going is that every now and then > people stand back and take stock of how it is working and that allows > people to realise that it works in different ways (and feels different) for > different people. > > This has made me wonder how often other forms of communication (even where > only two people are involved) can involve different people having very > different understandings about what they are doing and sometimes this > doesn't matter but sometimes it does. > > I hope we can keep it going. > > All the best, > > Rod > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Greg Thompson > Sent: 04 November 2016 19:58 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? > > Great question Rod! > > As to the answer, as John Cage was fond of saying: "no why, just here." > > Okay, fair enough. But it seems like the question deserves a more > thoughtful answer than this. > > I suppose if I were entirely honest, I find this to be a nice place to > hang out and learn and occasionally I try to use the listserve to put > something out there in the interest of getting some feedback to help > develop it. I've had much more success with the former than the latter. > > I do wonder what the mission statement of this listserve would be if there > were such a thing. It seems like we don't engage with MCA nearly as much as > we should if that were to be the goal of the listserve. > > Other than that, I would guess that the mission statement would be > something like: it's a place for people who are interested in CHAT to hang > out and talk about stuff that they care about (sometimes CHAT and MCA > related, sometimes not). > > Is that too cynical? Or is that just about right? > > Perhaps someone else can give a better statement of what the listserve is > "about"? (and I hate to even get into the question of what it SHOULD be - > I'd rather live it and see what works that deliberate about what that life > should look like, but, sure, there is some value in doing the former). > > Thanks for your question/contribution Rod. Right to the point. > -greg > > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Helena Worthen > wrote: > > > This is a good contribution. Thanks -- H > > > > Helena Worthen > > helenaworthen@gmail.com > > Vietnam blog: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > > > On Nov 4, 2016, at 2:30 AM, Rod Parker-Rees wrote: > > > > > I am an interested but time-poor lurker on the margins of xmca but > > > the > > ripples stirred by Mike's decision to reduce his pastoral contribution > > to our community have made me question how different participants > > understand what kind of activity we are engaging in here. > > > > > > It seems to me that each of us may understand the social form of > > > what we > > are doing in different ways. For some it is like a conversation and we > > feel disappointed or hurt if our contributions are met with silence or > > if the chain moves on in a different direction. For others we are a > > working group, collaborating to develop a practical and ethical > > theoretical model. For others we are something like a conference, > > where thoughts and ideas can be put before others for their > > consideration and response - and I am sure there are many other ways > > in which different people understand their participation differently. > > > > > > Does this matter? Would xmca be 'better' if it was more consistent, > > > more > > coherent, more tightly and predictably governed by shared social > > understandings? While more explicit regulation (protocols for > > labelling streams and posts and for timing of responses etc.) might > > help to make our activity feel more inclusive and more sharable it may > > also introduce new kinds of discomfort. > > > > > > What I have found interesting in my time around the margins of xmca > > > is > > the challenge of sustaining conversations without all the non-verbal > > feedback which we rely on when we talk with people. When 'wordings' > > float off into the ether, cast off from the body and personhood of > > their speakers or writers they become objects which can be scrutinised > > and revisited and this can be a reason for 'lurkers' to feel reluctant > about contributing. > > What we are doing is not a conversation. Nor is it even a forum, in > > the sense of people taking turns to orate before a crowd, because > > contributors often get very little phatic feedback from the lurkers > > and may have very little sense of how their arguments have been > > understood or received. But we are moved by our understandings of what > > it is and is not OK to do, which come from other kinds of > > interactions. Can I say something if I have not been part of what has > > gone before? Should I respond or stay quiet? What should I do if I am > > annoyed or angered by something someone else has contributed? > > > > > > I am already getting anxious about how what I have said might be > > interpreted by others and feeling I have had a long enough turn but I > > would be really interested to hear what others think about why we are > here! > > > > > > I have found what people do here very helpful but I do feel uneasy > > > about > > risking contributions! > > > > > > All the best, > > > > > > Rod > > > ________________________________ > > > [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif] > //www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass> > > > > > > This email and any files with it are confidential and intended > > > solely > > for the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not > > the intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the > > information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on > it. > > If you have received this email in error please let the sender know > > immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not > > necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University > > accepts no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to > > scan emails and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept > > responsibility for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this > > email or its attachments constitutes an order for goods or services > > unless accompanied by an official order form. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > Assistant Professor > Department of Anthropology > 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > Brigham Young University > Provo, UT 84602 > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson > ________________________________ > [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif] //www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass> > > This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely for > the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the > intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the > information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on it. > If you have received this email in error please let the sender know > immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not > necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University accepts > no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan emails > and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept responsibility > for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its > attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless accompanied > by an official order form. > > -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Fri Nov 4 13:48:38 2016 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 20:48:38 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: References: <00ab01d235fe$c29c1560$47d44020$@edu> <581b82bd.5207620a.9f848.0978@mx.google.com> , Message-ID: <1478292516277.72024@iped.uio.no> Greg, great thoughts. Obviously, opening new threads, as Rein just did with "Logic & Gender" resembles what you suggest. In terms of facilitating "inheritance" (as per our thread on Zaza's paper on technology and prototyping), turning to natural conversation is always a good strategy. There is more to be done, sure, but these are great inputs. Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Greg Thompson Sent: 04 November 2016 21:29 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse Vera (and others), Yes, I agree that the pace of the listserve often goes at breakneck speeds. I can't keep up. As a result, I am left with the options of either not responding (ever) or failing to read everything and responding ignorantly (I chose the latter this time). I have heard some folks kick around the possibility of spinning off topics and I wonder if there might be a way to do this productively. I'm not sure that the current approach of just threading conversations is enough to provide a quiet enough space for productive (i.e., productive for everyone) conversations to happen. I think this thread is a case and point - it feels like there are three or four different directions that are spinning off into and one wonders how to respond to all at the same time. We might ask: How do we resolve this in natural conversation such as at a cocktail party? We form smaller groups with people that can slow down and discuss an idea in more depth while also naturally blocking out the sound from surrounding conversations. Such groups are seldom bigger than 6 or 7 active participants (one huge advantage of list serves is that these conversations are not lost to history but exist in an archive that people can go back to and learn from if they want to). In cocktail party conversation, it seems that anytime we get groups larger than this it quickly takes on the nature of lecture - with just one or a couple people acting as "lecturers" (or, more commonly, "joke tellers") and the rest acting as audience. I'm trying to think of cases that differ, in particular some kind of ideal of democratic participation. Zucotti Park put to use that fabulous idea of "the people's microphone," but that was only using the people's voices in service of what one person had to say (Goffman's "author", the rest were just using their voices as "animators"). It had a neat effect but didn't seem as if all voices (i.e. authors) were equally heard. This suggests to me that there is something about the cacophony of voices on a listserve that, while delightfully democratic, might be too difficult to practically manage. And so I find the idea of enabling spin-off conversations an appealing idea. How to do that with a listserve? I have no idea... Any tech folks out there savvy enough to suggest a solution? -greg On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 2:06 PM, Annalisa Aguilar wrote: > > Hello, > > There is the presence of logic in Eastern cultures. So logic was not > invented in the West. > > It is true that basic thinking is associative, and logic is learned. But > once learned, it is a part of human cognition. That's why I say it is not > done with elbows and knees. The problem with the form of Western logic, as > I see it, is that it doesn't seem to take into account The Total, or if you > prefer, The Context. There is no logical means in the West of dealing with > contexts and wholes. What I cherish about Vygotsky is that he was > attempting to deal with that problem (i.e., the problem with the > environment). > > That is why we have the issues we do with class, with climate change, and > even perhaps impending epidemics and food shortages ? based on the way we > produce our food and administer medicine. Western logic (if you want to say > "by invention") considers only the particular. That is the Cartesian way, > but it is not the only way. Unfortunately that particular way and its > particular application is frequently administered in harmful ways, and the > motivation for those harmful ways is informed by the underlying values of > the people using the logic. There have been, are, and will be beneficial > uses of Western logic for doing lots good, but like any tool, it can be > abused. > > The problems that we face have nothing to do with an exercise of too much > logic (I'd offer it's too little and in the wrong way). It is the absence > of using that logic in a nourishing manner, a way that is not harmful, and > is compassionate. > > I'm not sure why anyone would want to disagree with that. > > Also, I would like to know for clarification what is meant by "chaining" > in the context of this thread. It seems the word is used in different ways, > so I was hoping it might be explained more explicitly. I know I'm not the > only one trying to understand that. I think I know, but I would like > clarification. If it isn't an imposition. > > Kind regards, > > Annalisa > > ________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of mike cole > Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 9:43 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse > > David-- > > Is this equivalent to what Vygotsky referred to as chaining? > > But one of the results that cognitive scientists have clearly established > is that human reasoning, in general, is associative, not logical. Our > conceptual structures are associatively linked, meaning that concepts > conjure up other, related concepts. Our reasoning is a kind of juggling of > these linked concepts. > > Unsure. > > mike > > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 8:29 AM, David H Kirshner wrote: > > > Annalisa, > > > > Recognizing that Jacob and others may see it differently, I agree with > you > > that logic is not gendered. > > I do disagree, though, with your final statement that "Logic isn't a > > Western invention, by the way. It's very much part of human cognition." > > > > What I think is sustainable is the position that reasoning is very much a > > part of human cognition. But one of the results that cognitive scientists > > have clearly established is that human reasoning, in general, is > > associative, not logical. Our conceptual structures are associatively > > linked, meaning that concepts conjure up other, related concepts. Our > > reasoning is a kind of juggling of these linked concepts. > > > > One of the classical studies that established this perspective concerns > > Margie the bank teller: > > > > Margie is bright, single, 31 year old, outspoken, and concerned with > > issues of social justice. > > What is more likely > > > > A) Margie is a bank teller, or > > B) Margie is a bank teller and Margie is a feminist. > > > > (If you're not familiar with this problem, take a moment to answer it.) > > ... > > > > > > The logical analysis holds that Margie is more likely to be a bank teller > > than both a bank teller and a feminist because choice A includes the > > possibility that Margie is a bank teller and a feminist as well as the > > possibility that Margie is a bank teller and not a feminist, but choice B > > includes only one of those possibilities. > > > > But the vast majority of subjects tested select choice B, which the > > cognitive psychologists take as indicating that we are guided by our > > associations to people like Margie rather than by the logical conditions > of > > the problem. > > > > In my view, logic as a discursive form--a technology of thought--is a > > Western invention. Whether it is identified as "male" because of > historical > > association or biological predisposition, I don't know, and I should > add, I > > don't care. (Jacob, the science of biologically based sex differences in > > cognition has not been "debunked." Rather, feminist scholars have rightly > > pointed out that the data are inconclusive, and that prior assertions of > > biologically based sex differences in cognition over-interpret the > > scientific results.) Neither history nor biology is determinative, and > > logic is too important a part of our cultural legacy to deny any > individual > > or group the opportunity to master it. > > > > David > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Annalisa Aguilar > > Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 12:28 AM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity ; Vera > > John-Steiner > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse > > > > Hi, > > > > About logic: to Greg M., Actually, I thought it was Jacob who discussed > > logic in gendered discourse. Unless you brought it up a long time ago in > > the group he references. I was under the impression that he had attempted > > to bring it up a few times in the past. Or am I mistaken? > > > > In his reply on timestamped Nov 03, 08:30:41 he stated: > > > > "Not to beat the proverbial dead horse, but several listserv > > members--including me--have tried to introduce this position re: logic in > > prior xmca threads. The position has mostly either been ignored or loudly > > rejected out of hand by more vocal participants on this listserv." > > > > So I was responding to that paragraph. > > > > I am not clear about Jacob's position but my position is that logic is an > > intellectual tool, just like intuition can be an emotional tool. Insight > > might be a combination of both logic and intuition. But nothing about > logic > > makes it male, as I see it, no matter how much men might assert that to > be > > the case. > > > > Logic is reasoning in a particular way with the mind, and any human can > > partake in it if one wants. You can't perform logic with your elbows and > > knees. Counting has a logic. So does self-preservation. > > > > What one does with logic has to do with one's values. If your values are > > for a pure race, for example, you can certainly use logic to rationalize > > activities that purify race however you might want to define it. Does > that > > make logic a tool to create meaning that is essentially determined by > > power? Or is it just abuse of logic to assert one's power (over others, > > which is actually being powerless, since one who is truly powerful does > not > > require power over others), which at its basis, is meaningless? > > > > Also, I don't think that Rein was saying gender is fluid. He said it is > > constructed: > > > > "... in other words, what cultures have "naturalized" as divisions into > > genders are more often than not constructions erected by a gender group > in > > order to dominate others. Such construction, I would argue, can only be > > taken down with arguments that follow a logic which itself is not > gendered, > > because if it were, it would be a contestant in the field, not the > referee." > > > > I believe if I read him as he wanted to be read, I think he's saying that > > logic is not gendered, which I agree with. The fact that we can say "a > > logic" means the application of that logic has a boundary, but it doesn't > > mean that this logic is different than that logic. It means if I use a > > hammer on a house, I can also use it to bash in skulls. The tool is the > > same, the application is different, as are the values motivating its use. > > The boundaries are the objectives for using the logic, not the logic > > itself. Of course we can bicker over the forms of mallets, claw hammers, > or > > rocks for hitting things and their differences, but the activity of > > hammering is the same. The values, motivations, and objectives are > > different, which offer the boundary, however the activity remains the > same > > despite those boundaries. > > > > Logic isn't a Western invention, by the way. It's very much part of human > > cognition. Rationalism I suppose could be Western, but I reserve the > right > > to be wrong about that. > > > > Kind regards, > > > > > > Annalisa > > > > > -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Fri Nov 4 13:59:07 2016 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 20:59:07 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? In-Reply-To: References: <6B2C5457-8B44-4DF9-A6A3-6101ED3C1AC6@gmail.com> , Message-ID: <1478293145903.24566@iped.uio.no> I too marvel at how much gets done despite so much scarcity... I take note on the "mission statement" and the observation that the engagement with MCA may be greater. I am thinking of ways of connecting the journal with the list through the xmca pages, but it takes lots of volunteer work. Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Greg Thompson Sent: 04 November 2016 21:37 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? Yes, I'm with you on that too Rod. I think that's why social media can get so nasty so often. It is a chilly medium that is a highly denuded form of communication. (e.g., when I said "I'm with you on that too", was I alluding to other times when I'm not "with you"? Some could interpret it that way (btw, that's not what I meant!!)). I marvel that there is so much that gets done on this listserve in spite of this fact. Also makes me wonder why so many people put so much stock in literacy as being a massively transformative capacity. Seems a more base form of communication than any form of oral communication I've ever experienced (even the phone gives you prosody!). -greg On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 2:22 PM, Rod Parker-Rees < R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk> wrote: > Thanks Helen and Greg, > > I certainly like the opportunity to hang out with interesting people but I > think it is probably inevitable in this sort of set up that wires can get > crossed when people feel they are engaging in different kinds of activities. > I suspect that what has kept this group going is that every now and then > people stand back and take stock of how it is working and that allows > people to realise that it works in different ways (and feels different) for > different people. > > This has made me wonder how often other forms of communication (even where > only two people are involved) can involve different people having very > different understandings about what they are doing and sometimes this > doesn't matter but sometimes it does. > > I hope we can keep it going. > > All the best, > > Rod > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Greg Thompson > Sent: 04 November 2016 19:58 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? > > Great question Rod! > > As to the answer, as John Cage was fond of saying: "no why, just here." > > Okay, fair enough. But it seems like the question deserves a more > thoughtful answer than this. > > I suppose if I were entirely honest, I find this to be a nice place to > hang out and learn and occasionally I try to use the listserve to put > something out there in the interest of getting some feedback to help > develop it. I've had much more success with the former than the latter. > > I do wonder what the mission statement of this listserve would be if there > were such a thing. It seems like we don't engage with MCA nearly as much as > we should if that were to be the goal of the listserve. > > Other than that, I would guess that the mission statement would be > something like: it's a place for people who are interested in CHAT to hang > out and talk about stuff that they care about (sometimes CHAT and MCA > related, sometimes not). > > Is that too cynical? Or is that just about right? > > Perhaps someone else can give a better statement of what the listserve is > "about"? (and I hate to even get into the question of what it SHOULD be - > I'd rather live it and see what works that deliberate about what that life > should look like, but, sure, there is some value in doing the former). > > Thanks for your question/contribution Rod. Right to the point. > -greg > > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Helena Worthen > wrote: > > > This is a good contribution. Thanks -- H > > > > Helena Worthen > > helenaworthen@gmail.com > > Vietnam blog: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > > > On Nov 4, 2016, at 2:30 AM, Rod Parker-Rees wrote: > > > > > I am an interested but time-poor lurker on the margins of xmca but > > > the > > ripples stirred by Mike's decision to reduce his pastoral contribution > > to our community have made me question how different participants > > understand what kind of activity we are engaging in here. > > > > > > It seems to me that each of us may understand the social form of > > > what we > > are doing in different ways. For some it is like a conversation and we > > feel disappointed or hurt if our contributions are met with silence or > > if the chain moves on in a different direction. For others we are a > > working group, collaborating to develop a practical and ethical > > theoretical model. For others we are something like a conference, > > where thoughts and ideas can be put before others for their > > consideration and response - and I am sure there are many other ways > > in which different people understand their participation differently. > > > > > > Does this matter? Would xmca be 'better' if it was more consistent, > > > more > > coherent, more tightly and predictably governed by shared social > > understandings? While more explicit regulation (protocols for > > labelling streams and posts and for timing of responses etc.) might > > help to make our activity feel more inclusive and more sharable it may > > also introduce new kinds of discomfort. > > > > > > What I have found interesting in my time around the margins of xmca > > > is > > the challenge of sustaining conversations without all the non-verbal > > feedback which we rely on when we talk with people. When 'wordings' > > float off into the ether, cast off from the body and personhood of > > their speakers or writers they become objects which can be scrutinised > > and revisited and this can be a reason for 'lurkers' to feel reluctant > about contributing. > > What we are doing is not a conversation. Nor is it even a forum, in > > the sense of people taking turns to orate before a crowd, because > > contributors often get very little phatic feedback from the lurkers > > and may have very little sense of how their arguments have been > > understood or received. But we are moved by our understandings of what > > it is and is not OK to do, which come from other kinds of > > interactions. Can I say something if I have not been part of what has > > gone before? Should I respond or stay quiet? What should I do if I am > > annoyed or angered by something someone else has contributed? > > > > > > I am already getting anxious about how what I have said might be > > interpreted by others and feeling I have had a long enough turn but I > > would be really interested to hear what others think about why we are > here! > > > > > > I have found what people do here very helpful but I do feel uneasy > > > about > > risking contributions! > > > > > > All the best, > > > > > > Rod > > > ________________________________ > > > [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif] > //www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass> > > > > > > This email and any files with it are confidential and intended > > > solely > > for the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not > > the intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the > > information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on > it. > > If you have received this email in error please let the sender know > > immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not > > necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University > > accepts no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to > > scan emails and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept > > responsibility for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this > > email or its attachments constitutes an order for goods or services > > unless accompanied by an official order form. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > Assistant Professor > Department of Anthropology > 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > Brigham Young University > Provo, UT 84602 > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson > ________________________________ > [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif] //www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass> > > This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely for > the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the > intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the > information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on it. > If you have received this email in error please let the sender know > immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not > necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University accepts > no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan emails > and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept responsibility > for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its > attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless accompanied > by an official order form. > > -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Fri Nov 4 14:06:19 2016 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 21:06:19 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? In-Reply-To: <1478293145903.24566@iped.uio.no> References: <6B2C5457-8B44-4DF9-A6A3-6101ED3C1AC6@gmail.com> , , <1478293145903.24566@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <1478293577720.92491@iped.uio.no> A current mission statement can be found here: http://lchc.ucsd.edu/xmca As with any plan for an action, the statement says many things except "what the devil you are ever talking about at the work site for what it looks like until you are up against it, let alone what it looks like 'really,' 'actually,''evidently'..." (as Garfinkel would have put it). I copy-paste: -- XMCA The Mind, Culture, and Activity Homepage is an interactive forum for a community of interdisciplinary scholars who share an interest in the study of human mind in its cultural and historical contexts. Our emphasis is research that seeks to resolve methodological problems associated with the analysis of human and theoretical approaches that place culture and activity at the center of attempts to understand human nature. Our participants come from a variety of disciplines, including anthropology, cognitive science, education, linguistics, psychology and sociology. The XMCA homepage seeks to integrate a variety of activities in the community into one on-line resource. On this page you will find links to current and past issues of MCA, on-line discussions from the XMCA mailing list, personal profiles of our participants, and links to other related Web sites. We invite all people interested in any aspect of our activities and research to contribute to a common dialogue among e-mail discussants, journal subscribers, and interested researchers. --- Alfredo ________________________________________ From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: 04 November 2016 21:59 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: Re: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? I too marvel at how much gets done despite so much scarcity... I take note on the "mission statement" and the observation that the engagement with MCA may be greater. I am thinking of ways of connecting the journal with the list through the xmca pages, but it takes lots of volunteer work. Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Greg Thompson Sent: 04 November 2016 21:37 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? Yes, I'm with you on that too Rod. I think that's why social media can get so nasty so often. It is a chilly medium that is a highly denuded form of communication. (e.g., when I said "I'm with you on that too", was I alluding to other times when I'm not "with you"? Some could interpret it that way (btw, that's not what I meant!!)). I marvel that there is so much that gets done on this listserve in spite of this fact. Also makes me wonder why so many people put so much stock in literacy as being a massively transformative capacity. Seems a more base form of communication than any form of oral communication I've ever experienced (even the phone gives you prosody!). -greg On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 2:22 PM, Rod Parker-Rees < R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk> wrote: > Thanks Helen and Greg, > > I certainly like the opportunity to hang out with interesting people but I > think it is probably inevitable in this sort of set up that wires can get > crossed when people feel they are engaging in different kinds of activities. > I suspect that what has kept this group going is that every now and then > people stand back and take stock of how it is working and that allows > people to realise that it works in different ways (and feels different) for > different people. > > This has made me wonder how often other forms of communication (even where > only two people are involved) can involve different people having very > different understandings about what they are doing and sometimes this > doesn't matter but sometimes it does. > > I hope we can keep it going. > > All the best, > > Rod > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Greg Thompson > Sent: 04 November 2016 19:58 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? > > Great question Rod! > > As to the answer, as John Cage was fond of saying: "no why, just here." > > Okay, fair enough. But it seems like the question deserves a more > thoughtful answer than this. > > I suppose if I were entirely honest, I find this to be a nice place to > hang out and learn and occasionally I try to use the listserve to put > something out there in the interest of getting some feedback to help > develop it. I've had much more success with the former than the latter. > > I do wonder what the mission statement of this listserve would be if there > were such a thing. It seems like we don't engage with MCA nearly as much as > we should if that were to be the goal of the listserve. > > Other than that, I would guess that the mission statement would be > something like: it's a place for people who are interested in CHAT to hang > out and talk about stuff that they care about (sometimes CHAT and MCA > related, sometimes not). > > Is that too cynical? Or is that just about right? > > Perhaps someone else can give a better statement of what the listserve is > "about"? (and I hate to even get into the question of what it SHOULD be - > I'd rather live it and see what works that deliberate about what that life > should look like, but, sure, there is some value in doing the former). > > Thanks for your question/contribution Rod. Right to the point. > -greg > > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Helena Worthen > wrote: > > > This is a good contribution. Thanks -- H > > > > Helena Worthen > > helenaworthen@gmail.com > > Vietnam blog: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > > > On Nov 4, 2016, at 2:30 AM, Rod Parker-Rees wrote: > > > > > I am an interested but time-poor lurker on the margins of xmca but > > > the > > ripples stirred by Mike's decision to reduce his pastoral contribution > > to our community have made me question how different participants > > understand what kind of activity we are engaging in here. > > > > > > It seems to me that each of us may understand the social form of > > > what we > > are doing in different ways. For some it is like a conversation and we > > feel disappointed or hurt if our contributions are met with silence or > > if the chain moves on in a different direction. For others we are a > > working group, collaborating to develop a practical and ethical > > theoretical model. For others we are something like a conference, > > where thoughts and ideas can be put before others for their > > consideration and response - and I am sure there are many other ways > > in which different people understand their participation differently. > > > > > > Does this matter? Would xmca be 'better' if it was more consistent, > > > more > > coherent, more tightly and predictably governed by shared social > > understandings? While more explicit regulation (protocols for > > labelling streams and posts and for timing of responses etc.) might > > help to make our activity feel more inclusive and more sharable it may > > also introduce new kinds of discomfort. > > > > > > What I have found interesting in my time around the margins of xmca > > > is > > the challenge of sustaining conversations without all the non-verbal > > feedback which we rely on when we talk with people. When 'wordings' > > float off into the ether, cast off from the body and personhood of > > their speakers or writers they become objects which can be scrutinised > > and revisited and this can be a reason for 'lurkers' to feel reluctant > about contributing. > > What we are doing is not a conversation. Nor is it even a forum, in > > the sense of people taking turns to orate before a crowd, because > > contributors often get very little phatic feedback from the lurkers > > and may have very little sense of how their arguments have been > > understood or received. But we are moved by our understandings of what > > it is and is not OK to do, which come from other kinds of > > interactions. Can I say something if I have not been part of what has > > gone before? Should I respond or stay quiet? What should I do if I am > > annoyed or angered by something someone else has contributed? > > > > > > I am already getting anxious about how what I have said might be > > interpreted by others and feeling I have had a long enough turn but I > > would be really interested to hear what others think about why we are > here! > > > > > > I have found what people do here very helpful but I do feel uneasy > > > about > > risking contributions! > > > > > > All the best, > > > > > > Rod > > > ________________________________ > > > [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif] > //www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass> > > > > > > This email and any files with it are confidential and intended > > > solely > > for the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not > > the intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the > > information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on > it. > > If you have received this email in error please let the sender know > > immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not > > necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University > > accepts no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to > > scan emails and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept > > responsibility for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this > > email or its attachments constitutes an order for goods or services > > unless accompanied by an official order form. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > Assistant Professor > Department of Anthropology > 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > Brigham Young University > Provo, UT 84602 > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson > ________________________________ > [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif] //www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass> > > This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely for > the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the > intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the > information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on it. > If you have received this email in error please let the sender know > immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not > necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University accepts > no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan emails > and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept responsibility > for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its > attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless accompanied > by an official order form. > > -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From dkellogg60@gmail.com Fri Nov 4 14:06:15 2016 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 08:06:15 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Help needed finding LSV references to *First*and *Second* Signal Systems In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Rod: Thanks for your comment. You see, I'm trying to write "summarizing notes" for our teachers back in Korea (the books are largely distributed and read through the teachers union). When we published "Thinking and Speech" with copious and obscurantist end-notes back in 2010, the teachers put out a study guide, called "The Easy Way to Read Thinking and Speech". Since then we've tried to include boxes and summarizing end-notes in the actual books themselves in order to save them the trouble, but I'm never quite sure how much and how to write them. I tend to get lost in the text. Anyway, you got it. The essence is the transition from non-co-generalized to co-generalized thinking. But of course "co-generalized" isn't really English and "non-co-generalized" is ungainly as well as being un-English. It sounds only marginally better in Korean, and even in the Russian, Vygotsky's making a link between "communication" and "generalization" that runs through Sapir rather than through etymology. It's easy, especially, as a foreigner, to make too much of etymology (as foreigners do when they assume that "understand" has something to do with standing under bridges between concepts). So for example there is, so far as I know, no common root for ???????? ("teaching-and-learning") and ????????? (?generalization?), although there is between ????????? (?generalization?) and ??????? ("interaction, communication, commonality"). I think that for everybody on xmca the best way into Hasan's work is right in front of your nose, a paper she wrote especially for us, to wit: http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/Paper/JuneJuly05/HasanVygHallBernst.pdf This is an early draft of her criticism of Vygotsky. There is also: http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/Paper/JuneJuly05/HasanSemMediation.pdf And finally, one of my favorites, unfortunately not available on the LCHC website: https://www.equinoxpub.com/home/view-chapter/?id=25626 But you are a child language person. I think that for you her work on mother-child dialogue and the "ontogenesis of ideology" would be riveting. See "HasanSemMediation" for a good taster. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Sat, Nov 5, 2016 at 12:50 AM, Rod Parker-Rees < R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk> wrote: > Many thanks for sending the lecture, David. > > I think the passage where V underlines the distinction between > 'co-generalized' and non co-generalized' thinking is intriguing: > > "From the psychological point of view, the transition from sensation to > thinking signifies in the first place a transition from a > non-co-generalized to a co-generalized reflection of reality in > consciousness". > > Is there an etymological connection between the Russian words ??????? and > ????????? and the word for teaching/learning which I know as 'obuchenie'? > > I teach a module which is grandly entitled 'Understanding Understanding', > the main focus of which is on the social nature of understanding > (etymologically 'standing among' rather than standing under!) - how we > don't understand something unless we know something of what it means to > other people. I think this was understood centuries ago and it informs the > etymology of words like conscience and consciousness (con-scientia - > co-knowing) and concepts (what is known together). So when V writes here > about co-generalized thinking is he using the same terms as he used in > Thinking and Speech (I believe) to contrast spontaneous and 'scientific' or > 'schooled' concepts? I have always read this as an argument that the > 'private' and the 'public' cannot be understood in isolation - the > spontaneous concepts bring 'colour and vitality' and significance to the > abstract scientific concepts which provide structure and sharability for > the spontaneous concepts. > > Is there something you can recommend as a way in to Hasan's work? > > All the best, > > Rod > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of David Kellogg > Sent: 04 November 2016 04:25 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Help needed finding LSV references to *First*and > *Second* Signal Systems > > Peter: (Maybe both Peters?) > > Sometimes I think the best we husbands, fathers, and political activists > can really do to promote gender equality in intellectual discourse is not > to maintain a respectful male silence but rather to use our own booming > baritones to amplify outstanding thinkers whose voices are in danger of > being lost precisely because they were more soprano, or because they > belonged to women born on the wrong side of the planet, or both. I am > thinking of Ruqaiya Hasan, who is in imminent danger of being lost, even to > feminist writers, in the cacaphony of Bourdieu, Baudrillard, Lyotard, > Habermas, Foucault, Derrida, Lacan, and even Freud, none of whom had > anything to say about Vygotsky (and, not coincidentally, all of whom are > lesser sociolinguists than she was). > > Ruqaiya was an appreciative but also very critical reader of Vygotsky. > Sometimes, when I am reading her thoughts on Vygotsky I feel like she is > holding the book upside down, but then when I read it again I find that I > am the one standing on my head. For example, one of the great advantages > that Hasan finds in Vygotsky is not that he distinguishes between the > higher and lower psychological functions. As far as Ruqaiya was concerned > there was a bit too much of that around, and there still is. Instead, > Ruqaiya finds that Vygotsky's strength is being able to link them together, > precisely through his studies of children, including the biological and the > social in a single complex unit of analysis (e.g. phonology AND > lexicogrammar in a single dimension, which Vygotsky calls "phasal"). > > Ruqaiya doesn't mean that "signalization" is tied to "signification"--she > is too much of a linguist and too much of a dialectician not to see the > huge gap between them. But she does think that the word values (or, as she > would prefer it, the "wording values") that are the bases for signification > are Whorfian, Sapirian social co-generalizations. These are biological in > the sense that they are huntable, gatherable, herdable, farmable, > reproducible. They are also, in materialized form, edible and wearable: > they are often made out of economic interests: they are exchange values, > like the exchange value of any commodity they evolve from use values based > in adapting the environment to human needs. > > Take a look at this. I think it is probably literally the last public > lecture Vygotsky ever gave, and as far as I know it's never been translated > into any language (except now Korean). I'm including the Russian because my > own Russian is...well, lousy, and I keep hoping some of the Russophones on > the list may catch some errors before it goes to press in February. In it, > Vygotsky is trying to show exactly what Ruqaiya was talking about: the way > in which the child goes from "non-co-generalized" thinking to > co-generalized thinking. It's not a step. It's not a leap. It's a whole set > of leaps, some of which depend on parents, professionals, and political > activists. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 9:04 AM, Peter Feigenbaum [Staff] < > pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu> wrote: > > > Dear colleagues, > > > > As a representative of the category *Slow Responder* (I am a busy > > professional, a husband, a father of two, and a political activist), I > > am only now getting around to replying to those who responded to my > > earlier request for help. My apologies if my pace is too slow for a > > satisfying exchange. > > > > Because I was fairly vague about my reason for asking for a reference > > to first and second signal systems in Vygotsky's writings, I > > unwittingly opened the door to discussion of the differences between > > *signals* and *signs*. In fact, my interest is in their > > *similarities*, in the properties that are common to both. I am > > seeking the common denominator between animal stimulus-response thinking > and human initiation-response thinking. > > Fortunately, that linkage exists precisely where David Kellogg pointed > me: > > in Vol. 4, on p.55 of HDHMF in Vygotsky's Collected Works in English. > > > > Vygotsky is very clear when he distinguishes between *natural* signals > > (or > > signalization) and *artificial* signs (or signification). The former > > occurs when animals interact with the environment and their brains > > form conditioned reflexes, whereas the latter occurs when humans > > invent their own conditioned reflexes (words) and then apply those > > reflexes to themselves (or others) in order to master their own > > behavior. In essence, Vygotsky considered *signification* a special case > of *signalization*. > > > > One issue I had not counted on is the historical/political one. I was > > unprepared for the possibility that the first and second signal > > systems may have been a political problem of accommodation to the > > authorities rather than an actual scientific problem. Thanks to Mike > > for pointing that out, and for pointing out A.R. Luria's fairly > > substantial contribution to the discussion--but especially for > > contacting (the wonderful and brilliant) Tanya Akhutina! > > > > I'm not quite sure how to make good use of Huw's suggestion about > > serial and parallel circuits, so I'll have to put that issue to the side > for now. > > But thanks for raising it. > > > > In light of the ongoing discussion about how to create a more > > gender-sensitive and gender-balanced dialogue on this listserv, I > > would like to invite anyone who is lurking (or very busy) to > > contribute any useful information you may have about my request *in your > own good time*. > > These problems are complicated, and I'm learning to be patient. > > > > Thanks to all. > > > > In solidarity, > > Peter > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 6:55 PM, mike cole wrote: > > > > > Peter -- Concerning your initial question. I obtained the following > > answer > > > from Tanya Akhutina. > > > > > > ????, > > > ?????? ??????? ? ?????? ?????????? ??????? ? 1932 ?. ?????????????? > > > ?????????? ? ??? ????? ????? ?????? ? 33 ? 34 ?????. ? ????? > > > ?????????? ? ?????????? ?? ?????. > > > ??? - ?????? ????, ?? ?????? ??? ??? ????????. ?? ???? ?????? ????? > > > ????? ???????????, ??????? ???, ?????? ???? ?.?.??????????. ?? > > > ???????????? ? ??????? ????? ?????????? ?????? ???? ????? ???????? ? > > > ????? ?????? ?? > > ???. > > > 144: " ?.?. ????????? ???? ?????????? ??????, ? ? ??? ??????? > > > ?????????? ??????? ? ??????? ??????? ???????????????? ????? ???? > > > ????????, ?? ??? ?? ????? ??????, ??????? ?? ??? ?????, ?????????? > > > ?? ?????? ????????? > > ?????". > > > > > > Roughly, > > > Mike, > > > Pavlov wrote about the second signal system in 1932. > > > Correspondingly, references/rememberances to it had to wait until > > > 1933-34. Such > > references/ > > > rememberances in Vygotsky I do not recall. > > > > > > ARL was another case, he was obligated to speak in this way. Olga > > Sergeevna > > > Vinogradova, a student of ARL's [with whom I conducted research in > > > the winter of 1962/63-mc] is cited by Lena Luria [Luria's daughter] > > > in her > > book > > > on p. 144 "A.R. new the teachings of Pavlov perfectly, and in his > > lectures > > > he changed the lexicon and the beauty of a straightforward > > > psychological language was replaced, but none the less the knowledge > > > which he gave us remained on the the level of real science." > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 3:42 PM, mike cole wrote: > > > > > > > It seems that side-by-side translations of the two documents merit > > > > archival publication, David. JREEP is an obvious repository. In > > addition > > > to > > > > which at present we have a good deal more evidence about children, > > chess > > > > boards, and the issues vexing Vygotsky than he had access to. The > > > > non/difficult chronology of the texts complicates an already > > complicated > > > > process of interpretation as we have long witnessed here. > > > > > > > > Perhaps as a separate thread, it would be nice to put together a > > > > discussion of the core linkages between Vygotsky and Halliday in > > > > your work..... one of those chains of discussion that come and go. > > > > Perhaps a mini-course devoted to the following, to me, essential > idea: > > > > > > > > It seems to me that ALL of these are signalization systems (not > > > > signifying systems, because they do not have lexicogrammar and > > > > cannot convey ideal values) > > > > > > > > Providing a "cheat sheet" for autodidacts, might it be possible to > > create > > > > some > > > > "field of interest" in the xmca discussion for dealing with this > idea? > > > > > > > > I have in no way forgotten the issue of the relation of > > > > microgenesis > > and > > > > ontogenesis. It seems another "key point" as most of us go about > > > > using > > > CHAT > > > > ideas in the course of the teaching/learning activities that pay > > > > the > > > bread > > > > and butter. As matters stand, I offer Franklin in the blocks as an > > > example > > > > of microgenesis in a preschool classroom involving play as an > > > > example > > of > > > a > > > > zone of proximal development where childre are a head taller than > > > > themselves. That discussion is for the microgenesis/ontogenesis > > > > thread > > > if I > > > > recall. > > > > > > > > I would be VERY interested to learn of ways that feminist, queer > > theory, > > > > critical disability studies theory, neurodiversity theory, and > > > > others > > can > > > > help me to understand these categories and the theories that > > > > purport to account for them. > > > > > > > > If they need to be re-thought, might as well be here. Ain't goin > > nowhere. > > > > > > > > mike > > > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 2:28 PM, David Kellogg > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> I'm working with two versions of one of Vygotsky's last lectures > > > >> (the second version is given exactly five days before he was > > > >> brought home > > > with > > > >> a > > > >> throat haemorrhage to die, the first about a year earlier). There > > > >> are passages that are almost word for word repetitions. There are > > > >> passages that are semantically the same and but quite differently > > > >> worded (the > > earlier > > > >> Vygotsky is quite modest and tentative; the later Vygotsky is > > > >> much > > more > > > >> critical and also more confident). Then there are passages that > > > >> say > > > pretty > > > >> much the opposite of what was said a year earlier: for example, > > > >> in the early lecture Vygotsky says that a child faced with a > > > >> chessboard who doesn't know how to play will see it structurally > > > >> and sort the pieces > > by > > > >> color (black pieces on black squares, white on white) but in the > > > >> later lecture it is the child who does know how to play who sees > > > >> it structurally, because the child sees a black knight in a > > > >> "structure" with a white > > > pawn. > > > >> He's a genius, and geniuses tend to think things over a lot, > > > >> turning > > > them > > > >> this way and that, and never looking at anything as final, not > > > >> even > > when > > > >> they are about to die. > > > >> > > > >> HDHMF has to be read the same way. Vygotsky cannot quite seem to > > > >> make > > up > > > >> his mind whether there are three stages of higher behavior > > > >> (instinct, habit, intelligence) or four different stages of > > > >> higher behavior (instinct, habit, intelligence, and freedom). In > > > >> Chapter Four, he very clearly > > > argues > > > >> for four or more, but in Chapter Five, which may have been > > > >> written > > much > > > >> earlier, he argues for three but then three paragraphs later > > > >> considers > > > it > > > >> safer to begin as Thorndike does with two levels (unconditional > > > >> and conditional responses). So "signal" vs. "signification" could > > > >> just be > > > seen > > > >> as the difference between unconditional and conditional > > > >> responses, or > > it > > > >> could be seen as the difference between instinct and > > > >> intelligence, or > > it > > > >> could be seen as two poles with an almost infinite number of > > > >> genetic variations in between. I prefer the latter view, but I > > > >> recognize that Vygotsky has to package things pretty differently > > > >> for different > > > audiences, > > > >> and we are not one of the audiences that he has foremost in his > mind. > > > >> > > > >> Take bacteria. Bacteria are apparently capable of quorum sensing: > > > >> that > > > is, > > > >> bacteria don't multiply when there are no other bacteria around, > > > >> they > > do > > > >> when there are some but not too many, and they don't when there > > > >> are > > too > > > >> many. Now, take ants. Ants have a system of finding new nests > > > >> that involves scouting for potential sites. If the site is > > > >> extremely good, they go > > > back > > > >> and take other ants there quickly, but if it is not so good they > > > >> tend > > to > > > >> dawdle a little, with the result that the best site gets more > > > >> ants, > > and > > > at > > > >> a certain point the whole nest "decides" to move there. Now, take > > > >> bees. Like ants, bees go scouting. The scouts come back and they > > dance; > > > >> the > > > >> dances attract more or fewer onlookers, and when a quorum is > > > >> reached, > > > the > > > >> hive moves. It seems to me that ALL of these are signalization > > > >> systems (not signifying systems, because they do not have > > > >> lexicogrammar and cannot convey ideal values) but the difference > > > >> between the ant system and > > the > > > >> bee > > > >> system is as big as the difference between the bee system and > > > >> early > > > child > > > >> language. For ants, the scouting and decision making are not > > > >> differentiated, but for bees they are distinct moments--so the > > > >> ant > > > system > > > >> involves a simple signal system and the bee system involves a > > > >> second signal system. > > > >> > > > >> David Kellogg > > > >> Macquarie University > > > >> > > > >> On Sun, Oct 30, 2016 at 3:45 AM, wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > In this discussion The center of this relational exploration is > > > between > > > >> > signalization AND signification and my question goes back to > > > >> > the > > place > > > >> of > > > >> > the general term *gesturing*. > > > >> > Is this signalization or is this phenomena signification. > > > >> > The act creating actual*ity (sens) which always includes > > > >> > tendency or orientation towards or away from something. > > > >> > The act is gestural acts and implies *each in the other*. > > > >> > > > > >> > The relation of gestural receiving and responding and this > > > >> > phenomena > > > in > > > >> > relation to signalization and signification. > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > >> > > > > >> > From: Huw Lloyd > > > >> > Sent: October 29, 2016 9:01 AM > > > >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: XMCA-ers: Help needed finding LSV > > > >> > references > > to > > > >> > *First*and *Second* Signal Systems > > > >> > > > > >> > Peter, > > > >> > > > > >> > If by signalisation you mean use of signs to influence > > > >> > behaviour in > > > >> terms > > > >> > of operational criteria and speech, then yes this is so. It > > > >> > has > > been > > > >> > studied quite systematically, but is perhaps less well known. I > > > >> > can elaborate on this if this is your drift. > > > >> > > > > >> > Best, > > > >> > Huw > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > On 28 October 2016 at 22:43, Peter Feigenbaum [Staff] < > > > >> > pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu> wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> > > David, > > > >> > > > > > >> > > As usual, your suggestions are both helpful and erudite. > > > >> > > Thanks > > for > > > >> the > > > >> > > poignant references to Vygotsky and to Marx. Although Soviet > > > academic > > > >> > > politics may have complicated the issue, there does seem to > > > >> > > be > > some > > > >> > > substance to the argument that the nervous systems of animals > > > >> > > and > > > the > > > >> > > speech communication systems of humans share the common > > > >> > > property > > of > > > >> > > *signalization*. Personally, I think there's a lot more to > > > >> > > this > > > topic > > > >> > than > > > >> > > meets the eye--or, better yet, there's a lot of opportunity > > > >> > > here > > for > > > >> > > developing the problem further. > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Once again, I owe an intellectual debt to the participants of > > > >> > > this listserv! > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Cheers, > > > >> > > Peter > > > >> > > > > > >> > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 5:10 PM, David Kellogg < > > > dkellogg60@gmail.com> > > > >> > > wrote: > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Peter: > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > I think Mike's right. The "second signal system" was an > > > >> > > > attempt > > to > > > >> > > preserve > > > >> > > > the idea of higher psychological functions in an atmosphere > > > >> > > > that > > > was > > > >> > not > > > >> > > > that different from what was going on in America at the > > > >> > > > same > > time > > > >> (and > > > >> > > > which Mike experienced first hand in both places). When I > > > >> > > > read > > > >> > Belyayev's > > > >> > > > work on foreign language teaching, he talks a lot about the > > > "second > > > >> > > signal > > > >> > > > system". There, are, however, two places in Vygotsky which > > > >> > > > MIGHT > > > >> > provide > > > >> > > > some support, if you wanted to make the case that the > > > >> > > > "second > > > signal > > > >> > > > system" is not completely incompatible with Vygotsky. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > One is Chapter Two of the History of the Development of the > > Higher > > > >> > Mental > > > >> > > > functions. See below. Starting around paragraph 142, > > > >> > > > Vygotsky > > > likens > > > >> > > > Pavlov's model of the brain as a telephone exchange. The > > problem, > > > of > > > >> > > > course, is that back then telephone exchanges did require > > > >> > > > human > > > >> > operators > > > >> > > > to make the connection! > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > The other is the discussion of "second order symbolism" in > > > >> > > > the > > > work > > > >> of > > > >> > > > Delacroix, which you can find in Chapter Six of Thinking > > > >> > > > and > > > Speech > > > >> and > > > >> > > > also in Chapter 7 of HDHMF (fifth para). This is a very > > different > > > >> > > > notion--it's the idea that writing is a set of symbols for > > > speaking. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > David Kellogg > > > >> > > > Macquarie University > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > >From HDHMF, Chapter Two, Research Method > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > We know that, as Pavlov says, ?the most general bases of > > > >> > > > higher > > > >> nervous > > > >> > > > activity are ascribed to the large hemispheres, the same in > > > >> > > > both > > > >> higher > > > >> > > > animals and in people, and for this reason even elementary > > > >> phenomena of > > > >> > > > this activity must be identical in the one and in the other > > > >> > > > in > > > both > > > >> > > normal > > > >> > > > and pathological cases? (1951, p. 15). Actually, this can > > scarcely > > > >> be > > > >> > > > disputed. But as soon as we go from the elementary > > > >> > > > phenomena of > > > >> higher > > > >> > > > nervous activity to the complex, to the higher phenomena > > > >> > > > within > > > this > > > >> > > higher > > > >> > > > ? in the physiological sense ? activity, then two different > > > >> > > methodological > > > >> > > > paths for studying the specific uniqueness of human higher > > > behavior > > > >> > open > > > >> > > > before us. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > One is the path to further study of complication, > > > >> > > > enrichment, > > and > > > >> > > > differentiation of the same phenomena that experimental > > > >> > > > study > > > >> > ascertains > > > >> > > in > > > >> > > > animals. Here, on this path, the greatest restraint must be > > > >> observed. > > > >> > In > > > >> > > > transferring information on higher nervous activity of > > > >> > > > animals > > to > > > >> > higher > > > >> > > > activity of man, we must constantly check the factual > > similarities > > > >> in > > > >> > the > > > >> > > > function of organs in man and animals, but in general the > > > principle > > > >> > > itself > > > >> > > > of the research remains the same as it was in the study of > > > animals. > > > >> > This > > > >> > > is > > > >> > > > the path of physiological study. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > True, this circumstance is of major significance and in the > > > >> > > > area > > > of > > > >> > > > physiological study of behavior, in a comparative study of > > > >> > > > man > > and > > > >> > > animals, > > > >> > > > we must not put the function of the heart, stomach, and > > > >> > > > other > > > organs > > > >> > > which > > > >> > > > are so similar to that of man on the same plane with higher > > > nervous > > > >> > > > activity. In the words of I. P. Pavlov, ?It is specifically > > > >> > > > this > > > >> > activity > > > >> > > > that so strikingly sets man apart from the rank of animals, > > > >> > > > that > > > >> places > > > >> > > man > > > >> > > > immeasurably above the whole animal world? (ibid. p. 414). > > > >> > > > And > > we > > > >> might > > > >> > > > expect that along the path of physiological research we > > > >> > > > will > > find > > > a > > > >> > > > specific qualitative difference in human activity. Let us > > > >> > > > recall > > > the > > > >> > > words > > > >> > > > of Pavlov cited above on the quantitative and qualitative > > > >> > incomparability > > > >> > > > of the word with conditioned stimuli of animals. Even in > > > >> > > > the > > plan > > > of > > > >> > > strict > > > >> > > > physiological consideration, ?the grandiose signalistics of > > > speech? > > > >> > > stands > > > >> > > > outside the whole other mass of stimuli, the > > > >> > > > ?multicapaciousness > > > of > > > >> the > > > >> > > > word? places it in a unique position. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > The other path is the path of psychological research. From > > > >> > > > the > > > very > > > >> > > > beginning, it proposes to seek the specific uniqueness of > > > >> > > > human > > > >> > behavior > > > >> > > > which does take us beyond the initial point. The specific > > > >> uniqueness is > > > >> > > > considered not only in its subsequent complexity and > > development, > > > >> > > > quantitative and qualitative refinement of the cerebral > > > hemispheres, > > > >> > but > > > >> > > > primarily in the social nature of man and in a new method > > > >> > > > of > > > >> > adaptation, > > > >> > > as > > > >> > > > compared with animals, that sets man apart. The main > > > >> > > > difference > > > >> between > > > >> > > the > > > >> > > > behavior of man and of animals consists not only in that > > > >> > > > the > > human > > > >> > brain > > > >> > > is > > > >> > > > immeasurably above the brain of the dog and that the higher > > > nervous > > > >> > > > activity ?so strikingly sets man apart from the rank of > > animals,? > > > >> but > > > >> > > most > > > >> > > > of all, because it is the brain of a social being and > > > >> > > > because > > the > > > >> laws > > > >> > of > > > >> > > > higher nervous activity of man are manifested and act in > > > >> > > > the > > human > > > >> > > > personality. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > But let us return again to the ?most general bases of > > > >> > > > higher > > > nervous > > > >> > > > activity, related to the cerebral hemispheres,? and > > > >> > > > identical in > > > >> higher > > > >> > > > animals and man. We think that it is in this point that we > > > >> > > > can > > > >> disclose > > > >> > > > with definitive clarity the difference of which we speak. > > > >> > > > The > > most > > > >> > > general > > > >> > > > basis of behavior, identical in man and animals, is > > > *signalization.* > > > >> > > Pavlov > > > >> > > > said, ?So the basic and most general activity of the > > > >> > > > cerebral > > > >> > hemispheres > > > >> > > > is signaling with an infinite number of signals and with > > > changeable > > > >> > > > signalization? (ibid., p. 30). As is known, this is the > > > >> > > > most > > > general > > > >> > > > formulation of the whole idea of conditioned reflexes that > > > >> > > > lies > > at > > > >> the > > > >> > > base > > > >> > > > of the physiology of higher nervous activity. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > But human behavior is distinguished exactly in that it > > > >> > > > creates > > > >> > artificial > > > >> > > > signaling stimuli, primarily the grandiose signalization of > > > speech, > > > >> and > > > >> > > in > > > >> > > > this way masters the signaling activity of the cerebral > > > >> hemispheres. If > > > >> > > the > > > >> > > > basic and most general activity of the cerebral hemispheres > > > >> > > > in > > > >> animals > > > >> > > and > > > >> > > > in man is signalization, then the basic and most general > > activity > > > of > > > >> > man > > > >> > > > that differentiates man from animals in the first place, > > > >> > > > from > > the > > > >> > aspect > > > >> > > of > > > >> > > > psychology, is *signification,* that is, creation and use > > > >> > > > of > > > signs. > > > >> We > > > >> > > are > > > >> > > > using this word in its most literal sense and precise meaning. > > > >> > > > Signification is the creation and use of signs, that is, > > > artificial > > > >> > > > signals. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > We will consider more closely this new principle of > > > >> > > > activity. It > > > >> must > > > >> > not > > > >> > > > in any sense be contrasted with the principle of > signalization. > > > >> > > Changeable > > > >> > > > signalization that results in the formation of temporary, > > > >> conditional, > > > >> > > > special connections between the organism and the > > > >> > > > environment is > > an > > > >> > > > indispensable, biological prerequisite of the higher > > > >> > > > activity > > that > > > >> we > > > >> > > > arbitrarily call signification and is its base. The system > > > >> > > > of > > > >> > connections > > > >> > > > that is established in the brain of an animal is a copy or > > > >> reflection > > > >> > of > > > >> > > > natural connections between ?all kinds of agents of nature? > > > >> > > > that > > > >> signal > > > >> > > the > > > >> > > > arrival of immediately favorable or destructive phenomena. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > It is very obvious that such signalization ? a reflection > > > >> > > > of the > > > >> > natural > > > >> > > > connection of phenomena, wholly created by natural > > > >> > > > conditions ? > > > >> cannot > > > >> > be > > > >> > > > an adequate basis of human behavior. For human adaptation, > > > >> > > > an > > > active > > > >> > > > *change > > > >> > > > in the nature of man *is essential. It is the basis of all > > > >> > > > human > > > >> > history. > > > >> > > > It necessarily presupposes an active change in man?s behavior. > > > >> > ?Affecting > > > >> > > > the environment by this movement and changing it, he > > > >> > > > changes his > > > own > > > >> > > nature > > > >> > > > at the same time,? says Marx. ?He develops forces asleep in > > > >> > > > it > > and > > > >> > > subjects > > > >> > > > the play of these forces to his own will? (K. Marx and F. > > Engels, > > > >> > > > *Collected > > > >> > > > Works,* Vol. 23, pp. 188-189 > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > 3A__www.marxists.org_archive_marx_works_1867-2Dc1_ch07.htm- > > > >> > > > 23forces&d=DQIFaQ&c=aqMfXOEvEJQh2iQMCb7Wy8l0sPnURk > > > cqADc2guUW8IM&r= > > > >> > > > mXj3yhpYNklTxyN3KioIJ0ECmPHilpf4N2p9PBMATWs&m= > > > >> > cxiDdHmIrHosSMq59vJlZ4j-S- > > > >> > > > 4h5DSiLaMzqzi2yNA&s=J3sZBxFP1DTk3B8MLGJTyEw- > > > RZmpA347cJfMSUrwSa4&e= > > > >> >). > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 7:50 AM, Peter Feigenbaum [Staff] < > > > >> > > > pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu> wrote: > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Mike, > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > Thanks for the Luria references. From a cursory reading > > > >> > > > > of > > the > > > >> > > relevant > > > >> > > > > passages in the Luria & Yudovich book, and judging by > > > >> > > > > some of > > > the > > > >> > other > > > >> > > > > sources you listed, I get the impression that there > > > >> > > > > hasn't > > been > > > >> much > > > >> > > > > theoretical *fleshing out* of the structures of the > > > >> > > > > second > > > signal > > > >> > > system. > > > >> > > > > I hope that the concept of a first and second signal > > > >> > > > > system is > > > not > > > >> > > just a > > > >> > > > > political argument, but instead has some real substance. > > > >> > > > > I > > find > > > it > > > >> > hard > > > >> > > > to > > > >> > > > > imagine that our *animal* (stimulus-response) system of > > thinking > > > >> is > > > >> > > > > developmentally unrelated to our *human* (conversational > > > >> > > > > initiation-response) system of thinking. > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > If anyone else knows of any passages from Vygotsky > > > >> > > > > related to > > > this > > > >> > > topic, > > > >> > > > > please don't hold back! > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > Much obliged. > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > In solidarity, > > > >> > > > > Peter > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 1:56 PM, mike cole > > > >> > > > > > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > Peter-- If you google Luria "second signal system" you > > > >> > > > > > will > > > >> come up > > > >> > > > with > > > >> > > > > > several references. There is a copy at luria.ucsd.edu > > > >> > > > > > of > > his > > > >> > little > > > >> > > > book > > > >> > > > > > with Yudovich on twins that uses that language. > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > It is not online (so far as i know), but Luria's > > > >> > > > > > article on > > > >> "Speech > > > >> > > > > > development and the formation of mental processes" in > > > >> > > > > > Cole > > and > > > >> > > > > > Maltzman, *Handbook > > > >> > > > > > of Soviet Psychology. *Basic Books, 1969 uses this term > > > >> > > > > > a > > lot. > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > I believe you will find an upsurge of usage associated > > > >> > > > > > with > > > the > > > >> > late > > > >> > > > > > 1940's-50's when Vygotskians were under severe attack, > > > >> > > > > > there > > > >> were > > > >> > > > special > > > >> > > > > > "Pavlov sessions" where they had to recant their > > > >> > > > > > errors, and > > > the > > > >> > use > > > >> > > of > > > >> > > > > > first and second signal system by Pavlov allowed them a > > > >> > > > > > life line to orthodoxy. > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > mike > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Peter Feigenbaum > > > >> > > > > > [Staff] < pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu> wrote: > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Dear colleagues, > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > I don't wish to detract in any way from the very > > > >> > > > > > > serious > > and > > > >> > > > absolutely > > > >> > > > > > > necessary discussion about male sensitivity (or > > > >> > > > > > > should I > > say > > > >> > > > > > insensitivity) > > > >> > > > > > > to the voices of the women inhabiting this list, but > > > >> > > > > > > I > > sure > > > >> could > > > >> > > use > > > >> > > > > > your > > > >> > > > > > > collective help with a small matter of scholarship. I > > > >> > > > > > > am > > > >> trying > > > >> > to > > > >> > > > > locate > > > >> > > > > > > any passages in LSV's Collected Works in English in > > > >> > > > > > > which > > he > > > >> > refers > > > >> > > > to > > > >> > > > > > the > > > >> > > > > > > *first* and *second* signal systems. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > My understanding is that Vygotsky considers the first > > signal > > > >> > system > > > >> > > > as > > > >> > > > > > the > > > >> > > > > > > biologically inherited stimulus-response (S-R) system > > > >> > > > > > > of > > > >> reflexes > > > >> > > as > > > >> > > > > > > described by Pavlov, whereas the second signal system > > refers > > > >> to > > > >> > the > > > >> > > > > > > culturally inherited system of initiation-response > > > >> > > > > > > that is > > > >> > > particular > > > >> > > > > to > > > >> > > > > > > human conversational activity. I am working with the > > > >> hypothesis > > > >> > > that, > > > >> > > > > in > > > >> > > > > > > ontogenetic development, the first signal system > > > >> > > > > > > becomes > > > >> > > > *domesticated* > > > >> > > > > > by, > > > >> > > > > > > and ultimately subordinated to, the second signal > system. > > > That > > > >> > is, > > > >> > > > the > > > >> > > > > > S-R > > > >> > > > > > > form of thinking becomes developmentally transformed > > > >> > > > > > > into > > > the > > > >> > > > > > > Initiation-Response form of thinking that is > > characteristic > > > >> of a > > > >> > > > person > > > >> > > > > > > performing a listening-speaking turn in conversation. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > If any of the wonderful scholars on this list could > > > >> > > > > > > help > > > point > > > >> > this > > > >> > > > > poor, > > > >> > > > > > > stumbling colleague > > > >> > > > > > > in the right direction, I would be most grateful. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Warm wishes to all, > > > >> > > > > > > Peter > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > p.s. -- Let me take this opportunity to express my > > heartfelt > > > >> > thanks > > > >> > > > to > > > >> > > > > > Mike > > > >> > > > > > > for creating this list in the first place, and with > > > >> > > > > > > it the > > > >> > > > opportunity > > > >> > > > > > for > > > >> > > > > > > Vygotskian scholars the world over to share and > > > >> > > > > > > discuss > > our > > > >> ideas > > > >> > > in > > > >> > > > an > > > >> > > > > > > open and honest forum. For my part, I pledge to do my > > level > > > >> best > > > >> > to > > > >> > > > > raise > > > >> > > > > > > my own consciousness where it is deficient so that my > > > >> > participation > > > >> > > > in > > > >> > > > > > this > > > >> > > > > > > forum will be as inclusive and respectful to all of > > > >> > > > > > > its > > > >> > > participants > > > >> > > > as > > > >> > > > > > is > > > >> > > > > > > humanly possible. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > -- > > > >> > > > > > > Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. > > > >> > > > > > > Director, > > > >> > > > > > > Office of Institutional Research > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > provos/office_of_institutio/index.asp> > > > >> > > > > > > Fordham University > > > >> > > > > > > Thebaud Hall-202 > > > >> > > > > > > Bronx, NY 10458 > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Phone: (718) 817-2243 > > > >> > > > > > > Fax: (718) 817-3817 > > > >> > > > > > > email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > -- > > > >> > > > > Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. > > > >> > > > > Director, > > > >> > > > > Office of Institutional Research > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > provos/office_of_institutio/index.asp> > > > >> > > > > Fordham University > > > >> > > > > Thebaud Hall-202 > > > >> > > > > Bronx, NY 10458 > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > Phone: (718) 817-2243 > > > >> > > > > Fax: (718) 817-3817 > > > >> > > > > email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > -- > > > >> > > Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. > > > >> > > Director, > > > >> > > Office of Institutional Research > > > >> > > > > >> > > office_of_institutio/index.asp> Fordham University Thebaud > > > >> > > Hall-202 Bronx, NY 10458 > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Phone: (718) 817-2243 > > > >> > > Fax: (718) 817-3817 > > > >> > > email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. > > Director, > > Office of Institutional Research > > > provos/office_of_institutio/index.asp> > > Fordham University > > Thebaud Hall-202 > > Bronx, NY 10458 > > > > Phone: (718) 817-2243 > > Fax: (718) 817-3817 > > email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu > > > ________________________________ > [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif] //www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass> > > This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely for > the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the > intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the > information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on it. > If you have received this email in error please let the sender know > immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not > necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University accepts > no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan emails > and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept responsibility > for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its > attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless accompanied > by an official order form. > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Fri Nov 4 14:07:45 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 14:07:45 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? In-Reply-To: References: <6B2C5457-8B44-4DF9-A6A3-6101ED3C1AC6@gmail.com> Message-ID: <581cf8aa.ce4f620a.66df5.79c7@mx.google.com> Rod, If a guiding question motivates a life trajectory then my question emerged in my adolescent years (the 1960?s) when i asked myself *How did we become so encapsulated* That has been an abiding question, but there are few places to go where i find people deeply engaged with guiding questions which have a compelling hold on the person. This community is one of the places that i could enter without first being required to be a true believer. This site allows what Peg refers to as *taking time* and picking up loose threads and *resuming* what has come before Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Rod Parker-Rees Sent: November 4, 2016 1:24 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? Thanks Helen and Greg, I certainly like the opportunity to hang out with interesting people but I think it is probably inevitable in this sort of set up that wires can get crossed when people feel they are engaging in different kinds of activities. I suspect that what has kept this group going is that every now and then people stand back and take stock of how it is working and that allows people to realise that it works in different ways (and feels different) for different people. This has made me wonder how often other forms of communication (even where only two people are involved) can involve different people having very different understandings about what they are doing and sometimes this doesn't matter but sometimes it does. I hope we can keep it going. All the best, Rod -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Greg Thompson Sent: 04 November 2016 19:58 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? Great question Rod! As to the answer, as John Cage was fond of saying: "no why, just here." Okay, fair enough. But it seems like the question deserves a more thoughtful answer than this. I suppose if I were entirely honest, I find this to be a nice place to hang out and learn and occasionally I try to use the listserve to put something out there in the interest of getting some feedback to help develop it. I've had much more success with the former than the latter. I do wonder what the mission statement of this listserve would be if there were such a thing. It seems like we don't engage with MCA nearly as much as we should if that were to be the goal of the listserve. Other than that, I would guess that the mission statement would be something like: it's a place for people who are interested in CHAT to hang out and talk about stuff that they care about (sometimes CHAT and MCA related, sometimes not). Is that too cynical? Or is that just about right? Perhaps someone else can give a better statement of what the listserve is "about"? (and I hate to even get into the question of what it SHOULD be - I'd rather live it and see what works that deliberate about what that life should look like, but, sure, there is some value in doing the former). Thanks for your question/contribution Rod. Right to the point. -greg On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Helena Worthen wrote: > This is a good contribution. Thanks -- H > > Helena Worthen > helenaworthen@gmail.com > Vietnam blog: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > On Nov 4, 2016, at 2:30 AM, Rod Parker-Rees wrote: > > > I am an interested but time-poor lurker on the margins of xmca but > > the > ripples stirred by Mike's decision to reduce his pastoral contribution > to our community have made me question how different participants > understand what kind of activity we are engaging in here. > > > > It seems to me that each of us may understand the social form of > > what we > are doing in different ways. For some it is like a conversation and we > feel disappointed or hurt if our contributions are met with silence or > if the chain moves on in a different direction. For others we are a > working group, collaborating to develop a practical and ethical > theoretical model. For others we are something like a conference, > where thoughts and ideas can be put before others for their > consideration and response - and I am sure there are many other ways > in which different people understand their participation differently. > > > > Does this matter? Would xmca be 'better' if it was more consistent, > > more > coherent, more tightly and predictably governed by shared social > understandings? While more explicit regulation (protocols for > labelling streams and posts and for timing of responses etc.) might > help to make our activity feel more inclusive and more sharable it may > also introduce new kinds of discomfort. > > > > What I have found interesting in my time around the margins of xmca > > is > the challenge of sustaining conversations without all the non-verbal > feedback which we rely on when we talk with people. When 'wordings' > float off into the ether, cast off from the body and personhood of > their speakers or writers they become objects which can be scrutinised > and revisited and this can be a reason for 'lurkers' to feel reluctant about contributing. > What we are doing is not a conversation. Nor is it even a forum, in > the sense of people taking turns to orate before a crowd, because > contributors often get very little phatic feedback from the lurkers > and may have very little sense of how their arguments have been > understood or received. But we are moved by our understandings of what > it is and is not OK to do, which come from other kinds of > interactions. Can I say something if I have not been part of what has > gone before? Should I respond or stay quiet? What should I do if I am > annoyed or angered by something someone else has contributed? > > > > I am already getting anxious about how what I have said might be > interpreted by others and feeling I have had a long enough turn but I > would be really interested to hear what others think about why we are here! > > > > I have found what people do here very helpful but I do feel uneasy > > about > risking contributions! > > > > All the best, > > > > Rod > > ________________________________ > > [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif] //www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass> > > > > This email and any files with it are confidential and intended > > solely > for the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not > the intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the > information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on it. > If you have received this email in error please let the sender know > immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not > necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University > accepts no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to > scan emails and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept > responsibility for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this > email or its attachments constitutes an order for goods or services > unless accompanied by an official order form. > > > > > -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson ________________________________ [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif] This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on it. If you have received this email in error please let the sender know immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University accepts no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan emails and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept responsibility for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless accompanied by an official order form. From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Fri Nov 4 14:09:45 2016 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 21:09:45 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Help needed finding LSV references to *First*and *Second* Signal Systems In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: <1478293783753.39188@iped.uio.no> David, I am still reading, but I did not want to let it pass without a huge thank you for so generously sharing that text with us. It made my day! Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of David Kellogg Sent: 04 November 2016 05:24 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Help needed finding LSV references to *First*and *Second* Signal Systems Peter: (Maybe both Peters?) Sometimes I think the best we husbands, fathers, and political activists can really do to promote gender equality in intellectual discourse is not to maintain a respectful male silence but rather to use our own booming baritones to amplify outstanding thinkers whose voices are in danger of being lost precisely because they were more soprano, or because they belonged to women born on the wrong side of the planet, or both. I am thinking of Ruqaiya Hasan, who is in imminent danger of being lost, even to feminist writers, in the cacaphony of Bourdieu, Baudrillard, Lyotard, Habermas, Foucault, Derrida, Lacan, and even Freud, none of whom had anything to say about Vygotsky (and, not coincidentally, all of whom are lesser sociolinguists than she was). Ruqaiya was an appreciative but also very critical reader of Vygotsky. Sometimes, when I am reading her thoughts on Vygotsky I feel like she is holding the book upside down, but then when I read it again I find that I am the one standing on my head. For example, one of the great advantages that Hasan finds in Vygotsky is not that he distinguishes between the higher and lower psychological functions. As far as Ruqaiya was concerned there was a bit too much of that around, and there still is. Instead, Ruqaiya finds that Vygotsky's strength is being able to link them together, precisely through his studies of children, including the biological and the social in a single complex unit of analysis (e.g. phonology AND lexicogrammar in a single dimension, which Vygotsky calls "phasal"). Ruqaiya doesn't mean that "signalization" is tied to "signification"--she is too much of a linguist and too much of a dialectician not to see the huge gap between them. But she does think that the word values (or, as she would prefer it, the "wording values") that are the bases for signification are Whorfian, Sapirian social co-generalizations. These are biological in the sense that they are huntable, gatherable, herdable, farmable, reproducible. They are also, in materialized form, edible and wearable: they are often made out of economic interests: they are exchange values, like the exchange value of any commodity they evolve from use values based in adapting the environment to human needs. Take a look at this. I think it is probably literally the last public lecture Vygotsky ever gave, and as far as I know it's never been translated into any language (except now Korean). I'm including the Russian because my own Russian is...well, lousy, and I keep hoping some of the Russophones on the list may catch some errors before it goes to press in February. In it, Vygotsky is trying to show exactly what Ruqaiya was talking about: the way in which the child goes from "non-co-generalized" thinking to co-generalized thinking. It's not a step. It's not a leap. It's a whole set of leaps, some of which depend on parents, professionals, and political activists. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 9:04 AM, Peter Feigenbaum [Staff] < pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu> wrote: > Dear colleagues, > > As a representative of the category *Slow Responder* (I am a busy > professional, a husband, a father of two, and a political activist), I am > only now getting around to replying to those who responded to my earlier > request for help. My apologies if my pace is too slow for a satisfying > exchange. > > Because I was fairly vague about my reason for asking for a reference to > first and second signal systems in Vygotsky's writings, I unwittingly > opened the door to discussion of the differences between *signals* and > *signs*. In fact, my interest is in their *similarities*, in the properties > that are common to both. I am seeking the common denominator between animal > stimulus-response thinking and human initiation-response thinking. > Fortunately, that linkage exists precisely where David Kellogg pointed me: > in Vol. 4, on p.55 of HDHMF in Vygotsky's Collected Works in English. > > Vygotsky is very clear when he distinguishes between *natural* signals (or > signalization) and *artificial* signs (or signification). The former occurs > when animals interact with the environment and their brains form > conditioned reflexes, whereas the latter occurs when humans invent their > own conditioned reflexes (words) and then apply those reflexes to > themselves (or others) in order to master their own behavior. In essence, > Vygotsky considered *signification* a special case of *signalization*. > > One issue I had not counted on is the historical/political one. I was > unprepared for the possibility that the first and second signal systems may > have been a political problem of accommodation to the authorities rather > than an actual scientific problem. Thanks to Mike for pointing that out, > and for pointing out A.R. Luria's fairly substantial contribution to the > discussion--but especially for contacting (the wonderful and brilliant) > Tanya Akhutina! > > I'm not quite sure how to make good use of Huw's suggestion about serial > and parallel circuits, so I'll have to put that issue to the side for now. > But thanks for raising it. > > In light of the ongoing discussion about how to create a more > gender-sensitive and gender-balanced dialogue on this listserv, I would > like to invite anyone who is lurking (or very busy) to contribute any > useful information you may have about my request *in your own good time*. > These problems are complicated, and I'm learning to be patient. > > Thanks to all. > > In solidarity, > Peter > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 6:55 PM, mike cole wrote: > > > Peter -- Concerning your initial question. I obtained the following > answer > > from Tanya Akhutina. > > > > ????, > > ?????? ??????? ? ?????? ?????????? ??????? ? 1932 ?. ?????????????? > > ?????????? ? ??? ????? ????? ?????? ? 33 ? 34 ?????. ? ????? ?????????? ? > > ?????????? ?? ?????. > > ??? - ?????? ????, ?? ?????? ??? ??? ????????. ?? ???? ?????? ????? ????? > > ???????????, ??????? ???, ?????? ???? ?.?.??????????. ?? ???????????? ? > > ??????? ????? ?????????? ?????? ???? ????? ???????? ? ????? ?????? ?? > ???. > > 144: " ?.?. ????????? ???? ?????????? ??????, ? ? ??? ??????? ?????????? > > ??????? ? ??????? ??????? ???????????????? ????? ???? ????????, ?? ??? ?? > > ????? ??????, ??????? ?? ??? ?????, ?????????? ?? ?????? ????????? > ?????". > > > > Roughly, > > Mike, > > Pavlov wrote about the second signal system in 1932. Correspondingly, > > references/rememberances to it had to wait until 1933-34. Such > references/ > > rememberances in Vygotsky I do not recall. > > > > ARL was another case, he was obligated to speak in this way. Olga > Sergeevna > > Vinogradova, a student of ARL's [with whom I conducted research in the > > winter of 1962/63-mc] is cited by Lena Luria [Luria's daughter] in her > book > > on p. 144 "A.R. new the teachings of Pavlov perfectly, and in his > lectures > > he changed the lexicon and the beauty of a straightforward psychological > > language was replaced, but none the less the knowledge which he gave us > > remained on the the level of real science." > > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 3:42 PM, mike cole wrote: > > > > > It seems that side-by-side translations of the two documents merit > > > archival publication, David. JREEP is an obvious repository. In > addition > > to > > > which at present we have a good deal more evidence about children, > chess > > > boards, and the issues vexing Vygotsky than he had access to. The > > > non/difficult chronology of the texts complicates an already > complicated > > > process of interpretation as we have long witnessed here. > > > > > > Perhaps as a separate thread, it would be nice to put together a > > > discussion of the core linkages between Vygotsky and Halliday in your > > > work..... one of those chains of discussion that come and go. Perhaps a > > > mini-course devoted to the following, to me, essential idea: > > > > > > It seems to me that ALL of these are signalization systems (not > > > signifying systems, because they do not have lexicogrammar and cannot > > > convey ideal values) > > > > > > Providing a "cheat sheet" for autodidacts, might it be possible to > create > > > some > > > "field of interest" in the xmca discussion for dealing with this idea? > > > > > > I have in no way forgotten the issue of the relation of microgenesis > and > > > ontogenesis. It seems another "key point" as most of us go about using > > CHAT > > > ideas in the course of the teaching/learning activities that pay the > > bread > > > and butter. As matters stand, I offer Franklin in the blocks as an > > example > > > of microgenesis in a preschool classroom involving play as an example > of > > a > > > zone of proximal development where childre are a head taller than > > > themselves. That discussion is for the microgenesis/ontogenesis thread > > if I > > > recall. > > > > > > I would be VERY interested to learn of ways that feminist, queer > theory, > > > critical disability studies theory, neurodiversity theory, and others > can > > > help me to understand these categories and the theories that purport to > > > account for them. > > > > > > If they need to be re-thought, might as well be here. Ain't goin > nowhere. > > > > > > mike > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 2:28 PM, David Kellogg > > > wrote: > > > > > >> I'm working with two versions of one of Vygotsky's last lectures (the > > >> second version is given exactly five days before he was brought home > > with > > >> a > > >> throat haemorrhage to die, the first about a year earlier). There are > > >> passages that are almost word for word repetitions. There are passages > > >> that > > >> are semantically the same and but quite differently worded (the > earlier > > >> Vygotsky is quite modest and tentative; the later Vygotsky is much > more > > >> critical and also more confident). Then there are passages that say > > pretty > > >> much the opposite of what was said a year earlier: for example, in the > > >> early lecture Vygotsky says that a child faced with a chessboard who > > >> doesn't know how to play will see it structurally and sort the pieces > by > > >> color (black pieces on black squares, white on white) but in the later > > >> lecture it is the child who does know how to play who sees it > > >> structurally, > > >> because the child sees a black knight in a "structure" with a white > > pawn. > > >> He's a genius, and geniuses tend to think things over a lot, turning > > them > > >> this way and that, and never looking at anything as final, not even > when > > >> they are about to die. > > >> > > >> HDHMF has to be read the same way. Vygotsky cannot quite seem to make > up > > >> his mind whether there are three stages of higher behavior (instinct, > > >> habit, intelligence) or four different stages of higher behavior > > >> (instinct, > > >> habit, intelligence, and freedom). In Chapter Four, he very clearly > > argues > > >> for four or more, but in Chapter Five, which may have been written > much > > >> earlier, he argues for three but then three paragraphs later considers > > it > > >> safer to begin as Thorndike does with two levels (unconditional and > > >> conditional responses). So "signal" vs. "signification" could just be > > seen > > >> as the difference between unconditional and conditional responses, or > it > > >> could be seen as the difference between instinct and intelligence, or > it > > >> could be seen as two poles with an almost infinite number of genetic > > >> variations in between. I prefer the latter view, but I recognize that > > >> Vygotsky has to package things pretty differently for different > > audiences, > > >> and we are not one of the audiences that he has foremost in his mind. > > >> > > >> Take bacteria. Bacteria are apparently capable of quorum sensing: that > > is, > > >> bacteria don't multiply when there are no other bacteria around, they > do > > >> when there are some but not too many, and they don't when there are > too > > >> many. Now, take ants. Ants have a system of finding new nests that > > >> involves > > >> scouting for potential sites. If the site is extremely good, they go > > back > > >> and take other ants there quickly, but if it is not so good they tend > to > > >> dawdle a little, with the result that the best site gets more ants, > and > > at > > >> a certain point the whole nest "decides" to move there. Now, take > > >> bees. Like ants, bees go scouting. The scouts come back and they > dance; > > >> the > > >> dances attract more or fewer onlookers, and when a quorum is reached, > > the > > >> hive moves. It seems to me that ALL of these are signalization systems > > >> (not > > >> signifying systems, because they do not have lexicogrammar and cannot > > >> convey ideal values) but the difference between the ant system and > the > > >> bee > > >> system is as big as the difference between the bee system and early > > child > > >> language. For ants, the scouting and decision making are not > > >> differentiated, but for bees they are distinct moments--so the ant > > system > > >> involves a simple signal system and the bee system involves a second > > >> signal > > >> system. > > >> > > >> David Kellogg > > >> Macquarie University > > >> > > >> On Sun, Oct 30, 2016 at 3:45 AM, wrote: > > >> > > >> > In this discussion The center of this relational exploration is > > between > > >> > signalization AND signification and my question goes back to the > place > > >> of > > >> > the general term *gesturing*. > > >> > Is this signalization or is this phenomena signification. > > >> > The act creating actual*ity (sens) which always includes tendency or > > >> > orientation towards or away from something. > > >> > The act is gestural acts and implies *each in the other*. > > >> > > > >> > The relation of gestural receiving and responding and this phenomena > > in > > >> > relation to signalization and signification. > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > >> > > > >> > From: Huw Lloyd > > >> > Sent: October 29, 2016 9:01 AM > > >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: XMCA-ers: Help needed finding LSV references > to > > >> > *First*and *Second* Signal Systems > > >> > > > >> > Peter, > > >> > > > >> > If by signalisation you mean use of signs to influence behaviour in > > >> terms > > >> > of operational criteria and speech, then yes this is so. It has > been > > >> > studied quite systematically, but is perhaps less well known. I can > > >> > elaborate on this if this is your drift. > > >> > > > >> > Best, > > >> > Huw > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > On 28 October 2016 at 22:43, Peter Feigenbaum [Staff] < > > >> > pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu> wrote: > > >> > > > >> > > David, > > >> > > > > >> > > As usual, your suggestions are both helpful and erudite. Thanks > for > > >> the > > >> > > poignant references to Vygotsky and to Marx. Although Soviet > > academic > > >> > > politics may have complicated the issue, there does seem to be > some > > >> > > substance to the argument that the nervous systems of animals and > > the > > >> > > speech communication systems of humans share the common property > of > > >> > > *signalization*. Personally, I think there's a lot more to this > > topic > > >> > than > > >> > > meets the eye--or, better yet, there's a lot of opportunity here > for > > >> > > developing the problem further. > > >> > > > > >> > > Once again, I owe an intellectual debt to the participants of this > > >> > > listserv! > > >> > > > > >> > > Cheers, > > >> > > Peter > > >> > > > > >> > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 5:10 PM, David Kellogg < > > dkellogg60@gmail.com> > > >> > > wrote: > > >> > > > > >> > > > Peter: > > >> > > > > > >> > > > I think Mike's right. The "second signal system" was an attempt > to > > >> > > preserve > > >> > > > the idea of higher psychological functions in an atmosphere that > > was > > >> > not > > >> > > > that different from what was going on in America at the same > time > > >> (and > > >> > > > which Mike experienced first hand in both places). When I read > > >> > Belyayev's > > >> > > > work on foreign language teaching, he talks a lot about the > > "second > > >> > > signal > > >> > > > system". There, are, however, two places in Vygotsky which MIGHT > > >> > provide > > >> > > > some support, if you wanted to make the case that the "second > > signal > > >> > > > system" is not completely incompatible with Vygotsky. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > One is Chapter Two of the History of the Development of the > Higher > > >> > Mental > > >> > > > functions. See below. Starting around paragraph 142, Vygotsky > > likens > > >> > > > Pavlov's model of the brain as a telephone exchange. The > problem, > > of > > >> > > > course, is that back then telephone exchanges did require human > > >> > operators > > >> > > > to make the connection! > > >> > > > > > >> > > > The other is the discussion of "second order symbolism" in the > > work > > >> of > > >> > > > Delacroix, which you can find in Chapter Six of Thinking and > > Speech > > >> and > > >> > > > also in Chapter 7 of HDHMF (fifth para). This is a very > different > > >> > > > notion--it's the idea that writing is a set of symbols for > > speaking. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > David Kellogg > > >> > > > Macquarie University > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >From HDHMF, Chapter Two, Research Method > > >> > > > > > >> > > > We know that, as Pavlov says, ?the most general bases of higher > > >> nervous > > >> > > > activity are ascribed to the large hemispheres, the same in both > > >> higher > > >> > > > animals and in people, and for this reason even elementary > > >> phenomena of > > >> > > > this activity must be identical in the one and in the other in > > both > > >> > > normal > > >> > > > and pathological cases? (1951, p. 15). Actually, this can > scarcely > > >> be > > >> > > > disputed. But as soon as we go from the elementary phenomena of > > >> higher > > >> > > > nervous activity to the complex, to the higher phenomena within > > this > > >> > > higher > > >> > > > ? in the physiological sense ? activity, then two different > > >> > > methodological > > >> > > > paths for studying the specific uniqueness of human higher > > behavior > > >> > open > > >> > > > before us. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > One is the path to further study of complication, enrichment, > and > > >> > > > differentiation of the same phenomena that experimental study > > >> > ascertains > > >> > > in > > >> > > > animals. Here, on this path, the greatest restraint must be > > >> observed. > > >> > In > > >> > > > transferring information on higher nervous activity of animals > to > > >> > higher > > >> > > > activity of man, we must constantly check the factual > similarities > > >> in > > >> > the > > >> > > > function of organs in man and animals, but in general the > > principle > > >> > > itself > > >> > > > of the research remains the same as it was in the study of > > animals. > > >> > This > > >> > > is > > >> > > > the path of physiological study. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > True, this circumstance is of major significance and in the area > > of > > >> > > > physiological study of behavior, in a comparative study of man > and > > >> > > animals, > > >> > > > we must not put the function of the heart, stomach, and other > > organs > > >> > > which > > >> > > > are so similar to that of man on the same plane with higher > > nervous > > >> > > > activity. In the words of I. P. Pavlov, ?It is specifically this > > >> > activity > > >> > > > that so strikingly sets man apart from the rank of animals, that > > >> places > > >> > > man > > >> > > > immeasurably above the whole animal world? (ibid. p. 414). And > we > > >> might > > >> > > > expect that along the path of physiological research we will > find > > a > > >> > > > specific qualitative difference in human activity. Let us recall > > the > > >> > > words > > >> > > > of Pavlov cited above on the quantitative and qualitative > > >> > incomparability > > >> > > > of the word with conditioned stimuli of animals. Even in the > plan > > of > > >> > > strict > > >> > > > physiological consideration, ?the grandiose signalistics of > > speech? > > >> > > stands > > >> > > > outside the whole other mass of stimuli, the ?multicapaciousness > > of > > >> the > > >> > > > word? places it in a unique position. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > The other path is the path of psychological research. From the > > very > > >> > > > beginning, it proposes to seek the specific uniqueness of human > > >> > behavior > > >> > > > which does take us beyond the initial point. The specific > > >> uniqueness is > > >> > > > considered not only in its subsequent complexity and > development, > > >> > > > quantitative and qualitative refinement of the cerebral > > hemispheres, > > >> > but > > >> > > > primarily in the social nature of man and in a new method of > > >> > adaptation, > > >> > > as > > >> > > > compared with animals, that sets man apart. The main difference > > >> between > > >> > > the > > >> > > > behavior of man and of animals consists not only in that the > human > > >> > brain > > >> > > is > > >> > > > immeasurably above the brain of the dog and that the higher > > nervous > > >> > > > activity ?so strikingly sets man apart from the rank of > animals,? > > >> but > > >> > > most > > >> > > > of all, because it is the brain of a social being and because > the > > >> laws > > >> > of > > >> > > > higher nervous activity of man are manifested and act in the > human > > >> > > > personality. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > But let us return again to the ?most general bases of higher > > nervous > > >> > > > activity, related to the cerebral hemispheres,? and identical in > > >> higher > > >> > > > animals and man. We think that it is in this point that we can > > >> disclose > > >> > > > with definitive clarity the difference of which we speak. The > most > > >> > > general > > >> > > > basis of behavior, identical in man and animals, is > > *signalization.* > > >> > > Pavlov > > >> > > > said, ?So the basic and most general activity of the cerebral > > >> > hemispheres > > >> > > > is signaling with an infinite number of signals and with > > changeable > > >> > > > signalization? (ibid., p. 30). As is known, this is the most > > general > > >> > > > formulation of the whole idea of conditioned reflexes that lies > at > > >> the > > >> > > base > > >> > > > of the physiology of higher nervous activity. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > But human behavior is distinguished exactly in that it creates > > >> > artificial > > >> > > > signaling stimuli, primarily the grandiose signalization of > > speech, > > >> and > > >> > > in > > >> > > > this way masters the signaling activity of the cerebral > > >> hemispheres. If > > >> > > the > > >> > > > basic and most general activity of the cerebral hemispheres in > > >> animals > > >> > > and > > >> > > > in man is signalization, then the basic and most general > activity > > of > > >> > man > > >> > > > that differentiates man from animals in the first place, from > the > > >> > aspect > > >> > > of > > >> > > > psychology, is *signification,* that is, creation and use of > > signs. > > >> We > > >> > > are > > >> > > > using this word in its most literal sense and precise meaning. > > >> > > > Signification is the creation and use of signs, that is, > > artificial > > >> > > > signals. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > We will consider more closely this new principle of activity. It > > >> must > > >> > not > > >> > > > in any sense be contrasted with the principle of signalization. > > >> > > Changeable > > >> > > > signalization that results in the formation of temporary, > > >> conditional, > > >> > > > special connections between the organism and the environment is > an > > >> > > > indispensable, biological prerequisite of the higher activity > that > > >> we > > >> > > > arbitrarily call signification and is its base. The system of > > >> > connections > > >> > > > that is established in the brain of an animal is a copy or > > >> reflection > > >> > of > > >> > > > natural connections between ?all kinds of agents of nature? that > > >> signal > > >> > > the > > >> > > > arrival of immediately favorable or destructive phenomena. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > It is very obvious that such signalization ? a reflection of the > > >> > natural > > >> > > > connection of phenomena, wholly created by natural conditions ? > > >> cannot > > >> > be > > >> > > > an adequate basis of human behavior. For human adaptation, an > > active > > >> > > > *change > > >> > > > in the nature of man *is essential. It is the basis of all human > > >> > history. > > >> > > > It necessarily presupposes an active change in man?s behavior. > > >> > ?Affecting > > >> > > > the environment by this movement and changing it, he changes his > > own > > >> > > nature > > >> > > > at the same time,? says Marx. ?He develops forces asleep in it > and > > >> > > subjects > > >> > > > the play of these forces to his own will? (K. Marx and F. > Engels, > > >> > > > *Collected > > >> > > > Works,* Vol. 23, pp. 188-189 > > >> > > > > >> > > > 3A__www.marxists.org_archive_marx_works_1867-2Dc1_ch07.htm- > > >> > > > 23forces&d=DQIFaQ&c=aqMfXOEvEJQh2iQMCb7Wy8l0sPnURk > > cqADc2guUW8IM&r= > > >> > > > mXj3yhpYNklTxyN3KioIJ0ECmPHilpf4N2p9PBMATWs&m= > > >> > cxiDdHmIrHosSMq59vJlZ4j-S- > > >> > > > 4h5DSiLaMzqzi2yNA&s=J3sZBxFP1DTk3B8MLGJTyEw- > > RZmpA347cJfMSUrwSa4&e= > > >> >). > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 7:50 AM, Peter Feigenbaum [Staff] < > > >> > > > pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu> wrote: > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Mike, > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Thanks for the Luria references. From a cursory reading of > the > > >> > > relevant > > >> > > > > passages in the Luria & Yudovich book, and judging by some of > > the > > >> > other > > >> > > > > sources you listed, I get the impression that there hasn't > been > > >> much > > >> > > > > theoretical *fleshing out* of the structures of the second > > signal > > >> > > system. > > >> > > > > I hope that the concept of a first and second signal system is > > not > > >> > > just a > > >> > > > > political argument, but instead has some real substance. I > find > > it > > >> > hard > > >> > > > to > > >> > > > > imagine that our *animal* (stimulus-response) system of > thinking > > >> is > > >> > > > > developmentally unrelated to our *human* (conversational > > >> > > > > initiation-response) system of thinking. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > If anyone else knows of any passages from Vygotsky related to > > this > > >> > > topic, > > >> > > > > please don't hold back! > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Much obliged. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > In solidarity, > > >> > > > > Peter > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 1:56 PM, mike cole > > >> wrote: > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Peter-- If you google Luria "second signal system" you will > > >> come up > > >> > > > with > > >> > > > > > several references. There is a copy at luria.ucsd.edu of > his > > >> > little > > >> > > > book > > >> > > > > > with Yudovich on twins that uses that language. > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > It is not online (so far as i know), but Luria's article on > > >> "Speech > > >> > > > > > development and the formation of mental processes" in Cole > and > > >> > > > > > Maltzman, *Handbook > > >> > > > > > of Soviet Psychology. *Basic Books, 1969 uses this term a > lot. > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > I believe you will find an upsurge of usage associated with > > the > > >> > late > > >> > > > > > 1940's-50's when Vygotskians were under severe attack, there > > >> were > > >> > > > special > > >> > > > > > "Pavlov sessions" where they had to recant their errors, and > > the > > >> > use > > >> > > of > > >> > > > > > first and second signal system by Pavlov > > >> > > > > > allowed them a life line to orthodoxy. > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > mike > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Peter Feigenbaum [Staff] < > > >> > > > > > pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu> wrote: > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Dear colleagues, > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > I don't wish to detract in any way from the very serious > and > > >> > > > absolutely > > >> > > > > > > necessary discussion about male sensitivity (or should I > say > > >> > > > > > insensitivity) > > >> > > > > > > to the voices of the women inhabiting this list, but I > sure > > >> could > > >> > > use > > >> > > > > > your > > >> > > > > > > collective help with a small matter of scholarship. I am > > >> trying > > >> > to > > >> > > > > locate > > >> > > > > > > any passages in LSV's Collected Works in English in which > he > > >> > refers > > >> > > > to > > >> > > > > > the > > >> > > > > > > *first* and *second* signal systems. > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > My understanding is that Vygotsky considers the first > signal > > >> > system > > >> > > > as > > >> > > > > > the > > >> > > > > > > biologically inherited stimulus-response (S-R) system of > > >> reflexes > > >> > > as > > >> > > > > > > described by Pavlov, whereas the second signal system > refers > > >> to > > >> > the > > >> > > > > > > culturally inherited system of initiation-response that is > > >> > > particular > > >> > > > > to > > >> > > > > > > human conversational activity. I am working with the > > >> hypothesis > > >> > > that, > > >> > > > > in > > >> > > > > > > ontogenetic development, the first signal system becomes > > >> > > > *domesticated* > > >> > > > > > by, > > >> > > > > > > and ultimately subordinated to, the second signal system. > > That > > >> > is, > > >> > > > the > > >> > > > > > S-R > > >> > > > > > > form of thinking becomes developmentally transformed into > > the > > >> > > > > > > Initiation-Response form of thinking that is > characteristic > > >> of a > > >> > > > person > > >> > > > > > > performing a listening-speaking turn in conversation. > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > If any of the wonderful scholars on this list could help > > point > > >> > this > > >> > > > > poor, > > >> > > > > > > stumbling colleague > > >> > > > > > > in the right direction, I would be most grateful. > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Warm wishes to all, > > >> > > > > > > Peter > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > p.s. -- Let me take this opportunity to express my > heartfelt > > >> > thanks > > >> > > > to > > >> > > > > > Mike > > >> > > > > > > for creating this list in the first place, and with it the > > >> > > > opportunity > > >> > > > > > for > > >> > > > > > > Vygotskian scholars the world over to share and discuss > our > > >> ideas > > >> > > in > > >> > > > an > > >> > > > > > > open and honest forum. For my part, I pledge to do my > level > > >> best > > >> > to > > >> > > > > raise > > >> > > > > > > my own consciousness where it is deficient so that my > > >> > participation > > >> > > > in > > >> > > > > > this > > >> > > > > > > forum will be as inclusive and respectful to all of its > > >> > > participants > > >> > > > as > > >> > > > > > is > > >> > > > > > > humanly possible. > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > -- > > >> > > > > > > Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. > > >> > > > > > > Director, > > >> > > > > > > Office of Institutional Research > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > provos/office_of_institutio/index.asp> > > >> > > > > > > Fordham University > > >> > > > > > > Thebaud Hall-202 > > >> > > > > > > Bronx, NY 10458 > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Phone: (718) 817-2243 > > >> > > > > > > Fax: (718) 817-3817 > > >> > > > > > > email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > -- > > >> > > > > Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. > > >> > > > > Director, > > >> > > > > Office of Institutional Research > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > provos/office_of_institutio/index.asp> > > >> > > > > Fordham University > > >> > > > > Thebaud Hall-202 > > >> > > > > Bronx, NY 10458 > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Phone: (718) 817-2243 > > >> > > > > Fax: (718) 817-3817 > > >> > > > > email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > -- > > >> > > Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. > > >> > > Director, > > >> > > Office of Institutional Research > > >> > > > >> > > office_of_institutio/index.asp> > > >> > > Fordham University > > >> > > Thebaud Hall-202 > > >> > > Bronx, NY 10458 > > >> > > > > >> > > Phone: (718) 817-2243 > > >> > > Fax: (718) 817-3817 > > >> > > email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. > Director, > Office of Institutional Research > provos/office_of_institutio/index.asp> > Fordham University > Thebaud Hall-202 > Bronx, NY 10458 > > Phone: (718) 817-2243 > Fax: (718) 817-3817 > email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu > From R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk Fri Nov 4 14:24:52 2016 From: R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk (Rod Parker-Rees) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 21:24:52 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Help needed finding LSV references to *First*and *Second* Signal Systems Message-ID: Brilliant! Many thanks David. Rod On 4 Nov 2016 9:08 pm, David Kellogg wrote: Rod: Thanks for your comment. You see, I'm trying to write "summarizing notes" for our teachers back in Korea (the books are largely distributed and read through the teachers union). When we published "Thinking and Speech" with copious and obscurantist end-notes back in 2010, the teachers put out a study guide, called "The Easy Way to Read Thinking and Speech". Since then we've tried to include boxes and summarizing end-notes in the actual books themselves in order to save them the trouble, but I'm never quite sure how much and how to write them. I tend to get lost in the text. Anyway, you got it. The essence is the transition from non-co-generalized to co-generalized thinking. But of course "co-generalized" isn't really English and "non-co-generalized" is ungainly as well as being un-English. It sounds only marginally better in Korean, and even in the Russian, Vygotsky's making a link between "communication" and "generalization" that runs through Sapir rather than through etymology. It's easy, especially, as a foreigner, to make too much of etymology (as foreigners do when they assume that "understand" has something to do with standing under bridges between concepts). So for example there is, so far as I know, no common root for ???????? ("teaching-and-learning") and ????????? (?generalization?), although there is between ????????? (?generalization?) and ??????? ("interaction, communication, commonality"). I think that for everybody on xmca the best way into Hasan's work is right in front of your nose, a paper she wrote especially for us, to wit: http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/Paper/JuneJuly05/HasanVygHallBernst.pdf This is an early draft of her criticism of Vygotsky. There is also: http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/Paper/JuneJuly05/HasanSemMediation.pdf And finally, one of my favorites, unfortunately not available on the LCHC website: https://www.equinoxpub.com/home/view-chapter/?id=25626 But you are a child language person. I think that for you her work on mother-child dialogue and the "ontogenesis of ideology" would be riveting. See "HasanSemMediation" for a good taster. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Sat, Nov 5, 2016 at 12:50 AM, Rod Parker-Rees < R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk> wrote: > Many thanks for sending the lecture, David. > > I think the passage where V underlines the distinction between > 'co-generalized' and non co-generalized' thinking is intriguing: > > "From the psychological point of view, the transition from sensation to > thinking signifies in the first place a transition from a > non-co-generalized to a co-generalized reflection of reality in > consciousness". > > Is there an etymological connection between the Russian words ??????? and > ????????? and the word for teaching/learning which I know as 'obuchenie'? > > I teach a module which is grandly entitled 'Understanding Understanding', > the main focus of which is on the social nature of understanding > (etymologically 'standing among' rather than standing under!) - how we > don't understand something unless we know something of what it means to > other people. I think this was understood centuries ago and it informs the > etymology of words like conscience and consciousness (con-scientia - > co-knowing) and concepts (what is known together). So when V writes here > about co-generalized thinking is he using the same terms as he used in > Thinking and Speech (I believe) to contrast spontaneous and 'scientific' or > 'schooled' concepts? I have always read this as an argument that the > 'private' and the 'public' cannot be understood in isolation - the > spontaneous concepts bring 'colour and vitality' and significance to the > abstract scientific concepts which provide structure and sharability for > the spontaneous concepts. > > Is there something you can recommend as a way in to Hasan's work? > > All the best, > > Rod > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of David Kellogg > Sent: 04 November 2016 04:25 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Help needed finding LSV references to *First*and > *Second* Signal Systems > > Peter: (Maybe both Peters?) > > Sometimes I think the best we husbands, fathers, and political activists > can really do to promote gender equality in intellectual discourse is not > to maintain a respectful male silence but rather to use our own booming > baritones to amplify outstanding thinkers whose voices are in danger of > being lost precisely because they were more soprano, or because they > belonged to women born on the wrong side of the planet, or both. I am > thinking of Ruqaiya Hasan, who is in imminent danger of being lost, even to > feminist writers, in the cacaphony of Bourdieu, Baudrillard, Lyotard, > Habermas, Foucault, Derrida, Lacan, and even Freud, none of whom had > anything to say about Vygotsky (and, not coincidentally, all of whom are > lesser sociolinguists than she was). > > Ruqaiya was an appreciative but also very critical reader of Vygotsky. > Sometimes, when I am reading her thoughts on Vygotsky I feel like she is > holding the book upside down, but then when I read it again I find that I > am the one standing on my head. For example, one of the great advantages > that Hasan finds in Vygotsky is not that he distinguishes between the > higher and lower psychological functions. As far as Ruqaiya was concerned > there was a bit too much of that around, and there still is. Instead, > Ruqaiya finds that Vygotsky's strength is being able to link them together, > precisely through his studies of children, including the biological and the > social in a single complex unit of analysis (e.g. phonology AND > lexicogrammar in a single dimension, which Vygotsky calls "phasal"). > > Ruqaiya doesn't mean that "signalization" is tied to "signification"--she > is too much of a linguist and too much of a dialectician not to see the > huge gap between them. But she does think that the word values (or, as she > would prefer it, the "wording values") that are the bases for signification > are Whorfian, Sapirian social co-generalizations. These are biological in > the sense that they are huntable, gatherable, herdable, farmable, > reproducible. They are also, in materialized form, edible and wearable: > they are often made out of economic interests: they are exchange values, > like the exchange value of any commodity they evolve from use values based > in adapting the environment to human needs. > > Take a look at this. I think it is probably literally the last public > lecture Vygotsky ever gave, and as far as I know it's never been translated > into any language (except now Korean). I'm including the Russian because my > own Russian is...well, lousy, and I keep hoping some of the Russophones on > the list may catch some errors before it goes to press in February. In it, > Vygotsky is trying to show exactly what Ruqaiya was talking about: the way > in which the child goes from "non-co-generalized" thinking to > co-generalized thinking. It's not a step. It's not a leap. It's a whole set > of leaps, some of which depend on parents, professionals, and political > activists. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 9:04 AM, Peter Feigenbaum [Staff] < > pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu> wrote: > > > Dear colleagues, > > > > As a representative of the category *Slow Responder* (I am a busy > > professional, a husband, a father of two, and a political activist), I > > am only now getting around to replying to those who responded to my > > earlier request for help. My apologies if my pace is too slow for a > > satisfying exchange. > > > > Because I was fairly vague about my reason for asking for a reference > > to first and second signal systems in Vygotsky's writings, I > > unwittingly opened the door to discussion of the differences between > > *signals* and *signs*. In fact, my interest is in their > > *similarities*, in the properties that are common to both. I am > > seeking the common denominator between animal stimulus-response thinking > and human initiation-response thinking. > > Fortunately, that linkage exists precisely where David Kellogg pointed > me: > > in Vol. 4, on p.55 of HDHMF in Vygotsky's Collected Works in English. > > > > Vygotsky is very clear when he distinguishes between *natural* signals > > (or > > signalization) and *artificial* signs (or signification). The former > > occurs when animals interact with the environment and their brains > > form conditioned reflexes, whereas the latter occurs when humans > > invent their own conditioned reflexes (words) and then apply those > > reflexes to themselves (or others) in order to master their own > > behavior. In essence, Vygotsky considered *signification* a special case > of *signalization*. > > > > One issue I had not counted on is the historical/political one. I was > > unprepared for the possibility that the first and second signal > > systems may have been a political problem of accommodation to the > > authorities rather than an actual scientific problem. Thanks to Mike > > for pointing that out, and for pointing out A.R. Luria's fairly > > substantial contribution to the discussion--but especially for > > contacting (the wonderful and brilliant) Tanya Akhutina! > > > > I'm not quite sure how to make good use of Huw's suggestion about > > serial and parallel circuits, so I'll have to put that issue to the side > for now. > > But thanks for raising it. > > > > In light of the ongoing discussion about how to create a more > > gender-sensitive and gender-balanced dialogue on this listserv, I > > would like to invite anyone who is lurking (or very busy) to > > contribute any useful information you may have about my request *in your > own good time*. > > These problems are complicated, and I'm learning to be patient. > > > > Thanks to all. > > > > In solidarity, > > Peter > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 6:55 PM, mike cole wrote: > > > > > Peter -- Concerning your initial question. I obtained the following > > answer > > > from Tanya Akhutina. > > > > > > ????, > > > ?????? ??????? ? ?????? ?????????? ??????? ? 1932 ?. ?????????????? > > > ?????????? ? ??? ????? ????? ?????? ? 33 ? 34 ?????. ? ????? > > > ?????????? ? ?????????? ?? ?????. > > > ??? - ?????? ????, ?? ?????? ??? ??? ????????. ?? ???? ?????? ????? > > > ????? ???????????, ??????? ???, ?????? ???? ?.?.??????????. ?? > > > ???????????? ? ??????? ????? ?????????? ?????? ???? ????? ???????? ? > > > ????? ?????? ?? > > ???. > > > 144: " ?.?. ????????? ???? ?????????? ??????, ? ? ??? ??????? > > > ?????????? ??????? ? ??????? ??????? ???????????????? ????? ???? > > > ????????, ?? ??? ?? ????? ??????, ??????? ?? ??? ?????, ?????????? > > > ?? ?????? ????????? > > ?????". > > > > > > Roughly, > > > Mike, > > > Pavlov wrote about the second signal system in 1932. > > > Correspondingly, references/rememberances to it had to wait until > > > 1933-34. Such > > references/ > > > rememberances in Vygotsky I do not recall. > > > > > > ARL was another case, he was obligated to speak in this way. Olga > > Sergeevna > > > Vinogradova, a student of ARL's [with whom I conducted research in > > > the winter of 1962/63-mc] is cited by Lena Luria [Luria's daughter] > > > in her > > book > > > on p. 144 "A.R. new the teachings of Pavlov perfectly, and in his > > lectures > > > he changed the lexicon and the beauty of a straightforward > > > psychological language was replaced, but none the less the knowledge > > > which he gave us remained on the the level of real science." > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 3:42 PM, mike cole wrote: > > > > > > > It seems that side-by-side translations of the two documents merit > > > > archival publication, David. JREEP is an obvious repository. In > > addition > > > to > > > > which at present we have a good deal more evidence about children, > > chess > > > > boards, and the issues vexing Vygotsky than he had access to. The > > > > non/difficult chronology of the texts complicates an already > > complicated > > > > process of interpretation as we have long witnessed here. > > > > > > > > Perhaps as a separate thread, it would be nice to put together a > > > > discussion of the core linkages between Vygotsky and Halliday in > > > > your work..... one of those chains of discussion that come and go. > > > > Perhaps a mini-course devoted to the following, to me, essential > idea: > > > > > > > > It seems to me that ALL of these are signalization systems (not > > > > signifying systems, because they do not have lexicogrammar and > > > > cannot convey ideal values) > > > > > > > > Providing a "cheat sheet" for autodidacts, might it be possible to > > create > > > > some > > > > "field of interest" in the xmca discussion for dealing with this > idea? > > > > > > > > I have in no way forgotten the issue of the relation of > > > > microgenesis > > and > > > > ontogenesis. It seems another "key point" as most of us go about > > > > using > > > CHAT > > > > ideas in the course of the teaching/learning activities that pay > > > > the > > > bread > > > > and butter. As matters stand, I offer Franklin in the blocks as an > > > example > > > > of microgenesis in a preschool classroom involving play as an > > > > example > > of > > > a > > > > zone of proximal development where childre are a head taller than > > > > themselves. That discussion is for the microgenesis/ontogenesis > > > > thread > > > if I > > > > recall. > > > > > > > > I would be VERY interested to learn of ways that feminist, queer > > theory, > > > > critical disability studies theory, neurodiversity theory, and > > > > others > > can > > > > help me to understand these categories and the theories that > > > > purport to account for them. > > > > > > > > If they need to be re-thought, might as well be here. Ain't goin > > nowhere. > > > > > > > > mike > > > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 2:28 PM, David Kellogg > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> I'm working with two versions of one of Vygotsky's last lectures > > > >> (the second version is given exactly five days before he was > > > >> brought home > > > with > > > >> a > > > >> throat haemorrhage to die, the first about a year earlier). There > > > >> are passages that are almost word for word repetitions. There are > > > >> passages that are semantically the same and but quite differently > > > >> worded (the > > earlier > > > >> Vygotsky is quite modest and tentative; the later Vygotsky is > > > >> much > > more > > > >> critical and also more confident). Then there are passages that > > > >> say > > > pretty > > > >> much the opposite of what was said a year earlier: for example, > > > >> in the early lecture Vygotsky says that a child faced with a > > > >> chessboard who doesn't know how to play will see it structurally > > > >> and sort the pieces > > by > > > >> color (black pieces on black squares, white on white) but in the > > > >> later lecture it is the child who does know how to play who sees > > > >> it structurally, because the child sees a black knight in a > > > >> "structure" with a white > > > pawn. > > > >> He's a genius, and geniuses tend to think things over a lot, > > > >> turning > > > them > > > >> this way and that, and never looking at anything as final, not > > > >> even > > when > > > >> they are about to die. > > > >> > > > >> HDHMF has to be read the same way. Vygotsky cannot quite seem to > > > >> make > > up > > > >> his mind whether there are three stages of higher behavior > > > >> (instinct, habit, intelligence) or four different stages of > > > >> higher behavior (instinct, habit, intelligence, and freedom). In > > > >> Chapter Four, he very clearly > > > argues > > > >> for four or more, but in Chapter Five, which may have been > > > >> written > > much > > > >> earlier, he argues for three but then three paragraphs later > > > >> considers > > > it > > > >> safer to begin as Thorndike does with two levels (unconditional > > > >> and conditional responses). So "signal" vs. "signification" could > > > >> just be > > > seen > > > >> as the difference between unconditional and conditional > > > >> responses, or > > it > > > >> could be seen as the difference between instinct and > > > >> intelligence, or > > it > > > >> could be seen as two poles with an almost infinite number of > > > >> genetic variations in between. I prefer the latter view, but I > > > >> recognize that Vygotsky has to package things pretty differently > > > >> for different > > > audiences, > > > >> and we are not one of the audiences that he has foremost in his > mind. > > > >> > > > >> Take bacteria. Bacteria are apparently capable of quorum sensing: > > > >> that > > > is, > > > >> bacteria don't multiply when there are no other bacteria around, > > > >> they > > do > > > >> when there are some but not too many, and they don't when there > > > >> are > > too > > > >> many. Now, take ants. Ants have a system of finding new nests > > > >> that involves scouting for potential sites. If the site is > > > >> extremely good, they go > > > back > > > >> and take other ants there quickly, but if it is not so good they > > > >> tend > > to > > > >> dawdle a little, with the result that the best site gets more > > > >> ants, > > and > > > at > > > >> a certain point the whole nest "decides" to move there. Now, take > > > >> bees. Like ants, bees go scouting. The scouts come back and they > > dance; > > > >> the > > > >> dances attract more or fewer onlookers, and when a quorum is > > > >> reached, > > > the > > > >> hive moves. It seems to me that ALL of these are signalization > > > >> systems (not signifying systems, because they do not have > > > >> lexicogrammar and cannot convey ideal values) but the difference > > > >> between the ant system and > > the > > > >> bee > > > >> system is as big as the difference between the bee system and > > > >> early > > > child > > > >> language. For ants, the scouting and decision making are not > > > >> differentiated, but for bees they are distinct moments--so the > > > >> ant > > > system > > > >> involves a simple signal system and the bee system involves a > > > >> second signal system. > > > >> > > > >> David Kellogg > > > >> Macquarie University > > > >> > > > >> On Sun, Oct 30, 2016 at 3:45 AM, wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > In this discussion The center of this relational exploration is > > > between > > > >> > signalization AND signification and my question goes back to > > > >> > the > > place > > > >> of > > > >> > the general term *gesturing*. > > > >> > Is this signalization or is this phenomena signification. > > > >> > The act creating actual*ity (sens) which always includes > > > >> > tendency or orientation towards or away from something. > > > >> > The act is gestural acts and implies *each in the other*. > > > >> > > > > >> > The relation of gestural receiving and responding and this > > > >> > phenomena > > > in > > > >> > relation to signalization and signification. > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > >> > > > > >> > From: Huw Lloyd > > > >> > Sent: October 29, 2016 9:01 AM > > > >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: XMCA-ers: Help needed finding LSV > > > >> > references > > to > > > >> > *First*and *Second* Signal Systems > > > >> > > > > >> > Peter, > > > >> > > > > >> > If by signalisation you mean use of signs to influence > > > >> > behaviour in > > > >> terms > > > >> > of operational criteria and speech, then yes this is so. It > > > >> > has > > been > > > >> > studied quite systematically, but is perhaps less well known. I > > > >> > can elaborate on this if this is your drift. > > > >> > > > > >> > Best, > > > >> > Huw > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > On 28 October 2016 at 22:43, Peter Feigenbaum [Staff] < > > > >> > pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu> wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> > > David, > > > >> > > > > > >> > > As usual, your suggestions are both helpful and erudite. > > > >> > > Thanks > > for > > > >> the > > > >> > > poignant references to Vygotsky and to Marx. Although Soviet > > > academic > > > >> > > politics may have complicated the issue, there does seem to > > > >> > > be > > some > > > >> > > substance to the argument that the nervous systems of animals > > > >> > > and > > > the > > > >> > > speech communication systems of humans share the common > > > >> > > property > > of > > > >> > > *signalization*. Personally, I think there's a lot more to > > > >> > > this > > > topic > > > >> > than > > > >> > > meets the eye--or, better yet, there's a lot of opportunity > > > >> > > here > > for > > > >> > > developing the problem further. > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Once again, I owe an intellectual debt to the participants of > > > >> > > this listserv! > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Cheers, > > > >> > > Peter > > > >> > > > > > >> > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 5:10 PM, David Kellogg < > > > dkellogg60@gmail.com> > > > >> > > wrote: > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Peter: > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > I think Mike's right. The "second signal system" was an > > > >> > > > attempt > > to > > > >> > > preserve > > > >> > > > the idea of higher psychological functions in an atmosphere > > > >> > > > that > > > was > > > >> > not > > > >> > > > that different from what was going on in America at the > > > >> > > > same > > time > > > >> (and > > > >> > > > which Mike experienced first hand in both places). When I > > > >> > > > read > > > >> > Belyayev's > > > >> > > > work on foreign language teaching, he talks a lot about the > > > "second > > > >> > > signal > > > >> > > > system". There, are, however, two places in Vygotsky which > > > >> > > > MIGHT > > > >> > provide > > > >> > > > some support, if you wanted to make the case that the > > > >> > > > "second > > > signal > > > >> > > > system" is not completely incompatible with Vygotsky. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > One is Chapter Two of the History of the Development of the > > Higher > > > >> > Mental > > > >> > > > functions. See below. Starting around paragraph 142, > > > >> > > > Vygotsky > > > likens > > > >> > > > Pavlov's model of the brain as a telephone exchange. The > > problem, > > > of > > > >> > > > course, is that back then telephone exchanges did require > > > >> > > > human > > > >> > operators > > > >> > > > to make the connection! > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > The other is the discussion of "second order symbolism" in > > > >> > > > the > > > work > > > >> of > > > >> > > > Delacroix, which you can find in Chapter Six of Thinking > > > >> > > > and > > > Speech > > > >> and > > > >> > > > also in Chapter 7 of HDHMF (fifth para). This is a very > > different > > > >> > > > notion--it's the idea that writing is a set of symbols for > > > speaking. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > David Kellogg > > > >> > > > Macquarie University > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > >From HDHMF, Chapter Two, Research Method > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > We know that, as Pavlov says, ?the most general bases of > > > >> > > > higher > > > >> nervous > > > >> > > > activity are ascribed to the large hemispheres, the same in > > > >> > > > both > > > >> higher > > > >> > > > animals and in people, and for this reason even elementary > > > >> phenomena of > > > >> > > > this activity must be identical in the one and in the other > > > >> > > > in > > > both > > > >> > > normal > > > >> > > > and pathological cases? (1951, p. 15). Actually, this can > > scarcely > > > >> be > > > >> > > > disputed. But as soon as we go from the elementary > > > >> > > > phenomena of > > > >> higher > > > >> > > > nervous activity to the complex, to the higher phenomena > > > >> > > > within > > > this > > > >> > > higher > > > >> > > > ? in the physiological sense ? activity, then two different > > > >> > > methodological > > > >> > > > paths for studying the specific uniqueness of human higher > > > behavior > > > >> > open > > > >> > > > before us. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > One is the path to further study of complication, > > > >> > > > enrichment, > > and > > > >> > > > differentiation of the same phenomena that experimental > > > >> > > > study > > > >> > ascertains > > > >> > > in > > > >> > > > animals. Here, on this path, the greatest restraint must be > > > >> observed. > > > >> > In > > > >> > > > transferring information on higher nervous activity of > > > >> > > > animals > > to > > > >> > higher > > > >> > > > activity of man, we must constantly check the factual > > similarities > > > >> in > > > >> > the > > > >> > > > function of organs in man and animals, but in general the > > > principle > > > >> > > itself > > > >> > > > of the research remains the same as it was in the study of > > > animals. > > > >> > This > > > >> > > is > > > >> > > > the path of physiological study. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > True, this circumstance is of major significance and in the > > > >> > > > area > > > of > > > >> > > > physiological study of behavior, in a comparative study of > > > >> > > > man > > and > > > >> > > animals, > > > >> > > > we must not put the function of the heart, stomach, and > > > >> > > > other > > > organs > > > >> > > which > > > >> > > > are so similar to that of man on the same plane with higher > > > nervous > > > >> > > > activity. In the words of I. P. Pavlov, ?It is specifically > > > >> > > > this > > > >> > activity > > > >> > > > that so strikingly sets man apart from the rank of animals, > > > >> > > > that > > > >> places > > > >> > > man > > > >> > > > immeasurably above the whole animal world? (ibid. p. 414). > > > >> > > > And > > we > > > >> might > > > >> > > > expect that along the path of physiological research we > > > >> > > > will > > find > > > a > > > >> > > > specific qualitative difference in human activity. Let us > > > >> > > > recall > > > the > > > >> > > words > > > >> > > > of Pavlov cited above on the quantitative and qualitative > > > >> > incomparability > > > >> > > > of the word with conditioned stimuli of animals. Even in > > > >> > > > the > > plan > > > of > > > >> > > strict > > > >> > > > physiological consideration, ?the grandiose signalistics of > > > speech? > > > >> > > stands > > > >> > > > outside the whole other mass of stimuli, the > > > >> > > > ?multicapaciousness > > > of > > > >> the > > > >> > > > word? places it in a unique position. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > The other path is the path of psychological research. From > > > >> > > > the > > > very > > > >> > > > beginning, it proposes to seek the specific uniqueness of > > > >> > > > human > > > >> > behavior > > > >> > > > which does take us beyond the initial point. The specific > > > >> uniqueness is > > > >> > > > considered not only in its subsequent complexity and > > development, > > > >> > > > quantitative and qualitative refinement of the cerebral > > > hemispheres, > > > >> > but > > > >> > > > primarily in the social nature of man and in a new method > > > >> > > > of > > > >> > adaptation, > > > >> > > as > > > >> > > > compared with animals, that sets man apart. The main > > > >> > > > difference > > > >> between > > > >> > > the > > > >> > > > behavior of man and of animals consists not only in that > > > >> > > > the > > human > > > >> > brain > > > >> > > is > > > >> > > > immeasurably above the brain of the dog and that the higher > > > nervous > > > >> > > > activity ?so strikingly sets man apart from the rank of > > animals,? > > > >> but > > > >> > > most > > > >> > > > of all, because it is the brain of a social being and > > > >> > > > because > > the > > > >> laws > > > >> > of > > > >> > > > higher nervous activity of man are manifested and act in > > > >> > > > the > > human > > > >> > > > personality. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > But let us return again to the ?most general bases of > > > >> > > > higher > > > nervous > > > >> > > > activity, related to the cerebral hemispheres,? and > > > >> > > > identical in > > > >> higher > > > >> > > > animals and man. We think that it is in this point that we > > > >> > > > can > > > >> disclose > > > >> > > > with definitive clarity the difference of which we speak. > > > >> > > > The > > most > > > >> > > general > > > >> > > > basis of behavior, identical in man and animals, is > > > *signalization.* > > > >> > > Pavlov > > > >> > > > said, ?So the basic and most general activity of the > > > >> > > > cerebral > > > >> > hemispheres > > > >> > > > is signaling with an infinite number of signals and with > > > changeable > > > >> > > > signalization? (ibid., p. 30). As is known, this is the > > > >> > > > most > > > general > > > >> > > > formulation of the whole idea of conditioned reflexes that > > > >> > > > lies > > at > > > >> the > > > >> > > base > > > >> > > > of the physiology of higher nervous activity. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > But human behavior is distinguished exactly in that it > > > >> > > > creates > > > >> > artificial > > > >> > > > signaling stimuli, primarily the grandiose signalization of > > > speech, > > > >> and > > > >> > > in > > > >> > > > this way masters the signaling activity of the cerebral > > > >> hemispheres. If > > > >> > > the > > > >> > > > basic and most general activity of the cerebral hemispheres > > > >> > > > in > > > >> animals > > > >> > > and > > > >> > > > in man is signalization, then the basic and most general > > activity > > > of > > > >> > man > > > >> > > > that differentiates man from animals in the first place, > > > >> > > > from > > the > > > >> > aspect > > > >> > > of > > > >> > > > psychology, is *signification,* that is, creation and use > > > >> > > > of > > > signs. > > > >> We > > > >> > > are > > > >> > > > using this word in its most literal sense and precise meaning. > > > >> > > > Signification is the creation and use of signs, that is, > > > artificial > > > >> > > > signals. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > We will consider more closely this new principle of > > > >> > > > activity. It > > > >> must > > > >> > not > > > >> > > > in any sense be contrasted with the principle of > signalization. > > > >> > > Changeable > > > >> > > > signalization that results in the formation of temporary, > > > >> conditional, > > > >> > > > special connections between the organism and the > > > >> > > > environment is > > an > > > >> > > > indispensable, biological prerequisite of the higher > > > >> > > > activity > > that > > > >> we > > > >> > > > arbitrarily call signification and is its base. The system > > > >> > > > of > > > >> > connections > > > >> > > > that is established in the brain of an animal is a copy or > > > >> reflection > > > >> > of > > > >> > > > natural connections between ?all kinds of agents of nature? > > > >> > > > that > > > >> signal > > > >> > > the > > > >> > > > arrival of immediately favorable or destructive phenomena. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > It is very obvious that such signalization ? a reflection > > > >> > > > of the > > > >> > natural > > > >> > > > connection of phenomena, wholly created by natural > > > >> > > > conditions ? > > > >> cannot > > > >> > be > > > >> > > > an adequate basis of human behavior. For human adaptation, > > > >> > > > an > > > active > > > >> > > > *change > > > >> > > > in the nature of man *is essential. It is the basis of all > > > >> > > > human > > > >> > history. > > > >> > > > It necessarily presupposes an active change in man?s behavior. > > > >> > ?Affecting > > > >> > > > the environment by this movement and changing it, he > > > >> > > > changes his > > > own > > > >> > > nature > > > >> > > > at the same time,? says Marx. ?He develops forces asleep in > > > >> > > > it > > and > > > >> > > subjects > > > >> > > > the play of these forces to his own will? (K. Marx and F. > > Engels, > > > >> > > > *Collected > > > >> > > > Works,* Vol. 23, pp. 188-189 > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > 3A__www.marxists.org_archive_marx_works_1867-2Dc1_ch07.htm- > > > >> > > > 23forces&d=DQIFaQ&c=aqMfXOEvEJQh2iQMCb7Wy8l0sPnURk > > > cqADc2guUW8IM&r= > > > >> > > > mXj3yhpYNklTxyN3KioIJ0ECmPHilpf4N2p9PBMATWs&m= > > > >> > cxiDdHmIrHosSMq59vJlZ4j-S- > > > >> > > > 4h5DSiLaMzqzi2yNA&s=J3sZBxFP1DTk3B8MLGJTyEw- > > > RZmpA347cJfMSUrwSa4&e= > > > >> >). > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 7:50 AM, Peter Feigenbaum [Staff] < > > > >> > > > pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu> wrote: > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Mike, > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > Thanks for the Luria references. From a cursory reading > > > >> > > > > of > > the > > > >> > > relevant > > > >> > > > > passages in the Luria & Yudovich book, and judging by > > > >> > > > > some of > > > the > > > >> > other > > > >> > > > > sources you listed, I get the impression that there > > > >> > > > > hasn't > > been > > > >> much > > > >> > > > > theoretical *fleshing out* of the structures of the > > > >> > > > > second > > > signal > > > >> > > system. > > > >> > > > > I hope that the concept of a first and second signal > > > >> > > > > system is > > > not > > > >> > > just a > > > >> > > > > political argument, but instead has some real substance. > > > >> > > > > I > > find > > > it > > > >> > hard > > > >> > > > to > > > >> > > > > imagine that our *animal* (stimulus-response) system of > > thinking > > > >> is > > > >> > > > > developmentally unrelated to our *human* (conversational > > > >> > > > > initiation-response) system of thinking. > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > If anyone else knows of any passages from Vygotsky > > > >> > > > > related to > > > this > > > >> > > topic, > > > >> > > > > please don't hold back! > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > Much obliged. > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > In solidarity, > > > >> > > > > Peter > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 1:56 PM, mike cole > > > >> > > > > > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > Peter-- If you google Luria "second signal system" you > > > >> > > > > > will > > > >> come up > > > >> > > > with > > > >> > > > > > several references. There is a copy at luria.ucsd.edu > > > >> > > > > > of > > his > > > >> > little > > > >> > > > book > > > >> > > > > > with Yudovich on twins that uses that language. > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > It is not online (so far as i know), but Luria's > > > >> > > > > > article on > > > >> "Speech > > > >> > > > > > development and the formation of mental processes" in > > > >> > > > > > Cole > > and > > > >> > > > > > Maltzman, *Handbook > > > >> > > > > > of Soviet Psychology. *Basic Books, 1969 uses this term > > > >> > > > > > a > > lot. > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > I believe you will find an upsurge of usage associated > > > >> > > > > > with > > > the > > > >> > late > > > >> > > > > > 1940's-50's when Vygotskians were under severe attack, > > > >> > > > > > there > > > >> were > > > >> > > > special > > > >> > > > > > "Pavlov sessions" where they had to recant their > > > >> > > > > > errors, and > > > the > > > >> > use > > > >> > > of > > > >> > > > > > first and second signal system by Pavlov allowed them a > > > >> > > > > > life line to orthodoxy. > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > mike > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Peter Feigenbaum > > > >> > > > > > [Staff] < pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu> wrote: > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Dear colleagues, > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > I don't wish to detract in any way from the very > > > >> > > > > > > serious > > and > > > >> > > > absolutely > > > >> > > > > > > necessary discussion about male sensitivity (or > > > >> > > > > > > should I > > say > > > >> > > > > > insensitivity) > > > >> > > > > > > to the voices of the women inhabiting this list, but > > > >> > > > > > > I > > sure > > > >> could > > > >> > > use > > > >> > > > > > your > > > >> > > > > > > collective help with a small matter of scholarship. I > > > >> > > > > > > am > > > >> trying > > > >> > to > > > >> > > > > locate > > > >> > > > > > > any passages in LSV's Collected Works in English in > > > >> > > > > > > which > > he > > > >> > refers > > > >> > > > to > > > >> > > > > > the > > > >> > > > > > > *first* and *second* signal systems. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > My understanding is that Vygotsky considers the first > > signal > > > >> > system > > > >> > > > as > > > >> > > > > > the > > > >> > > > > > > biologically inherited stimulus-response (S-R) system > > > >> > > > > > > of > > > >> reflexes > > > >> > > as > > > >> > > > > > > described by Pavlov, whereas the second signal system > > refers > > > >> to > > > >> > the > > > >> > > > > > > culturally inherited system of initiation-response > > > >> > > > > > > that is > > > >> > > particular > > > >> > > > > to > > > >> > > > > > > human conversational activity. I am working with the > > > >> hypothesis > > > >> > > that, > > > >> > > > > in > > > >> > > > > > > ontogenetic development, the first signal system > > > >> > > > > > > becomes > > > >> > > > *domesticated* > > > >> > > > > > by, > > > >> > > > > > > and ultimately subordinated to, the second signal > system. > > > That > > > >> > is, > > > >> > > > the > > > >> > > > > > S-R > > > >> > > > > > > form of thinking becomes developmentally transformed > > > >> > > > > > > into > > > the > > > >> > > > > > > Initiation-Response form of thinking that is > > characteristic > > > >> of a > > > >> > > > person > > > >> > > > > > > performing a listening-speaking turn in conversation. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > If any of the wonderful scholars on this list could > > > >> > > > > > > help > > > point > > > >> > this > > > >> > > > > poor, > > > >> > > > > > > stumbling colleague > > > >> > > > > > > in the right direction, I would be most grateful. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Warm wishes to all, > > > >> > > > > > > Peter > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > p.s. -- Let me take this opportunity to express my > > heartfelt > > > >> > thanks > > > >> > > > to > > > >> > > > > > Mike > > > >> > > > > > > for creating this list in the first place, and with > > > >> > > > > > > it the > > > >> > > > opportunity > > > >> > > > > > for > > > >> > > > > > > Vygotskian scholars the world over to share and > > > >> > > > > > > discuss > > our > > > >> ideas > > > >> > > in > > > >> > > > an > > > >> > > > > > > open and honest forum. For my part, I pledge to do my > > level > > > >> best > > > >> > to > > > >> > > > > raise > > > >> > > > > > > my own consciousness where it is deficient so that my > > > >> > participation > > > >> > > > in > > > >> > > > > > this > > > >> > > > > > > forum will be as inclusive and respectful to all of > > > >> > > > > > > its > > > >> > > participants > > > >> > > > as > > > >> > > > > > is > > > >> > > > > > > humanly possible. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > -- > > > >> > > > > > > Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. > > > >> > > > > > > Director, > > > >> > > > > > > Office of Institutional Research > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > provos/office_of_institutio/index.asp> > > > >> > > > > > > Fordham University > > > >> > > > > > > Thebaud Hall-202 > > > >> > > > > > > Bronx, NY 10458 > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Phone: (718) 817-2243 > > > >> > > > > > > Fax: (718) 817-3817 > > > >> > > > > > > email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > -- > > > >> > > > > Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. > > > >> > > > > Director, > > > >> > > > > Office of Institutional Research > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > provos/office_of_institutio/index.asp> > > > >> > > > > Fordham University > > > >> > > > > Thebaud Hall-202 > > > >> > > > > Bronx, NY 10458 > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > Phone: (718) 817-2243 > > > >> > > > > Fax: (718) 817-3817 > > > >> > > > > email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > -- > > > >> > > Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. > > > >> > > Director, > > > >> > > Office of Institutional Research > > > >> > > > > >> > > office_of_institutio/index.asp> Fordham University Thebaud > > > >> > > Hall-202 Bronx, NY 10458 > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Phone: (718) 817-2243 > > > >> > > Fax: (718) 817-3817 > > > >> > > email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. > > Director, > > Office of Institutional Research > > > provos/office_of_institutio/index.asp> > > Fordham University > > Thebaud Hall-202 > > Bronx, NY 10458 > > > > Phone: (718) 817-2243 > > Fax: (718) 817-3817 > > email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu > > > ________________________________ > [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif] //www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass> > > This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely for > the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the > intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the > information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on it. > If you have received this email in error please let the sender know > immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not > necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University accepts > no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan emails > and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept responsibility > for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its > attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless accompanied > by an official order form. > > ________________________________ [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif] This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on it. If you have received this email in error please let the sender know immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University accepts no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan emails and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept responsibility for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless accompanied by an official order form. From mcole@ucsd.edu Fri Nov 4 14:26:48 2016 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 14:26:48 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Fwd: [UCLinks] Digital Learning position at UC Davis In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Leee Martin Associate Professor School of Education, UC Davis The School of Education (SOE) at the University of California, Davis invites applications for a position at the rank of assistant professor in the area of technology and learning. Digital tools and computational media are increasingly important in the lives of children and young people, and they hold great potential for transforming learning environments: they can reconfigure how children and youth reason, collaborate, conduct inquiry, and monitor their learning, as well as how educators facilitate instruction, introduce concepts, assess student learning, and differentiate their teaching, to name just a few possibilities. Access to these tools and practices, however, varies widely across learners of different age levels, cultural backgrounds, socioeconomic resources, and regional settings, and innovations insensitive to that variation risk exacerbating educational inequities. We seek a scholar committed to studying innovations that offer new and transformative solutions to persistent educational challenges. The specific focus is open; possible areas of emphasis include: ? A specific content area, such as social studies ? Intersections between technology and pedagogy ? Technologies across children?s development ? Educational access and equity ? Cross-context technology practices salient in the lives of youth ? Assessment of student learning, including learning analytics approaches ? Organizational perspectives on technology use The position will be a full-time, nine-month academic year tenure-track appointment. Qualifications: Applicants must (1) have, or be close to completing, an earned doctorate in Education, Psychology, Computer Science, or related fields; (2) demonstrate an innovative research agenda with potential for extramural funding from the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) and related sources; and 3) have the ability to teach courses on digital learning to undergraduates and graduate students in the SOE. Responsibilities: Conducting and maintaining a productive program of research, seeking extramural support for research and graduate students, teaching education courses in the SOE, and serving on school and university committees. To apply, visit: https://recruit.ucdavis.edu/apply/JPF01312 From dkellogg60@gmail.com Fri Nov 4 14:28:38 2016 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 08:28:38 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Help needed finding LSV references to *First*and*Second* Signal Systems In-Reply-To: <581caa2a.45cf620a.17f97.4b8b@mx.google.com> References: <581caa2a.45cf620a.17f97.4b8b@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Larry: I think that "sens" is one kind of "valeur", specifically, it's use value and not exchange value. Word value changes from being mostly "sens" (smysl) in the child to being mostly "signification" (znachenie) in the adult. The French is actually not very useful here, because the distinction sens/signification comes to us from Paulhan, for whom both are psychological concepts and neither one is sociological, but if you rework the distinction using Volosinov's "theme" and "meaning" it makes perfect sense (the same is true of reworking Saussure's "valeur" as Marx's "value"). We start with use-values, and through "co-generalization" we create exchange-values. As you say, the real distinction Vygotsky is getting at, outside word value, lies in the disinction between "environment" (what Hasan and Malinowski would call the "Context of Situation") and "world" (what they would call the "Context of Culture"). These two kinds of context are related in more or less the same way that a text (in a Context of Situation) is related to a whole language system (in a Context of Culture). That is, they are related along a cline of instantiation, like weather and climate, or like coins in your pocket and the whole money supply. When Vygotsky complains that Claparede and Piaget have left no "inner link" between conscious awareness and free will, he means something pretty specific. For Piaget and his boss Claparede, the both free will and conscious awareness are caused by "unsuccessful adaptations"--that is, by drinking the coffee before it is cooled off, which teaches you to be aware of the temperature and select the wiser option of eating your doughnut first. Nothing here that an associative model of thinking can't handle. But for Vygotsky, the existence of conscious awareness and free will is all the proof we need to know that the nature of thinking is NOT associative. Associative thinking is made up of minimal choices arranged right in your face, like whether you are going to drink your coffee first or eat your donut first. It's the meal and not the menu. But free will is a choice between what is and what could be: it's a menu and not a meal. You can see that free will only exists if you are conscious of what you could have, and only if you have consciousness of what you could have do you have free choice. That's an inner link. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Sat, Nov 5, 2016 at 2:32 AM, wrote: > On the first page of David?s translation he say Vugotsky asks how > ?onsciousness and free will are internally linked because the answer that > the common cause of this linking through *unsuccessful adaptations to the > environment* - are a *purely external link*. > Vygotsky?s alternative answer is that both consciousness and free will > come into view through co-generalization -that is through word *values* > (implying sens which always has a direction of action toward actual*ity). > Thesw word values are shared in communication. They are *internally > linked* through their shared co-generated and co-generating (which resumes > the temporally co-generated) *intellectualization* > This intellectualization with its *internal moment* of sens contrasts with > the notion that sens is a purely external link of consciousness through > adaptation to the environment. > I will add these alternatives contrast *worlds* and *environment* > Apology for jumping in quickly but i hope it is relevant to the > exploration of gender equality. I will start a new thread. > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: Rod Parker-Rees > Sent: November 4, 2016 6:52 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Help needed finding LSV references to > *First*and*Second* Signal Systems > > Many thanks for sending the lecture, David. > > I think the passage where V underlines the distinction between > 'co-generalized' and non co-generalized' thinking is intriguing: > > "From the psychological point of view, the transition from sensation to > thinking signifies in the first place a transition from a > non-co-generalized to a co-generalized reflection of reality in > consciousness". > > Is there an etymological connection between the Russian words ??????? and > ????????? and the word for teaching/learning which I know as 'obuchenie'? > > I teach a module which is grandly entitled 'Understanding Understanding', > the main focus of which is on the social nature of understanding > (etymologically 'standing among' rather than standing under!) - how we > don't understand something unless we know something of what it means to > other people. I think this was understood centuries ago and it informs the > etymology of words like conscience and consciousness (con-scientia - > co-knowing) and concepts (what is known together). So when V writes here > about co-generalized thinking is he using the same terms as he used in > Thinking and Speech (I believe) to contrast spontaneous and 'scientific' or > 'schooled' concepts? I have always read this as an argument that the > 'private' and the 'public' cannot be understood in isolation - the > spontaneous concepts bring 'colour and vitality' and significance to the > abstract scientific concepts which provide structure and sharability for > the spontaneous concepts. > > Is there something you can recommend as a way in to Hasan's work? > > All the best, > > Rod > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of David Kellogg > Sent: 04 November 2016 04:25 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Help needed finding LSV references to *First*and > *Second* Signal Systems > > Peter: (Maybe both Peters?) > > Sometimes I think the best we husbands, fathers, and political activists > can really do to promote gender equality in intellectual discourse is not > to maintain a respectful male silence but rather to use our own booming > baritones to amplify outstanding thinkers whose voices are in danger of > being lost precisely because they were more soprano, or because they > belonged to women born on the wrong side of the planet, or both. I am > thinking of Ruqaiya Hasan, who is in imminent danger of being lost, even to > feminist writers, in the cacaphony of Bourdieu, Baudrillard, Lyotard, > Habermas, Foucault, Derrida, Lacan, and even Freud, none of whom had > anything to say about Vygotsky (and, not coincidentally, all of whom are > lesser sociolinguists than she was). > > Ruqaiya was an appreciative but also very critical reader of Vygotsky. > Sometimes, when I am reading her thoughts on Vygotsky I feel like she is > holding the book upside down, but then when I read it again I find that I > am the one standing on my head. For example, one of the great advantages > that Hasan finds in Vygotsky is not that he distinguishes between the > higher and lower psychological functions. As far as Ruqaiya was concerned > there was a bit too much of that around, and there still is. Instead, > Ruqaiya finds that Vygotsky's strength is being able to link them together, > precisely through his studies of children, including the biological and the > social in a single complex unit of analysis (e.g. phonology AND > lexicogrammar in a single dimension, which Vygotsky calls "phasal"). > > Ruqaiya doesn't mean that "signalization" is tied to "signification"--she > is too much of a linguist and too much of a dialectician not to see the > huge gap between them. But she does think that the word values (or, as she > would prefer it, the "wording values") that are the bases for signification > are Whorfian, Sapirian social co-generalizations. These are biological in > the sense that they are huntable, gatherable, herdable, farmable, > reproducible. They are also, in materialized form, edible and wearable: > they are often made out of economic interests: they are exchange values, > like the exchange value of any commodity they evolve from use values based > in adapting the environment to human needs. > > Take a look at this. I think it is probably literally the last public > lecture Vygotsky ever gave, and as far as I know it's never been translated > into any language (except now Korean). I'm including the Russian because my > own Russian is...well, lousy, and I keep hoping some of the Russophones on > the list may catch some errors before it goes to press in February. In it, > Vygotsky is trying to show exactly what Ruqaiya was talking about: the way > in which the child goes from "non-co-generalized" thinking to > co-generalized thinking. It's not a step. It's not a leap. It's a whole set > of leaps, some of which depend on parents, professionals, and political > activists. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 9:04 AM, Peter Feigenbaum [Staff] < > pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu> wrote: > > > Dear colleagues, > > > > As a representative of the category *Slow Responder* (I am a busy > > professional, a husband, a father of two, and a political activist), I > > am only now getting around to replying to those who responded to my > > earlier request for help. My apologies if my pace is too slow for a > > satisfying exchange. > > > > Because I was fairly vague about my reason for asking for a reference > > to first and second signal systems in Vygotsky's writings, I > > unwittingly opened the door to discussion of the differences between > > *signals* and *signs*. In fact, my interest is in their > > *similarities*, in the properties that are common to both. I am > > seeking the common denominator between animal stimulus-response thinking > and human initiation-response thinking. > > Fortunately, that linkage exists precisely where David Kellogg pointed > me: > > in Vol. 4, on p.55 of HDHMF in Vygotsky's Collected Works in English. > > > > Vygotsky is very clear when he distinguishes between *natural* signals > > (or > > signalization) and *artificial* signs (or signification). The former > > occurs when animals interact with the environment and their brains > > form conditioned reflexes, whereas the latter occurs when humans > > invent their own conditioned reflexes (words) and then apply those > > reflexes to themselves (or others) in order to master their own > > behavior. In essence, Vygotsky considered *signification* a special case > of *signalization*. > > > > One issue I had not counted on is the historical/political one. I was > > unprepared for the possibility that the first and second signal > > systems may have been a political problem of accommodation to the > > authorities rather than an actual scientific problem. Thanks to Mike > > for pointing that out, and for pointing out A.R. Luria's fairly > > substantial contribution to the discussion--but especially for > > contacting (the wonderful and brilliant) Tanya Akhutina! > > > > I'm not quite sure how to make good use of Huw's suggestion about > > serial and parallel circuits, so I'll have to put that issue to the side > for now. > > But thanks for raising it. > > > > In light of the ongoing discussion about how to create a more > > gender-sensitive and gender-balanced dialogue on this listserv, I > > would like to invite anyone who is lurking (or very busy) to > > contribute any useful information you may have about my request *in your > own good time*. > > These problems are complicated, and I'm learning to be patient. > > > > Thanks to all. > > > > In solidarity, > > Peter > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 6:55 PM, mike cole wrote: > > > > > Peter -- Concerning your initial question. I obtained the following > > answer > > > from Tanya Akhutina. > > > > > > ????, > > > ?????? ??????? ? ?????? ?????????? ??????? ? 1932 ?. ?????????????? > > > ?????????? ? ??? ????? ????? ?????? ? 33 ? 34 ?????. ? ????? > > > ?????????? ? ?????????? ?? ?????. > > > ??? - ?????? ????, ?? ?????? ??? ??? ????????. ?? ???? ?????? ????? > > > ????? ???????????, ??????? ???, ?????? ???? ?.?.??????????. ?? > > > ???????????? ? ??????? ????? ?????????? ?????? ???? ????? ???????? ? > > > ????? ?????? ?? > > ???. > > > 144: " ?.?. ????????? ???? ?????????? ??????, ? ? ??? ??????? > > > ?????????? ??????? ? ??????? ??????? ???????????????? ????? ???? > > > ????????, ?? ??? ?? ????? ??????, ??????? ?? ??? ?????, ?????????? > > > ?? ?????? ????????? > > ?????". > > > > > > Roughly, > > > Mike, > > > Pavlov wrote about the second signal system in 1932. > > > Correspondingly, references/rememberances to it had to wait until > > > 1933-34. Such > > references/ > > > rememberances in Vygotsky I do not recall. > > > > > > ARL was another case, he was obligated to speak in this way. Olga > > Sergeevna > > > Vinogradova, a student of ARL's [with whom I conducted research in > > > the winter of 1962/63-mc] is cited by Lena Luria [Luria's daughter] > > > in her > > book > > > on p. 144 "A.R. new the teachings of Pavlov perfectly, and in his > > lectures > > > he changed the lexicon and the beauty of a straightforward > > > psychological language was replaced, but none the less the knowledge > > > which he gave us remained on the the level of real science." > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 3:42 PM, mike cole wrote: > > > > > > > It seems that side-by-side translations of the two documents merit > > > > archival publication, David. JREEP is an obvious repository. In > > addition > > > to > > > > which at present we have a good deal more evidence about children, > > chess > > > > boards, and the issues vexing Vygotsky than he had access to. The > > > > non/difficult chronology of the texts complicates an already > > complicated > > > > process of interpretation as we have long witnessed here. > > > > > > > > Perhaps as a separate thread, it would be nice to put together a > > > > discussion of the core linkages between Vygotsky and Halliday in > > > > your work..... one of those chains of discussion that come and go. > > > > Perhaps a mini-course devoted to the following, to me, essential > idea: > > > > > > > > It seems to me that ALL of these are signalization systems (not > > > > signifying systems, because they do not have lexicogrammar and > > > > cannot convey ideal values) > > > > > > > > Providing a "cheat sheet" for autodidacts, might it be possible to > > create > > > > some > > > > "field of interest" in the xmca discussion for dealing with this > idea? > > > > > > > > I have in no way forgotten the issue of the relation of > > > > microgenesis > > and > > > > ontogenesis. It seems another "key point" as most of us go about > > > > using > > > CHAT > > > > ideas in the course of the teaching/learning activities that pay > > > > the > > > bread > > > > and butter. As matters stand, I offer Franklin in the blocks as an > > > example > > > > of microgenesis in a preschool classroom involving play as an > > > > example > > of > > > a > > > > zone of proximal development where childre are a head taller than > > > > themselves. That discussion is for the microgenesis/ontogenesis > > > > thread > > > if I > > > > recall. > > > > > > > > I would be VERY interested to learn of ways that feminist, queer > > theory, > > > > critical disability studies theory, neurodiversity theory, and > > > > others > > can > > > > help me to understand these categories and the theories that > > > > purport to account for them. > > > > > > > > If they need to be re-thought, might as well be here. Ain't goin > > nowhere. > > > > > > > > mike > > > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 2:28 PM, David Kellogg > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> I'm working with two versions of one of Vygotsky's last lectures > > > >> (the second version is given exactly five days before he was > > > >> brought home > > > with > > > >> a > > > >> throat haemorrhage to die, the first about a year earlier). There > > > >> are passages that are almost word for word repetitions. There are > > > >> passages that are semantically the same and but quite differently > > > >> worded (the > > earlier > > > >> Vygotsky is quite modest and tentative; the later Vygotsky is > > > >> much > > more > > > >> critical and also more confident). Then there are passages that > > > >> say > > > pretty > > > >> much the opposite of what was said a year earlier: for example, > > > >> in the early lecture Vygotsky says that a child faced with a > > > >> chessboard who doesn't know how to play will see it structurally > > > >> and sort the pieces > > by > > > >> color (black pieces on black squares, white on white) but in the > > > >> later lecture it is the child who does know how to play who sees > > > >> it structurally, because the child sees a black knight in a > > > >> "structure" with a white > > > pawn. > > > >> He's a genius, and geniuses tend to think things over a lot, > > > >> turning > > > them > > > >> this way and that, and never looking at anything as final, not > > > >> even > > when > > > >> they are about to die. > > > >> > > > >> HDHMF has to be read the same way. Vygotsky cannot quite seem to > > > >> make > > up > > > >> his mind whether there are three stages of higher behavior > > > >> (instinct, habit, intelligence) or four different stages of > > > >> higher behavior (instinct, habit, intelligence, and freedom). In > > > >> Chapter Four, he very clearly > > > argues > > > >> for four or more, but in Chapter Five, which may have been > > > >> written > > much > > > >> earlier, he argues for three but then three paragraphs later > > > >> considers > > > it > > > >> safer to begin as Thorndike does with two levels (unconditional > > > >> and conditional responses). So "signal" vs. "signification" could > > > >> just be > > > seen > > > >> as the difference between unconditional and conditional > > > >> responses, or > > it > > > >> could be seen as the difference between instinct and > > > >> intelligence, or > > it > > > >> could be seen as two poles with an almost infinite number of > > > >> genetic variations in between. I prefer the latter view, but I > > > >> recognize that Vygotsky has to package things pretty differently > > > >> for different > > > audiences, > > > >> and we are not one of the audiences that he has foremost in his > mind. > > > >> > > > >> Take bacteria. Bacteria are apparently capable of quorum sensing: > > > >> that > > > is, > > > >> bacteria don't multiply when there are no other bacteria around, > > > >> they > > do > > > >> when there are some but not too many, and they don't when there > > > >> are > > too > > > >> many. Now, take ants. Ants have a system of finding new nests > > > >> that involves scouting for potential sites. If the site is > > > >> extremely good, they go > > > back > > > >> and take other ants there quickly, but if it is not so good they > > > >> tend > > to > > > >> dawdle a little, with the result that the best site gets more > > > >> ants, > > and > > > at > > > >> a certain point the whole nest "decides" to move there. Now, take > > > >> bees. Like ants, bees go scouting. The scouts come back and they > > dance; > > > >> the > > > >> dances attract more or fewer onlookers, and when a quorum is > > > >> reached, > > > the > > > >> hive moves. It seems to me that ALL of these are signalization > > > >> systems (not signifying systems, because they do not have > > > >> lexicogrammar and cannot convey ideal values) but the difference > > > >> between the ant system and > > the > > > >> bee > > > >> system is as big as the difference between the bee system and > > > >> early > > > child > > > >> language. For ants, the scouting and decision making are not > > > >> differentiated, but for bees they are distinct moments--so the > > > >> ant > > > system > > > >> involves a simple signal system and the bee system involves a > > > >> second signal system. > > > >> > > > >> David Kellogg > > > >> Macquarie University > > > >> > > > >> On Sun, Oct 30, 2016 at 3:45 AM, wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > In this discussion The center of this relational exploration is > > > between > > > >> > signalization AND signification and my question goes back to > > > >> > the > > place > > > >> of > > > >> > the general term *gesturing*. > > > >> > Is this signalization or is this phenomena signification. > > > >> > The act creating actual*ity (sens) which always includes > > > >> > tendency or orientation towards or away from something. > > > >> > The act is gestural acts and implies *each in the other*. > > > >> > > > > >> > The relation of gestural receiving and responding and this > > > >> > phenomena > > > in > > > >> > relation to signalization and signification. > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > >> > > > > >> > From: Huw Lloyd > > > >> > Sent: October 29, 2016 9:01 AM > > > >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: XMCA-ers: Help needed finding LSV > > > >> > references > > to > > > >> > *First*and *Second* Signal Systems > > > >> > > > > >> > Peter, > > > >> > > > > >> > If by signalisation you mean use of signs to influence > > > >> > behaviour in > > > >> terms > > > >> > of operational criteria and speech, then yes this is so. It > > > >> > has > > been > > > >> > studied quite systematically, but is perhaps less well known. I > > > >> > can elaborate on this if this is your drift. > > > >> > > > > >> > Best, > > > >> > Huw > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > On 28 October 2016 at 22:43, Peter Feigenbaum [Staff] < > > > >> > pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu> wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> > > David, > > > >> > > > > > >> > > As usual, your suggestions are both helpful and erudite. > > > >> > > Thanks > > for > > > >> the > > > >> > > poignant references to Vygotsky and to Marx. Although Soviet > > > academic > > > >> > > politics may have complicated the issue, there does seem to > > > >> > > be > > some > > > >> > > substance to the argument that the nervous systems of animals > > > >> > > and > > > the > > > >> > > speech communication systems of humans share the common > > > >> > > property > > of > > > >> > > *signalization*. Personally, I think there's a lot more to > > > >> > > this > > > topic > > > >> > than > > > >> > > meets the eye--or, better yet, there's a lot of opportunity > > > >> > > here > > for > > > >> > > developing the problem further. > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Once again, I owe an intellectual debt to the participants of > > > >> > > this listserv! > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Cheers, > > > >> > > Peter > > > >> > > > > > >> > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 5:10 PM, David Kellogg < > > > dkellogg60@gmail.com> > > > >> > > wrote: > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Peter: > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > I think Mike's right. The "second signal system" was an > > > >> > > > attempt > > to > > > >> > > preserve > > > >> > > > the idea of higher psychological functions in an atmosphere > > > >> > > > that > > > was > > > >> > not > > > >> > > > that different from what was going on in America at the > > > >> > > > same > > time > > > >> (and > > > >> > > > which Mike experienced first hand in both places). When I > > > >> > > > read > > > >> > Belyayev's > > > >> > > > work on foreign language teaching, he talks a lot about the > > > "second > > > >> > > signal > > > >> > > > system". There, are, however, two places in Vygotsky which > > > >> > > > MIGHT > > > >> > provide > > > >> > > > some support, if you wanted to make the case that the > > > >> > > > "second > > > signal > > > >> > > > system" is not completely incompatible with Vygotsky. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > One is Chapter Two of the History of the Development of the > > Higher > > > >> > Mental > > > >> > > > functions. See below. Starting around paragraph 142, > > > >> > > > Vygotsky > > > likens > > > >> > > > Pavlov's model of the brain as a telephone exchange. The > > problem, > > > of > > > >> > > > course, is that back then telephone exchanges did require > > > >> > > > human > > > >> > operators > > > >> > > > to make the connection! > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > The other is the discussion of "second order symbolism" in > > > >> > > > the > > > work > > > >> of > > > >> > > > Delacroix, which you can find in Chapter Six of Thinking > > > >> > > > and > > > Speech > > > >> and > > > >> > > > also in Chapter 7 of HDHMF (fifth para). This is a very > > different > > > >> > > > notion--it's the idea that writing is a set of symbols for > > > speaking. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > David Kellogg > > > >> > > > Macquarie University > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > >From HDHMF, Chapter Two, Research Method > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > We know that, as Pavlov says, ?the most general bases of > > > >> > > > higher > > > >> nervous > > > >> > > > activity are ascribed to the large hemispheres, the same in > > > >> > > > both > > > >> higher > > > >> > > > animals and in people, and for this reason even elementary > > > >> phenomena of > > > >> > > > this activity must be identical in the one and in the other > > > >> > > > in > > > both > > > >> > > normal > > > >> > > > and pathological cases? (1951, p. 15). Actually, this can > > scarcely > > > >> be > > > >> > > > disputed. But as soon as we go from the elementary > > > >> > > > phenomena of > > > >> higher > > > >> > > > nervous activity to the complex, to the higher phenomena > > > >> > > > within > > > this > > > >> > > higher > > > >> > > > ? in the physiological sense ? activity, then two different > > > >> > > methodological > > > >> > > > paths for studying the specific uniqueness of human higher > > > behavior > > > >> > open > > > >> > > > before us. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > One is the path to further study of complication, > > > >> > > > enrichment, > > and > > > >> > > > differentiation of the same phenomena that experimental > > > >> > > > study > > > >> > ascertains > > > >> > > in > > > >> > > > animals. Here, on this path, the greatest restraint must be > > > >> observed. > > > >> > In > > > >> > > > transferring information on higher nervous activity of > > > >> > > > animals > > to > > > >> > higher > > > >> > > > activity of man, we must constantly check the factual > > similarities > > > >> in > > > >> > the > > > >> > > > function of organs in man and animals, but in general the > > > principle > > > >> > > itself > > > >> > > > of the research remains the same as it was in the study of > > > animals. > > > >> > This > > > >> > > is > > > >> > > > the path of physiological study. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > True, this circumstance is of major significance and in the > > > >> > > > area > > > of > > > >> > > > physiological study of behavior, in a comparative study of > > > >> > > > man > > and > > > >> > > animals, > > > >> > > > we must not put the function of the heart, stomach, and > > > >> > > > other > > > organs > > > >> > > which > > > >> > > > are so similar to that of man on the same plane with higher > > > nervous > > > >> > > > activity. In the words of I. P. Pavlov, ?It is specifically > > > >> > > > this > > > >> > activity > > > >> > > > that so strikingly sets man apart from the rank of animals, > > > >> > > > that > > > >> places > > > >> > > man > > > >> > > > immeasurably above the whole animal world? (ibid. p. 414). > > > >> > > > And > > we > > > >> might > > > >> > > > expect that along the path of physiological research we > > > >> > > > will > > find > > > a > > > >> > > > specific qualitative difference in human activity. Let us > > > >> > > > recall > > > the > > > >> > > words > > > >> > > > of Pavlov cited above on the quantitative and qualitative > > > >> > incomparability > > > >> > > > of the word with conditioned stimuli of animals. Even in > > > >> > > > the > > plan > > > of > > > >> > > strict > > > >> > > > physiological consideration, ?the grandiose signalistics of > > > speech? > > > >> > > stands > > > >> > > > outside the whole other mass of stimuli, the > > > >> > > > ?multicapaciousness > > > of > > > >> the > > > >> > > > word? places it in a unique position. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > The other path is the path of psychological research. From > > > >> > > > the > > > very > > > >> > > > beginning, it proposes to seek the specific uniqueness of > > > >> > > > human > > > >> > behavior > > > >> > > > which does take us beyond the initial point. The specific > > > >> uniqueness is > > > >> > > > considered not only in its subsequent complexity and > > development, > > > >> > > > quantitative and qualitative refinement of the cerebral > > > hemispheres, > > > >> > but > > > >> > > > primarily in the social nature of man and in a new method > > > >> > > > of > > > >> > adaptation, > > > >> > > as > > > >> > > > compared with animals, that sets man apart. The main > > > >> > > > difference > > > >> between > > > >> > > the > > > >> > > > behavior of man and of animals consists not only in that > > > >> > > > the > > human > > > >> > brain > > > >> > > is > > > >> > > > immeasurably above the brain of the dog and that the higher > > > nervous > > > >> > > > activity ?so strikingly sets man apart from the rank of > > animals,? > > > >> but > > > >> > > most > > > >> > > > of all, because it is the brain of a social being and > > > >> > > > because > > the > > > >> laws > > > >> > of > > > >> > > > higher nervous activity of man are manifested and act in > > > >> > > > the > > human > > > >> > > > personality. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > But let us return again to the ?most general bases of > > > >> > > > higher > > > nervous > > > >> > > > activity, related to the cerebral hemispheres,? and > > > >> > > > identical in > > > >> higher > > > >> > > > animals and man. We think that it is in this point that we > > > >> > > > can > > > >> disclose > > > >> > > > with definitive clarity the difference of which we speak. > > > >> > > > The > > most > > > >> > > general > > > >> > > > basis of behavior, identical in man and animals, is > > > *signalization.* > > > >> > > Pavlov > > > >> > > > said, ?So the basic and most general activity of the > > > >> > > > cerebral > > > >> > hemispheres > > > >> > > > is signaling with an infinite number of signals and with > > > changeable > > > >> > > > signalization? (ibid., p. 30). As is known, this is the > > > >> > > > most > > > general > > > >> > > > formulation of the whole idea of conditioned reflexes that > > > >> > > > lies > > at > > > >> the > > > >> > > base > > > >> > > > of the physiology of higher nervous activity. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > But human behavior is distinguished exactly in that it > > > >> > > > creates > > > >> > artificial > > > >> > > > signaling stimuli, primarily the grandiose signalization of > > > speech, > > > >> and > > > >> > > in > > > >> > > > this way masters the signaling activity of the cerebral > > > >> hemispheres. If > > > >> > > the > > > >> > > > basic and most general activity of the cerebral hemispheres > > > >> > > > in > > > >> animals > > > >> > > and > > > >> > > > in man is signalization, then the basic and most general > > activity > > > of > > > >> > man > > > >> > > > that differentiates man from animals in the first place, > > > >> > > > from > > the > > > >> > aspect > > > >> > > of > > > >> > > > psychology, is *signification,* that is, creation and use > > > >> > > > of > > > signs. > > > >> We > > > >> > > are > > > >> > > > using this word in its most literal sense and precise meaning. > > > >> > > > Signification is the creation and use of signs, that is, > > > artificial > > > >> > > > signals. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > We will consider more closely this new principle of > > > >> > > > activity. It > > > >> must > > > >> > not > > > >> > > > in any sense be contrasted with the principle of > signalization. > > > >> > > Changeable > > > >> > > > signalization that results in the formation of temporary, > > > >> conditional, > > > >> > > > special connections between the organism and the > > > >> > > > environment is > > an > > > >> > > > indispensable, biological prerequisite of the higher > > > >> > > > activity > > that > > > >> we > > > >> > > > arbitrarily call signification and is its base. The system > > > >> > > > of > > > >> > connections > > > >> > > > that is established in the brain of an animal is a copy or > > > >> reflection > > > >> > of > > > >> > > > natural connections between ?all kinds of agents of nature? > > > >> > > > that > > > >> signal > > > >> > > the > > > >> > > > arrival of immediately favorable or destructive phenomena. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > It is very obvious that such signalization ? a reflection > > > >> > > > of the > > > >> > natural > > > >> > > > connection of phenomena, wholly created by natural > > > >> > > > conditions ? > > > >> cannot > > > >> > be > > > >> > > > an adequate basis of human behavior. For human adaptation, > > > >> > > > an > > > active > > > >> > > > *change > > > >> > > > in the nature of man *is essential. It is the basis of all > > > >> > > > human > > > >> > history. > > > >> > > > It necessarily presupposes an active change in man?s behavior. > > > >> > ?Affecting > > > >> > > > the environment by this movement and changing it, he > > > >> > > > changes his > > > own > > > >> > > nature > > > >> > > > at the same time,? says Marx. ?He develops forces asleep in > > > >> > > > it > > and > > > >> > > subjects > > > >> > > > the play of these forces to his own will? (K. Marx and F. > > Engels, > > > >> > > > *Collected > > > >> > > > Works,* Vol. 23, pp. 188-189 > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > 3A__www.marxists.org_archive_marx_works_1867-2Dc1_ch07.htm- > > > >> > > > 23forces&d=DQIFaQ&c=aqMfXOEvEJQh2iQMCb7Wy8l0sPnURk > > > cqADc2guUW8IM&r= > > > >> > > > mXj3yhpYNklTxyN3KioIJ0ECmPHilpf4N2p9PBMATWs&m= > > > >> > cxiDdHmIrHosSMq59vJlZ4j-S- > > > >> > > > 4h5DSiLaMzqzi2yNA&s=J3sZBxFP1DTk3B8MLGJTyEw- > > > RZmpA347cJfMSUrwSa4&e= > > > >> >). > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 7:50 AM, Peter Feigenbaum [Staff] < > > > >> > > > pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu> wrote: > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Mike, > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > Thanks for the Luria references. From a cursory reading > > > >> > > > > of > > the > > > >> > > relevant > > > >> > > > > passages in the Luria & Yudovich book, and judging by > > > >> > > > > some of > > > the > > > >> > other > > > >> > > > > sources you listed, I get the impression that there > > > >> > > > > hasn't > > been > > > >> much > > > >> > > > > theoretical *fleshing out* of the structures of the > > > >> > > > > second > > > signal > > > >> > > system. > > > >> > > > > I hope that the concept of a first and second signal > > > >> > > > > system is > > > not > > > >> > > just a > > > >> > > > > political argument, but instead has some real substance. > > > >> > > > > I > > find > > > it > > > >> > hard > > > >> > > > to > > > >> > > > > imagine that our *animal* (stimulus-response) system of > > thinking > > > >> is > > > >> > > > > developmentally unrelated to our *human* (conversational > > > >> > > > > initiation-response) system of thinking. > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > If anyone else knows of any passages from Vygotsky > > > >> > > > > related to > > > this > > > >> > > topic, > > > >> > > > > please don't hold back! > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > Much obliged. > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > In solidarity, > > > >> > > > > Peter > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 1:56 PM, mike cole > > > >> > > > > > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > Peter-- If you google Luria "second signal system" you > > > >> > > > > > will > > > >> come up > > > >> > > > with > > > >> > > > > > several references. There is a copy at luria.ucsd.edu > > > >> > > > > > of > > his > > > >> > little > > > >> > > > book > > > >> > > > > > with Yudovich on twins that uses that language. > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > It is not online (so far as i know), but Luria's > > > >> > > > > > article on > > > >> "Speech > > > >> > > > > > development and the formation of mental processes" in > > > >> > > > > > Cole > > and > > > >> > > > > > Maltzman, *Handbook > > > >> > > > > > of Soviet Psychology. *Basic Books, 1969 uses this term > > > >> > > > > > a > > lot. > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > I believe you will find an upsurge of usage associated > > > >> > > > > > with > > > the > > > >> > late > > > >> > > > > > 1940's-50's when Vygotskians were under severe attack, > > > >> > > > > > there > > > >> were > > > >> > > > special > > > >> > > > > > "Pavlov sessions" where they had to recant their > > > >> > > > > > errors, and > > > the > > > >> > use > > > >> > > of > > > >> > > > > > first and second signal system by Pavlov allowed them a > > > >> > > > > > life line to orthodoxy. > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > mike > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Peter Feigenbaum > > > >> > > > > > [Staff] < pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu> wrote: > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Dear colleagues, > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > I don't wish to detract in any way from the very > > > >> > > > > > > serious > > and > > > >> > > > absolutely > > > >> > > > > > > necessary discussion about male sensitivity (or > > > >> > > > > > > should I > > say > > > >> > > > > > insensitivity) > > > >> > > > > > > to the voices of the women inhabiting this list, but > > > >> > > > > > > I > > sure > > > >> could > > > >> > > use > > > >> > > > > > your > > > >> > > > > > > collective help with a small matter of scholarship. I > > > >> > > > > > > am > > > >> trying > > > >> > to > > > >> > > > > locate > > > >> > > > > > > any passages in LSV's Collected Works in English in > > > >> > > > > > > which > > he > > > >> > refers > > > >> > > > to > > > >> > > > > > the > > > >> > > > > > > *first* and *second* signal systems. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > My understanding is that Vygotsky considers the first > > signal > > > >> > system > > > >> > > > as > > > >> > > > > > the > > > >> > > > > > > biologically inherited stimulus-response (S-R) system > > > >> > > > > > > of > > > >> reflexes > > > >> > > as > > > >> > > > > > > described by Pavlov, whereas the second signal system > > refers > > > >> to > > > >> > the > > > >> > > > > > > culturally inherited system of initiation-response > > > >> > > > > > > that is > > > >> > > particular > > > >> > > > > to > > > >> > > > > > > human conversational activity. I am working with the > > > >> hypothesis > > > >> > > that, > > > >> > > > > in > > > >> > > > > > > ontogenetic development, the first signal system > > > >> > > > > > > becomes > > > >> > > > *domesticated* > > > >> > > > > > by, > > > >> > > > > > > and ultimately subordinated to, the second signal > system. > > > That > > > >> > is, > > > >> > > > the > > > >> > > > > > S-R > > > >> > > > > > > form of thinking becomes developmentally transformed > > > >> > > > > > > into > > > the > > > >> > > > > > > Initiation-Response form of thinking that is > > characteristic > > > >> of a > > > >> > > > person > > > >> > > > > > > performing a listening-speaking turn in conversation. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > If any of the wonderful scholars on this list could > > > >> > > > > > > help > > > point > > > >> > this > > > >> > > > > poor, > > > >> > > > > > > stumbling colleague > > > >> > > > > > > in the right direction, I would be most grateful. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Warm wishes to all, > > > >> > > > > > > Peter > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > p.s. -- Let me take this opportunity to express my > > heartfelt > > > >> > thanks > > > >> > > > to > > > >> > > > > > Mike > > > >> > > > > > > for creating this list in the first place, and with > > > >> > > > > > > it the > > > >> > > > opportunity > > > >> > > > > > for > > > >> > > > > > > Vygotskian scholars the world over to share and > > > >> > > > > > > discuss > > our > > > >> ideas > > > >> > > in > > > >> > > > an > > > >> > > > > > > open and honest forum. For my part, I pledge to do my > > level > > > >> best > > > >> > to > > > >> > > > > raise > > > >> > > > > > > my own consciousness where it is deficient so that my > > > >> > participation > > > >> > > > in > > > >> > > > > > this > > > >> > > > > > > forum will be as inclusive and respectful to all of > > > >> > > > > > > its > > > >> > > participants > > > >> > > > as > > > >> > > > > > is > > > >> > > > > > > humanly possible. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > -- > > > >> > > > > > > Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. > > > >> > > > > > > Director, > > > >> > > > > > > Office of Institutional Research > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > provos/office_of_institutio/index.asp> > > > >> > > > > > > Fordham University > > > >> > > > > > > Thebaud Hall-202 > > > >> > > > > > > Bronx, NY 10458 > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Phone: (718) 817-2243 > > > >> > > > > > > Fax: (718) 817-3817 > > > >> > > > > > > email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > -- > > > >> > > > > Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. > > > >> > > > > Director, > > > >> > > > > Office of Institutional Research > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > provos/office_of_institutio/index.asp> > > > >> > > > > Fordham University > > > >> > > > > Thebaud Hall-202 > > > >> > > > > Bronx, NY 10458 > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > Phone: (718) 817-2243 > > > >> > > > > Fax: (718) 817-3817 > > > >> > > > > email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > -- > > > >> > > Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. > > > >> > > Director, > > > >> > > Office of Institutional Research > > > >> > > > > >> > > office_of_institutio/index.asp> Fordham University Thebaud > > > >> > > Hall-202 Bronx, NY 10458 > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Phone: (718) 817-2243 > > > >> > > Fax: (718) 817-3817 > > > >> > > email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. > > Director, > > Office of Institutional Research > > > provos/office_of_institutio/index.asp> > > Fordham University > > Thebaud Hall-202 > > Bronx, NY 10458 > > > > Phone: (718) 817-2243 > > Fax: (718) 817-3817 > > email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu > > > ________________________________ > [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif] //www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass> > > This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely for > the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the > intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the > information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on it. > If you have received this email in error please let the sender know > immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not > necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University accepts > no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan emails > and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept responsibility > for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its > attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless accompanied > by an official order form. > > > From pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu Fri Nov 4 14:29:56 2016 From: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu (Peter Feigenbaum [Staff]) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 17:29:56 -0400 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Help needed finding LSV references to *First*and *Second* Signal Systems In-Reply-To: <1478293783753.39188@iped.uio.no> References: <1478293783753.39188@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: David, I, too, want to thank you (in advance) for sharing your thoughts and related writings on this topic. I haven't had a moment all day to even glance at the materials you provided, but I look forward eagerly to reading them over the weekend. Much obliged! Cheers, Peter On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 5:09 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > David, I am still reading, but I did not want to let it pass without a > huge thank you for so generously sharing that text with us. It made my day! > Alfredo > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of David Kellogg > Sent: 04 November 2016 05:24 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Help needed finding LSV references to *First*and > *Second* Signal Systems > > Peter: (Maybe both Peters?) > > Sometimes I think the best we husbands, fathers, and political activists > can really do to promote gender equality in intellectual discourse is > not to maintain a respectful male silence but rather to use our own booming > baritones to amplify outstanding thinkers whose voices are in danger of > being lost precisely because they were more soprano, or because > they belonged to women born on the wrong side of the planet, or both. I am > thinking of Ruqaiya Hasan, who is in imminent danger of being lost, even to > feminist writers, in the cacaphony of Bourdieu, Baudrillard, Lyotard, > Habermas, Foucault, Derrida, Lacan, and even Freud, none of whom had > anything to say about Vygotsky (and, not coincidentally, all of whom are > lesser sociolinguists than she was). > > Ruqaiya was an appreciative but also very critical reader of Vygotsky. > Sometimes, when I am reading her thoughts on Vygotsky I feel like she is > holding the book upside down, but then when I read it again I find that I > am the one standing on my head. For example, one of the great advantages > that Hasan finds in Vygotsky is not that he distinguishes between the > higher and lower psychological functions. As far as Ruqaiya was concerned > there was a bit too much of that around, and there still is. Instead, > Ruqaiya finds that Vygotsky's strength is being able to link them together, > precisely through his studies of children, including the biological and the > social in a single complex unit of analysis (e.g. phonology AND > lexicogrammar in a single dimension, which Vygotsky calls "phasal"). > > Ruqaiya doesn't mean that "signalization" is tied to "signification"--she > is too much of a linguist and too much of a dialectician not to see the > huge gap between them. But she does think that the word values (or, as she > would prefer it, the "wording values") that are the bases for signification > are Whorfian, Sapirian social co-generalizations. These are biological in > the sense that they are huntable, gatherable, herdable, farmable, > reproducible. They are also, in materialized form, edible and wearable: > they are often made out of economic interests: they are exchange values, > like the exchange value of any commodity they evolve from use values based > in adapting the environment to human needs. > > Take a look at this. I think it is probably literally the last public > lecture Vygotsky ever gave, and as far as I know it's never been translated > into any language (except now Korean). I'm including the Russian because my > own Russian is...well, lousy, and I keep hoping some of the Russophones on > the list may catch some errors before it goes to press in February. In it, > Vygotsky is trying to show exactly what Ruqaiya was talking about: the way > in which the child goes from "non-co-generalized" thinking to > co-generalized thinking. It's not a step. It's not a leap. It's a whole set > of leaps, some of which depend on parents, professionals, and political > activists. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 9:04 AM, Peter Feigenbaum [Staff] < > pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu> wrote: > > > Dear colleagues, > > > > As a representative of the category *Slow Responder* (I am a busy > > professional, a husband, a father of two, and a political activist), I am > > only now getting around to replying to those who responded to my earlier > > request for help. My apologies if my pace is too slow for a satisfying > > exchange. > > > > Because I was fairly vague about my reason for asking for a reference to > > first and second signal systems in Vygotsky's writings, I unwittingly > > opened the door to discussion of the differences between *signals* and > > *signs*. In fact, my interest is in their *similarities*, in the > properties > > that are common to both. I am seeking the common denominator between > animal > > stimulus-response thinking and human initiation-response thinking. > > Fortunately, that linkage exists precisely where David Kellogg pointed > me: > > in Vol. 4, on p.55 of HDHMF in Vygotsky's Collected Works in English. > > > > Vygotsky is very clear when he distinguishes between *natural* signals > (or > > signalization) and *artificial* signs (or signification). The former > occurs > > when animals interact with the environment and their brains form > > conditioned reflexes, whereas the latter occurs when humans invent their > > own conditioned reflexes (words) and then apply those reflexes to > > themselves (or others) in order to master their own behavior. In essence, > > Vygotsky considered *signification* a special case of *signalization*. > > > > One issue I had not counted on is the historical/political one. I was > > unprepared for the possibility that the first and second signal systems > may > > have been a political problem of accommodation to the authorities rather > > than an actual scientific problem. Thanks to Mike for pointing that out, > > and for pointing out A.R. Luria's fairly substantial contribution to the > > discussion--but especially for contacting (the wonderful and brilliant) > > Tanya Akhutina! > > > > I'm not quite sure how to make good use of Huw's suggestion about serial > > and parallel circuits, so I'll have to put that issue to the side for > now. > > But thanks for raising it. > > > > In light of the ongoing discussion about how to create a more > > gender-sensitive and gender-balanced dialogue on this listserv, I would > > like to invite anyone who is lurking (or very busy) to contribute any > > useful information you may have about my request *in your own good time*. > > These problems are complicated, and I'm learning to be patient. > > > > Thanks to all. > > > > In solidarity, > > Peter > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 6:55 PM, mike cole wrote: > > > > > Peter -- Concerning your initial question. I obtained the following > > answer > > > from Tanya Akhutina. > > > > > > ????, > > > ?????? ??????? ? ?????? ?????????? ??????? ? 1932 ?. ?????????????? > > > ?????????? ? ??? ????? ????? ?????? ? 33 ? 34 ?????. ? ????? > ?????????? ? > > > ?????????? ?? ?????. > > > ??? - ?????? ????, ?? ?????? ??? ??? ????????. ?? ???? ?????? ????? > ????? > > > ???????????, ??????? ???, ?????? ???? ?.?.??????????. ?? ???????????? ? > > > ??????? ????? ?????????? ?????? ???? ????? ???????? ? ????? ?????? ?? > > ???. > > > 144: " ?.?. ????????? ???? ?????????? ??????, ? ? ??? ??????? > ?????????? > > > ??????? ? ??????? ??????? ???????????????? ????? ???? ????????, ?? ??? > ?? > > > ????? ??????, ??????? ?? ??? ?????, ?????????? ?? ?????? ????????? > > ?????". > > > > > > Roughly, > > > Mike, > > > Pavlov wrote about the second signal system in 1932. Correspondingly, > > > references/rememberances to it had to wait until 1933-34. Such > > references/ > > > rememberances in Vygotsky I do not recall. > > > > > > ARL was another case, he was obligated to speak in this way. Olga > > Sergeevna > > > Vinogradova, a student of ARL's [with whom I conducted research in the > > > winter of 1962/63-mc] is cited by Lena Luria [Luria's daughter] in her > > book > > > on p. 144 "A.R. new the teachings of Pavlov perfectly, and in his > > lectures > > > he changed the lexicon and the beauty of a straightforward > psychological > > > language was replaced, but none the less the knowledge which he gave us > > > remained on the the level of real science." > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 3:42 PM, mike cole wrote: > > > > > > > It seems that side-by-side translations of the two documents merit > > > > archival publication, David. JREEP is an obvious repository. In > > addition > > > to > > > > which at present we have a good deal more evidence about children, > > chess > > > > boards, and the issues vexing Vygotsky than he had access to. The > > > > non/difficult chronology of the texts complicates an already > > complicated > > > > process of interpretation as we have long witnessed here. > > > > > > > > Perhaps as a separate thread, it would be nice to put together a > > > > discussion of the core linkages between Vygotsky and Halliday in your > > > > work..... one of those chains of discussion that come and go. > Perhaps a > > > > mini-course devoted to the following, to me, essential idea: > > > > > > > > It seems to me that ALL of these are signalization systems (not > > > > signifying systems, because they do not have lexicogrammar and cannot > > > > convey ideal values) > > > > > > > > Providing a "cheat sheet" for autodidacts, might it be possible to > > create > > > > some > > > > "field of interest" in the xmca discussion for dealing with this > idea? > > > > > > > > I have in no way forgotten the issue of the relation of microgenesis > > and > > > > ontogenesis. It seems another "key point" as most of us go about > using > > > CHAT > > > > ideas in the course of the teaching/learning activities that pay the > > > bread > > > > and butter. As matters stand, I offer Franklin in the blocks as an > > > example > > > > of microgenesis in a preschool classroom involving play as an example > > of > > > a > > > > zone of proximal development where childre are a head taller than > > > > themselves. That discussion is for the microgenesis/ontogenesis > thread > > > if I > > > > recall. > > > > > > > > I would be VERY interested to learn of ways that feminist, queer > > theory, > > > > critical disability studies theory, neurodiversity theory, and others > > can > > > > help me to understand these categories and the theories that purport > to > > > > account for them. > > > > > > > > If they need to be re-thought, might as well be here. Ain't goin > > nowhere. > > > > > > > > mike > > > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 2:28 PM, David Kellogg > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> I'm working with two versions of one of Vygotsky's last lectures > (the > > > >> second version is given exactly five days before he was brought home > > > with > > > >> a > > > >> throat haemorrhage to die, the first about a year earlier). There > are > > > >> passages that are almost word for word repetitions. There are > passages > > > >> that > > > >> are semantically the same and but quite differently worded (the > > earlier > > > >> Vygotsky is quite modest and tentative; the later Vygotsky is much > > more > > > >> critical and also more confident). Then there are passages that say > > > pretty > > > >> much the opposite of what was said a year earlier: for example, in > the > > > >> early lecture Vygotsky says that a child faced with a chessboard who > > > >> doesn't know how to play will see it structurally and sort the > pieces > > by > > > >> color (black pieces on black squares, white on white) but in the > later > > > >> lecture it is the child who does know how to play who sees it > > > >> structurally, > > > >> because the child sees a black knight in a "structure" with a white > > > pawn. > > > >> He's a genius, and geniuses tend to think things over a lot, turning > > > them > > > >> this way and that, and never looking at anything as final, not even > > when > > > >> they are about to die. > > > >> > > > >> HDHMF has to be read the same way. Vygotsky cannot quite seem to > make > > up > > > >> his mind whether there are three stages of higher behavior > (instinct, > > > >> habit, intelligence) or four different stages of higher behavior > > > >> (instinct, > > > >> habit, intelligence, and freedom). In Chapter Four, he very clearly > > > argues > > > >> for four or more, but in Chapter Five, which may have been written > > much > > > >> earlier, he argues for three but then three paragraphs later > considers > > > it > > > >> safer to begin as Thorndike does with two levels (unconditional and > > > >> conditional responses). So "signal" vs. "signification" could just > be > > > seen > > > >> as the difference between unconditional and conditional responses, > or > > it > > > >> could be seen as the difference between instinct and intelligence, > or > > it > > > >> could be seen as two poles with an almost infinite number of genetic > > > >> variations in between. I prefer the latter view, but I recognize > that > > > >> Vygotsky has to package things pretty differently for different > > > audiences, > > > >> and we are not one of the audiences that he has foremost in his > mind. > > > >> > > > >> Take bacteria. Bacteria are apparently capable of quorum sensing: > that > > > is, > > > >> bacteria don't multiply when there are no other bacteria around, > they > > do > > > >> when there are some but not too many, and they don't when there are > > too > > > >> many. Now, take ants. Ants have a system of finding new nests that > > > >> involves > > > >> scouting for potential sites. If the site is extremely good, they go > > > back > > > >> and take other ants there quickly, but if it is not so good they > tend > > to > > > >> dawdle a little, with the result that the best site gets more ants, > > and > > > at > > > >> a certain point the whole nest "decides" to move there. Now, take > > > >> bees. Like ants, bees go scouting. The scouts come back and they > > dance; > > > >> the > > > >> dances attract more or fewer onlookers, and when a quorum is > reached, > > > the > > > >> hive moves. It seems to me that ALL of these are signalization > systems > > > >> (not > > > >> signifying systems, because they do not have lexicogrammar and > cannot > > > >> convey ideal values) but the difference between the ant system and > > the > > > >> bee > > > >> system is as big as the difference between the bee system and early > > > child > > > >> language. For ants, the scouting and decision making are not > > > >> differentiated, but for bees they are distinct moments--so the ant > > > system > > > >> involves a simple signal system and the bee system involves a second > > > >> signal > > > >> system. > > > >> > > > >> David Kellogg > > > >> Macquarie University > > > >> > > > >> On Sun, Oct 30, 2016 at 3:45 AM, wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > In this discussion The center of this relational exploration is > > > between > > > >> > signalization AND signification and my question goes back to the > > place > > > >> of > > > >> > the general term *gesturing*. > > > >> > Is this signalization or is this phenomena signification. > > > >> > The act creating actual*ity (sens) which always includes tendency > or > > > >> > orientation towards or away from something. > > > >> > The act is gestural acts and implies *each in the other*. > > > >> > > > > >> > The relation of gestural receiving and responding and this > phenomena > > > in > > > >> > relation to signalization and signification. > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > >> > > > > >> > From: Huw Lloyd > > > >> > Sent: October 29, 2016 9:01 AM > > > >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: XMCA-ers: Help needed finding LSV references > > to > > > >> > *First*and *Second* Signal Systems > > > >> > > > > >> > Peter, > > > >> > > > > >> > If by signalisation you mean use of signs to influence behaviour > in > > > >> terms > > > >> > of operational criteria and speech, then yes this is so. It has > > been > > > >> > studied quite systematically, but is perhaps less well known. I > can > > > >> > elaborate on this if this is your drift. > > > >> > > > > >> > Best, > > > >> > Huw > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > On 28 October 2016 at 22:43, Peter Feigenbaum [Staff] < > > > >> > pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu> wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> > > David, > > > >> > > > > > >> > > As usual, your suggestions are both helpful and erudite. Thanks > > for > > > >> the > > > >> > > poignant references to Vygotsky and to Marx. Although Soviet > > > academic > > > >> > > politics may have complicated the issue, there does seem to be > > some > > > >> > > substance to the argument that the nervous systems of animals > and > > > the > > > >> > > speech communication systems of humans share the common property > > of > > > >> > > *signalization*. Personally, I think there's a lot more to this > > > topic > > > >> > than > > > >> > > meets the eye--or, better yet, there's a lot of opportunity here > > for > > > >> > > developing the problem further. > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Once again, I owe an intellectual debt to the participants of > this > > > >> > > listserv! > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Cheers, > > > >> > > Peter > > > >> > > > > > >> > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 5:10 PM, David Kellogg < > > > dkellogg60@gmail.com> > > > >> > > wrote: > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Peter: > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > I think Mike's right. The "second signal system" was an > attempt > > to > > > >> > > preserve > > > >> > > > the idea of higher psychological functions in an atmosphere > that > > > was > > > >> > not > > > >> > > > that different from what was going on in America at the same > > time > > > >> (and > > > >> > > > which Mike experienced first hand in both places). When I read > > > >> > Belyayev's > > > >> > > > work on foreign language teaching, he talks a lot about the > > > "second > > > >> > > signal > > > >> > > > system". There, are, however, two places in Vygotsky which > MIGHT > > > >> > provide > > > >> > > > some support, if you wanted to make the case that the "second > > > signal > > > >> > > > system" is not completely incompatible with Vygotsky. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > One is Chapter Two of the History of the Development of the > > Higher > > > >> > Mental > > > >> > > > functions. See below. Starting around paragraph 142, Vygotsky > > > likens > > > >> > > > Pavlov's model of the brain as a telephone exchange. The > > problem, > > > of > > > >> > > > course, is that back then telephone exchanges did require > human > > > >> > operators > > > >> > > > to make the connection! > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > The other is the discussion of "second order symbolism" in the > > > work > > > >> of > > > >> > > > Delacroix, which you can find in Chapter Six of Thinking and > > > Speech > > > >> and > > > >> > > > also in Chapter 7 of HDHMF (fifth para). This is a very > > different > > > >> > > > notion--it's the idea that writing is a set of symbols for > > > speaking. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > David Kellogg > > > >> > > > Macquarie University > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > >From HDHMF, Chapter Two, Research Method > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > We know that, as Pavlov says, ?the most general bases of > higher > > > >> nervous > > > >> > > > activity are ascribed to the large hemispheres, the same in > both > > > >> higher > > > >> > > > animals and in people, and for this reason even elementary > > > >> phenomena of > > > >> > > > this activity must be identical in the one and in the other in > > > both > > > >> > > normal > > > >> > > > and pathological cases? (1951, p. 15). Actually, this can > > scarcely > > > >> be > > > >> > > > disputed. But as soon as we go from the elementary phenomena > of > > > >> higher > > > >> > > > nervous activity to the complex, to the higher phenomena > within > > > this > > > >> > > higher > > > >> > > > ? in the physiological sense ? activity, then two different > > > >> > > methodological > > > >> > > > paths for studying the specific uniqueness of human higher > > > behavior > > > >> > open > > > >> > > > before us. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > One is the path to further study of complication, enrichment, > > and > > > >> > > > differentiation of the same phenomena that experimental study > > > >> > ascertains > > > >> > > in > > > >> > > > animals. Here, on this path, the greatest restraint must be > > > >> observed. > > > >> > In > > > >> > > > transferring information on higher nervous activity of animals > > to > > > >> > higher > > > >> > > > activity of man, we must constantly check the factual > > similarities > > > >> in > > > >> > the > > > >> > > > function of organs in man and animals, but in general the > > > principle > > > >> > > itself > > > >> > > > of the research remains the same as it was in the study of > > > animals. > > > >> > This > > > >> > > is > > > >> > > > the path of physiological study. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > True, this circumstance is of major significance and in the > area > > > of > > > >> > > > physiological study of behavior, in a comparative study of man > > and > > > >> > > animals, > > > >> > > > we must not put the function of the heart, stomach, and other > > > organs > > > >> > > which > > > >> > > > are so similar to that of man on the same plane with higher > > > nervous > > > >> > > > activity. In the words of I. P. Pavlov, ?It is specifically > this > > > >> > activity > > > >> > > > that so strikingly sets man apart from the rank of animals, > that > > > >> places > > > >> > > man > > > >> > > > immeasurably above the whole animal world? (ibid. p. 414). And > > we > > > >> might > > > >> > > > expect that along the path of physiological research we will > > find > > > a > > > >> > > > specific qualitative difference in human activity. Let us > recall > > > the > > > >> > > words > > > >> > > > of Pavlov cited above on the quantitative and qualitative > > > >> > incomparability > > > >> > > > of the word with conditioned stimuli of animals. Even in the > > plan > > > of > > > >> > > strict > > > >> > > > physiological consideration, ?the grandiose signalistics of > > > speech? > > > >> > > stands > > > >> > > > outside the whole other mass of stimuli, the > ?multicapaciousness > > > of > > > >> the > > > >> > > > word? places it in a unique position. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > The other path is the path of psychological research. From the > > > very > > > >> > > > beginning, it proposes to seek the specific uniqueness of > human > > > >> > behavior > > > >> > > > which does take us beyond the initial point. The specific > > > >> uniqueness is > > > >> > > > considered not only in its subsequent complexity and > > development, > > > >> > > > quantitative and qualitative refinement of the cerebral > > > hemispheres, > > > >> > but > > > >> > > > primarily in the social nature of man and in a new method of > > > >> > adaptation, > > > >> > > as > > > >> > > > compared with animals, that sets man apart. The main > difference > > > >> between > > > >> > > the > > > >> > > > behavior of man and of animals consists not only in that the > > human > > > >> > brain > > > >> > > is > > > >> > > > immeasurably above the brain of the dog and that the higher > > > nervous > > > >> > > > activity ?so strikingly sets man apart from the rank of > > animals,? > > > >> but > > > >> > > most > > > >> > > > of all, because it is the brain of a social being and because > > the > > > >> laws > > > >> > of > > > >> > > > higher nervous activity of man are manifested and act in the > > human > > > >> > > > personality. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > But let us return again to the ?most general bases of higher > > > nervous > > > >> > > > activity, related to the cerebral hemispheres,? and identical > in > > > >> higher > > > >> > > > animals and man. We think that it is in this point that we can > > > >> disclose > > > >> > > > with definitive clarity the difference of which we speak. The > > most > > > >> > > general > > > >> > > > basis of behavior, identical in man and animals, is > > > *signalization.* > > > >> > > Pavlov > > > >> > > > said, ?So the basic and most general activity of the cerebral > > > >> > hemispheres > > > >> > > > is signaling with an infinite number of signals and with > > > changeable > > > >> > > > signalization? (ibid., p. 30). As is known, this is the most > > > general > > > >> > > > formulation of the whole idea of conditioned reflexes that > lies > > at > > > >> the > > > >> > > base > > > >> > > > of the physiology of higher nervous activity. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > But human behavior is distinguished exactly in that it creates > > > >> > artificial > > > >> > > > signaling stimuli, primarily the grandiose signalization of > > > speech, > > > >> and > > > >> > > in > > > >> > > > this way masters the signaling activity of the cerebral > > > >> hemispheres. If > > > >> > > the > > > >> > > > basic and most general activity of the cerebral hemispheres in > > > >> animals > > > >> > > and > > > >> > > > in man is signalization, then the basic and most general > > activity > > > of > > > >> > man > > > >> > > > that differentiates man from animals in the first place, from > > the > > > >> > aspect > > > >> > > of > > > >> > > > psychology, is *signification,* that is, creation and use of > > > signs. > > > >> We > > > >> > > are > > > >> > > > using this word in its most literal sense and precise meaning. > > > >> > > > Signification is the creation and use of signs, that is, > > > artificial > > > >> > > > signals. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > We will consider more closely this new principle of activity. > It > > > >> must > > > >> > not > > > >> > > > in any sense be contrasted with the principle of > signalization. > > > >> > > Changeable > > > >> > > > signalization that results in the formation of temporary, > > > >> conditional, > > > >> > > > special connections between the organism and the environment > is > > an > > > >> > > > indispensable, biological prerequisite of the higher activity > > that > > > >> we > > > >> > > > arbitrarily call signification and is its base. The system of > > > >> > connections > > > >> > > > that is established in the brain of an animal is a copy or > > > >> reflection > > > >> > of > > > >> > > > natural connections between ?all kinds of agents of nature? > that > > > >> signal > > > >> > > the > > > >> > > > arrival of immediately favorable or destructive phenomena. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > It is very obvious that such signalization ? a reflection of > the > > > >> > natural > > > >> > > > connection of phenomena, wholly created by natural conditions > ? > > > >> cannot > > > >> > be > > > >> > > > an adequate basis of human behavior. For human adaptation, an > > > active > > > >> > > > *change > > > >> > > > in the nature of man *is essential. It is the basis of all > human > > > >> > history. > > > >> > > > It necessarily presupposes an active change in man?s behavior. > > > >> > ?Affecting > > > >> > > > the environment by this movement and changing it, he changes > his > > > own > > > >> > > nature > > > >> > > > at the same time,? says Marx. ?He develops forces asleep in it > > and > > > >> > > subjects > > > >> > > > the play of these forces to his own will? (K. Marx and F. > > Engels, > > > >> > > > *Collected > > > >> > > > Works,* Vol. 23, pp. 188-189 > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > 3A__www.marxists.org_archive_marx_works_1867-2Dc1_ch07.htm- > > > >> > > > 23forces&d=DQIFaQ&c=aqMfXOEvEJQh2iQMCb7Wy8l0sPnURk > > > cqADc2guUW8IM&r= > > > >> > > > mXj3yhpYNklTxyN3KioIJ0ECmPHilpf4N2p9PBMATWs&m= > > > >> > cxiDdHmIrHosSMq59vJlZ4j-S- > > > >> > > > 4h5DSiLaMzqzi2yNA&s=J3sZBxFP1DTk3B8MLGJTyEw- > > > RZmpA347cJfMSUrwSa4&e= > > > >> >). > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 7:50 AM, Peter Feigenbaum [Staff] < > > > >> > > > pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu> wrote: > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Mike, > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > Thanks for the Luria references. From a cursory reading of > > the > > > >> > > relevant > > > >> > > > > passages in the Luria & Yudovich book, and judging by some > of > > > the > > > >> > other > > > >> > > > > sources you listed, I get the impression that there hasn't > > been > > > >> much > > > >> > > > > theoretical *fleshing out* of the structures of the second > > > signal > > > >> > > system. > > > >> > > > > I hope that the concept of a first and second signal system > is > > > not > > > >> > > just a > > > >> > > > > political argument, but instead has some real substance. I > > find > > > it > > > >> > hard > > > >> > > > to > > > >> > > > > imagine that our *animal* (stimulus-response) system of > > thinking > > > >> is > > > >> > > > > developmentally unrelated to our *human* (conversational > > > >> > > > > initiation-response) system of thinking. > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > If anyone else knows of any passages from Vygotsky related > to > > > this > > > >> > > topic, > > > >> > > > > please don't hold back! > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > Much obliged. > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > In solidarity, > > > >> > > > > Peter > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 1:56 PM, mike cole > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > Peter-- If you google Luria "second signal system" you > will > > > >> come up > > > >> > > > with > > > >> > > > > > several references. There is a copy at luria.ucsd.edu of > > his > > > >> > little > > > >> > > > book > > > >> > > > > > with Yudovich on twins that uses that language. > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > It is not online (so far as i know), but Luria's article > on > > > >> "Speech > > > >> > > > > > development and the formation of mental processes" in Cole > > and > > > >> > > > > > Maltzman, *Handbook > > > >> > > > > > of Soviet Psychology. *Basic Books, 1969 uses this term a > > lot. > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > I believe you will find an upsurge of usage associated > with > > > the > > > >> > late > > > >> > > > > > 1940's-50's when Vygotskians were under severe attack, > there > > > >> were > > > >> > > > special > > > >> > > > > > "Pavlov sessions" where they had to recant their errors, > and > > > the > > > >> > use > > > >> > > of > > > >> > > > > > first and second signal system by Pavlov > > > >> > > > > > allowed them a life line to orthodoxy. > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > mike > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Peter Feigenbaum > [Staff] < > > > >> > > > > > pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu> wrote: > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Dear colleagues, > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > I don't wish to detract in any way from the very serious > > and > > > >> > > > absolutely > > > >> > > > > > > necessary discussion about male sensitivity (or should I > > say > > > >> > > > > > insensitivity) > > > >> > > > > > > to the voices of the women inhabiting this list, but I > > sure > > > >> could > > > >> > > use > > > >> > > > > > your > > > >> > > > > > > collective help with a small matter of scholarship. I am > > > >> trying > > > >> > to > > > >> > > > > locate > > > >> > > > > > > any passages in LSV's Collected Works in English in > which > > he > > > >> > refers > > > >> > > > to > > > >> > > > > > the > > > >> > > > > > > *first* and *second* signal systems. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > My understanding is that Vygotsky considers the first > > signal > > > >> > system > > > >> > > > as > > > >> > > > > > the > > > >> > > > > > > biologically inherited stimulus-response (S-R) system of > > > >> reflexes > > > >> > > as > > > >> > > > > > > described by Pavlov, whereas the second signal system > > refers > > > >> to > > > >> > the > > > >> > > > > > > culturally inherited system of initiation-response that > is > > > >> > > particular > > > >> > > > > to > > > >> > > > > > > human conversational activity. I am working with the > > > >> hypothesis > > > >> > > that, > > > >> > > > > in > > > >> > > > > > > ontogenetic development, the first signal system becomes > > > >> > > > *domesticated* > > > >> > > > > > by, > > > >> > > > > > > and ultimately subordinated to, the second signal > system. > > > That > > > >> > is, > > > >> > > > the > > > >> > > > > > S-R > > > >> > > > > > > form of thinking becomes developmentally transformed > into > > > the > > > >> > > > > > > Initiation-Response form of thinking that is > > characteristic > > > >> of a > > > >> > > > person > > > >> > > > > > > performing a listening-speaking turn in conversation. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > If any of the wonderful scholars on this list could help > > > point > > > >> > this > > > >> > > > > poor, > > > >> > > > > > > stumbling colleague > > > >> > > > > > > in the right direction, I would be most grateful. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Warm wishes to all, > > > >> > > > > > > Peter > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > p.s. -- Let me take this opportunity to express my > > heartfelt > > > >> > thanks > > > >> > > > to > > > >> > > > > > Mike > > > >> > > > > > > for creating this list in the first place, and with it > the > > > >> > > > opportunity > > > >> > > > > > for > > > >> > > > > > > Vygotskian scholars the world over to share and discuss > > our > > > >> ideas > > > >> > > in > > > >> > > > an > > > >> > > > > > > open and honest forum. For my part, I pledge to do my > > level > > > >> best > > > >> > to > > > >> > > > > raise > > > >> > > > > > > my own consciousness where it is deficient so that my > > > >> > participation > > > >> > > > in > > > >> > > > > > this > > > >> > > > > > > forum will be as inclusive and respectful to all of its > > > >> > > participants > > > >> > > > as > > > >> > > > > > is > > > >> > > > > > > humanly possible. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > -- > > > >> > > > > > > Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. > > > >> > > > > > > Director, > > > >> > > > > > > Office of Institutional Research > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > provos/office_of_institutio/index.asp> > > > >> > > > > > > Fordham University > > > >> > > > > > > Thebaud Hall-202 > > > >> > > > > > > Bronx, NY 10458 > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Phone: (718) 817-2243 > > > >> > > > > > > Fax: (718) 817-3817 > > > >> > > > > > > email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > -- > > > >> > > > > Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. > > > >> > > > > Director, > > > >> > > > > Office of Institutional Research > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > provos/office_of_institutio/index.asp> > > > >> > > > > Fordham University > > > >> > > > > Thebaud Hall-202 > > > >> > > > > Bronx, NY 10458 > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > Phone: (718) 817-2243 > > > >> > > > > Fax: (718) 817-3817 > > > >> > > > > email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > -- > > > >> > > Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. > > > >> > > Director, > > > >> > > Office of Institutional Research > > > >> > > > > >> > > office_of_institutio/index.asp> > > > >> > > Fordham University > > > >> > > Thebaud Hall-202 > > > >> > > Bronx, NY 10458 > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Phone: (718) 817-2243 > > > >> > > Fax: (718) 817-3817 > > > >> > > email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. > > Director, > > Office of Institutional Research > > > provos/office_of_institutio/index.asp> > > Fordham University > > Thebaud Hall-202 > > Bronx, NY 10458 > > > > Phone: (718) 817-2243 > > Fax: (718) 817-3817 > > email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu > > > -- Peter Feigenbaum, Ph.D. Director, Office of Institutional Research Fordham University Thebaud Hall-202 Bronx, NY 10458 Phone: (718) 817-2243 Fax: (718) 817-3817 email: pfeigenbaum@fordham.edu From annalisa@unm.edu Fri Nov 4 14:58:23 2016 From: annalisa@unm.edu (Annalisa Aguilar) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 21:58:23 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, production, and reproduction (and reversibility) Message-ID: Hello, It seems that people are having a time with the originating thread pertaining to the subject "Analysis of gender in early XMCA discourse," which I find to be a goose chase, since it is difficult to analyze posts that were never made (owing to the fact that, as a few members have spoken up to say, they were never made to feel safe enough to post because of the domination of a kind of discourse that is called gendered ? though some admit it has to do with time and prior commitments). How does one study discourse of non-participants? I'm utterly perplexed by that. If men have been dominating the discourse, then what the subject line really means is we should a study of male discourse and how others are kept out. Why do we need to know how others are kept out when we can just explain it ourselves to you? Or are we not fit enough for our explanations to be taken seriously? What I liked about one of Jacob's recent posts is that he revealed to us *the discourse* that goes on *off-the-list.* But no one seemed to give that any notice. I hope I am giving him appropriate credit for that. I caught it, but I wanted to wait to see if anyone else did. Respectfully, I think it would be more productive discuss how gender is expected and *entrained* (and maybe this is what Maria Cristina means by reproduction, not sure). Not about what gender is, because we'll never get anywhere with that. If we understand the demands and the production of those expectations-fufilled, is it possible we can raise our awareness of how those process do not serve those who are harmed by those expectations. I would offer that these gendered expectations are harmful to everyone, not just those lacking privilege. I say that because of lost opportunities, which I've already discussed in a previous email on the original thread. If there are allies on this list, and I think that there are, then would it not be of help for them to sit back and let those of us who feel harmed or threatened, or just uncomfortable, explain it how it is. And how we (that is, those of us who feel irrelevant despite having something meaningful to offer) believe the problem might be solved, or at least ameliorated. Can we explain it ourselves without any help from explainers? I would like to encourage trailblazing this new path of comparing how non-gendered discourse might compare to gendered discourse. Because that comparison might reveal something important to all of us. All of Us. Or it may not, but who knows for certain until we try. Or... will this suggestion be shot down because it doesn't remain within the status quo? Or will it be somehow made to sit outside what is allowable to post on this list because it (somehow) doesn't pertain the XMCA's mission statement? Or some other law I have broken? Of course, it remains the case that some might believe that it is impossible to speak about anything without gender, but I'd say that that might possibly mean that such a position considers the problem essential (I do not), that somehow biologically, or in some other determined way, gender is hard-wired like biological sex is hardwired (Note: with the growing awareness of the existence of trans-gender populations, I'd like to offer that even that position, that biological sex is hardwired, is now suspect). I do think that there are some areas where we don't speak about gender, and I'm only asking that we might compare those discourses with discourses that are heavy on the influence of gender. Is that somehow a faulty proposition? It felt that there was something of a spark with Maria Cristina's contribution combined with Larry's juxtaposed and mine. So I'm hoping there might be a continuance from this point. Is that interesting enough? So I am adhering to Greg M's suggestion of cordoning off a space for this topic. Let's see if these swim lanes actually work. I doubt it, but I will exhibit a willingness to cooperate if it will foster more discourse about the matter at hand. Though, actually, I think I've just been invited to place myself into a ghetto. I suppose that is an inflammatory thing to say, but I'm just trying to be honest. Or maybe I've been invited to populate the periphery, because I don't have a privileged credentials to be in the center. It's always something, as Gilda Radner used to say. Kind egads, Annalisa From greg.a.thompson@gmail.com Fri Nov 4 16:12:22 2016 From: greg.a.thompson@gmail.com (Greg Thompson) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 17:12:22 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, production, and reproduction (and reversibility) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Annalisa et al, Tell me if you'd rather that I hush-up already but I'll just mention two things that are very telling from the conversation: 1. There has NOT been much consideration of the placemaking of the listserve - i.e., what exactly is this place called XMCA - what is the nature of the place/space that has been created by our collective "talk"? And how might this context itself be alienating for many women. [and btw, I'm sure I'm just repeating what other women have said thus far, which may be bad or good since I seem to recall a report from a group of women who were trying to figure out how to make women's voices heard in meetings (the typical thing that men do with women's comments is pay lip service, if that, and then introduce their own (manly) ideas and move the meeting in their direction); one strategy that these women came up with was anytime a woman says something, to have another woman repeat exactly what the previous woman had said - that serves to reinforce the point and make it so that men can't so easily disregard it. Seems a useful approach - whether or not it works with a man seconding the woman's point, I'm not sure (since it easily could reinscribe a gendered hierarcy - the point is ignored when the woman says it, but when a man says it...)] 2. Relatedly, Jacob's comment that he always first hesitates to post, then has a conversation with his partner who says "don't do it!" and then, after posting, realizes that he shouldn't have posted -- this suggests to me that there is a "high stakes" nature to the list that some of the old heads on the list might not appreciate. I'm open to the possibility that the "high stakes" nature of things might have some value, but I also suspect that, for engendered reasons, this is also what makes it a place that many women find unwelcome for their participation (and no, I don't necessarily see this in essentializing terms - as if the female sex doesn't welcome high stakes conversations, rather I see it as being the case that in this particular here and now this seems to be common - and there are certainly women who seek out such conversations, as well as men who disprefer them). And once again, I don't know what to do about this. I'll hush-up now. -greg On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 3:58 PM, Annalisa Aguilar wrote: > Hello, > > > It seems that people are having a time with the originating thread > pertaining to the subject "Analysis of gender in early XMCA discourse," > which I find to be a goose chase, since it is difficult to analyze posts > that were never made (owing to the fact that, as a few members have spoken > up to say, they were never made to feel safe enough to post because of the > domination of a kind of discourse that is called gendered ? though some > admit it has to do with time and prior commitments). > > > How does one study discourse of non-participants? I'm utterly perplexed by > that. > > > If men have been dominating the discourse, then what the subject line > really means is we should a study of male discourse and how others are kept > out. > > > Why do we need to know how others are kept out when we can just explain it > ourselves to you? > > > Or are we not fit enough for our explanations to be taken seriously? > > > What I liked about one of Jacob's recent posts is that he revealed to us > *the discourse* that goes on *off-the-list.* But no one seemed to give that > any notice. I hope I am giving him appropriate credit for that. I caught > it, but I wanted to wait to see if anyone else did. > > > Respectfully, I think it would be more productive discuss how gender is > expected and *entrained* (and maybe this is what Maria Cristina means by > reproduction, not sure). Not about what gender is, because we'll never get > anywhere with that. If we understand the demands and the production of > those expectations-fufilled, is it possible we can raise our awareness of > how those process do not serve those who are harmed by those expectations. > > > I would offer that these gendered expectations are harmful to everyone, > not just those lacking privilege. I say that because of lost opportunities, > which I've already discussed in a previous email on the original thread. > > > If there are allies on this list, and I think that there are, then would > it not be of help for them to sit back and let those of us who feel harmed > or threatened, or just uncomfortable, explain it how it is. And how we > (that is, those of us who feel irrelevant despite having something > meaningful to offer) believe the problem might be solved, or at least > ameliorated. Can we explain it ourselves without any help from explainers? > > > I would like to encourage trailblazing this new path of comparing how > non-gendered discourse might compare to gendered discourse. Because that > comparison might reveal something important to all of us. All of Us. > > > Or it may not, but who knows for certain until we try. Or... will this > suggestion be shot down because it doesn't remain within the status quo? Or > will it be somehow made to sit outside what is allowable to post on this > list because it (somehow) doesn't pertain the XMCA's mission statement? Or > some other law I have broken? > > > Of course, it remains the case that some might believe that it is > impossible to speak about anything without gender, but I'd say that that > might possibly mean that such a position considers the problem essential (I > do not), that somehow biologically, or in some other determined way, gender > is hard-wired like biological sex is hardwired (Note: with the growing > awareness of the existence of trans-gender populations, I'd like to offer > that even that position, that biological sex is hardwired, is now suspect). > > > I do think that there are some areas where we don't speak about gender, > and I'm only asking that we might compare those discourses with discourses > that are heavy on the influence of gender. > > > Is that somehow a faulty proposition? > > > It felt that there was something of a spark with Maria Cristina's > contribution combined with Larry's juxtaposed and mine. So I'm hoping there > might be a continuance from this point. Is that interesting enough? > > > So I am adhering to Greg M's suggestion of cordoning off a space for this > topic. Let's see if these swim lanes actually work. I doubt it, but I will > exhibit a willingness to cooperate if it will foster more discourse about > the matter at hand. > > > Though, actually, I think I've just been invited to place myself into a > ghetto. I suppose that is an inflammatory thing to say, but I'm just trying > to be honest. Or maybe I've been invited to populate the periphery, because > I don't have a privileged credentials to be in the center. > > > It's always something, as Gilda Radner used to say. > > > Kind egads, > > > Annalisa > > > > > > > > > -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From mcole@ucsd.edu Fri Nov 4 16:29:47 2016 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 16:29:47 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, production, and reproduction (and reversibility) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Greg- Briefly. You are correct when you speculate that about a "high stakes" nature to the list that some of the old heads on the list might not appreciate." Speaking personally, I do not like it in the least. These discussions were initiated to provide an inter-medium of half baked ideas that contributors were welcome to bake up if they could, and let other people know how they did it. It became a medium to provide authors with rapid feedback on work that invites collective consideration about pressing problems of mind, culture, and activity. It is a currently a hybrid of these impulses and projects. To the extent that it is allowed to become a high stakes shoot out spectator sport with a rep for being an old man's club it has miserably failed in its aspirations. Like it or not. mike On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 4:12 PM, Greg Thompson wrote: > Annalisa et al, > > Tell me if you'd rather that I hush-up already but I'll just mention two > things that are very telling from the conversation: > > 1. There has NOT been much consideration of the placemaking of the > listserve - i.e., what exactly is this place called XMCA - what is the > nature of the place/space that has been created by our collective "talk"? > And how might this context itself be alienating for many women. [and btw, > I'm sure I'm just repeating what other women have said thus far, which may > be bad or good since I seem to recall a report from a group of women who > were trying to figure out how to make women's voices heard in meetings (the > typical thing that men do with women's comments is pay lip service, if > that, and then introduce their own (manly) ideas and move the meeting in > their direction); one strategy that these women came up with was anytime a > woman says something, to have another woman repeat exactly what the > previous woman had said - that serves to reinforce the point and make it so > that men can't so easily disregard it. Seems a useful approach - whether or > not it works with a man seconding the woman's point, I'm not sure (since it > easily could reinscribe a gendered hierarcy - the point is ignored when the > woman says it, but when a man says it...)] > > 2. Relatedly, Jacob's comment that he always first hesitates to post, then > has a conversation with his partner who says "don't do it!" and then, after > posting, realizes that he shouldn't have posted -- this suggests to me that > there is a "high stakes" nature to the list that some of the old heads on > the list might not appreciate. I'm open to the possibility that the "high > stakes" nature of things might have some value, but I also suspect that, > for engendered reasons, this is also what makes it a place that many women > find unwelcome for their participation (and no, I don't necessarily see > this in essentializing terms - as if the female sex doesn't welcome high > stakes conversations, rather I see it as being the case that in this > particular here and now this seems to be common - and there are certainly > women who seek out such conversations, as well as men who disprefer them). > > And once again, I don't know what to do about this. > > I'll hush-up now. > -greg > > > > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 3:58 PM, Annalisa Aguilar wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > It seems that people are having a time with the originating thread > > pertaining to the subject "Analysis of gender in early XMCA discourse," > > which I find to be a goose chase, since it is difficult to analyze posts > > that were never made (owing to the fact that, as a few members have > spoken > > up to say, they were never made to feel safe enough to post because of > the > > domination of a kind of discourse that is called gendered ? though some > > admit it has to do with time and prior commitments). > > > > > > How does one study discourse of non-participants? I'm utterly perplexed > by > > that. > > > > > > If men have been dominating the discourse, then what the subject line > > really means is we should a study of male discourse and how others are > kept > > out. > > > > > > Why do we need to know how others are kept out when we can just explain > it > > ourselves to you? > > > > > > Or are we not fit enough for our explanations to be taken seriously? > > > > > > What I liked about one of Jacob's recent posts is that he revealed to us > > *the discourse* that goes on *off-the-list.* But no one seemed to give > that > > any notice. I hope I am giving him appropriate credit for that. I caught > > it, but I wanted to wait to see if anyone else did. > > > > > > Respectfully, I think it would be more productive discuss how gender is > > expected and *entrained* (and maybe this is what Maria Cristina means by > > reproduction, not sure). Not about what gender is, because we'll never > get > > anywhere with that. If we understand the demands and the production of > > those expectations-fufilled, is it possible we can raise our awareness of > > how those process do not serve those who are harmed by those > expectations. > > > > > > I would offer that these gendered expectations are harmful to everyone, > > not just those lacking privilege. I say that because of lost > opportunities, > > which I've already discussed in a previous email on the original thread. > > > > > > If there are allies on this list, and I think that there are, then would > > it not be of help for them to sit back and let those of us who feel > harmed > > or threatened, or just uncomfortable, explain it how it is. And how we > > (that is, those of us who feel irrelevant despite having something > > meaningful to offer) believe the problem might be solved, or at least > > ameliorated. Can we explain it ourselves without any help from > explainers? > > > > > > I would like to encourage trailblazing this new path of comparing how > > non-gendered discourse might compare to gendered discourse. Because that > > comparison might reveal something important to all of us. All of Us. > > > > > > Or it may not, but who knows for certain until we try. Or... will this > > suggestion be shot down because it doesn't remain within the status quo? > Or > > will it be somehow made to sit outside what is allowable to post on this > > list because it (somehow) doesn't pertain the XMCA's mission statement? > Or > > some other law I have broken? > > > > > > Of course, it remains the case that some might believe that it is > > impossible to speak about anything without gender, but I'd say that that > > might possibly mean that such a position considers the problem essential > (I > > do not), that somehow biologically, or in some other determined way, > gender > > is hard-wired like biological sex is hardwired (Note: with the growing > > awareness of the existence of trans-gender populations, I'd like to offer > > that even that position, that biological sex is hardwired, is now > suspect). > > > > > > I do think that there are some areas where we don't speak about gender, > > and I'm only asking that we might compare those discourses with > discourses > > that are heavy on the influence of gender. > > > > > > Is that somehow a faulty proposition? > > > > > > It felt that there was something of a spark with Maria Cristina's > > contribution combined with Larry's juxtaposed and mine. So I'm hoping > there > > might be a continuance from this point. Is that interesting enough? > > > > > > So I am adhering to Greg M's suggestion of cordoning off a space for this > > topic. Let's see if these swim lanes actually work. I doubt it, but I > will > > exhibit a willingness to cooperate if it will foster more discourse about > > the matter at hand. > > > > > > Though, actually, I think I've just been invited to place myself into a > > ghetto. I suppose that is an inflammatory thing to say, but I'm just > trying > > to be honest. Or maybe I've been invited to populate the periphery, > because > > I don't have a privileged credentials to be in the center. > > > > > > It's always something, as Gilda Radner used to say. > > > > > > Kind egads, > > > > > > Annalisa > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > Assistant Professor > Department of Anthropology > 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > Brigham Young University > Provo, UT 84602 > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson > From dkirsh@lsu.edu Fri Nov 4 17:39:44 2016 From: dkirsh@lsu.edu (David H Kirshner) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 00:39:44 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, production, and reproduction (and reversibility) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I like Annalisa's considerations of some kind of empirical analysis of the *Dilemmas of Gendered Discourse on XMCA*. 1. What are the base rates of male/female membership in XMCA? 2. How many posts are initiated by men/women (raw data, plus per base rate)? 3. Percentage of posts by gender that receive negative/no/positive response. 4. Discourse analysis of types of responses in terms of polarity (what are the varieties of negative and positive responses). 5. Calculation of an Affect of Replies Score (ARS) for each poster (-1 for each negative response, +1 for each positive response). 6. Trend analysis of ARS scores over time by gender (do people's scores tend to improve over time). 7. Persistence analysis by ARS scores and gender: likelihood of subsequent posting as a function of ARS. 8. Survey of a stratified sample of members (frequent posters, occasional posters, lurkers X male, female) concerning factors affecting participation, including 9. an Affect survey: Likert scale questionnaire concerning affective response to positive and negative replies. Anyone looking for a dissertation topic -- tentative title *above"? David -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Annalisa Aguilar Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 4:58 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, production, and reproduction (and reversibility) Hello, It seems that people are having a time with the originating thread pertaining to the subject "Analysis of gender in early XMCA discourse," which I find to be a goose chase, since it is difficult to analyze posts that were never made (owing to the fact that, as a few members have spoken up to say, they were never made to feel safe enough to post because of the domination of a kind of discourse that is called gendered - though some admit it has to do with time and prior commitments). How does one study discourse of non-participants? I'm utterly perplexed by that. If men have been dominating the discourse, then what the subject line really means is we should a study of male discourse and how others are kept out. Why do we need to know how others are kept out when we can just explain it ourselves to you? Or are we not fit enough for our explanations to be taken seriously? What I liked about one of Jacob's recent posts is that he revealed to us *the discourse* that goes on *off-the-list.* But no one seemed to give that any notice. I hope I am giving him appropriate credit for that. I caught it, but I wanted to wait to see if anyone else did. Respectfully, I think it would be more productive discuss how gender is expected and *entrained* (and maybe this is what Maria Cristina means by reproduction, not sure). Not about what gender is, because we'll never get anywhere with that. If we understand the demands and the production of those expectations-fufilled, is it possible we can raise our awareness of how those process do not serve those who are harmed by those expectations. I would offer that these gendered expectations are harmful to everyone, not just those lacking privilege. I say that because of lost opportunities, which I've already discussed in a previous email on the original thread. If there are allies on this list, and I think that there are, then would it not be of help for them to sit back and let those of us who feel harmed or threatened, or just uncomfortable, explain it how it is. And how we (that is, those of us who feel irrelevant despite having something meaningful to offer) believe the problem might be solved, or at least ameliorated. Can we explain it ourselves without any help from explainers? I would like to encourage trailblazing this new path of comparing how non-gendered discourse might compare to gendered discourse. Because that comparison might reveal something important to all of us. All of Us. Or it may not, but who knows for certain until we try. Or... will this suggestion be shot down because it doesn't remain within the status quo? Or will it be somehow made to sit outside what is allowable to post on this list because it (somehow) doesn't pertain the XMCA's mission statement? Or some other law I have broken? Of course, it remains the case that some might believe that it is impossible to speak about anything without gender, but I'd say that that might possibly mean that such a position considers the problem essential (I do not), that somehow biologically, or in some other determined way, gender is hard-wired like biological sex is hardwired (Note: with the growing awareness of the existence of trans-gender populations, I'd like to offer that even that position, that biological sex is hardwired, is now suspect). I do think that there are some areas where we don't speak about gender, and I'm only asking that we might compare those discourses with discourses that are heavy on the influence of gender. Is that somehow a faulty proposition? It felt that there was something of a spark with Maria Cristina's contribution combined with Larry's juxtaposed and mine. So I'm hoping there might be a continuance from this point. Is that interesting enough? So I am adhering to Greg M's suggestion of cordoning off a space for this topic. Let's see if these swim lanes actually work. I doubt it, but I will exhibit a willingness to cooperate if it will foster more discourse about the matter at hand. Though, actually, I think I've just been invited to place myself into a ghetto. I suppose that is an inflammatory thing to say, but I'm just trying to be honest. Or maybe I've been invited to populate the periphery, because I don't have a privileged credentials to be in the center. It's always something, as Gilda Radner used to say. Kind egads, Annalisa From schuckthemonkey@gmail.com Fri Nov 4 18:13:09 2016 From: schuckthemonkey@gmail.com (Christopher Schuck) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 21:13:09 -0400 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? In-Reply-To: References: <6B2C5457-8B44-4DF9-A6A3-6101ED3C1AC6@gmail.com> Message-ID: Thanks too for such a thoughtful synopsis, Rod, which I found myself relating to deeply. And I suppose this is also relevant to the stuff on the Gender thread, but I no longer know where to go. Fast Swim, Slow Swim, Gender, Logic, Genesis of Gender...all spinning off of what appeared to be a single theme. Wow! My head is spinning. Having checked in after some time and discovered two or three parallel conversations well underway, all the comments about time frames (including Vera's observation about differing paces, styles and degrees of necessary reflection time) feel very apropos. One of the realities of this format and the quick turnaround times for posting is that if one is not conscientious about keeping up (or just lacks the time), there is inevitably an "in media res" effect of trying to understand the running narrative backwards while needing to (collectively and collaboratively) live it forwards. I don't think this is always a bad thing. In fact, I suspect it can sometimes have the paradoxical effect of enhancing and elevating the discussion. There is a certain humility and beginner's mind that comes with wandering into a conversation late, a certain openness to what may not yet be fully processed, understood and contextualized. And, coming at it with fresh eyes can lend a different angle that shakes up the conversation a bit. It felt this way, for instance, when Maria Cristina suddenly entered and offered a re-contextualization (time constraints and domestic responsibilities) that kind of turned everything on its head. At the same time, there may be a certain responsibility on the part of those already engrossed in the dialogue to be welcoming and inclusive towards anyone "in media res distress." I agree with Alfredo that trying to prescribe along the "fast/slow" dimension is undesirable; I'm not sure how much adding new tags for posts or further classifying per se would really help to counter any problematic dynamics, though I know nothing about these technologies. I find myself thinking: what's wrong with the good old-fashioned initiative of emailing individuals separately and CC-ing whoever seems interested, or announcing that you'd like to email further with any takers? Having looked over the last several threads (if far from reading exhaustively), it seems to me there may be two different issues: 1) how to do better justice to all these differing purposes, styles and uses of the listserve, and/or clarify "what we are doing here" in order to avoid confusion; 2) how to cultivate a fully hospitable atmosphere for those who may end up being marginalized in various ways, and address these issues without generating even more unnecessary distress. Of course, those two things aren't entirely unrelated. But improving the second may not require that we have fully resolved the first. In another post accidentally sent from the wrong email, which bounced back and disappeared, I attempted a preliminary list of different ways people might end up feeling marginalized or shut out of conversations. Probably not worth resending at this point. I am more of a peripheral member of this community and have only posted a few times, but in each instance was very aware of anxiety over the possibility of translating poorly or just sounding plain stupid. Trying to negotiate complex ideas *and *respect feelings and boundaries *and *not sound ignorant, in the absence of voice, expression and physical proximity, sometimes feels a bit like entering a dark and crowded room. You want to make contact without knocking someone over or banging into them, but ultimately you must wait for your eyes to adjust to the night vision so you can "know your way about" (as Wittgenstein might say). I think it's easy to underestimate the diversity of cognitive and discursive styles, not just goals and values, among people on the board. As someone who tends to approach things very analytically and linearly, in such contexts of ambiguity I find myself tempted to fall back on the intellectual structure of ideas, abstract theory, content over form or use, as if it were some kind of "universal language." Yet as we all know, this does not always help - and sometimes it backfires. Meanwhile, as someone who like all of us has an inner life and related experiences, I am tempted to offer something immediate, concrete and personal. But this can feel risky and possibly irrelevant, perhaps even narcissistic. To a great extent I am happy just to listen and learn. But Alfredo's point about not just being a spectator also resonates with me. Despite all these misgivings, I'm not sure I'm ready to agree that this format for communication, or verbal written discourse in general, is automatically inferior and impoverished in relation to other modes. I mean, in some ways it obviously is. But there is often a level of care and thought -- and continuity -- that would be difficult to reproduce in a room where people are prone to physically competing while attempting high-level discourse in real time, yet still manages to be relational. There are definitely tradeoffs. I think like most technology, it brings great opportunities and big problems. And new opportunities that arise from having to face those problems. Chris On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 4:37 PM, Greg Thompson wrote: > Yes, I'm with you on that too Rod. I think that's why social media can get > so nasty so often. It is a chilly medium that is a highly denuded form of > communication. (e.g., when I said "I'm with you on that too", was I > alluding to other times when I'm not "with you"? Some could interpret it > that way (btw, that's not what I meant!!)). > > I marvel that there is so much that gets done on this listserve in spite of > this fact. > > Also makes me wonder why so many people put so much stock in literacy as > being a massively transformative capacity. Seems a more base form of > communication than any form of oral communication I've ever experienced > (even the phone gives you prosody!). > > -greg > > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 2:22 PM, Rod Parker-Rees < > R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk> wrote: > > > Thanks Helen and Greg, > > > > I certainly like the opportunity to hang out with interesting people but > I > > think it is probably inevitable in this sort of set up that wires can get > > crossed when people feel they are engaging in different kinds of > activities. > > I suspect that what has kept this group going is that every now and then > > people stand back and take stock of how it is working and that allows > > people to realise that it works in different ways (and feels different) > for > > different people. > > > > This has made me wonder how often other forms of communication (even > where > > only two people are involved) can involve different people having very > > different understandings about what they are doing and sometimes this > > doesn't matter but sometimes it does. > > > > I hope we can keep it going. > > > > All the best, > > > > Rod > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Greg Thompson > > Sent: 04 November 2016 19:58 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? > > > > Great question Rod! > > > > As to the answer, as John Cage was fond of saying: "no why, just here." > > > > Okay, fair enough. But it seems like the question deserves a more > > thoughtful answer than this. > > > > I suppose if I were entirely honest, I find this to be a nice place to > > hang out and learn and occasionally I try to use the listserve to put > > something out there in the interest of getting some feedback to help > > develop it. I've had much more success with the former than the latter. > > > > I do wonder what the mission statement of this listserve would be if > there > > were such a thing. It seems like we don't engage with MCA nearly as much > as > > we should if that were to be the goal of the listserve. > > > > Other than that, I would guess that the mission statement would be > > something like: it's a place for people who are interested in CHAT to > hang > > out and talk about stuff that they care about (sometimes CHAT and MCA > > related, sometimes not). > > > > Is that too cynical? Or is that just about right? > > > > Perhaps someone else can give a better statement of what the listserve is > > "about"? (and I hate to even get into the question of what it SHOULD be - > > I'd rather live it and see what works that deliberate about what that > life > > should look like, but, sure, there is some value in doing the former). > > > > Thanks for your question/contribution Rod. Right to the point. > > -greg > > > > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Helena Worthen > > > wrote: > > > > > This is a good contribution. Thanks -- H > > > > > > Helena Worthen > > > helenaworthen@gmail.com > > > Vietnam blog: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > > > > > On Nov 4, 2016, at 2:30 AM, Rod Parker-Rees wrote: > > > > > > > I am an interested but time-poor lurker on the margins of xmca but > > > > the > > > ripples stirred by Mike's decision to reduce his pastoral contribution > > > to our community have made me question how different participants > > > understand what kind of activity we are engaging in here. > > > > > > > > It seems to me that each of us may understand the social form of > > > > what we > > > are doing in different ways. For some it is like a conversation and we > > > feel disappointed or hurt if our contributions are met with silence or > > > if the chain moves on in a different direction. For others we are a > > > working group, collaborating to develop a practical and ethical > > > theoretical model. For others we are something like a conference, > > > where thoughts and ideas can be put before others for their > > > consideration and response - and I am sure there are many other ways > > > in which different people understand their participation differently. > > > > > > > > Does this matter? Would xmca be 'better' if it was more consistent, > > > > more > > > coherent, more tightly and predictably governed by shared social > > > understandings? While more explicit regulation (protocols for > > > labelling streams and posts and for timing of responses etc.) might > > > help to make our activity feel more inclusive and more sharable it may > > > also introduce new kinds of discomfort. > > > > > > > > What I have found interesting in my time around the margins of xmca > > > > is > > > the challenge of sustaining conversations without all the non-verbal > > > feedback which we rely on when we talk with people. When 'wordings' > > > float off into the ether, cast off from the body and personhood of > > > their speakers or writers they become objects which can be scrutinised > > > and revisited and this can be a reason for 'lurkers' to feel reluctant > > about contributing. > > > What we are doing is not a conversation. Nor is it even a forum, in > > > the sense of people taking turns to orate before a crowd, because > > > contributors often get very little phatic feedback from the lurkers > > > and may have very little sense of how their arguments have been > > > understood or received. But we are moved by our understandings of what > > > it is and is not OK to do, which come from other kinds of > > > interactions. Can I say something if I have not been part of what has > > > gone before? Should I respond or stay quiet? What should I do if I am > > > annoyed or angered by something someone else has contributed? > > > > > > > > I am already getting anxious about how what I have said might be > > > interpreted by others and feeling I have had a long enough turn but I > > > would be really interested to hear what others think about why we are > > here! > > > > > > > > I have found what people do here very helpful but I do feel uneasy > > > > about > > > risking contributions! > > > > > > > > All the best, > > > > > > > > Rod > > > > ________________________________ > > > > [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif] > > //www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass> > > > > > > > > This email and any files with it are confidential and intended > > > > solely > > > for the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not > > > the intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the > > > information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on > > it. > > > If you have received this email in error please let the sender know > > > immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not > > > necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University > > > accepts no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to > > > scan emails and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept > > > responsibility for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this > > > email or its attachments constitutes an order for goods or services > > > unless accompanied by an official order form. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > > Assistant Professor > > Department of Anthropology > > 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > > Brigham Young University > > Provo, UT 84602 > > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson > > ________________________________ > > [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif] > //www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass> > > > > This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely for > > the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the > > intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the > > information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on > it. > > If you have received this email in error please let the sender know > > immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not > > necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University accepts > > no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan > emails > > and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept responsibility > > for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its > > attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless accompanied > > by an official order form. > > > > > > > -- > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > Assistant Professor > Department of Anthropology > 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > Brigham Young University > Provo, UT 84602 > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson > From annalisa@unm.edu Fri Nov 4 18:58:44 2016 From: annalisa@unm.edu (Annalisa Aguilar) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 01:58:44 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, production, and reproduction (and reversibility) In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: David, That is not my idea. I was *not* suggesting a discourse analysis of Dilemmas of Gendered Discourse at XMCA* at ALL. In fact quite the opposite. Where in the world did I say that, and why are you attributing that to me? I don't understand what you didn't understand. I said how about we compare and contrast in this thread, as a thought sculpture (not embark in some sort of statistical analyses), what the differences are between non-gendered discourse, and gendered discourse. But first focusing upon non-gendered discourse. I don't think that means we should talk about Math, either, or logic! It sort of feels like you just graffiti'd my thread, I'm sorry to say. So if that is the intent, I don't know how that is supposed to work here. Thanks? Kind regards, Annalisa From annalisa@unm.edu Fri Nov 4 19:31:17 2016 From: annalisa@unm.edu (Annalisa Aguilar) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 02:31:17 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, production, and reproduction (and reversibility) In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: Hi Greg and Mike, In cities everywhere, there are neighborhoods that change character based upon who moves in. I suspect it is no different for listservs. That might be why some listservs require moderation and even a policing so that the tenets of the list stay intact. But who has time for that? And depending upon one person isn't exactly fair and it must be very very draining. A while back I had suggested a newcomers page, but it never happened for reasons that are not clear to me. It's OK because if the idea isn't worthwhile for this list, then it's not. I accept that. Still I had been super enthusiastic about the idea so that we could welcome newcomers, but now I don't really have the time or inclination to do that at this point. Maybe someone else can run with the idea. As I've told you in a previous post, I'm on a farm right now. There is a particular culture here and expectations. There are problems when the expectations aren't clear, even if the intention is to follow the conventions to appropriately meet the expectations. I feel that having written instructions helps a lot. People who know the deal get tired and even fed up with repeating themselves, and then they stop letting people know, and allow newcomers the agony of reinventing wheels. Which, by the way, I don't think is very nice. That's why I'm for notes and reminders which people can read on an as-needed basis. Otherwise people, high stakes or not, just will not post. I would rather you didn't hush up. Maybe allow yourselves the license and expression on how you think an ally could behave on this list, figuring that you are indeed allies. I posted the Ada Initiative link for a reason, I think it's a good approach to consider what allies are and not put the onus upon those who are aggrieved. As you, I also thought the list would be also a place to discuss ideas and papers, rapid feedback, etc., as Mike described, and sometimes it is that. But there is a sober reality that it's not that for all people, all the time. There is an exclusive feeling here, it might be worthwhile to explore how that starts, what is its genesis. Perhaps because I don't have high stakes, I don't feel at risk to post, but maybe there will be a time I regret being freer with speaking from the heart. I hope not. My intentions are to support social justice and still retain my personhood and at the same time respect the personhood of others. Maybe I don't reach that high bar, but it is where I always start from and what I try to do. It's never quite clear to me if those intentions come through, but I'm reminded what a teacher told me once: it's not any of my business what people think about me. I interpret that to mean that people are free to think as they like, so it's ridiculous to try to influence what can't be influenced. It's also quite difficult to read minds, and it's also quite needy to require of people that they be pleased with everything I do or say. There is no more perfect place for (not) caring what others say than in academia, you would think. If you can't take the heat and criticism then it's time to be a hermit. Maybe. Kind regards, Annalisa From lpscholar2@gmail.com Fri Nov 4 21:46:46 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 21:46:46 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: <1478292516277.72024@iped.uio.no> References: <00ab01d235fe$c29c1560$47d44020$@edu> <581b82bd.5207620a.9f848.0978@mx.google.com> , <1478292516277.72024@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <581d6443.0512620a.ff1dd.95e3@mx.google.com> What do we do with those times like today when i want to follow both Rein and his book and David k?s inspiring translation of Vygotsky?s last lecture, and my hope that each topic opens up a thread for elaboration. There is also the topic of gender and being personal and Jacob sharing what he said in private that this time the conversation will be different. While all this is unfolding, there is this month?s article waiting in the wings for discussion. Each one of these topics warranting (taking time) Opening each of these these multiple fields of inquiry is so valuable but also is interrupting a particular thread from developing more fully. And therefore leaving people hanging wondering if their invitation for co-generation will just become a dropped thread? One small suggestion. A paper such as David K?s could be posted to a (living bookshelf) in the archives of MCA and also a thread opened on that paper here on XMCA with the understanding that the thread will get dropped and picked up and dropped and picked up in a zig-zag fashion that we will resume addressing through (taking time) In short, at times it is the opposite of scarcity in our place making that affects the way gendered conversation plays out. It is plenitude. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: November 4, 2016 1:50 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse Greg, great thoughts. Obviously, opening new threads, as Rein just did with "Logic & Gender" resembles what you suggest. In terms of facilitating "inheritance" (as per our thread on Zaza's paper on technology and prototyping), turning to natural conversation is always a good strategy. There is more to be done, sure, but these are great inputs. Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Greg Thompson Sent: 04 November 2016 21:29 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse Vera (and others), Yes, I agree that the pace of the listserve often goes at breakneck speeds. I can't keep up. As a result, I am left with the options of either not responding (ever) or failing to read everything and responding ignorantly (I chose the latter this time). I have heard some folks kick around the possibility of spinning off topics and I wonder if there might be a way to do this productively. I'm not sure that the current approach of just threading conversations is enough to provide a quiet enough space for productive (i.e., productive for everyone) conversations to happen. I think this thread is a case and point - it feels like there are three or four different directions that are spinning off into and one wonders how to respond to all at the same time. We might ask: How do we resolve this in natural conversation such as at a cocktail party? We form smaller groups with people that can slow down and discuss an idea in more depth while also naturally blocking out the sound from surrounding conversations. Such groups are seldom bigger than 6 or 7 active participants (one huge advantage of list serves is that these conversations are not lost to history but exist in an archive that people can go back to and learn from if they want to). In cocktail party conversation, it seems that anytime we get groups larger than this it quickly takes on the nature of lecture - with just one or a couple people acting as "lecturers" (or, more commonly, "joke tellers") and the rest acting as audience. I'm trying to think of cases that differ, in particular some kind of ideal of democratic participation. Zucotti Park put to use that fabulous idea of "the people's microphone," but that was only using the people's voices in service of what one person had to say (Goffman's "author", the rest were just using their voices as "animators"). It had a neat effect but didn't seem as if all voices (i.e. authors) were equally heard. This suggests to me that there is something about the cacophony of voices on a listserve that, while delightfully democratic, might be too difficult to practically manage. And so I find the idea of enabling spin-off conversations an appealing idea. How to do that with a listserve? I have no idea... Any tech folks out there savvy enough to suggest a solution? -greg On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 2:06 PM, Annalisa Aguilar wrote: > > Hello, > > There is the presence of logic in Eastern cultures. So logic was not > invented in the West. > > It is true that basic thinking is associative, and logic is learned. But > once learned, it is a part of human cognition. That's why I say it is not > done with elbows and knees. The problem with the form of Western logic, as > I see it, is that it doesn't seem to take into account The Total, or if you > prefer, The Context. There is no logical means in the West of dealing with > contexts and wholes. What I cherish about Vygotsky is that he was > attempting to deal with that problem (i.e., the problem with the > environment). > > That is why we have the issues we do with class, with climate change, and > even perhaps impending epidemics and food shortages ? based on the way we > produce our food and administer medicine. Western logic (if you want to say > "by invention") considers only the particular. That is the Cartesian way, > but it is not the only way. Unfortunately that particular way and its > particular application is frequently administered in harmful ways, and the > motivation for those harmful ways is informed by the underlying values of > the people using the logic. There have been, are, and will be beneficial > uses of Western logic for doing lots good, but like any tool, it can be > abused. > > The problems that we face have nothing to do with an exercise of too much > logic (I'd offer it's too little and in the wrong way). It is the absence > of using that logic in a nourishing manner, a way that is not harmful, and > is compassionate. > > I'm not sure why anyone would want to disagree with that. > > Also, I would like to know for clarification what is meant by "chaining" > in the context of this thread. It seems the word is used in different ways, > so I was hoping it might be explained more explicitly. I know I'm not the > only one trying to understand that. I think I know, but I would like > clarification. If it isn't an imposition. > > Kind regards, > > Annalisa > > ________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of mike cole > Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 9:43 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse > > David-- > > Is this equivalent to what Vygotsky referred to as chaining? > > But one of the results that cognitive scientists have clearly established > is that human reasoning, in general, is associative, not logical. Our > conceptual structures are associatively linked, meaning that concepts > conjure up other, related concepts. Our reasoning is a kind of juggling of > these linked concepts. > > Unsure. > > mike > > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 8:29 AM, David H Kirshner wrote: > > > Annalisa, > > > > Recognizing that Jacob and others may see it differently, I agree with > you > > that logic is not gendered. > > I do disagree, though, with your final statement that "Logic isn't a > > Western invention, by the way. It's very much part of human cognition." > > > > What I think is sustainable is the position that reasoning is very much a > > part of human cognition. But one of the results that cognitive scientists > > have clearly established is that human reasoning, in general, is > > associative, not logical. Our conceptual structures are associatively > > linked, meaning that concepts conjure up other, related concepts. Our > > reasoning is a kind of juggling of these linked concepts. > > > > One of the classical studies that established this perspective concerns > > Margie the bank teller: > > > > Margie is bright, single, 31 year old, outspoken, and concerned with > > issues of social justice. > > What is more likely > > > > A) Margie is a bank teller, or > > B) Margie is a bank teller and Margie is a feminist. > > > > (If you're not familiar with this problem, take a moment to answer it.) > > ... > > > > > > The logical analysis holds that Margie is more likely to be a bank teller > > than both a bank teller and a feminist because choice A includes the > > possibility that Margie is a bank teller and a feminist as well as the > > possibility that Margie is a bank teller and not a feminist, but choice B > > includes only one of those possibilities. > > > > But the vast majority of subjects tested select choice B, which the > > cognitive psychologists take as indicating that we are guided by our > > associations to people like Margie rather than by the logical conditions > of > > the problem. > > > > In my view, logic as a discursive form--a technology of thought--is a > > Western invention. Whether it is identified as "male" because of > historical > > association or biological predisposition, I don't know, and I should > add, I > > don't care. (Jacob, the science of biologically based sex differences in > > cognition has not been "debunked." Rather, feminist scholars have rightly > > pointed out that the data are inconclusive, and that prior assertions of > > biologically based sex differences in cognition over-interpret the > > scientific results.) Neither history nor biology is determinative, and > > logic is too important a part of our cultural legacy to deny any > individual > > or group the opportunity to master it. > > > > David > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Annalisa Aguilar > > Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 12:28 AM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity ; Vera > > John-Steiner > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse > > > > Hi, > > > > About logic: to Greg M., Actually, I thought it was Jacob who discussed > > logic in gendered discourse. Unless you brought it up a long time ago in > > the group he references. I was under the impression that he had attempted > > to bring it up a few times in the past. Or am I mistaken? > > > > In his reply on timestamped Nov 03, 08:30:41 he stated: > > > > "Not to beat the proverbial dead horse, but several listserv > > members--including me--have tried to introduce this position re: logic in > > prior xmca threads. The position has mostly either been ignored or loudly > > rejected out of hand by more vocal participants on this listserv." > > > > So I was responding to that paragraph. > > > > I am not clear about Jacob's position but my position is that logic is an > > intellectual tool, just like intuition can be an emotional tool. Insight > > might be a combination of both logic and intuition. But nothing about > logic > > makes it male, as I see it, no matter how much men might assert that to > be > > the case. > > > > Logic is reasoning in a particular way with the mind, and any human can > > partake in it if one wants. You can't perform logic with your elbows and > > knees. Counting has a logic. So does self-preservation. > > > > What one does with logic has to do with one's values. If your values are > > for a pure race, for example, you can certainly use logic to rationalize > > activities that purify race however you might want to define it. Does > that > > make logic a tool to create meaning that is essentially determined by > > power? Or is it just abuse of logic to assert one's power (over others, > > which is actually being powerless, since one who is truly powerful does > not > > require power over others), which at its basis, is meaningless? > > > > Also, I don't think that Rein was saying gender is fluid. He said it is > > constructed: > > > > "... in other words, what cultures have "naturalized" as divisions into > > genders are more often than not constructions erected by a gender group > in > > order to dominate others. Such construction, I would argue, can only be > > taken down with arguments that follow a logic which itself is not > gendered, > > because if it were, it would be a contestant in the field, not the > referee." > > > > I believe if I read him as he wanted to be read, I think he's saying that > > logic is not gendered, which I agree with. The fact that we can say "a > > logic" means the application of that logic has a boundary, but it doesn't > > mean that this logic is different than that logic. It means if I use a > > hammer on a house, I can also use it to bash in skulls. The tool is the > > same, the application is different, as are the values motivating its use. > > The boundaries are the objectives for using the logic, not the logic > > itself. Of course we can bicker over the forms of mallets, claw hammers, > or > > rocks for hitting things and their differences, but the activity of > > hammering is the same. The values, motivations, and objectives are > > different, which offer the boundary, however the activity remains the > same > > despite those boundaries. > > > > Logic isn't a Western invention, by the way. It's very much part of human > > cognition. Rationalism I suppose could be Western, but I reserve the > right > > to be wrong about that. > > > > Kind regards, > > > > > > Annalisa > > > > > -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Fri Nov 4 22:13:21 2016 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 05:13:21 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, production, and reproduction (and reversibility) In-Reply-To: References: , , Message-ID: <1478323151009.65738@iped.uio.no> I do not take David's comments as graffiti. I think you both are suggesting empirical studies, and both proposals make sense to me. Indeed, I have already begun to look for a student who may want to draw on xmca to do some analyses on gender and (academic) online participation (and I am not joking). Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Annalisa Aguilar Sent: 05 November 2016 02:58 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, production, and reproduction (and reversibility) David, That is not my idea. I was *not* suggesting a discourse analysis of Dilemmas of Gendered Discourse at XMCA* at ALL. In fact quite the opposite. Where in the world did I say that, and why are you attributing that to me? I don't understand what you didn't understand. I said how about we compare and contrast in this thread, as a thought sculpture (not embark in some sort of statistical analyses), what the differences are between non-gendered discourse, and gendered discourse. But first focusing upon non-gendered discourse. I don't think that means we should talk about Math, either, or logic! It sort of feels like you just graffiti'd my thread, I'm sorry to say. So if that is the intent, I don't know how that is supposed to work here. Thanks? Kind regards, Annalisa From dkirsh@lsu.edu Sat Nov 5 03:34:39 2016 From: dkirsh@lsu.edu (David H Kirshner) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 10:34:39 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: <1478278731285.71377@iped.uio.no> References: <00ab01d235fe$c29c1560$47d44020$@edu> <581b82bd.5207620a.9f848.0978@mx.google.com> , , <1478278731285.71377@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Alfredo, Thanks for bringing forward Bateson's idea of "Syllogisms in Barbara" (classical logic) and "Syllogisms in Grass" (logic of metaphor). I want to look at these through the lens of cognitive psychology, and also respond to Mike's query about "under what conditions is this [logical] capability realized in practice." Earlier I gave the example about Margie the bank teller that illustrates how fallacious reasoning is actually governed by associative processes, not logical processes. I want to follow up with an example from cognitive science that shows that correct reasoning, too, often is governed by associative processes, rather than logic. The Wason task is another classical study from the cognitive literature involving--if you've not seen it before, play along and answer the questions before reading on. The set-up is that there are four cards each of which has a number on one side and a letter on the other. Here is what is showing on the face-up sides of the 4 cards: E 7 F 4 So, the cards with E and F showing have numbers on the other side, and the cards with 7 and 4 showing have letters on the other side. Your task is to select the card(s) you would need to turn over in order to verify that every vowel is paired with an odd number. Now, of course, we could turn over all of the cards and easily determine whether or not it is the case that every vowel is paired with an odd number. But can we do it more cheaply, without turning over all the cards? The task is to select the minimal set of cards you have to turn over to verify that every vowel is paired with an odd number. ...take a moment now to make your selection. Next we move to part 2 of the Wason task. Again, there are four cards, each represents a table at a bar. On one side of the card is the customer's drink at that table, and on the other side is the customer's age. Beer 23 Cola 18 Your task is to determine what is the minimal set of cards you would have to turn over to verify that every alcohol drinker is over 20 years of age. ...take a moment now to make your selection. If you're like most people you will answer these questions differently. Typically for the first task subjects choose E and 7 as the set of cards to turn over, and for the second task they select Beer and 18. In this case, the subject will have gotten the second problem correct, and the first one incorrect. In order to verify that every vowel is paired with an odd number, you have to turn over the vowel to see if it's paired with an odd number and the even number to make sure it's not paired with a vowel. The logical structure of the two problems is identical, but people generally only are successful on the contextual problem. What seems to be happening on the non-contextual task is fairly clear. People selecting the vowel and the odd number are guided by the fact that "vowel" and "odd number" are mentioned in the problem statement. Since we have to verify something about vowels and odd numbers, let's select those items to inspect. This is an associative process, not a logical one. In the case of the contextual problem, the process is, again, associative. As with Margie, people associate to their experiences in actual bars, with all the attendant drama of under-age drinkers. There are several morals to draw from this story. First, associative reasoning in everyday contexts is often successful! Second, in such circumstances, we generally take ourselves to be reasoning logically, but we're not. Third, metaphorical reasoning (e.g., Bateson's "Syllogisms in Grass": Grass die; Men die; therefore, Men are grass) illustrates the mechanism of association, things that share properties in our experience become linked to each other. And this is adaptive! I take it that Bateson's point is that there's a sense in which men ARE grass because they both die, and this is worth hanging on to. Fourth, logic is rooted in language--a process for handling propositions in structural relation to one another--not in material experience. Our remarkable associative propensity seduces us away from logic. So, Mike, logic is realized in practice only when (1) one has mastered the abstract rules of logic, and (2) one's habit of thought includes scrutiny of propositional structure as a cue to when to resist metaphorical and associative linkages. If Bruner is correct in his portrayal of Vygotsky's position (quoted in an earlier post, and copied below), then his position is radically at odds with the cognitive perspective presented above. Logic may be a foundation of Western civilization (even if it originated in the East--thanks, Rein), but it is not a prominent or dominant factor in normal, mature development. As Annalisa pointed out, we are struggling now in the U.S. political season with a whole lot of associative, logically-deficient reasoning--truly frightening. David Bruner (1987) from his prolog to Vygotsky's Collected Works: "For Vygotsky, becoming human implies the "centralizing" or cerebralization of mental processes -- whether in development, in cultural history, or in phylogenesis. ... Processes go inward, and they are thereby made amenable to interaction with other processes. ... The existence of autonomous processes is a sign of immaturity, of pathology, or phylogenetic primitiveness. Perception operating on its own, for example, yields the symptomatology of mental subnormality. Through interaction, human mental processes become ordered, systemic, logical, and goal oriented. By the achievement of generative order we become free of the immediacy of sensation, free of the chaining of associations, capable of applying logic to practical application" (p. 15) -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 11:59 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse David, all, your post just reminds me of one of G. Bateson's arguments concerning logic, and which might be of relevance to this aspect of this thread. It seems that there is some concern in the discussion concerning the status of logic (as more or less defined tool that can be applied differently depending on the objectives, or as some form of reasoning that is in nature (not just objectives) different from others, and the product of Western history. Bateson made a distinction between (it was David's syllogism that sparked the connection) "Syllogisms in Barbara" and "Syllogisms in Grass". Syllogisms in Barbara are those one can find in classical logic: Men die; Socrates is a man; Socrates will die. "The basic structure of this little monster," Bateson writes, "is built upon classification. The predicate 'will die' is attached to Socrates by identifying him as a member of a class whose members share that predicate" (Bateson & Bateson, 1987, p. 26). In contrasts, Syllogism in Grass are the "'logic' o metaphor", and go like this: Grass die; Men die; Men are grass. This syllogisms, Bateson writes, "are the very stuff of which natural history is made." In Bateson (and I believe this would be in agreement with much of what a Marxist psychology would argue for), there is not one grand, exclusive logic that belongs to the human brain (cognition). He goes on to argue that biological forms have historically evolved in terms of syllogisms in grass. "Biological data make sense-are connected-by syllogisms in grass." In Bateson, thus, logic is a form of organisation; and a form of organisation not of things, but of processes of growth (and it is here where I think Bateson and Vygotsky make a good match). I think Bateson's distinction is interesting here because it allows nuancing the discussion on logic and gender. I believe that gendered facts exist and come to affect our lives both in terms of syllogisms of Barbara (formal logic), and in terms of syllogisms of grass (metaphor). However, I think that the former, which entails work of classification, need to be enforced and sustained by external means (e.g., institutions), as (feminist) researchers such as S. L. Star so convincingly showed in their research. They offer a frame for asking: what are the external measures being taken so that the classification system in which men get listed under some privileged categories, is being made effective? Most interesting, how are the two logics connected in developmental processes so that we sometime are able to draw syllogisms of the form: - women are human, - men are human, - women and men are equal. but still fall so often into perceptions, feelings, behaviours, etc ... that seem to mess all this up? It seems that changing our epistemology at the deeper level takes more than classical logic. Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of David H Kirshner Sent: 04 November 2016 16:29 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse Annalisa, Recognizing that Jacob and others may see it differently, I agree with you that logic is not gendered. I do disagree, though, with your final statement that "Logic isn't a Western invention, by the way. It's very much part of human cognition." What I think is sustainable is the position that reasoning is very much a part of human cognition. But one of the results that cognitive scientists have clearly established is that human reasoning, in general, is associative, not logical. Our conceptual structures are associatively linked, meaning that concepts conjure up other, related concepts. Our reasoning is a kind of juggling of these linked concepts. One of the classical studies that established this perspective concerns Margie the bank teller: Margie is bright, single, 31 year old, outspoken, and concerned with issues of social justice. What is more likely A) Margie is a bank teller, or B) Margie is a bank teller and Margie is a feminist. (If you're not familiar with this problem, take a moment to answer it.) ... The logical analysis holds that Margie is more likely to be a bank teller than both a bank teller and a feminist because choice A includes the possibility that Margie is a bank teller and a feminist as well as the possibility that Margie is a bank teller and not a feminist, but choice B includes only one of those possibilities. But the vast majority of subjects tested select choice B, which the cognitive psychologists take as indicating that we are guided by our associations to people like Margie rather than by the logical conditions of the problem. In my view, logic as a discursive form--a technology of thought--is a Western invention. Whether it is identified as "male" because of historical association or biological predisposition, I don't know, and I should add, I don't care. (Jacob, the science of biologically based sex differences in cognition has not been "debunked." Rather, feminist scholars have rightly pointed out that the data are inconclusive, and that prior assertions of biologically based sex differences in cognition over-interpret the scientific results.) Neither history nor biology is determinative, and logic is too important a part of our cultural legacy to deny any individual or group the opportunity to master it. David -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Annalisa Aguilar Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 12:28 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity ; Vera John-Steiner Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse Hi, About logic: to Greg M., Actually, I thought it was Jacob who discussed logic in gendered discourse. Unless you brought it up a long time ago in the group he references. I was under the impression that he had attempted to bring it up a few times in the past. Or am I mistaken? In his reply on timestamped Nov 03, 08:30:41 he stated: "Not to beat the proverbial dead horse, but several listserv members--including me--have tried to introduce this position re: logic in prior xmca threads. The position has mostly either been ignored or loudly rejected out of hand by more vocal participants on this listserv." So I was responding to that paragraph. I am not clear about Jacob's position but my position is that logic is an intellectual tool, just like intuition can be an emotional tool. Insight might be a combination of both logic and intuition. But nothing about logic makes it male, as I see it, no matter how much men might assert that to be the case. Logic is reasoning in a particular way with the mind, and any human can partake in it if one wants. You can't perform logic with your elbows and knees. Counting has a logic. So does self-preservation. What one does with logic has to do with one's values. If your values are for a pure race, for example, you can certainly use logic to rationalize activities that purify race however you might want to define it. Does that make logic a tool to create meaning that is essentially determined by power? Or is it just abuse of logic to assert one's power (over others, which is actually being powerless, since one who is truly powerful does not require power over others), which at its basis, is meaningless? Also, I don't think that Rein was saying gender is fluid. He said it is constructed: "... in other words, what cultures have "naturalized" as divisions into genders are more often than not constructions erected by a gender group in order to dominate others. Such construction, I would argue, can only be taken down with arguments that follow a logic which itself is not gendered, because if it were, it would be a contestant in the field, not the referee." I believe if I read him as he wanted to be read, I think he's saying that logic is not gendered, which I agree with. The fact that we can say "a logic" means the application of that logic has a boundary, but it doesn't mean that this logic is different than that logic. It means if I use a hammer on a house, I can also use it to bash in skulls. The tool is the same, the application is different, as are the values motivating its use. The boundaries are the objectives for using the logic, not the logic itself. Of course we can bicker over the forms of mallets, claw hammers, or rocks for hitting things and their differences, but the activity of hammering is the same. The values, motivations, and objectives are different, which offer the boundary, however the activity remains the same despite those boundaries. Logic isn't a Western invention, by the way. It's very much part of human cognition. Rationalism I suppose could be Western, but I reserve the right to be wrong about that. Kind regards, Annalisa From tom.richardson3@googlemail.com Sat Nov 5 04:19:53 2016 From: tom.richardson3@googlemail.com (Tom Richardson) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 11:19:53 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: References: <1477662717568.90322@iped.uio.no> <1CF09B3A-DF07-4538-A198-FDB1B1EDE432@gmail.com> <58174c10.4223620a.cb56a.39b6@mx.google.com> <004801d23447$4aef6110$e0ce2330$@att.net> <581a026f.0f08620a.9bde9.a672@mx.google.com> <3f68de59-0c17-04fe-dd9c-1acc43000bd8@ires.piemonte.it> Message-ID: Annalisa - I am a 'lurker' who would like to butt in here on the possibility/ies of capitalism, in response to your 3 Nov. posting. A book by Raya Dunayevskaya, "Rosa Luxemburg, Women's Liberation and Marx's Philosophy of Revolution" has, in chapter III, a concentrated explanation of 'the fundamental principles' of capitalism's workings. You used the word 'heretical' about your hypothesising some cure for capitalism's present inhuman solutions to its problems, as if we face questions merely of belief and revealed wisdom. I'm contributing from outside the exciting academic milieu of these xmca threads, because , IMO, the analysis which is put forward by writers like Marx, and following him, Dunayevskaya, has an objective, Marx called it a 'scientific' basis. It may be that the whole 'jargon' of the piece proves to make it off-putting, rather than illuminating; if so, I should butt out. Best Tom Middlesbrough UK On 3 November 2016 at 21:27, Annalisa Aguilar wrote: > Maria Cristina, and others, > > > I agree 200% that scarcity is a concept upon which capitalism flourishes. > We know that the capitalist ideology, as it were, is used to control class, > as our good friend Karl tells us. > > > I believe there are some who want to offer that the ideology behind > capitalism as inherently intertwined with control and oppression, and is > somehow immoveable, but that there cannot be good done with capitalism. But > perhaps capitalism is just a tool, and this ideology and its identification > with scarcity is the real problem for what capitalism has historically > supported. Maybe with the proper fundamental values capitalism can work for > a greater good. I don't know, I just offer that thought. Perhaps I am > making a heretical statement by saying that. > > > I'm not sure where I stand, but I'm happy to explore the line of those > thoughts, not because I believe in capitalism, but because I don't believe > there is scarcity on this planet (unless we are talking about a lack of > infinite oil reserves and forests and clean healthy oceans, then I agree). > What I mean by scarcity is not so much in materials, but in innovation, in > demand. I do not agree that innovation is scarce, neither is demand, and I > believe that the reserves of human innovation are infinite, if we only > choose to tap into them. When demand is scarce, then production diminishes. > But when the grassroots demand change, production does increase, especially > over time. I remember when being vegetarian was considered an oddity, and > it was difficult to go grocery shopping, or to eat out at restaurants. Now > it is much better for vegetarians. But that is because of demand, not > production. > > > What I think is the basis of gendered discourse, whether you believe that > innovation (and its link to demand) is possible beyond being a white male. > I do not mean to insult white males as representing that because they are > white and male that it denotes they believe that that is true; rather, I > speak to the ideology and the logic of that ideology. Let me be clear about > that, for the record. > > > I would like to offer, Maria Cristina, that what you call reproduction (if > I'm understanding you), might be what I'm indicating in terms of demand. > But I'm not sure. We can explore this together. > > > When we look at the dining room table example, the table is reproducing > many domestic activities in the way it is supportive to the community of > the household (in Greek parlance the oikia), regardless of gender. Because > we all have to eat, regardless of gender. Almost all households have dining > room tables, so I hope that is not a class-ist generalization that leaves > out households without dining room tables. Far from it for me to be a > furniture bigot. > > > What I am suggesting is that flipping the orientation from production to > demand, we can start to see the world with less emphasis upon the colored > glass of gender and race, and just think in human terms in relation to > tools and the demand we have for them (outside the realm of commodities). > Demand also can be a test for where gender is a dependent concept or > independent one. My suggestion is not intended to dismiss the discussion of > gender, but to consider how tools and their demand can indicate our values. > And those values, as revealed, can in turn help to reveal what constructs > the structure of gender ideologies. I believe there is a lot of work in > this area in the world of anthropology, right Greg T.? > > > (Please know, this line of inquiry is a tool intended for exploration, and > not to be weaponized.) > > > I think also this weaves well with the social reality of giving, something > Maria Cristina you also include in this discussion. Much of what is given > is either tools to help make a better life, or products that were created > with those tools, and it is those tools that have demand, because of their > social worth in the realm of giving (and not solely the realm of commerce). > > > I also would like to acknowledge what you say about there being many gifts > around us. I am of the worldview that there is much about this world for > which to be grateful. There is a lot to be said for cultivating gratitude > in community, over competition. Thanks, Maria Cristina, for your > participation and collaboration with me. > > > Last, I agree that the division between the private and the public, (the > oikia and the agora), could be the result of patriarchy, but it could also > just have to do with protecting the ones that you love from harmful > adversaries. We cannot say with certainty that matriarchal societies would > dissolve that barrier. Though it has an appeal, it may be too idealistic. > When we identify our vulnerable selves, it usually has to do with intimate > spaces, and these tend not to be on display in the agora. At the least we > have been socialized this way, but could that be more the way we are wired > as humans? I can't be sure so far in this line of thought. I'm open to see > possibilities and other considerations. > > > What is prohibitive to women is not that there is a division between the > public and the private, but that they are not safe to travel to the agora > and to mill about the public space without being insulted or threatened. If > that were removed, it might be fine to have that boundary between the > private and the public. Men of course are not ridiculed in the oikia to the > extent that women are in the agora, and so while men might be chastised for > not knowing how to bake a casserole, or how the iron a shirt, or how not to > mix darks with lights in the washing machine, their lives are never > threatened for not knowing these things. Iinstead their fates are relegated > to a bad diet, wrinkled clothes, and grey whites, which are frequently seen > as charming signifiers of bachelorhood. Certainly, their lives are enhanced > for knowing how to do these tasks, if only because they can share in the > housework, as Alfredo has offered in sharing his story. > > > I am also reminded of something that was made apparent to me in an episode > of the KPBS drama Indian Summers, which aired last Sunday. Without getting > into the story, a theme in this episode had to do with the notion that > insulting one's wife is the way for one man to deeply, albeit sinisterly, > insult another man. That notion could be carried over to one's daughter I > suppose, or one's mother or one's sister, even. Is this why, perhaps, women > were kept back away from the agora or they were forced to be accompanied by > a brother, husband, or father. And yes, we are talking about a patriarchy, > but is the idea of insulting a man by insulting his wife generated by > patriarchy? Women do not attack one another by insulting their husbands. Or > their sons, brothers, or fathers. > > > So I wonder if this also has to do with keeping women away from the agora. > > > Let's keep reasoning with the seasoning of curiosity (as time permits, of > course). > > > Kind regards, > > > Annalisa > > > From vwilk@inf.shizuoka.ac.jp Sat Nov 5 05:23:08 2016 From: vwilk@inf.shizuoka.ac.jp (Wilkinson) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 21:23:08 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? In-Reply-To: References: <6B2C5457-8B44-4DF9-A6A3-6101ED3C1AC6@gmail.com> Message-ID: Hey, Rod, I too am a lurker and dipper. I've been hanging out here since 2008 and have made friends and occasionally made contributions.I owe much to Mike Cole and some others. I haven't done much with Vygotsky, but work with stuff I find in this space, and got some of V's books but don't have time to live with them. I teach language and have been doing so for 40 years, but who can I talk to about metaphor and concept? Many of XCMAers are educators and thinkers. I've taught men and women, adolescents, children, and infants, and since I came to Japan 36 years ago, a virtual Third Space Community such as this successfully stands in for other good places to hang out in another age, ROTC in Fayetteville, Arkansas, Buster's in South Pasadena. Those places may offer a great place to read a book, see familiar faces, have a latte with a friend, but the real physical places do not have the intellectual on-going discussions. Well they might, but I am just passing through. Can't stay. But intellectual civilization advanced in such places where Boswell and Johnson had coffee in a public place where they could see and be seen, listen and speak. I have ridden a good horse named "General Systems Theory via Gregory Bateson." I was doing Allegory before I got this job, I think Cognition and Epistemology and Metaphor occupy the fields where my horse feeds. I teach English to freshmen in all Informatics programs and freshmen in all Engineering majors, and one really needs a general place to come from to meet such a wide variety of unique persons in such a wide variety of specialties. I haven't had time for years to compose the kind of research inspired by the atmosphere in this amazing virtual community where I can't really claim desk space, but I can buy a cup of coffee and chat with the barista. I owe much to this community for this space, because there are few on the ground here who speak my language so I must use whatever I can to keep moving forward... Thanks much for the digest. Vandy Wilkinson On 2016/11/05 10:13, Christopher Schuck wrote: B > Thanks too for such a thoughtful synopsis, Rod, which I found myself > relating to deeply. And I suppose this is also relevant to the stuff on the > Gender thread, but I no longer know where to go. Fast Swim, Slow Swim, > Gender, Logic, Genesis of Gender...all spinning off of what appeared to be > a single theme. Wow! My head is spinning. > > Having checked in after some time and discovered two or three parallel > conversations well underway, all the comments about time frames (including > Vera's observation about differing paces, styles and degrees of necessary > reflection time) feel very apropos. One of the realities of this format and > the quick turnaround times for posting is that if one is not conscientious > about keeping up (or just lacks the time), there is inevitably an "in media > res" effect of trying to understand the running narrative backwards while > needing to (collectively and collaboratively) live it forwards. I don't > think this is always a bad thing. In fact, I suspect it can sometimes have > the paradoxical effect of enhancing and elevating the discussion. There is > a certain humility and beginner's mind that comes with wandering into a > conversation late, a certain openness to what may not yet be fully > processed, understood and contextualized. And, coming at it with fresh eyes > can lend a different angle that shakes up the conversation a bit. It felt > this way, for instance, when Maria Cristina suddenly entered and offered a > re-contextualization (time constraints and domestic responsibilities) that > kind of turned everything on its head. At the same time, there may be a > certain responsibility on the part of those already engrossed in the > dialogue to be welcoming and inclusive towards anyone "in media res > distress." I agree with Alfredo that trying to prescribe along the > "fast/slow" dimension is undesirable; I'm not sure how much adding new tags > for posts or further classifying per se would really help to counter any > problematic dynamics, though I know nothing about these technologies. I > find myself thinking: what's wrong with the good old-fashioned initiative > of emailing individuals separately and CC-ing whoever seems interested, or > announcing that you'd like to email further with any takers? > > Having looked over the last several threads (if far from reading > exhaustively), it seems to me there may be two different issues: 1) how to > do better justice to all these differing purposes, styles and uses of the > listserve, and/or clarify "what we are doing here" in order to avoid > confusion; 2) how to cultivate a fully hospitable atmosphere for those who > may end up being marginalized in various ways, and address these issues > without generating even more unnecessary distress. Of course, those two > things aren't entirely unrelated. But improving the second may not require > that we have fully resolved the first. In another post accidentally sent > from the wrong email, which bounced back and disappeared, I attempted a > preliminary list of different ways people might end up feeling marginalized > or shut out of conversations. Probably not worth resending at this point. > > I am more of a peripheral member of this community and have only posted a > few times, but in each instance was very aware of anxiety over the > possibility of translating poorly or just sounding plain stupid. Trying to > negotiate complex ideas *and *respect feelings and boundaries *and *not > sound ignorant, in the absence of voice, expression and physical proximity, > sometimes feels a bit like entering a dark and crowded room. You want to > make contact without knocking someone over or banging into them, but > ultimately you must wait for your eyes to adjust to the night vision so you > can "know your way about" (as Wittgenstein might say). I think it's easy to > underestimate the diversity of cognitive and discursive styles, not just > goals and values, among people on the board. As someone who tends to > approach things very analytically and linearly, in such contexts of > ambiguity I find myself tempted to fall back on the intellectual structure > of ideas, abstract theory, content over form or use, as if it were some > kind of "universal language." Yet as we all know, this does not always help > - and sometimes it backfires. Meanwhile, as someone who like all of us has > an inner life and related experiences, I am tempted to offer something > immediate, concrete and personal. But this can feel risky and possibly > irrelevant, perhaps even narcissistic. To a great extent I am happy just to > listen and learn. But Alfredo's point about not just being a spectator also > resonates with me. > > Despite all these misgivings, I'm not sure I'm ready to agree that this > format for communication, or verbal written discourse in general, is > automatically inferior and impoverished in relation to other modes. I mean, > in some ways it obviously is. But there is often a level of care and > thought -- and continuity -- that would be difficult to reproduce in a room > where people are prone to physically competing while attempting high-level > discourse in real time, yet still manages to be relational. There are > definitely tradeoffs. I think like most technology, it brings great > opportunities and big problems. And new opportunities that arise from > having to face those problems. > > Chris > > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 4:37 PM, Greg Thompson > wrote: > >> Yes, I'm with you on that too Rod. I think that's why social media can get >> so nasty so often. It is a chilly medium that is a highly denuded form of >> communication. (e.g., when I said "I'm with you on that too", was I >> alluding to other times when I'm not "with you"? Some could interpret it >> that way (btw, that's not what I meant!!)). >> >> I marvel that there is so much that gets done on this listserve in spite of >> this fact. >> >> Also makes me wonder why so many people put so much stock in literacy as >> being a massively transformative capacity. Seems a more base form of >> communication than any form of oral communication I've ever experienced >> (even the phone gives you prosody!). >> >> -greg >> >> On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 2:22 PM, Rod Parker-Rees < >> R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk> wrote: >> >>> Thanks Helen and Greg, >>> >>> I certainly like the opportunity to hang out with interesting people but >> I >>> think it is probably inevitable in this sort of set up that wires can get >>> crossed when people feel they are engaging in different kinds of >> activities. >>> I suspect that what has kept this group going is that every now and then >>> people stand back and take stock of how it is working and that allows >>> people to realise that it works in different ways (and feels different) >> for >>> different people. >>> >>> This has made me wonder how often other forms of communication (even >> where >>> only two people are involved) can involve different people having very >>> different understandings about what they are doing and sometimes this >>> doesn't matter but sometimes it does. >>> >>> I hope we can keep it going. >>> >>> All the best, >>> >>> Rod >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ >>> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Greg Thompson >>> Sent: 04 November 2016 19:58 >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? >>> >>> Great question Rod! >>> >>> As to the answer, as John Cage was fond of saying: "no why, just here." >>> >>> Okay, fair enough. But it seems like the question deserves a more >>> thoughtful answer than this. >>> >>> I suppose if I were entirely honest, I find this to be a nice place to >>> hang out and learn and occasionally I try to use the listserve to put >>> something out there in the interest of getting some feedback to help >>> develop it. I've had much more success with the former than the latter. >>> >>> I do wonder what the mission statement of this listserve would be if >> there >>> were such a thing. It seems like we don't engage with MCA nearly as much >> as >>> we should if that were to be the goal of the listserve. >>> >>> Other than that, I would guess that the mission statement would be >>> something like: it's a place for people who are interested in CHAT to >> hang >>> out and talk about stuff that they care about (sometimes CHAT and MCA >>> related, sometimes not). >>> >>> Is that too cynical? Or is that just about right? >>> >>> Perhaps someone else can give a better statement of what the listserve is >>> "about"? (and I hate to even get into the question of what it SHOULD be - >>> I'd rather live it and see what works that deliberate about what that >> life >>> should look like, but, sure, there is some value in doing the former). >>> >>> Thanks for your question/contribution Rod. Right to the point. >>> -greg >>> >>> On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Helena Worthen >> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> This is a good contribution. Thanks -- H >>>> >>>> Helena Worthen >>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>>> Vietnam blog: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>>> >>>> On Nov 4, 2016, at 2:30 AM, Rod Parker-Rees wrote: >>>> >>>>> I am an interested but time-poor lurker on the margins of xmca but >>>>> the >>>> ripples stirred by Mike's decision to reduce his pastoral contribution >>>> to our community have made me question how different participants >>>> understand what kind of activity we are engaging in here. >>>>> >>>>> It seems to me that each of us may understand the social form of >>>>> what we >>>> are doing in different ways. For some it is like a conversation and we >>>> feel disappointed or hurt if our contributions are met with silence or >>>> if the chain moves on in a different direction. For others we are a >>>> working group, collaborating to develop a practical and ethical >>>> theoretical model. For others we are something like a conference, >>>> where thoughts and ideas can be put before others for their >>>> consideration and response - and I am sure there are many other ways >>>> in which different people understand their participation differently. >>>>> >>>>> Does this matter? Would xmca be 'better' if it was more consistent, >>>>> more >>>> coherent, more tightly and predictably governed by shared social >>>> understandings? While more explicit regulation (protocols for >>>> labelling streams and posts and for timing of responses etc.) might >>>> help to make our activity feel more inclusive and more sharable it may >>>> also introduce new kinds of discomfort. >>>>> >>>>> What I have found interesting in my time around the margins of xmca >>>>> is >>>> the challenge of sustaining conversations without all the non-verbal >>>> feedback which we rely on when we talk with people. When 'wordings' >>>> float off into the ether, cast off from the body and personhood of >>>> their speakers or writers they become objects which can be scrutinised >>>> and revisited and this can be a reason for 'lurkers' to feel reluctant >>> about contributing. >>>> What we are doing is not a conversation. Nor is it even a forum, in >>>> the sense of people taking turns to orate before a crowd, because >>>> contributors often get very little phatic feedback from the lurkers >>>> and may have very little sense of how their arguments have been >>>> understood or received. But we are moved by our understandings of what >>>> it is and is not OK to do, which come from other kinds of >>>> interactions. Can I say something if I have not been part of what has >>>> gone before? Should I respond or stay quiet? What should I do if I am >>>> annoyed or angered by something someone else has contributed? >>>>> >>>>> I am already getting anxious about how what I have said might be >>>> interpreted by others and feeling I have had a long enough turn but I >>>> would be really interested to hear what others think about why we are >>> here! >>>>> >>>>> I have found what people do here very helpful but I do feel uneasy >>>>> about >>>> risking contributions! >>>>> >>>>> All the best, >>>>> >>>>> Rod >>>>> ________________________________ >>>>> [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif]>>> //www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass> >>>>> >>>>> This email and any files with it are confidential and intended >>>>> solely >>>> for the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not >>>> the intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the >>>> information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on >>> it. >>>> If you have received this email in error please let the sender know >>>> immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not >>>> necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University >>>> accepts no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to >>>> scan emails and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept >>>> responsibility for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this >>>> email or its attachments constitutes an order for goods or services >>>> unless accompanied by an official order form. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. >>> Assistant Professor >>> Department of Anthropology >>> 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower >>> Brigham Young University >>> Provo, UT 84602 >>> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson >>> ________________________________ >>> [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif]>> //www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass> >>> >>> This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely for >>> the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the >>> intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the >>> information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on >> it. >>> If you have received this email in error please let the sender know >>> immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not >>> necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University accepts >>> no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan >> emails >>> and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept responsibility >>> for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its >>> attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless accompanied >>> by an official order form. >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. >> Assistant Professor >> Department of Anthropology >> 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower >> Brigham Young University >> Provo, UT 84602 >> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson >> > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Sat Nov 5 08:04:06 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 08:04:06 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? In-Reply-To: References: <6B2C5457-8B44-4DF9-A6A3-6101ED3C1AC6@gmail.com> Message-ID: <581df4f3.c7a2420a.89939.8890@mx.google.com> Vandy, Your reasons for being here in this virtual community resonate with my reasons. I read about *salon* culture or instituting co-generative deeply reflective conversations within the stream of consciousness in particular coffee house ways of place making and they had a different feel or mood than most academic places of specialization. XMCA has some overlap with salon social, cultural, and imaginary place making. I now want to make a volitional shift in my personal stream of consciousness to return to the title of this thread (what are we doing here?). Mike presented two concerns requiring our care going forward. *more gender balance *Less chaining and more sustained reflection. I wonder when we talk about *turns* (leaving safe harbours, or refuge,) such as the linguistic turn or rhetorical turn, or pragmatic/action turn if we are not now deeply into an *ethical* turn where invitations are presented and we can respond or turn away and each way of responding has ethical con-sequences. In this spirit of turns i want to return to Peg?s and Dana?s con-tributions. Peg referred to loose *threads* that are left and can be picked up and *resumed*. This seems to involve zig-zagging, or turns, or reversability with a 3 part structure. The zig-gap-zag structure. This brings me to my stream of consciousness and picking up Dana?s loose thread. She invited us to turn toward Margaret Eisenhart the author of this months article who expresses a feminist voice within her two written books. Dana sent out an invitation as a thread that was dropped and went silent. My now picking up Dana?s thread is my way of acknowledging her contribution and how it entered my stream of consciousness. I had intended to google Eisenhart?s books on Dana?s recommendation and to hear a feminist voice. However, that morning, both Rein?s referring to his new book, and David Kellogg posting Vygotsky?s last lecture turned me away from Dana?s invitation and her thread became a loose and silent thread with no acknowledgement and no intertwining within co-generation in the stream of consciousness. I am now saying i today will turn back, pick up Dana?s loose thread (thanks Peg for this metaphor) and *resume* what i was initially intending to do. I also want to turn to David?s article and Rein?s book later (taking time) but as an ethical response to the Mike?s call to develop the emerging theme of gender balance i will first acknowledge and pick up and follow Dana?s loose thread and hope this loose thread (as a feminist response) will become weaved into our intertwining tapestry. Margaret Eisenhart and Carrie Allen suggest our theories and social imaginaries are being *hollowed out* and shallow. Rein?s book overlaps with this concern. The feminist response is to *take care* within our emerging concerns and my sharing how i volitionally entered my stream of conciousness to *take care* and *resume* a loose thread is my morning contemplation Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Wilkinson Sent: November 5, 2016 5:24 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? Hey, Rod, I too am a lurker and dipper. I've been hanging out here since 2008 and have made friends and occasionally made contributions.I owe much to Mike Cole and some others. I haven't done much with Vygotsky, but work with stuff I find in this space, and got some of V's books but don't have time to live with them. I teach language and have been doing so for 40 years, but who can I talk to about metaphor and concept? Many of XCMAers are educators and thinkers. I've taught men and women, adolescents, children, and infants, and since I came to Japan 36 years ago, a virtual Third Space Community such as this successfully stands in for other good places to hang out in another age, ROTC in Fayetteville, Arkansas, Buster's in South Pasadena. Those places may offer a great place to read a book, see familiar faces, have a latte with a friend, but the real physical places do not have the intellectual on-going discussions. Well they might, but I am just passing through. Can't stay. But intellectual civilization advanced in such places where Boswell and Johnson had coffee in a public place where they could see and be seen, listen and speak. I have ridden a good horse named "General Systems Theory via Gregory Bateson." I was doing Allegory before I got this job, I think Cognition and Epistemology and Metaphor occupy the fields where my horse feeds. I teach English to freshmen in all Informatics programs and freshmen in all Engineering majors, and one really needs a general place to come from to meet such a wide variety of unique persons in such a wide variety of specialties. I haven't had time for years to compose the kind of research inspired by the atmosphere in this amazing virtual community where I can't really claim desk space, but I can buy a cup of coffee and chat with the barista. I owe much to this community for this space, because there are few on the ground here who speak my language so I must use whatever I can to keep moving forward... Thanks much for the digest. Vandy Wilkinson On 2016/11/05 10:13, Christopher Schuck wrote: B > Thanks too for such a thoughtful synopsis, Rod, which I found myself > relating to deeply. And I suppose this is also relevant to the stuff on the > Gender thread, but I no longer know where to go. Fast Swim, Slow Swim, > Gender, Logic, Genesis of Gender...all spinning off of what appeared to be > a single theme. Wow! My head is spinning. > > Having checked in after some time and discovered two or three parallel > conversations well underway, all the comments about time frames (including > Vera's observation about differing paces, styles and degrees of necessary > reflection time) feel very apropos. One of the realities of this format and > the quick turnaround times for posting is that if one is not conscientious > about keeping up (or just lacks the time), there is inevitably an "in media > res" effect of trying to understand the running narrative backwards while > needing to (collectively and collaboratively) live it forwards. I don't > think this is always a bad thing. In fact, I suspect it can sometimes have > the paradoxical effect of enhancing and elevating the discussion. There is > a certain humility and beginner's mind that comes with wandering into a > conversation late, a certain openness to what may not yet be fully > processed, understood and contextualized. And, coming at it with fresh eyes > can lend a different angle that shakes up the conversation a bit. It felt > this way, for instance, when Maria Cristina suddenly entered and offered a > re-contextualization (time constraints and domestic responsibilities) that > kind of turned everything on its head. At the same time, there may be a > certain responsibility on the part of those already engrossed in the > dialogue to be welcoming and inclusive towards anyone "in media res > distress." I agree with Alfredo that trying to prescribe along the > "fast/slow" dimension is undesirable; I'm not sure how much adding new tags > for posts or further classifying per se would really help to counter any > problematic dynamics, though I know nothing about these technologies. I > find myself thinking: what's wrong with the good old-fashioned initiative > of emailing individuals separately and CC-ing whoever seems interested, or > announcing that you'd like to email further with any takers? > > Having looked over the last several threads (if far from reading > exhaustively), it seems to me there may be two different issues: 1) how to > do better justice to all these differing purposes, styles and uses of the > listserve, and/or clarify "what we are doing here" in order to avoid > confusion; 2) how to cultivate a fully hospitable atmosphere for those who > may end up being marginalized in various ways, and address these issues > without generating even more unnecessary distress. Of course, those two > things aren't entirely unrelated. But improving the second may not require > that we have fully resolved the first. In another post accidentally sent > from the wrong email, which bounced back and disappeared, I attempted a > preliminary list of different ways people might end up feeling marginalized > or shut out of conversations. Probably not worth resending at this point. > > I am more of a peripheral member of this community and have only posted a > few times, but in each instance was very aware of anxiety over the > possibility of translating poorly or just sounding plain stupid. Trying to > negotiate complex ideas *and *respect feelings and boundaries *and *not > sound ignorant, in the absence of voice, expression and physical proximity, > sometimes feels a bit like entering a dark and crowded room. You want to > make contact without knocking someone over or banging into them, but > ultimately you must wait for your eyes to adjust to the night vision so you > can "know your way about" (as Wittgenstein might say). I think it's easy to > underestimate the diversity of cognitive and discursive styles, not just > goals and values, among people on the board. As someone who tends to > approach things very analytically and linearly, in such contexts of > ambiguity I find myself tempted to fall back on the intellectual structure > of ideas, abstract theory, content over form or use, as if it were some > kind of "universal language." Yet as we all know, this does not always help > - and sometimes it backfires. Meanwhile, as someone who like all of us has > an inner life and related experiences, I am tempted to offer something > immediate, concrete and personal. But this can feel risky and possibly > irrelevant, perhaps even narcissistic. To a great extent I am happy just to > listen and learn. But Alfredo's point about not just being a spectator also > resonates with me. > > Despite all these misgivings, I'm not sure I'm ready to agree that this > format for communication, or verbal written discourse in general, is > automatically inferior and impoverished in relation to other modes. I mean, > in some ways it obviously is. But there is often a level of care and > thought -- and continuity -- that would be difficult to reproduce in a room > where people are prone to physically competing while attempting high-level > discourse in real time, yet still manages to be relational. There are > definitely tradeoffs. I think like most technology, it brings great > opportunities and big problems. And new opportunities that arise from > having to face those problems. > > Chris > > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 4:37 PM, Greg Thompson > wrote: > >> Yes, I'm with you on that too Rod. I think that's why social media can get >> so nasty so often. It is a chilly medium that is a highly denuded form of >> communication. (e.g., when I said "I'm with you on that too", was I >> alluding to other times when I'm not "with you"? Some could interpret it >> that way (btw, that's not what I meant!!)). >> >> I marvel that there is so much that gets done on this listserve in spite of >> this fact. >> >> Also makes me wonder why so many people put so much stock in literacy as >> being a massively transformative capacity. Seems a more base form of >> communication than any form of oral communication I've ever experienced >> (even the phone gives you prosody!). >> >> -greg >> >> On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 2:22 PM, Rod Parker-Rees < >> R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk> wrote: >> >>> Thanks Helen and Greg, >>> >>> I certainly like the opportunity to hang out with interesting people but >> I >>> think it is probably inevitable in this sort of set up that wires can get >>> crossed when people feel they are engaging in different kinds of >> activities. >>> I suspect that what has kept this group going is that every now and then >>> people stand back and take stock of how it is working and that allows >>> people to realise that it works in different ways (and feels different) >> for >>> different people. >>> >>> This has made me wonder how often other forms of communication (even >> where >>> only two people are involved) can involve different people having very >>> different understandings about what they are doing and sometimes this >>> doesn't matter but sometimes it does. >>> >>> I hope we can keep it going. >>> >>> All the best, >>> >>> Rod >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ >>> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Greg Thompson >>> Sent: 04 November 2016 19:58 >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? >>> >>> Great question Rod! >>> >>> As to the answer, as John Cage was fond of saying: "no why, just here." >>> >>> Okay, fair enough. But it seems like the question deserves a more >>> thoughtful answer than this. >>> >>> I suppose if I were entirely honest, I find this to be a nice place to >>> hang out and learn and occasionally I try to use the listserve to put >>> something out there in the interest of getting some feedback to help >>> develop it. I've had much more success with the former than the latter. >>> >>> I do wonder what the mission statement of this listserve would be if >> there >>> were such a thing. It seems like we don't engage with MCA nearly as much >> as >>> we should if that were to be the goal of the listserve. >>> >>> Other than that, I would guess that the mission statement would be >>> something like: it's a place for people who are interested in CHAT to >> hang >>> out and talk about stuff that they care about (sometimes CHAT and MCA >>> related, sometimes not). >>> >>> Is that too cynical? Or is that just about right? >>> >>> Perhaps someone else can give a better statement of what the listserve is >>> "about"? (and I hate to even get into the question of what it SHOULD be - >>> I'd rather live it and see what works that deliberate about what that >> life >>> should look like, but, sure, there is some value in doing the former). >>> >>> Thanks for your question/contribution Rod. Right to the point. >>> -greg >>> >>> On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Helena Worthen >> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> This is a good contribution. Thanks -- H >>>> >>>> Helena Worthen >>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>>> Vietnam blog: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>>> >>>> On Nov 4, 2016, at 2:30 AM, Rod Parker-Rees wrote: >>>> >>>>> I am an interested but time-poor lurker on the margins of xmca but >>>>> the >>>> ripples stirred by Mike's decision to reduce his pastoral contribution >>>> to our community have made me question how different participants >>>> understand what kind of activity we are engaging in here. >>>>> >>>>> It seems to me that each of us may understand the social form of >>>>> what we >>>> are doing in different ways. For some it is like a conversation and we >>>> feel disappointed or hurt if our contributions are met with silence or >>>> if the chain moves on in a different direction. For others we are a >>>> working group, collaborating to develop a practical and ethical >>>> theoretical model. For others we are something like a conference, >>>> where thoughts and ideas can be put before others for their >>>> consideration and response - and I am sure there are many other ways >>>> in which different people understand their participation differently. >>>>> >>>>> Does this matter? Would xmca be 'better' if it was more consistent, >>>>> more >>>> coherent, more tightly and predictably governed by shared social >>>> understandings? While more explicit regulation (protocols for >>>> labelling streams and posts and for timing of responses etc.) might >>>> help to make our activity feel more inclusive and more sharable it may >>>> also introduce new kinds of discomfort. >>>>> >>>>> What I have found interesting in my time around the margins of xmca >>>>> is >>>> the challenge of sustaining conversations without all the non-verbal >>>> feedback which we rely on when we talk with people. When 'wordings' >>>> float off into the ether, cast off from the body and personhood of >>>> their speakers or writers they become objects which can be scrutinised >>>> and revisited and this can be a reason for 'lurkers' to feel reluctant >>> about contributing. >>>> What we are doing is not a conversation. Nor is it even a forum, in >>>> the sense of people taking turns to orate before a crowd, because >>>> contributors often get very little phatic feedback from the lurkers >>>> and may have very little sense of how their arguments have been >>>> understood or received. But we are moved by our understandings of what >>>> it is and is not OK to do, which come from other kinds of >>>> interactions. Can I say something if I have not been part of what has >>>> gone before? Should I respond or stay quiet? What should I do if I am >>>> annoyed or angered by something someone else has contributed? >>>>> >>>>> I am already getting anxious about how what I have said might be >>>> interpreted by others and feeling I have had a long enough turn but I >>>> would be really interested to hear what others think about why we are >>> here! >>>>> >>>>> I have found what people do here very helpful but I do feel uneasy >>>>> about >>>> risking contributions! >>>>> >>>>> All the best, >>>>> >>>>> Rod >>>>> ________________________________ >>>>> [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif]>>> //www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass> >>>>> >>>>> This email and any files with it are confidential and intended >>>>> solely >>>> for the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not >>>> the intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the >>>> information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on >>> it. >>>> If you have received this email in error please let the sender know >>>> immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not >>>> necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University >>>> accepts no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to >>>> scan emails and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept >>>> responsibility for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this >>>> email or its attachments constitutes an order for goods or services >>>> unless accompanied by an official order form. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. >>> Assistant Professor >>> Department of Anthropology >>> 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower >>> Brigham Young University >>> Provo, UT 84602 >>> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson >>> ________________________________ >>> [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif]>> //www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass> >>> >>> This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely for >>> the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the >>> intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the >>> information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on >> it. >>> If you have received this email in error please let the sender know >>> immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not >>> necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University accepts >>> no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan >> emails >>> and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept responsibility >>> for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its >>> attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless accompanied >>> by an official order form. >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. >> Assistant Professor >> Department of Anthropology >> 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower >> Brigham Young University >> Provo, UT 84602 >> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson >> > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Sat Nov 5 08:44:15 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 08:44:15 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Baritone Voices Promoting Gender Equality in Intellectual Co-Creation Message-ID: <581dfe52.41db620a.c4fbd.9932@mx.google.com> I wanted to take a turn and was concerned about interrupting so decided to pick up a thread or text *message* from David Kellogg and transpose it to a new thread for Baritone Voices amplifying Soprano voices [hopefully in harmony]. David, like Rod, I would, following your invitation and your lead get my hands [or computer] on something that Ruqaiyn wrote. Your way of contrasting her with that list of men, and also sensing Vygotsky is read too much diverging spontaneous and scientific word meaning and her seeing *value* in their *reversibility* [each IN the other] indicating co-generation and co-expression of thought, intellectualization, logic, and logos, seems to be pregnant with possibility as Baritones finding *common sense* with Sopranos. Rod, your taking up David?s invitation and describing your course *understanding understanding* is also very pertinent to *extending* this conversation. I hope my jumping in rapidly [with excitement] and the hope of learning to more effectively to become a Baritone co-creating *sens* [which always indicates meaning with direction] may be encouraged in a new thread for Baritones supporting Soprano voices. Thereby creating a symphonic harmony. Back to pick up and *resume* Rod?s request to engage with Ruqiya. Whwere do we start? PS: Soprano voices may reply here Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From Dana.Walker@unco.edu Sat Nov 5 10:37:54 2016 From: Dana.Walker@unco.edu (Walker, Dana) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 17:37:54 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? In-Reply-To: References: <6B2C5457-8B44-4DF9-A6A3-6101ED3C1AC6@gmail.com> Message-ID: <278F23D9-C17C-4D09-9AB9-9552FEDBC24B@unco.edu> Chris, I enjoyed reading your post, and would like to read the email you did not send, if you were willing to share it (or you could send it directly to me dana.walker@unco.edu), since the question of how marginalization is accomplished discursively interests me. Regarding your closing thoughts about face to face versus written communication: I think there are probably a variety of formats for non f2f communication that could afford a less narrow range of interaction than does this the email listserve. You mentioned the phone and prosody: The application Voicemail does this as well. You can directly record either an audio or video post and include a artefactual ?third thing,? such as photo or a slide. Participants can see/hear and respond to each other at either a fast or slow pace, since the voicethread remains in place until it is removed. It is free up to 5 voicethreads per person. Dana On 11/4/16, 7:13 PM, "xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Christopher Schuck" wrote: Thanks too for such a thoughtful synopsis, Rod, which I found myself relating to deeply. And I suppose this is also relevant to the stuff on the Gender thread, but I no longer know where to go. Fast Swim, Slow Swim, Gender, Logic, Genesis of Gender...all spinning off of what appeared to be a single theme. Wow! My head is spinning. Having checked in after some time and discovered two or three parallel conversations well underway, all the comments about time frames (including Vera's observation about differing paces, styles and degrees of necessary reflection time) feel very apropos. One of the realities of this format and the quick turnaround times for posting is that if one is not conscientious about keeping up (or just lacks the time), there is inevitably an "in media res" effect of trying to understand the running narrative backwards while needing to (collectively and collaboratively) live it forwards. I don't think this is always a bad thing. In fact, I suspect it can sometimes have the paradoxical effect of enhancing and elevating the discussion. There is a certain humility and beginner's mind that comes with wandering into a conversation late, a certain openness to what may not yet be fully processed, understood and contextualized. And, coming at it with fresh eyes can lend a different angle that shakes up the conversation a bit. It felt this way, for instance, when Maria Cristina suddenly entered and offered a re-contextualization (time constraints and domestic responsibilities) that kind of turned everything on its head. At the same time, there may be a certain responsibility on the part of those already engrossed in the dialogue to be welcoming and inclusive towards anyone "in media res distress." I agree with Alfredo that trying to prescribe along the "fast/slow" dimension is undesirable; I'm not sure how much adding new tags for posts or further classifying per se would really help to counter any problematic dynamics, though I know nothing about these technologies. I find myself thinking: what's wrong with the good old-fashioned initiative of emailing individuals separately and CC-ing whoever seems interested, or announcing that you'd like to email further with any takers? Having looked over the last several threads (if far from reading exhaustively), it seems to me there may be two different issues: 1) how to do better justice to all these differing purposes, styles and uses of the listserve, and/or clarify "what we are doing here" in order to avoid confusion; 2) how to cultivate a fully hospitable atmosphere for those who may end up being marginalized in various ways, and address these issues without generating even more unnecessary distress. Of course, those two things aren't entirely unrelated. But improving the second may not require that we have fully resolved the first. In another post accidentally sent from the wrong email, which bounced back and disappeared, I attempted a preliminary list of different ways people might end up feeling marginalized or shut out of conversations. Probably not worth resending at this point. I am more of a peripheral member of this community and have only posted a few times, but in each instance was very aware of anxiety over the possibility of translating poorly or just sounding plain stupid. Trying to negotiate complex ideas *and *respect feelings and boundaries *and *not sound ignorant, in the absence of voice, expression and physical proximity, sometimes feels a bit like entering a dark and crowded room. You want to make contact without knocking someone over or banging into them, but ultimately you must wait for your eyes to adjust to the night vision so you can "know your way about" (as Wittgenstein might say). I think it's easy to underestimate the diversity of cognitive and discursive styles, not just goals and values, among people on the board. As someone who tends to approach things very analytically and linearly, in such contexts of ambiguity I find myself tempted to fall back on the intellectual structure of ideas, abstract theory, content over form or use, as if it were some kind of "universal language." Yet as we all know, this does not always help - and sometimes it backfires. Meanwhile, as someone who like all of us has an inner life and related experiences, I am tempted to offer something immediate, concrete and personal. But this can feel risky and possibly irrelevant, perhaps even narcissistic. To a great extent I am happy just to listen and learn. But Alfredo's point about not just being a spectator also resonates with me. Despite all these misgivings, I'm not sure I'm ready to agree that this format for communication, or verbal written discourse in general, is automatically inferior and impoverished in relation to other modes. I mean, in some ways it obviously is. But there is often a level of care and thought -- and continuity -- that would be difficult to reproduce in a room where people are prone to physically competing while attempting high-level discourse in real time, yet still manages to be relational. There are definitely tradeoffs. I think like most technology, it brings great opportunities and big problems. And new opportunities that arise from having to face those problems. Chris On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 4:37 PM, Greg Thompson wrote: > Yes, I'm with you on that too Rod. I think that's why social media can get > so nasty so often. It is a chilly medium that is a highly denuded form of > communication. (e.g., when I said "I'm with you on that too", was I > alluding to other times when I'm not "with you"? Some could interpret it > that way (btw, that's not what I meant!!)). > > I marvel that there is so much that gets done on this listserve in spite of > this fact. > > Also makes me wonder why so many people put so much stock in literacy as > being a massively transformative capacity. Seems a more base form of > communication than any form of oral communication I've ever experienced > (even the phone gives you prosody!). > > -greg > > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 2:22 PM, Rod Parker-Rees < > R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk> wrote: > > > Thanks Helen and Greg, > > > > I certainly like the opportunity to hang out with interesting people but > I > > think it is probably inevitable in this sort of set up that wires can get > > crossed when people feel they are engaging in different kinds of > activities. > > I suspect that what has kept this group going is that every now and then > > people stand back and take stock of how it is working and that allows > > people to realise that it works in different ways (and feels different) > for > > different people. > > > > This has made me wonder how often other forms of communication (even > where > > only two people are involved) can involve different people having very > > different understandings about what they are doing and sometimes this > > doesn't matter but sometimes it does. > > > > I hope we can keep it going. > > > > All the best, > > > > Rod > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Greg Thompson > > Sent: 04 November 2016 19:58 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? > > > > Great question Rod! > > > > As to the answer, as John Cage was fond of saying: "no why, just here." > > > > Okay, fair enough. But it seems like the question deserves a more > > thoughtful answer than this. > > > > I suppose if I were entirely honest, I find this to be a nice place to > > hang out and learn and occasionally I try to use the listserve to put > > something out there in the interest of getting some feedback to help > > develop it. I've had much more success with the former than the latter. > > > > I do wonder what the mission statement of this listserve would be if > there > > were such a thing. It seems like we don't engage with MCA nearly as much > as > > we should if that were to be the goal of the listserve. > > > > Other than that, I would guess that the mission statement would be > > something like: it's a place for people who are interested in CHAT to > hang > > out and talk about stuff that they care about (sometimes CHAT and MCA > > related, sometimes not). > > > > Is that too cynical? Or is that just about right? > > > > Perhaps someone else can give a better statement of what the listserve is > > "about"? (and I hate to even get into the question of what it SHOULD be - > > I'd rather live it and see what works that deliberate about what that > life > > should look like, but, sure, there is some value in doing the former). > > > > Thanks for your question/contribution Rod. Right to the point. > > -greg > > > > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Helena Worthen > > > wrote: > > > > > This is a good contribution. Thanks -- H > > > > > > Helena Worthen > > > helenaworthen@gmail.com > > > Vietnam blog: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > > > > > On Nov 4, 2016, at 2:30 AM, Rod Parker-Rees wrote: > > > > > > > I am an interested but time-poor lurker on the margins of xmca but > > > > the > > > ripples stirred by Mike's decision to reduce his pastoral contribution > > > to our community have made me question how different participants > > > understand what kind of activity we are engaging in here. > > > > > > > > It seems to me that each of us may understand the social form of > > > > what we > > > are doing in different ways. For some it is like a conversation and we > > > feel disappointed or hurt if our contributions are met with silence or > > > if the chain moves on in a different direction. For others we are a > > > working group, collaborating to develop a practical and ethical > > > theoretical model. For others we are something like a conference, > > > where thoughts and ideas can be put before others for their > > > consideration and response - and I am sure there are many other ways > > > in which different people understand their participation differently. > > > > > > > > Does this matter? Would xmca be 'better' if it was more consistent, > > > > more > > > coherent, more tightly and predictably governed by shared social > > > understandings? While more explicit regulation (protocols for > > > labelling streams and posts and for timing of responses etc.) might > > > help to make our activity feel more inclusive and more sharable it may > > > also introduce new kinds of discomfort. > > > > > > > > What I have found interesting in my time around the margins of xmca > > > > is > > > the challenge of sustaining conversations without all the non-verbal > > > feedback which we rely on when we talk with people. When 'wordings' > > > float off into the ether, cast off from the body and personhood of > > > their speakers or writers they become objects which can be scrutinised > > > and revisited and this can be a reason for 'lurkers' to feel reluctant > > about contributing. > > > What we are doing is not a conversation. Nor is it even a forum, in > > > the sense of people taking turns to orate before a crowd, because > > > contributors often get very little phatic feedback from the lurkers > > > and may have very little sense of how their arguments have been > > > understood or received. But we are moved by our understandings of what > > > it is and is not OK to do, which come from other kinds of > > > interactions. Can I say something if I have not been part of what has > > > gone before? Should I respond or stay quiet? What should I do if I am > > > annoyed or angered by something someone else has contributed? > > > > > > > > I am already getting anxious about how what I have said might be > > > interpreted by others and feeling I have had a long enough turn but I > > > would be really interested to hear what others think about why we are > > here! > > > > > > > > I have found what people do here very helpful but I do feel uneasy > > > > about > > > risking contributions! > > > > > > > > All the best, > > > > > > > > Rod > > > > ________________________________ > > > > [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif] > > //www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass> > > > > > > > > This email and any files with it are confidential and intended > > > > solely > > > for the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not > > > the intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the > > > information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on > > it. > > > If you have received this email in error please let the sender know > > > immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not > > > necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University > > > accepts no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to > > > scan emails and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept > > > responsibility for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this > > > email or its attachments constitutes an order for goods or services > > > unless accompanied by an official order form. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > > Assistant Professor > > Department of Anthropology > > 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > > Brigham Young University > > Provo, UT 84602 > > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson > > ________________________________ > > [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif] > //www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass> > > > > This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely for > > the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the > > intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the > > information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on > it. > > If you have received this email in error please let the sender know > > immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not > > necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University accepts > > no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan > emails > > and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept responsibility > > for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its > > attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless accompanied > > by an official order form. > > > > > > > -- > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > Assistant Professor > Department of Anthropology > 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > Brigham Young University > Provo, UT 84602 > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson > From Dana.Walker@unco.edu Sat Nov 5 10:44:20 2016 From: Dana.Walker@unco.edu (Walker, Dana) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 17:44:20 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? In-Reply-To: <581df4f3.c7a2420a.89939.8890@mx.google.com> References: <6B2C5457-8B44-4DF9-A6A3-6101ED3C1AC6@gmail.com> <581df4f3.c7a2420a.89939.8890@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Thank you lpscholar2. I?m sorry I don?t know your name. Dana On 11/5/16, 9:04 AM, "xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com" wrote: Vandy, Your reasons for being here in this virtual community resonate with my reasons. I read about *salon* culture or instituting co-generative deeply reflective conversations within the stream of consciousness in particular coffee house ways of place making and they had a different feel or mood than most academic places of specialization. XMCA has some overlap with salon social, cultural, and imaginary place making. I now want to make a volitional shift in my personal stream of consciousness to return to the title of this thread (what are we doing here?). Mike presented two concerns requiring our care going forward. *more gender balance *Less chaining and more sustained reflection. I wonder when we talk about *turns* (leaving safe harbours, or refuge,) such as the linguistic turn or rhetorical turn, or pragmatic/action turn if we are not now deeply into an *ethical* turn where invitations are presented and we can respond or turn away and each way of responding has ethical con-sequences. In this spirit of turns i want to return to Peg?s and Dana?s con-tributions. Peg referred to loose *threads* that are left and can be picked up and *resumed*. This seems to involve zig-zagging, or turns, or reversability with a 3 part structure. The zig-gap-zag structure. This brings me to my stream of consciousness and picking up Dana?s loose thread. She invited us to turn toward Margaret Eisenhart the author of this months article who expresses a feminist voice within her two written books. Dana sent out an invitation as a thread that was dropped and went silent. My now picking up Dana?s thread is my way of acknowledging her contribution and how it entered my stream of consciousness. I had intended to google Eisenhart?s books on Dana?s recommendation and to hear a feminist voice. However, that morning, both Rein?s referring to his new book, and David Kellogg posting Vygotsky?s last lecture turned me away from Dana?s invitation and her thread became a loose and silent thread with no acknowledgement and no intertwining within co-generation in the stream of consciousness. I am now saying i today will turn back, pick up Dana?s loose thread (thanks Peg for this metaphor) and *resume* what i was initially intending to do. I also want to turn to David?s article and Rein?s book later (taking time) but as an ethical response to the Mike?s call to develop the emerging theme of gender balance i will first acknowledge and pick up and follow Dana?s loose thread and hope this loose thread (as a feminist response) will become weaved into our intertwining tapestry. Margaret Eisenhart and Carrie Allen suggest our theories and social imaginaries are being *hollowed out* and shallow. Rein?s book overlaps with this concern. The feminist response is to *take care* within our emerging concerns and my sharing how i volitionally entered my stream of conciousness to *take care* and *resume* a loose thread is my morning contemplation Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Wilkinson Sent: November 5, 2016 5:24 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? Hey, Rod, I too am a lurker and dipper. I've been hanging out here since 2008 and have made friends and occasionally made contributions.I owe much to Mike Cole and some others. I haven't done much with Vygotsky, but work with stuff I find in this space, and got some of V's books but don't have time to live with them. I teach language and have been doing so for 40 years, but who can I talk to about metaphor and concept? Many of XCMAers are educators and thinkers. I've taught men and women, adolescents, children, and infants, and since I came to Japan 36 years ago, a virtual Third Space Community such as this successfully stands in for other good places to hang out in another age, ROTC in Fayetteville, Arkansas, Buster's in South Pasadena. Those places may offer a great place to read a book, see familiar faces, have a latte with a friend, but the real physical places do not have the intellectual on-going discussions. Well they might, but I am just passing through. Can't stay. But intellectual civilization advanced in such places where Boswell and Johnson had coffee in a public place where they could see and be seen, listen and speak. I have ridden a good horse named "General Systems Theory via Gregory Bateson." I was doing Allegory before I got this job, I think Cognition and Epistemology and Metaphor occupy the fields where my horse feeds. I teach English to freshmen in all Informatics programs and freshmen in all Engineering majors, and one really needs a general place to come from to meet such a wide variety of unique persons in such a wide variety of specialties. I haven't had time for years to compose the kind of research inspired by the atmosphere in this amazing virtual community where I can't really claim desk space, but I can buy a cup of coffee and chat with the barista. I owe much to this community for this space, because there are few on the ground here who speak my language so I must use whatever I can to keep moving forward... Thanks much for the digest. Vandy Wilkinson On 2016/11/05 10:13, Christopher Schuck wrote: B > Thanks too for such a thoughtful synopsis, Rod, which I found myself > relating to deeply. And I suppose this is also relevant to the stuff on the > Gender thread, but I no longer know where to go. Fast Swim, Slow Swim, > Gender, Logic, Genesis of Gender...all spinning off of what appeared to be > a single theme. Wow! My head is spinning. > > Having checked in after some time and discovered two or three parallel > conversations well underway, all the comments about time frames (including > Vera's observation about differing paces, styles and degrees of necessary > reflection time) feel very apropos. One of the realities of this format and > the quick turnaround times for posting is that if one is not conscientious > about keeping up (or just lacks the time), there is inevitably an "in media > res" effect of trying to understand the running narrative backwards while > needing to (collectively and collaboratively) live it forwards. I don't > think this is always a bad thing. In fact, I suspect it can sometimes have > the paradoxical effect of enhancing and elevating the discussion. There is > a certain humility and beginner's mind that comes with wandering into a > conversation late, a certain openness to what may not yet be fully > processed, understood and contextualized. And, coming at it with fresh eyes > can lend a different angle that shakes up the conversation a bit. It felt > this way, for instance, when Maria Cristina suddenly entered and offered a > re-contextualization (time constraints and domestic responsibilities) that > kind of turned everything on its head. At the same time, there may be a > certain responsibility on the part of those already engrossed in the > dialogue to be welcoming and inclusive towards anyone "in media res > distress." I agree with Alfredo that trying to prescribe along the > "fast/slow" dimension is undesirable; I'm not sure how much adding new tags > for posts or further classifying per se would really help to counter any > problematic dynamics, though I know nothing about these technologies. I > find myself thinking: what's wrong with the good old-fashioned initiative > of emailing individuals separately and CC-ing whoever seems interested, or > announcing that you'd like to email further with any takers? > > Having looked over the last several threads (if far from reading > exhaustively), it seems to me there may be two different issues: 1) how to > do better justice to all these differing purposes, styles and uses of the > listserve, and/or clarify "what we are doing here" in order to avoid > confusion; 2) how to cultivate a fully hospitable atmosphere for those who > may end up being marginalized in various ways, and address these issues > without generating even more unnecessary distress. Of course, those two > things aren't entirely unrelated. But improving the second may not require > that we have fully resolved the first. In another post accidentally sent > from the wrong email, which bounced back and disappeared, I attempted a > preliminary list of different ways people might end up feeling marginalized > or shut out of conversations. Probably not worth resending at this point. > > I am more of a peripheral member of this community and have only posted a > few times, but in each instance was very aware of anxiety over the > possibility of translating poorly or just sounding plain stupid. Trying to > negotiate complex ideas *and *respect feelings and boundaries *and *not > sound ignorant, in the absence of voice, expression and physical proximity, > sometimes feels a bit like entering a dark and crowded room. You want to > make contact without knocking someone over or banging into them, but > ultimately you must wait for your eyes to adjust to the night vision so you > can "know your way about" (as Wittgenstein might say). I think it's easy to > underestimate the diversity of cognitive and discursive styles, not just > goals and values, among people on the board. As someone who tends to > approach things very analytically and linearly, in such contexts of > ambiguity I find myself tempted to fall back on the intellectual structure > of ideas, abstract theory, content over form or use, as if it were some > kind of "universal language." Yet as we all know, this does not always help > - and sometimes it backfires. Meanwhile, as someone who like all of us has > an inner life and related experiences, I am tempted to offer something > immediate, concrete and personal. But this can feel risky and possibly > irrelevant, perhaps even narcissistic. To a great extent I am happy just to > listen and learn. But Alfredo's point about not just being a spectator also > resonates with me. > > Despite all these misgivings, I'm not sure I'm ready to agree that this > format for communication, or verbal written discourse in general, is > automatically inferior and impoverished in relation to other modes. I mean, > in some ways it obviously is. But there is often a level of care and > thought -- and continuity -- that would be difficult to reproduce in a room > where people are prone to physically competing while attempting high-level > discourse in real time, yet still manages to be relational. There are > definitely tradeoffs. I think like most technology, it brings great > opportunities and big problems. And new opportunities that arise from > having to face those problems. > > Chris > > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 4:37 PM, Greg Thompson > wrote: > >> Yes, I'm with you on that too Rod. I think that's why social media can get >> so nasty so often. It is a chilly medium that is a highly denuded form of >> communication. (e.g., when I said "I'm with you on that too", was I >> alluding to other times when I'm not "with you"? Some could interpret it >> that way (btw, that's not what I meant!!)). >> >> I marvel that there is so much that gets done on this listserve in spite of >> this fact. >> >> Also makes me wonder why so many people put so much stock in literacy as >> being a massively transformative capacity. Seems a more base form of >> communication than any form of oral communication I've ever experienced >> (even the phone gives you prosody!). >> >> -greg >> >> On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 2:22 PM, Rod Parker-Rees < >> R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk> wrote: >> >>> Thanks Helen and Greg, >>> >>> I certainly like the opportunity to hang out with interesting people but >> I >>> think it is probably inevitable in this sort of set up that wires can get >>> crossed when people feel they are engaging in different kinds of >> activities. >>> I suspect that what has kept this group going is that every now and then >>> people stand back and take stock of how it is working and that allows >>> people to realise that it works in different ways (and feels different) >> for >>> different people. >>> >>> This has made me wonder how often other forms of communication (even >> where >>> only two people are involved) can involve different people having very >>> different understandings about what they are doing and sometimes this >>> doesn't matter but sometimes it does. >>> >>> I hope we can keep it going. >>> >>> All the best, >>> >>> Rod >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ >>> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Greg Thompson >>> Sent: 04 November 2016 19:58 >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? >>> >>> Great question Rod! >>> >>> As to the answer, as John Cage was fond of saying: "no why, just here." >>> >>> Okay, fair enough. But it seems like the question deserves a more >>> thoughtful answer than this. >>> >>> I suppose if I were entirely honest, I find this to be a nice place to >>> hang out and learn and occasionally I try to use the listserve to put >>> something out there in the interest of getting some feedback to help >>> develop it. I've had much more success with the former than the latter. >>> >>> I do wonder what the mission statement of this listserve would be if >> there >>> were such a thing. It seems like we don't engage with MCA nearly as much >> as >>> we should if that were to be the goal of the listserve. >>> >>> Other than that, I would guess that the mission statement would be >>> something like: it's a place for people who are interested in CHAT to >> hang >>> out and talk about stuff that they care about (sometimes CHAT and MCA >>> related, sometimes not). >>> >>> Is that too cynical? Or is that just about right? >>> >>> Perhaps someone else can give a better statement of what the listserve is >>> "about"? (and I hate to even get into the question of what it SHOULD be - >>> I'd rather live it and see what works that deliberate about what that >> life >>> should look like, but, sure, there is some value in doing the former). >>> >>> Thanks for your question/contribution Rod. Right to the point. >>> -greg >>> >>> On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Helena Worthen >> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> This is a good contribution. Thanks -- H >>>> >>>> Helena Worthen >>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>>> Vietnam blog: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>>> >>>> On Nov 4, 2016, at 2:30 AM, Rod Parker-Rees wrote: >>>> >>>>> I am an interested but time-poor lurker on the margins of xmca but >>>>> the >>>> ripples stirred by Mike's decision to reduce his pastoral contribution >>>> to our community have made me question how different participants >>>> understand what kind of activity we are engaging in here. >>>>> >>>>> It seems to me that each of us may understand the social form of >>>>> what we >>>> are doing in different ways. For some it is like a conversation and we >>>> feel disappointed or hurt if our contributions are met with silence or >>>> if the chain moves on in a different direction. For others we are a >>>> working group, collaborating to develop a practical and ethical >>>> theoretical model. For others we are something like a conference, >>>> where thoughts and ideas can be put before others for their >>>> consideration and response - and I am sure there are many other ways >>>> in which different people understand their participation differently. >>>>> >>>>> Does this matter? Would xmca be 'better' if it was more consistent, >>>>> more >>>> coherent, more tightly and predictably governed by shared social >>>> understandings? While more explicit regulation (protocols for >>>> labelling streams and posts and for timing of responses etc.) might >>>> help to make our activity feel more inclusive and more sharable it may >>>> also introduce new kinds of discomfort. >>>>> >>>>> What I have found interesting in my time around the margins of xmca >>>>> is >>>> the challenge of sustaining conversations without all the non-verbal >>>> feedback which we rely on when we talk with people. When 'wordings' >>>> float off into the ether, cast off from the body and personhood of >>>> their speakers or writers they become objects which can be scrutinised >>>> and revisited and this can be a reason for 'lurkers' to feel reluctant >>> about contributing. >>>> What we are doing is not a conversation. Nor is it even a forum, in >>>> the sense of people taking turns to orate before a crowd, because >>>> contributors often get very little phatic feedback from the lurkers >>>> and may have very little sense of how their arguments have been >>>> understood or received. But we are moved by our understandings of what >>>> it is and is not OK to do, which come from other kinds of >>>> interactions. Can I say something if I have not been part of what has >>>> gone before? Should I respond or stay quiet? What should I do if I am >>>> annoyed or angered by something someone else has contributed? >>>>> >>>>> I am already getting anxious about how what I have said might be >>>> interpreted by others and feeling I have had a long enough turn but I >>>> would be really interested to hear what others think about why we are >>> here! >>>>> >>>>> I have found what people do here very helpful but I do feel uneasy >>>>> about >>>> risking contributions! >>>>> >>>>> All the best, >>>>> >>>>> Rod >>>>> ________________________________ >>>>> [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif]>>> //www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass> >>>>> >>>>> This email and any files with it are confidential and intended >>>>> solely >>>> for the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not >>>> the intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the >>>> information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on >>> it. >>>> If you have received this email in error please let the sender know >>>> immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not >>>> necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University >>>> accepts no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to >>>> scan emails and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept >>>> responsibility for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this >>>> email or its attachments constitutes an order for goods or services >>>> unless accompanied by an official order form. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. >>> Assistant Professor >>> Department of Anthropology >>> 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower >>> Brigham Young University >>> Provo, UT 84602 >>> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson >>> ________________________________ >>> [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif]>> //www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass> >>> >>> This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely for >>> the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the >>> intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the >>> information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on >> it. >>> If you have received this email in error please let the sender know >>> immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not >>> necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University accepts >>> no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan >> emails >>> and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept responsibility >>> for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its >>> attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless accompanied >>> by an official order form. >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. >> Assistant Professor >> Department of Anthropology >> 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower >> Brigham Young University >> Provo, UT 84602 >> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson >> > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Sat Nov 5 11:07:14 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 11:07:14 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? In-Reply-To: References: <6B2C5457-8B44-4DF9-A6A3-6101ED3C1AC6@gmail.com> <581df4f3.c7a2420a.89939.8890@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <581e1fdf.0737620a.55b90.a96b@mx.google.com> Dana, My name is Larry Purss. I have had a chance to glance at Dorothy Holland?s and Margaret Eisenhart?s book and their findings that undergraduate women are educated in romance through being confined to a culture of the peer group. Their study reveals the extent to which the stuff of daily conversations, and the preoccupations, the joys, the pains, the sufferings, were confined to their peer group. Identity ideals and ideaology. The peer culture in turn was *centered* around gender relations. My commentary and rejoinder is the archaic concept of *philia* as a deeply felt truth as one aspect or mode of *eros* that maybe should be acknowledged and may be expressed in f?mininist theory and cultural imaginary. Validating this desire and longing for peer relations that has become disinherited in neo-liberal times Larry Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Walker, Dana Sent: November 5, 2016 10:46 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; Wilkinson Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? Thank you lpscholar2. I?m sorry I don?t know your name. Dana On 11/5/16, 9:04 AM, "xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com" wrote: Vandy, Your reasons for being here in this virtual community resonate with my reasons. I read about *salon* culture or instituting co-generative deeply reflective conversations within the stream of consciousness in particular coffee house ways of place making and they had a different feel or mood than most academic places of specialization. XMCA has some overlap with salon social, cultural, and imaginary place making. I now want to make a volitional shift in my personal stream of consciousness to return to the title of this thread (what are we doing here?). Mike presented two concerns requiring our care going forward. *more gender balance *Less chaining and more sustained reflection. I wonder when we talk about *turns* (leaving safe harbours, or refuge,) such as the linguistic turn or rhetorical turn, or pragmatic/action turn if we are not now deeply into an *ethical* turn where invitations are presented and we can respond or turn away and each way of responding has ethical con-sequences. In this spirit of turns i want to return to Peg?s and Dana?s con-tributions. Peg referred to loose *threads* that are left and can be picked up and *resumed*. This seems to involve zig-zagging, or turns, or reversability with a 3 part structure. The zig-gap-zag structure. This brings me to my stream of consciousness and picking up Dana?s loose thread. She invited us to turn toward Margaret Eisenhart the author of this months article who expresses a feminist voice within her two written books. Dana sent out an invitation as a thread that was dropped and went silent. My now picking up Dana?s thread is my way of acknowledging her contribution and how it entered my stream of consciousness. I had intended to google Eisenhart?s books on Dana?s recommendation and to hear a feminist voice. However, that morning, both Rein?s referring to his new book, and David Kellogg posting Vygotsky?s last lecture turned me away from Dana?s invitation and her thread became a loose and silent thread with no acknowledgement and no intertwining within co-generation in the stream of consciousness. I am now saying i today will turn back, pick up Dana?s loose thread (thanks Peg for this metaphor) and *resume* what i was initially intending to do. I also want to turn to David?s article and Rein?s book later (taking time) but as an ethical response to the Mike?s call to develop the emerging theme of gender balance i will first acknowledge and pick up and follow Dana?s loose thread and hope this loose thread (as a feminist response) will become weaved into our intertwining tapestry. Margaret Eisenhart and Carrie Allen suggest our theories and social imaginaries are being *hollowed out* and shallow. Rein?s book overlaps with this concern. The feminist response is to *take care* within our emerging concerns and my sharing how i volitionally entered my stream of conciousness to *take care* and *resume* a loose thread is my morning contemplation Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Wilkinson Sent: November 5, 2016 5:24 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? Hey, Rod, I too am a lurker and dipper. I've been hanging out here since 2008 and have made friends and occasionally made contributions.I owe much to Mike Cole and some others. I haven't done much with Vygotsky, but work with stuff I find in this space, and got some of V's books but don't have time to live with them. I teach language and have been doing so for 40 years, but who can I talk to about metaphor and concept? Many of XCMAers are educators and thinkers. I've taught men and women, adolescents, children, and infants, and since I came to Japan 36 years ago, a virtual Third Space Community such as this successfully stands in for other good places to hang out in another age, ROTC in Fayetteville, Arkansas, Buster's in South Pasadena. Those places may offer a great place to read a book, see familiar faces, have a latte with a friend, but the real physical places do not have the intellectual on-going discussions. Well they might, but I am just passing through. Can't stay. But intellectual civilization advanced in such places where Boswell and Johnson had coffee in a public place where they could see and be seen, listen and speak. I have ridden a good horse named "General Systems Theory via Gregory Bateson." I was doing Allegory before I got this job, I think Cognition and Epistemology and Metaphor occupy the fields where my horse feeds. I teach English to freshmen in all Informatics programs and freshmen in all Engineering majors, and one really needs a general place to come from to meet such a wide variety of unique persons in such a wide variety of specialties. I haven't had time for years to compose the kind of research inspired by the atmosphere in this amazing virtual community where I can't really claim desk space, but I can buy a cup of coffee and chat with the barista. I owe much to this community for this space, because there are few on the ground here who speak my language so I must use whatever I can to keep moving forward... Thanks much for the digest. Vandy Wilkinson On 2016/11/05 10:13, Christopher Schuck wrote: B > Thanks too for such a thoughtful synopsis, Rod, which I found myself > relating to deeply. And I suppose this is also relevant to the stuff on the > Gender thread, but I no longer know where to go. Fast Swim, Slow Swim, > Gender, Logic, Genesis of Gender...all spinning off of what appeared to be > a single theme. Wow! My head is spinning. > > Having checked in after some time and discovered two or three parallel > conversations well underway, all the comments about time frames (including > Vera's observation about differing paces, styles and degrees of necessary > reflection time) feel very apropos. One of the realities of this format and > the quick turnaround times for posting is that if one is not conscientious > about keeping up (or just lacks the time), there is inevitably an "in media > res" effect of trying to understand the running narrative backwards while > needing to (collectively and collaboratively) live it forwards. I don't > think this is always a bad thing. In fact, I suspect it can sometimes have > the paradoxical effect of enhancing and elevating the discussion. There is > a certain humility and beginner's mind that comes with wandering into a > conversation late, a certain openness to what may not yet be fully > processed, understood and contextualized. And, coming at it with fresh eyes > can lend a different angle that shakes up the conversation a bit. It felt > this way, for instance, when Maria Cristina suddenly entered and offered a > re-contextualization (time constraints and domestic responsibilities) that > kind of turned everything on its head. At the same time, there may be a > certain responsibility on the part of those already engrossed in the > dialogue to be welcoming and inclusive towards anyone "in media res > distress." I agree with Alfredo that trying to prescribe along the > "fast/slow" dimension is undesirable; I'm not sure how much adding new tags > for posts or further classifying per se would really help to counter any > problematic dynamics, though I know nothing about these technologies. I > find myself thinking: what's wrong with the good old-fashioned initiative > of emailing individuals separately and CC-ing whoever seems interested, or > announcing that you'd like to email further with any takers? > > Having looked over the last several threads (if far from reading > exhaustively), it seems to me there may be two different issues: 1) how to > do better justice to all these differing purposes, styles and uses of the > listserve, and/or clarify "what we are doing here" in order to avoid > confusion; 2) how to cultivate a fully hospitable atmosphere for those who > may end up being marginalized in various ways, and address these issues > without generating even more unnecessary distress. Of course, those two > things aren't entirely unrelated. But improving the second may not require > that we have fully resolved the first. In another post accidentally sent > from the wrong email, which bounced back and disappeared, I attempted a > preliminary list of different ways people might end up feeling marginalized > or shut out of conversations. Probably not worth resending at this point. > > I am more of a peripheral member of this community and have only posted a > few times, but in each instance was very aware of anxiety over the > possibility of translating poorly or just sounding plain stupid. Trying to > negotiate complex ideas *and *respect feelings and boundaries *and *not > sound ignorant, in the absence of voice, expression and physical proximity, > sometimes feels a bit like entering a dark and crowded room. You want to > make contact without knocking someone over or banging into them, but > ultimately you must wait for your eyes to adjust to the night vision so you > can "know your way about" (as Wittgenstein might say). I think it's easy to > underestimate the diversity of cognitive and discursive styles, not just > goals and values, among people on the board. As someone who tends to > approach things very analytically and linearly, in such contexts of > ambiguity I find myself tempted to fall back on the intellectual structure > of ideas, abstract theory, content over form or use, as if it were some > kind of "universal language." Yet as we all know, this does not always help > - and sometimes it backfires. Meanwhile, as someone who like all of us has > an inner life and related experiences, I am tempted to offer something > immediate, concrete and personal. But this can feel risky and possibly > irrelevant, perhaps even narcissistic. To a great extent I am happy just to > listen and learn. But Alfredo's point about not just being a spectator also > resonates with me. > > Despite all these misgivings, I'm not sure I'm ready to agree that this > format for communication, or verbal written discourse in general, is > automatically inferior and impoverished in relation to other modes. I mean, > in some ways it obviously is. But there is often a level of care and > thought -- and continuity -- that would be difficult to reproduce in a room > where people are prone to physically competing while attempting high-level > discourse in real time, yet still manages to be relational. There are > definitely tradeoffs. I think like most technology, it brings great > opportunities and big problems. And new opportunities that arise from > having to face those problems. > > Chris > > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 4:37 PM, Greg Thompson > wrote: > >> Yes, I'm with you on that too Rod. I think that's why social media can get >> so nasty so often. It is a chilly medium that is a highly denuded form of >> communication. (e.g., when I said "I'm with you on that too", was I >> alluding to other times when I'm not "with you"? Some could interpret it >> that way (btw, that's not what I meant!!)). >> >> I marvel that there is so much that gets done on this listserve in spite of >> this fact. >> >> Also makes me wonder why so many people put so much stock in literacy as >> being a massively transformative capacity. Seems a more base form of >> communication than any form of oral communication I've ever experienced >> (even the phone gives you prosody!). >> >> -greg >> >> On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 2:22 PM, Rod Parker-Rees < >> R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk> wrote: >> >>> Thanks Helen and Greg, >>> >>> I certainly like the opportunity to hang out with interesting people but >> I >>> think it is probably inevitable in this sort of set up that wires can get >>> crossed when people feel they are engaging in different kinds of >> activities. >>> I suspect that what has kept this group going is that every now and then >>> people stand back and take stock of how it is working and that allows >>> people to realise that it works in different ways (and feels different) >> for >>> different people. >>> >>> This has made me wonder how often other forms of communication (even >> where >>> only two people are involved) can involve different people having very >>> different understandings about what they are doing and sometimes this >>> doesn't matter but sometimes it does. >>> >>> I hope we can keep it going. >>> >>> All the best, >>> >>> Rod >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ >>> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Greg Thompson >>> Sent: 04 November 2016 19:58 >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? >>> >>> Great question Rod! >>> >>> As to the answer, as John Cage was fond of saying: "no why, just here." >>> >>> Okay, fair enough. But it seems like the question deserves a more >>> thoughtful answer than this. >>> >>> I suppose if I were entirely honest, I find this to be a nice place to >>> hang out and learn and occasionally I try to use the listserve to put >>> something out there in the interest of getting some feedback to help >>> develop it. I've had much more success with the former than the latter. >>> >>> I do wonder what the mission statement of this listserve would be if >> there >>> were such a thing. It seems like we don't engage with MCA nearly as much >> as >>> we should if that were to be the goal of the listserve. >>> >>> Other than that, I would guess that the mission statement would be >>> something like: it's a place for people who are interested in CHAT to >> hang >>> out and talk about stuff that they care about (sometimes CHAT and MCA >>> related, sometimes not). >>> >>> Is that too cynical? Or is that just about right? >>> >>> Perhaps someone else can give a better statement of what the listserve is >>> "about"? (and I hate to even get into the question of what it SHOULD be - >>> I'd rather live it and see what works that deliberate about what that >> life >>> should look like, but, sure, there is some value in doing the former). >>> >>> Thanks for your question/contribution Rod. Right to the point. >>> -greg >>> >>> On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Helena Worthen >> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> This is a good contribution. Thanks -- H >>>> >>>> Helena Worthen >>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com >>>> Vietnam blog: helenaworthen.wordpress.com >>>> >>>> On Nov 4, 2016, at 2:30 AM, Rod Parker-Rees wrote: >>>> >>>>> I am an interested but time-poor lurker on the margins of xmca but >>>>> the >>>> ripples stirred by Mike's decision to reduce his pastoral contribution >>>> to our community have made me question how different participants >>>> understand what kind of activity we are engaging in here. >>>>> >>>>> It seems to me that each of us may understand the social form of >>>>> what we >>>> are doing in different ways. For some it is like a conversation and we >>>> feel disappointed or hurt if our contributions are met with silence or >>>> if the chain moves on in a different direction. For others we are a >>>> working group, collaborating to develop a practical and ethical >>>> theoretical model. For others we are something like a conference, >>>> where thoughts and ideas can be put before others for their >>>> consideration and response - and I am sure there are many other ways >>>> in which different people understand their participation differently. >>>>> >>>>> Does this matter? Would xmca be 'better' if it was more consistent, >>>>> more >>>> coherent, more tightly and predictably governed by shared social >>>> understandings? While more explicit regulation (protocols for >>>> labelling streams and posts and for timing of responses etc.) might >>>> help to make our activity feel more inclusive and more sharable it may >>>> also introduce new kinds of discomfort. >>>>> >>>>> What I have found interesting in my time around the margins of xmca >>>>> is >>>> the challenge of sustaining conversations without all the non-verbal >>>> feedback which we rely on when we talk with people. When 'wordings' >>>> float off into the ether, cast off from the body and personhood of >>>> their speakers or writers they become objects which can be scrutinised >>>> and revisited and this can be a reason for 'lurkers' to feel reluctant >>> about contributing. >>>> What we are doing is not a conversation. Nor is it even a forum, in >>>> the sense of people taking turns to orate before a crowd, because >>>> contributors often get very little phatic feedback from the lurkers >>>> and may have very little sense of how their arguments have been >>>> understood or received. But we are moved by our understandings of what >>>> it is and is not OK to do, which come from other kinds of >>>> interactions. Can I say something if I have not been part of what has >>>> gone before? Should I respond or stay quiet? What should I do if I am >>>> annoyed or angered by something someone else has contributed? >>>>> >>>>> I am already getting anxious about how what I have said might be >>>> interpreted by others and feeling I have had a long enough turn but I >>>> would be really interested to hear what others think about why we are >>> here! >>>>> >>>>> I have found what people do here very helpful but I do feel uneasy >>>>> about >>>> risking contributions! >>>>> >>>>> All the best, >>>>> >>>>> Rod >>>>> ________________________________ >>>>> [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif]>>> //www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass> >>>>> >>>>> This email and any files with it are confidential and intended >>>>> solely >>>> for the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not >>>> the intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the >>>> information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on >>> it. >>>> If you have received this email in error please let the sender know >>>> immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not >>>> necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University >>>> accepts no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to >>>> scan emails and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept >>>> responsibility for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this >>>> email or its attachments constitutes an order for goods or services >>>> unless accompanied by an official order form. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. >>> Assistant Professor >>> Department of Anthropology >>> 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower >>> Brigham Young University >>> Provo, UT 84602 >>> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson >>> ________________________________ >>> [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif]>> //www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass> >>> >>> This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely for >>> the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the >>> intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the >>> information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on >> it. >>> If you have received this email in error please let the sender know >>> immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not >>> necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University accepts >>> no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan >> emails >>> and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept responsibility >>> for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its >>> attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless accompanied >>> by an official order form. >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. >> Assistant Professor >> Department of Anthropology >> 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower >> Brigham Young University >> Provo, UT 84602 >> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson >> > > > From annalisa@unm.edu Sat Nov 5 11:40:34 2016 From: annalisa@unm.edu (Annalisa Aguilar) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 18:40:34 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: References: <1477662717568.90322@iped.uio.no> <1CF09B3A-DF07-4538-A198-FDB1B1EDE432@gmail.com> <58174c10.4223620a.cb56a.39b6@mx.google.com> <004801d23447$4aef6110$e0ce2330$@att.net> <581a026f.0f08620a.9bde9.a672@mx.google.com> <3f68de59-0c17-04fe-dd9c-1acc43000bd8@ires.piemonte.it> , Message-ID: Hi Tom, Thanks very much for your post and sharing a text that might be beneficial to the thread. Is it possible for you to scan this chapter and post it to the list? It would contribute to the thread significantly, and I would certainly see you as an ally in collaboration with what the thread initiated if you did it, rather than being relegated to a lurker. Please join us, and anyone else interested. If being scientific means being logical, and being logical means gendered, then certainly that can present problems. But if being scientific means avoidance of confirmation bias, then I'm all for it. What I don't understand concerning Marx, and I do not mean to be insulting in any way; this is a real question... He served a very important purpose and he is historically valuable, so I do not doubt that. What troubles me, especially after reading some of the Piketty book, Capital in the Twenty-first Century, is that Marx could not get his hands on the data to determine if his analyses were correct. Now Piketty (an economist) says in some ways Marx was right, but in others he was wrong. If there is someone being scientific about it, I'd say Piketty is. But the reasons Marx was wrong where he was wrong is because the data doesn't support his notions. Piketty explained his own work was to basically collect the data that Marx could not, now that the internet being what it is, that's basically the project of the book. But somehow it is heretical to have doubts about Marx, and that is why I said what I said, Tom. If Marx was a scientist, then why not be skeptical of him, just as any other scientist among us? I'd certainly be interested in hearing from a person who had doubts in Darwin, not because they are creationists, but because they saw something in the theory that caused them to have doubt, and they want to follow the seam of that doubt. That seems very scientific to me. I hope that doesn't make me a full-blooded capitalist for saying these things. Anyway, I want to make the point that there is a privilege given to Marx as if he were a prophet and his utterances cannot be at all mistaken. He was a single man living in a time of economic upheaval and change, and he thought about it, he talked about it, and he wrote about it. And what he wrote viscerally resonated for people who suffer from the injustice inherent in the system, I cannot dismiss that and do not mean to. However history continues and technology continues in their development, and the view from the train of history isn't always flat and predictable. So how can it be that we anticipate that the worldview of Marx's train compartment will be identical to ours? Should we assume that the tools he fashioned then will work now? Piketty draws that out, he is looking at the problem scientifically, I'd say. The publication of the translation in the US really freaked out all the capitalists, as I recall. Both Piketty and Varoufakis, that other famous lefty-economist, have remarked vociferously (maybe Varoufakis more than Piketty) that economics (in the university and elsewhere) *as a science* is a shambles and have almost come as close to saying the state of the discipline is no different then reading tea leaves (my words; their sense about it). Last year I had been reading the first chapter of La Pens?e Sauvage by Levi-Strauss and I really admired his observation that scientific thinking begins with the science of the concrete. Maybe that is what is referenced here as associative thinking or chaining, not sure. What is somehow off-putting is that associative thinking frequently gets short shrift, when it is the very kindling for higher conceptual thinking. But it seems like airing dirty laundry to admit to doing that kind of thinking or encouraging it. I did not get to the 2nd chapter on totemism (yet), but I sense that Levi-Strauss's work was to eliminate the hierarchies of human cognition because of his sense of social justice, having lived through the destruction of WW II, which we all know was begun because of a stubborn belief in a hierarchy of mental ability connected to unscientific notions of race. I wonder (which I would likely learn if I got deeper into the text) if he comments upon the idea that any hierarchies that do pertain to thinking and cognition are functional but not value laden, in terms of class or caste, intelligence versus stupidity, literacy vs illiteracy, etc. That's what I sense from his work, intuitively. I feel the analogy of functional hierarchies very much when I've been building fires these past weeks. There is a trick to building the fire from paper and kindling to catching a log so the fire really starts to warm up the house and take the chill off. It's true you can't just go from kindling to logs and the flames must be of a certain caliber to light the log, so there must be intermediary and transitional pieces of wood to make the fire inevitable, while also contained. It also helps to have a bellows or to blow really hard to fan the fire. If there is not enough air the flames at the beginning do go out. There is more attention and care required at that stage. So to all you fire builders out there, you might know what I am talking about. Still wondering if anyone will discuss what is meant by chaining. But thanks Tom, I hope to hear from you more, and others. Kind regards, Annalisa From annalisa@unm.edu Sat Nov 5 12:04:40 2016 From: annalisa@unm.edu (Annalisa Aguilar) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 19:04:40 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, production, and reproduction (and reversibility) In-Reply-To: <1478323151009.65738@iped.uio.no> References: , , , <1478323151009.65738@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Hi Alfredo, I think to take what I have written and to say that my idea is (really) his idea (or his idea is mine) doesn't make sense to me. Let me put it plainly: *I do not want to talk about logic here.* I've discussed it all I want to. Please, go start a different thread about that. I was not suggesting empirical studies, I am talking about having a conversation right here right now about the genesis of gender expectations and to reflect about demand, production, and reproduction. It's like I said. If you want to know why people are feel reticent to post here, then why don't you ask the people who feel marginalized? Why not listen to us? And what's so foreign about asking you to put yourselves in our shoes and empathize with us? We have to do that all the time with those with power and privilege, something I think African Americans have written much about, and perhaps others. Why not ask how you can be an ally? Why do you need sprint to a solution as if possessing some logical analysis will help you to know what the problem is? Do you NOT believe us? Sure, if this mere kindling of thought generates into a flame for your own work, certainly you should move forward upon it. Isn't that what this list is all about?? But please do not stamp out the small flame here and please allow a fire be built for those who want to participate. If I'm sounding defensive, there is a reason for it. Maybe this conversation will just have to be off-list in order for it to grow sufficiently and be nourished appropriately. Which means it will be not something shared here, for reasons perhaps that we have been considering that pertain to gendered discourse and why there are such imbalances in the voices. So from being moved from the center to the periphery, I am now being escorted out of the building like Medea Benjamin of Code Pink, and I'm just being vocal about each infringement, as people have been with me when bringing up (arbitrary) rules, that are not written down anywhere, anyway. Do you see the violence inherent in the system? I hope so. ________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 11:13 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, production, and reproduction (and reversibility) I do not take David's comments as graffiti. I think you both are suggesting empirical studies, and both proposals make sense to me. Indeed, I have already begun to look for a student who may want to draw on xmca to do some analyses on gender and (academic) online participation (and I am not joking). Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Annalisa Aguilar Sent: 05 November 2016 02:58 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, production, and reproduction (and reversibility) David, That is not my idea. I was *not* suggesting a discourse analysis of Dilemmas of Gendered Discourse at XMCA* at ALL. In fact quite the opposite. Where in the world did I say that, and why are you attributing that to me? I don't understand what you didn't understand. I said how about we compare and contrast in this thread, as a thought sculpture (not embark in some sort of statistical analyses), what the differences are between non-gendered discourse, and gendered discourse. But first focusing upon non-gendered discourse. I don't think that means we should talk about Math, either, or logic! It sort of feels like you just graffiti'd my thread, I'm sorry to say. So if that is the intent, I don't know how that is supposed to work here. Thanks? Kind regards, Annalisa From mcole@ucsd.edu Sat Nov 5 12:10:08 2016 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 12:10:08 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, production, and reproduction (and reversibility) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: All the data are publicly available. Mike On Friday, November 4, 2016, David H Kirshner wrote: > I like Annalisa's considerations of some kind of empirical analysis of the > *Dilemmas of Gendered Discourse on XMCA*. > > 1. What are the base rates of male/female membership in XMCA? > 2. How many posts are initiated by men/women (raw data, plus per base > rate)? > 3. Percentage of posts by gender that receive negative/no/positive > response. > 4. Discourse analysis of types of responses in terms of polarity (what are > the varieties of negative and positive responses). > 5. Calculation of an Affect of Replies Score (ARS) for each poster (-1 for > each negative response, +1 for each positive response). > 6. Trend analysis of ARS scores over time by gender (do people's scores > tend to improve over time). > 7. Persistence analysis by ARS scores and gender: likelihood of subsequent > posting as a function of ARS. > 8. Survey of a stratified sample of members (frequent posters, occasional > posters, lurkers X male, female) concerning factors affecting > participation, including > 9. an Affect survey: Likert scale questionnaire concerning affective > response to positive and negative replies. > > Anyone looking for a dissertation topic -- tentative title *above"? > > David > > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu ] On Behalf Of Annalisa > Aguilar > Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 4:58 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, > production, and reproduction (and reversibility) > > Hello, > > > It seems that people are having a time with the originating thread > pertaining to the subject "Analysis of gender in early XMCA discourse," > which I find to be a goose chase, since it is difficult to analyze posts > that were never made (owing to the fact that, as a few members have spoken > up to say, they were never made to feel safe enough to post because of the > domination of a kind of discourse that is called gendered - though some > admit it has to do with time and prior commitments). > > > How does one study discourse of non-participants? I'm utterly perplexed by > that. > > > If men have been dominating the discourse, then what the subject line > really means is we should a study of male discourse and how others are kept > out. > > > Why do we need to know how others are kept out when we can just explain it > ourselves to you? > > > Or are we not fit enough for our explanations to be taken seriously? > > > What I liked about one of Jacob's recent posts is that he revealed to us > *the discourse* that goes on *off-the-list.* But no one seemed to give that > any notice. I hope I am giving him appropriate credit for that. I caught > it, but I wanted to wait to see if anyone else did. > > > Respectfully, I think it would be more productive discuss how gender is > expected and *entrained* (and maybe this is what Maria Cristina means by > reproduction, not sure). Not about what gender is, because we'll never get > anywhere with that. If we understand the demands and the production of > those expectations-fufilled, is it possible we can raise our awareness of > how those process do not serve those who are harmed by those expectations. > > > I would offer that these gendered expectations are harmful to everyone, > not just those lacking privilege. I say that because of lost opportunities, > which I've already discussed in a previous email on the original thread. > > > If there are allies on this list, and I think that there are, then would > it not be of help for them to sit back and let those of us who feel harmed > or threatened, or just uncomfortable, explain it how it is. And how we > (that is, those of us who feel irrelevant despite having something > meaningful to offer) believe the problem might be solved, or at least > ameliorated. Can we explain it ourselves without any help from explainers? > > > I would like to encourage trailblazing this new path of comparing how > non-gendered discourse might compare to gendered discourse. Because that > comparison might reveal something important to all of us. All of Us. > > > Or it may not, but who knows for certain until we try. Or... will this > suggestion be shot down because it doesn't remain within the status quo? Or > will it be somehow made to sit outside what is allowable to post on this > list because it (somehow) doesn't pertain the XMCA's mission statement? Or > some other law I have broken? > > > Of course, it remains the case that some might believe that it is > impossible to speak about anything without gender, but I'd say that that > might possibly mean that such a position considers the problem essential (I > do not), that somehow biologically, or in some other determined way, gender > is hard-wired like biological sex is hardwired (Note: with the growing > awareness of the existence of trans-gender populations, I'd like to offer > that even that position, that biological sex is hardwired, is now suspect). > > > I do think that there are some areas where we don't speak about gender, > and I'm only asking that we might compare those discourses with discourses > that are heavy on the influence of gender. > > > Is that somehow a faulty proposition? > > > It felt that there was something of a spark with Maria Cristina's > contribution combined with Larry's juxtaposed and mine. So I'm hoping there > might be a continuance from this point. Is that interesting enough? > > > So I am adhering to Greg M's suggestion of cordoning off a space for this > topic. Let's see if these swim lanes actually work. I doubt it, but I will > exhibit a willingness to cooperate if it will foster more discourse about > the matter at hand. > > > Though, actually, I think I've just been invited to place myself into a > ghetto. I suppose that is an inflammatory thing to say, but I'm just trying > to be honest. Or maybe I've been invited to populate the periphery, because > I don't have a privileged credentials to be in the center. > > > It's always something, as Gilda Radner used to say. > > > Kind egads, > > > Annalisa > > > > > > > > > > From schuckthemonkey@gmail.com Sat Nov 5 12:18:08 2016 From: schuckthemonkey@gmail.com (Christopher Schuck) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 15:18:08 -0400 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? In-Reply-To: <278F23D9-C17C-4D09-9AB9-9552FEDBC24B@unco.edu> References: <6B2C5457-8B44-4DF9-A6A3-6101ED3C1AC6@gmail.com> <278F23D9-C17C-4D09-9AB9-9552FEDBC24B@unco.edu> Message-ID: Sure, Dana - thanks for asking. It's not detailed or especially revelatory; just a simple heuristic accounting for some of the complaints that seem to have come up either directly or indirectly, and one possible starting point in the event that some new convention or unofficial policy is ever attempted. Why don't I just include it below for simplicity's sake. Perhaps it's still relevant to Rod's question "What are we doing here?" in speaking the opposite question, "Whatever else we might be doing here, what *don't * we want to be doing here?" By the way, I realize now that the second long paragraph of my prior post devoted to time frames, in media res, etc. was actually intended for one of the other threads discussing that theme, but had trouble locating that one and then forgot to separate it. Sorry if it seemed out of place here. I wasn't aware of the Voicemail application - that sounds interesting. It was actually Greg who mentioned the phone and prosody, but it's fitting you bring it up because I had also considered sharing anecdotally (re. diverse cognitive and discursive style) that personally, I have always hated the phone and feel way more connected to people when writing or face to face. For me, that middle ground of phone or Skype just ends up being the worst of both worlds: less organic than pure verbal *or *pure embodied interaction. But that's just me. Anyway, here's what I wrote before, for what it's worth: "As part of any effort to make discussions more inclusive, it might be worth specifying the kinds of problematic dynamics being targeted. For instance, off the top of my head I can think of seven ways, broadly speaking, that people might end up feeling marginalized or shut out of conversations: 1) Someone makes a thoughtful or relevant comment that invites some kind of further response, and is roundly ignored. 2) Someone makes a comment and is responded to on a very abstract or theoretical level incongruent with the spirit in which the comment was made (including reference to concrete lived experience). 3) Someone makes a comment and is responded to concretely and directly, but with a certain degree of insensitivity or unequal power dynamic (conscious or not). 4) Someone is responded to with overt hostility, intimidation, passive-aggressiveness and/or deliberate insensitivity. 5) Someone finds it especially difficult to enter or make any initial post, due to lots of "inside" conversation or a competitive sink-or-swim environment that makes it feel unpalatable or unsafe to participate. 6) Someone comes to a conversation to find they're already hopelessly behind (e.g. 30 posts from missing a couple days), and finds it difficult to catch up or contribute anything they might still have to offer, because the thread is geared only toward those who have been there from the very beginning (and no one is willing to cut them some slack or help fill in missing context) 7) A newcomer who has never participated before would like to join one of the ongoing conversations, but has absolutely no idea what the prevailing customs are and what is appropriate, or what level of erudition and background familiarity is assumed for which fields, and as a result feels like they have nothing to hang their hat on." Chris On Sat, Nov 5, 2016 at 1:37 PM, Walker, Dana wrote: > Chris, > > I enjoyed reading your post, and would like to read the email you did not > send, if you were willing to share it (or you could send it directly to me > dana.walker@unco.edu), since the question of how marginalization is > accomplished discursively interests me. > > Regarding your closing thoughts about face to face versus written > communication: I think there are probably a variety of formats for non f2f > communication that could afford a less narrow range of interaction than > does this the email listserve. You mentioned the phone and prosody: The > application Voicemail does this as well. You can directly record either an > audio or video post and include a artefactual ?third thing,? such as photo > or a slide. Participants can see/hear and respond to each other at either a > fast or slow pace, since the voicethread remains in place until it is > removed. It is free up to 5 voicethreads per person. > > Dana > > On 11/4/16, 7:13 PM, "xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of > Christopher Schuck" schuckthemonkey@gmail.com> wrote: > > Thanks too for such a thoughtful synopsis, Rod, which I found myself > relating to deeply. And I suppose this is also relevant to the stuff > on the > Gender thread, but I no longer know where to go. Fast Swim, Slow Swim, > Gender, Logic, Genesis of Gender...all spinning off of what appeared > to be > a single theme. Wow! My head is spinning. > > Having checked in after some time and discovered two or three parallel > conversations well underway, all the comments about time frames > (including > Vera's observation about differing paces, styles and degrees of > necessary > reflection time) feel very apropos. One of the realities of this > format and > the quick turnaround times for posting is that if one is not > conscientious > about keeping up (or just lacks the time), there is inevitably an "in > media > res" effect of trying to understand the running narrative backwards > while > needing to (collectively and collaboratively) live it forwards. I don't > think this is always a bad thing. In fact, I suspect it can sometimes > have > the paradoxical effect of enhancing and elevating the discussion. > There is > a certain humility and beginner's mind that comes with wandering into a > conversation late, a certain openness to what may not yet be fully > processed, understood and contextualized. And, coming at it with fresh > eyes > can lend a different angle that shakes up the conversation a bit. It > felt > this way, for instance, when Maria Cristina suddenly entered and > offered a > re-contextualization (time constraints and domestic responsibilities) > that > kind of turned everything on its head. At the same time, there may be a > certain responsibility on the part of those already engrossed in the > dialogue to be welcoming and inclusive towards anyone "in media res > distress." I agree with Alfredo that trying to prescribe along the > "fast/slow" dimension is undesirable; I'm not sure how much adding new > tags > for posts or further classifying per se would really help to counter > any > problematic dynamics, though I know nothing about these technologies. I > find myself thinking: what's wrong with the good old-fashioned > initiative > of emailing individuals separately and CC-ing whoever seems > interested, or > announcing that you'd like to email further with any takers? > > Having looked over the last several threads (if far from reading > exhaustively), it seems to me there may be two different issues: 1) > how to > do better justice to all these differing purposes, styles and uses of > the > listserve, and/or clarify "what we are doing here" in order to avoid > confusion; 2) how to cultivate a fully hospitable atmosphere for those > who > may end up being marginalized in various ways, and address these issues > without generating even more unnecessary distress. Of course, those two > things aren't entirely unrelated. But improving the second may not > require > that we have fully resolved the first. In another post accidentally > sent > from the wrong email, which bounced back and disappeared, I attempted a > preliminary list of different ways people might end up feeling > marginalized > or shut out of conversations. Probably not worth resending at this > point. > > I am more of a peripheral member of this community and have only > posted a > few times, but in each instance was very aware of anxiety over the > possibility of translating poorly or just sounding plain stupid. > Trying to > negotiate complex ideas *and *respect feelings and boundaries *and *not > sound ignorant, in the absence of voice, expression and physical > proximity, > sometimes feels a bit like entering a dark and crowded room. You want > to > make contact without knocking someone over or banging into them, but > ultimately you must wait for your eyes to adjust to the night vision > so you > can "know your way about" (as Wittgenstein might say). I think it's > easy to > underestimate the diversity of cognitive and discursive styles, not > just > goals and values, among people on the board. As someone who tends to > approach things very analytically and linearly, in such contexts of > ambiguity I find myself tempted to fall back on the intellectual > structure > of ideas, abstract theory, content over form or use, as if it were some > kind of "universal language." Yet as we all know, this does not always > help > - and sometimes it backfires. Meanwhile, as someone who like all of us > has > an inner life and related experiences, I am tempted to offer something > immediate, concrete and personal. But this can feel risky and possibly > irrelevant, perhaps even narcissistic. To a great extent I am happy > just to > listen and learn. But Alfredo's point about not just being a spectator > also > resonates with me. > > Despite all these misgivings, I'm not sure I'm ready to agree that this > format for communication, or verbal written discourse in general, is > automatically inferior and impoverished in relation to other modes. I > mean, > in some ways it obviously is. But there is often a level of care and > thought -- and continuity -- that would be difficult to reproduce in a > room > where people are prone to physically competing while attempting > high-level > discourse in real time, yet still manages to be relational. There are > definitely tradeoffs. I think like most technology, it brings great > opportunities and big problems. And new opportunities that arise from > having to face those problems. > > Chris > > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 4:37 PM, Greg Thompson < > greg.a.thompson@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Yes, I'm with you on that too Rod. I think that's why social media > can get > > so nasty so often. It is a chilly medium that is a highly denuded > form of > > communication. (e.g., when I said "I'm with you on that too", was I > > alluding to other times when I'm not "with you"? Some could > interpret it > > that way (btw, that's not what I meant!!)). > > > > I marvel that there is so much that gets done on this listserve in > spite of > > this fact. > > > > Also makes me wonder why so many people put so much stock in > literacy as > > being a massively transformative capacity. Seems a more base form of > > communication than any form of oral communication I've ever > experienced > > (even the phone gives you prosody!). > > > > -greg > > > > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 2:22 PM, Rod Parker-Rees < > > R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk> wrote: > > > > > Thanks Helen and Greg, > > > > > > I certainly like the opportunity to hang out with interesting > people but > > I > > > think it is probably inevitable in this sort of set up that wires > can get > > > crossed when people feel they are engaging in different kinds of > > activities. > > > I suspect that what has kept this group going is that every now > and then > > > people stand back and take stock of how it is working and that > allows > > > people to realise that it works in different ways (and feels > different) > > for > > > different people. > > > > > > This has made me wonder how often other forms of communication > (even > > where > > > only two people are involved) can involve different people having > very > > > different understandings about what they are doing and sometimes > this > > > doesn't matter but sometimes it does. > > > > > > I hope we can keep it going. > > > > > > All the best, > > > > > > Rod > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > > > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Greg Thompson > > > Sent: 04 November 2016 19:58 > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? > > > > > > Great question Rod! > > > > > > As to the answer, as John Cage was fond of saying: "no why, just > here." > > > > > > Okay, fair enough. But it seems like the question deserves a more > > > thoughtful answer than this. > > > > > > I suppose if I were entirely honest, I find this to be a nice > place to > > > hang out and learn and occasionally I try to use the listserve to > put > > > something out there in the interest of getting some feedback to > help > > > develop it. I've had much more success with the former than the > latter. > > > > > > I do wonder what the mission statement of this listserve would be > if > > there > > > were such a thing. It seems like we don't engage with MCA nearly > as much > > as > > > we should if that were to be the goal of the listserve. > > > > > > Other than that, I would guess that the mission statement would be > > > something like: it's a place for people who are interested in CHAT > to > > hang > > > out and talk about stuff that they care about (sometimes CHAT and > MCA > > > related, sometimes not). > > > > > > Is that too cynical? Or is that just about right? > > > > > > Perhaps someone else can give a better statement of what the > listserve is > > > "about"? (and I hate to even get into the question of what it > SHOULD be - > > > I'd rather live it and see what works that deliberate about what > that > > life > > > should look like, but, sure, there is some value in doing the > former). > > > > > > Thanks for your question/contribution Rod. Right to the point. > > > -greg > > > > > > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Helena Worthen < > helenaworthen@gmail.com > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > This is a good contribution. Thanks -- H > > > > > > > > Helena Worthen > > > > helenaworthen@gmail.com > > > > Vietnam blog: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > > > > > > > On Nov 4, 2016, at 2:30 AM, Rod Parker-Rees wrote: > > > > > > > > > I am an interested but time-poor lurker on the margins of xmca > but > > > > > the > > > > ripples stirred by Mike's decision to reduce his pastoral > contribution > > > > to our community have made me question how different participants > > > > understand what kind of activity we are engaging in here. > > > > > > > > > > It seems to me that each of us may understand the social form > of > > > > > what we > > > > are doing in different ways. For some it is like a conversation > and we > > > > feel disappointed or hurt if our contributions are met with > silence or > > > > if the chain moves on in a different direction. For others we > are a > > > > working group, collaborating to develop a practical and ethical > > > > theoretical model. For others we are something like a conference, > > > > where thoughts and ideas can be put before others for their > > > > consideration and response - and I am sure there are many other > ways > > > > in which different people understand their participation > differently. > > > > > > > > > > Does this matter? Would xmca be 'better' if it was more > consistent, > > > > > more > > > > coherent, more tightly and predictably governed by shared social > > > > understandings? While more explicit regulation (protocols for > > > > labelling streams and posts and for timing of responses etc.) > might > > > > help to make our activity feel more inclusive and more sharable > it may > > > > also introduce new kinds of discomfort. > > > > > > > > > > What I have found interesting in my time around the margins of > xmca > > > > > is > > > > the challenge of sustaining conversations without all the > non-verbal > > > > feedback which we rely on when we talk with people. When > 'wordings' > > > > float off into the ether, cast off from the body and personhood > of > > > > their speakers or writers they become objects which can be > scrutinised > > > > and revisited and this can be a reason for 'lurkers' to feel > reluctant > > > about contributing. > > > > What we are doing is not a conversation. Nor is it even a forum, > in > > > > the sense of people taking turns to orate before a crowd, because > > > > contributors often get very little phatic feedback from the > lurkers > > > > and may have very little sense of how their arguments have been > > > > understood or received. But we are moved by our understandings > of what > > > > it is and is not OK to do, which come from other kinds of > > > > interactions. Can I say something if I have not been part of > what has > > > > gone before? Should I respond or stay quiet? What should I do if > I am > > > > annoyed or angered by something someone else has contributed? > > > > > > > > > > I am already getting anxious about how what I have said might > be > > > > interpreted by others and feeling I have had a long enough turn > but I > > > > would be really interested to hear what others think about why > we are > > > here! > > > > > > > > > > I have found what people do here very helpful but I do feel > uneasy > > > > > about > > > > risking contributions! > > > > > > > > > > All the best, > > > > > > > > > > Rod > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif] > > > //www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass> > > > > > > > > > > This email and any files with it are confidential and intended > > > > > solely > > > > for the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are > not > > > > the intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use > of the > > > > information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not > rely on > > > it. > > > > If you have received this email in error please let the sender > know > > > > immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails > are not > > > > necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University > > > > accepts no responsibility for viruses and it is your > responsibility to > > > > scan emails and their attachments. Plymouth University does not > accept > > > > responsibility for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing > in this > > > > email or its attachments constitutes an order for goods or > services > > > > unless accompanied by an official order form. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > > > Assistant Professor > > > Department of Anthropology > > > 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > > > Brigham Young University > > > Provo, UT 84602 > > > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson > > > ________________________________ > > > [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif] > > //www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass> > > > > > > This email and any files with it are confidential and intended > solely for > > > the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not > the > > > intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the > > > information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not > rely on > > it. > > > If you have received this email in error please let the sender know > > > immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are > not > > > necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University > accepts > > > no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan > > emails > > > and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept > responsibility > > > for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or > its > > > attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless > accompanied > > > by an official order form. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > > Assistant Professor > > Department of Anthropology > > 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > > Brigham Young University > > Provo, UT 84602 > > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson > > > > > > From smago@uga.edu Sat Nov 5 12:53:07 2016 From: smago@uga.edu (Peter Smagorinsky) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 19:53:07 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, production, and reproduction (and reversibility) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Just a small contribution for anyone interested in undertaking this analysis: 1. http://lchc-resources.org/xmca/subscriber_list.php lists member profiles, but from what I can tell, once a profile is up, it doesn't come down if someone unsubscribes. Is there a way to track whether women or men unsubscribe at greater rates? That might help identify the sort of trend that would indicate an undercurrent, rather than the more obvious posting record. 2. Waaay back when this list was known as xlchc, gender issues were often raised by Mary Bryson (I'm pretty sure this is the same one: http://grsj.arts.ubc.ca/persons/mary-bryson/). Mary had a pretty direct way of confronting things that she found problematic, and in fact was involved, as I recall, in the very hostile exchange that caused Mike to unplug the listserv for a summer and relaunch it as xmca (which also shifted it from the lab to the journal). Like her or not, she raised one point that might be worth looking into, which is the degree to which male and female, hetero and LGBTQ sources are invoked to inform our discussions. She contended that the list's reliance on male sources suggested a deep structure of masculinity, and at one point announced that she was only reading articles, books, and posts by women. (Keep in mind I'm relying on my swiss-cheese memory here, so anything I say should be verified.) I think it's an interesting question, and informally have noticed that of late, aside from Hasan, the sources and readings have been men. Is that a question worth looking into, especially if it produces a lot of unsubscriptions from women? 3. Of course, I offer this as an old white guy, so defer to broader perspectives. -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2016 3:10 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, production, and reproduction (and reversibility) All the data are publicly available. Mike On Friday, November 4, 2016, David H Kirshner wrote: > I like Annalisa's considerations of some kind of empirical analysis of > the *Dilemmas of Gendered Discourse on XMCA*. > > 1. What are the base rates of male/female membership in XMCA? > 2. How many posts are initiated by men/women (raw data, plus per base > rate)? > 3. Percentage of posts by gender that receive negative/no/positive > response. > 4. Discourse analysis of types of responses in terms of polarity (what > are the varieties of negative and positive responses). > 5. Calculation of an Affect of Replies Score (ARS) for each poster (-1 > for each negative response, +1 for each positive response). > 6. Trend analysis of ARS scores over time by gender (do people's > scores tend to improve over time). > 7. Persistence analysis by ARS scores and gender: likelihood of > subsequent posting as a function of ARS. > 8. Survey of a stratified sample of members (frequent posters, > occasional posters, lurkers X male, female) concerning factors > affecting participation, including 9. an Affect survey: Likert scale > questionnaire concerning affective response to positive and negative > replies. > > Anyone looking for a dissertation topic -- tentative title *above"? > > David > > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu ] On Behalf Of Annalisa > Aguilar > Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 4:58 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, > production, and reproduction (and reversibility) > > Hello, > > > It seems that people are having a time with the originating thread > pertaining to the subject "Analysis of gender in early XMCA discourse," > which I find to be a goose chase, since it is difficult to analyze > posts that were never made (owing to the fact that, as a few members > have spoken up to say, they were never made to feel safe enough to > post because of the domination of a kind of discourse that is called > gendered - though some admit it has to do with time and prior commitments). > > > How does one study discourse of non-participants? I'm utterly > perplexed by that. > > > If men have been dominating the discourse, then what the subject line > really means is we should a study of male discourse and how others are > kept out. > > > Why do we need to know how others are kept out when we can just > explain it ourselves to you? > > > Or are we not fit enough for our explanations to be taken seriously? > > > What I liked about one of Jacob's recent posts is that he revealed to > us *the discourse* that goes on *off-the-list.* But no one seemed to > give that any notice. I hope I am giving him appropriate credit for > that. I caught it, but I wanted to wait to see if anyone else did. > > > Respectfully, I think it would be more productive discuss how gender > is expected and *entrained* (and maybe this is what Maria Cristina > means by reproduction, not sure). Not about what gender is, because > we'll never get anywhere with that. If we understand the demands and > the production of those expectations-fufilled, is it possible we can > raise our awareness of how those process do not serve those who are harmed by those expectations. > > > I would offer that these gendered expectations are harmful to > everyone, not just those lacking privilege. I say that because of lost > opportunities, which I've already discussed in a previous email on the original thread. > > > If there are allies on this list, and I think that there are, then > would it not be of help for them to sit back and let those of us who > feel harmed or threatened, or just uncomfortable, explain it how it > is. And how we (that is, those of us who feel irrelevant despite > having something meaningful to offer) believe the problem might be > solved, or at least ameliorated. Can we explain it ourselves without any help from explainers? > > > I would like to encourage trailblazing this new path of comparing how > non-gendered discourse might compare to gendered discourse. Because > that comparison might reveal something important to all of us. All of Us. > > > Or it may not, but who knows for certain until we try. Or... will this > suggestion be shot down because it doesn't remain within the status > quo? Or will it be somehow made to sit outside what is allowable to > post on this list because it (somehow) doesn't pertain the XMCA's > mission statement? Or some other law I have broken? > > > Of course, it remains the case that some might believe that it is > impossible to speak about anything without gender, but I'd say that > that might possibly mean that such a position considers the problem > essential (I do not), that somehow biologically, or in some other > determined way, gender is hard-wired like biological sex is hardwired > (Note: with the growing awareness of the existence of trans-gender > populations, I'd like to offer that even that position, that biological sex is hardwired, is now suspect). > > > I do think that there are some areas where we don't speak about > gender, and I'm only asking that we might compare those discourses > with discourses that are heavy on the influence of gender. > > > Is that somehow a faulty proposition? > > > It felt that there was something of a spark with Maria Cristina's > contribution combined with Larry's juxtaposed and mine. So I'm hoping > there might be a continuance from this point. Is that interesting enough? > > > So I am adhering to Greg M's suggestion of cordoning off a space for > this topic. Let's see if these swim lanes actually work. I doubt it, > but I will exhibit a willingness to cooperate if it will foster more > discourse about the matter at hand. > > > Though, actually, I think I've just been invited to place myself into > a ghetto. I suppose that is an inflammatory thing to say, but I'm just > trying to be honest. Or maybe I've been invited to populate the > periphery, because I don't have a privileged credentials to be in the center. > > > It's always something, as Gilda Radner used to say. > > > Kind egads, > > > Annalisa > > > > > > > > > > From smago@uga.edu Sat Nov 5 12:55:24 2016 From: smago@uga.edu (Peter Smagorinsky) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 19:55:24 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, production, and reproduction (and reversibility) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: My name is Peter Smagorinsky, and I approve of this message. -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Peter Smagorinsky Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2016 3:53 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, production, and reproduction (and reversibility) This sender failed our fraud detection checks and may not be who they appear to be. Learn about spoofing at http://aka.ms/LearnAboutSpoofing Just a small contribution for anyone interested in undertaking this analysis: 1. http://lchc-resources.org/xmca/subscriber_list.php lists member profiles, but from what I can tell, once a profile is up, it doesn't come down if someone unsubscribes. Is there a way to track whether women or men unsubscribe at greater rates? That might help identify the sort of trend that would indicate an undercurrent, rather than the more obvious posting record. 2. Waaay back when this list was known as xlchc, gender issues were often raised by Mary Bryson (I'm pretty sure this is the same one: http://grsj.arts.ubc.ca/persons/mary-bryson/). Mary had a pretty direct way of confronting things that she found problematic, and in fact was involved, as I recall, in the very hostile exchange that caused Mike to unplug the listserv for a summer and relaunch it as xmca (which also shifted it from the lab to the journal). Like her or not, she raised one point that might be worth looking into, which is the degree to which male and female, hetero and LGBTQ sources are invoked to inform our discussions. She contended that the list's reliance on male sources suggested a deep structure of masculinity, and at one point announced that she was only reading articles, books, and posts by women. (Keep in mind I'm relying on my swiss-cheese memory here, so anything I say should be verified.) I think it's an interesting question, and informally have noticed that of late, aside from Hasan, the sources and readings have been men. Is that a question worth looking into, especially if it produces a lot of unsubscriptions from women? 3. Of course, I offer this as an old white guy, so defer to broader perspectives. -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2016 3:10 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, production, and reproduction (and reversibility) All the data are publicly available. Mike On Friday, November 4, 2016, David H Kirshner wrote: > I like Annalisa's considerations of some kind of empirical analysis of > the *Dilemmas of Gendered Discourse on XMCA*. > > 1. What are the base rates of male/female membership in XMCA? > 2. How many posts are initiated by men/women (raw data, plus per base > rate)? > 3. Percentage of posts by gender that receive negative/no/positive > response. > 4. Discourse analysis of types of responses in terms of polarity (what > are the varieties of negative and positive responses). > 5. Calculation of an Affect of Replies Score (ARS) for each poster (-1 > for each negative response, +1 for each positive response). > 6. Trend analysis of ARS scores over time by gender (do people's > scores tend to improve over time). > 7. Persistence analysis by ARS scores and gender: likelihood of > subsequent posting as a function of ARS. > 8. Survey of a stratified sample of members (frequent posters, > occasional posters, lurkers X male, female) concerning factors > affecting participation, including 9. an Affect survey: Likert scale > questionnaire concerning affective response to positive and negative > replies. > > Anyone looking for a dissertation topic -- tentative title *above"? > > David > > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu ] On Behalf Of Annalisa > Aguilar > Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 4:58 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, > production, and reproduction (and reversibility) > > Hello, > > > It seems that people are having a time with the originating thread > pertaining to the subject "Analysis of gender in early XMCA discourse," > which I find to be a goose chase, since it is difficult to analyze > posts that were never made (owing to the fact that, as a few members > have spoken up to say, they were never made to feel safe enough to > post because of the domination of a kind of discourse that is called > gendered - though some admit it has to do with time and prior commitments). > > > How does one study discourse of non-participants? I'm utterly > perplexed by that. > > > If men have been dominating the discourse, then what the subject line > really means is we should a study of male discourse and how others are > kept out. > > > Why do we need to know how others are kept out when we can just > explain it ourselves to you? > > > Or are we not fit enough for our explanations to be taken seriously? > > > What I liked about one of Jacob's recent posts is that he revealed to > us *the discourse* that goes on *off-the-list.* But no one seemed to > give that any notice. I hope I am giving him appropriate credit for > that. I caught it, but I wanted to wait to see if anyone else did. > > > Respectfully, I think it would be more productive discuss how gender > is expected and *entrained* (and maybe this is what Maria Cristina > means by reproduction, not sure). Not about what gender is, because > we'll never get anywhere with that. If we understand the demands and > the production of those expectations-fufilled, is it possible we can > raise our awareness of how those process do not serve those who are harmed by those expectations. > > > I would offer that these gendered expectations are harmful to > everyone, not just those lacking privilege. I say that because of lost > opportunities, which I've already discussed in a previous email on the original thread. > > > If there are allies on this list, and I think that there are, then > would it not be of help for them to sit back and let those of us who > feel harmed or threatened, or just uncomfortable, explain it how it > is. And how we (that is, those of us who feel irrelevant despite > having something meaningful to offer) believe the problem might be > solved, or at least ameliorated. Can we explain it ourselves without any help from explainers? > > > I would like to encourage trailblazing this new path of comparing how > non-gendered discourse might compare to gendered discourse. Because > that comparison might reveal something important to all of us. All of Us. > > > Or it may not, but who knows for certain until we try. Or... will this > suggestion be shot down because it doesn't remain within the status > quo? Or will it be somehow made to sit outside what is allowable to > post on this list because it (somehow) doesn't pertain the XMCA's > mission statement? Or some other law I have broken? > > > Of course, it remains the case that some might believe that it is > impossible to speak about anything without gender, but I'd say that > that might possibly mean that such a position considers the problem > essential (I do not), that somehow biologically, or in some other > determined way, gender is hard-wired like biological sex is hardwired > (Note: with the growing awareness of the existence of trans-gender > populations, I'd like to offer that even that position, that biological sex is hardwired, is now suspect). > > > I do think that there are some areas where we don't speak about > gender, and I'm only asking that we might compare those discourses > with discourses that are heavy on the influence of gender. > > > Is that somehow a faulty proposition? > > > It felt that there was something of a spark with Maria Cristina's > contribution combined with Larry's juxtaposed and mine. So I'm hoping > there might be a continuance from this point. Is that interesting enough? > > > So I am adhering to Greg M's suggestion of cordoning off a space for > this topic. Let's see if these swim lanes actually work. I doubt it, > but I will exhibit a willingness to cooperate if it will foster more > discourse about the matter at hand. > > > Though, actually, I think I've just been invited to place myself into > a ghetto. I suppose that is an inflammatory thing to say, but I'm just > trying to be honest. Or maybe I've been invited to populate the > periphery, because I don't have a privileged credentials to be in the center. > > > It's always something, as Gilda Radner used to say. > > > Kind egads, > > > Annalisa > > > > > > > > > > From annalisa@unm.edu Sat Nov 5 13:00:26 2016 From: annalisa@unm.edu (Annalisa Aguilar) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 20:00:26 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, production, and reproduction (and reversibility) In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: Is this mic on? Just a small contribution for anyone interested in undertaking this analysis: 1. http://lchc-resources.org/xmca/subscriber_list.php lists member profiles, but from what I can tell, once a profile is up, it doesn't come down if someone unsubscribes. Is there a way to track whether women or men unsubscribe at greater rates? That might help identify the sort of trend that would indicate an undercurrent, rather than the more obvious posting record. 2. Waaay back when this list was known as xlchc, gender issues were often raised by Mary Bryson (I'm pretty sure this is the same one: http://grsj.arts.ubc.ca/persons/mary-bryson/). Mary had a pretty direct way of confronting things that she found problematic, and in fact was involved, as I recall, in the very hostile exchange that caused Mike to unplug the listserv for a summer and relaunch it as xmca (which also shifted it from the lab to the journal). Like her or not, she raised one point that might be worth looking into, which is the degree to which male and female, hetero and LGBTQ sources are invoked to inform our discussions. She contended that the list's reliance on male sources suggested a deep structure of masculinity, and at one point announced that she was only reading articles, books, and posts by women. (Keep in mind I'm relying on my swiss-cheese memory here, so anything I say should be verified.) I think it's an interesting question, and informally have noticed that o [http://grsj.arts.ubc.ca/files/2014/03/cropped-BrysonM_1.jpg] Mary Bryson | The Social Justice Institute grsj.arts.ubc.ca Biography. Dr. Mary K. Bryson (http://ubc.academia.edu/MaryKBryson) is Professor of Education (Language and Literacy Education, LLED) at the University of British ... f late, aside from Hasan, the sources and readings have been men. Is that a question worth looking into, especially if it produces a lot of unsubscriptions from women? 3. Of course, I offer this as an old white guy, so defer to broader perspectives. -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2016 3:10 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, production, and reproduction (and reversibility) All the data are publicly available. Mike On Friday, November 4, 2016, David H Kirshner wrote: > I like Annalisa's considerations of some kind of empirical analysis of > the *Dilemmas of Gendered Discourse on XMCA*. > > 1. What are the base rates of male/female membership in XMCA? > 2. How many posts are initiated by men/women (raw data, plus per base > rate)? > 3. Percentage of posts by gender that receive negative/no/positive > response. > 4. Discourse analysis of types of responses in terms of polarity (what > are the varieties of negative and positive responses). > 5. Calculation of an Affect of Replies Score (ARS) for each poster (-1 > for each negative response, +1 for each positive response). > 6. Trend analysis of ARS scores over time by gender (do people's > scores tend to improve over time). > 7. Persistence analysis by ARS scores and gender: likelihood of > subsequent posting as a function of ARS. > 8. Survey of a stratified sample of members (frequent posters, > occasional posters, lurkers X male, female) concerning factors > affecting participation, including 9. an Affect survey: Likert scale > questionnaire concerning affective response to positive and negative > replies. > > Anyone looking for a dissertation topic -- tentative title *above"? > > David > > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu ] On Behalf Of Annalisa > Aguilar > Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 4:58 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, > production, and reproduction (and reversibility) > > Hello, > > > It seems that people are having a time with the originating thread > pertaining to the subject "Analysis of gender in early XMCA discourse," > which I find to be a goose chase, since it is difficult to analyze > posts that were never made (owing to the fact that, as a few members > have spoken up to say, they were never made to feel safe enough to > post because of the domination of a kind of discourse that is called > gendered - though some admit it has to do with time and prior commitments). > > > How does one study discourse of non-participants? I'm utterly > perplexed by that. > > > If men have been dominating the discourse, then what the subject line > really means is we should a study of male discourse and how others are > kept out. > > > Why do we need to know how others are kept out when we can just > explain it ourselves to you? > > > Or are we not fit enough for our explanations to be taken seriously? > > > What I liked about one of Jacob's recent posts is that he revealed to > us *the discourse* that goes on *off-the-list.* But no one seemed to > give that any notice. I hope I am giving him appropriate credit for > that. I caught it, but I wanted to wait to see if anyone else did. > > > Respectfully, I think it would be more productive discuss how gender > is expected and *entrained* (and maybe this is what Maria Cristina > means by reproduction, not sure). Not about what gender is, because > we'll never get anywhere with that. If we understand the demands and > the production of those expectations-fufilled, is it possible we can > raise our awareness of how those process do not serve those who are harmed by those expectations. > > > I would offer that these gendered expectations are harmful to > everyone, not just those lacking privilege. I say that because of lost > opportunities, which I've already discussed in a previous email on the original thread. > > > If there are allies on this list, and I think that there are, then > would it not be of help for them to sit back and let those of us who > feel harmed or threatened, or just uncomfortable, explain it how it > is. And how we (that is, those of us who feel irrelevant despite > having something meaningful to offer) believe the problem might be > solved, or at least ameliorated. Can we explain it ourselves without any help from explainers? > > > I would like to encourage trailblazing this new path of comparing how > non-gendered discourse might compare to gendered discourse. Because > that comparison might reveal something important to all of us. All of Us. > > > Or it may not, but who knows for certain until we try. Or... will this > suggestion be shot down because it doesn't remain within the status > quo? Or will it be somehow made to sit outside what is allowable to > post on this list because it (somehow) doesn't pertain the XMCA's > mission statement? Or some other law I have broken? > > > Of course, it remains the case that some might believe that it is > impossible to speak about anything without gender, but I'd say that > that might possibly mean that such a position considers the problem > essential (I do not), that somehow biologically, or in some other > determined way, gender is hard-wired like biological sex is hardwired > (Note: with the growing awareness of the existence of trans-gender > populations, I'd like to offer that even that position, that biological sex is hardwired, is now suspect). > > > I do think that there are some areas where we don't speak about > gender, and I'm only asking that we might compare those discourses > with discourses that are heavy on the influence of gender. > > > Is that somehow a faulty proposition? > > > It felt that there was something of a spark with Maria Cristina's > contribution combined with Larry's juxtaposed and mine. So I'm hoping > there might be a continuance from this point. Is that interesting enough? > > > So I am adhering to Greg M's suggestion of cordoning off a space for > this topic. Let's see if these swim lanes actually work. I doubt it, > but I will exhibit a willingness to cooperate if it will foster more > discourse about the matter at hand. > > > Though, actually, I think I've just been invited to place myself into > a ghetto. I suppose that is an inflammatory thing to say, but I'm just > trying to be honest. Or maybe I've been invited to populate the > periphery, because I don't have a privileged credentials to be in the center. > > > It's always something, as Gilda Radner used to say. > > > Kind egads, > > > Annalisa > > > > > > > > > > From dkirsh@lsu.edu Sat Nov 5 13:29:35 2016 From: dkirsh@lsu.edu (David H Kirshner) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 20:29:35 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, production, and reproduction (and reversibility) In-Reply-To: References: , , , <1478323151009.65738@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Annalisa is right. My suggested empirical study was not responsive to the ongoing thread. I inserted it into the thread because I'd been wishing for some kind of empirical backdrop to the discussion of gendered participation, and something in Annalisa's post brought that to mind. And I attributed the basic interest to Annalisa as a way to justify my pursuing it. I can see that falsely attributing the interest to her might be seen as hijacking her direction, so I apologize. By way of explanation, because the suggested research study was so far off of the ongoing topic, I didn't consider there to be much danger that the ongoing thread would be disrupted; in fact, I thought my suggested study might be interpreted as a humorous interlude (though I am pleased that Alfredo and Peter find it of possible serious interest). If anyone does want to discuss it further, please introduce a new thread line for it. Finally, threads don't belong to individuals, they belong to the list. And they frequently break out in directions not intended by the initiator. This case of my intentionally diverging from the main thrust of a thread seems to me a rare exception. So, Annalisa, whereas you're justified in being angry at me in this case, I don't think there's much to be mined here in terms of the general problem of gendered discourse on XMCA. This doesn't seem to me to be a good example of anything. David -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Annalisa Aguilar Sent: Saturday, November 5, 2016 2:05 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, production, and reproduction (and reversibility) Hi Alfredo, I think to take what I have written and to say that my idea is (really) his idea (or his idea is mine) doesn't make sense to me. Let me put it plainly: *I do not want to talk about logic here.* I've discussed it all I want to. Please, go start a different thread about that. I was not suggesting empirical studies, I am talking about having a conversation right here right now about the genesis of gender expectations and to reflect about demand, production, and reproduction. It's like I said. If you want to know why people are feel reticent to post here, then why don't you ask the people who feel marginalized? Why not listen to us? And what's so foreign about asking you to put yourselves in our shoes and empathize with us? We have to do that all the time with those with power and privilege, something I think African Americans have written much about, and perhaps others. Why not ask how you can be an ally? Why do you need sprint to a solution as if possessing some logical analysis will help you to know what the problem is? Do you NOT believe us? Sure, if this mere kindling of thought generates into a flame for your own work, certainly you should move forward upon it. Isn't that what this list is all about?? But please do not stamp out the small flame here and please allow a fire be built for those who want to participate. If I'm sounding defensive, there is a reason for it. Maybe this conversation will just have to be off-list in order for it to grow sufficiently and be nourished appropriately. Which means it will be not something shared here, for reasons perhaps that we have been considering that pertain to gendered discourse and why there are such imbalances in the voices. So from being moved from the center to the periphery, I am now being escorted out of the building like Medea Benjamin of Code Pink, and I'm just being vocal about each infringement, as people have been with me when bringing up (arbitrary) rules, that are not written down anywhere, anyway. Do you see the violence inherent in the system? I hope so. ________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 11:13 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, production, and reproduction (and reversibility) I do not take David's comments as graffiti. I think you both are suggesting empirical studies, and both proposals make sense to me. Indeed, I have already begun to look for a student who may want to draw on xmca to do some analyses on gender and (academic) online participation (and I am not joking). Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Annalisa Aguilar Sent: 05 November 2016 02:58 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, production, and reproduction (and reversibility) David, That is not my idea. I was *not* suggesting a discourse analysis of Dilemmas of Gendered Discourse at XMCA* at ALL. In fact quite the opposite. Where in the world did I say that, and why are you attributing that to me? I don't understand what you didn't understand. I said how about we compare and contrast in this thread, as a thought sculpture (not embark in some sort of statistical analyses), what the differences are between non-gendered discourse, and gendered discourse. But first focusing upon non-gendered discourse. I don't think that means we should talk about Math, either, or logic! It sort of feels like you just graffiti'd my thread, I'm sorry to say. So if that is the intent, I don't know how that is supposed to work here. Thanks? Kind regards, Annalisa From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Sat Nov 5 13:51:35 2016 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 20:51:35 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, production, and reproduction (and reversibility) In-Reply-To: References: , , , <1478323151009.65738@iped.uio.no> , Message-ID: <1478379094083.29395@iped.uio.no> Annalisa, I am sorry if I have in any way contributed to the violence that you feel and display. My only intention was to point out that yours, comparing gendered and non-gendered discourse, also could be seen as an empirical endeavour, just one using different methods. Clearly this takes a broader view on what "empirical" means and this is obviously not the thread to make that clarification more extensive. So, please, accept my apologies. I fully subscribe David's comment that threads are joint products, they cannot be reduced to the intention of the initiator. But I also subscribe to Annalisa's point that a thread's topic and spirit is to be respected, and I will do my best to support it further (even if in this case that may mean remaining in the periphery). Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of David H Kirshner Sent: 05 November 2016 21:29 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, production, and reproduction (and reversibility) Annalisa is right. My suggested empirical study was not responsive to the ongoing thread. I inserted it into the thread because I'd been wishing for some kind of empirical backdrop to the discussion of gendered participation, and something in Annalisa's post brought that to mind. And I attributed the basic interest to Annalisa as a way to justify my pursuing it. I can see that falsely attributing the interest to her might be seen as hijacking her direction, so I apologize. By way of explanation, because the suggested research study was so far off of the ongoing topic, I didn't consider there to be much danger that the ongoing thread would be disrupted; in fact, I thought my suggested study might be interpreted as a humorous interlude (though I am pleased that Alfredo and Peter find it of possible serious interest). If anyone does want to discuss it further, please introduce a new thread line for it. Finally, threads don't belong to individuals, they belong to the list. And they frequently break out in directions not intended by the initiator. This case of my intentionally diverging from the main thrust of a thread seems to me a rare exception. So, Annalisa, whereas you're justified in being angry at me in this case, I don't think there's much to be mined here in terms of the general problem of gendered discourse on XMCA. This doesn't seem to me to be a good example of anything. David -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Annalisa Aguilar Sent: Saturday, November 5, 2016 2:05 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, production, and reproduction (and reversibility) Hi Alfredo, I think to take what I have written and to say that my idea is (really) his idea (or his idea is mine) doesn't make sense to me. Let me put it plainly: *I do not want to talk about logic here.* I've discussed it all I want to. Please, go start a different thread about that. I was not suggesting empirical studies, I am talking about having a conversation right here right now about the genesis of gender expectations and to reflect about demand, production, and reproduction. It's like I said. If you want to know why people are feel reticent to post here, then why don't you ask the people who feel marginalized? Why not listen to us? And what's so foreign about asking you to put yourselves in our shoes and empathize with us? We have to do that all the time with those with power and privilege, something I think African Americans have written much about, and perhaps others. Why not ask how you can be an ally? Why do you need sprint to a solution as if possessing some logical analysis will help you to know what the problem is? Do you NOT believe us? Sure, if this mere kindling of thought generates into a flame for your own work, certainly you should move forward upon it. Isn't that what this list is all about?? But please do not stamp out the small flame here and please allow a fire be built for those who want to participate. If I'm sounding defensive, there is a reason for it. Maybe this conversation will just have to be off-list in order for it to grow sufficiently and be nourished appropriately. Which means it will be not something shared here, for reasons perhaps that we have been considering that pertain to gendered discourse and why there are such imbalances in the voices. So from being moved from the center to the periphery, I am now being escorted out of the building like Medea Benjamin of Code Pink, and I'm just being vocal about each infringement, as people have been with me when bringing up (arbitrary) rules, that are not written down anywhere, anyway. Do you see the violence inherent in the system? I hope so. ________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 11:13 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, production, and reproduction (and reversibility) I do not take David's comments as graffiti. I think you both are suggesting empirical studies, and both proposals make sense to me. Indeed, I have already begun to look for a student who may want to draw on xmca to do some analyses on gender and (academic) online participation (and I am not joking). Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Annalisa Aguilar Sent: 05 November 2016 02:58 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, production, and reproduction (and reversibility) David, That is not my idea. I was *not* suggesting a discourse analysis of Dilemmas of Gendered Discourse at XMCA* at ALL. In fact quite the opposite. Where in the world did I say that, and why are you attributing that to me? I don't understand what you didn't understand. I said how about we compare and contrast in this thread, as a thought sculpture (not embark in some sort of statistical analyses), what the differences are between non-gendered discourse, and gendered discourse. But first focusing upon non-gendered discourse. I don't think that means we should talk about Math, either, or logic! It sort of feels like you just graffiti'd my thread, I'm sorry to say. So if that is the intent, I don't know how that is supposed to work here. Thanks? Kind regards, Annalisa From lpscholar2@gmail.com Sat Nov 5 13:55:03 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 13:55:03 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, production, and reproduction (and reversibility) In-Reply-To: References: , , , <1478323151009.65738@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <581e4734.6208430a.15f95.5cdc@mx.google.com> David, Annalisa, I take the view that misunderstandings are inevitable on the way to shared understandings. The notion of postings being invitations that open a place for conversation. The concern is the possibility the invitations will not be taken up. This is why we must (take time) and (take care) and when inevitable ruptures occur to once again go back and pick up the loose threads. Ruptures seem to be an aspect of developing shared meaning. I do not believe they can be avoided but conversations can be (with care and concern) returned (resumed) as an opportunity for exploring our ethical turn (including feminist theory and historical imaginary). It is not the rupture itself, but the care and concern in response that models this ethical turn. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: David H Kirshner Sent: November 5, 2016 1:31 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand,production, and reproduction (and reversibility) Annalisa is right. My suggested empirical study was not responsive to the ongoing thread. I inserted it into the thread because I'd been wishing for some kind of empirical backdrop to the discussion of gendered participation, and something in Annalisa's post brought that to mind. And I attributed the basic interest to Annalisa as a way to justify my pursuing it. I can see that falsely attributing the interest to her might be seen as hijacking her direction, so I apologize. By way of explanation, because the suggested research study was so far off of the ongoing topic, I didn't consider there to be much danger that the ongoing thread would be disrupted; in fact, I thought my suggested study might be interpreted as a humorous interlude (though I am pleased that Alfredo and Peter find it of possible serious interest). If anyone does want to discuss it further, please introduce a new thread line for it. Finally, threads don't belong to individuals, they belong to the list. And they frequently break out in directions not intended by the initiator. This case of my intentionally diverging from the main thrust of a thread seems to me a rare exception. So, Annalisa, whereas you're justified in being angry at me in this case, I don't think there's much to be mined here in terms of the general problem of gendered discourse on XMCA. This doesn't seem to me to be a good example of anything. David -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Annalisa Aguilar Sent: Saturday, November 5, 2016 2:05 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, production, and reproduction (and reversibility) Hi Alfredo, I think to take what I have written and to say that my idea is (really) his idea (or his idea is mine) doesn't make sense to me. Let me put it plainly: *I do not want to talk about logic here.* I've discussed it all I want to. Please, go start a different thread about that. I was not suggesting empirical studies, I am talking about having a conversation right here right now about the genesis of gender expectations and to reflect about demand, production, and reproduction. It's like I said. If you want to know why people are feel reticent to post here, then why don't you ask the people who feel marginalized? Why not listen to us? And what's so foreign about asking you to put yourselves in our shoes and empathize with us? We have to do that all the time with those with power and privilege, something I think African Americans have written much about, and perhaps others. Why not ask how you can be an ally? Why do you need sprint to a solution as if possessing some logical analysis will help you to know what the problem is? Do you NOT believe us? Sure, if this mere kindling of thought generates into a flame for your own work, certainly you should move forward upon it. Isn't that what this list is all about?? But please do not stamp out the small flame here and please allow a fire be built for those who want to participate. If I'm sounding defensive, there is a reason for it. Maybe this conversation will just have to be off-list in order for it to grow sufficiently and be nourished appropriately. Which means it will be not something shared here, for reasons perhaps that we have been considering that pertain to gendered discourse and why there are such imbalances in the voices. So from being moved from the center to the periphery, I am now being escorted out of the building like Medea Benjamin of Code Pink, and I'm just being vocal about each infringement, as people have been with me when bringing up (arbitrary) rules, that are not written down anywhere, anyway. Do you see the violence inherent in the system? I hope so. ________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 11:13 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, production, and reproduction (and reversibility) I do not take David's comments as graffiti. I think you both are suggesting empirical studies, and both proposals make sense to me. Indeed, I have already begun to look for a student who may want to draw on xmca to do some analyses on gender and (academic) online participation (and I am not joking). Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Annalisa Aguilar Sent: 05 November 2016 02:58 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, production, and reproduction (and reversibility) David, That is not my idea. I was *not* suggesting a discourse analysis of Dilemmas of Gendered Discourse at XMCA* at ALL. In fact quite the opposite. Where in the world did I say that, and why are you attributing that to me? I don't understand what you didn't understand. I said how about we compare and contrast in this thread, as a thought sculpture (not embark in some sort of statistical analyses), what the differences are between non-gendered discourse, and gendered discourse. But first focusing upon non-gendered discourse. I don't think that means we should talk about Math, either, or logic! It sort of feels like you just graffiti'd my thread, I'm sorry to say. So if that is the intent, I don't know how that is supposed to work here. Thanks? Kind regards, Annalisa From dkellogg60@gmail.com Sat Nov 5 14:02:19 2016 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2016 08:02:19 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Baritone Voices Promoting Gender Equality in Intellectual Co-Creation In-Reply-To: <581dfe52.41db620a.c4fbd.9932@mx.google.com> References: <581dfe52.41db620a.c4fbd.9932@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Larry, Peter, and Rod: Not at all. It's a great pleasure to be writing stuff that gets to the right place. For Larry--Here are the links to Ruqaiya's work on the lchc website that I put in the previous mail: http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/Paper/JuneJuly05/HasanVygHallBernst.pdf http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/Paper/JuneJuly05/HasanSemMediation.pdf I think the problem with what the other David K is saying about associative thinking on the other thread is that so much of life is literally elsewhere. Yet it too is linked, as we say in China, by a thousand threads and ten thousand strands, to our own. Right now, for example, the USA where I was born is embroiled in a bracing national referendum on sexual assault (and why not? It is an issue that at least half of the electorate understands very well). But closer to home, a quarter of a million people are on the streets of Seoul demanding the immediate resignation of an authoritarian bully who seized her fortune and her political career through family connections. Perhaps what David Ki is calling logic proper is really just the historical product of millennia of other people's lives and other people's associations. And perhaps where logic as a historical, social product of other people's lives really differs from my own associative thinking it is thanks to the fact that other lives really are different from mine. I think one of the main differences between baritones and sopranos has to do, not so much with how much chutzpah but how much time we have at our disposal. That's why I am writing these summarizing notes, for busy people, soprano or baritone, like Peter F--attached. Let me know, Peter, if they make the readings any faster...or just add to the pile! David Kellogg Macquarie University On Sun, Nov 6, 2016 at 2:44 AM, wrote: > I wanted to take a turn and was concerned about interrupting so decided to > pick up a thread or text *message* from David Kellogg and transpose it to a > new thread for Baritone Voices amplifying Soprano voices [hopefully in > harmony]. > > David, like Rod, I would, following your invitation and your lead get my > hands [or computer] on something that Ruqaiyn wrote. Your way of > contrasting her with that list of men, and also sensing Vygotsky is read > too much diverging spontaneous and scientific word meaning and her seeing > *value* in their *reversibility* [each IN the other] indicating > co-generation and co-expression of thought, intellectualization, logic, and > logos, seems to be pregnant with possibility as Baritones finding *common > sense* with Sopranos. > > Rod, your taking up David?s invitation and describing your course > *understanding understanding* is also very pertinent to *extending* this > conversation. > > I hope my jumping in rapidly [with excitement] and the hope of learning to > more effectively to become a Baritone co-creating *sens* [which always > indicates meaning with direction] may be encouraged in a new thread for > Baritones supporting Soprano voices. Thereby creating a symphonic harmony. > > Back to pick up and *resume* Rod?s request to engage with Ruqiya. Whwere > do we start? > > PS: Soprano voices may reply here > > Sent from Mail for Windows 10 > > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Summarizing Endnote for Chapter 5.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 28546 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20161106/8798f5a9/attachment-0001.bin From R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk Sat Nov 5 14:04:43 2016 From: R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk (Rod Parker-Rees) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 21:04:43 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? In-Reply-To: References: <6B2C5457-8B44-4DF9-A6A3-6101ED3C1AC6@gmail.com> <278F23D9-C17C-4D09-9AB9-9552FEDBC24B@unco.edu> Message-ID: Thank you from me too, Dana, and to Chris for offering this list of potentially marginalising moves. I am conscious, when I consider replying to a post here, that I don't feel sure about the prevailing etiquette - the done thing - and I suspect that this may be partly because there are many different things being done here all at the same time. An image that popped into my mind while I was trying to work out what I wanted to say was the inter-alien bar scenes in 'The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy' and, I believe, in Star Wars films - where beings from different worlds drink, talk, gamble and fight together (very blokey!). Is that what we have here? A bunch of Vygotsky exegetes and scholars, another group of academics who would like to know what the scholars say but who don't have the time (or the knowledge of Russian) to be able to engage with the texts in the same way, some practitioners (particularly language teachers?) and at other tables all sorts of other interesting and interested people each belonging to one or many groups which each have their own ways of doing things. What complicates matters further is that (I suspect) most of us are not able to linger as long as we might like in this hyper-cosmopolitan melee of ideas, which means that our contributions are sporadic and cannot hope to sustain threads or even zig-gap-zags. I am deeply grateful to the 'regulars' who put in the real work to keep conversations going and most of the time I am content to listen in on their conversations but sometimes I do try to chip in. The din in the bar makes it hard to follow several different conversations at the same time (I am listening in on the genesis of gendered expectations, dipping a toe into first and second signal systems and trying to follow the discussion about what we are doing here). I have just read a chapter by Ruqaiya Hasan, recommended by David Kellogg, which includes some lovely examples of conversations between mothers and young children - usually alongside the dailiness of getting on with what needs doing - and this made me realise how impossible it would be to transcribe a 'conversation' on xmca. One post can result in multiple simultaneous responses, each of which potentially takes the conversation in a different direction - or in none. Some of these responses may be cross-linked by traces from previous other posts so we end up with not so much a chain of linked but separate ideas as a tree of branching and spreading ones. Hasan (http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/Paper/JuneJuly05/HasanSemMediation.pdf ) writes about the way children are shaped by both visible and invisible pedagogies - by HOW others engage with them and respond to them as well as by WHAT others say - some children learning to expect others to be interested in what they think while others learn that they are expected to fit in and do and think as they are expected to do and think. And of course these differences are both socially productive and reproductive. So what can participants in xmca learn about how we are expected to do things? Yes, we could have a set of protocols and rules - but which species would decide what those should be? Better, I suspect, to accept the diversity of cultures while recognising that we all have a responsibility to do our best to make sure we don't trample on anyone in the hurly burly. I think there is something here about a dialectic between the critical component of contributions and their ethical component - between the second signal system, conceptual, co-generalized WHAT and the respect, trust and social sensitivity in HOW we engage with each other and I do think this is particularly challenging when we can't quite be sure what it is that other participants are up to. I like the liveliness and I value the opportunity to stumble across bits of long-running conversations but I hope I can do something to make what we are doing here feel more inclusive - it is particularly hard to know when you have trodden on someone's toe or caused offence when there is so little real time feedback- and I am completely with Annalisa when she pointed out that it isn't the victims of a car crash who should be expected to take responsibility for making sure lessons are learned. Too long- sorry! Rod -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Christopher Schuck Sent: 05 November 2016 19:18 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? Sure, Dana - thanks for asking. It's not detailed or especially revelatory; just a simple heuristic accounting for some of the complaints that seem to have come up either directly or indirectly, and one possible starting point in the event that some new convention or unofficial policy is ever attempted. Why don't I just include it below for simplicity's sake. Perhaps it's still relevant to Rod's question "What are we doing here?" in speaking the opposite question, "Whatever else we might be doing here, what *don't * we want to be doing here?" By the way, I realize now that the second long paragraph of my prior post devoted to time frames, in media res, etc. was actually intended for one of the other threads discussing that theme, but had trouble locating that one and then forgot to separate it. Sorry if it seemed out of place here. I wasn't aware of the Voicemail application - that sounds interesting. It was actually Greg who mentioned the phone and prosody, but it's fitting you bring it up because I had also considered sharing anecdotally (re. diverse cognitive and discursive style) that personally, I have always hated the phone and feel way more connected to people when writing or face to face. For me, that middle ground of phone or Skype just ends up being the worst of both worlds: less organic than pure verbal *or *pure embodied interaction. But that's just me. Anyway, here's what I wrote before, for what it's worth: "As part of any effort to make discussions more inclusive, it might be worth specifying the kinds of problematic dynamics being targeted. For instance, off the top of my head I can think of seven ways, broadly speaking, that people might end up feeling marginalized or shut out of conversations: 1) Someone makes a thoughtful or relevant comment that invites some kind of further response, and is roundly ignored. 2) Someone makes a comment and is responded to on a very abstract or theoretical level incongruent with the spirit in which the comment was made (including reference to concrete lived experience). 3) Someone makes a comment and is responded to concretely and directly, but with a certain degree of insensitivity or unequal power dynamic (conscious or not). 4) Someone is responded to with overt hostility, intimidation, passive-aggressiveness and/or deliberate insensitivity. 5) Someone finds it especially difficult to enter or make any initial post, due to lots of "inside" conversation or a competitive sink-or-swim environment that makes it feel unpalatable or unsafe to participate. 6) Someone comes to a conversation to find they're already hopelessly behind (e.g. 30 posts from missing a couple days), and finds it difficult to catch up or contribute anything they might still have to offer, because the thread is geared only toward those who have been there from the very beginning (and no one is willing to cut them some slack or help fill in missing context) 7) A newcomer who has never participated before would like to join one of the ongoing conversations, but has absolutely no idea what the prevailing customs are and what is appropriate, or what level of erudition and background familiarity is assumed for which fields, and as a result feels like they have nothing to hang their hat on." Chris On Sat, Nov 5, 2016 at 1:37 PM, Walker, Dana wrote: > Chris, > > I enjoyed reading your post, and would like to read the email you did > not send, if you were willing to share it (or you could send it > directly to me dana.walker@unco.edu), since the question of how > marginalization is accomplished discursively interests me. > > Regarding your closing thoughts about face to face versus written > communication: I think there are probably a variety of formats for non > f2f communication that could afford a less narrow range of interaction > than does this the email listserve. You mentioned the phone and > prosody: The application Voicemail does this as well. You can directly > record either an audio or video post and include a artefactual ?third > thing,? such as photo or a slide. Participants can see/hear and > respond to each other at either a fast or slow pace, since the > voicethread remains in place until it is removed. It is free up to 5 voicethreads per person. > > Dana > > On 11/4/16, 7:13 PM, "xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of > Christopher Schuck" schuckthemonkey@gmail.com> wrote: > > Thanks too for such a thoughtful synopsis, Rod, which I found myself > relating to deeply. And I suppose this is also relevant to the > stuff on the > Gender thread, but I no longer know where to go. Fast Swim, Slow Swim, > Gender, Logic, Genesis of Gender...all spinning off of what > appeared to be > a single theme. Wow! My head is spinning. > > Having checked in after some time and discovered two or three parallel > conversations well underway, all the comments about time frames > (including > Vera's observation about differing paces, styles and degrees of > necessary > reflection time) feel very apropos. One of the realities of this > format and > the quick turnaround times for posting is that if one is not > conscientious > about keeping up (or just lacks the time), there is inevitably an > "in media > res" effect of trying to understand the running narrative > backwards while > needing to (collectively and collaboratively) live it forwards. I don't > think this is always a bad thing. In fact, I suspect it can > sometimes have > the paradoxical effect of enhancing and elevating the discussion. > There is > a certain humility and beginner's mind that comes with wandering into a > conversation late, a certain openness to what may not yet be fully > processed, understood and contextualized. And, coming at it with > fresh eyes > can lend a different angle that shakes up the conversation a bit. > It felt > this way, for instance, when Maria Cristina suddenly entered and > offered a > re-contextualization (time constraints and domestic > responsibilities) that > kind of turned everything on its head. At the same time, there may be a > certain responsibility on the part of those already engrossed in the > dialogue to be welcoming and inclusive towards anyone "in media res > distress." I agree with Alfredo that trying to prescribe along the > "fast/slow" dimension is undesirable; I'm not sure how much adding > new tags > for posts or further classifying per se would really help to > counter any > problematic dynamics, though I know nothing about these technologies. I > find myself thinking: what's wrong with the good old-fashioned > initiative > of emailing individuals separately and CC-ing whoever seems > interested, or > announcing that you'd like to email further with any takers? > > Having looked over the last several threads (if far from reading > exhaustively), it seems to me there may be two different issues: > 1) how to > do better justice to all these differing purposes, styles and uses > of the > listserve, and/or clarify "what we are doing here" in order to avoid > confusion; 2) how to cultivate a fully hospitable atmosphere for > those who > may end up being marginalized in various ways, and address these issues > without generating even more unnecessary distress. Of course, those two > things aren't entirely unrelated. But improving the second may not > require > that we have fully resolved the first. In another post > accidentally sent > from the wrong email, which bounced back and disappeared, I attempted a > preliminary list of different ways people might end up feeling > marginalized > or shut out of conversations. Probably not worth resending at this > point. > > I am more of a peripheral member of this community and have only > posted a > few times, but in each instance was very aware of anxiety over the > possibility of translating poorly or just sounding plain stupid. > Trying to > negotiate complex ideas *and *respect feelings and boundaries *and *not > sound ignorant, in the absence of voice, expression and physical > proximity, > sometimes feels a bit like entering a dark and crowded room. You > want to > make contact without knocking someone over or banging into them, but > ultimately you must wait for your eyes to adjust to the night > vision so you > can "know your way about" (as Wittgenstein might say). I think > it's easy to > underestimate the diversity of cognitive and discursive styles, > not just > goals and values, among people on the board. As someone who tends to > approach things very analytically and linearly, in such contexts of > ambiguity I find myself tempted to fall back on the intellectual > structure > of ideas, abstract theory, content over form or use, as if it were some > kind of "universal language." Yet as we all know, this does not > always help > - and sometimes it backfires. Meanwhile, as someone who like all > of us has > an inner life and related experiences, I am tempted to offer something > immediate, concrete and personal. But this can feel risky and possibly > irrelevant, perhaps even narcissistic. To a great extent I am > happy just to > listen and learn. But Alfredo's point about not just being a > spectator also > resonates with me. > > Despite all these misgivings, I'm not sure I'm ready to agree that this > format for communication, or verbal written discourse in general, is > automatically inferior and impoverished in relation to other > modes. I mean, > in some ways it obviously is. But there is often a level of care and > thought -- and continuity -- that would be difficult to reproduce > in a room > where people are prone to physically competing while attempting > high-level > discourse in real time, yet still manages to be relational. There are > definitely tradeoffs. I think like most technology, it brings great > opportunities and big problems. And new opportunities that arise from > having to face those problems. > > Chris > > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 4:37 PM, Greg Thompson < > greg.a.thompson@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Yes, I'm with you on that too Rod. I think that's why social > media can get > > so nasty so often. It is a chilly medium that is a highly > denuded form of > > communication. (e.g., when I said "I'm with you on that too", was I > > alluding to other times when I'm not "with you"? Some could > interpret it > > that way (btw, that's not what I meant!!)). > > > > I marvel that there is so much that gets done on this listserve > in spite of > > this fact. > > > > Also makes me wonder why so many people put so much stock in > literacy as > > being a massively transformative capacity. Seems a more base form of > > communication than any form of oral communication I've ever > experienced > > (even the phone gives you prosody!). > > > > -greg > > > > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 2:22 PM, Rod Parker-Rees < > > R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk> wrote: > > > > > Thanks Helen and Greg, > > > > > > I certainly like the opportunity to hang out with interesting > people but > > I > > > think it is probably inevitable in this sort of set up that > wires can get > > > crossed when people feel they are engaging in different kinds of > > activities. > > > I suspect that what has kept this group going is that every > now and then > > > people stand back and take stock of how it is working and that > allows > > > people to realise that it works in different ways (and feels > different) > > for > > > different people. > > > > > > This has made me wonder how often other forms of communication > (even > > where > > > only two people are involved) can involve different people > having very > > > different understandings about what they are doing and > sometimes this > > > doesn't matter but sometimes it does. > > > > > > I hope we can keep it going. > > > > > > All the best, > > > > > > Rod > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > > > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Greg Thompson > > > Sent: 04 November 2016 19:58 > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? > > > > > > Great question Rod! > > > > > > As to the answer, as John Cage was fond of saying: "no why, > just here." > > > > > > Okay, fair enough. But it seems like the question deserves a more > > > thoughtful answer than this. > > > > > > I suppose if I were entirely honest, I find this to be a nice > place to > > > hang out and learn and occasionally I try to use the listserve > to put > > > something out there in the interest of getting some feedback > to help > > > develop it. I've had much more success with the former than > the latter. > > > > > > I do wonder what the mission statement of this listserve would > be if > > there > > > were such a thing. It seems like we don't engage with MCA > nearly as much > > as > > > we should if that were to be the goal of the listserve. > > > > > > Other than that, I would guess that the mission statement would be > > > something like: it's a place for people who are interested in > CHAT to > > hang > > > out and talk about stuff that they care about (sometimes CHAT > and MCA > > > related, sometimes not). > > > > > > Is that too cynical? Or is that just about right? > > > > > > Perhaps someone else can give a better statement of what the > listserve is > > > "about"? (and I hate to even get into the question of what it > SHOULD be - > > > I'd rather live it and see what works that deliberate about > what that > > life > > > should look like, but, sure, there is some value in doing the > former). > > > > > > Thanks for your question/contribution Rod. Right to the point. > > > -greg > > > > > > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Helena Worthen < > helenaworthen@gmail.com > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > This is a good contribution. Thanks -- H > > > > > > > > Helena Worthen > > > > helenaworthen@gmail.com > > > > Vietnam blog: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > > > > > > > On Nov 4, 2016, at 2:30 AM, Rod Parker-Rees wrote: > > > > > > > > > I am an interested but time-poor lurker on the margins of > xmca but > > > > > the > > > > ripples stirred by Mike's decision to reduce his pastoral > contribution > > > > to our community have made me question how different participants > > > > understand what kind of activity we are engaging in here. > > > > > > > > > > It seems to me that each of us may understand the social > form of > > > > > what we > > > > are doing in different ways. For some it is like a > conversation and we > > > > feel disappointed or hurt if our contributions are met with > silence or > > > > if the chain moves on in a different direction. For others > we are a > > > > working group, collaborating to develop a practical and ethical > > > > theoretical model. For others we are something like a conference, > > > > where thoughts and ideas can be put before others for their > > > > consideration and response - and I am sure there are many > other ways > > > > in which different people understand their participation > differently. > > > > > > > > > > Does this matter? Would xmca be 'better' if it was more > consistent, > > > > > more > > > > coherent, more tightly and predictably governed by shared social > > > > understandings? While more explicit regulation (protocols for > > > > labelling streams and posts and for timing of responses > etc.) might > > > > help to make our activity feel more inclusive and more > sharable it may > > > > also introduce new kinds of discomfort. > > > > > > > > > > What I have found interesting in my time around the > margins of xmca > > > > > is > > > > the challenge of sustaining conversations without all the > non-verbal > > > > feedback which we rely on when we talk with people. When > 'wordings' > > > > float off into the ether, cast off from the body and > personhood of > > > > their speakers or writers they become objects which can be > scrutinised > > > > and revisited and this can be a reason for 'lurkers' to feel > reluctant > > > about contributing. > > > > What we are doing is not a conversation. Nor is it even a > forum, in > > > > the sense of people taking turns to orate before a crowd, because > > > > contributors often get very little phatic feedback from the > lurkers > > > > and may have very little sense of how their arguments have been > > > > understood or received. But we are moved by our > understandings of what > > > > it is and is not OK to do, which come from other kinds of > > > > interactions. Can I say something if I have not been part of > what has > > > > gone before? Should I respond or stay quiet? What should I > do if I am > > > > annoyed or angered by something someone else has contributed? > > > > > > > > > > I am already getting anxious about how what I have said > might be > > > > interpreted by others and feeling I have had a long enough > turn but I > > > > would be really interested to hear what others think about > why we are > > > here! > > > > > > > > > > I have found what people do here very helpful but I do > feel uneasy > > > > > about > > > > risking contributions! > > > > > > > > > > All the best, > > > > > > > > > > Rod > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif] > > > //www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass> > > > > > > > > > > This email and any files with it are confidential and intended > > > > > solely > > > > for the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you > are not > > > > the intended recipient then copying, distribution or other > use of the > > > > information contained is strictly prohibited and you should > not rely on > > > it. > > > > If you have received this email in error please let the > sender know > > > > immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet > emails are not > > > > necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University > > > > accepts no responsibility for viruses and it is your > responsibility to > > > > scan emails and their attachments. Plymouth University does > not accept > > > > responsibility for any changes made after it was sent. > Nothing in this > > > > email or its attachments constitutes an order for goods or > services > > > > unless accompanied by an official order form. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > > > Assistant Professor > > > Department of Anthropology > > > 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > > > Brigham Young University > > > Provo, UT 84602 > > > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson > > > ________________________________ > > > [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif] > > //www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass> > > > > > > This email and any files with it are confidential and intended > solely for > > > the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are > not the > > > intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the > > > information contained is strictly prohibited and you should > not rely on > > it. > > > If you have received this email in error please let the sender know > > > immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails > are not > > > necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth > University accepts > > > no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan > > emails > > > and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept > responsibility > > > for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email > or its > > > attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless > accompanied > > > by an official order form. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > > Assistant Professor > > Department of Anthropology > > 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > > Brigham Young University > > Provo, UT 84602 > > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson > > > > > > ________________________________ [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif] This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on it. If you have received this email in error please let the sender know immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University accepts no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan emails and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept responsibility for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless accompanied by an official order form. From tom.richardson3@googlemail.com Sat Nov 5 14:11:59 2016 From: tom.richardson3@googlemail.com (Tom Richardson) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 21:11:59 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: References: <1477662717568.90322@iped.uio.no> <1CF09B3A-DF07-4538-A198-FDB1B1EDE432@gmail.com> <58174c10.4223620a.cb56a.39b6@mx.google.com> <004801d23447$4aef6110$e0ce2330$@att.net> <581a026f.0f08620a.9bde9.a672@mx.google.com> <3f68de59-0c17-04fe-dd9c-1acc43000bd8@ires.piemonte.it> Message-ID: Hi Annalisa Thank you for the prompt and relevant response. I trust it won't feel like mansplaining if I bullet point my comments in reply - this is a large debate and I'm unsure of how best to elucidate the essence of any disagreement. First, apologies since, at present,I cannot give a link to Dunayevskaya's book - it isn't on the MIA - Marxist Internet Archive in her section: I'll have a look on another site that might include it. - I haven't followed any thread about the gendering of science(s) / logic(s) - Marx and Engels were, well Marx definitely, sexist and culturally racist, but I was using 'scientific' in the sense of an analysis of data, starting from its essential 'seed', in the case of *Capital*, the commodity, and following through, as I describe below, to examine the working processes that arise from that starting point. - I will have to look up 'confirmation bias', so I cannot say that I and my material don't suffer from it. - It is interesting that you laud Piketty for his analysis of data, unavailable to Marx. From a Marxian/Marxist pov, Piketty's conflation of *wealth* with *capital, *is a primary, categorical error. Wealth / money becomes capital only when it is invested in productive capacity / is capable of reproducing its value and adding a *surplus value,* which will allow for further accumulation of productive capacity. Money interest and rent are one form of the total surplus value arising from *capitalist production.* - Clearly, today's world contains systems, processes and factors which were absent from late C19 world with its societies and processes, but I am of the opinion that the process, analysed arguing from the abstract level of essence and building up to the concrete processes, by which value is created and surplus extracted from human labour through the capitalist exploitation of wage earners enslaved in the wages system has not changed. - I feel that it is somewhat superficial to suggest that the hours spent by Marx, note taking from official Blue Books and Parliamentary reports and current newspaper reportage, wasn't an antique but deeply effective and up-to-date 'drilling down' into his world, comparable with any Google search. - And Fred Engels, his collaborator for years, brought his knowledge of management at Engels and Barmen ( I remember seeing one of my mother's cotton reels with the company name on it, long before I was interested in any of this stuff ?), as well as his research in the factories and stews of Manchester - so there was, I would counter, a valid continuing collection of contemporary data by the pair of them. - I am also of the opinion, desperately sadly, that ending the law of value through international communist revolution is a consummation, though devoutly to be wished, very far from possibility at this moment. - There are a variety of Marxist grouplets trying to figure out the solution to that problem (me as an individual, too), but the question of the *politics* necessary to persuade enough people that the Marxist * critique of political economy* means that we need to produce simply for human need, not for corporative profit, is at present escaping us. - Your final, fire kindling metaphor applies to that situation too ?. - I have every trust that, if Andy Blunden, follows this thread, he will correct / refute any errors in my short introduction to Marx, so that I am not leading other followers into culs-de-sac. Again, I value the inclusiveness of the fact of your reading and responding, meaning I have the opportunity to contribute. Best Tom On 5 November 2016 at 18:40, Annalisa Aguilar wrote: > > > Hi Tom, > > Thanks very much for your post and sharing a text that might be beneficial > to the thread. > > Is it possible for you to scan this chapter and post it to the list? It > would contribute to the thread significantly, and I would certainly see you > as an ally in collaboration with what the thread initiated if you did it, > rather than being relegated to a lurker. Please join us, and anyone else > interested. > > If being scientific means being logical, and being logical means gendered, > then certainly that can present problems. But if being scientific means > avoidance of confirmation bias, then I'm all for it. > > What I don't understand concerning Marx, and I do not mean to be insulting > in any way; this is a real question... He served a very important purpose > and he is historically valuable, so I do not doubt that. What troubles me, > especially after reading some of the Piketty book, Capital in the > Twenty-first Century, is that Marx could not get his hands on the data to > determine if his analyses were correct. Now Piketty (an economist) says in > some ways Marx was right, but in others he was wrong. If there is someone > being scientific about it, I'd say Piketty is. But the reasons Marx was > wrong where he was wrong is because the data doesn't support his notions. > Piketty explained his own work was to basically collect the data that Marx > could not, now that the internet being what it is, that's basically the > project of the book. But somehow it is heretical to have doubts about Marx, > and that is why I said what I said, Tom. If Marx was a scientist, then why > not be skeptical of him, just as any other scientist among us? > > I'd certainly be interested in hearing from a person who had doubts in > Darwin, not because they are creationists, but because they saw something > in the theory that caused them to have doubt, and they want to follow the > seam of that doubt. That seems very scientific to me. > > I hope that doesn't make me a full-blooded capitalist for saying these > things. > > Anyway, I want to make the point that there is a privilege given to Marx > as if he were a prophet and his utterances cannot be at all mistaken. He > was a single man living in a time of economic upheaval and change, and he > thought about it, he talked about it, and he wrote about it. And what he > wrote viscerally resonated for people who suffer from the injustice > inherent in the system, I cannot dismiss that and do not mean to. However > history continues and technology continues in their development, and the > view from the train of history isn't always flat and predictable. So how > can it be that we anticipate that the worldview of Marx's train compartment > will be identical to ours? Should we assume that the tools he fashioned > then will work now? > > Piketty draws that out, he is looking at the problem scientifically, I'd > say. The publication of the translation in the US really freaked out all > the capitalists, as I recall. Both Piketty and Varoufakis, that other > famous lefty-economist, have remarked vociferously (maybe Varoufakis more > than Piketty) that economics (in the university and elsewhere) *as a > science* is a shambles and have almost come as close to saying the state of > the discipline is no different then reading tea leaves (my words; their > sense about it). > > Last year I had been reading the first chapter of La Pens?e Sauvage by > Levi-Strauss and I really admired his observation that scientific thinking > begins with the science of the concrete. Maybe that is what is referenced > here as associative thinking or chaining, not sure. What is somehow > off-putting is that associative thinking frequently gets short shrift, when > it is the very kindling for higher conceptual thinking. But it seems like > airing dirty laundry to admit to doing that kind of thinking or encouraging > it. I did not get to the 2nd chapter on totemism (yet), but I sense that > Levi-Strauss's work was to eliminate the hierarchies of human cognition > because of his sense of social justice, having lived through the > destruction of WW II, which we all know was begun because of a stubborn > belief in a hierarchy of mental ability connected to unscientific notions > of race. I wonder (which I would likely learn if I got deeper into the > text) if he comments upon the idea that any hierarchies that do pertain to > thinking and cognition are functional but not value laden, in terms of > class or caste, intelligence versus stupidity, literacy vs illiteracy, etc. > That's what I sense from his work, intuitively. > > I feel the analogy of functional hierarchies very much when I've been > building fires these past weeks. There is a trick to building the fire from > paper and kindling to catching a log so the fire really starts to warm up > the house and take the chill off. It's true you can't just go from kindling > to logs and the flames must be of a certain caliber to light the log, so > there must be intermediary and transitional pieces of wood to make the fire > inevitable, while also contained. It also helps to have a bellows or to > blow really hard to fan the fire. If there is not enough air the flames at > the beginning do go out. There is more attention and care required at that > stage. > > So to all you fire builders out there, you might know what I am talking > about. > > Still wondering if anyone will discuss what is meant by chaining. > > But thanks Tom, I hope to hear from you more, and others. > > Kind regards, > > Annalisa > From Dana.Walker@unco.edu Sat Nov 5 15:02:52 2016 From: Dana.Walker@unco.edu (Walker, Dana) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 22:02:52 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? In-Reply-To: References: <6B2C5457-8B44-4DF9-A6A3-6101ED3C1AC6@gmail.com> <278F23D9-C17C-4D09-9AB9-9552FEDBC24B@unco.edu> Message-ID: <4CF65AE6-DFDE-411E-BAD8-571C1D4AC2A4@unco.edu> On 11/5/16, 1:18 PM, "xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Christopher Schuck" wrote: "As part of any effort to make discussions more inclusive, it might be worth specifying the kinds of problematic dynamics being targeted. Chris, I found this analysis of ways that people might feel shut down or shut out of discussion in XMCA very insightful. How can we use it to guide us through the dim light and hurly burly of this inter-alien bar that is XMCA? (I do think Rod?s analogy is right-on, and very funny). This is another example of how the email thread could be enhanced by a more spatial, less linear representation of our thoughts, emotions, and practices, as in a website or blogsite where we could post, edit, revisit your description of seven moves that engender marginalization when we post to the group. We might even begin to develop a consensus about what we are all doing here, both ethically and conceptually. Topical threads could have their own spaces, to help avoid the confusion of names (who said what) and ideas. Dana From tom.richardson3@googlemail.com Sat Nov 5 15:02:48 2016 From: tom.richardson3@googlemail.com (Tom Richardson) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 22:02:48 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: References: <1477662717568.90322@iped.uio.no> <1CF09B3A-DF07-4538-A198-FDB1B1EDE432@gmail.com> <58174c10.4223620a.cb56a.39b6@mx.google.com> <004801d23447$4aef6110$e0ce2330$@att.net> <581a026f.0f08620a.9bde9.a672@mx.google.com> <3f68de59-0c17-04fe-dd9c-1acc43000bd8@ires.piemonte.it> Message-ID: Hi again Annalisa Here is a link to an earlier Dunayevskaya article which clearly forms the basis for the third chapter of the book I mentioned. Given your unfamiliarity with the Marxian 'discourse', it may NOT be *at all useful*. I know that I find it exceptionally difficult to try to follow the different threads on these xmca pages, fascinating and challenging though they are. It requires types of familiarity and more importantly, a mind-set which investigates apparently 'obvious' positions to test out their presumptions, using new conceptual frameworks and language. I am inflicting that, on your mind, with this. I trust that my first post gives some sort of basis/ introduction that eases your way somewhat. My intentions are 'good'.?, which we are told leads often only in one direction. www.marxists.org/archive/dunayevskaya/works/1947/luxemburg.htm I hope you find time for this 'thread', along with all the other difficult *auseinandersetzungen *which seem to be bumpily taking place. Best Tom Middlesbrough UK On 5 November 2016 at 18:40, Annalisa Aguilar wrote: > > > Hi Tom, > > Thanks very much for your post and sharing a text that might be beneficial > to the thread. > > Is it possible for you to scan this chapter and post it to the list? It > would contribute to the thread significantly, and I would certainly see you > as an ally in collaboration with what the thread initiated if you did it, > rather than being relegated to a lurker. Please join us, and anyone else > interested. > > If being scientific means being logical, and being logical means gendered, > then certainly that can present problems. But if being scientific means > avoidance of confirmation bias, then I'm all for it. > > What I don't understand concerning Marx, and I do not mean to be insulting > in any way; this is a real question... He served a very important purpose > and he is historically valuable, so I do not doubt that. What troubles me, > especially after reading some of the Piketty book, Capital in the > Twenty-first Century, is that Marx could not get his hands on the data to > determine if his analyses were correct. Now Piketty (an economist) says in > some ways Marx was right, but in others he was wrong. If there is someone > being scientific about it, I'd say Piketty is. But the reasons Marx was > wrong where he was wrong is because the data doesn't support his notions. > Piketty explained his own work was to basically collect the data that Marx > could not, now that the internet being what it is, that's basically the > project of the book. But somehow it is heretical to have doubts about Marx, > and that is why I said what I said, Tom. If Marx was a scientist, then why > not be skeptical of him, just as any other scientist among us? > > I'd certainly be interested in hearing from a person who had doubts in > Darwin, not because they are creationists, but because they saw something > in the theory that caused them to have doubt, and they want to follow the > seam of that doubt. That seems very scientific to me. > > I hope that doesn't make me a full-blooded capitalist for saying these > things. > > Anyway, I want to make the point that there is a privilege given to Marx > as if he were a prophet and his utterances cannot be at all mistaken. He > was a single man living in a time of economic upheaval and change, and he > thought about it, he talked about it, and he wrote about it. And what he > wrote viscerally resonated for people who suffer from the injustice > inherent in the system, I cannot dismiss that and do not mean to. However > history continues and technology continues in their development, and the > view from the train of history isn't always flat and predictable. So how > can it be that we anticipate that the worldview of Marx's train compartment > will be identical to ours? Should we assume that the tools he fashioned > then will work now? > > Piketty draws that out, he is looking at the problem scientifically, I'd > say. The publication of the translation in the US really freaked out all > the capitalists, as I recall. Both Piketty and Varoufakis, that other > famous lefty-economist, have remarked vociferously (maybe Varoufakis more > than Piketty) that economics (in the university and elsewhere) *as a > science* is a shambles and have almost come as close to saying the state of > the discipline is no different then reading tea leaves (my words; their > sense about it). > > Last year I had been reading the first chapter of La Pens?e Sauvage by > Levi-Strauss and I really admired his observation that scientific thinking > begins with the science of the concrete. Maybe that is what is referenced > here as associative thinking or chaining, not sure. What is somehow > off-putting is that associative thinking frequently gets short shrift, when > it is the very kindling for higher conceptual thinking. But it seems like > airing dirty laundry to admit to doing that kind of thinking or encouraging > it. I did not get to the 2nd chapter on totemism (yet), but I sense that > Levi-Strauss's work was to eliminate the hierarchies of human cognition > because of his sense of social justice, having lived through the > destruction of WW II, which we all know was begun because of a stubborn > belief in a hierarchy of mental ability connected to unscientific notions > of race. I wonder (which I would likely learn if I got deeper into the > text) if he comments upon the idea that any hierarchies that do pertain to > thinking and cognition are functional but not value laden, in terms of > class or caste, intelligence versus stupidity, literacy vs illiteracy, etc. > That's what I sense from his work, intuitively. > > I feel the analogy of functional hierarchies very much when I've been > building fires these past weeks. There is a trick to building the fire from > paper and kindling to catching a log so the fire really starts to warm up > the house and take the chill off. It's true you can't just go from kindling > to logs and the flames must be of a certain caliber to light the log, so > there must be intermediary and transitional pieces of wood to make the fire > inevitable, while also contained. It also helps to have a bellows or to > blow really hard to fan the fire. If there is not enough air the flames at > the beginning do go out. There is more attention and care required at that > stage. > > So to all you fire builders out there, you might know what I am talking > about. > > Still wondering if anyone will discuss what is meant by chaining. > > But thanks Tom, I hope to hear from you more, and others. > > Kind regards, > > Annalisa > From Dana.Walker@unco.edu Sat Nov 5 15:15:59 2016 From: Dana.Walker@unco.edu (Walker, Dana) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 22:15:59 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Voices of the Mind... on Radio Lab Message-ID: <4D6B35DD-0D4E-449A-B409-D135BFEED5D3@unco.edu> The Voices Inside You ?Where would we be without the voices in our heads? To get at this question, Charles Fernyhough raises another: can children think before they have words? According to Fernyhough, a Russian psychologist named Lev Vygotsky developed a theory about how the words and voices we hear as kids turn from ...? http://www.radiolab.org/story/301401-inner-voices/ On 11/5/16, 4:02 PM, "xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Walker, Dana" wrote: On 11/5/16, 1:18 PM, "xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Christopher Schuck" wrote: "As part of any effort to make discussions more inclusive, it might be worth specifying the kinds of problematic dynamics being targeted. Chris, I found this analysis of ways that people might feel shut down or shut out of discussion in XMCA very insightful. How can we use it to guide us through the dim light and hurly burly of this inter-alien bar that is XMCA? (I do think Rod?s analogy is right-on, and very funny). This is another example of how the email thread could be enhanced by a more spatial, less linear representation of our thoughts, emotions, and practices, as in a website or blogsite where we could post, edit, revisit your description of seven moves that engender marginalization when we post to the group. We might even begin to develop a consensus about what we are all doing here, both ethically and conceptually. Topical threads could have their own spaces, to help avoid the confusion of names (who said what) and ideas. Dana From schuckthemonkey@gmail.com Sat Nov 5 17:02:39 2016 From: schuckthemonkey@gmail.com (Christopher Schuck) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 20:02:39 -0400 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: References: <1477662717568.90322@iped.uio.no> <1CF09B3A-DF07-4538-A198-FDB1B1EDE432@gmail.com> <58174c10.4223620a.cb56a.39b6@mx.google.com> <004801d23447$4aef6110$e0ce2330$@att.net> <581a026f.0f08620a.9bde9.a672@mx.google.com> <3f68de59-0c17-04fe-dd9c-1acc43000bd8@ires.piemonte.it> Message-ID: Annalisa, I happen to have the book - here it is. Ashamed to say I had not (yet) actually read it. Just call me a hoarder. Just to make things clear, I am a white straight male who has never struggled with or directly encountered the specific kinds of gender-related barriers and experiences under discussion here. It may be that all I have to offer right now is to stay respectfully on the sidelines and learn what I can. But I wanted to let you know that I have gained something being exposed to all these dialogues, even if I cannot articulate exactly what it is. While of course it's observable that more men post, I was not aware that this listserve had such historical problems with gender and that at least some women and minorities continue to find it unpleasant, nor would I have necessarily picked up on this were it not expressly brought to my attention. Jacob's anecdote about the cynical conversation with his partner really drove home the reality of some of these dynamics in a qualitatively different way. Certainly, I am inspired to take some of this back to my primary academic community and especially their listserve, which is -- believe it or not -- far less evolved than here when it comes to diverse participation and discussion of these issues. (If it is appropriate for a male to be involved in Alfredo's proposed research project on gendered listserves, I might be very interested in participating in the future.) By no means do I expect that, e.g., Jacob would suddenly find it worthwhile to keep engaging with the listserve just because one white dude says he's "learning something." But perhaps it makes a tiny bit of difference just to know there is some kind of ripple effect, that it may still be reaching and influencing some people who can benefit and pass it on to others, even if they are not reaching you? There is a whole other shadow world we can't see: all those lurkers and future allies-in-the-making who are listening and being affected, right now. Perhaps this too is part of the non-commodified "demand" you speak of. If I might offer one more thing (and I'm struck recently by how many seem torn between wanting to be thorough and do proper justice to nuanced issues so as not to gloss or trivialize, and wanting to respectfully occupy as little space as possible), some of the tension and conflict on a couple of these threads strikes me as a content over form/tone issue. That is, you (and others, like Jacob and Vera) point to an atmosphere that reinforces male-centered discourse, and when males respond in the effort to be "constructive," not only do we end up being the only ones responding and taking up yet more room (like me!) but we tend to put all the emphasis on the *content *of the dynamic and how to target this impossibly complicated "problem," when sometimes all I'm hearing you ask for is a *spirit *of alliance and empathy; a stance, as it were. In a way, something much less ambitious - yet, very easy to step right over in the zeal to problem-solve. The more directly we try to assist or contribute, the more we bypass the indirect and contextualized kind of things you are talking about. So, instead of asking we end up telling or explicating (maybe like I'm doing now - but I'm trying to work toward a question!); instead of encouraging you and others to illuminate us about something we may not yet understand, we implicitly demand that you show us. Even if all the intentions are good, and the language seemed "correct." Does this sound right to you? More importantly: does it *feel *like I am an ally when I share these things, or anything else I may say or ask in the future? Does it feel better when I address you in the second person as opposed to just using your name when responding indirectly to something you said? Would it be enough to just say I am an ally, and that I believe what you and some others have alluded to is not just some chimera? These are the questions I'm trying to keep in the center of my perceptual field. Or maybe instead of all that I should just say: I'm sorry that you and Jacob and Vera and unnamed others have apparently been made to feel this way; let me know if there is anything special I can do or not do. Time allowing, of course. That's the longest post you'll see from me on this thread unless otherwise requested. Chris On Sat, Nov 5, 2016 at 2:40 PM, Annalisa Aguilar wrote: > > > Hi Tom, > > Thanks very much for your post and sharing a text that might be beneficial > to the thread. > > Is it possible for you to scan this chapter and post it to the list? It > would contribute to the thread significantly, and I would certainly see you > as an ally in collaboration with what the thread initiated if you did it, > rather than being relegated to a lurker. Please join us, and anyone else > interested. > > If being scientific means being logical, and being logical means gendered, > then certainly that can present problems. But if being scientific means > avoidance of confirmation bias, then I'm all for it. > > What I don't understand concerning Marx, and I do not mean to be insulting > in any way; this is a real question... He served a very important purpose > and he is historically valuable, so I do not doubt that. What troubles me, > especially after reading some of the Piketty book, Capital in the > Twenty-first Century, is that Marx could not get his hands on the data to > determine if his analyses were correct. Now Piketty (an economist) says in > some ways Marx was right, but in others he was wrong. If there is someone > being scientific about it, I'd say Piketty is. But the reasons Marx was > wrong where he was wrong is because the data doesn't support his notions. > Piketty explained his own work was to basically collect the data that Marx > could not, now that the internet being what it is, that's basically the > project of the book. But somehow it is heretical to have doubts about Marx, > and that is why I said what I said, Tom. If Marx was a scientist, then why > not be skeptical of him, just as any other scientist among us? > > I'd certainly be interested in hearing from a person who had doubts in > Darwin, not because they are creationists, but because they saw something > in the theory that caused them to have doubt, and they want to follow the > seam of that doubt. That seems very scientific to me. > > I hope that doesn't make me a full-blooded capitalist for saying these > things. > > Anyway, I want to make the point that there is a privilege given to Marx > as if he were a prophet and his utterances cannot be at all mistaken. He > was a single man living in a time of economic upheaval and change, and he > thought about it, he talked about it, and he wrote about it. And what he > wrote viscerally resonated for people who suffer from the injustice > inherent in the system, I cannot dismiss that and do not mean to. However > history continues and technology continues in their development, and the > view from the train of history isn't always flat and predictable. So how > can it be that we anticipate that the worldview of Marx's train compartment > will be identical to ours? Should we assume that the tools he fashioned > then will work now? > > Piketty draws that out, he is looking at the problem scientifically, I'd > say. The publication of the translation in the US really freaked out all > the capitalists, as I recall. Both Piketty and Varoufakis, that other > famous lefty-economist, have remarked vociferously (maybe Varoufakis more > than Piketty) that economics (in the university and elsewhere) *as a > science* is a shambles and have almost come as close to saying the state of > the discipline is no different then reading tea leaves (my words; their > sense about it). > > Last year I had been reading the first chapter of La Pens?e Sauvage by > Levi-Strauss and I really admired his observation that scientific thinking > begins with the science of the concrete. Maybe that is what is referenced > here as associative thinking or chaining, not sure. What is somehow > off-putting is that associative thinking frequently gets short shrift, when > it is the very kindling for higher conceptual thinking. But it seems like > airing dirty laundry to admit to doing that kind of thinking or encouraging > it. I did not get to the 2nd chapter on totemism (yet), but I sense that > Levi-Strauss's work was to eliminate the hierarchies of human cognition > because of his sense of social justice, having lived through the > destruction of WW II, which we all know was begun because of a stubborn > belief in a hierarchy of mental ability connected to unscientific notions > of race. I wonder (which I would likely learn if I got deeper into the > text) if he comments upon the idea that any hierarchies that do pertain to > thinking and cognition are functional but not value laden, in terms of > class or caste, intelligence versus stupidity, literacy vs illiteracy, etc. > That's what I sense from his work, intuitively. > > I feel the analogy of functional hierarchies very much when I've been > building fires these past weeks. There is a trick to building the fire from > paper and kindling to catching a log so the fire really starts to warm up > the house and take the chill off. It's true you can't just go from kindling > to logs and the flames must be of a certain caliber to light the log, so > there must be intermediary and transitional pieces of wood to make the fire > inevitable, while also contained. It also helps to have a bellows or to > blow really hard to fan the fire. If there is not enough air the flames at > the beginning do go out. There is more attention and care required at that > stage. > > So to all you fire builders out there, you might know what I am talking > about. > > Still wondering if anyone will discuss what is meant by chaining. > > But thanks Tom, I hope to hear from you more, and others. > > Kind regards, > > Annalisa > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Dunayevskaya-RosaLuxemburgWomen'sLiberationMarxistPhilosophy(1991).pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 4609911 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20161105/c74c6339/attachment-0001.pdf From mcole@ucsd.edu Sat Nov 5 17:21:18 2016 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 17:21:18 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, production, and reproduction (and reversibility) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: All of this history is, so to speak, an open book, Peter. I would note some hesitation in making causal attributions to the historical record. Especially from long term memory. Whether or not it is helpful I cannot judge. It would be great if Mary, with her great experience, could find the time to re-join the discussion. Staying off line and on the telephone calling potential voters, and reconsidering the efficacy of prayer. The consequences of this election with respect to the position of women in this society will be once in a lifetime events. reading Margaret's paper. mike mike On Sat, Nov 5, 2016 at 12:53 PM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > Just a small contribution for anyone interested in undertaking this > analysis: > 1. http://lchc-resources.org/xmca/subscriber_list.php lists member > profiles, but from what I can tell, once a profile is up, it doesn't come > down if someone unsubscribes. Is there a way to track whether women or men > unsubscribe at greater rates? That might help identify the sort of trend > that would indicate an undercurrent, rather than the more obvious posting > record. > 2. Waaay back when this list was known as xlchc, gender issues were often > raised by Mary Bryson (I'm pretty sure this is the same one: > http://grsj.arts.ubc.ca/persons/mary-bryson/). Mary had a pretty direct > way of confronting things that she found problematic, and in fact was > involved, as I recall, in the very hostile exchange that caused Mike to > unplug the listserv for a summer and relaunch it as xmca (which also > shifted it from the lab to the journal). Like her or not, she raised one > point that might be worth looking into, which is the degree to which male > and female, hetero and LGBTQ sources are invoked to inform our discussions. > She contended that the list's reliance on male sources suggested a deep > structure of masculinity, and at one point announced that she was only > reading articles, books, and posts by women. (Keep in mind I'm relying on > my swiss-cheese memory here, so anything I say should be verified.) I think > it's an interesting question, and informally have noticed that of late, > aside from Hasan, the sources and readings have been men. Is that a > question worth looking into, especially if it produces a lot of > unsubscriptions from women? > 3. Of course, I offer this as an old white guy, so defer to broader > perspectives. > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole > Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2016 3:10 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, > production, and reproduction (and reversibility) > > All the data are publicly available. > Mike > > On Friday, November 4, 2016, David H Kirshner wrote: > > > I like Annalisa's considerations of some kind of empirical analysis of > > the *Dilemmas of Gendered Discourse on XMCA*. > > > > 1. What are the base rates of male/female membership in XMCA? > > 2. How many posts are initiated by men/women (raw data, plus per base > > rate)? > > 3. Percentage of posts by gender that receive negative/no/positive > > response. > > 4. Discourse analysis of types of responses in terms of polarity (what > > are the varieties of negative and positive responses). > > 5. Calculation of an Affect of Replies Score (ARS) for each poster (-1 > > for each negative response, +1 for each positive response). > > 6. Trend analysis of ARS scores over time by gender (do people's > > scores tend to improve over time). > > 7. Persistence analysis by ARS scores and gender: likelihood of > > subsequent posting as a function of ARS. > > 8. Survey of a stratified sample of members (frequent posters, > > occasional posters, lurkers X male, female) concerning factors > > affecting participation, including 9. an Affect survey: Likert scale > > questionnaire concerning affective response to positive and negative > > replies. > > > > Anyone looking for a dissertation topic -- tentative title *above"? > > > > David > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: > > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu ] On Behalf Of Annalisa > > Aguilar > > Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 4:58 PM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] The genesis of gender(ed) expectations: demand, > > production, and reproduction (and reversibility) > > > > Hello, > > > > > > It seems that people are having a time with the originating thread > > pertaining to the subject "Analysis of gender in early XMCA discourse," > > which I find to be a goose chase, since it is difficult to analyze > > posts that were never made (owing to the fact that, as a few members > > have spoken up to say, they were never made to feel safe enough to > > post because of the domination of a kind of discourse that is called > > gendered - though some admit it has to do with time and prior > commitments). > > > > > > How does one study discourse of non-participants? I'm utterly > > perplexed by that. > > > > > > If men have been dominating the discourse, then what the subject line > > really means is we should a study of male discourse and how others are > > kept out. > > > > > > Why do we need to know how others are kept out when we can just > > explain it ourselves to you? > > > > > > Or are we not fit enough for our explanations to be taken seriously? > > > > > > What I liked about one of Jacob's recent posts is that he revealed to > > us *the discourse* that goes on *off-the-list.* But no one seemed to > > give that any notice. I hope I am giving him appropriate credit for > > that. I caught it, but I wanted to wait to see if anyone else did. > > > > > > Respectfully, I think it would be more productive discuss how gender > > is expected and *entrained* (and maybe this is what Maria Cristina > > means by reproduction, not sure). Not about what gender is, because > > we'll never get anywhere with that. If we understand the demands and > > the production of those expectations-fufilled, is it possible we can > > raise our awareness of how those process do not serve those who are > harmed by those expectations. > > > > > > I would offer that these gendered expectations are harmful to > > everyone, not just those lacking privilege. I say that because of lost > > opportunities, which I've already discussed in a previous email on the > original thread. > > > > > > If there are allies on this list, and I think that there are, then > > would it not be of help for them to sit back and let those of us who > > feel harmed or threatened, or just uncomfortable, explain it how it > > is. And how we (that is, those of us who feel irrelevant despite > > having something meaningful to offer) believe the problem might be > > solved, or at least ameliorated. Can we explain it ourselves without > any help from explainers? > > > > > > I would like to encourage trailblazing this new path of comparing how > > non-gendered discourse might compare to gendered discourse. Because > > that comparison might reveal something important to all of us. All of Us. > > > > > > Or it may not, but who knows for certain until we try. Or... will this > > suggestion be shot down because it doesn't remain within the status > > quo? Or will it be somehow made to sit outside what is allowable to > > post on this list because it (somehow) doesn't pertain the XMCA's > > mission statement? Or some other law I have broken? > > > > > > Of course, it remains the case that some might believe that it is > > impossible to speak about anything without gender, but I'd say that > > that might possibly mean that such a position considers the problem > > essential (I do not), that somehow biologically, or in some other > > determined way, gender is hard-wired like biological sex is hardwired > > (Note: with the growing awareness of the existence of trans-gender > > populations, I'd like to offer that even that position, that biological > sex is hardwired, is now suspect). > > > > > > I do think that there are some areas where we don't speak about > > gender, and I'm only asking that we might compare those discourses > > with discourses that are heavy on the influence of gender. > > > > > > Is that somehow a faulty proposition? > > > > > > It felt that there was something of a spark with Maria Cristina's > > contribution combined with Larry's juxtaposed and mine. So I'm hoping > > there might be a continuance from this point. Is that interesting enough? > > > > > > So I am adhering to Greg M's suggestion of cordoning off a space for > > this topic. Let's see if these swim lanes actually work. I doubt it, > > but I will exhibit a willingness to cooperate if it will foster more > > discourse about the matter at hand. > > > > > > Though, actually, I think I've just been invited to place myself into > > a ghetto. I suppose that is an inflammatory thing to say, but I'm just > > trying to be honest. Or maybe I've been invited to populate the > > periphery, because I don't have a privileged credentials to be in the > center. > > > > > > It's always something, as Gilda Radner used to say. > > > > > > Kind egads, > > > > > > Annalisa > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From schuckthemonkey@gmail.com Sat Nov 5 17:48:11 2016 From: schuckthemonkey@gmail.com (Christopher Schuck) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 20:48:11 -0400 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: What are we doing here? In-Reply-To: <4CF65AE6-DFDE-411E-BAD8-571C1D4AC2A4@unco.edu> References: <6B2C5457-8B44-4DF9-A6A3-6101ED3C1AC6@gmail.com> <278F23D9-C17C-4D09-9AB9-9552FEDBC24B@unco.edu> <4CF65AE6-DFDE-411E-BAD8-571C1D4AC2A4@unco.edu> Message-ID: The only thing missing from Rod's analogy is the background music: what would the Star Wars "Tatooine Theme" sound like for XMCA? I don't have any immediate technological or design suggestions because I am truly technologically and spatially challenged. It certainly seems like some additional way of stepping back and getting the view from 10,000 feet, through some kind of map or tool capturing some of the relationships and connections that are harder to keep track of on the ground, could be helpful (in a way, that's what Rod's initial post in starting this thread was all about, verbally speaking). One big obstruction to seeing better on the ground is the number of running parallel posts that aren't necessarily always about what their header says they're about; another is the quick time frame where everything is always morphing and leaving people in the dust; another is the emotional involvement which has a way of focusing and prioritizing certain locations over others (you're looking more closely and engaging more, but less energy left over to look around). For me the time frame has always felt like the biggest barrier: there is no alternate way of participating when you are a "slow" thinker and poster. But if we were to designate a "Slow Swim Lane" like before, that might become such a self-selecting population that no one really wants to be there and there is a sense of missing out on all the good stuff going on at XMCA Central. Again, I haven't been part of this list all that long, and only sporadically involved. But I when I do participate, I find myself wanting to know something more about the people I am messaging with; at least, some context for who they are and their connection to the community (respecting boundaries of privacy, of course). When someone's header lists a website or name I have sometimes checked them out, especially if I liked one of their posts. For instance, I was pleasantly surprised to learn that Greg Mcverry teaches at Southern Connecticut State University, since I am from New Haven and have taken many classes at Southern over the years (and would never in a million years have connected Southern and XMCA in the same sentence!). Chris On Sat, Nov 5, 2016 at 6:02 PM, Walker, Dana wrote: > > On 11/5/16, 1:18 PM, "xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of > Christopher Schuck" schuckthemonkey@gmail.com> wrote: > > "As part of any effort to make discussions more inclusive, it might be > worth specifying the kinds of problematic dynamics being targeted. > > Chris, I found this analysis of ways that people might feel shut down or > shut out of discussion in XMCA very insightful. How can we use it to guide > us through the dim light and hurly burly of this inter-alien bar that is > XMCA? (I do think Rod?s analogy is right-on, and very funny). This is > another example of how the email thread could be enhanced by a more > spatial, less linear representation of our thoughts, emotions, and > practices, as in a website or blogsite where we could post, edit, revisit > your description of seven moves that engender marginalization when we post > to the group. We might even begin to develop a consensus about what we are > all doing here, both ethically and conceptually. Topical threads could > have their own spaces, to help avoid the confusion of names (who said what) > and ideas. > > Dana > > > From schuckthemonkey@gmail.com Sat Nov 5 19:23:31 2016 From: schuckthemonkey@gmail.com (Christopher Schuck) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 22:23:31 -0400 Subject: [Xmca-l] Privacy guidelines Message-ID: I just realized I named the academic institution of a member who does *not *specifically have a link to their personal website on XMCA; this was an oversight on my part. If this constitutes a major violation of privacy, I'm so sorry!! Is there any formal code when it comes to mentioning details, confidentiality, etc., that I should be aware of? I always assumed that nothing posted on this list can be repeated elsewhere, but since it's public maybe that's not true? Just wondering about the rules for privacy and confidentiality. Again, I apologize if I erred. Chris From mcole@ucsd.edu Sat Nov 5 19:51:02 2016 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 19:51:02 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Privacy guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Anything on this appears on google! Mike On Saturday, November 5, 2016, Christopher Schuck wrote: > I just realized I named the academic institution of a member who does > *not *specifically > have a link to their personal website on XMCA; this was an oversight on my > part. If this constitutes a major violation of privacy, I'm so sorry!! > > Is there any formal code when it comes to mentioning details, > confidentiality, etc., that I should be aware of? I always assumed that > nothing posted on this list can be repeated elsewhere, but since it's > public maybe that's not true? > > Just wondering about the rules for privacy and confidentiality. Again, I > apologize if I erred. > > Chris > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Sat Nov 5 19:55:41 2016 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2016 02:55:41 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Privacy guidelines In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: <1478400941223.63624@iped.uio.no> Hi Chris, all posts are listed in a public domain, the xmca webpages. But, if am not wrong, a given post can be removed from them. Otherwise, posts go to the private mail boxes of each member of the list. I think most of the subscribers to xmca will be familiar to standards and codes for academic integrity in research, including respecting confidentiality. But I guess I should research bit more of this. Other more experienced voices? Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of mike cole Sent: 06 November 2016 03:51 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Privacy guidelines Anything on this appears on google! Mike On Saturday, November 5, 2016, Christopher Schuck wrote: > I just realized I named the academic institution of a member who does > *not *specifically > have a link to their personal website on XMCA; this was an oversight on my > part. If this constitutes a major violation of privacy, I'm so sorry!! > > Is there any formal code when it comes to mentioning details, > confidentiality, etc., that I should be aware of? I always assumed that > nothing posted on this list can be repeated elsewhere, but since it's > public maybe that's not true? > > Just wondering about the rules for privacy and confidentiality. Again, I > apologize if I erred. > > Chris > From schuckthemonkey@gmail.com Sat Nov 5 20:38:57 2016 From: schuckthemonkey@gmail.com (Christopher Schuck) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 23:38:57 -0400 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Privacy guidelines In-Reply-To: <1478400941223.63624@iped.uio.no> References: <1478400941223.63624@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: That's what I assumed, but then feared I might be mistaken. Thanks for clarifying. I guess one other consideration is that I have actually been toying with the idea of putting together some kind of presentation or paper at a future conference that would center around challenges involved in academic listserves, including gender dynamics and some of the other things that have come up lately. Most likely I would focus on the other discussion board I have been part of (Society for Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology), but in truth the online participation and dialogue here seems richer and I would love to draw upon XMCA as a case study, maybe even promote dialogue between the two communities. It's interesting to observe how these communities differ, and what ends up generating the most heat on the listserve. For instance, over there the question of how to discuss the election and how far we could go in naming names and airing opinions, and what was appropriate for psychologists to venture about candidates using psychological language, became a huge saga with multiple installments, but over here Mike shrugged and said, "Yeah, I suppose we shouldn't talk about X, but these are extraordinary times. Oh well." - and that was that. But, perhaps there are issues with venturing "outside," quoting people, appropriating for a different context, etc....I have no experience with this sort of thing. So, if anyone has done this before or there are important considerations aside from obvious ones of basic respect, accuracy, academic integrity, etc., feel free to weigh in. All of this is very hypothetical at this point, anyway. Chris On Sat, Nov 5, 2016 at 10:55 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > Hi Chris, > > all posts are listed in a public domain, the xmca webpages. But, if am not > wrong, a given post can be removed from them. Otherwise, posts go to the > private mail boxes of each member of the list. I think most of the > subscribers to xmca will be familiar to standards and codes for academic > integrity in research, including respecting confidentiality. But I guess I > should research bit more of this. Other more experienced voices? > > Alfredo > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of mike cole > Sent: 06 November 2016 03:51 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Privacy guidelines > > Anything on this appears on google! > Mike > > On Saturday, November 5, 2016, Christopher Schuck < > schuckthemonkey@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > I just realized I named the academic institution of a member who does > > *not *specifically > > have a link to their personal website on XMCA; this was an oversight on > my > > part. If this constitutes a major violation of privacy, I'm so sorry!! > > > > Is there any formal code when it comes to mentioning details, > > confidentiality, etc., that I should be aware of? I always assumed that > > nothing posted on this list can be repeated elsewhere, but since it's > > public maybe that's not true? > > > > Just wondering about the rules for privacy and confidentiality. Again, I > > apologize if I erred. > > > > Chris > > > From mpacker@uniandes.edu.co Sat Nov 5 22:01:27 2016 From: mpacker@uniandes.edu.co (Martin John Packer) Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2016 05:01:27 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Privacy guidelines In-Reply-To: References: <1478400941223.63624@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <89EF4BAD-5C1B-4AD7-AB69-CFD919594BF0@uniandes.edu.co> Can I suggest -- tactfully, with all due respect ? that it is (as usual) Mike who has his priorities straight. Spending time just now, three days before the election, debating discourtesies here on the listserve when one could be helping to get out the vote is, it seems to me, rather like fiddling while Rome burns. That is to say, it is time wasted. If the election turns out badly, we will in a few years be looking back fondly on the good days of rude talk on xmca. I currently live outside the US, but I?ve navigated the baroque requirements to file an absentee ballot. This election seems like it may perhaps be an important one. For life on this planet. Martin > On Nov 5, 2016, at 10:38 PM, Christopher Schuck wrote: > > That's what I assumed, but then feared I might be mistaken. Thanks for > clarifying. > > I guess one other consideration is that I have actually been toying with > the idea of putting together some kind of presentation or paper at a future > conference that would center around challenges involved in academic > listserves, including gender dynamics and some of the other things that > have come up lately. Most likely I would focus on the other discussion > board I have been part of (Society for Theoretical and Philosophical > Psychology), but in truth the online participation and dialogue here seems > richer and I would love to draw upon XMCA as a case study, maybe even > promote dialogue between the two communities. It's interesting to observe > how these communities differ, and what ends up generating the most heat on > the listserve. For instance, over there the question of how to discuss the > election and how far we could go in naming names and airing opinions, and > what was appropriate for psychologists to venture about candidates using > psychological language, became a huge saga with multiple installments, but > over here Mike shrugged and said, "Yeah, I suppose we shouldn't talk about > X, but these are extraordinary times. Oh well." - and that was that. > > But, perhaps there are issues with venturing "outside," quoting people, > appropriating for a different context, etc....I have no experience with > this sort of thing. So, if anyone has done this before or there are > important considerations aside from obvious ones of basic respect, > accuracy, academic integrity, etc., feel free to weigh in. All of this is > very hypothetical at this point, anyway. > > Chris > > > > On Sat, Nov 5, 2016 at 10:55 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > wrote: > >> Hi Chris, >> >> all posts are listed in a public domain, the xmca webpages. But, if am not >> wrong, a given post can be removed from them. Otherwise, posts go to the >> private mail boxes of each member of the list. I think most of the >> subscribers to xmca will be familiar to standards and codes for academic >> integrity in research, including respecting confidentiality. But I guess I >> should research bit more of this. Other more experienced voices? >> >> Alfredo >> ________________________________________ >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of mike cole >> Sent: 06 November 2016 03:51 >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Privacy guidelines >> >> Anything on this appears on google! >> Mike >> >> On Saturday, November 5, 2016, Christopher Schuck < >> schuckthemonkey@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> I just realized I named the academic institution of a member who does >>> *not *specifically >>> have a link to their personal website on XMCA; this was an oversight on >> my >>> part. If this constitutes a major violation of privacy, I'm so sorry!! >>> >>> Is there any formal code when it comes to mentioning details, >>> confidentiality, etc., that I should be aware of? I always assumed that >>> nothing posted on this list can be repeated elsewhere, but since it's >>> public maybe that's not true? >>> >>> Just wondering about the rules for privacy and confidentiality. Again, I >>> apologize if I erred. >>> >>> Chris >>> >> From mpacker@uniandes.edu.co Sun Nov 6 04:16:40 2016 From: mpacker@uniandes.edu.co (Martin John Packer) Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2016 12:16:40 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Fwd: Race/Related: The non-white vote, explained References: <581F0E8D.00000B8C@pmta01.sea1.nytimes.com> Message-ID: I subscribe to the NY Times Race/Related newsletter. Today it looks at some issues that might be useful/important to folk on xmca, including local elections that people might be able to vote in. Martin From: NYTimes.com > Subject: Race/Related: The non-white vote, explained Date: November 6, 2016 at 6:05:49 AM GMT-5 Reply-To: nytdirect@nytimes.com Join the discussion View in Browser | Add nytdirect@nytimes.com to your address book. Sunday, November 6, 2016 [The New York Times] Join Race/Related ? [The New York Times] [] Moonsick Gang (This week and next week, Race/Related will explore the election. We start with a look at polling among non-white voters, followed by a guide to local races that might otherwise be ignored. Tell us what you think at racerelated@nytimes.com.) ??? ?They?re bringing crime. They?re rapists.? ?A total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States.? ?Look at my African American.? Donald J. Trump?s candidacy has often seemed like a carefully tailored attempt at alienating all voters who are not white conservatives. If so, it has worked: non-white voters express an overwhelming antipathy toward the Republican nominee, and huge numbers say he does not understand their perspective, according to a pre-election New York Times/CBS News poll released Thursday. But a closer look at the numbers reveals a deeper layer of nuance and angst. Strong Clinton Support ? Kind Of Non-white voters, who now represent roughly 31 percent of the electorate, are not getting behind Hillary Clinton in the same numbers as they did President Obama?s historic candidacies. The Democratic nominee has support from 66 percent of likely non-white voters, and 83 percent of African-Americans, according to the poll released Thursday. That?s well shy of where Mr. Obama was in 2012, when he won 80 percent of non-whites and 93 percent of black voters. Early voting tallies this week also showed that black turnout in crucial states like North Carolina and Florida has not been as robust as it was in 2012, when historically strong African-American turnout helped propel Mr. Obama to victory. Too Much Trump? Aversion to Mr. Trump runs strong: four out of five non-white voters say Mr. Trump does not understand the needs and problems of people like themselves, compared with three in 10 who said they feel that way about Mrs. Clinton. Mr. Trump has support from just 19 percent of non-white voters, including a minuscule 2 percent of African-Americans. That suggests he could fall below Senator John McCain?s record-low 4 percent showing among African Americans in 2008. Mrs. Clinton?s campaign, not surprisingly, has placed a heavy focus on attacking Mr. Trump, calling him unfit to serve as president. But Steve Phillips, the author of ?Brown Is the New White: How the Demographic Revolution Has Created a New American Majority,? suggested that some voters ? particularly those of color ? might be eager for less Trump criticism, and a deeper explanation of her own priorities. ?This election could be a clarion call to continue the legacy of Obama?s election, and the policies he was championing to foster greater racial equality and progress,? said Mr. Phillips, who is also a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank. ?That would require leading with and continuing to hammer immigration reform, police accountability, and the racial wealth gap. But those aren?t the issues they lead with.? Issues White voters are relatively split when asked who would better handle some of today?s most pressing issues. Voters of color favor Mrs. Clinton over Mr. Trump by wide margins on: Immigration: Minority voters diverge from whites most starkly on immigration: White voters trust Mr. Trump on it by a margin of 17 points; non-whites choose Mrs. Clinton by a gaping, 54-point spread. Inequality: Eighty percent of non-white voters, and 56 percent of all voters, think that Mr. Trump?s policies would favor the rich. That?s particularly noteworthy, since voters across ethnic divides are most likely to name jobs and the economy as their top voting issue. Obamacare: Non-white voters report broad approval of the Affordable Care Act, which Mr. Obama signed in 2010. But only about one third of white voters agree. Race and Revelation Finally, many non-white Clinton supporters seem less alarmed by Mr. Trump?s campaign than her white backers do. Nearly three-fifths of white Clinton supporters say they would lose respect for an acquaintance if they found out that person were a Trump supporter; most non-white Clinton voters say this would have no effect on their feeling. ?I think a lot of white liberals are shocked and appalled by what they?re seeing,? Mr. Phillips said, ?whereas people of color deal with implicit and explicit racism on a daily basis. So that what he is revealing is not as unfamiliar to people of color.? ? Giovanni Russonello [] Ruth Fremson/The New York Times Five Races to Watch There are dozens of races across the nation in which race is playing a major factor. Many Americans know of California?s Senate race between Kamala Harris, the daughter of immigrants from Jamaica and India, and Loretta Sanchez, the daughter of Mexican immigrants. A victory by either woman would be a milestone: Ms. Harris, the state?s attorney general, would be the first black woman in the United States Senate since Carol Moseley Braun, an Illinois Democrat who served from 1993 to 1999. Ms. Sanchez, a Congresswoman, would become the first Latina elected to the Senate. Here are some other races that caught our eye: Nevada ? Catherine Cortez Masto: The state?s former attorney general is locked in a tight race with her Republican opponent, Representative Joe Heck for the seat held for 30 years by Harry Reid, the retiring minority leader. If she wins, Ms. Cortez Masto, a Democrat who is the granddaughter of a Mexican immigrant, would be the first Latina to enter the Senate. Earlier this fall, Ms. Cortez Masto?s ethnic heritage made her a target of Republican operatives, who claimed she was not really Hispanic, noting her lack of fluent Spanish. Washington State ? Pramila Jayapal: The state senator and immigrant rights? advocate is also in a close race, with her fellow progressive Democrat, State Representative Brady Walkinshaw, to represent Seattle in Congress. She was born in India and could become the first Indian-American woman to serve in Congress. (Her opponent, Mr. Walkinshaw is of mixed-race descent, with his mother immigrating from Cuba.) California ? Bao Nguyen: The mayor of Garden Grove, in Orange County, was born in a United Nations refugee camp in Vietnam 36 years ago. He?s running against a fellow Democrat and former state senator, Lou Correa, for the Congressional seat held by outgoing Rep. Loretta Sanchez, who is running against Kamala Harris for California?s open U.S. Senate seat. Ms. Sanchez and Rep. Nancy Pelosi, the House minority leader, are supporting Mr. Correa, leaving Mr. Nguyen as the clear underdog. Minnesota ? Ilhan Omar: A native of Somalia who lived in a refugee camp in Kenya for four years, Ms. Omar, a community activist, defeated the longest-serving state legislator in Minnesota history in the Democratic primary in August ? giving victory speeches in English and Somali ? and will face another Somali refugee in the general election, the Republican Abdimalik Askar, who ran for the presidency of Somalia in 2012. California ? Emilio Huerta: The son of the labor organizer Dolores Huerta, Mr. Huerta is going after the seat of an incumbent Republican congressman in the Central Valley, where a longstanding disconnect has existed between the population ? dominated by Latino and Asian immigrants, groups that tend to favor democrats ? and its elected officials, who tend to skew white and Republican. The elder Huerta has also floated an interesting theory about her son?s challenger: she believes the incumbent, David Valadao who is Portuguese, is pretending to be Latino. Mr. Valadao delivers speeches in fluent Spanish and uses the colors of the Portuguese flag (which are the same as those of the Mexican flag) on campaign materials. ?He?s really trying to pass for a Mexican-American,? Ms. Huerta told The San Jose Mercury News. ? Adeel Hassan and Caitlin Dickerson ADVERTISEMENT [http://z.glaka.com/imp?s=174149&sz=300x250&li=NYTRaceRelated&m=E92168964AF8CF87428D71DFC3BDB5E8&p=2016.11.06.11.05.49] [http://z.glaka.com/imp?s=2297&sz=116x15&li=NYTRaceRelated&m=E92168964AF8CF87428D71DFC3BDB5E8&p=2016.11.06.11.05.49] [http://z.glaka.com/imp?s=96149&sz=69x15&li=NYTRaceRelated&m=E92168964AF8CF87428D71DFC3BDB5E8&p=2016.11.06.11.05.49] Around the Web Here are some of the stories that we?re talking about, beyond The Times. First of all, check out the efforts by Facebook, Google and Twitter to put information about federal, state and local elections at voters? fingertips. In other news? Facebook?s advertising system allows advertisers to exclude black, Hispanic, and other ?ethnic affinities? from seeing ads? Yes. Yes it does. A new category is poised to count those of Middle Eastern and North African heritage in the 2020 United States Census. It was championed by advocates, but some are wary of being targeted. The director of ?Doctor Strange? explains why he cast Tilda Swinton as The Ancient One, erasing the comic book character?s Asianness, but also its steretyping. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and Henry Louis Gates, Jr., recently discussed race relationsin the United States. And, circling back to technolgy and race, Airbnb successfully blocked a proposed class action alleging racial discrimination on the company?s platform, but it will now require hosts to agree to an anti-discrimination policy. Plus, this: The reason I'm not an ex-con; I'm white, and my parents had some money. In The Times The Times publishes many stories that touch on race. Normally, we choose six favorites. This week, though, our coverage was especially deep and wide-ranging so we?re offering an expanded selection. [Supporters of Donald J. Trump, the Republican presidential nominee, during a rally last month in Naples, Fla.] Eric Thayer for The New York Times Behind 2016?s Turmoil, a Crisis of White Identity By AMANDA TAUB From ?Brexit? to the rise of Donald Trump, white anxiety is fueling political unrest in the West. [Gary Jones, right, the Cubs? third-base coach, congratulating Willson Contreras in Game 6 of the N.L.C.S. Despite a lengthy r?sum?, Jones has not managed a major league team.] Jon Durr/USA Today Sports, via Reuters Where Are Baseball?s Minority Managers? By MICHAEL POWELL Commissioner Rob Manfred speaks of pipelines and entry-level positions while seemingly qualified black and Latino candidates wait for a chance to fill a void. [Researchers from the University of Washington, M.I.T. and Stanford say a study found that African-American users faced racial discrimination by some Uber and Lyft drivers.] Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg Study Finds Some Uber and Lyft Drivers Racially Discriminate By MARK SCOTT Researchers who studied trips in Seattle and Boston said African-American users might wait up to 35 percent longer for rides than white users. [Hamdi Ulukaya employs about 300 refugees from Africa and the Middle East at Chobani. Mr. Ulukaya started a foundation to help refugees. His advocacy has made him a focus of racist attacks.] Drew Nash/Times News For Helping Immigrants, Chobani?s Founder Draws Threats By DAVID GELLES Hamdi Ulukaya employs resettled refugees at his yogurt factories. Now he?s being targeted on social media and by right-wing websites. [Donald Glover and Zazie Beetz on the FX series ?Atlanta,? which has its season finale on Tuesday.] Guy D?Alema/FX In ?Atlanta,? a Soundtrack That Subtly Whispers Its Locale By JOE COSCARELLI This FX series painstakingly bypasses theme songs and obvious contemporary hits in favor of a hyper-accurate local vibe. [The Rev. Joseph Darby at the Harbour Club in Charleston, S.C.] Travis Dove for The New York Times A Somber Charleston Reflects on Race as 2 Murder Trials Begin By ALAN BLINDER The trials of a police officer and a white supremacist will draw renewed attention to South Carolina, where many still struggle with killings that rattled the nation. [https://static01.nyt.com/images/2016/10/29/us/29PIPELINE-video/29PIPELINE-video-largeHorizontal375.jpg] Angus Mordant for The New York Times Tension Rises Between Police and Standing Rock Protesters By SUE SKALICKY AND MONICA DAVEY The tension had been building for months, with Native Americans who had camped out saying that the Dakota Access pipeline threatens the region?s water supply. [https://static01.nyt.com/images/2016/10/24/us/generacion-dividida-latinos-historias-personales-1478037049587/generacion-dividida-latinos-historias-personales-1478037049587-largeHorizontal375-v2.png] Caitlin O?Hara for The New York Times Arizona?s Scarred Generation By FERNANDA SANTOS Two daughters of Mexican immigrants who crossed the border illegally. Two different futures for young Latinos. Which will we choose? [Donald Trump speaking at a campaign event at the Kinston Jet Center in Kinston, N.C., on Oct. 26.] Sara D. Davis/Getty Images Trump?s Inconvenient Racial Truth By NIKOLE HANNAH-JONES For all he gets wrong on race, the Republican nominee got one thing right: The Democratic Party does take black Americans for granted, and that?s a problem. [Early voting at the Board of Elections in Durham, N.C., on Tuesday.] Justin Cook for The New York Times Black Turnout Soft in Early Voting, Boding Ill for Hillary Clinton By JEREMY W. PETERS, RICHARD FAUSSET AND MICHAEL WINES The numbers in several states have begun pointing to a slump many Democrats feared might materialize without the nation?s first black president on the ticket. [?Vote Trump? was spray-painted on the side of Hopewell Missionary Baptist Church in Greenville, Miss., which was badly damaged by fire Tuesday evening.] Rogelio V. Solis/Associated Press Black Church Burned in Mississippi, With ?Vote Trump? Scrawled on Side By CAMPBELL ROBERTSON AND RICHARD FAUSSET The attack, determined to be arson, reinforced fears of potential violence as a polarizing and racially charged presidential race nears its conclusion. [As a Republican presidential candidate, Ronald Reagan toured the South Bronx in the summer of 1980 to try to win urban voters.] Vic DeLucia/The New York Times Why Republicans Don?t Even Try to Win Cities Anymore By EMILY BADGER AND QUOCTRUNG BUI In a fundamental realignment in which race plays a key role, population density has become a strong predictor of how people vote. [Bianca walked her 6-year-old son, Anthony, to the bus stop before sunrise on Wednesday. She and her family decided to return to the United States from Honduras after being threatened by gang members there.] Justin T. Gellerson for The New York Times Immigrants Living ?On Pause? Fear Leniency Will End With Election By CAITLIN DICKERSON Two families who came to the United States illegally show the enormous risks and weight of unanswered questions in divergent paths toward asylum. [Protesters at a Black Lives Matter rally in Melbourne, Australia in July.] Asanka Brendon Ratnayake/Anadolu Agency, via Getty Images Why Isn?t Blackface Taboo for Australians? By DAVID T. SMITH Indigenous and other nonwhite Australians are tired of telling the country what is wrong with the degrading practice. What Do You Think of This Newsletter? How are we doing? Email us at racerelated@nytimes.com. If you like what you?re reading, please share it with your friends on Facebook or Twitter and suggest they sign up here. ADVERTISEMENT FOLLOW RACE/RELATED [Instagram] Instagram Get more NYTimes.com newsletters ? | Get unlimited access to NYTimes.com and our NYTimes apps for just $0.99. Subscribe ? ABOUT THIS EMAIL You received this message because you signed up for NYTimes.com's Race/Related newsletter. Unsubscribe | Manage Subscriptions | Change Your Email | Privacy Policy | Contact | Advertise Copyright 2016 The New York Times Company | 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018 [http://p.nytimes.com/email/re?location=hdaNaYedr2/IomeWRKt0nffrak8aSGLbvtkkq/r7ihwOf5XePlpJ1w==&campaign_id=16868&instance_id=85821&segment_id=97710&user_id=e92168964af8cf87428d71dfc3bdb5e8®i_id=47999] From mpacker@uniandes.edu.co Sun Nov 6 06:25:49 2016 From: mpacker@uniandes.edu.co (Martin John Packer) Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2016 14:25:49 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Fwd: A Special Message from The Times References: <623.63381915.201611061421184609683.0048347248@email.newyorktimes.com> Message-ID: <772C8B23-78BA-4CEE-A8AC-15F3A4BDA242@uniandes.edu.co> And relatedly? In case it doesn?t come through, the link in the message is: Martin Begin forwarded message: From: "The New York Times" > Subject: A Special Message from The Times Date: November 6, 2016 at 9:21:25 AM GMT-5 A note from our executive editor Dean Baquet and editorial page editor James Bennet announcing three days of free access around the U.S. elections. [The New York Times] View in browser [http://i.email.newyorktimes.com/wpm/623/ContentUploads/crs-13172_ElectionOpenAcces_DeanLetter_DK_Hero.gif] A special message from The Times. To our readers, As journalists who have covered our fair share of campaigns, we consider these moments to be among the most important in the life of a democracy. We believe that everyone, without exception, deserves a deeper understanding of the candidates, the issues and the results of this unprecedented election. So we have decided to open our digital platforms to all ? without charge ? on Nov. 7, 8 and 9. We invite you to come back as often as you like to take advantage of our reporting, analysis and commentary, from the lead-up through the aftermath. This is the type of work that The New York Times does every day. And as fewer news organizations commit the kind of resources we do, we?re redoubling our efforts. No matter who prevails on Tuesday, we will continue to work hard to bring you everything you need to understand this historic moment and all that follows. Sincerely, [Dean Baquet] Dean Baquet Executive Editor The New York Times [James Bennet] James Bennet Editor, Editorial Page The New York Times This email was sent to mpacker885@gmail.com Account Login | Help Center Attn: Customer Service, P.O. Box 8041, Davenport, IA 52808-5041 Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | Unsubscribe ?2016 The New York Times Company | 620 Eighth Ave, New York, NY, 10018 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - From Peg.Griffin@att.net Sun Nov 6 07:46:32 2016 From: Peg.Griffin@att.net (Peg Griffin) Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2016 10:46:32 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Privacy guidelines In-Reply-To: <89EF4BAD-5C1B-4AD7-AB69-CFD919594BF0@uniandes.edu.co> References: <1478400941223.63624@iped.uio.no> <89EF4BAD-5C1B-4AD7-AB69-CFD919594BF0@uniandes.edu.co> Message-ID: <004601d23844$f2e289f0$d8a79dd0$@att.net> Yay for absentee voters and phone bankers in San Diego! As I mentioned to Martin off-line, people currently in other countries might also try helping in this way: Can you text, call, or email friends (heck, even vague acquaintances) back in the states and help them stay on task about voting? Ask them about how it was when they voted or about the plan they have about when and where to vote? You might even be able to help counter false information about what ID people have to bring to the polls (and you or they can look up the real requirements on the Board of elections for the state or the state's secretary of State...) Apparently, some folks in some countries are using less expensive local throw away phones to do this. Since voter suppression is a big tactic this election, this independent phone/text/e-mail reach out might be a useful antidote (to say nothing of helping to counter the storm of massive scare ads which are depressing voters who haven?t been suppressed). The phone bank I go to has been focusing on Florida the last few days. (In DC we have no voting representative in Congress, so we do what we can to get some folks elected who might help us change that -- I especially love supporting Mike's House of Representative candidates when they ask us to). Many of the folks on the Florida list we have been calling really did like some friendly talk about getting to the polls and the number of Latino voters who are enthusiastic about early votes seems to have increased quite a bit in the last few days. Today (Sunday) is the last early vote day in Florida so then they have to wait for Tuesday and go to their regular polling place (which some are a bit worried about). Church to polls busses might kick in quite a few votes more in Florida today (and other states), and, by the way, last Friday, mosque to polls busses were active in some states. Back to laundry and catching up on teaching students before more electioneering no too far from the polls. Peg -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Martin John Packer Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2016 1:01 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Privacy guidelines Can I suggest -- tactfully, with all due respect ? that it is (as usual) Mike who has his priorities straight. Spending time just now, three days before the election, debating discourtesies here on the listserve when one could be helping to get out the vote is, it seems to me, rather like fiddling while Rome burns. That is to say, it is time wasted. If the election turns out badly, we will in a few years be looking back fondly on the good days of rude talk on xmca. I currently live outside the US, but I?ve navigated the baroque requirements to file an absentee ballot. This election seems like it may perhaps be an important one. For life on this planet. Martin > On Nov 5, 2016, at 10:38 PM, Christopher Schuck wrote: > > That's what I assumed, but then feared I might be mistaken. Thanks for > clarifying. > > I guess one other consideration is that I have actually been toying > with the idea of putting together some kind of presentation or paper > at a future conference that would center around challenges involved in > academic listserves, including gender dynamics and some of the other > things that have come up lately. Most likely I would focus on the > other discussion board I have been part of (Society for Theoretical > and Philosophical Psychology), but in truth the online participation > and dialogue here seems richer and I would love to draw upon XMCA as a > case study, maybe even promote dialogue between the two communities. > It's interesting to observe how these communities differ, and what > ends up generating the most heat on the listserve. For instance, over > there the question of how to discuss the election and how far we could > go in naming names and airing opinions, and what was appropriate for > psychologists to venture about candidates using psychological > language, became a huge saga with multiple installments, but over here > Mike shrugged and said, "Yeah, I suppose we shouldn't talk about X, but these are extraordinary times. Oh well." - and that was that. > > But, perhaps there are issues with venturing "outside," quoting > people, appropriating for a different context, etc....I have no > experience with this sort of thing. So, if anyone has done this before > or there are important considerations aside from obvious ones of basic > respect, accuracy, academic integrity, etc., feel free to weigh in. > All of this is very hypothetical at this point, anyway. > > Chris > > > > On Sat, Nov 5, 2016 at 10:55 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > wrote: > >> Hi Chris, >> >> all posts are listed in a public domain, the xmca webpages. But, if >> am not wrong, a given post can be removed from them. Otherwise, posts >> go to the private mail boxes of each member of the list. I think most >> of the subscribers to xmca will be familiar to standards and codes >> for academic integrity in research, including respecting >> confidentiality. But I guess I should research bit more of this. Other more experienced voices? >> >> Alfredo >> ________________________________________ >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> on behalf of mike cole >> >> Sent: 06 November 2016 03:51 >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Privacy guidelines >> >> Anything on this appears on google! >> Mike >> >> On Saturday, November 5, 2016, Christopher Schuck < >> schuckthemonkey@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> I just realized I named the academic institution of a member who >>> does *not *specifically have a link to their personal website on >>> XMCA; this was an oversight on >> my >>> part. If this constitutes a major violation of privacy, I'm so sorry!! >>> >>> Is there any formal code when it comes to mentioning details, >>> confidentiality, etc., that I should be aware of? I always assumed >>> that nothing posted on this list can be repeated elsewhere, but >>> since it's public maybe that's not true? >>> >>> Just wondering about the rules for privacy and confidentiality. >>> Again, I apologize if I erred. >>> >>> Chris >>> >> From dkellogg60@gmail.com Sun Nov 6 20:55:32 2016 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2016 15:55:32 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Privacy guidelines In-Reply-To: <89EF4BAD-5C1B-4AD7-AB69-CFD919594BF0@uniandes.edu.co> References: <1478400941223.63624@iped.uio.no> <89EF4BAD-5C1B-4AD7-AB69-CFD919594BF0@uniandes.edu.co> Message-ID: I got a very interesting post from an xmca correspondent this morning and I am very tempted to share it, but I gather it was sent off list because the correspondent doesn't want to disturb people who are canvasing votes. With all due respect, Martin. This is an international listserve. Yes, America is one important factor in global life, but for many of us it is by no means a central factor. Even in the USA, the person at the head of a government is one important factor in national life, but for many of us it is by no means a central factor. (I for example voted for a party and a programme and not against a personality--and that was not just because I vote in a state that is safe for Hillary.) In Seoul, there are a quarter of a million people in the street and Bak Geunhye has probably become the very first dictator in history to record an actual 0% approval rating while still (supposedly) in power (although now there is some question about whether she ever was really in power at all). For me, this is more pressing than the American plebiscite on sexual predation. But I don't insist that xmca maintain radio silence on other important issues until the South Korean crisis is resolved one way or another. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Sun, Nov 6, 2016 at 4:01 PM, Martin John Packer wrote: > Can I suggest -- tactfully, with all due respect ? that it is (as usual) > Mike who has his priorities straight. Spending time just now, three days > before the election, debating discourtesies here on the listserve when one > could be helping to get out the vote is, it seems to me, rather like > fiddling while Rome burns. That is to say, it is time wasted. If the > election turns out badly, we will in a few years be looking back fondly on > the good days of rude talk on xmca. I currently live outside the US, but > I?ve navigated the baroque requirements to file an absentee ballot. This > election seems like it may perhaps be an important one. For life on this > planet. > > Martin > > > On Nov 5, 2016, at 10:38 PM, Christopher Schuck < > schuckthemonkey@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > That's what I assumed, but then feared I might be mistaken. Thanks for > > clarifying. > > > > I guess one other consideration is that I have actually been toying with > > the idea of putting together some kind of presentation or paper at a > future > > conference that would center around challenges involved in academic > > listserves, including gender dynamics and some of the other things that > > have come up lately. Most likely I would focus on the other discussion > > board I have been part of (Society for Theoretical and Philosophical > > Psychology), but in truth the online participation and dialogue here > seems > > richer and I would love to draw upon XMCA as a case study, maybe even > > promote dialogue between the two communities. It's interesting to observe > > how these communities differ, and what ends up generating the most heat > on > > the listserve. For instance, over there the question of how to discuss > the > > election and how far we could go in naming names and airing opinions, and > > what was appropriate for psychologists to venture about candidates using > > psychological language, became a huge saga with multiple installments, > but > > over here Mike shrugged and said, "Yeah, I suppose we shouldn't talk > about > > X, but these are extraordinary times. Oh well." - and that was that. > > > > But, perhaps there are issues with venturing "outside," quoting people, > > appropriating for a different context, etc....I have no experience with > > this sort of thing. So, if anyone has done this before or there are > > important considerations aside from obvious ones of basic respect, > > accuracy, academic integrity, etc., feel free to weigh in. All of this is > > very hypothetical at this point, anyway. > > > > Chris > > > > > > > > On Sat, Nov 5, 2016 at 10:55 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > wrote: > > > >> Hi Chris, > >> > >> all posts are listed in a public domain, the xmca webpages. But, if am > not > >> wrong, a given post can be removed from them. Otherwise, posts go to the > >> private mail boxes of each member of the list. I think most of the > >> subscribers to xmca will be familiar to standards and codes for academic > >> integrity in research, including respecting confidentiality. But I > guess I > >> should research bit more of this. Other more experienced voices? > >> > >> Alfredo > >> ________________________________________ > >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >> on behalf of mike cole > >> Sent: 06 November 2016 03:51 > >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Privacy guidelines > >> > >> Anything on this appears on google! > >> Mike > >> > >> On Saturday, November 5, 2016, Christopher Schuck < > >> schuckthemonkey@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> I just realized I named the academic institution of a member who does > >>> *not *specifically > >>> have a link to their personal website on XMCA; this was an oversight on > >> my > >>> part. If this constitutes a major violation of privacy, I'm so sorry!! > >>> > >>> Is there any formal code when it comes to mentioning details, > >>> confidentiality, etc., that I should be aware of? I always assumed that > >>> nothing posted on this list can be repeated elsewhere, but since it's > >>> public maybe that's not true? > >>> > >>> Just wondering about the rules for privacy and confidentiality. Again, > I > >>> apologize if I erred. > >>> > >>> Chris > >>> > >> > > > From Peg.Griffin@att.net Sun Nov 6 22:57:03 2016 From: Peg.Griffin@att.net (Peg Griffin) Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2016 01:57:03 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Privacy guidelines In-Reply-To: References: <1478400941223.63624@iped.uio.no> <89EF4BAD-5C1B-4AD7-AB69-CFD919594BF0@uniandes.edu.co> Message-ID: <000001d238c4$25781d60$70685820$@att.net> Sorry, David. No insistence on radio silence here. No plebiscite on sexual predation, either. You must be thinking of something or someplace else. PG -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of David Kellogg Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2016 11:56 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Privacy guidelines I got a very interesting post from an xmca correspondent this morning and I am very tempted to share it, but I gather it was sent off list because the correspondent doesn't want to disturb people who are canvasing votes. With all due respect, Martin. This is an international listserve. Yes, America is one important factor in global life, but for many of us it is by no means a central factor. Even in the USA, the person at the head of a government is one important factor in national life, but for many of us it is by no means a central factor. (I for example voted for a party and a programme and not against a personality--and that was not just because I vote in a state that is safe for Hillary.) In Seoul, there are a quarter of a million people in the street and Bak Geunhye has probably become the very first dictator in history to record an actual 0% approval rating while still (supposedly) in power (although now there is some question about whether she ever was really in power at all). For me, this is more pressing than the American plebiscite on sexual predation. But I don't insist that xmca maintain radio silence on other important issues until the South Korean crisis is resolved one way or another. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Sun, Nov 6, 2016 at 4:01 PM, Martin John Packer wrote: > Can I suggest -- tactfully, with all due respect ? that it is (as > usual) Mike who has his priorities straight. Spending time just now, > three days before the election, debating discourtesies here on the > listserve when one could be helping to get out the vote is, it seems > to me, rather like fiddling while Rome burns. That is to say, it is > time wasted. If the election turns out badly, we will in a few years > be looking back fondly on the good days of rude talk on xmca. I > currently live outside the US, but I?ve navigated the baroque > requirements to file an absentee ballot. This election seems like it > may perhaps be an important one. For life on this planet. > > Martin > > > On Nov 5, 2016, at 10:38 PM, Christopher Schuck < > schuckthemonkey@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > That's what I assumed, but then feared I might be mistaken. Thanks > > for clarifying. > > > > I guess one other consideration is that I have actually been toying > > with the idea of putting together some kind of presentation or paper > > at a > future > > conference that would center around challenges involved in academic > > listserves, including gender dynamics and some of the other things > > that have come up lately. Most likely I would focus on the other > > discussion board I have been part of (Society for Theoretical and > > Philosophical Psychology), but in truth the online participation and > > dialogue here > seems > > richer and I would love to draw upon XMCA as a case study, maybe > > even promote dialogue between the two communities. It's interesting > > to observe how these communities differ, and what ends up generating > > the most heat > on > > the listserve. For instance, over there the question of how to > > discuss > the > > election and how far we could go in naming names and airing > > opinions, and what was appropriate for psychologists to venture > > about candidates using psychological language, became a huge saga > > with multiple installments, > but > > over here Mike shrugged and said, "Yeah, I suppose we shouldn't talk > about > > X, but these are extraordinary times. Oh well." - and that was that. > > > > But, perhaps there are issues with venturing "outside," quoting > > people, appropriating for a different context, etc....I have no > > experience with this sort of thing. So, if anyone has done this > > before or there are important considerations aside from obvious ones > > of basic respect, accuracy, academic integrity, etc., feel free to > > weigh in. All of this is very hypothetical at this point, anyway. > > > > Chris > > > > > > > > On Sat, Nov 5, 2016 at 10:55 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > > > wrote: > > > >> Hi Chris, > >> > >> all posts are listed in a public domain, the xmca webpages. But, if > >> am > not > >> wrong, a given post can be removed from them. Otherwise, posts go > >> to the private mail boxes of each member of the list. I think most > >> of the subscribers to xmca will be familiar to standards and codes > >> for academic integrity in research, including respecting > >> confidentiality. But I > guess I > >> should research bit more of this. Other more experienced voices? > >> > >> Alfredo > >> ________________________________________ > >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >> on behalf of mike cole > >> > >> Sent: 06 November 2016 03:51 > >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Privacy guidelines > >> > >> Anything on this appears on google! > >> Mike > >> > >> On Saturday, November 5, 2016, Christopher Schuck < > >> schuckthemonkey@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> I just realized I named the academic institution of a member who > >>> does *not *specifically have a link to their personal website on > >>> XMCA; this was an oversight on > >> my > >>> part. If this constitutes a major violation of privacy, I'm so sorry!! > >>> > >>> Is there any formal code when it comes to mentioning details, > >>> confidentiality, etc., that I should be aware of? I always assumed > >>> that nothing posted on this list can be repeated elsewhere, but > >>> since it's public maybe that's not true? > >>> > >>> Just wondering about the rules for privacy and confidentiality. > >>> Again, > I > >>> apologize if I erred. > >>> > >>> Chris > >>> > >> > > > From Peg.Griffin@att.net Sun Nov 6 23:01:17 2016 From: Peg.Griffin@att.net (Peg Griffin) Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2016 02:01:17 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Privacy guidelines In-Reply-To: References: <1478400941223.63624@iped.uio.no> <89EF4BAD-5C1B-4AD7-AB69-CFD919594BF0@uniandes.edu.co> Message-ID: <000101d238c4$bd028490$37078db0$@att.net> Sorry, David, seems a bit off. No insistence on radio silence here. No plebiscite on sexual predation, either. You must be thinking of something or someplace else? PG -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of David Kellogg Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2016 11:56 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Privacy guidelines I got a very interesting post from an xmca correspondent this morning and I am very tempted to share it, but I gather it was sent off list because the correspondent doesn't want to disturb people who are canvasing votes. With all due respect, Martin. This is an international listserve. Yes, America is one important factor in global life, but for many of us it is by no means a central factor. Even in the USA, the person at the head of a government is one important factor in national life, but for many of us it is by no means a central factor. (I for example voted for a party and a programme and not against a personality--and that was not just because I vote in a state that is safe for Hillary.) In Seoul, there are a quarter of a million people in the street and Bak Geunhye has probably become the very first dictator in history to record an actual 0% approval rating while still (supposedly) in power (although now there is some question about whether she ever was really in power at all). For me, this is more pressing than the American plebiscite on sexual predation. But I don't insist that xmca maintain radio silence on other important issues until the South Korean crisis is resolved one way or another. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Sun, Nov 6, 2016 at 4:01 PM, Martin John Packer wrote: > Can I suggest -- tactfully, with all due respect ? that it is (as > usual) Mike who has his priorities straight. Spending time just now, > three days before the election, debating discourtesies here on the > listserve when one could be helping to get out the vote is, it seems > to me, rather like fiddling while Rome burns. That is to say, it is > time wasted. If the election turns out badly, we will in a few years > be looking back fondly on the good days of rude talk on xmca. I > currently live outside the US, but I?ve navigated the baroque > requirements to file an absentee ballot. This election seems like it > may perhaps be an important one. For life on this planet. > > Martin > > > On Nov 5, 2016, at 10:38 PM, Christopher Schuck < > schuckthemonkey@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > That's what I assumed, but then feared I might be mistaken. Thanks > > for clarifying. > > > > I guess one other consideration is that I have actually been toying > > with the idea of putting together some kind of presentation or paper > > at a > future > > conference that would center around challenges involved in academic > > listserves, including gender dynamics and some of the other things > > that have come up lately. Most likely I would focus on the other > > discussion board I have been part of (Society for Theoretical and > > Philosophical Psychology), but in truth the online participation and > > dialogue here > seems > > richer and I would love to draw upon XMCA as a case study, maybe > > even promote dialogue between the two communities. It's interesting > > to observe how these communities differ, and what ends up generating > > the most heat > on > > the listserve. For instance, over there the question of how to > > discuss > the > > election and how far we could go in naming names and airing > > opinions, and what was appropriate for psychologists to venture > > about candidates using psychological language, became a huge saga > > with multiple installments, > but > > over here Mike shrugged and said, "Yeah, I suppose we shouldn't talk > about > > X, but these are extraordinary times. Oh well." - and that was that. > > > > But, perhaps there are issues with venturing "outside," quoting > > people, appropriating for a different context, etc....I have no > > experience with this sort of thing. So, if anyone has done this > > before or there are important considerations aside from obvious ones > > of basic respect, accuracy, academic integrity, etc., feel free to > > weigh in. All of this is very hypothetical at this point, anyway. > > > > Chris > > > > > > > > On Sat, Nov 5, 2016 at 10:55 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > > > wrote: > > > >> Hi Chris, > >> > >> all posts are listed in a public domain, the xmca webpages. But, if > >> am > not > >> wrong, a given post can be removed from them. Otherwise, posts go > >> to the private mail boxes of each member of the list. I think most > >> of the subscribers to xmca will be familiar to standards and codes > >> for academic integrity in research, including respecting > >> confidentiality. But I > guess I > >> should research bit more of this. Other more experienced voices? > >> > >> Alfredo > >> ________________________________________ > >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >> on behalf of mike cole > >> > >> Sent: 06 November 2016 03:51 > >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Privacy guidelines > >> > >> Anything on this appears on google! > >> Mike > >> > >> On Saturday, November 5, 2016, Christopher Schuck < > >> schuckthemonkey@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> I just realized I named the academic institution of a member who > >>> does *not *specifically have a link to their personal website on > >>> XMCA; this was an oversight on > >> my > >>> part. If this constitutes a major violation of privacy, I'm so sorry!! > >>> > >>> Is there any formal code when it comes to mentioning details, > >>> confidentiality, etc., that I should be aware of? I always assumed > >>> that nothing posted on this list can be repeated elsewhere, but > >>> since it's public maybe that's not true? > >>> > >>> Just wondering about the rules for privacy and confidentiality. > >>> Again, > I > >>> apologize if I erred. > >>> > >>> Chris > >>> > >> > > > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Mon Nov 7 13:16:54 2016 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2016 08:16:54 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Communication, Co-generalization, and Crises Message-ID: Well, of course, Peg is really right--or at least half right. That is, the American elections are not just a plebiscite on sexual assault, and using the term "sexual predator" reduces the whole thing to the kind of "tu quoques" argumentation which makes up the whole of the Republican case these days. Actually, for the first time in my memory, the American elections are about real issues that actually touch the lives of ordinary people, namely sexism, racism, and the impunity conferred by real fame and largely imaginary wealth. But I would like to know that the other half is also right: that is, that xmca's normal concerns with mind, culture, and activity do not require radio silence in times of crisis. Let me talk about another crisis and see. Unlike the USA, South Korea has had, since 1949, six different constitutions. Until very recently (1997) the peaceful transfer of power was the exception and not the rule: governments changed if and only if people took matters into their own hands, either through mass demonstrations or violent military coups or both (the one apparent exception was when the current president's father, Bak Jeonghi, was forced to call an election by the Nixon administration: on the verge of losing to Kim Daejeong, he peacefully overthrew himself instead). Now, Vygotsky also describes development in terms of six crises (Birth, One, Three, Seven, Thirteen and Seventeen) and five more or less stable periods of equilibrium (Infancy, Early Childhood, Preschool, School Age, Adolescence). In fact, the Zoped (assuming that "ped" means pedological and not pedagogical) really refers to the functions that belong to the NEXT zone of development and not the actual one: if a child can simply take over functions from the environment and make them his or her own, then almost by definition they are functions that belong to the zone of actual, and not the zone of proximal, development. That means that for every stable period, the Zoped is going to be a crisis (and of course that, along with prolepsis, accounts for the unpredictability of the Zoped which Peg noted). Korean crises not when people are overexploited and ruthlessly suppressed; that is a much better description of the stable periods in Korean history. Crises happen just when people become superproductive and try to self-emancipate. I think crises of development in the child also happen the same way: that is, during normal periods, the environment is communicating with the child and the child is taking over co-generalizations by restructuring them to fit the child's extant psychological system. But Vygotsky says that there are moments when this cannot happen, because the psychological system itself must be restructured: the central neoformation dissolves the social situation of development. During normal times, the environment is the source of development and the child's personality is only the site of development: but during these crazy crises (the crisis of "autonomous speech", the crisis of the negativistic "proto will", the crisis of the affected, manneristic, clownish "proto-self"), it is almost as if the child, superproductive and active, wants to "turn the tables", transforming the personality into the source of development and adapting the environment to it instead. One of the most puzzling things in Vygotsky's last lectures is the Central Line of Development. On the one hand, these are always forms of "communication" and "co-generalization". And on the other, because each Neoformation is entirely new, what is Central in one period is Peripheral in the next: perception, for example, is the maximally developing function in Infancy, but memory is the leading function in Preschool. Speech is a Central Line of Development in early childhood but Thinking in School Age. How can BOTH of these things be true? It seems to me that both of them are true.Communication represents contact with the social environment, and this is always foregrounded during stable periods and backgrounded during crises. Co-generalization represents what we use to call "internalization", and this is foregrounded during crises and backgrounded during stable periods. In addition, the content of the communication and co-generalization changes as the child develops, from doing things in Infancy, to saying things in Early Childhood, to feeling in Preschool, and to thinking in School Age. When co-generalization becomes super-productive, we get conscious awareness, and with awareness, crisis. With crises, worlds change. David Kellogg Macquarie University From mpacker@uniandes.edu.co Mon Nov 7 15:08:29 2016 From: mpacker@uniandes.edu.co (Martin John Packer) Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2016 23:08:29 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Communication, Co-generalization, and Crises In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <254594BA-A2C5-4B8B-B8EA-99598B163FBA@uniandes.edu.co> I think you misunderstood me, David; I certainly wasn?t suggesting ?radio silence? here on xmca. Simply pointing out that a concern with women?s rights (or virtually any other rights) would be served more efficiently right now by working to get out the vote. Martin > On Nov 7, 2016, at 4:16 PM, David Kellogg wrote: > > Well, of course, Peg is really right--or at least half right. That is, the > American elections are not just a plebiscite on sexual assault, and using > the term "sexual predator" reduces the whole thing to the kind of > "tu quoques" argumentation which makes up the whole of the Republican case > these days. Actually, for the first time in my memory, the American > elections are about real issues that actually touch the lives of ordinary > people, namely sexism, racism, and the impunity conferred by real fame and > largely imaginary wealth. > > But I would like to know that the other half is also right: that is, that > xmca's normal concerns with mind, culture, and activity do not require > radio silence in times of crisis. Let me talk about another crisis and see. > Unlike the USA, South Korea has had, since 1949, six different > constitutions. Until very recently (1997) the peaceful transfer of power > was the exception and not the rule: governments changed if and only if > people took matters into their own hands, either through mass > demonstrations or violent military coups or both (the one apparent > exception was when the current president's father, Bak Jeonghi, was forced > to call an election by the Nixon administration: on the verge of losing to > Kim Daejeong, he peacefully overthrew himself instead). > > Now, Vygotsky also describes development in terms of six crises (Birth, > One, Three, Seven, Thirteen and Seventeen) and five more or less stable > periods of equilibrium (Infancy, Early Childhood, Preschool, School Age, > Adolescence). In fact, the Zoped (assuming that "ped" means pedological and > not pedagogical) really refers to the functions that belong to the NEXT > zone of development and not the actual one: if a child can simply take over > functions from the environment and make them his or her own, then almost by > definition they are functions that belong to the zone of actual, and not > the zone of proximal, development. That means that for every stable period, > the Zoped is going to be a crisis (and of course that, along with > prolepsis, accounts for the unpredictability of the Zoped which Peg noted). > > Korean crises not when people are overexploited and ruthlessly suppressed; > that is a much better description of the stable periods in Korean history. > Crises happen just when people become superproductive and try to > self-emancipate. I think crises of development in the child also happen the > same way: that is, during normal periods, the environment is communicating > with the child and the child is taking over co-generalizations by > restructuring them to fit the child's extant psychological system. But > Vygotsky says that there are moments when this cannot happen, because the > psychological system itself must be restructured: the central neoformation > dissolves the social situation of development. > > During normal times, the environment is the source of development and the > child's personality is only the site of development: but during these crazy > crises (the crisis of "autonomous speech", the crisis of the negativistic > "proto will", the crisis of the affected, manneristic, clownish > "proto-self"), it is almost as if the child, superproductive and active, > wants to "turn the tables", transforming the personality into the source of > development and adapting the environment to it instead. > > One of the most puzzling things in Vygotsky's last lectures is the Central > Line of Development. On the one hand, these are always forms > of "communication" and "co-generalization". And on the other, because each > Neoformation is entirely new, what is Central in one period is Peripheral > in the next: perception, for example, is the maximally developing function > in Infancy, but memory is the leading function in Preschool. Speech is a > Central Line of Development in early childhood but Thinking in School Age. > How can BOTH of these things be true? > > It seems to me that both of them are true.Communication represents contact > with the social environment, and this is always foregrounded during stable > periods and backgrounded during crises. Co-generalization represents what > we use to call "internalization", and this is foregrounded during crises > and backgrounded during stable periods. In addition, the content of the > communication and co-generalization changes as the child develops, from > doing things in Infancy, to saying things in Early Childhood, to feeling in > Preschool, and to thinking in School Age. When co-generalization becomes > super-productive, we get conscious awareness, and with awareness, crisis. > With crises, worlds change. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University From vwilk@inf.shizuoka.ac.jp Sun Nov 6 18:35:43 2016 From: vwilk@inf.shizuoka.ac.jp (valerie A. Wilkinson) Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2016 11:35:43 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] A Quick Lightning Dive - like a Kingfisher Message-ID: <001801d2389f$a3bf3b60$eb3db220$@inf.shizuoka.ac.jp> Good morning, XMCAers, Vandy@GST here, promoting "requisite variety" as the true path. I've spent some hours pondering all that has happened since Mike dropped his "bombshell": Time for a generational change." Mike himself put gender and chaining on the table at that time. Larry, in taking up the themes and honoring Mike for his "middle" role led to Phillip putting gender and chaining firmly together as patriarchal and hierarchical, even if unwitting and well intentioned. The discussion has gone in many directions and I am late for work. The US election is "tomorrow" and what I wanted to say in an article before the decision, in a haiku-like spontaneous effusion of wisdom, learning, philosophy, and engaged learning across a lifetime was "bogged down" by APA rules. In Japan, science writers have to use APA format. I am a humanist operating in the field of Informatics and even after 20 years on board here, I do not feel I have a place at the table. So what I want to say now, as everything hangs in the balance: My Indonesian and Vietnamese graduate students are women who have already graduated from the university and are getting married and having babies at the same time that they are students in Informatics. My Chinese and Nepalese women students graduated from universities in their home countries, but their cultural and language level is almost incalculably higher than my Indonesian and Vietnamese students. My female student from Tunisia is from yet another world. My class of "Professional Presentations in English" is a one credit class and I am not their individual advisor. All of them owe obedience to their own advisor, which I do not have the standing to compete with. It is my job to be a model of a woman of learning to help them discover their calling and talent while working in their lab with their own professor. My own students are at an English level for which writing correct English is a challenge and at a cultural level (poverty and farmers) which makes them like very talented Middle School students. We have to have fun, make paper chains, popcorn balls, posters. We have to enjoy our time and keep our space clean. Strangely, five years of rehabilitation prepared me well for this. Sadly, rank has no meaning if the rest of the gang does not recognize it . I voted. Now I'm in the "hold my breath" phase of waiting for this thing to pass so we can get on with our lives. From tom.richardson3@googlemail.com Tue Nov 8 07:09:52 2016 From: tom.richardson3@googlemail.com (Tom Richardson) Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2016 15:09:52 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: A Quick Lightning Dive - like a Kingfisher In-Reply-To: <001801d2389f$a3bf3b60$eb3db220$@inf.shizuoka.ac.jp> References: <001801d2389f$a3bf3b60$eb3db220$@inf.shizuoka.ac.jp> Message-ID: Thank you Vandy@GST A delightfully serious read; a breath of mind-clearing oxygen, although it isn't clear to me why. Maybe it's just because it is grounded and graspable. Technical languages have an essential role, but make xmca postings, no matter how genuinely mind-opening and conceptually developmental, a leetle(sic) hard-going at times. Thanks (Pity neither Hillary nor Donald is anything other than dangerous to global survival, IMO) Tom Richardson Middlesbrough UK On 7 November 2016 at 02:35, valerie A. Wilkinson wrote: > Good morning, XMCAers, Vandy@GST here, promoting "requisite variety" as > the > true path. > > I've spent some hours pondering all that has happened since Mike dropped > his > "bombshell": Time for a generational change." > > > > Mike himself put gender and chaining on the table at that time. > > Larry, in taking up the themes and honoring Mike for his "middle" role > > led to Phillip putting gender and chaining firmly together as patriarchal > and hierarchical, even if unwitting and well intentioned. > > > > The discussion has gone in many directions and I am late for work. The US > election is "tomorrow" and what I wanted to say in an article before the > decision, in a haiku-like spontaneous effusion of wisdom, learning, > philosophy, and engaged learning across a lifetime was "bogged down" by APA > rules. In Japan, science writers have to use APA format. I am a humanist > operating in the field of Informatics and even after 20 years on board > here, > I do not feel I have a place at the table. > > > > So what I want to say now, as everything hangs in the balance: > > My Indonesian and Vietnamese graduate students are women who have already > graduated from the university and are getting married and having babies at > the same time that they are students in Informatics. My Chinese and > Nepalese women students graduated from universities in their home > countries, > but their cultural and language level is almost incalculably higher than my > Indonesian and Vietnamese students. My female student from Tunisia is from > yet another world. My class of "Professional Presentations in English" is a > one credit class and I am not their individual advisor. All of them owe > obedience to their own advisor, which I do not have the standing to compete > with. > > > > It is my job to be a model of a woman of learning to help them discover > their calling and talent while working in their lab with their own > professor. My own students are at an English level for which writing > correct English is a challenge and at a cultural level (poverty and > farmers) > which makes them like very talented Middle School students. We have to > have > fun, make paper chains, popcorn balls, posters. We have to enjoy our time > and keep our space clean. Strangely, five years of rehabilitation prepared > me well for this. Sadly, rank has no meaning if the rest of the gang does > not recognize it . > > I voted. Now I'm in the "hold my breath" phase of waiting for this thing > to > pass so we can get on with our lives. > > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Tue Nov 8 08:02:30 2016 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2016 16:02:30 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] list server name and other technical issues Message-ID: <1478620949905.97809@iped.uio.no> Dear all, just a brief onte, while some ?in and outside the US are holding their breath before the election results tonight, ??on some technical issues with the list. One post was recently stopped by the system for moderation, the reason being that the e-mail was sent to one of the OLD list ?addresses, xmca@weber.ucsd.edu ??and/or ??xmca@potpourri.ucsd.edu. In 2012, the name of the list was changed to xmca-l@ucsd.edu and it is this address that must be used. Please, if you happen to get an e-mail stopped, check whether one of the old addresses is still in your address book and update it. In other occasions, posts are stopped as the result of someone who either is trying to post from a non-subscribed address, or put too many addresses in the To: or Cc: line. Whenever this happens, you can directly contact Bruce at bjones@ucsd.edu , who takes care of the mailing list. Alfredo PS: I just read the Newyorker today and I am glad to discover that at least some media in the US have, and at least some days a year, have a much more elegant ?way to endorse candidates than do some newspapers in Spain (http://www.eldiario.es/politica/Pedro-Sanchez-economicos-gobernara-Podemos_0_574992889.html?) From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Tue Nov 8 16:15:50 2016 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 00:15:50 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Communication, Co-generalization, and Crises In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Where does 'co-generalization' come from, David? Perhaps a good carry over from your consideration of political milieu is the factor of tension in development: tension to foster attention, a socialised 'will' if you like. Best, Huw On 7 November 2016 at 21:16, David Kellogg wrote: > Well, of course, Peg is really right--or at least half right. That is, the > American elections are not just a plebiscite on sexual assault, and using > the term "sexual predator" reduces the whole thing to the kind of > "tu quoques" argumentation which makes up the whole of the Republican case > these days. Actually, for the first time in my memory, the American > elections are about real issues that actually touch the lives of ordinary > people, namely sexism, racism, and the impunity conferred by real fame and > largely imaginary wealth. > > But I would like to know that the other half is also right: that is, that > xmca's normal concerns with mind, culture, and activity do not require > radio silence in times of crisis. Let me talk about another crisis and see. > Unlike the USA, South Korea has had, since 1949, six different > constitutions. Until very recently (1997) the peaceful transfer of power > was the exception and not the rule: governments changed if and only if > people took matters into their own hands, either through mass > demonstrations or violent military coups or both (the one apparent > exception was when the current president's father, Bak Jeonghi, was forced > to call an election by the Nixon administration: on the verge of losing to > Kim Daejeong, he peacefully overthrew himself instead). > > Now, Vygotsky also describes development in terms of six crises (Birth, > One, Three, Seven, Thirteen and Seventeen) and five more or less stable > periods of equilibrium (Infancy, Early Childhood, Preschool, School Age, > Adolescence). In fact, the Zoped (assuming that "ped" means pedological and > not pedagogical) really refers to the functions that belong to the NEXT > zone of development and not the actual one: if a child can simply take over > functions from the environment and make them his or her own, then almost by > definition they are functions that belong to the zone of actual, and not > the zone of proximal, development. That means that for every stable period, > the Zoped is going to be a crisis (and of course that, along with > prolepsis, accounts for the unpredictability of the Zoped which Peg noted). > > Korean crises not when people are overexploited and ruthlessly suppressed; > that is a much better description of the stable periods in Korean history. > Crises happen just when people become superproductive and try to > self-emancipate. I think crises of development in the child also happen the > same way: that is, during normal periods, the environment is communicating > with the child and the child is taking over co-generalizations by > restructuring them to fit the child's extant psychological system. But > Vygotsky says that there are moments when this cannot happen, because the > psychological system itself must be restructured: the central neoformation > dissolves the social situation of development. > > During normal times, the environment is the source of development and the > child's personality is only the site of development: but during these crazy > crises (the crisis of "autonomous speech", the crisis of the negativistic > "proto will", the crisis of the affected, manneristic, clownish > "proto-self"), it is almost as if the child, superproductive and active, > wants to "turn the tables", transforming the personality into the source of > development and adapting the environment to it instead. > > One of the most puzzling things in Vygotsky's last lectures is the Central > Line of Development. On the one hand, these are always forms > of "communication" and "co-generalization". And on the other, because each > Neoformation is entirely new, what is Central in one period is Peripheral > in the next: perception, for example, is the maximally developing function > in Infancy, but memory is the leading function in Preschool. Speech is a > Central Line of Development in early childhood but Thinking in School Age. > How can BOTH of these things be true? > > It seems to me that both of them are true.Communication represents contact > with the social environment, and this is always foregrounded during stable > periods and backgrounded during crises. Co-generalization represents what > we use to call "internalization", and this is foregrounded during crises > and backgrounded during stable periods. In addition, the content of the > communication and co-generalization changes as the child develops, from > doing things in Infancy, to saying things in Early Childhood, to feeling in > Preschool, and to thinking in School Age. When co-generalization becomes > super-productive, we get conscious awareness, and with awareness, crisis. > With crises, worlds change. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Tue Nov 8 17:55:46 2016 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 12:55:46 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Communication, Co-generalization, and Crises In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Huw: I think in general we tend to overstate the differences between Vygotsky's thinking in different periods, because we notice that he changes his wordings and we assume that means he has changed his mind. We forget that Vygotsky steals most of his words from other people ("egocentric speech", "pseudoconcept", "mediation", "neoformation", etc.) and then works them into his own system of concepts, and it's the system of concepts that is really new, not the words. So for example Yasnitsky and Van der Veer claim that Vygotsky gave up instrumentalism, abandoned the distinction between higher and lower psychological functions, and tried to become a Gestaltist, and failed. None of this is true, as far as I can tell. The final lectures--right up to the one I sent around--have a central role for word meanings, maintain that the higher psychological functions are specifically human and the main expanadum, and include some pretty harsh criticisms of the Gestaltists, who were by then showing distinctly Nazi tendencies. But it is certainly true that the words change, and some of the words that have caused the most trouble--interestingly enough--disappear. For example, Vygotsky stops using the word "reaction", he no longer talks about "vrashevaniye" or "introvolution", and he only uses the word "internalize" once, when he is talking about a whole system of concepts (not when he is talking about reactions). So the question arises--what takes its place? Here's what we put in the "Thinking at School Age" chapter that I sent around. Criticisms from Russophones? Vygotsky contrasts ????????? (?generalization?) and ??????? (?communication?, ?contact?, ?interaction?). But if we translate these terms as ?generalization? and ?communication? respectively, we obscure the fact that they have the same root: ?commonality? or ?sharing?. In Russian, ?? is a preposition, meaning ?about? or ?of?, so we might render this contrast as ?about-communication? or ?meta-communication? vs. ?communication?. But this would allow the sociological, interpersonal side of Vygotsky?s meaning to eclipse the psychological, intra-personal side. Another way to put it would be to say that ?generalization? is really ?inter-generalization?, because it is between the child and the environment, and ?interaction? is really ?intra-generalization??within the child. The child derives intra-mental generalizations through a process of inter-personal communications, by interaction using shared word values within a speech community. This ?community generalization? or ?common generalization? or ?co-generalization? for short is what is enabled by word meanings shared within the speech community. These meanings the child at first only partially shares. This word ????????? usually translated as ?generalization?. Because this turns out to be a very important point in this particular lecture and in the lectures that follow, we will take the liberty of translating as ?co-generalization?. A ?co-generalization? is a generalization about generalizations made by the child through construing the shared generalizations of word values in a speech community. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 11:15 AM, Huw Lloyd wrote: > Where does 'co-generalization' come from, David? Perhaps a good carry over > from your consideration of political milieu is the factor of tension in > development: tension to foster attention, a socialised 'will' if you like. > > Best, > Huw > > On 7 November 2016 at 21:16, David Kellogg wrote: > > > Well, of course, Peg is really right--or at least half right. That is, > the > > American elections are not just a plebiscite on sexual assault, and using > > the term "sexual predator" reduces the whole thing to the kind of > > "tu quoques" argumentation which makes up the whole of the Republican > case > > these days. Actually, for the first time in my memory, the American > > elections are about real issues that actually touch the lives of ordinary > > people, namely sexism, racism, and the impunity conferred by real fame > and > > largely imaginary wealth. > > > > But I would like to know that the other half is also right: that is, that > > xmca's normal concerns with mind, culture, and activity do not require > > radio silence in times of crisis. Let me talk about another crisis and > see. > > Unlike the USA, South Korea has had, since 1949, six different > > constitutions. Until very recently (1997) the peaceful transfer of power > > was the exception and not the rule: governments changed if and only if > > people took matters into their own hands, either through mass > > demonstrations or violent military coups or both (the one apparent > > exception was when the current president's father, Bak Jeonghi, was > forced > > to call an election by the Nixon administration: on the verge of losing > to > > Kim Daejeong, he peacefully overthrew himself instead). > > > > Now, Vygotsky also describes development in terms of six crises (Birth, > > One, Three, Seven, Thirteen and Seventeen) and five more or less stable > > periods of equilibrium (Infancy, Early Childhood, Preschool, School Age, > > Adolescence). In fact, the Zoped (assuming that "ped" means pedological > and > > not pedagogical) really refers to the functions that belong to the NEXT > > zone of development and not the actual one: if a child can simply take > over > > functions from the environment and make them his or her own, then almost > by > > definition they are functions that belong to the zone of actual, and not > > the zone of proximal, development. That means that for every stable > period, > > the Zoped is going to be a crisis (and of course that, along with > > prolepsis, accounts for the unpredictability of the Zoped which Peg > noted). > > > > Korean crises not when people are overexploited and ruthlessly > suppressed; > > that is a much better description of the stable periods in Korean > history. > > Crises happen just when people become superproductive and try to > > self-emancipate. I think crises of development in the child also happen > the > > same way: that is, during normal periods, the environment is > communicating > > with the child and the child is taking over co-generalizations by > > restructuring them to fit the child's extant psychological system. But > > Vygotsky says that there are moments when this cannot happen, because the > > psychological system itself must be restructured: the central > neoformation > > dissolves the social situation of development. > > > > During normal times, the environment is the source of development and the > > child's personality is only the site of development: but during these > crazy > > crises (the crisis of "autonomous speech", the crisis of the negativistic > > "proto will", the crisis of the affected, manneristic, clownish > > "proto-self"), it is almost as if the child, superproductive and active, > > wants to "turn the tables", transforming the personality into the source > of > > development and adapting the environment to it instead. > > > > One of the most puzzling things in Vygotsky's last lectures is the > Central > > Line of Development. On the one hand, these are always forms > > of "communication" and "co-generalization". And on the other, because > each > > Neoformation is entirely new, what is Central in one period is Peripheral > > in the next: perception, for example, is the maximally developing > function > > in Infancy, but memory is the leading function in Preschool. Speech is a > > Central Line of Development in early childhood but Thinking in School > Age. > > How can BOTH of these things be true? > > > > It seems to me that both of them are true.Communication represents > contact > > with the social environment, and this is always foregrounded during > stable > > periods and backgrounded during crises. Co-generalization represents what > > we use to call "internalization", and this is foregrounded during crises > > and backgrounded during stable periods. In addition, the content of the > > communication and co-generalization changes as the child develops, from > > doing things in Infancy, to saying things in Early Childhood, to feeling > in > > Preschool, and to thinking in School Age. When co-generalization becomes > > super-productive, we get conscious awareness, and with awareness, > crisis. > > With crises, worlds change. > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Tue Nov 8 18:02:00 2016 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 13:02:00 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: A Quick Lightning Dive - like a Kingfisher In-Reply-To: References: <001801d2389f$a3bf3b60$eb3db220$@inf.shizuoka.ac.jp> Message-ID: Tom and Vandy: This is an issue I really have to worry about all the time, because the main readers of our books are elementary school teachers, who really don't have much time for the kind of stuff they had to study up on to pass the civil service examination. At one time I was kind of hoping that Vygotsky would be put on the syllabus, but now I am rather glad he wasn't. One year, just for fun, I bought exam prep books and tried to follow the TV lectures (though I didn't sit the exam itself). It wasn't that much fun. Anyway, this is the first draft for a foreword I wrote last night for the new volume of Vygotsky lectures. If you have a minute, I'd really appreciate hearing what you think. See if you think it's too technical. See if you think it makes the book sound worth reading. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 2:09 AM, Tom Richardson < tom.richardson3@googlemail.com> wrote: > Thank you Vandy@GST > A delightfully serious read; a breath of mind-clearing oxygen, although it > isn't clear to me why. Maybe it's just because it is grounded and > graspable. > Technical languages have an essential role, but make xmca postings, no > matter how genuinely mind-opening and conceptually developmental, a > leetle(sic) hard-going at times. > Thanks > (Pity neither Hillary nor Donald is anything other than dangerous to > global survival, IMO) > Tom Richardson > Middlesbrough UK > > > On 7 November 2016 at 02:35, valerie A. Wilkinson < > vwilk@inf.shizuoka.ac.jp> > wrote: > > > Good morning, XMCAers, Vandy@GST here, promoting "requisite variety" as > > the > > true path. > > > > I've spent some hours pondering all that has happened since Mike dropped > > his > > "bombshell": Time for a generational change." > > > > > > > > Mike himself put gender and chaining on the table at that time. > > > > Larry, in taking up the themes and honoring Mike for his "middle" role > > > > led to Phillip putting gender and chaining firmly together as patriarchal > > and hierarchical, even if unwitting and well intentioned. > > > > > > > > The discussion has gone in many directions and I am late for work. The > US > > election is "tomorrow" and what I wanted to say in an article before the > > decision, in a haiku-like spontaneous effusion of wisdom, learning, > > philosophy, and engaged learning across a lifetime was "bogged down" by > APA > > rules. In Japan, science writers have to use APA format. I am a > humanist > > operating in the field of Informatics and even after 20 years on board > > here, > > I do not feel I have a place at the table. > > > > > > > > So what I want to say now, as everything hangs in the balance: > > > > My Indonesian and Vietnamese graduate students are women who have already > > graduated from the university and are getting married and having babies > at > > the same time that they are students in Informatics. My Chinese and > > Nepalese women students graduated from universities in their home > > countries, > > but their cultural and language level is almost incalculably higher than > my > > Indonesian and Vietnamese students. My female student from Tunisia is > from > > yet another world. My class of "Professional Presentations in English" > is a > > one credit class and I am not their individual advisor. All of them owe > > obedience to their own advisor, which I do not have the standing to > compete > > with. > > > > > > > > It is my job to be a model of a woman of learning to help them discover > > their calling and talent while working in their lab with their own > > professor. My own students are at an English level for which writing > > correct English is a challenge and at a cultural level (poverty and > > farmers) > > which makes them like very talented Middle School students. We have to > > have > > fun, make paper chains, popcorn balls, posters. We have to enjoy our > time > > and keep our space clean. Strangely, five years of rehabilitation > prepared > > me well for this. Sadly, rank has no meaning if the rest of the gang > does > > not recognize it . > > > > I voted. Now I'm in the "hold my breath" phase of waiting for this thing > > to > > pass so we can get on with our lives. > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: First Draft for a Foreword.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 34161 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20161109/1e67a3cf/attachment.bin From vwilk@inf.shizuoka.ac.jp Tue Nov 8 20:20:29 2016 From: vwilk@inf.shizuoka.ac.jp (Wilkinson) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 13:20:29 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: A Quick Lightning Dive - like a Kingfisher In-Reply-To: References: <001801d2389f$a3bf3b60$eb3db220$@inf.shizuoka.ac.jp> Message-ID: David, Would you mind if I ask a couple of my more advanced English students (adults) if they find the writing conceptually interesting and inviting. If OK, I'll enjoy seeing what kind of discussions are generated by your writing. Vandy On 2016/11/09 11:02, David Kellogg wrote: > Tom and Vandy: > > This is an issue I really have to worry about all the time, because the > main readers of our books are elementary school teachers, who really don't > have much time for the kind of stuff they had to study up on to pass the > civil service examination. At one time I was kind of hoping that Vygotsky > would be put on the syllabus, but now I am rather glad he wasn't. One year, > just for fun, I bought exam prep books and tried to follow the TV lectures > (though I didn't sit the exam itself). It wasn't that much fun. > > Anyway, this is the first draft for a foreword I wrote last night for the > new volume of Vygotsky lectures. If you have a minute, I'd really > appreciate hearing what you think. See if you think it's too technical. See > if you think it makes the book sound worth reading. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 2:09 AM, Tom Richardson < > tom.richardson3@googlemail.com> wrote: > >> Thank you Vandy@GST >> A delightfully serious read; a breath of mind-clearing oxygen, although it >> isn't clear to me why. Maybe it's just because it is grounded and >> graspable. >> Technical languages have an essential role, but make xmca postings, no >> matter how genuinely mind-opening and conceptually developmental, a >> leetle(sic) hard-going at times. >> Thanks >> (Pity neither Hillary nor Donald is anything other than dangerous to >> global survival, IMO) >> Tom Richardson >> Middlesbrough UK >> >> >> On 7 November 2016 at 02:35, valerie A. Wilkinson < >> vwilk@inf.shizuoka.ac.jp> >> wrote: >> >>> Good morning, XMCAers, Vandy@GST here, promoting "requisite variety" as >>> the >>> true path. >>> >>> I've spent some hours pondering all that has happened since Mike dropped >>> his >>> "bombshell": Time for a generational change." >>> >>> >>> >>> Mike himself put gender and chaining on the table at that time. >>> >>> Larry, in taking up the themes and honoring Mike for his "middle" role >>> >>> led to Phillip putting gender and chaining firmly together as patriarchal >>> and hierarchical, even if unwitting and well intentioned. >>> >>> >>> >>> The discussion has gone in many directions and I am late for work. The >> US >>> election is "tomorrow" and what I wanted to say in an article before the >>> decision, in a haiku-like spontaneous effusion of wisdom, learning, >>> philosophy, and engaged learning across a lifetime was "bogged down" by >> APA >>> rules. In Japan, science writers have to use APA format. I am a >> humanist >>> operating in the field of Informatics and even after 20 years on board >>> here, >>> I do not feel I have a place at the table. >>> >>> >>> >>> So what I want to say now, as everything hangs in the balance: >>> >>> My Indonesian and Vietnamese graduate students are women who have already >>> graduated from the university and are getting married and having babies >> at >>> the same time that they are students in Informatics. My Chinese and >>> Nepalese women students graduated from universities in their home >>> countries, >>> but their cultural and language level is almost incalculably higher than >> my >>> Indonesian and Vietnamese students. My female student from Tunisia is >> from >>> yet another world. My class of "Professional Presentations in English" >> is a >>> one credit class and I am not their individual advisor. All of them owe >>> obedience to their own advisor, which I do not have the standing to >> compete >>> with. >>> >>> >>> >>> It is my job to be a model of a woman of learning to help them discover >>> their calling and talent while working in their lab with their own >>> professor. My own students are at an English level for which writing >>> correct English is a challenge and at a cultural level (poverty and >>> farmers) >>> which makes them like very talented Middle School students. We have to >>> have >>> fun, make paper chains, popcorn balls, posters. We have to enjoy our >> time >>> and keep our space clean. Strangely, five years of rehabilitation >> prepared >>> me well for this. Sadly, rank has no meaning if the rest of the gang >> does >>> not recognize it . >>> >>> I voted. Now I'm in the "hold my breath" phase of waiting for this thing >>> to >>> pass so we can get on with our lives. >>> >>> >> From dkellogg60@gmail.com Tue Nov 8 21:04:43 2016 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 16:04:43 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: A Quick Lightning Dive - like a Kingfisher In-Reply-To: References: <001801d2389f$a3bf3b60$eb3db220$@inf.shizuoka.ac.jp> Message-ID: Great, Vandy--particularly if they are teachers or parents. But you are a teacher, and you work in a context not far from us. What did YOU think? David Kellogg Macquarie University On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 3:20 PM, Wilkinson wrote: > David, > Would you mind if I ask a couple of my more advanced English students > (adults) if they find the writing conceptually interesting and inviting. > If OK, I'll enjoy seeing what kind of discussions are generated by your > writing. > Vandy > > On 2016/11/09 11:02, David Kellogg wrote: > >> Tom and Vandy: >> >> This is an issue I really have to worry about all the time, because the >> main readers of our books are elementary school teachers, who really don't >> have much time for the kind of stuff they had to study up on to pass the >> civil service examination. At one time I was kind of hoping that Vygotsky >> would be put on the syllabus, but now I am rather glad he wasn't. One >> year, >> just for fun, I bought exam prep books and tried to follow the TV lectures >> (though I didn't sit the exam itself). It wasn't that much fun. >> >> Anyway, this is the first draft for a foreword I wrote last night for the >> new volume of Vygotsky lectures. If you have a minute, I'd really >> appreciate hearing what you think. See if you think it's too technical. >> See >> if you think it makes the book sound worth reading. >> >> David Kellogg >> Macquarie University >> >> On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 2:09 AM, Tom Richardson < >> tom.richardson3@googlemail.com> wrote: >> >> Thank you Vandy@GST >>> A delightfully serious read; a breath of mind-clearing oxygen, although >>> it >>> isn't clear to me why. Maybe it's just because it is grounded and >>> graspable. >>> Technical languages have an essential role, but make xmca postings, no >>> matter how genuinely mind-opening and conceptually developmental, a >>> leetle(sic) hard-going at times. >>> Thanks >>> (Pity neither Hillary nor Donald is anything other than dangerous to >>> global survival, IMO) >>> Tom Richardson >>> Middlesbrough UK >>> >>> >>> On 7 November 2016 at 02:35, valerie A. Wilkinson < >>> vwilk@inf.shizuoka.ac.jp> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Good morning, XMCAers, Vandy@GST here, promoting "requisite variety" as >>>> the >>>> true path. >>>> >>>> I've spent some hours pondering all that has happened since Mike dropped >>>> his >>>> "bombshell": Time for a generational change." >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Mike himself put gender and chaining on the table at that time. >>>> >>>> Larry, in taking up the themes and honoring Mike for his "middle" role >>>> >>>> led to Phillip putting gender and chaining firmly together as >>>> patriarchal >>>> and hierarchical, even if unwitting and well intentioned. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> The discussion has gone in many directions and I am late for work. The >>>> >>> US >>> >>>> election is "tomorrow" and what I wanted to say in an article before the >>>> decision, in a haiku-like spontaneous effusion of wisdom, learning, >>>> philosophy, and engaged learning across a lifetime was "bogged down" by >>>> >>> APA >>> >>>> rules. In Japan, science writers have to use APA format. I am a >>>> >>> humanist >>> >>>> operating in the field of Informatics and even after 20 years on board >>>> here, >>>> I do not feel I have a place at the table. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> So what I want to say now, as everything hangs in the balance: >>>> >>>> My Indonesian and Vietnamese graduate students are women who have >>>> already >>>> graduated from the university and are getting married and having babies >>>> >>> at >>> >>>> the same time that they are students in Informatics. My Chinese and >>>> Nepalese women students graduated from universities in their home >>>> countries, >>>> but their cultural and language level is almost incalculably higher than >>>> >>> my >>> >>>> Indonesian and Vietnamese students. My female student from Tunisia is >>>> >>> from >>> >>>> yet another world. My class of "Professional Presentations in English" >>>> >>> is a >>> >>>> one credit class and I am not their individual advisor. All of them owe >>>> obedience to their own advisor, which I do not have the standing to >>>> >>> compete >>> >>>> with. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> It is my job to be a model of a woman of learning to help them discover >>>> their calling and talent while working in their lab with their own >>>> professor. My own students are at an English level for which writing >>>> correct English is a challenge and at a cultural level (poverty and >>>> farmers) >>>> which makes them like very talented Middle School students. We have to >>>> have >>>> fun, make paper chains, popcorn balls, posters. We have to enjoy our >>>> >>> time >>> >>>> and keep our space clean. Strangely, five years of rehabilitation >>>> >>> prepared >>> >>>> me well for this. Sadly, rank has no meaning if the rest of the gang >>>> >>> does >>> >>>> not recognize it . >>>> >>>> I voted. Now I'm in the "hold my breath" phase of waiting for this >>>> thing >>>> to >>>> pass so we can get on with our lives. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> > > > From mcole@ucsd.edu Tue Nov 8 21:27:19 2016 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2016 21:27:19 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] That other political crisis Message-ID: Having worked until time was up, I have had time to go back and read some of what has been discussed. The outcome of the election is there for all to consider and experience in the weeks and months ahead. I attach an article for those who do not (like me) know much about the current political crisis in South Korea. David will correct the errors in it i am confident, and it appears to give at least a hint of the turmoil in that part of the world. it can be found here, last time i looked http://www.nytimes.com/2016/ 11/06/world/asia/south-koreans-ashamed-over-les-secretive-adviser.html FYI mike From mcole@ucsd.edu Tue Nov 8 21:40:12 2016 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2016 21:40:12 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Communication, Co-generalization, and Crises In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: These are interesting ideas, David. I will respond and ask questions in italics between paragraphs because the overall note seems to contain some sub-themes worth comment on their own. ?? On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 5:55 PM, David Kellogg wrote: > Huw: > > > I think in general we tend to overstate the differences between Vygotsky's > thinking in different periods, because we notice that he changes his > wordings and we assume that means he has changed his mind. We forget that > Vygotsky steals most of his words from other people ("egocentric speech", > "pseudoconcept", "mediation", "neoformation", etc.) and then works them > into his own system of concepts, and it's the system of concepts that is > really new, not the words. > > ?*I agree,but its hard to keep the chronology straight and a lot of his ideas come from Western Europe/US sources*?. *The translations of terms across systems cannot help but be a distorted lens which use of common terms hides from us. Unwitting players in the pseudoconcept game.* ? > So for example Yasnitsky and Van der Veer claim that Vygotsky gave up > instrumentalism, abandoned the distinction between higher and lower > psychological functions, and tried to become a Gestaltist, and failed. None > of this is true, as far as I can tell. The final lectures--right up to the > one I sent around--have a central role for word meanings, maintain that the > higher psychological functions are specifically human and the main > expanadum, and include some pretty harsh criticisms of the Gestaltists, who > were by then showing distinctly Nazi tendencies. > > ?*The stages of instrumentalism, functional systems, to "perezhivanie" > (transactionalism?) have always seemed to me a clear case where earlier > stages are sublated. He was critical of Gestaltists for their reductions to > biology and the fascism associated with it, but the problem of the whole in > relations to parts and the centrality of structuration seems to remain. How > else could one step in instruction create two steps in development?* > ? > ? > > But it is certainly true that the words change, and some of the words that > have caused the most trouble--interestingly enough--disappear. For example, > Vygotsky stops using the word "reaction", he no longer talks about > "vrashevaniye" or "introvolution", and he only uses the word "internalize" > once, when he is talking about a whole system of concepts (not when he is > talking about reactions). So the question arises--what takes its place? > > > Here's what we put in the "Thinking at School Age" chapter that I sent > around. Criticisms from Russophones? > > ?*The issues raised here seem really central to understand, but I am not > sure I fully understood them all.*? > > Vygotsky contrasts ????????? (?generalization?) and ??????? > (?communication?, ?contact?, ?interaction?). But if we translate these > terms as ?generalization? and ?communication? respectively, we obscure the > fact that they have the same root: ?commonality? or ?sharing?. > > *?OK, got it, the unity of generalization and communication, in russian, > have the same root as "common-ness (?????-ness)?."? But I have trouble > getting from there to "meta-communication." Maybe my denseness.* > ? > ?In Russian, ?? is a preposition, meaning ?about? or ?of?, so we might render this contrast as ?about-communication? or ?meta-communication? vs. > ?communication?. But this would allow the sociological, interpersonal side > of Vygotsky?s meaning to eclipse the psychological, intra-personal side. > > ?*Why and when do we have to allow such eclipsing given the theoretical > formulation above? Missed that.* > > ? > > Another way to put it would be to say that ?generalization? is really > ?inter-generalization?, because it is between the child and the > environment, and ?interaction? is really ?intra-generalization??within the > child. *?I find that very difficult to follow but the next sentence reads correctly to me... although I am not sure what 'the child derives" means.* ? > The child derives intra-mental generalizations through a process of > inter-personal communications, by interaction using shared word values > within a speech community. This ?community generalization? or ?common > generalization? or ?co-generalization? for short is what is enabled by word > meanings shared within the speech community. These meanings the child at > first only partially shares. > *Does the community generalization- to common generalization, to co-generation end correspond to the extreme, externalize form of sense? So these are different ways of expressing the conventionality/historical nature of word meaning??* ?*Seems to me that not only the child at first, but the human of any age for ever after only partially share the conventional/valued word meanings of the society that mediate everyday experience (to use some borrowed words!) of one's same of the species' delights.?* > > > This word ????????? usually translated as ?generalization?. Because this > turns out to be a very important point in this particular lecture and in > the lectures that follow, we will take the liberty of translating as > ?co-generalization?. A ?co-generalization? is a generalization about > generalizations made by the child through construing the shared > generalizations of word values in a speech community. > *?This seems the biggy to pull of. What, in truth, do russianophiles have to say about it?* mike? > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 11:15 AM, Huw Lloyd > wrote: > > > Where does 'co-generalization' come from, David? Perhaps a good carry > over > > from your consideration of political milieu is the factor of tension in > > development: tension to foster attention, a socialised 'will' if you > like. > > > > Best, > > Huw > > > > On 7 November 2016 at 21:16, David Kellogg wrote: > > > > > Well, of course, Peg is really right--or at least half right. That is, > > the > > > American elections are not just a plebiscite on sexual assault, and > using > > > the term "sexual predator" reduces the whole thing to the kind of > > > "tu quoques" argumentation which makes up the whole of the Republican > > case > > > these days. Actually, for the first time in my memory, the American > > > elections are about real issues that actually touch the lives of > ordinary > > > people, namely sexism, racism, and the impunity conferred by real fame > > and > > > largely imaginary wealth. > > > > > > But I would like to know that the other half is also right: that is, > that > > > xmca's normal concerns with mind, culture, and activity do not require > > > radio silence in times of crisis. Let me talk about another crisis and > > see. > > > Unlike the USA, South Korea has had, since 1949, six different > > > constitutions. Until very recently (1997) the peaceful transfer of > power > > > was the exception and not the rule: governments changed if and only if > > > people took matters into their own hands, either through mass > > > demonstrations or violent military coups or both (the one apparent > > > exception was when the current president's father, Bak Jeonghi, was > > forced > > > to call an election by the Nixon administration: on the verge of losing > > to > > > Kim Daejeong, he peacefully overthrew himself instead). > > > > > > Now, Vygotsky also describes development in terms of six crises (Birth, > > > One, Three, Seven, Thirteen and Seventeen) and five more or less stable > > > periods of equilibrium (Infancy, Early Childhood, Preschool, School > Age, > > > Adolescence). In fact, the Zoped (assuming that "ped" means pedological > > and > > > not pedagogical) really refers to the functions that belong to the NEXT > > > zone of development and not the actual one: if a child can simply take > > over > > > functions from the environment and make them his or her own, then > almost > > by > > > definition they are functions that belong to the zone of actual, and > not > > > the zone of proximal, development. That means that for every stable > > period, > > > the Zoped is going to be a crisis (and of course that, along with > > > prolepsis, accounts for the unpredictability of the Zoped which Peg > > noted). > > > > > > Korean crises not when people are overexploited and ruthlessly > > suppressed; > > > that is a much better description of the stable periods in Korean > > history. > > > Crises happen just when people become superproductive and try to > > > self-emancipate. I think crises of development in the child also happen > > the > > > same way: that is, during normal periods, the environment is > > communicating > > > with the child and the child is taking over co-generalizations by > > > restructuring them to fit the child's extant psychological system. But > > > Vygotsky says that there are moments when this cannot happen, because > the > > > psychological system itself must be restructured: the central > > neoformation > > > dissolves the social situation of development. > > > > > > During normal times, the environment is the source of development and > the > > > child's personality is only the site of development: but during these > > crazy > > > crises (the crisis of "autonomous speech", the crisis of the > negativistic > > > "proto will", the crisis of the affected, manneristic, clownish > > > "proto-self"), it is almost as if the child, superproductive and > active, > > > wants to "turn the tables", transforming the personality into the > source > > of > > > development and adapting the environment to it instead. > > > > > > One of the most puzzling things in Vygotsky's last lectures is the > > Central > > > Line of Development. On the one hand, these are always forms > > > of "communication" and "co-generalization". And on the other, because > > each > > > Neoformation is entirely new, what is Central in one period is > Peripheral > > > in the next: perception, for example, is the maximally developing > > function > > > in Infancy, but memory is the leading function in Preschool. Speech is > a > > > Central Line of Development in early childhood but Thinking in School > > Age. > > > How can BOTH of these things be true? > > > > > > It seems to me that both of them are true.Communication represents > > contact > > > with the social environment, and this is always foregrounded during > > stable > > > periods and backgrounded during crises. Co-generalization represents > what > > > we use to call "internalization", and this is foregrounded during > crises > > > and backgrounded during stable periods. In addition, the content of the > > > communication and co-generalization changes as the child develops, from > > > doing things in Infancy, to saying things in Early Childhood, to > feeling > > in > > > Preschool, and to thinking in School Age. When co-generalization > becomes > > > super-productive, we get conscious awareness, and with awareness, > > crisis. > > > With crises, worlds change. > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > From R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk Wed Nov 9 05:30:06 2016 From: R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk (Rod Parker-Rees) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 13:30:06 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Communication, Co-generalization, and Crises In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: This raises questions for me about how we understand the word 'concept'. This can be understood as referring to things that go together but really things that are taken together - the 'con' seems to do double work, both the togetherness of the things which are taken together and the togetherness of the cultural agreement to take these things AS going together. So concepts, as we usually use the term, are co-generalizations or conconcepts? Things which we (together) agree to think of as going together. It is easy to miss the sociocultural 'agreement' aspects, as it is in 'understanding', which no longer resonates with a sense of joining in with (or standing among) others. All the best, Rod -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole Sent: 09 November 2016 05:40 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Communication, Co-generalization, and Crises These are interesting ideas, David. I will respond and ask questions in italics between paragraphs because the overall note seems to contain some sub-themes worth comment on their own. ?? On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 5:55 PM, David Kellogg wrote: > Huw: > > > I think in general we tend to overstate the differences between > Vygotsky's thinking in different periods, because we notice that he > changes his wordings and we assume that means he has changed his mind. > We forget that Vygotsky steals most of his words from other people > ("egocentric speech", "pseudoconcept", "mediation", "neoformation", > etc.) and then works them into his own system of concepts, and it's > the system of concepts that is really new, not the words. > > ?*I agree,but its hard to keep the chronology straight and a lot of > his ideas come from Western Europe/US sources*?. *The translations of terms across systems cannot help but be a distorted lens which use of common terms hides from us. Unwitting players in the pseudoconcept game.* ? > So for example Yasnitsky and Van der Veer claim that Vygotsky gave up > instrumentalism, abandoned the distinction between higher and lower > psychological functions, and tried to become a Gestaltist, and failed. > None of this is true, as far as I can tell. The final lectures--right > up to the one I sent around--have a central role for word meanings, > maintain that the higher psychological functions are specifically > human and the main expanadum, and include some pretty harsh criticisms > of the Gestaltists, who were by then showing distinctly Nazi tendencies. > > ?*The stages of instrumentalism, functional systems, to "perezhivanie" > (transactionalism?) have always seemed to me a clear case where > earlier stages are sublated. He was critical of Gestaltists for their > reductions to biology and the fascism associated with it, but the > problem of the whole in relations to parts and the centrality of > structuration seems to remain. How else could one step in instruction > create two steps in development?* ? > ? > > But it is certainly true that the words change, and some of the words > that have caused the most trouble--interestingly enough--disappear. > For example, Vygotsky stops using the word "reaction", he no longer > talks about "vrashevaniye" or "introvolution", and he only uses the word "internalize" > once, when he is talking about a whole system of concepts (not when he > is talking about reactions). So the question arises--what takes its place? > > > Here's what we put in the "Thinking at School Age" chapter that I sent > around. Criticisms from Russophones? > > ?*The issues raised here seem really central to understand, but I am > not sure I fully understood them all.*? > > Vygotsky contrasts ????????? (?generalization?) and ??????? > (?communication?, ?contact?, ?interaction?). But if we translate these > terms as ?generalization? and ?communication? respectively, we obscure > the fact that they have the same root: ?commonality? or ?sharing?. > > *?OK, got it, the unity of generalization and communication, in > russian, have the same root as "common-ness (?????-ness)?."? But I > have trouble getting from there to "meta-communication." Maybe my > denseness.* > ? > ?In Russian, ?? is a preposition, meaning ?about? or ?of?, so we might render this contrast as ?about-communication? or ?meta-communication? vs. > ?communication?. But this would allow the sociological, interpersonal > side of Vygotsky?s meaning to eclipse the psychological, intra-personal side. > > ?*Why and when do we have to allow such eclipsing given the > theoretical formulation above? Missed that.* > > ? > > Another way to put it would be to say that ?generalization? is really > ?inter-generalization?, because it is between the child and the > environment, and ?interaction? is really ?intra-generalization??within > the child. *?I find that very difficult to follow but the next sentence reads correctly to me... although I am not sure what 'the child derives" means.* ? > The child derives intra-mental generalizations through a process of > inter-personal communications, by interaction using shared word values > within a speech community. This ?community generalization? or ?common > generalization? or ?co-generalization? for short is what is enabled by > word meanings shared within the speech community. These meanings the > child at first only partially shares. > *Does the community generalization- to common generalization, to co-generation end correspond to the extreme, externalize form of sense? So these are different ways of expressing the conventionality/historical nature of word meaning??* ?*Seems to me that not only the child at first, but the human of any age for ever after only partially share the conventional/valued word meanings of the society that mediate everyday experience (to use some borrowed words!) of one's same of the species' delights.?* > > > This word ????????? usually translated as ?generalization?. Because > this turns out to be a very important point in this particular lecture > and in the lectures that follow, we will take the liberty of > translating as ?co-generalization?. A ?co-generalization? is a > generalization about generalizations made by the child through > construing the shared generalizations of word values in a speech community. > *?This seems the biggy to pull of. What, in truth, do russianophiles have to say about it?* mike? > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 11:15 AM, Huw Lloyd > wrote: > > > Where does 'co-generalization' come from, David? Perhaps a good > > carry > over > > from your consideration of political milieu is the factor of tension > > in > > development: tension to foster attention, a socialised 'will' if you > like. > > > > Best, > > Huw > > > > On 7 November 2016 at 21:16, David Kellogg wrote: > > > > > Well, of course, Peg is really right--or at least half right. That > > > is, > > the > > > American elections are not just a plebiscite on sexual assault, > > > and > using > > > the term "sexual predator" reduces the whole thing to the kind of > > > "tu quoques" argumentation which makes up the whole of the > > > Republican > > case > > > these days. Actually, for the first time in my memory, the > > > American elections are about real issues that actually touch the > > > lives of > ordinary > > > people, namely sexism, racism, and the impunity conferred by real > > > fame > > and > > > largely imaginary wealth. > > > > > > But I would like to know that the other half is also right: that > > > is, > that > > > xmca's normal concerns with mind, culture, and activity do not > > > require radio silence in times of crisis. Let me talk about > > > another crisis and > > see. > > > Unlike the USA, South Korea has had, since 1949, six different > > > constitutions. Until very recently (1997) the peaceful transfer of > power > > > was the exception and not the rule: governments changed if and > > > only if people took matters into their own hands, either through > > > mass demonstrations or violent military coups or both (the one > > > apparent exception was when the current president's father, Bak > > > Jeonghi, was > > forced > > > to call an election by the Nixon administration: on the verge of > > > losing > > to > > > Kim Daejeong, he peacefully overthrew himself instead). > > > > > > Now, Vygotsky also describes development in terms of six crises > > > (Birth, One, Three, Seven, Thirteen and Seventeen) and five more > > > or less stable periods of equilibrium (Infancy, Early Childhood, > > > Preschool, School > Age, > > > Adolescence). In fact, the Zoped (assuming that "ped" means > > > pedological > > and > > > not pedagogical) really refers to the functions that belong to the > > > NEXT zone of development and not the actual one: if a child can > > > simply take > > over > > > functions from the environment and make them his or her own, then > almost > > by > > > definition they are functions that belong to the zone of actual, > > > and > not > > > the zone of proximal, development. That means that for every > > > stable > > period, > > > the Zoped is going to be a crisis (and of course that, along with > > > prolepsis, accounts for the unpredictability of the Zoped which > > > Peg > > noted). > > > > > > Korean crises not when people are overexploited and ruthlessly > > suppressed; > > > that is a much better description of the stable periods in Korean > > history. > > > Crises happen just when people become superproductive and try to > > > self-emancipate. I think crises of development in the child also > > > happen > > the > > > same way: that is, during normal periods, the environment is > > communicating > > > with the child and the child is taking over co-generalizations by > > > restructuring them to fit the child's extant psychological system. > > > But Vygotsky says that there are moments when this cannot happen, > > > because > the > > > psychological system itself must be restructured: the central > > neoformation > > > dissolves the social situation of development. > > > > > > During normal times, the environment is the source of development > > > and > the > > > child's personality is only the site of development: but during > > > these > > crazy > > > crises (the crisis of "autonomous speech", the crisis of the > negativistic > > > "proto will", the crisis of the affected, manneristic, clownish > > > "proto-self"), it is almost as if the child, superproductive and > active, > > > wants to "turn the tables", transforming the personality into the > source > > of > > > development and adapting the environment to it instead. > > > > > > One of the most puzzling things in Vygotsky's last lectures is the > > Central > > > Line of Development. On the one hand, these are always forms of > > > "communication" and "co-generalization". And on the other, because > > each > > > Neoformation is entirely new, what is Central in one period is > Peripheral > > > in the next: perception, for example, is the maximally developing > > function > > > in Infancy, but memory is the leading function in Preschool. > > > Speech is > a > > > Central Line of Development in early childhood but Thinking in > > > School > > Age. > > > How can BOTH of these things be true? > > > > > > It seems to me that both of them are true.Communication represents > > contact > > > with the social environment, and this is always foregrounded > > > during > > stable > > > periods and backgrounded during crises. Co-generalization > > > represents > what > > > we use to call "internalization", and this is foregrounded during > crises > > > and backgrounded during stable periods. In addition, the content > > > of the communication and co-generalization changes as the child > > > develops, from doing things in Infancy, to saying things in Early > > > Childhood, to > feeling > > in > > > Preschool, and to thinking in School Age. When co-generalization > becomes > > > super-productive, we get conscious awareness, and with awareness, > > crisis. > > > With crises, worlds change. > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > ________________________________ [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif] This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on it. If you have received this email in error please let the sender know immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University accepts no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan emails and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept responsibility for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless accompanied by an official order form. From lpscholar2@gmail.com Wed Nov 9 07:59:10 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 07:59:10 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Communication, Co-generalization, and Crises In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <582347db.434e420a.48957.0814@mx.google.com> Rod, Mike, David, I know i am now in over my head, trying to follow this nuanced and complex conversation through communication, co-generalization and crises. I have been reading Vygotsky?s last lecture on school age in conconjunction with Ruquiya?s paper (semiotic mediation language and society: Three exotripic theories ? Vygotsky, halliday, Bernstein). To read both papers in a zig-gap-zag back and forth immersion in this topic or theme (textual theme) Here is Ruqaiya as she enters our conversation on this emerging topic of communication, co-generlization and what she refers to as the *experiential or representational* aspect of semiotic mediation. RUQUIYA: a second contradiction in Vygotsky?s theory is that his views on language as system posits the history of the development of linguistic meaning is social BUT meaning itself is representational/experiential. He wishes to stress the sociogenesis of higher mental functions, but the only meanings he finds of interest are the meanings that do NOT DIRECTLY relate to interpersonal relations. My turn is up, but i do recommend reading both David Kellogg?s translation of Vygotsky?s last lecture in con/junction with Ruqaiya?s paper. This way of reading each paper through the other may allow Baritones to foreground soprano voices within the exploration of semiotic mediation. PS Ruquia briefly mentions gesturing as a semiotic modality or means of co-generating meaning but my turn is up. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Rod Parker-Rees Sent: November 9, 2016 5:32 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Communication, Co-generalization, and Crises This raises questions for me about how we understand the word 'concept'. This can be understood as referring to things that go together but really things that are taken together - the 'con' seems to do double work, both the togetherness of the things which are taken together and the togetherness of the cultural agreement to take these things AS going together. So concepts, as we usually use the term, are co-generalizations or conconcepts? Things which we (together) agree to think of as going together. It is easy to miss the sociocultural 'agreement' aspects, as it is in 'understanding', which no longer resonates with a sense of joining in with (or standing among) others. All the best, Rod -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole Sent: 09 November 2016 05:40 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Communication, Co-generalization, and Crises These are interesting ideas, David. I will respond and ask questions in italics between paragraphs because the overall note seems to contain some sub-themes worth comment on their own. ?? On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 5:55 PM, David Kellogg wrote: > Huw: > > > I think in general we tend to overstate the differences between > Vygotsky's thinking in different periods, because we notice that he > changes his wordings and we assume that means he has changed his mind. > We forget that Vygotsky steals most of his words from other people > ("egocentric speech", "pseudoconcept", "mediation", "neoformation", > etc.) and then works them into his own system of concepts, and it's > the system of concepts that is really new, not the words. > > ?*I agree,but its hard to keep the chronology straight and a lot of > his ideas come from Western Europe/US sources*?. *The translations of terms across systems cannot help but be a distorted lens which use of common terms hides from us. Unwitting players in the pseudoconcept game.* ? > So for example Yasnitsky and Van der Veer claim that Vygotsky gave up > instrumentalism, abandoned the distinction between higher and lower > psychological functions, and tried to become a Gestaltist, and failed. > None of this is true, as far as I can tell. The final lectures--right > up to the one I sent around--have a central role for word meanings, > maintain that the higher psychological functions are specifically > human and the main expanadum, and include some pretty harsh criticisms > of the Gestaltists, who were by then showing distinctly Nazi tendencies. > > ?*The stages of instrumentalism, functional systems, to "perezhivanie" > (transactionalism?) have always seemed to me a clear case where > earlier stages are sublated. He was critical of Gestaltists for their > reductions to biology and the fascism associated with it, but the > problem of the whole in relations to parts and the centrality of > structuration seems to remain. How else could one step in instruction > create two steps in development?* ? > ? > > But it is certainly true that the words change, and some of the words > that have caused the most trouble--interestingly enough--disappear. > For example, Vygotsky stops using the word "reaction", he no longer > talks about "vrashevaniye" or "introvolution", and he only uses the word "internalize" > once, when he is talking about a whole system of concepts (not when he > is talking about reactions). So the question arises--what takes its place? > > > Here's what we put in the "Thinking at School Age" chapter that I sent > around. Criticisms from Russophones? > > ?*The issues raised here seem really central to understand, but I am > not sure I fully understood them all.*? > > Vygotsky contrasts ????????? (?generalization?) and ??????? > (?communication?, ?contact?, ?interaction?). But if we translate these > terms as ?generalization? and ?communication? respectively, we obscure > the fact that they have the same root: ?commonality? or ?sharing?. > > *?OK, got it, the unity of generalization and communication, in > russian, have the same root as "common-ness (?????-ness)?."? But I > have trouble getting from there to "meta-communication." Maybe my > denseness.* > ? > ?In Russian, ?? is a preposition, meaning ?about? or ?of?, so we might render this contrast as ?about-communication? or ?meta-communication? vs. > ?communication?. But this would allow the sociological, interpersonal > side of Vygotsky?s meaning to eclipse the psychological, intra-personal side. > > ?*Why and when do we have to allow such eclipsing given the > theoretical formulation above? Missed that.* > > ? > > Another way to put it would be to say that ?generalization? is really > ?inter-generalization?, because it is between the child and the > environment, and ?interaction? is really ?intra-generalization??within > the child. *?I find that very difficult to follow but the next sentence reads correctly to me... although I am not sure what 'the child derives" means.* ? > The child derives intra-mental generalizations through a process of > inter-personal communications, by interaction using shared word values > within a speech community. This ?community generalization? or ?common > generalization? or ?co-generalization? for short is what is enabled by > word meanings shared within the speech community. These meanings the > child at first only partially shares. > *Does the community generalization- to common generalization, to co-generation end correspond to the extreme, externalize form of sense? So these are different ways of expressing the conventionality/historical nature of word meaning??* ?*Seems to me that not only the child at first, but the human of any age for ever after only partially share the conventional/valued word meanings of the society that mediate everyday experience (to use some borrowed words!) of one's same of the species' delights.?* > > > This word ????????? usually translated as ?generalization?. Because > this turns out to be a very important point in this particular lecture > and in the lectures that follow, we will take the liberty of > translating as ?co-generalization?. A ?co-generalization? is a > generalization about generalizations made by the child through > construing the shared generalizations of word values in a speech community. > *?This seems the biggy to pull of. What, in truth, do russianophiles have to say about it?* mike? > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 11:15 AM, Huw Lloyd > wrote: > > > Where does 'co-generalization' come from, David? Perhaps a good > > carry > over > > from your consideration of political milieu is the factor of tension > > in > > development: tension to foster attention, a socialised 'will' if you > like. > > > > Best, > > Huw > > > > On 7 November 2016 at 21:16, David Kellogg wrote: > > > > > Well, of course, Peg is really right--or at least half right. That > > > is, > > the > > > American elections are not just a plebiscite on sexual assault, > > > and > using > > > the term "sexual predator" reduces the whole thing to the kind of > > > "tu quoques" argumentation which makes up the whole of the > > > Republican > > case > > > these days. Actually, for the first time in my memory, the > > > American elections are about real issues that actually touch the > > > lives of > ordinary > > > people, namely sexism, racism, and the impunity conferred by real > > > fame > > and > > > largely imaginary wealth. > > > > > > But I would like to know that the other half is also right: that > > > is, > that > > > xmca's normal concerns with mind, culture, and activity do not > > > require radio silence in times of crisis. Let me talk about > > > another crisis and > > see. > > > Unlike the USA, South Korea has had, since 1949, six different > > > constitutions. Until very recently (1997) the peaceful transfer of > power > > > was the exception and not the rule: governments changed if and > > > only if people took matters into their own hands, either through > > > mass demonstrations or violent military coups or both (the one > > > apparent exception was when the current president's father, Bak > > > Jeonghi, was > > forced > > > to call an election by the Nixon administration: on the verge of > > > losing > > to > > > Kim Daejeong, he peacefully overthrew himself instead). > > > > > > Now, Vygotsky also describes development in terms of six crises > > > (Birth, One, Three, Seven, Thirteen and Seventeen) and five more > > > or less stable periods of equilibrium (Infancy, Early Childhood, > > > Preschool, School > Age, > > > Adolescence). In fact, the Zoped (assuming that "ped" means > > > pedological > > and > > > not pedagogical) really refers to the functions that belong to the > > > NEXT zone of development and not the actual one: if a child can > > > simply take > > over > > > functions from the environment and make them his or her own, then > almost > > by > > > definition they are functions that belong to the zone of actual, > > > and > not > > > the zone of proximal, development. That means that for every > > > stable > > period, > > > the Zoped is going to be a crisis (and of course that, along with > > > prolepsis, accounts for the unpredictability of the Zoped which > > > Peg > > noted). > > > > > > Korean crises not when people are overexploited and ruthlessly > > suppressed; > > > that is a much better description of the stable periods in Korean > > history. > > > Crises happen just when people become superproductive and try to > > > self-emancipate. I think crises of development in the child also > > > happen > > the > > > same way: that is, during normal periods, the environment is > > communicating > > > with the child and the child is taking over co-generalizations by > > > restructuring them to fit the child's extant psychological system. > > > But Vygotsky says that there are moments when this cannot happen, > > > because > the > > > psychological system itself must be restructured: the central > > neoformation > > > dissolves the social situation of development. > > > > > > During normal times, the environment is the source of development > > > and > the > > > child's personality is only the site of development: but during > > > these > > crazy > > > crises (the crisis of "autonomous speech", the crisis of the > negativistic > > > "proto will", the crisis of the affected, manneristic, clownish > > > "proto-self"), it is almost as if the child, superproductive and > active, > > > wants to "turn the tables", transforming the personality into the > source > > of > > > development and adapting the environment to it instead. > > > > > > One of the most puzzling things in Vygotsky's last lectures is the > > Central > > > Line of Development. On the one hand, these are always forms of > > > "communication" and "co-generalization". And on the other, because > > each > > > Neoformation is entirely new, what is Central in one period is > Peripheral > > > in the next: perception, for example, is the maximally developing > > function > > > in Infancy, but memory is the leading function in Preschool. > > > Speech is > a > > > Central Line of Development in early childhood but Thinking in > > > School > > Age. > > > How can BOTH of these things be true? > > > > > > It seems to me that both of them are true.Communication represents > > contact > > > with the social environment, and this is always foregrounded > > > during > > stable > > > periods and backgrounded during crises. Co-generalization > > > represents > what > > > we use to call "internalization", and this is foregrounded during > crises > > > and backgrounded during stable periods. In addition, the content > > > of the communication and co-generalization changes as the child > > > develops, from doing things in Infancy, to saying things in Early > > > Childhood, to > feeling > > in > > > Preschool, and to thinking in School Age. When co-generalization > becomes > > > super-productive, we get conscious awareness, and with awareness, > > crisis. > > > With crises, worlds change. > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > ________________________________ [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif] This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on it. If you have received this email in error please let the sender know immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University accepts no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan emails and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept responsibility for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless accompanied by an official order form. From lpscholar2@gmail.com Wed Nov 9 09:56:14 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 09:56:14 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Communication, Co-generalization, and Crises In-Reply-To: <582347db.434e420a.48957.0814@mx.google.com> References: <582347db.434e420a.48957.0814@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <5823634b.01d6620a.9dfb5.2168@mx.google.com> One further trace from Ruqaiya. What I posted previously is on page 9 of her article. Further down this page Ruquaia is focusing on (mental dispositions). In her words: The Vygotsky literature ignores what I (Ruqaiya) have called *invisible semiotic mediation*: Mediation that occurs in discourse embedded in everyday ordinary activities of a subject?s life. In this way, the literature on semiotic mediation ignores the genesis of mental (dispositions), the social subjects? culturally learned *sense* of *what matters in life*. And yet there is every reason to suppose that these mental (attitudes) are critical in the success of otherwise *visible* semiotic mediation, which is active in the genesis of *so called* higher mental functions. This draws our attention to two dimensions of semiotic mediation (invisible and visible) and a third aspect which is the relation occuring within the intertwining of the (invisible and visible) Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: November 9, 2016 7:59 AM To: Rod Parker-Rees; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: Communication, Co-generalization, and Crises Rod, Mike, David, I know i am now in over my head, trying to follow this nuanced and complex conversation through communication, co-generalization and crises. I have been reading Vygotsky?s last lecture on school age in conconjunction with Ruquiya?s paper (semiotic mediation language and society: Three exotripic theories ? Vygotsky, halliday, Bernstein). To read both papers in a zig-gap-zag back and forth immersion in this topic or theme (textual theme) Here is Ruqaiya ?as she enters our conversation on this emerging topic of communication, co-generlization and what she refers to as the *experiential or representational* aspect of semiotic mediation. RUQUIYA:? a second contradiction in Vygotsky?s theory is that his views on language as system posits the history of the development of linguistic meaning is social BUT meaning itself is representational/experiential.? He wishes to stress the sociogenesis of higher mental functions, but the only meanings he finds of interest are the meanings that do NOT DIRECTLY relate to interpersonal relations. My turn is up, but i do recommend reading both David Kellogg?s translation of Vygotsky?s last lecture in con/junction with Ruqaiya?s paper. This way of reading each paper through the other may allow Baritones to foreground soprano voices within the exploration of semiotic mediation. PS Ruquia briefly mentions gesturing as a semiotic modality or means of co-generating meaning but my turn is up. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Rod Parker-Rees Sent: November 9, 2016 5:32 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Communication, Co-generalization, and Crises This raises questions for me about how we understand the word 'concept'. This can be understood as referring to things that go together but really things that are taken together - the 'con' seems to do double work, both the togetherness of the things which are taken together and the togetherness of the cultural agreement to take these things AS going together. So concepts, as we usually use the term, are co-generalizations or conconcepts? Things which we (together) agree to think of as going together. It is easy to miss the sociocultural 'agreement' aspects, as it is in 'understanding', which no longer resonates with a sense of joining in with (or standing among) others. All the best, Rod -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole Sent: 09 November 2016 05:40 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Communication, Co-generalization, and Crises These are interesting ideas, David. I will respond and ask questions in italics between paragraphs because the overall note seems to contain some sub-themes worth comment on their own. ?? On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 5:55 PM, David Kellogg wrote: >? Huw: > > > I think in general we tend to overstate the differences between > Vygotsky's thinking in different periods, because we notice that he > changes his wordings and we assume that means he has changed his mind. > We forget that Vygotsky steals most of his words from other people > ("egocentric speech", "pseudoconcept", "mediation", "neoformation", > etc.) and then works them into his own system of concepts, and it's > the system of concepts that is really new, not the words. > > ?*I agree,but its hard to keep the chronology straight and a lot of > his ideas come from Western Europe/US sources*?. *The translations of terms across systems cannot help but be a distorted lens which use of common terms hides from us. Unwitting players in the pseudoconcept game.* ? > So for example Yasnitsky and Van der Veer claim that Vygotsky gave up > instrumentalism, abandoned the distinction between higher and lower > psychological functions, and tried to become a Gestaltist, and failed. > None of this is true, as far as I can tell. The final lectures--right > up to the one I sent around--have a central role for word meanings, > maintain that the higher psychological functions are specifically > human and the main expanadum, and include some pretty harsh criticisms > of the Gestaltists, who were by then showing distinctly Nazi tendencies. > > ?*The stages of instrumentalism, functional systems, to "perezhivanie" > (transactionalism?) have always seemed to me a clear case where > earlier stages are sublated. He was critical of Gestaltists for their > reductions to biology and the fascism associated with it, but the > problem of the whole in relations to parts and the centrality of > structuration seems to remain. How else could one step in instruction > create two steps in development?* ? > ? > > But it is certainly true that the words change, and some of the words > that have caused the most trouble--interestingly enough--disappear. > For example, Vygotsky stops using the word "reaction", he no longer > talks about "vrashevaniye" or "introvolution", and he only uses the word "internalize" > once, when he is talking about a whole system of concepts (not when he > is talking about reactions). So the question arises--what takes its place? > > > Here's what we put in the "Thinking at School Age" chapter that I sent > around. Criticisms from Russophones? > > ?*The issues raised here seem really central to understand, but I am > not sure I fully understood them all.*? > > Vygotsky contrasts ????????? (?generalization?) and ??????? > (?communication?, ?contact?, ?interaction?). But if we translate these > terms as ?generalization? and ?communication? respectively, we obscure > the fact that they have the same root: ?commonality? or ?sharing?. > > *?OK, got it, the unity of generalization and communication, in > russian, have the same root as "common-ness (?????-ness)?."? But I > have trouble getting from there to "meta-communication." Maybe my > denseness.* > ? > ?In Russian, ?? is a preposition, meaning ?about? or ?of?, so we might render this contrast as ?about-communication? or ?meta-communication? vs. > ?communication?. But this would allow the sociological, interpersonal > side of Vygotsky?s meaning to eclipse the psychological, intra-personal side. > > ?*Why and when do we have to allow such eclipsing given the > theoretical formulation above? Missed that.* > > ? > > Another way to put it would be to say that ?generalization? is really > ?inter-generalization?, because it is between the child and the > environment, and ?interaction? is really ?intra-generalization??within > the child. *?I find that very difficult to follow but the next sentence reads correctly to me... although I am not sure what 'the child derives" means.* ? > The child derives intra-mental generalizations through a process of > inter-personal communications, by interaction using shared word values > within a speech community. This ?community generalization? or ?common > generalization? or ?co-generalization? for short is what is enabled by > word meanings shared within the speech community. These meanings the > child at first only partially shares. > *Does the community generalization- to common generalization, to co-generation end correspond to the extreme, externalize form of sense? So these are different ways of expressing the conventionality/historical nature of word meaning??* ?*Seems to me that not only the child at first, but the human of any age for ever after only partially share the conventional/valued word meanings of the society that mediate everyday experience (to use some borrowed words!) of one's same of the species' delights.?* > > > This word ????????? usually translated as ?generalization?. Because > this turns out to be a very important point in this particular lecture > and in the lectures that follow, we will take the liberty of > translating as ?co-generalization?. A ?co-generalization? is a > generalization about generalizations made by the child through > construing the shared generalizations of word values in a speech community. > *?This seems the biggy to pull of. What, in truth, do russianophiles have to say about it?* mike? > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 11:15 AM, Huw Lloyd > wrote: > > > Where does 'co-generalization' come from, David? Perhaps a good > > carry > over > > from your consideration of political milieu is the factor of tension > > in > > development: tension to foster attention, a socialised 'will' if you > like. > > > > Best, > > Huw > > > > On 7 November 2016 at 21:16, David Kellogg wrote: > > > > > Well, of course, Peg is really right--or at least half right. That > > > is, > > the > > > American elections are not just a plebiscite on sexual assault, > > > and > using > > > the term "sexual predator" reduces the whole thing to the kind of > > > "tu quoques" argumentation which makes up the whole of the > > > Republican > > case > > > these days. Actually, for the first time in my memory, the > > > American elections are about real issues that actually touch the > > > lives of > ordinary > > > people, namely sexism, racism, and the impunity conferred by real > > > fame > > and > > > largely imaginary wealth. > > > > > > But I would like to know that the other half is also right: that > > > is, > that > > > xmca's normal concerns with mind, culture, and activity do not > > > require radio silence in times of crisis. Let me talk about > > > another crisis and > > see. > > > Unlike the USA, South Korea has had, since 1949, six different > > > constitutions. Until very recently (1997) the peaceful transfer of > power > > > was the exception and not the rule: governments changed if and > > > only if people took matters into their own hands, either through > > > mass demonstrations or violent military coups or both (the one > > > apparent exception was when the current president's father, Bak > > > Jeonghi, was > > forced > > > to call an election by the Nixon administration: on the verge of > > > losing > > to > > > Kim Daejeong, he peacefully overthrew himself instead). > > > > > > Now, Vygotsky also describes development in terms of six crises > > > (Birth, One, Three, Seven, Thirteen and Seventeen) and five more > > > or less stable periods of equilibrium (Infancy, Early Childhood, > > > Preschool, School > Age, > > > Adolescence). In fact, the Zoped (assuming that "ped" means > > > pedological > > and > > > not pedagogical) really refers to the functions that belong to the > > > NEXT zone of development and not the actual one: if a child can > > > simply take > > over > > > functions from the environment and make them his or her own, then > almost > > by > > > definition they are functions that belong to the zone of actual, > > > and > not > > > the zone of proximal, development. That means that for every > > > stable > > period, > > > the Zoped is going to be a crisis (and of course that, along with > > > prolepsis, accounts for the unpredictability of the Zoped which > > > Peg > > noted). > > > > > > Korean crises not when people are overexploited and ruthlessly > > suppressed; > > > that is a much better description of the stable periods in Korean > > history. > > > Crises happen just when people become superproductive and try to > > > self-emancipate. I think crises of development in the child also > > > happen > > the > > > same way: that is, during normal periods, the environment is > > communicating > > > with the child and the child is taking over co-generalizations by > > > restructuring them to fit the child's extant psychological system. > > > But Vygotsky says that there are moments when this cannot happen, > > > because > the > > > psychological system itself must be restructured: the central > > neoformation > > > dissolves the social situation of development. > > > > > > During normal times, the environment is the source of development > > > and > the > > > child's personality is only the site of development: but during > > > these > > crazy > > > crises (the crisis of "autonomous speech", the crisis of the > negativistic > > > "proto will", the crisis of the affected, manneristic, clownish > > > "proto-self"), it is almost as if the child, superproductive and > active, > > > wants to "turn the tables", transforming the personality into the > source > > of > > > development and adapting the environment to it instead. > > > > > > One of the most puzzling things in Vygotsky's last lectures is the > > Central > > > Line of Development. On the one hand, these are always forms of > > > "communication" and "co-generalization". And on the other, because > > each > > > Neoformation is entirely new, what is Central in one period is > Peripheral > > > in the next: perception, for example, is the maximally developing > > function > > > in Infancy, but memory is the leading function in Preschool. > > > Speech is > a > > > Central Line of Development in early childhood but Thinking in > > > School > > Age. > > > How can BOTH of these things be true? > > > > > > It seems to me that both of them are true.Communication represents > > contact > > > with the social environment, and this is always foregrounded > > > during > > stable > > > periods and backgrounded during crises. Co-generalization > > > represents > what > > > we use to call "internalization", and this is foregrounded during > crises > > > and backgrounded during stable periods. In addition, the content > > > of the communication and co-generalization changes as the child > > > develops, from doing things in Infancy, to saying things in Early > > > Childhood, to > feeling > > in > > > Preschool, and to thinking in School Age. When co-generalization > becomes > > > super-productive, we get conscious awareness, and? with awareness, > > crisis. > > > With crises, worlds change. > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > ________________________________ [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif] This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on it. If you have received this email in error please let the sender know immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University accepts no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan emails and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept responsibility for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless accompanied by an official order form. From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Wed Nov 9 10:07:13 2016 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 18:07:13 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Communication, Co-generalization, and Crises In-Reply-To: <5823634b.01d6620a.9dfb5.2168@mx.google.com> References: <582347db.434e420a.48957.0814@mx.google.com> <5823634b.01d6620a.9dfb5.2168@mx.google.com> Message-ID: You might link that up with my remarks about Wertsch's "implicit mediation", Larry, in the comparisons paper. Best, Huw On 9 November 2016 at 17:56, wrote: > One further trace from Ruqaiya. What I posted previously is on page 9 of > her article. Further down this page Ruquaia is focusing on (mental > dispositions). > > In her words: The Vygotsky literature ignores what I (Ruqaiya) have > called *invisible semiotic mediation*: Mediation that occurs in discourse > embedded in everyday ordinary activities of a subject?s life. In this way, > the literature on semiotic mediation ignores the genesis of mental > (dispositions), the social subjects? culturally learned *sense* of *what > matters in life*. And yet there is every reason to suppose that these > mental (attitudes) are critical in the success of otherwise *visible* > semiotic mediation, which is active in the genesis of *so called* higher > mental functions. > > This draws our attention to two dimensions of semiotic mediation > (invisible and visible) and a third aspect which is the relation occuring > within the intertwining of the (invisible and visible) > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: lpscholar2@gmail.com > Sent: November 9, 2016 7:59 AM > To: Rod Parker-Rees; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: Communication, Co-generalization, and Crises > > Rod, Mike, David, > I know i am now in over my head, trying to follow this nuanced and complex > conversation through communication, co-generalization and crises. > I have been reading Vygotsky?s last lecture on school age in > conconjunction with Ruquiya?s paper (semiotic mediation language and > society: Three exotripic theories ? Vygotsky, halliday, Bernstein). > > To read both papers in a zig-gap-zag back and forth immersion in this > topic or theme (textual theme) > > Here is Ruqaiya as she enters our conversation on this emerging topic of > communication, co-generlization and what she refers to as the *experiential > or representational* aspect of semiotic mediation. > > RUQUIYA: a second contradiction in Vygotsky?s theory is that his views on > language as system posits the history of the development of linguistic > meaning is social BUT meaning itself is representational/experiential. > He wishes to stress the sociogenesis of higher mental functions, but the > only meanings he finds of interest are the meanings that do NOT DIRECTLY > relate to interpersonal relations. > > My turn is up, but i do recommend reading both David Kellogg?s translation > of Vygotsky?s last lecture in con/junction with Ruqaiya?s paper. This way > of reading each paper through the other may allow Baritones to foreground > soprano voices within the exploration of semiotic mediation. > > PS Ruquia briefly mentions gesturing as a semiotic modality or means of > co-generating meaning but my turn is up. > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: Rod Parker-Rees > Sent: November 9, 2016 5:32 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Communication, Co-generalization, and Crises > > This raises questions for me about how we understand the word 'concept'. > > This can be understood as referring to things that go together but really > things that are taken together - the 'con' seems to do double work, both > the togetherness of the things which are taken together and the > togetherness of the cultural agreement to take these things AS going > together. So concepts, as we usually use the term, are co-generalizations > or conconcepts? Things which we (together) agree to think of as going > together. > > It is easy to miss the sociocultural 'agreement' aspects, as it is in > 'understanding', which no longer resonates with a sense of joining in with > (or standing among) others. > > All the best, > > Rod > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole > Sent: 09 November 2016 05:40 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Communication, Co-generalization, and Crises > > These are interesting ideas, David. I will respond and ask questions in > italics between paragraphs because the overall note seems to contain some > sub-themes worth comment on their own. > > ?? > > On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 5:55 PM, David Kellogg > wrote: > > > Huw: > > > > > > I think in general we tend to overstate the differences between > > Vygotsky's thinking in different periods, because we notice that he > > changes his wordings and we assume that means he has changed his mind. > > We forget that Vygotsky steals most of his words from other people > > ("egocentric speech", "pseudoconcept", "mediation", "neoformation", > > etc.) and then works them into his own system of concepts, and it's > > the system of concepts that is really new, not the words. > > > > ?*I agree,but its hard to keep the chronology straight and a lot of > > his > ideas come from Western Europe/US sources*?. *The translations of terms > across systems cannot help but be a distorted lens which use of common > terms hides from us. Unwitting players in the pseudoconcept game.* ? > > > So for example Yasnitsky and Van der Veer claim that Vygotsky gave up > > instrumentalism, abandoned the distinction between higher and lower > > psychological functions, and tried to become a Gestaltist, and failed. > > None of this is true, as far as I can tell. The final lectures--right > > up to the one I sent around--have a central role for word meanings, > > maintain that the higher psychological functions are specifically > > human and the main expanadum, and include some pretty harsh criticisms > > of the Gestaltists, who were by then showing distinctly Nazi tendencies. > > > > ?*The stages of instrumentalism, functional systems, to "perezhivanie" > > (transactionalism?) have always seemed to me a clear case where > > earlier stages are sublated. He was critical of Gestaltists for their > > reductions to biology and the fascism associated with it, but the > > problem of the whole in relations to parts and the centrality of > > structuration seems to remain. How else could one step in instruction > > create two steps in development?* ? > > > > ? > > > > But it is certainly true that the words change, and some of the words > > that have caused the most trouble--interestingly enough--disappear. > > For example, Vygotsky stops using the word "reaction", he no longer > > talks about "vrashevaniye" or "introvolution", and he only uses the word > "internalize" > > once, when he is talking about a whole system of concepts (not when he > > is talking about reactions). So the question arises--what takes its > place? > > > > > > Here's what we put in the "Thinking at School Age" chapter that I sent > > around. Criticisms from Russophones? > > > > ?*The issues raised here seem really central to understand, but I am > > not sure I fully understood them all.*? > > > > Vygotsky contrasts ????????? (?generalization?) and ??????? > > (?communication?, ?contact?, ?interaction?). But if we translate these > > terms as ?generalization? and ?communication? respectively, we obscure > > the fact that they have the same root: ?commonality? or ?sharing?. > > > > *?OK, got it, the unity of generalization and communication, in > > russian, have the same root as "common-ness (?????-ness)?."? But I > > have trouble getting from there to "meta-communication." Maybe my > > denseness.* > > > > > ? > > ?In Russian, ?? is a preposition, meaning ?about? or ?of?, so we might > > render this contrast as ?about-communication? or ?meta-communication? vs. > > ?communication?. But this would allow the sociological, interpersonal > > side of Vygotsky?s meaning to eclipse the psychological, intra-personal > side. > > > > ?*Why and when do we have to allow such eclipsing given the > > theoretical formulation above? Missed that.* > > > > > > ? > > > > Another way to put it would be to say that ?generalization? is really > > ?inter-generalization?, because it is between the child and the > > environment, and ?interaction? is really ?intra-generalization??within > > the child. > > > *?I find that very difficult to follow but the next sentence reads > correctly to me... although I am not sure what 'the child derives" means.* ? > > > > The child derives intra-mental generalizations through a process of > > inter-personal communications, by interaction using shared word values > > within a speech community. This ?community generalization? or ?common > > generalization? or ?co-generalization? for short is what is enabled by > > word meanings shared within the speech community. These meanings the > > child at first only partially shares. > > > > *Does the community generalization- to common generalization, to > co-generation end correspond to the extreme, externalize form of sense? So > these are different ways of expressing the conventionality/historical > nature of word meaning??* > > ?*Seems to me that not only the child at first, but the human of any age > for ever after only partially share the conventional/valued word meanings > of the society that mediate everyday experience (to use some borrowed > words!) of one's same of the species' delights.?* > > > > > > > > This word ????????? usually translated as ?generalization?. Because > > this turns out to be a very important point in this particular lecture > > and in the lectures that follow, we will take the liberty of > > translating as ?co-generalization?. A ?co-generalization? is a > > generalization about generalizations made by the child through > > construing the shared generalizations of word values in a speech > community. > > > > *?This seems the biggy to pull of. What, in truth, do russianophiles have > to say about it?* > > mike? > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > Macquarie University > > > > On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 11:15 AM, Huw Lloyd > > wrote: > > > > > Where does 'co-generalization' come from, David? Perhaps a good > > > carry > > over > > > from your consideration of political milieu is the factor of tension > > > in > > > development: tension to foster attention, a socialised 'will' if you > > like. > > > > > > Best, > > > Huw > > > > > > On 7 November 2016 at 21:16, David Kellogg > wrote: > > > > > > > Well, of course, Peg is really right--or at least half right. That > > > > is, > > > the > > > > American elections are not just a plebiscite on sexual assault, > > > > and > > using > > > > the term "sexual predator" reduces the whole thing to the kind of > > > > "tu quoques" argumentation which makes up the whole of the > > > > Republican > > > case > > > > these days. Actually, for the first time in my memory, the > > > > American elections are about real issues that actually touch the > > > > lives of > > ordinary > > > > people, namely sexism, racism, and the impunity conferred by real > > > > fame > > > and > > > > largely imaginary wealth. > > > > > > > > But I would like to know that the other half is also right: that > > > > is, > > that > > > > xmca's normal concerns with mind, culture, and activity do not > > > > require radio silence in times of crisis. Let me talk about > > > > another crisis and > > > see. > > > > Unlike the USA, South Korea has had, since 1949, six different > > > > constitutions. Until very recently (1997) the peaceful transfer of > > power > > > > was the exception and not the rule: governments changed if and > > > > only if people took matters into their own hands, either through > > > > mass demonstrations or violent military coups or both (the one > > > > apparent exception was when the current president's father, Bak > > > > Jeonghi, was > > > forced > > > > to call an election by the Nixon administration: on the verge of > > > > losing > > > to > > > > Kim Daejeong, he peacefully overthrew himself instead). > > > > > > > > Now, Vygotsky also describes development in terms of six crises > > > > (Birth, One, Three, Seven, Thirteen and Seventeen) and five more > > > > or less stable periods of equilibrium (Infancy, Early Childhood, > > > > Preschool, School > > Age, > > > > Adolescence). In fact, the Zoped (assuming that "ped" means > > > > pedological > > > and > > > > not pedagogical) really refers to the functions that belong to the > > > > NEXT zone of development and not the actual one: if a child can > > > > simply take > > > over > > > > functions from the environment and make them his or her own, then > > almost > > > by > > > > definition they are functions that belong to the zone of actual, > > > > and > > not > > > > the zone of proximal, development. That means that for every > > > > stable > > > period, > > > > the Zoped is going to be a crisis (and of course that, along with > > > > prolepsis, accounts for the unpredictability of the Zoped which > > > > Peg > > > noted). > > > > > > > > Korean crises not when people are overexploited and ruthlessly > > > suppressed; > > > > that is a much better description of the stable periods in Korean > > > history. > > > > Crises happen just when people become superproductive and try to > > > > self-emancipate. I think crises of development in the child also > > > > happen > > > the > > > > same way: that is, during normal periods, the environment is > > > communicating > > > > with the child and the child is taking over co-generalizations by > > > > restructuring them to fit the child's extant psychological system. > > > > But Vygotsky says that there are moments when this cannot happen, > > > > because > > the > > > > psychological system itself must be restructured: the central > > > neoformation > > > > dissolves the social situation of development. > > > > > > > > During normal times, the environment is the source of development > > > > and > > the > > > > child's personality is only the site of development: but during > > > > these > > > crazy > > > > crises (the crisis of "autonomous speech", the crisis of the > > negativistic > > > > "proto will", the crisis of the affected, manneristic, clownish > > > > "proto-self"), it is almost as if the child, superproductive and > > active, > > > > wants to "turn the tables", transforming the personality into the > > source > > > of > > > > development and adapting the environment to it instead. > > > > > > > > One of the most puzzling things in Vygotsky's last lectures is the > > > Central > > > > Line of Development. On the one hand, these are always forms of > > > > "communication" and "co-generalization". And on the other, because > > > each > > > > Neoformation is entirely new, what is Central in one period is > > Peripheral > > > > in the next: perception, for example, is the maximally developing > > > function > > > > in Infancy, but memory is the leading function in Preschool. > > > > Speech is > > a > > > > Central Line of Development in early childhood but Thinking in > > > > School > > > Age. > > > > How can BOTH of these things be true? > > > > > > > > It seems to me that both of them are true.Communication represents > > > contact > > > > with the social environment, and this is always foregrounded > > > > during > > > stable > > > > periods and backgrounded during crises. Co-generalization > > > > represents > > what > > > > we use to call "internalization", and this is foregrounded during > > crises > > > > and backgrounded during stable periods. In addition, the content > > > > of the communication and co-generalization changes as the child > > > > develops, from doing things in Infancy, to saying things in Early > > > > Childhood, to > > feeling > > > in > > > > Preschool, and to thinking in School Age. When co-generalization > > becomes > > > > super-productive, we get conscious awareness, and with awareness, > > > crisis. > > > > With crises, worlds change. > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif] //www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass> > > This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely for > the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the > intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the > information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on it. > If you have received this email in error please let the sender know > immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not > necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University accepts > no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan emails > and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept responsibility > for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its > attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless accompanied > by an official order form. > > > > From mcole@ucsd.edu Wed Nov 9 11:45:18 2016 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 11:45:18 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] The Local State of Mind Message-ID: ?Even as I seek to narrow the focus of my thinking to areas of professional concern, such as that concerning Vygotsky/meaning/communication etc., the mental work it requires to screen out the impact of the election is exhausting. One long time xmca participant sent a note saying he needed time to come to grips with what has happened and how to live in a community for whom the outcome of this election is seen as a life saving, noble, affair. Many colleagues, particularly women who have been struggling since the 1960's and 70's for equal rights, report difficulty breathing. That our local crisis is not just about us seems important to keep in mind. But the country's self revelation last night was a real shock. To give you some idea of how this is seen here at UCSD I paste below a letter to faculty from a concerned, experienced, departmental administrator to convey some sense of trauma that many in this community experiencing. It reflects what i am hearing from many communities to which I am somehow connected, and I expect you are too. In 50 years of teaching at a university I have never seen such a document related to an election. 9/11 and recent mass shootings are other events that have evoked this kind of trauma. Coming to terms.... and looking forward to the discussion of the consequences of neoliberal STEM education. mike -------------------- Dept Letter about "resources for after the election": I wanted to remind our community of general resources available for self-care, coping skills and connection. First, our department has organized a workshop with the *Faculty Staff & Assistance Program (FSAP) *to be held *Monday, November 14th from 3:00 - 4:00 in Mandler 1539*. This is available to all members of our community to help process emotions and provide general support and resilience strategies for dealing with stressful life events. FSAP is also available for appointments (for faculty, staff, post-docs, labstaff and their family members). You can arrange an appointment here: http://blink.ucsd.edu/HR/services/support/counseling/appointment.html For undergraduate and graduate students, *Counseling and Psychological Services* is available to assist you. Please call if you wish to make an appointment: (858) 534-3755. More information available here: http://caps.ucsd.edu As a reminder, CAPS offers drop-in workshops for all students daily. Today?s is ?Mindfulness for Daily Living? and occurs at Student Health Services from 3-4:30. More information here: http://caps.ucsd.edu/groups. html Additionally, I believe all of the Campus Community Centers (Black Resource Center, Cross-Cultural Center, the LGBT Resource Center, the Raza Resource Centro, the Women?s Center) are having some open hours this week. This site provides details for each: http://community.ucsd.edu Finally, a word for *instructors* of classes. The person-to-person (not office-to-person) recommendation from CAPS is to have compassion with students who are feeling distressed in the wake of the election. You may wish to be compassionate with respect to rescheduling or postponing scheduled exams; keep in mind that if you postpone an exam for one student, you must be willing to do the same for all other students under similar circumstances. Please feel free to use me as a resource when considering whether or how to adjust your class. For students in distress, refer them as needed to the resources above, and also recall the Triton Concern Line, (858) 246-1111 (more information here: http://blink.ucsd.edu/ instructors/advising/concern/index.html#Communicating-sensitive-informa) Thank you all for being a community that can work together despite differences of opinion and thank you for being supportive of those who need support now and in the coming weeks. From dkellogg60@gmail.com Wed Nov 9 11:47:35 2016 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2016 06:47:35 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: That other political crisis In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thoughtful and care-full as always, Mike. The link you sent wasn't full of errors, but it also wasn't very full of information: it faithfully reflected the questions that most people have (Why, for example, should a friendship between two women be a matter for scandal and street demonstrations?). It also didn't really answer them. But maybe this one will (Greg--if you are not following the scandal through Mark's work on Cheondoism then you might want to give this to your students): http://askakorean.blogspot.com.au/2016/10/the-irrational-downfall-of-park-geun-hye.html Last night I was thinking to myself, with some astonishment, that 2016 represents the first time since 1933 that a major Western country has voted in a far right government with a violent, extraparliamentary base. When Marine Le Pen began "Euro-fascism", I had thought it would probably happen in France or Austria or Switzerland first. The fact that it has happened in the USA (and that it happened through social media but largely without a parliamentary "ground game" of the sort that people on this list were engaged in) astonished me, and I fell asleep thinking that xmca might want to revisit the PPTization of intellectual arguments, the nature of media like twitter, and the ways in which Trump's speeches were constructed on the fly, in order to really understand it. (I keep thinking of his uncanny ability to end every sentence on a fall, except when he is constructing a speech act around a vacuum--"I'm not sayin', but I'm just sayin', y'know?") But this morning when I woke up I realized that it has happened before, and that Alfredo can probably tell us a lot about it. Spain, after years of Francoism, underwent an eight year experiment with social democracy and then voted in a neo-Francoist party under Aznar. Similarly, South Korea, after years of murderous repression under the current president's father and his military academy juniors (Jeon Duhwan and Noh Tae-u, the "Class of 56", who succeeded Bak Jeonghi when he was assassinated) underwent a ten year experiment with something like social democracy--this coincided with my own rather carelessly made decision to settle there--before voting in the current president on a similar neo-authoritarian platform. Something there is about a frantic petty bourgeoisie that loves a wall. Mutatis mutandis. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 4:27 PM, mike cole wrote: > Having worked until time was up, I have had time to go back and read some > of what has been discussed. > > The outcome of the election is there for all to consider and experience in > the weeks and months ahead. > > I attach an article for those who do not (like me) know much about the > current political crisis in South Korea. David will correct the errors in > it i am confident, and it appears to give at least a hint of the turmoil in > that part of the world. > > it can be found here, last time i looked http://www.nytimes.com/2016/ > 11/06/world/asia/south-koreans-ashamed-over-les-secretive-adviser.html > > FYI > > mike > From mcole@ucsd.edu Wed Nov 9 11:52:49 2016 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 11:52:49 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Local State of Mind In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: PS- One bit of context I omitted from the prior note on the sense of crisis locally. Living close as we do with the border, and working with many colleagues and community members, I am hearing from people whose grandchildren are waking up at night in fear of losing the parents and other family members. Nightmares. Real nightmares. mike On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 11:45 AM, mike cole wrote: > ?Even as I seek to narrow the focus of my thinking to areas of > professional concern, such as that > concerning Vygotsky/meaning/communication etc., the mental work it > requires to screen out the impact of the election is exhausting. > > One long time xmca participant sent a note saying he needed time to come > to grips with what > has happened and how to live in a community for whom the outcome of this > election is seen as a life saving, noble, affair. Many colleagues, > particularly women who have been struggling since the > 1960's and 70's for equal rights, report difficulty breathing. > > That our local crisis is not just about us seems important to keep in > mind. But the country's self revelation last night was a real shock. > > To give you some idea of how this is seen here at UCSD I paste below a > letter to faculty from a concerned, experienced, departmental administrator > to convey some sense of trauma that many in this community experiencing. > It reflects what i am hearing from many communities to which I am somehow > connected, and I expect you are too. In 50 years of teaching at a > university I have never seen such a document related to an election. 9/11 > and recent mass shootings are other events that have evoked this kind of > trauma. > > Coming to terms.... and looking forward to the discussion of the > consequences of neoliberal STEM education. > mike > -------------------- > > Dept Letter about "resources for after the election": > > I wanted to remind our community of general resources available for > self-care, coping skills and connection. > > First, our department has organized a workshop with the *Faculty Staff & > Assistance Program (FSAP) *to be held *Monday, November 14th from 3:00 - > 4:00 in Mandler 1539*. This is available to all members of our community > to help process emotions and provide general support and resilience > strategies for dealing with stressful life events. > > FSAP is also available for appointments (for faculty, staff, post-docs, > labstaff and their family members). You can arrange an appointment here: > http://blink.ucsd.edu/HR/services/support/counseling/appointment.html > > For undergraduate and graduate students, *Counseling and Psychological > Services* is available to assist you. Please call if you wish to make an > appointment: (858) 534-3755. More information available here: > http://caps.ucsd.edu > > As a reminder, CAPS offers drop-in workshops for all students daily. > Today?s is ?Mindfulness for Daily Living? and occurs at Student Health > Services from 3-4:30. More information here: > http://caps.ucsd.edu/groups.html > > Additionally, I believe all of the Campus Community Centers (Black > Resource Center, Cross-Cultural Center, the LGBT Resource Center, the Raza > Resource Centro, the Women?s Center) are having some open hours this week. > This site provides details for each: http://community.ucsd.edu > > Finally, a word for *instructors* of classes. The person-to-person (not > office-to-person) recommendation from CAPS is to have compassion with > students who are feeling distressed in the wake of the election. You may > wish to be compassionate with respect to rescheduling or postponing > scheduled exams; keep in mind that if you postpone an exam for one student, > you must be willing to do the same for all other students under similar > circumstances. Please feel free to use me as a resource when considering > whether or how to adjust your class. For students in distress, refer them > as needed to the resources above, and also recall the Triton Concern Line, > (858) 246-1111 (more information here: http://blink.ucsd.edu/instruc > tors/advising/concern/index.html#Communicating-sensitive-informa) > > Thank you all for being a community that can work together despite > differences of opinion and thank you for being supportive of those who need > support now and in the coming weeks. > > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Wed Nov 9 12:22:32 2016 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2016 07:22:32 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Communication, Co-generalization, and Crises In-Reply-To: References: <582347db.434e420a.48957.0814@mx.google.com> <5823634b.01d6620a.9dfb5.2168@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Mike puts his finger on the very spot. I said: "Another way to put it would be to say that ?generalization? is really "inter-generalization?, because it is between the child and the environment, and ?interaction? is really ?intra-generalization??within the child." This needs to be EXACTLY the other way around: "generalization" is really intra-generalization, because it is within the child. It's the way the infant, for example, decides that "mama" is not just a sound that coincides with the appearance of the mother's face or the way that the toddler decides that similar objects can have the same name and similar actions have the same name too, and the way that pre-schoolers realize that you can name things that don't even exist, and the way that the school age child decides that things like "growth" and "school" do not really exist, but then again they do, not because we name them but because we do them and then we name them. And of course "interaction" is really "inter-generalization", because it is between the child and the environment. It's the way that the child and the environment come to an agreement about what to call things. Here's a wonderful example. A Korean mother is taking her two children to the doctor, and she talks to them one by one as the other is being seen by the doctor. She is a member of our Vygotsky group, so she is trying to replicate a little experiment that Vygotsky and Piaget performed with their own children...playing a game where you call dogs "cows" and cows "dogs". One of her kids is in the "Crisis at Three" (the crisis of 'negativism'). We will call her Number 3. And the other is in the "Crisis at Seven" (the crisis of affectation, posing, clowning and pretension--the crisis of lying and imaginary friends). As you'll see, it makes a difference! Mom : Number Three...do you know what your name is? What do we call you? Three: Number Three. Mom : Number Three? Number Three? Well, suppose I decide to call you Number Seven. How is that? Three: You can't. Mom: I can't? Then I'll call Number Seven Number Three. How's that? No good? Three: No good. Mom : Why is it no good? Three : You can't switch names like that. Mom : I can't switch names? Three: No. Mom : So what's your name? Three : Number Three. Mom : It's not Number Seven? Suppose I call you "Princess" from now on? Three : No. Mom : No good? Why not? Three : Just because. Now Number Seven comes out of the doctor's office, and it's Number Three's turn. So Mommy turns to Number Seven. Mom : Seven! Do you know what your name is? Seven : Number Seven. Mom : Really? Number Seven, suppose I gave your name to Number Three. Is that okay or not? Then I give Number Three's name to you. How's that? Seven. Uh. OK. Mom : So, you are Number Three, and Number Three is Number Seven--right? Seven (grinning) : Good. Mom : Good? Is it right? Is it proper? Seven : Right! Mom : Oh, really. Say...Number Three... Seven : (laughs) Mom : (laughs) Do you know what your mother's name is? Siwon :.. Daddy. I think you can see that the children are at very different stages of development. But one way to look at is that they have very different co-generalizations about names, and that both causes and is caused by very different experiences with interactions--the pre-schooler has many more years of interactions with imaginary characters! David Kellogg Macquarie University > On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 5:07 AM, Huw Lloyd wrote: > You might link that up with my remarks about Wertsch's "implicit > mediation", Larry, in the comparisons paper. > > Best, > Huw > > On 9 November 2016 at 17:56, wrote: > > > One further trace from Ruqaiya. What I posted previously is on page 9 of > > her article. Further down this page Ruquaia is focusing on (mental > > dispositions). > > > > In her words: The Vygotsky literature ignores what I (Ruqaiya) have > > called *invisible semiotic mediation*: Mediation that occurs in discourse > > embedded in everyday ordinary activities of a subject?s life. In this > way, > > the literature on semiotic mediation ignores the genesis of mental > > (dispositions), the social subjects? culturally learned *sense* of *what > > matters in life*. And yet there is every reason to suppose that these > > mental (attitudes) are critical in the success of otherwise *visible* > > semiotic mediation, which is active in the genesis of *so called* higher > > mental functions. > > > > This draws our attention to two dimensions of semiotic mediation > > (invisible and visible) and a third aspect which is the relation occuring > > within the intertwining of the (invisible and visible) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > From: lpscholar2@gmail.com > > Sent: November 9, 2016 7:59 AM > > To: Rod Parker-Rees; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: Communication, Co-generalization, and Crises > > > > Rod, Mike, David, > > I know i am now in over my head, trying to follow this nuanced and > complex > > conversation through communication, co-generalization and crises. > > I have been reading Vygotsky?s last lecture on school age in > > conconjunction with Ruquiya?s paper (semiotic mediation language and > > society: Three exotripic theories ? Vygotsky, halliday, Bernstein). > > > > To read both papers in a zig-gap-zag back and forth immersion in this > > topic or theme (textual theme) > > > > Here is Ruqaiya as she enters our conversation on this emerging topic of > > communication, co-generlization and what she refers to as the > *experiential > > or representational* aspect of semiotic mediation. > > > > RUQUIYA: a second contradiction in Vygotsky?s theory is that his views > on > > language as system posits the history of the development of linguistic > > meaning is social BUT meaning itself is representational/experiential. > > He wishes to stress the sociogenesis of higher mental functions, but the > > only meanings he finds of interest are the meanings that do NOT DIRECTLY > > relate to interpersonal relations. > > > > My turn is up, but i do recommend reading both David Kellogg?s > translation > > of Vygotsky?s last lecture in con/junction with Ruqaiya?s paper. This way > > of reading each paper through the other may allow Baritones to foreground > > soprano voices within the exploration of semiotic mediation. > > > > PS Ruquia briefly mentions gesturing as a semiotic modality or means of > > co-generating meaning but my turn is up. > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > From: Rod Parker-Rees > > Sent: November 9, 2016 5:32 AM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Communication, Co-generalization, and Crises > > > > This raises questions for me about how we understand the word 'concept'. > > > > This can be understood as referring to things that go together but really > > things that are taken together - the 'con' seems to do double work, both > > the togetherness of the things which are taken together and the > > togetherness of the cultural agreement to take these things AS going > > together. So concepts, as we usually use the term, are co-generalizations > > or conconcepts? Things which we (together) agree to think of as going > > together. > > > > It is easy to miss the sociocultural 'agreement' aspects, as it is in > > 'understanding', which no longer resonates with a sense of joining in > with > > (or standing among) others. > > > > All the best, > > > > Rod > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole > > Sent: 09 November 2016 05:40 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Communication, Co-generalization, and Crises > > > > These are interesting ideas, David. I will respond and ask questions in > > italics between paragraphs because the overall note seems to contain some > > sub-themes worth comment on their own. > > > > ?? > > > > On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 5:55 PM, David Kellogg > > wrote: > > > > > Huw: > > > > > > > > > I think in general we tend to overstate the differences between > > > Vygotsky's thinking in different periods, because we notice that he > > > changes his wordings and we assume that means he has changed his mind. > > > We forget that Vygotsky steals most of his words from other people > > > ("egocentric speech", "pseudoconcept", "mediation", "neoformation", > > > etc.) and then works them into his own system of concepts, and it's > > > the system of concepts that is really new, not the words. > > > > > > ?*I agree,but its hard to keep the chronology straight and a lot of > > > his > > ideas come from Western Europe/US sources*?. *The translations of terms > > across systems cannot help but be a distorted lens which use of common > > terms hides from us. Unwitting players in the pseudoconcept game.* ? > > > > > So for example Yasnitsky and Van der Veer claim that Vygotsky gave up > > > instrumentalism, abandoned the distinction between higher and lower > > > psychological functions, and tried to become a Gestaltist, and failed. > > > None of this is true, as far as I can tell. The final lectures--right > > > up to the one I sent around--have a central role for word meanings, > > > maintain that the higher psychological functions are specifically > > > human and the main expanadum, and include some pretty harsh criticisms > > > of the Gestaltists, who were by then showing distinctly Nazi > tendencies. > > > > > > ?*The stages of instrumentalism, functional systems, to "perezhivanie" > > > (transactionalism?) have always seemed to me a clear case where > > > earlier stages are sublated. He was critical of Gestaltists for their > > > reductions to biology and the fascism associated with it, but the > > > problem of the whole in relations to parts and the centrality of > > > structuration seems to remain. How else could one step in instruction > > > create two steps in development?* ? > > > > > > > ? > > > > > > But it is certainly true that the words change, and some of the words > > > that have caused the most trouble--interestingly enough--disappear. > > > For example, Vygotsky stops using the word "reaction", he no longer > > > talks about "vrashevaniye" or "introvolution", and he only uses the > word > > "internalize" > > > once, when he is talking about a whole system of concepts (not when he > > > is talking about reactions). So the question arises--what takes its > > place? > > > > > > > > > Here's what we put in the "Thinking at School Age" chapter that I sent > > > around. Criticisms from Russophones? > > > > > > ?*The issues raised here seem really central to understand, but I am > > > not sure I fully understood them all.*? > > > > > > Vygotsky contrasts ????????? (?generalization?) and ??????? > > > (?communication?, ?contact?, ?interaction?). But if we translate these > > > terms as ?generalization? and ?communication? respectively, we obscure > > > the fact that they have the same root: ?commonality? or ?sharing?. > > > > > > *?OK, got it, the unity of generalization and communication, in > > > russian, have the same root as "common-ness (?????-ness)?."? But I > > > have trouble getting from there to "meta-communication." Maybe my > > > denseness.* > > > > > > > > > ? > > > ?In Russian, ?? is a preposition, meaning ?about? or ?of?, so we might > > > > render this contrast as ?about-communication? or ?meta-communication? vs. > > > ?communication?. But this would allow the sociological, interpersonal > > > side of Vygotsky?s meaning to eclipse the psychological, intra-personal > > side. > > > > > > ?*Why and when do we have to allow such eclipsing given the > > > theoretical formulation above? Missed that.* > > > > > > > > > > ? > > > > > > Another way to put it would be to say that ?generalization? is really > > > ?inter-generalization?, because it is between the child and the > > > environment, and ?interaction? is really ?intra-generalization??within > > > the child. > > > > > > *?I find that very difficult to follow but the next sentence reads > > correctly to me... although I am not sure what 'the child derives" > means.* ? > > > > > > > The child derives intra-mental generalizations through a process of > > > inter-personal communications, by interaction using shared word values > > > within a speech community. This ?community generalization? or ?common > > > generalization? or ?co-generalization? for short is what is enabled by > > > word meanings shared within the speech community. These meanings the > > > child at first only partially shares. > > > > > > > *Does the community generalization- to common generalization, to > > co-generation end correspond to the extreme, externalize form of sense? > So > > these are different ways of expressing the conventionality/historical > > nature of word meaning??* > > > > ?*Seems to me that not only the child at first, but the human of any age > > for ever after only partially share the conventional/valued word meanings > > of the society that mediate everyday experience (to use some borrowed > > words!) of one's same of the species' delights.?* > > > > > > > > > > > > > This word ????????? usually translated as ?generalization?. Because > > > this turns out to be a very important point in this particular lecture > > > and in the lectures that follow, we will take the liberty of > > > translating as ?co-generalization?. A ?co-generalization? is a > > > generalization about generalizations made by the child through > > > construing the shared generalizations of word values in a speech > > community. > > > > > > > *?This seems the biggy to pull of. What, in truth, do russianophiles have > > to say about it?* > > > > mike? > > > > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 11:15 AM, Huw Lloyd > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Where does 'co-generalization' come from, David? Perhaps a good > > > > carry > > > over > > > > from your consideration of political milieu is the factor of tension > > > > in > > > > development: tension to foster attention, a socialised 'will' if you > > > like. > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > Huw > > > > > > > > On 7 November 2016 at 21:16, David Kellogg > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Well, of course, Peg is really right--or at least half right. That > > > > > is, > > > > the > > > > > American elections are not just a plebiscite on sexual assault, > > > > > and > > > using > > > > > the term "sexual predator" reduces the whole thing to the kind of > > > > > "tu quoques" argumentation which makes up the whole of the > > > > > Republican > > > > case > > > > > these days. Actually, for the first time in my memory, the > > > > > American elections are about real issues that actually touch the > > > > > lives of > > > ordinary > > > > > people, namely sexism, racism, and the impunity conferred by real > > > > > fame > > > > and > > > > > largely imaginary wealth. > > > > > > > > > > But I would like to know that the other half is also right: that > > > > > is, > > > that > > > > > xmca's normal concerns with mind, culture, and activity do not > > > > > require radio silence in times of crisis. Let me talk about > > > > > another crisis and > > > > see. > > > > > Unlike the USA, South Korea has had, since 1949, six different > > > > > constitutions. Until very recently (1997) the peaceful transfer of > > > power > > > > > was the exception and not the rule: governments changed if and > > > > > only if people took matters into their own hands, either through > > > > > mass demonstrations or violent military coups or both (the one > > > > > apparent exception was when the current president's father, Bak > > > > > Jeonghi, was > > > > forced > > > > > to call an election by the Nixon administration: on the verge of > > > > > losing > > > > to > > > > > Kim Daejeong, he peacefully overthrew himself instead). > > > > > > > > > > Now, Vygotsky also describes development in terms of six crises > > > > > (Birth, One, Three, Seven, Thirteen and Seventeen) and five more > > > > > or less stable periods of equilibrium (Infancy, Early Childhood, > > > > > Preschool, School > > > Age, > > > > > Adolescence). In fact, the Zoped (assuming that "ped" means > > > > > pedological > > > > and > > > > > not pedagogical) really refers to the functions that belong to the > > > > > NEXT zone of development and not the actual one: if a child can > > > > > simply take > > > > over > > > > > functions from the environment and make them his or her own, then > > > almost > > > > by > > > > > definition they are functions that belong to the zone of actual, > > > > > and > > > not > > > > > the zone of proximal, development. That means that for every > > > > > stable > > > > period, > > > > > the Zoped is going to be a crisis (and of course that, along with > > > > > prolepsis, accounts for the unpredictability of the Zoped which > > > > > Peg > > > > noted). > > > > > > > > > > Korean crises not when people are overexploited and ruthlessly > > > > suppressed; > > > > > that is a much better description of the stable periods in Korean > > > > history. > > > > > Crises happen just when people become superproductive and try to > > > > > self-emancipate. I think crises of development in the child also > > > > > happen > > > > the > > > > > same way: that is, during normal periods, the environment is > > > > communicating > > > > > with the child and the child is taking over co-generalizations by > > > > > restructuring them to fit the child's extant psychological system. > > > > > But Vygotsky says that there are moments when this cannot happen, > > > > > because > > > the > > > > > psychological system itself must be restructured: the central > > > > neoformation > > > > > dissolves the social situation of development. > > > > > > > > > > During normal times, the environment is the source of development > > > > > and > > > the > > > > > child's personality is only the site of development: but during > > > > > these > > > > crazy > > > > > crises (the crisis of "autonomous speech", the crisis of the > > > negativistic > > > > > "proto will", the crisis of the affected, manneristic, clownish > > > > > "proto-self"), it is almost as if the child, superproductive and > > > active, > > > > > wants to "turn the tables", transforming the personality into the > > > source > > > > of > > > > > development and adapting the environment to it instead. > > > > > > > > > > One of the most puzzling things in Vygotsky's last lectures is the > > > > Central > > > > > Line of Development. On the one hand, these are always forms of > > > > > "communication" and "co-generalization". And on the other, because > > > > each > > > > > Neoformation is entirely new, what is Central in one period is > > > Peripheral > > > > > in the next: perception, for example, is the maximally developing > > > > function > > > > > in Infancy, but memory is the leading function in Preschool. > > > > > Speech is > > > a > > > > > Central Line of Development in early childhood but Thinking in > > > > > School > > > > Age. > > > > > How can BOTH of these things be true? > > > > > > > > > > It seems to me that both of them are true.Communication represents > > > > contact > > > > > with the social environment, and this is always foregrounded > > > > > during > > > > stable > > > > > periods and backgrounded during crises. Co-generalization > > > > > represents > > > what > > > > > we use to call "internalization", and this is foregrounded during > > > crises > > > > > and backgrounded during stable periods. In addition, the content > > > > > of the communication and co-generalization changes as the child > > > > > develops, from doing things in Infancy, to saying things in Early > > > > > Childhood, to > > > feeling > > > > in > > > > > Preschool, and to thinking in School Age. When co-generalization > > > becomes > > > > > super-productive, we get conscious awareness, and with awareness, > > > > crisis. > > > > > With crises, worlds change. > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif] > //www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass> > > > > This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely for > > the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the > > intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the > > information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on > it. > > If you have received this email in error please let the sender know > > immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not > > necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University accepts > > no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan > emails > > and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept responsibility > > for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its > > attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless accompanied > > by an official order form. > > > > > > > > > From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Wed Nov 9 12:41:20 2016 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 20:41:20 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Communication, Co-generalization, and Crises In-Reply-To: References: <582347db.434e420a.48957.0814@mx.google.com> <5823634b.01d6620a.9dfb5.2168@mx.google.com> Message-ID: I have deeper disagreements with respect to the role of language/codification, but for the sake of the interest around generalisation I offer this elaboration: the mediating aspect of "inter" is the agreed/established structures of activity, such as legitimate moves within a game. The skill at making a move has a different basis to this. Both novice and advanced chess players can agree upon legitimate moves, but what they actually do is liable to be very different. Best, Huw On 9 November 2016 at 20:22, David Kellogg wrote: > Mike puts his finger on the very spot. I said: > > "Another way to put it would be to say that ?generalization? is > really "inter-generalization?, because it is between the child and the > environment, and ?interaction? is really ?intra-generalization??within the > child." > > This needs to be EXACTLY the other way around: "generalization" is really > intra-generalization, because it is within the child. It's the way the > infant, for example, decides that "mama" is not just a sound that coincides > with the appearance of the mother's face or the way that the toddler > decides that similar objects can have the same name and similar actions > have the same name too, and the way that pre-schoolers realize that you can > name things that don't even exist, and the way that the school age child > decides that things like "growth" and "school" do not really exist, but > then again they do, not because we name them but because we do them and > then we name them. > > And of course "interaction" is really "inter-generalization", because it is > between the child and the environment. It's the way that the child and the > environment come to an agreement about what to call things. > > Here's a wonderful example. A Korean mother is taking her two children to > the doctor, and she talks to them one by one as the other is being seen by > the doctor. She is a member of our Vygotsky group, so she is trying to > replicate a little experiment that Vygotsky and Piaget performed with their > own children...playing a game where you call dogs "cows" and cows "dogs". > > One of her kids is in the "Crisis at Three" (the crisis of 'negativism'). > We will call her Number 3. And the other is in the "Crisis at Seven" (the > crisis of affectation, posing, clowning and pretension--the crisis of lying > and imaginary friends). As you'll see, it makes a difference! > > > Mom : Number Three...do you know what your name is? What do we call you? > > Three: Number Three. > > Mom : Number Three? Number Three? Well, suppose I decide to call you Number > Seven. How is that? > > Three: You can't. > > Mom: I can't? Then I'll call Number Seven Number Three. How's that? No > good? > > Three: No good. > > Mom : Why is it no good? > > Three : You can't switch names like that. > > Mom : I can't switch names? > > Three: No. > > Mom : So what's your name? > > Three : Number Three. > > Mom : It's not Number Seven? Suppose I call you "Princess" from now on? > > Three : No. > > Mom : No good? Why not? > > Three : Just because. > > Now Number Seven comes out of the doctor's office, and it's Number Three's > turn. So Mommy turns to Number Seven. > > Mom : Seven! Do you know what your name is? > > Seven : Number Seven. > > Mom : Really? Number Seven, suppose I gave your name to Number Three. Is > that okay or not? Then I give Number Three's name to you. How's that? > > Seven. Uh. OK. > > Mom : So, you are Number Three, and Number Three is Number Seven--right? > > Seven (grinning) : Good. > > Mom : Good? Is it right? Is it proper? > > Seven : Right! > > Mom : Oh, really. Say...Number Three... > > Seven : (laughs) > > Mom : (laughs) Do you know what your mother's name is? > > Siwon :.. Daddy. > I think you can see that the children are at very different stages of > development. But one way to look at is that they have very different > co-generalizations about names, and that both causes and is caused by very > different experiences with interactions--the pre-schooler has many more > years of interactions with imaginary characters! > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > > > > On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 5:07 AM, Huw Lloyd > wrote: > > > You might link that up with my remarks about Wertsch's "implicit > > mediation", Larry, in the comparisons paper. > > > > Best, > > Huw > > > > On 9 November 2016 at 17:56, wrote: > > > > > One further trace from Ruqaiya. What I posted previously is on page 9 > of > > > her article. Further down this page Ruquaia is focusing on (mental > > > dispositions). > > > > > > In her words: The Vygotsky literature ignores what I (Ruqaiya) have > > > called *invisible semiotic mediation*: Mediation that occurs in > discourse > > > embedded in everyday ordinary activities of a subject?s life. In this > > way, > > > the literature on semiotic mediation ignores the genesis of mental > > > (dispositions), the social subjects? culturally learned *sense* of > *what > > > matters in life*. And yet there is every reason to suppose that these > > > mental (attitudes) are critical in the success of otherwise *visible* > > > semiotic mediation, which is active in the genesis of *so called* > higher > > > mental functions. > > > > > > This draws our attention to two dimensions of semiotic mediation > > > (invisible and visible) and a third aspect which is the relation > occuring > > > within the intertwining of the (invisible and visible) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > From: lpscholar2@gmail.com > > > Sent: November 9, 2016 7:59 AM > > > To: Rod Parker-Rees; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: Communication, Co-generalization, and Crises > > > > > > Rod, Mike, David, > > > I know i am now in over my head, trying to follow this nuanced and > > complex > > > conversation through communication, co-generalization and crises. > > > I have been reading Vygotsky?s last lecture on school age in > > > conconjunction with Ruquiya?s paper (semiotic mediation language and > > > society: Three exotripic theories ? Vygotsky, halliday, Bernstein). > > > > > > To read both papers in a zig-gap-zag back and forth immersion in this > > > topic or theme (textual theme) > > > > > > Here is Ruqaiya as she enters our conversation on this emerging topic > of > > > communication, co-generlization and what she refers to as the > > *experiential > > > or representational* aspect of semiotic mediation. > > > > > > RUQUIYA: a second contradiction in Vygotsky?s theory is that his views > > on > > > language as system posits the history of the development of linguistic > > > meaning is social BUT meaning itself is representational/experiential. > > > He wishes to stress the sociogenesis of higher mental functions, but > the > > > only meanings he finds of interest are the meanings that do NOT > DIRECTLY > > > relate to interpersonal relations. > > > > > > My turn is up, but i do recommend reading both David Kellogg?s > > translation > > > of Vygotsky?s last lecture in con/junction with Ruqaiya?s paper. This > way > > > of reading each paper through the other may allow Baritones to > foreground > > > soprano voices within the exploration of semiotic mediation. > > > > > > PS Ruquia briefly mentions gesturing as a semiotic modality or means of > > > co-generating meaning but my turn is up. > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > From: Rod Parker-Rees > > > Sent: November 9, 2016 5:32 AM > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Communication, Co-generalization, and Crises > > > > > > This raises questions for me about how we understand the word > 'concept'. > > > > > > This can be understood as referring to things that go together but > really > > > things that are taken together - the 'con' seems to do double work, > both > > > the togetherness of the things which are taken together and the > > > togetherness of the cultural agreement to take these things AS going > > > together. So concepts, as we usually use the term, are > co-generalizations > > > or conconcepts? Things which we (together) agree to think of as going > > > together. > > > > > > It is easy to miss the sociocultural 'agreement' aspects, as it is in > > > 'understanding', which no longer resonates with a sense of joining in > > with > > > (or standing among) others. > > > > > > All the best, > > > > > > Rod > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > > > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole > > > Sent: 09 November 2016 05:40 > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Communication, Co-generalization, and Crises > > > > > > These are interesting ideas, David. I will respond and ask questions in > > > italics between paragraphs because the overall note seems to contain > some > > > sub-themes worth comment on their own. > > > > > > ?? > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 5:55 PM, David Kellogg > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Huw: > > > > > > > > > > > > I think in general we tend to overstate the differences between > > > > Vygotsky's thinking in different periods, because we notice that he > > > > changes his wordings and we assume that means he has changed his > mind. > > > > We forget that Vygotsky steals most of his words from other people > > > > ("egocentric speech", "pseudoconcept", "mediation", "neoformation", > > > > etc.) and then works them into his own system of concepts, and it's > > > > the system of concepts that is really new, not the words. > > > > > > > > ?*I agree,but its hard to keep the chronology straight and a lot of > > > > his > > > ideas come from Western Europe/US sources*?. *The translations of terms > > > across systems cannot help but be a distorted lens which use of common > > > terms hides from us. Unwitting players in the pseudoconcept game.* ? > > > > > > > So for example Yasnitsky and Van der Veer claim that Vygotsky gave up > > > > instrumentalism, abandoned the distinction between higher and lower > > > > psychological functions, and tried to become a Gestaltist, and > failed. > > > > None of this is true, as far as I can tell. The final lectures--right > > > > up to the one I sent around--have a central role for word meanings, > > > > maintain that the higher psychological functions are specifically > > > > human and the main expanadum, and include some pretty harsh > criticisms > > > > of the Gestaltists, who were by then showing distinctly Nazi > > tendencies. > > > > > > > > ?*The stages of instrumentalism, functional systems, to > "perezhivanie" > > > > (transactionalism?) have always seemed to me a clear case where > > > > earlier stages are sublated. He was critical of Gestaltists for their > > > > reductions to biology and the fascism associated with it, but the > > > > problem of the whole in relations to parts and the centrality of > > > > structuration seems to remain. How else could one step in instruction > > > > create two steps in development?* ? > > > > > > > > > > ? > > > > > > > > But it is certainly true that the words change, and some of the words > > > > that have caused the most trouble--interestingly enough--disappear. > > > > For example, Vygotsky stops using the word "reaction", he no longer > > > > talks about "vrashevaniye" or "introvolution", and he only uses the > > word > > > "internalize" > > > > once, when he is talking about a whole system of concepts (not when > he > > > > is talking about reactions). So the question arises--what takes its > > > place? > > > > > > > > > > > > Here's what we put in the "Thinking at School Age" chapter that I > sent > > > > around. Criticisms from Russophones? > > > > > > > > ?*The issues raised here seem really central to understand, but I am > > > > not sure I fully understood them all.*? > > > > > > > > Vygotsky contrasts ????????? (?generalization?) and ??????? > > > > (?communication?, ?contact?, ?interaction?). But if we translate > these > > > > terms as ?generalization? and ?communication? respectively, we > obscure > > > > the fact that they have the same root: ?commonality? or ?sharing?. > > > > > > > > *?OK, got it, the unity of generalization and communication, in > > > > russian, have the same root as "common-ness (?????-ness)?."? But I > > > > have trouble getting from there to "meta-communication." Maybe my > > > > denseness.* > > > > > > > > > > > > > ? > > > > ?In Russian, ?? is a preposition, meaning ?about? or ?of?, so we > might > > > > > > render this contrast as ?about-communication? or ?meta-communication? > vs. > > > > ?communication?. But this would allow the sociological, interpersonal > > > > side of Vygotsky?s meaning to eclipse the psychological, > intra-personal > > > side. > > > > > > > > ?*Why and when do we have to allow such eclipsing given the > > > > theoretical formulation above? Missed that.* > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ? > > > > > > > > Another way to put it would be to say that ?generalization? is really > > > > ?inter-generalization?, because it is between the child and the > > > > environment, and ?interaction? is really > ?intra-generalization??within > > > > the child. > > > > > > > > > *?I find that very difficult to follow but the next sentence reads > > > correctly to me... although I am not sure what 'the child derives" > > means.* ? > > > > > > > > > > The child derives intra-mental generalizations through a process of > > > > inter-personal communications, by interaction using shared word > values > > > > within a speech community. This ?community generalization? or ?common > > > > generalization? or ?co-generalization? for short is what is enabled > by > > > > word meanings shared within the speech community. These meanings the > > > > child at first only partially shares. > > > > > > > > > > *Does the community generalization- to common generalization, to > > > co-generation end correspond to the extreme, externalize form of sense? > > So > > > these are different ways of expressing the conventionality/historical > > > nature of word meaning??* > > > > > > ?*Seems to me that not only the child at first, but the human of any > age > > > for ever after only partially share the conventional/valued word > meanings > > > of the society that mediate everyday experience (to use some borrowed > > > words!) of one's same of the species' delights.?* > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This word ????????? usually translated as ?generalization?. Because > > > > this turns out to be a very important point in this particular > lecture > > > > and in the lectures that follow, we will take the liberty of > > > > translating as ?co-generalization?. A ?co-generalization? is a > > > > generalization about generalizations made by the child through > > > > construing the shared generalizations of word values in a speech > > > community. > > > > > > > > > > *?This seems the biggy to pull of. What, in truth, do russianophiles > have > > > to say about it?* > > > > > > mike? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 11:15 AM, Huw Lloyd < > huw.softdesigns@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Where does 'co-generalization' come from, David? Perhaps a good > > > > > carry > > > > over > > > > > from your consideration of political milieu is the factor of > tension > > > > > in > > > > > development: tension to foster attention, a socialised 'will' if > you > > > > like. > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > Huw > > > > > > > > > > On 7 November 2016 at 21:16, David Kellogg > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Well, of course, Peg is really right--or at least half right. > That > > > > > > is, > > > > > the > > > > > > American elections are not just a plebiscite on sexual assault, > > > > > > and > > > > using > > > > > > the term "sexual predator" reduces the whole thing to the kind of > > > > > > "tu quoques" argumentation which makes up the whole of the > > > > > > Republican > > > > > case > > > > > > these days. Actually, for the first time in my memory, the > > > > > > American elections are about real issues that actually touch the > > > > > > lives of > > > > ordinary > > > > > > people, namely sexism, racism, and the impunity conferred by real > > > > > > fame > > > > > and > > > > > > largely imaginary wealth. > > > > > > > > > > > > But I would like to know that the other half is also right: that > > > > > > is, > > > > that > > > > > > xmca's normal concerns with mind, culture, and activity do not > > > > > > require radio silence in times of crisis. Let me talk about > > > > > > another crisis and > > > > > see. > > > > > > Unlike the USA, South Korea has had, since 1949, six different > > > > > > constitutions. Until very recently (1997) the peaceful transfer > of > > > > power > > > > > > was the exception and not the rule: governments changed if and > > > > > > only if people took matters into their own hands, either through > > > > > > mass demonstrations or violent military coups or both (the one > > > > > > apparent exception was when the current president's father, Bak > > > > > > Jeonghi, was > > > > > forced > > > > > > to call an election by the Nixon administration: on the verge of > > > > > > losing > > > > > to > > > > > > Kim Daejeong, he peacefully overthrew himself instead). > > > > > > > > > > > > Now, Vygotsky also describes development in terms of six crises > > > > > > (Birth, One, Three, Seven, Thirteen and Seventeen) and five more > > > > > > or less stable periods of equilibrium (Infancy, Early Childhood, > > > > > > Preschool, School > > > > Age, > > > > > > Adolescence). In fact, the Zoped (assuming that "ped" means > > > > > > pedological > > > > > and > > > > > > not pedagogical) really refers to the functions that belong to > the > > > > > > NEXT zone of development and not the actual one: if a child can > > > > > > simply take > > > > > over > > > > > > functions from the environment and make them his or her own, then > > > > almost > > > > > by > > > > > > definition they are functions that belong to the zone of actual, > > > > > > and > > > > not > > > > > > the zone of proximal, development. That means that for every > > > > > > stable > > > > > period, > > > > > > the Zoped is going to be a crisis (and of course that, along with > > > > > > prolepsis, accounts for the unpredictability of the Zoped which > > > > > > Peg > > > > > noted). > > > > > > > > > > > > Korean crises not when people are overexploited and ruthlessly > > > > > suppressed; > > > > > > that is a much better description of the stable periods in Korean > > > > > history. > > > > > > Crises happen just when people become superproductive and try to > > > > > > self-emancipate. I think crises of development in the child also > > > > > > happen > > > > > the > > > > > > same way: that is, during normal periods, the environment is > > > > > communicating > > > > > > with the child and the child is taking over co-generalizations by > > > > > > restructuring them to fit the child's extant psychological > system. > > > > > > But Vygotsky says that there are moments when this cannot happen, > > > > > > because > > > > the > > > > > > psychological system itself must be restructured: the central > > > > > neoformation > > > > > > dissolves the social situation of development. > > > > > > > > > > > > During normal times, the environment is the source of development > > > > > > and > > > > the > > > > > > child's personality is only the site of development: but during > > > > > > these > > > > > crazy > > > > > > crises (the crisis of "autonomous speech", the crisis of the > > > > negativistic > > > > > > "proto will", the crisis of the affected, manneristic, clownish > > > > > > "proto-self"), it is almost as if the child, superproductive and > > > > active, > > > > > > wants to "turn the tables", transforming the personality into the > > > > source > > > > > of > > > > > > development and adapting the environment to it instead. > > > > > > > > > > > > One of the most puzzling things in Vygotsky's last lectures is > the > > > > > Central > > > > > > Line of Development. On the one hand, these are always forms of > > > > > > "communication" and "co-generalization". And on the other, > because > > > > > each > > > > > > Neoformation is entirely new, what is Central in one period is > > > > Peripheral > > > > > > in the next: perception, for example, is the maximally developing > > > > > function > > > > > > in Infancy, but memory is the leading function in Preschool. > > > > > > Speech is > > > > a > > > > > > Central Line of Development in early childhood but Thinking in > > > > > > School > > > > > Age. > > > > > > How can BOTH of these things be true? > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems to me that both of them are true.Communication > represents > > > > > contact > > > > > > with the social environment, and this is always foregrounded > > > > > > during > > > > > stable > > > > > > periods and backgrounded during crises. Co-generalization > > > > > > represents > > > > what > > > > > > we use to call "internalization", and this is foregrounded during > > > > crises > > > > > > and backgrounded during stable periods. In addition, the content > > > > > > of the communication and co-generalization changes as the child > > > > > > develops, from doing things in Infancy, to saying things in Early > > > > > > Childhood, to > > > > feeling > > > > > in > > > > > > Preschool, and to thinking in School Age. When co-generalization > > > > becomes > > > > > > super-productive, we get conscious awareness, and with > awareness, > > > > > crisis. > > > > > > With crises, worlds change. > > > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif] > > //www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass> > > > > > > This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely > for > > > the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the > > > intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the > > > information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on > > it. > > > If you have received this email in error please let the sender know > > > immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not > > > necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University > accepts > > > no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan > > emails > > > and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept > responsibility > > > for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its > > > attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless > accompanied > > > by an official order form. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Wed Nov 9 12:49:56 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 12:49:56 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Local State of Mind In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <58238c01.82dc620a.55cd8.4196@mx.google.com> Mike, Is it possible that our professional concerns on the xmca site and yesterday?s USA self-revelation may have some overlapping shared historical contexts. For example this month?s article describes *social imaginaries* and exploration of authoritarian personality character or disposition. Yesterday was a seismic earth shattering event. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: mike cole Sent: November 9, 2016 11:47 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] The Local State of Mind ?Even as I seek to narrow the focus of my thinking to areas of professional concern, such as that concerning Vygotsky/meaning/communication etc., the mental work it requires to screen out the impact of the election is exhausting. One long time xmca participant sent a note saying he needed time to come to grips with what has happened and how to live in a community for whom the outcome of this election is seen as a life saving, noble, affair. Many colleagues, particularly women who have been struggling since the 1960's and 70's for equal rights, report difficulty breathing. That our local crisis is not just about us seems important to keep in mind. But the country's self revelation last night was a real shock. To give you some idea of how this is seen here at UCSD I paste below a letter to faculty from a concerned, experienced, departmental administrator to convey some sense of trauma that many in this community experiencing. It reflects what i am hearing from many communities to which I am somehow connected, and I expect you are too. In 50 years of teaching at a university I have never seen such a document related to an election. 9/11 and recent mass shootings are other events that have evoked this kind of trauma. Coming to terms.... and looking forward to the discussion of the consequences of neoliberal STEM education. mike -------------------- Dept Letter about "resources for after the election": I wanted to remind our community of general resources available for self-care, coping skills and connection. First, our department has organized a workshop with the *Faculty Staff & Assistance Program (FSAP) *to be held *Monday, November 14th from 3:00 - 4:00 in Mandler 1539*. This is available to all members of our community to help process emotions and provide general support and resilience strategies for dealing with stressful life events. FSAP is also available for appointments (for faculty, staff, post-docs, labstaff and their family members). You can arrange an appointment here: http://blink.ucsd.edu/HR/services/support/counseling/appointment.html For undergraduate and graduate students, *Counseling and Psychological Services* is available to assist you. Please call if you wish to make an appointment: (858) 534-3755. More information available here: http://caps.ucsd.edu As a reminder, CAPS offers drop-in workshops for all students daily. Today?s is ?Mindfulness for Daily Living? and occurs at Student Health Services from 3-4:30. More information here: http://caps.ucsd.edu/groups. html Additionally, I believe all of the Campus Community Centers (Black Resource Center, Cross-Cultural Center, the LGBT Resource Center, the Raza Resource Centro, the Women?s Center) are having some open hours this week. This site provides details for each: http://community.ucsd.edu Finally, a word for *instructors* of classes. The person-to-person (not office-to-person) recommendation from CAPS is to have compassion with students who are feeling distressed in the wake of the election. You may wish to be compassionate with respect to rescheduling or postponing scheduled exams; keep in mind that if you postpone an exam for one student, you must be willing to do the same for all other students under similar circumstances. Please feel free to use me as a resource when considering whether or how to adjust your class. For students in distress, refer them as needed to the resources above, and also recall the Triton Concern Line, (858) 246-1111 (more information here: http://blink.ucsd.edu/ instructors/advising/concern/index.html#Communicating-sensitive-informa) Thank you all for being a community that can work together despite differences of opinion and thank you for being supportive of those who need support now and in the coming weeks. From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Wed Nov 9 13:18:35 2016 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 21:18:35 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Communication, Co-generalization, and Crises In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: <1478726316083.91858@iped.uio.no> David, all, I too agree that we may sometimes overstate the shifts in Vygotsky's writing, though I think that, by far, what you most often find in the literature is precisely the opposite: writings in which Vygotsky's work is presented as if it had grown in a steady and cumulative fashion, making it look as if all concepts developed through his last 10 years formed part of a more or less consistent whole. Be it as it may, and only again thanking you most heartfully for your wonderful work and for sharing it with us, I was wondering whether there is no such an overstatement of the old in the new in the comments that are attached to the lecture that you shared with us. I am referring to the part where you discuss the distinction between generalisation (co-generalization) and communication or interaction. In the text you shared with us, you write that, one apparently plausible way to understand that difference between concepts is that "... ?generalization? is really ?inter-generalization?, because it is between the child and the environment, and ?interaction? is really ?intra-generalization??within the child" I was surprised by such a reading, mostly because I did not find evidence in the text that you shared that would be the case. I particularly found it difficult to see that "interaction" is meant to be "intra-generalisation", particularly when I hear Vygotsky speaking in quite different terms (as per the translation you offered us). Thus, in the text you shared, we hear Vygotsky saying that, "human consciousness emerges, grows and changes in the interaction between people, i.e. of the fact that the whole business does not occur in such a way that everyone grows his own consciousness in his own head and then communicates the final product, but that instead consciousness grows and creates its own basic functions through the process of interaction." And again later that: I do not hear him speaking of some consciousness that is intra-individual as the result of being in interaction, but rather that consciousness GROWS AND CREATES ITS OWN BASIC FUNCTIONS through the process of interaction. If generalisation is one such function, and according to the interpretation mentioned above, this would translate something like: "consciousness grows and creates co-generalization in the process of intra-generalisation". I had written the lines above when David had not yet sent a new e-mail correcting: generalisation is intra- interaction is inter-... But the problem to me remains the same: it does not seem to me that Vygotsky is using those terms, I don?t feel the way the lecture is organized is suggesting an intra and extra, an inside and outside divide. And so I think that David?s interpretation may be in this case an example of doing some extra work to make Vygotsky?s statements fit earlier phases of his writing. If I read the lecture without an intra- inter- distinction underlying the difference between generalization and interaction, then what Vygotsky seems to be describing is a thinking that has generalization and communication as to irreducibly connected moments, and that is the way he seems to explicitly describe it, where he states speech as connected to (at the same time) to two aspects: consciousness (or ?a mode of reflecting reality?) and interaction. ?Co-generalization also constitutes, as Lenin points out, a way of reflecting reality different in principle, not a dead mirror-like copy, but a zig-zagging act which imposes a flight from reality and a return to it, which includes within itself a bit of fantasy, and speech is, on the one hand linked to interaction, but on the other hand linked to a new mode of reflecting reality? The passage is clearly reminiscence to another passage of the same period at the end of Thinking and Speech, where he paraphrases Feuerbach in stating that the word is impossible for one, and only possible for two. In neither case I think there is talk about internal and external, a talk that comes in the third consideration very clearly. But there I don?t think communication stands for internal, and generalization for external (or vice-versa). Rather, I think that the hypothesis that the relation between the two (communication/interaction and generalization) is one similar to the Spinozan view of mind and body, both being manifestations of one and the same substance, seems to fit better the lecture. Of course, I may have totally misread you, David; and certainly I have not a centesimal part of your experience with Vygotsky?s writing. But the worst thing that can happen to me if I am wrong is that I?ll learn more. Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of David Kellogg Sent: 09 November 2016 02:55 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Communication, Co-generalization, and Crises Huw: I think in general we tend to overstate the differences between Vygotsky's thinking in different periods, because we notice that he changes his wordings and we assume that means he has changed his mind. We forget that Vygotsky steals most of his words from other people ("egocentric speech", "pseudoconcept", "mediation", "neoformation", etc.) and then works them into his own system of concepts, and it's the system of concepts that is really new, not the words. So for example Yasnitsky and Van der Veer claim that Vygotsky gave up instrumentalism, abandoned the distinction between higher and lower psychological functions, and tried to become a Gestaltist, and failed. None of this is true, as far as I can tell. The final lectures--right up to the one I sent around--have a central role for word meanings, maintain that the higher psychological functions are specifically human and the main expanadum, and include some pretty harsh criticisms of the Gestaltists, who were by then showing distinctly Nazi tendencies. But it is certainly true that the words change, and some of the words that have caused the most trouble--interestingly enough--disappear. For example, Vygotsky stops using the word "reaction", he no longer talks about "vrashevaniye" or "introvolution", and he only uses the word "internalize" once, when he is talking about a whole system of concepts (not when he is talking about reactions). So the question arises--what takes its place? Here's what we put in the "Thinking at School Age" chapter that I sent around. Criticisms from Russophones? Vygotsky contrasts ????????? (?generalization?) and ??????? (?communication?, ?contact?, ?interaction?). But if we translate these terms as ?generalization? and ?communication? respectively, we obscure the fact that they have the same root: ?commonality? or ?sharing?. In Russian, ?? is a preposition, meaning ?about? or ?of?, so we might render this contrast as ?about-communication? or ?meta-communication? vs. ?communication?. But this would allow the sociological, interpersonal side of Vygotsky?s meaning to eclipse the psychological, intra-personal side. Another way to put it would be to say that ?generalization? is really ?inter-generalization?, because it is between the child and the environment, and ?interaction? is really ?intra-generalization??within the child. The child derives intra-mental generalizations through a process of inter-personal communications, by interaction using shared word values within a speech community. This ?community generalization? or ?common generalization? or ?co-generalization? for short is what is enabled by word meanings shared within the speech community. These meanings the child at first only partially shares. This word ????????? usually translated as ?generalization?. Because this turns out to be a very important point in this particular lecture and in the lectures that follow, we will take the liberty of translating as ?co-generalization?. A ?co-generalization? is a generalization about generalizations made by the child through construing the shared generalizations of word values in a speech community. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 11:15 AM, Huw Lloyd wrote: > Where does 'co-generalization' come from, David? Perhaps a good carry over > from your consideration of political milieu is the factor of tension in > development: tension to foster attention, a socialised 'will' if you like. > > Best, > Huw > > On 7 November 2016 at 21:16, David Kellogg wrote: > > > Well, of course, Peg is really right--or at least half right. That is, > the > > American elections are not just a plebiscite on sexual assault, and using > > the term "sexual predator" reduces the whole thing to the kind of > > "tu quoques" argumentation which makes up the whole of the Republican > case > > these days. Actually, for the first time in my memory, the American > > elections are about real issues that actually touch the lives of ordinary > > people, namely sexism, racism, and the impunity conferred by real fame > and > > largely imaginary wealth. > > > > But I would like to know that the other half is also right: that is, that > > xmca's normal concerns with mind, culture, and activity do not require > > radio silence in times of crisis. Let me talk about another crisis and > see. > > Unlike the USA, South Korea has had, since 1949, six different > > constitutions. Until very recently (1997) the peaceful transfer of power > > was the exception and not the rule: governments changed if and only if > > people took matters into their own hands, either through mass > > demonstrations or violent military coups or both (the one apparent > > exception was when the current president's father, Bak Jeonghi, was > forced > > to call an election by the Nixon administration: on the verge of losing > to > > Kim Daejeong, he peacefully overthrew himself instead). > > > > Now, Vygotsky also describes development in terms of six crises (Birth, > > One, Three, Seven, Thirteen and Seventeen) and five more or less stable > > periods of equilibrium (Infancy, Early Childhood, Preschool, School Age, > > Adolescence). In fact, the Zoped (assuming that "ped" means pedological > and > > not pedagogical) really refers to the functions that belong to the NEXT > > zone of development and not the actual one: if a child can simply take > over > > functions from the environment and make them his or her own, then almost > by > > definition they are functions that belong to the zone of actual, and not > > the zone of proximal, development. That means that for every stable > period, > > the Zoped is going to be a crisis (and of course that, along with > > prolepsis, accounts for the unpredictability of the Zoped which Peg > noted). > > > > Korean crises not when people are overexploited and ruthlessly > suppressed; > > that is a much better description of the stable periods in Korean > history. > > Crises happen just when people become superproductive and try to > > self-emancipate. I think crises of development in the child also happen > the > > same way: that is, during normal periods, the environment is > communicating > > with the child and the child is taking over co-generalizations by > > restructuring them to fit the child's extant psychological system. But > > Vygotsky says that there are moments when this cannot happen, because the > > psychological system itself must be restructured: the central > neoformation > > dissolves the social situation of development. > > > > During normal times, the environment is the source of development and the > > child's personality is only the site of development: but during these > crazy > > crises (the crisis of "autonomous speech", the crisis of the negativistic > > "proto will", the crisis of the affected, manneristic, clownish > > "proto-self"), it is almost as if the child, superproductive and active, > > wants to "turn the tables", transforming the personality into the source > of > > development and adapting the environment to it instead. > > > > One of the most puzzling things in Vygotsky's last lectures is the > Central > > Line of Development. On the one hand, these are always forms > > of "communication" and "co-generalization". And on the other, because > each > > Neoformation is entirely new, what is Central in one period is Peripheral > > in the next: perception, for example, is the maximally developing > function > > in Infancy, but memory is the leading function in Preschool. Speech is a > > Central Line of Development in early childhood but Thinking in School > Age. > > How can BOTH of these things be true? > > > > It seems to me that both of them are true.Communication represents > contact > > with the social environment, and this is always foregrounded during > stable > > periods and backgrounded during crises. Co-generalization represents what > > we use to call "internalization", and this is foregrounded during crises > > and backgrounded during stable periods. In addition, the content of the > > communication and co-generalization changes as the child develops, from > > doing things in Infancy, to saying things in Early Childhood, to feeling > in > > Preschool, and to thinking in School Age. When co-generalization becomes > > super-productive, we get conscious awareness, and with awareness, > crisis. > > With crises, worlds change. > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Wed Nov 9 13:52:41 2016 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 21:52:41 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Local State of Mind In-Reply-To: <58238c01.82dc620a.55cd8.4196@mx.google.com> References: <58238c01.82dc620a.55cd8.4196@mx.google.com> Message-ID: If the aftermath of Brexit is anything to go by, then extra vigilance will be required around xenophobic acts. Common decency is more important, not only for the present but for the future beyond the new horizons -- what you can preserve under pressure can stand you in good stead. From what I can see, Bernie was the Democrat's anti-establishment vote, which may have been the underdog with respect to the democrats but not, it seems, for the electorate as a whole. Best, Huw On 9 November 2016 at 20:49, wrote: > Mike, > Is it possible that our professional concerns on the xmca site and > yesterday?s USA self-revelation may have some overlapping shared > historical contexts. > For example this month?s article describes *social imaginaries* and > exploration of authoritarian personality character or disposition. > > Yesterday was a seismic earth shattering event. > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: mike cole > Sent: November 9, 2016 11:47 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] The Local State of Mind > > ?Even as I seek to narrow the focus of my thinking to areas of professional > concern, such as that > concerning Vygotsky/meaning/communication etc., the mental work it requires > to screen out the impact of the election is exhausting. > > One long time xmca participant sent a note saying he needed time to come to > grips with what > has happened and how to live in a community for whom the outcome of this > election is seen as a life saving, noble, affair. Many colleagues, > particularly women who have been struggling since the > 1960's and 70's for equal rights, report difficulty breathing. > > That our local crisis is not just about us seems important to keep in > mind. But the country's self revelation last night was a real shock. > > To give you some idea of how this is seen here at UCSD I paste below a > letter to faculty from a concerned, experienced, departmental administrator > to convey some sense of trauma that many in this community experiencing. > It reflects what i am hearing from many communities to which I am somehow > connected, and I expect you are too. In 50 years of teaching at a > university I have never seen such a document related to an election. 9/11 > and recent mass shootings are other events that have evoked this kind of > trauma. > > Coming to terms.... and looking forward to the discussion of the > consequences of neoliberal STEM education. > mike > -------------------- > > Dept Letter about "resources for after the election": > > I wanted to remind our community of general resources available for > self-care, coping skills and connection. > > First, our department has organized a workshop with the *Faculty Staff & > Assistance Program (FSAP) *to be held *Monday, November 14th from 3:00 - > 4:00 in Mandler 1539*. This is available to all members of our community > to help process emotions and provide general support and resilience > strategies for dealing with stressful life events. > > FSAP is also available for appointments (for faculty, staff, post-docs, > labstaff and their family members). You can arrange an appointment here: > http://blink.ucsd.edu/HR/services/support/counseling/appointment.html > > For undergraduate and graduate students, *Counseling and Psychological > Services* is available to assist you. Please call if you wish to make an > appointment: (858) 534-3755. More information available here: > http://caps.ucsd.edu > > As a reminder, CAPS offers drop-in workshops for all students daily. > Today?s is ?Mindfulness for Daily Living? and occurs at Student Health > Services from 3-4:30. More information here: > http://caps.ucsd.edu/groups. > html > > Additionally, I believe all of the Campus Community Centers (Black Resource > Center, Cross-Cultural Center, the LGBT Resource Center, the Raza Resource > Centro, the Women?s Center) are having some open hours this week. This > site provides details for each: http://community.ucsd.edu > > Finally, a word for *instructors* of classes. The person-to-person (not > office-to-person) recommendation from CAPS is to have compassion with > students who are feeling distressed in the wake of the election. You may > wish to be compassionate with respect to rescheduling or postponing > scheduled exams; keep in mind that if you postpone an exam for one student, > you must be willing to do the same for all other students under similar > circumstances. Please feel free to use me as a resource when considering > whether or how to adjust your class. For students in distress, refer them > as needed to the resources above, and also recall the Triton Concern Line, > (858) 246-1111 (more information here: http://blink.ucsd.edu/ > instructors/advising/concern/index.html#Communicating-sensitive-informa) > > Thank you all for being a community that can work together despite > differences of opinion and thank you for being supportive of those who need > support now and in the coming weeks. > > From anamshane@gmail.com Wed Nov 9 14:09:39 2016 From: anamshane@gmail.com (Ana Marjanovic-Shane) Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2016 22:09:39 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] A request on behalf of Eugene Matusov: Inviting prospective grad students to SCA doctoral program Message-ID: Dear colleagues, I would like to ask you to share the following invitation letter with prospective graduate students who may be interested in the Sociocultural and Community-Based Approaches doctoral program in the School of Education, University of Delaware. Thanks a lot, Eugene Matusov ????? ? Editor-in-Chief, Dialogic Pedagogy Journal Professor of Education School of Education 16 W Main st University of Delaware Newark, DE 19716, USA Email: ematusov@udel.edu ? Publications: http://ematusov.soe.udel.edu/vita/publications.htm DiaPed: http://diaped.soe.udel.edu DPJ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/groups/DPJ.two/ ????- Dear prospective doctoral graduate education student? We would like to invite to apply to the graduate program in the Sociocultural and Community-Based Approaches (SCA) doctoral program in the School of Education, University of Delaware. The Sociocultural and Community-Based Approaches to Research and Education specialization views education as contextual, dialogic, and relational. We recognize that learning is shaped by institutions, cultures, communities (including online communities), practices, technology, and histories. We are interested in how teachers, students, families, community members, and the society at large ?make sense? of the principles and practices of education in complex and sometimes contradictory ways. We seek to investigate the purposes of education and to create models of equitable quality education. Our perspective includes, but is not limited to, research done in the area of situated cognition, critical pedagogy, critical race theory, social justice, feminist theory and disabilities studies. It also encompasses social science approaches grounded in sociology, psychology, anthropology and history. The SCA specialization emphasizes the development of expertise in conducting high-quality research on significant issues in sociocultural and community-centered approaches to education. We also strive to prepare teacher educators who will engage preservice and in-service teachers, educational leaders and policy makers, and families and students in the work of examining and developing equitable educational communities. We are committed to authorial education, graduate students? ownership of their education, and graduate students? learning activism. We believe that graduate students should become responsible for making informed decisions and defining their own education journey. We support diverse informal forms of education. Currently, we have the following informal organizations meeting on a regular basis: ? SCA Reading Group, where we ? faculty and grad students ? select books for monthly reading and in depth discussion; ? SCA Teaching Club, where we discuss our teaching successes and challenges on a weekly basis; ? SCA Research Group, where we present and discuss our research projects on a weekly basis. Our recently graduated, and advanced doctoral candidates? dissertation topics include, multicultural dialogic education, social justice education, dialogic pedagogy, and teacher education for equity, hip hop pedagogy, democratic dialogic education, critical dialogue and so on. For further information, please, visit our website: http://www.education.udel.edu/doctoral/phd/sca/ The deadline for application is December 15th online: http://www.education.udel.edu/prospective-students/how-to-apply/ If you have questions about the SCA program, please contact: Dr. Elizabeth Soslau (the SCA coordinator): esoslau@udel.edu -- *Ana Marjanovic-Shane* Dialogic Pedagogy Journal, Editor (dpj.pitt.edu) Chestnut Hill College, Associate Professor of Education e-mails: shaneam@chc.edu anamshane@gmail.com US phone: +1 267-334-2905 Serbian phone: +381 62 1904 110 From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Wed Nov 9 14:38:44 2016 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 22:38:44 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> , , <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> 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 on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil 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 on behalf of mike cole 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 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 > on behalf of 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 > 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 > 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 > 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach it as PDF. > > ??Good read! > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Wed Nov 9 14:42:58 2016 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 22:42:58 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> , , <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no>,<1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <1478731376226.98401@iped.uio.no> 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 on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: 09 November 2016 23:38 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started 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 on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil 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 on behalf of mike cole 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 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 > on behalf of 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 > 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 > 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 > 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach it as PDF. > > ??Good read! > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > From mcole@ucsd.edu Wed Nov 9 15:01:38 2016 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 15:01:38 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: 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 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 > on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > 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 > on behalf of mike cole > 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 > > 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 > > on behalf of 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 > > > 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 > > 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 > > 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach it as PDF. > > > ??Good read! > > > > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > > > > From goncu@uic.edu Wed Nov 9 18:29:16 2016 From: goncu@uic.edu (Goncu, Artin) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 20:29:16 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] [Fwd: National Search for new Chair for C&I - please share widely] Message-ID: <079bf35fde00b22c5a7397539bdb97e2.squirrel@webmail.uic.edu> fyi ---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: National Search for new Chair for C&I - please share widely From: "Josh Radinsky" Date: Wed, November 9, 2016 4:34 pm To: EDFAC@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hello College of Ed colleagues, as you know the Curriculum & Instruction Department currently has a job search open to hire a new Chair. Below, and attached, please find the ad for the position - we encourage you to please share it widely, and particularly with anyone who you think might pose a good match for the priorities of the Department and our College, and a good fit with our faculty. Many thanks, Josh and the C&I Chair Search Committee Josh Radinsky, PhD Associate Professor of Curriculum Studies and the Learning Sciences University of Illinois at Chicago Director of Graduate Studies, Learning Sciences Co-Editor in Chief, Journal of the Learning Sciences ?????? JOB POSTING ANNOUNCEMENT: University of Illinois at Chicago College of Education Curriculum and Instruction Department Chair The College of Education at the University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC), ranked in the top 50 Colleges of Education in the nation, is seeking applications to fill the position of Department Chair for Curriculum and Instruction beginning in the 2017-2018 academic year. Candidates should be at the Associate or Full Professor rank. UIC???s Department of Curriculum and Instruction is the vibrant home to 30 faculty members and 500 students (undergraduate and graduate) who are engaged in critical scholarship, practice, and praxis addressing the most pressing issues in education, both locally and globally. The department has a long and celebrated history of producing scholars, educators, and leaders whose work has shaped the educational research community, nationally and internationally, and the practices and contexts of schooling in Chicago Public Schools, the nation???s third largest school district. The department has produced notable scholarship in areas including curriculum studies; the teaching and learning of mathematics, history, literacies and science; bilingual education; language ideology; political economy; teacher learning and development; and the history of education, among others. Through its three doctoral programs (Curriculum Studies; Literacy, Language and Culture; Mathematics and Science Education) three master???s programs (Educational Studies; Language, Literacies and Learning; Science Education), and one undergraduate program (Urban Elementary Education), the Curriculum and Instruction Department prepares educators, researchers, and advocates to work effectively in urban schools, institutions of higher education, and other educational and community contexts. The faculty actively engages the most pressing problems facing urban communities through our work at the intersection of teaching, research, policy, and practice, and we are committed to changing the landscape of education inside and outside of schools and wherever learning takes place. Our scholarship and teaching is grounded in a commitment to social, racial, and economic justice. We seek a Chair who is committed to working with our dynamic and productive faculty in collectively charting the direction for the Department moving forward, including, but not limited to, nurturing the Department???s research productivity; supporting an optimal educational experience for undergraduate and graduate students; and continuing to develop our premier urban elementary education program. We seek candidates whose scholarship is rooted in the histories, contexts, and/or practices of teaching and learning. Applicants who bridge disciplinary boundaries and engage in critical analysis of urban education are particularly encouraged to apply. Candidates should have a vigorous program of research, a record of scholarly publications, evidence of strong teaching, and experience and skills in mentoring, administrative leadership and organizational development. As part of the leadership role in the Department, the Chair will also be expected to teach, mentor students, and supervise doctoral dissertations. Please submit application materials electronically at https://jobs.uic.edu/job-board/job-details?jobID=72485 no later than December 2, 2016. These materials should include (a) a letter of application addressing fit with expectations for the position; (b) a curriculum vitae, (c) copies of two recent publications, and (d) the names of and contact information for at least three references. For inquiries about this position contact Dr. Josh Radinsky, Chair of Search Committee, joshuar@uic.edu . The University of Illinois at Chicago is an Equal Opportunity, Affirmative Action employer. Minorities, women, veterans and individuals with disabilities are encouraged to apply. The University of Illinois conducts background checks on all job candidates upon acceptance of contingent offer of employment. Background checks will be performed in compliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act will be performed in compliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Artin Goncu, Ph.D http://www.artingoncu.com/ Professor Emeritus, University of Illinois at Chicago College of Education M/C 147 1040 W. Harrison St. Chicago, IL 60607 -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: untitled-[2.1] Url: https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20161109/f9fd7312/attachment.pl -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Chair Search Ad.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 50482 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20161109/f9fd7312/attachment.pdf -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: untitled-[2.3] Url: https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20161109/f9fd7312/attachment-0001.pl From mcole@ucsd.edu Wed Nov 9 20:41:09 2016 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 20:41:09 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Fwd: If You're A Minority In America, The Terror Of This Moment Is Overwhelming In-Reply-To: <010001584c53f0cd-555deb25-62b2-4fbf-b6c7-2d8e56bb91ff-000000@email.amazonses.com> References: <010001584c53f0cd-555deb25-62b2-4fbf-b6c7-2d8e56bb91ff-000000@email.amazonses.com> Message-ID: A particularly relevant story relevant to my elaboration on the way that anti-immigrant fears are playing out in many parts of the U.S. Huw's observation of the increase in attacks on marginalized groups increased after/associated with Brexit. FYI ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Mike Cole Date: Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 7:41 PM Subject: If You're A Minority In America, The Terror Of This Moment Is Overwhelming To: lchcmike@gmail.com [image: The Huffington Post] Mike Cole sent you this article on the Huffington Post. Here's what they said: I saw this on HuffPost and thought you might like it. If You're A Minority In America, The Terror Of This Moment Is Overwhelming Waking up today felt like waking up from a fever dream. Over the past 18 months, minorities have endured an immense amount of collective traum... Read the entire article here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ entry/american-minorities-donald-trump_us_582344d6e4b0e80b02ce3f57 [image: The Huffington Post] Follow HuffPost on Facebook and Twitter: [image: HuffPost on Facebook] [image: HuffPost on Twitter] Get Huffington Post on the Go [image: HuffPost at the Google Play Store] [image: HuffPost on iTunes] [image: HuffPost on iTunes] Know something we don't? E-mail us at dailybrief@huffingtonpost.com From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Thu Nov 10 06:39:53 2016 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2016 14:39:53 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: That other political crisis In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: <1478788792652.41341@iped.uio.no> Hi David, yes, Spain has moved to the right after socialist governments in what in Spain we refer to as bi-partidism: always two main options (in Spain, as I believe in most of Europe, the colours are reversed as compared to US, the socialist-inclined party is red and the right-ish party blue). I see the point of your comparison, but I should say that when Aznar's government won, his campaign, and the way the party (which, you are right, was formed by the most direct heritors of Francoism) presented itself was very different to the now spread populist far-right campaigns. I read now a post at "El Pais" from 1996, a then socialist inclined newspaper (today totally submitted to other powers), which referred to Aznar and his party as "centre-right." Although today PP's (Aznar's party) heritage and profile are evident to everyone in Spain, I do not think the voters at the time (and note that they won by a small margin) perceived Aznar and his party as quite moderate, and even sophisticated, and not as the extremes that the other more clearly fascist-like cases (Trump, Le Pen...) are perceived today. For good or for bad, today's Spanish political landscape is more colourful, with at least two new big forces (one to the left of the once socialists, and one to the right of the latter; the socialists no longer knowing well who they are). So that now there are four colours, purple, red, orange, and blue. We could be closer to the rainbow, though. Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of David Kellogg Sent: 09 November 2016 20:47 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: That other political crisis Thoughtful and care-full as always, Mike. The link you sent wasn't full of errors, but it also wasn't very full of information: it faithfully reflected the questions that most people have (Why, for example, should a friendship between two women be a matter for scandal and street demonstrations?). It also didn't really answer them. But maybe this one will (Greg--if you are not following the scandal through Mark's work on Cheondoism then you might want to give this to your students): http://askakorean.blogspot.com.au/2016/10/the-irrational-downfall-of-park-geun-hye.html Last night I was thinking to myself, with some astonishment, that 2016 represents the first time since 1933 that a major Western country has voted in a far right government with a violent, extraparliamentary base. When Marine Le Pen began "Euro-fascism", I had thought it would probably happen in France or Austria or Switzerland first. The fact that it has happened in the USA (and that it happened through social media but largely without a parliamentary "ground game" of the sort that people on this list were engaged in) astonished me, and I fell asleep thinking that xmca might want to revisit the PPTization of intellectual arguments, the nature of media like twitter, and the ways in which Trump's speeches were constructed on the fly, in order to really understand it. (I keep thinking of his uncanny ability to end every sentence on a fall, except when he is constructing a speech act around a vacuum--"I'm not sayin', but I'm just sayin', y'know?") But this morning when I woke up I realized that it has happened before, and that Alfredo can probably tell us a lot about it. Spain, after years of Francoism, underwent an eight year experiment with social democracy and then voted in a neo-Francoist party under Aznar. Similarly, South Korea, after years of murderous repression under the current president's father and his military academy juniors (Jeon Duhwan and Noh Tae-u, the "Class of 56", who succeeded Bak Jeonghi when he was assassinated) underwent a ten year experiment with something like social democracy--this coincided with my own rather carelessly made decision to settle there--before voting in the current president on a similar neo-authoritarian platform. Something there is about a frantic petty bourgeoisie that loves a wall. Mutatis mutandis. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 4:27 PM, mike cole wrote: > Having worked until time was up, I have had time to go back and read some > of what has been discussed. > > The outcome of the election is there for all to consider and experience in > the weeks and months ahead. > > I attach an article for those who do not (like me) know much about the > current political crisis in South Korea. David will correct the errors in > it i am confident, and it appears to give at least a hint of the turmoil in > that part of the world. > > it can be found here, last time i looked http://www.nytimes.com/2016/ > 11/06/world/asia/south-koreans-ashamed-over-les-secretive-adviser.html > > FYI > > mike > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Thu Nov 10 06:46:04 2016 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2016 14:46:04 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: That other political crisis In-Reply-To: <1478788792652.41341@iped.uio.no> References: , , <1478788792652.41341@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <1478789163461.75410@iped.uio.no> I meant "I do think the voters perceived ... as quite moderate" ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: 10 November 2016 15:39 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: That other political crisis Hi David, yes, Spain has moved to the right after socialist governments in what in Spain we refer to as bi-partidism: always two main options (in Spain, as I believe in most of Europe, the colours are reversed as compared to US, the socialist-inclined party is red and the right-ish party blue). I see the point of your comparison, but I should say that when Aznar's government won, his campaign, and the way the party (which, you are right, was formed by the most direct heritors of Francoism) presented itself was very different to the now spread populist far-right campaigns. I read now a post at "El Pais" from 1996, a then socialist inclined newspaper (today totally submitted to other powers), which referred to Aznar and his party as "centre-right." Although today PP's (Aznar's party) heritage and profile are evident to everyone in Spain, I do not think the voters at the time (and note that they won by a small margin) perceived Aznar and his party as quite moderate, and even sophisticated, and not as the extremes that the other more clearly fascist-like cases (Trump, Le Pen...) are perceived today. For good or for bad, today's Spanish political landscape is more colourful, with at least two new big forces (one to the left of the once socialists, and one to the right of the latter; the socialists no longer knowing well who they are). So that now there are four colours, purple, red, orange, and blue. We could be closer to the rainbow, though. Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of David Kellogg Sent: 09 November 2016 20:47 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: That other political crisis Thoughtful and care-full as always, Mike. The link you sent wasn't full of errors, but it also wasn't very full of information: it faithfully reflected the questions that most people have (Why, for example, should a friendship between two women be a matter for scandal and street demonstrations?). It also didn't really answer them. But maybe this one will (Greg--if you are not following the scandal through Mark's work on Cheondoism then you might want to give this to your students): http://askakorean.blogspot.com.au/2016/10/the-irrational-downfall-of-park-geun-hye.html Last night I was thinking to myself, with some astonishment, that 2016 represents the first time since 1933 that a major Western country has voted in a far right government with a violent, extraparliamentary base. When Marine Le Pen began "Euro-fascism", I had thought it would probably happen in France or Austria or Switzerland first. The fact that it has happened in the USA (and that it happened through social media but largely without a parliamentary "ground game" of the sort that people on this list were engaged in) astonished me, and I fell asleep thinking that xmca might want to revisit the PPTization of intellectual arguments, the nature of media like twitter, and the ways in which Trump's speeches were constructed on the fly, in order to really understand it. (I keep thinking of his uncanny ability to end every sentence on a fall, except when he is constructing a speech act around a vacuum--"I'm not sayin', but I'm just sayin', y'know?") But this morning when I woke up I realized that it has happened before, and that Alfredo can probably tell us a lot about it. Spain, after years of Francoism, underwent an eight year experiment with social democracy and then voted in a neo-Francoist party under Aznar. Similarly, South Korea, after years of murderous repression under the current president's father and his military academy juniors (Jeon Duhwan and Noh Tae-u, the "Class of 56", who succeeded Bak Jeonghi when he was assassinated) underwent a ten year experiment with something like social democracy--this coincided with my own rather carelessly made decision to settle there--before voting in the current president on a similar neo-authoritarian platform. Something there is about a frantic petty bourgeoisie that loves a wall. Mutatis mutandis. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 4:27 PM, mike cole wrote: > Having worked until time was up, I have had time to go back and read some > of what has been discussed. > > The outcome of the election is there for all to consider and experience in > the weeks and months ahead. > > I attach an article for those who do not (like me) know much about the > current political crisis in South Korea. David will correct the errors in > it i am confident, and it appears to give at least a hint of the turmoil in > that part of the world. > > it can be found here, last time i looked http://www.nytimes.com/2016/ > 11/06/world/asia/south-koreans-ashamed-over-les-secretive-adviser.html > > FYI > > mike > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Thu Nov 10 12:04:27 2016 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2016 07:04:27 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: That other political crisis In-Reply-To: <1478789163461.75410@iped.uio.no> References: <1478788792652.41341@iped.uio.no> <1478789163461.75410@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Yes, I remember Aznar won by a small margin and the Popular were eventually repudiated by a HUGE popular movement (when they tried to pin the Madrid bombings on ETA just before an election). The same thing is now happening in South Korea: we are starting to emerge from the same dark tunnel which America has just entered: http://askakorean.blogspot.com.au/2016/11/the-days-ahead.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook I think that every far right movement (including Hitler's) is salad dressing. It's an emulsion of two basically incompatible fluids: extra-parliamentary mass terror and stable, board-room corporate bureaucratism, and you can shake these things together for a while with money and power but they will start to separate out almost immediately. There is already some question in my mind to what extent Trump is a sincere white nationalist and to what extent he just thinks he can harness the white nationalist whirlwind as his fellow Republicans tried to harness him. We know, for example, that Trump's anti-Semitism is quite insincere--a real anti-Semite would not allow his daughter to marry a Jew and convert to Judaism. He can't harness them, of course; but he can and he will protect them, and they will commit outrages that will turn the whole country against the lot. Wasn't it amazing that the ambush of police officers in Iowa by a WHITE nationalist did not make the national conversation, did absolutely nothing to alter the outcome in a key state? It was a vital opportunity to drive a wedge between Trump and the white nationalists, and the Democrats and the media simply let it go. THAT would not have happened in Spain or in South Korea. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 1:46 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > I meant "I do think the voters perceived ... as quite moderate" > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > Sent: 10 November 2016 15:39 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: That other political crisis > > Hi David, > > yes, Spain has moved to the right after socialist governments in what in > Spain we refer to as bi-partidism: always two main options (in Spain, as I > believe in most of Europe, the colours are reversed as compared to US, the > socialist-inclined party is red and the right-ish party blue). > > I see the point of your comparison, but I should say that when Aznar's > government won, his campaign, and the way the party (which, you are right, > was formed by the most direct heritors of Francoism) presented itself was > very different to the now spread populist far-right campaigns. I read now a > post at "El Pais" from 1996, a then socialist inclined newspaper (today > totally submitted to other powers), which referred to Aznar and his party > as "centre-right." Although today PP's (Aznar's party) heritage and profile > are evident to everyone in Spain, I do not think the voters at the time > (and note that they won by a small margin) perceived Aznar and his party as > quite moderate, and even sophisticated, and not as the extremes that the > other more clearly fascist-like cases (Trump, Le Pen...) are perceived > today. > > For good or for bad, today's Spanish political landscape is more > colourful, with at least two new big forces (one to the left of the once > socialists, and one to the right of the latter; the socialists no longer > knowing well who they are). So that now there are four colours, purple, > red, orange, and blue. We could be closer to the rainbow, though. > > Alfredo > > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of David Kellogg > Sent: 09 November 2016 20:47 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: That other political crisis > > Thoughtful and care-full as always, Mike. The link you sent wasn't full of > errors, but it also wasn't very full of information: it faithfully > reflected the questions that most people have (Why, for example, should a > friendship between two women be a matter for scandal and street > demonstrations?). It also didn't really answer them. > > But maybe this one will (Greg--if you are not following the scandal through > Mark's work on Cheondoism then you might want to give this to your > students): > > http://askakorean.blogspot.com.au/2016/10/the-irrational- > downfall-of-park-geun-hye.html > > Last night I was thinking to myself, with some astonishment, that 2016 > represents the first time since 1933 that a major Western country has voted > in a far right government with a violent, extraparliamentary base. When > Marine Le Pen began "Euro-fascism", I had thought it would probably happen > in France or Austria or Switzerland first. The fact that it has happened in > the USA (and that it happened through social media but largely without a > parliamentary "ground game" of the sort that people on this list were > engaged in) astonished me, and I fell asleep thinking that xmca might want > to revisit the PPTization of intellectual arguments, the nature of media > like twitter, and the ways in which Trump's speeches were constructed on > the fly, in order to really understand it. (I keep thinking of his uncanny > ability to end every sentence on a fall, except when he is constructing > a speech act around a vacuum--"I'm not sayin', but I'm just sayin', > y'know?") > > But this morning when I woke up I realized that it has happened before, and > that Alfredo can probably tell us a lot about it. Spain, after years of > Francoism, underwent an eight year experiment with social democracy and > then voted in a neo-Francoist party under Aznar. Similarly, South Korea, > after years of murderous repression under the current president's father > and his military academy juniors (Jeon Duhwan and Noh Tae-u, the "Class of > 56", who succeeded Bak Jeonghi when he was assassinated) underwent a ten > year experiment with something like social democracy--this coincided with > my own rather carelessly made decision to settle there--before voting in > the current president on a similar neo-authoritarian platform. Something > there is about a frantic petty bourgeoisie that loves a wall. > > Mutatis mutandis. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > > On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 4:27 PM, mike cole wrote: > > > Having worked until time was up, I have had time to go back and read some > > of what has been discussed. > > > > The outcome of the election is there for all to consider and experience > in > > the weeks and months ahead. > > > > I attach an article for those who do not (like me) know much about the > > current political crisis in South Korea. David will correct the errors in > > it i am confident, and it appears to give at least a hint of the turmoil > in > > that part of the world. > > > > it can be found here, last time i looked http://www.nytimes.com/2016/ > > 11/06/world/asia/south-koreans-ashamed-over-les-secretive-adviser.html > > > > FYI > > > > mike > > > > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Thu Nov 10 12:27:01 2016 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2016 07:27:01 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Communication, Co-generalization, and Crises In-Reply-To: <1478726316083.91858@iped.uio.no> References: <1478726316083.91858@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Alfredo: The quote from Lenin is also used in Chapter Two of Thinking and Speech, where Vygotsky is attacking the "purely logical" construction of child autism in Piaget and Freud. Why does Vygotsky stress that the child is born a primitive communist; why does he insist that the child's first model of consciousness is that since we all share the world of objects we must also share the world of thoughts constructed on these objects? But you are right. I AM trying to get Vygotsky to do new work. To tell you the truth, I am tired of being a paleo-Vygotskyan, of reacting to excessively metaphorical and loose readings of Vygotsky with a strictly literal, fundamentalist reading. Vygotsky was not a fundamentalist--the reason he keeps changing his terminology is that he is deeply dissatisfied, and I think it's true, as he says at the beginning of Thinking and Speech, that he really did have to start over several times. On the other hand, I don't agree that he started over from scratch, and I certainly don't think that he was a failed Gestaltist; in fact, I agree strongly with Mike, that he saw himself as a real Gestaltist, but to him that meant not being a reductionist, just as being a real materialist meant being a real dialectician (any physicist can be a materialist, but it takes a Marxist to be a materialist AND a psychologist). Bernstein asks: How does the outside get inside, and how is what is inside realized in what is outside? To put it in terms that an infant might understand, once the child figures out that we may sleep on the same bed but we dream different dreams, how does the child ACTUALLY manage to construct a shared world of thoughts--word values--constructed on objects? At the end of Chapter Five of HDHMF, Vygotsky gives three kinds of "intro-volution": a scar, a "verbalization", and a holistic import of the whole system of signs. Word values are the latter. But like an eye, only the whole system is useful: part of the system is useless (so for example, negation doesn't do anything unless you have a system of Finite operators in place, and vowels are not particularly useful until you know the consonants). It seems to me that a long period of crisis-ridden co-generalizations might give a possible answer. And yes, Vygotsky does describe this, although mostly he stresses how long it takes for the child to actually master the co-generalization "for himself" and not simply "for others". David Kellogg Macquarie University On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 8:18 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > David, all, > > I too agree that we may sometimes overstate the shifts in Vygotsky's > writing, though I think that, by far, what you most often find in the > literature is precisely the opposite: writings in which Vygotsky's work is > presented as if it had grown in a steady and cumulative fashion, making it > look as if all concepts developed through his last 10 years formed part of > a more or less consistent whole. > > Be it as it may, and only again thanking you most heartfully for your > wonderful work and for sharing it with us, I was wondering whether there is > no such an overstatement of the old in the new in the comments that are > attached to the lecture that you shared with us. I am referring to the part > where you discuss the distinction between generalisation > (co-generalization) and communication or interaction. > > In the text you shared with us, you write that, one apparently plausible > way to understand that difference between concepts is that > > "... ?generalization? is really ?inter-generalization?, because it is > between the child and the environment, and ?interaction? is really > ?intra-generalization??within the child" > > I was surprised by such a reading, mostly because I did not find evidence > in the text that you shared that would be the case. I particularly found it > difficult to see that "interaction" is meant to be "intra-generalisation", > particularly when I hear Vygotsky speaking in quite different terms (as per > the translation you offered us). Thus, in the text you shared, we hear > Vygotsky saying that, > > "human consciousness emerges, grows and changes in the interaction between > people, i.e. of the fact that the whole business does not occur in such a > way that everyone grows his own consciousness in his own head and then > communicates the final product, but that instead consciousness grows and > creates its own basic functions through the process of interaction." > > And again later that: > > I do not hear him speaking of some consciousness that is intra-individual > as the result of being in interaction, but rather that consciousness GROWS > AND CREATES ITS OWN BASIC FUNCTIONS through the process of interaction. If > generalisation is one such function, > > and according to the interpretation mentioned above, this would translate > something like: "consciousness grows and creates co-generalization in the > process of intra-generalisation". > > I had written the lines above when David had not yet sent a new e-mail > correcting: generalisation is intra- interaction is inter-... But the > problem to me remains the same: it does not seem to me that Vygotsky is > using those terms, I don?t feel the way the lecture is organized is > suggesting an intra and extra, an inside and outside divide. And so I think > that David?s interpretation may be in this case an example of doing some > extra work to make Vygotsky?s statements fit earlier phases of his writing. > > If I read the lecture without an intra- inter- distinction underlying the > difference between generalization and interaction, then what Vygotsky seems > to be describing is a thinking that has generalization and communication as > to irreducibly connected moments, and that is the way he seems to > explicitly describe it, where he states speech as connected to (at the same > time) to two aspects: consciousness (or ?a mode of reflecting reality?) and > interaction. > > ?Co-generalization also constitutes, as Lenin points out, a way of > reflecting reality different in principle, not a dead mirror-like copy, but > a zig-zagging act which imposes a flight from reality and a return to it, > which includes within itself a bit of fantasy, and speech is, on the one > hand linked to interaction, but on the other hand linked to a new mode of > reflecting reality? > > The passage is clearly reminiscence to another passage of the same period > at the end of Thinking and Speech, where he paraphrases Feuerbach in > stating that the word is impossible for one, and only possible for two. In > neither case I think there is talk about internal and external, a talk that > comes in the third consideration very clearly. But there I don?t think > communication stands for internal, and generalization for external (or > vice-versa). Rather, I think that the hypothesis that the relation between > the two (communication/interaction and generalization) is one similar to > the Spinozan view of mind and body, both being manifestations of one and > the same substance, seems to fit better the lecture. > > Of course, I may have totally misread you, David; and certainly I have not > a centesimal part of your experience with Vygotsky?s writing. But the worst > thing that can happen to me if I am wrong is that I?ll learn more. > > Alfredo > > > > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of David Kellogg > Sent: 09 November 2016 02:55 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Communication, Co-generalization, and Crises > > Huw: > > > I think in general we tend to overstate the differences between Vygotsky's > thinking in different periods, because we notice that he changes his > wordings and we assume that means he has changed his mind. We forget that > Vygotsky steals most of his words from other people ("egocentric speech", > "pseudoconcept", "mediation", "neoformation", etc.) and then works them > into his own system of concepts, and it's the system of concepts that is > really new, not the words. > > > So for example Yasnitsky and Van der Veer claim that Vygotsky gave up > instrumentalism, abandoned the distinction between higher and lower > psychological functions, and tried to become a Gestaltist, and failed. None > of this is true, as far as I can tell. The final lectures--right up to the > one I sent around--have a central role for word meanings, maintain that the > higher psychological functions are specifically human and the main > expanadum, and include some pretty harsh criticisms of the Gestaltists, who > were by then showing distinctly Nazi tendencies. > > > But it is certainly true that the words change, and some of the words that > have caused the most trouble--interestingly enough--disappear. For example, > Vygotsky stops using the word "reaction", he no longer talks about > "vrashevaniye" or "introvolution", and he only uses the word "internalize" > once, when he is talking about a whole system of concepts (not when he is > talking about reactions). So the question arises--what takes its place? > > > Here's what we put in the "Thinking at School Age" chapter that I sent > around. Criticisms from Russophones? > > > Vygotsky contrasts ????????? (?generalization?) and ??????? > (?communication?, ?contact?, ?interaction?). But if we translate these > terms as ?generalization? and ?communication? respectively, we obscure the > fact that they have the same root: ?commonality? or ?sharing?. > > > In Russian, ?? is a preposition, meaning ?about? or ?of?, so we might > render this contrast as ?about-communication? or ?meta-communication? vs. > ?communication?. But this would allow the sociological, interpersonal side > of Vygotsky?s meaning to eclipse the psychological, intra-personal side. > > > Another way to put it would be to say that ?generalization? is really > ?inter-generalization?, because it is between the child and the > environment, and ?interaction? is really ?intra-generalization??within the > child. The child derives intra-mental generalizations through a process of > inter-personal communications, by interaction using shared word values > within a speech community. This ?community generalization? or ?common > generalization? or ?co-generalization? for short is what is enabled by word > meanings shared within the speech community. These meanings the child at > first only partially shares. > > > This word ????????? usually translated as ?generalization?. Because this > turns out to be a very important point in this particular lecture and in > the lectures that follow, we will take the liberty of translating as > ?co-generalization?. A ?co-generalization? is a generalization about > generalizations made by the child through construing the shared > generalizations of word values in a speech community. > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 11:15 AM, Huw Lloyd > wrote: > > > Where does 'co-generalization' come from, David? Perhaps a good carry > over > > from your consideration of political milieu is the factor of tension in > > development: tension to foster attention, a socialised 'will' if you > like. > > > > Best, > > Huw > > > > On 7 November 2016 at 21:16, David Kellogg wrote: > > > > > Well, of course, Peg is really right--or at least half right. That is, > > the > > > American elections are not just a plebiscite on sexual assault, and > using > > > the term "sexual predator" reduces the whole thing to the kind of > > > "tu quoques" argumentation which makes up the whole of the Republican > > case > > > these days. Actually, for the first time in my memory, the American > > > elections are about real issues that actually touch the lives of > ordinary > > > people, namely sexism, racism, and the impunity conferred by real fame > > and > > > largely imaginary wealth. > > > > > > But I would like to know that the other half is also right: that is, > that > > > xmca's normal concerns with mind, culture, and activity do not require > > > radio silence in times of crisis. Let me talk about another crisis and > > see. > > > Unlike the USA, South Korea has had, since 1949, six different > > > constitutions. Until very recently (1997) the peaceful transfer of > power > > > was the exception and not the rule: governments changed if and only if > > > people took matters into their own hands, either through mass > > > demonstrations or violent military coups or both (the one apparent > > > exception was when the current president's father, Bak Jeonghi, was > > forced > > > to call an election by the Nixon administration: on the verge of losing > > to > > > Kim Daejeong, he peacefully overthrew himself instead). > > > > > > Now, Vygotsky also describes development in terms of six crises (Birth, > > > One, Three, Seven, Thirteen and Seventeen) and five more or less stable > > > periods of equilibrium (Infancy, Early Childhood, Preschool, School > Age, > > > Adolescence). In fact, the Zoped (assuming that "ped" means pedological > > and > > > not pedagogical) really refers to the functions that belong to the NEXT > > > zone of development and not the actual one: if a child can simply take > > over > > > functions from the environment and make them his or her own, then > almost > > by > > > definition they are functions that belong to the zone of actual, and > not > > > the zone of proximal, development. That means that for every stable > > period, > > > the Zoped is going to be a crisis (and of course that, along with > > > prolepsis, accounts for the unpredictability of the Zoped which Peg > > noted). > > > > > > Korean crises not when people are overexploited and ruthlessly > > suppressed; > > > that is a much better description of the stable periods in Korean > > history. > > > Crises happen just when people become superproductive and try to > > > self-emancipate. I think crises of development in the child also happen > > the > > > same way: that is, during normal periods, the environment is > > communicating > > > with the child and the child is taking over co-generalizations by > > > restructuring them to fit the child's extant psychological system. But > > > Vygotsky says that there are moments when this cannot happen, because > the > > > psychological system itself must be restructured: the central > > neoformation > > > dissolves the social situation of development. > > > > > > During normal times, the environment is the source of development and > the > > > child's personality is only the site of development: but during these > > crazy > > > crises (the crisis of "autonomous speech", the crisis of the > negativistic > > > "proto will", the crisis of the affected, manneristic, clownish > > > "proto-self"), it is almost as if the child, superproductive and > active, > > > wants to "turn the tables", transforming the personality into the > source > > of > > > development and adapting the environment to it instead. > > > > > > One of the most puzzling things in Vygotsky's last lectures is the > > Central > > > Line of Development. On the one hand, these are always forms > > > of "communication" and "co-generalization". And on the other, because > > each > > > Neoformation is entirely new, what is Central in one period is > Peripheral > > > in the next: perception, for example, is the maximally developing > > function > > > in Infancy, but memory is the leading function in Preschool. Speech is > a > > > Central Line of Development in early childhood but Thinking in School > > Age. > > > How can BOTH of these things be true? > > > > > > It seems to me that both of them are true.Communication represents > > contact > > > with the social environment, and this is always foregrounded during > > stable > > > periods and backgrounded during crises. Co-generalization represents > what > > > we use to call "internalization", and this is foregrounded during > crises > > > and backgrounded during stable periods. In addition, the content of the > > > communication and co-generalization changes as the child develops, from > > > doing things in Infancy, to saying things in Early Childhood, to > feeling > > in > > > Preschool, and to thinking in School Age. When co-generalization > becomes > > > super-productive, we get conscious awareness, and with awareness, > > crisis. > > > With crises, worlds change. > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > From mcole@ucsd.edu Fri Nov 11 07:27:46 2016 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2016 07:27:46 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Fwd: Postdoc positions in Oxford In-Reply-To: <5D55A1E7-AE6B-4417-8674-429C37507195@anthro.ox.ac.uk> References: <5D55A1E7-AE6B-4417-8674-429C37507195@anthro.ox.ac.uk> Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: *Harvey Whitehouse* Date: Friday, November 11, 2016 Subject: Postdoc positions in Oxford To: COG-SCI-REL-L@jiscmail.ac.uk Dear Colleagues, We are seeking to employ three Postdoctoral Researchers as part of a new research project: ?Cognitive and Cultural Foundations of Morality? funded by the Templeton World Charity Foundation and led by myself and Dr Jonathan Jong. This project aims to investigate the ways in which moral and religious beliefs have co-evolved around the world, both in terms of biological and cultural evolution. It consists of (a) one large-scale cross-cultural survey (30-50 countries) on religion and morality, and (b) a series of lab- and field experiments on the ways in which basic cognitive mechanisms interact with cultural environments to produce moral and religious beliefs. The postholders will primarily be involved in the design and implementation of cross-cultural experiments, in collaboration with the Project Leaders, other staff, and external collaborators. They may also contribute to the design and implementation of the cross-cultural survey. These positions involve extensive fieldwork outside of the UK, in a site of the postholder?s choosing. You must have completed or be in the final stages of a PhD in Social, Experimental, or Cross-cultural Psychology, Cognitive Anthropology, or a related discipline, with substantial experience in designing and conducting lab and/or field psychology experiments. You will have quantitative statistical skills and the ability to travel abroad for sustained periods of fieldwork. For further details, including the project summary, job description and selection criteria, posted here: http://www.jobs.ac.uk/job/AVJ687/postdoctoral-researcher-in-cognitive- anthropology/ The closing date for applications is 12.00 noon on Thursday 8 December 2016. All best, Harvey ___ Professor Harvey Whitehouse Chair of Social Anthropology Fellow of Magdalen College Director of the Institute of Cognitive and Evolutionary Anthropology University of Oxford 51-53 Banbury Road Oxford OX2 6PE http://www.harveywhitehouse.com https://www.icea.ox.ac.uk https://camoxford.org From lpscholar2@gmail.com Fri Nov 11 10:35:11 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2016 10:35:11 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> 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 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 > on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > 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 > on behalf of mike cole > 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 > > 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 > > on behalf of 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 > > > 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 > > 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 > > 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach it as PDF. > > > ??Good read! > > > > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > > > > > > From vwilk@inf.shizuoka.ac.jp Fri Nov 11 13:42:47 2016 From: vwilk@inf.shizuoka.ac.jp (valerie A. Wilkinson) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2016 06:42:47 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse In-Reply-To: <00ab01d235fe$c29c1560$47d44020$@edu> References: <1477604046100.32976@iped.uio.no> <1 477637094283.80763@iped.uio.no> <1477662717568.90322@iped.uio.no> <1CF09B3A-DF07-453 8-A198-FDB1B1EDE432@gmail.com> <58174c10.4223620a.cb56a.39b6@mx.google.com> <004801d234 47$4aef6110$e0ce2330$@att.net> <581a026f.0f08620a.9bde9.a672@mx.goo gle.com> <581b5f69.44da420a.50c17.bb2d@mx.google.com> <00ab01d235fe$c29c1560$47d44020$@edu> Message-ID: <004301d23c64$8b669e00$a233da00$@inf.shizuoka.ac.jp> Hello. This is Vandy@GST. There is a narrative here well worth the review time to sort it out. Vera's voice (below) summing up a) the process time b) the difference between debate and share and solo authored statements in the ecology here; whereas articles in MCA show a better gender/collaborative balance. I put GST on my "moniker" so I will *channel* through Gregory Bateson (though GST "starts" with Bertalanffy). Rigor and Imagination. Gregory Bateson is ANECDOTAL. I'm thinking of the dolphin who exhibited "eight conspicuous pieces of behavior of which four were new and never before observed in this species of animal, From the animal's point of view, there is a jump, a discontinuity, between the logical types." (Mind and Nature 137). A famous "shortest verse" in an ancient collection of documents is, "Jesus wept." A most conspicuous shorted sentence in the account of the dolphin-trainer relationship is "Unearned fish!" To preserve the interspecies relationship the trainer had to break the rules. I am going through the Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse to find an image that struck me. The review goes back to 10/25. Just focusing on the Analysis of Gender thread which emerged ... on 10/28 with Annalisa Aguilar's " [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse" the weaving of the introduced thread "Analysis" with the thread "Time for a generational change" required some members to reply to both for a few exchanges. Then we were into the remembered "history" for some days. I haven't finished my review, which I have to do to find the bit someone said, but then I balled up the word document I was using for my time-line of memos, a most generous sorting, once we got into the history of gender, but suddenly, and this was conspicuous, I put Logic as the subject line for the letter by which I sent the doc. as an attachment. So here is what's bugging me about the discussion of logic. "Right brain / left brain processing" is a metaphor for the electric-hologram processing of the brain, since it is not so simple as the physical left and right hemisphere with the corpus callosum which communicates and integrates the two. BUT WE HAVE TO HAVE IMAGES TO BE ABLE TO HAVE A CONVERSATION AT ALL. Economy comes from the Greek word "oikos" so the model of economy from the git-go is domestic, with the helpers, family, slaves, hired-hands, concubines and all of that ... or don't! What a tangle, just to get a global interconnected term. Some logic is sequential and hierarchical, some logic is fractal, analogic. "Left brain thinking" is summative, procedural, methodical while "Right brain" is generative, creative, diverse, developmental, intuitive. We can easily see we need both styles, or if we embrace multiple intelligences - all styles, the whole "gestalt". I've patched in a few words because I don't even have time to write this note, let alone finish my review - maybe sometime this weekend... BUT clearly it is not a male/female thing at all - but look at the I Ching which starts with six solid lines, the image a STALLION the CREATIVE and the second pattern is six broken lines, the image a MARE, and the word is RECEPTIVE. US ego-centric culture all put-out; Japan group-center is all take-in. I have to work in this world and after years of having a strange problem that I couldn't put my finger on, I suddenly notice that ALL my interlocutors view their relationship with me as 1-1 personal and private. There is no group or team here. This goes right the way back to year 2000 when I want to put up a poster for the event sponsored by my class and admin wouldn't approve the poster put up by a full professor for an event produced by a required class BECAUSE it was private. I thought that was exactly what it was not. Who do I complain to? End of rant. VAW -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Vera John-Steiner Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 3:19 To: 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse The low vocal participation of women in xmca discussions may be partly a reflection of the genre. These are solo authored messages which tend to debate theoretical interpretations. Articles in Mind, Culture and Activity show a better gender balance, they are also frequently written collaboratively. Feminist literature has emphasized relational issues as crucial in women's roles. In our own CHAT writings we have also discussed the importance of interdependence. Perhaps if we could find a way to share more and debate less we might improve the balance. In my own case, I find that I need some reflection time before I am ready to enter a debate and by the time I am ready, the topic of discussion has shifted. And then the responses are few if any. This makes me feel irrelevant. I am also of a generation of women who had to prove that we belonged in academia, and that we had something to contribute to theory. In looking over an article I wrote in 1999 on Sociocultural and Feminist Theory, I find references to studies which reveal that in problem-solving groups "females engage in more maintenance or socioemotional behaviors, while males generate more ideas(Aries,1996)." We are still engaged in shifting this balance which is why consider this discussion a healthy and helpful one. Vera -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Peter Smagorinsky Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 10:36 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse Is it perhaps telling that Mike's observation that the xmca discussion is dominated by men has largely been taken up by men? And that Jake's points have been taken up, in my view, somewhat dismissively and at abstract levels rather than at the immediate level at which the problem is located? As a White U.S. male, I consider myself more problem than solution, of which I have none other than to try to listen. But I suspect that this topic has already been shut down in terms of achieving the more equitable balance across the gender and sexuality spectrum of participation. The very problems identified as the topic of discussion appear to me to be replicated in the discussion that has followed. -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 12:02 PM To: Rein Raud ; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse Hi Rein, Your question opens up a direction I want to follow in your leading question. Using your insight on *ity* in previous posts (that have entered my awareness and keep returning and *resuming* a presence in my reflections). We can say we are talking about masculin*ity and feminin*ity as being expressed as generalities in our cultured words and worlds. This involves *logic* and may include logic of feminin*ity as counterparts of the logic of masculin*ity. This is a turn in the conversation. I would suggest we are possibly turning to the ethical dimension as primary. This would include the general logic of (ForGiving) and also the general logic of *hollowed-out* shallow neo-liberal general*ites. I will just repeat this is not expressing the image of two sides of the same coin. The coin image implies two *independent* sides fused in a material stratum (the coin). I hear the *ity* as interrelation, intertwining, chiasm, *each IN the other. I am wondering (with Merleau-Ponty) if this theme also expresses the 3 aspects of the play of activity-gap-passivity or the reverse as passivity-gap-activity as playing out and being expressed in the images of masculin*ity and feminin*ity. The breath of inspiration-gap-expiration or looking-gap-seeing. In the oikos realm the image of the dance of *marriage* as ethical philosophy. For our moment in history to *resume* these themes once again for the first time. The mystery of the gap Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Rein Raud Sent: November 3, 2016 8:05 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Analysis of Gender in early xmca discourse Jacob and Greg, Please clarify what do you have in mind when saying that ?logic is gendered?. In order for that sentence (or any other) to be correct or incorrect you already need what I understand should be called ?logic?, i.e. general rules for judging an argument in a context. Does ?logic is gendered? mean that ?logic? is something that representatives of a specific gender have invented f.ex. in order to subdue other genders, or that each gender has its own logic? By the way, I don?t believe there are culture-independent genders, i.e. it means something different to have been called ?man? in ancient Greece or India than f ex in the world of today, so there is certainly a point in claiming that the system of genders is itself gendered, in other words, what cultures have ?naturalized? as divisions into genders are more often than not constructions erected by a gender group in order to dominate others. Such construction, I would argue, can only be taken down with arguments that follow a logic which itself is not gendered, because if it were, it would be a contestant in the field, not the referee. With best wishes, Rein > On 03 Nov 2016, at 16:30, Jacob McWilliams wrote: > > There's no doubt that "logic," as an outgrowth of objectivist, > rationalist epistemology, is gendered--after all, if theorists wants > us to believe that all _other_ epistemologies are socially > constructed, then it follows that objectivism is too. And it's > constructed to benefit those in power--i.e., people who think like, and commonly are, white men. > > Lots of feminist theorists have written about this. Donna Haraway took > us on a wild ride through science's logic fetish back in the 1980s: > http://www.jstor.org/stable/3178066?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents. > > Lots of feminists have written about this. Sadly, most folks in most > academic departments are appallingly unfamiliar with their work. Sadly > but unsurprisingly. > > Not to beat the proverbial dead horse, but several listserv > members--including me--have tried to introduce this position re: logic > in prior xmca threads. The position has mostly either been ignored or > loudly rejected out of hand by more vocal participants on this listserv. > > > -- > > > Jacob McWilliams > Learning Sciences & Human Development Program University of Colorado > Boulder j.mcwilliams@colorado.edu > > > > On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 8:12 AM, Greg Mcverry wrote: > >> I want to bring a call back to the idea of logic and gender. >> >> Someone in the thread noted that "academic discourse" wasn't about >> winning but simply prevailing logic. Anna commented back you could be >> logical and not be a "jerk" about it. >> >> Maybe both statements can be true. >> >> White males may not excel in this type of logic simply based on their >> privilege. Though I am sure privilege plays a huge role. >> >> Could it be the Western tradition of logic is itself rooted in gender >> inequality? It is a field a few thousand years old that was made up >> by white men arguing "logically" with other white men. Naturally the >> discourse practices would signify and reinforce membership within these circles. >> Exclusion of underrepresented voices has influence how the concept of >> "logic" has evolved. >> >> I keep thinking about "logic" and argumentation as I begin to >> interact with scholars outside of the US. We have put a strong >> emphasis on arguing in our >> K12 curriculum. Yet when I talk to people from other countries they >> note a word for "argumentative writing" or "argumentation" does not >> really exist in their language. Which as we know influences >> thought...which influences language..and both contribute to culture and activity. >> >> So could it be the gender bias that has existed in the listserv is a >> symptom of stressing a definition of "logic" maybe engendered. Notice >> the talk in our models of logic have been proving who is right and >> who is wrong? What translation is best for example. >> >> It is one individual "proving" he is right rather than they reaching >> a consensus on what is right. >> >> >> >> On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 12:47 AM Annalisa Aguilar wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> >>> Sometimes synchronicity is spooky. I spied this in the Guardian just now. >>> >>> >>> https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/nov/02/ >> silicon-valley-sexism-diversity-valerie-aurora-frame-shift >>> >>> >>> In reply to Maria-Cristina, it's difficult to have work-life balance >>> when the division of the personal and the public worlds exists. From >>> what is described in biased workplaces (in article above), it's >>> necessary to have some sort of protective wall, if only to survive another day. >>> >>> >>> The irony is that people become competitive in the work place >>> because of >> a >>> perceived scarcity of resources, but in technology it seems to me to >>> be a perceived scarcity of privileges. I have never understood how >>> sitting at >> a >>> keyboard is somehow "hard work." I know it requires effort and >> intellectual >>> effort in particular, but it's not like working on a farm, where >>> solving problems with scarce resources is always the norm. Think bricolage. >>> >>> >>> Maybe this perceived scarcity is the same in academia. Having a >>> worldview that the field of knowledge is infinite, seems to be, >>> looking from the outside. But perhaps I am unaware of the bricolage >>> people do inside the university. I do not mean to diminish truly hard work. >>> >>> >>> Anyway, these resources are culled from the public world to feed the >>> personal world in the end, isn't that the true motivation? To >>> protect >> home >>> and hearth when we aren't talking about invading hoards on longboats >>> shooting flaming arrows at our huts shouldn't carry that same >>> impending fear, dread, and uncertainty. But sometimes it seems to >>> feel that way, >> that >>> people behave with that same ferocity of a struggle to the death. >>> >>> >>> It is an illusion, a misperception. But this misperception has its >>> apparent reality that creates real fear in people. As if their lives >> didn't >>> matter and unbalanced equations must be attacked with quadratic >> solutions, >>> to set the matter straight. >>> >>> >>> Instead, a shared effort is required to permit that defensiveness, >>> born >> of >>> competition, to dissipate. In order to do that, people have to feel safe. >>> So how is safety created in the spaces? Spaces free of ridicule and >>> non-acceptance. Then, isn't that what every human being desires and >>> requires to flourish? Interesting that that need has no bias. >>> >>> >>> That is why I admire Aurora so much. I really think that she is on >>> to something. >>> >>> >>> Larry, rather than reversibility, I'd prefer receptivity or reciprocity. >>> >>> >>> And rather than finer nature, I'd prefer true nature (with an idea >>> that being competitive, biased, prejudiced, unethical etc, are >>> actually artificial constructs, that when obstructions have been >>> lifted, what is natural is to balance what is there (like >>> homeostasis), free from hindrances. >>> >>> >>> In order for us to recognize what is fullness in ourselves, fullness >>> must already be present within us, otherwise we could not recognize >>> it, we wouldn't have affinity toward it. So if we can remove the >>> notion of scarcity, then the fullness of who and what we are, which >>> is already >> there, >>> will be evident. It will have an appearance of emerging from >>> nothing, but it's really just appearing like a tree in the fog that >>> was standing quiet all along, and all that was required was for the fog to lift. >>> >>> >>> Anyway, I want to lastly add that I bring up demand over production, >> which >>> Maria Cristina had shown some interest. The idea is that we have >>> demands which actually decide production, and these demands are >>> socially based, because we have social natures. Even if we are >>> talking about biological demands like food and shelter, early >>> childcare, regardless, in those >> cases >>> there is a social aspect to them. >>> >>> >>> Looking through the other end of the telescope, when we consider >>> demand first rather than production, things look interestingly >>> different. If we include things in demand in that exploration >>> (rather than things in production), we begin to see the social life >>> of things, we start to see >> how >>> these items go in and out of commodification, where objects have >>> auras of value that reside outside of monetary value and markets. >>> >>> >>> Let's consider your dining room table. You bought it in a furniture >> store, >>> or perhaps online, or from a thrift store or garage sale, maybe it >>> was a gift. But as long as you own it, you don't consider the market >>> value of your dining room table, or its appreciating value if say it >>> was made by a famous furniture maker where in 20-30 years you'll see >>> those items appraised on The Antiques Road Show; at least not until >>> you decide you don't want to own it anymore. During that time of >>> possession, the dining room table starts to have different value, a >>> social value, which is determined by its demand, or should I say >>> demand for it. It supports the family by providing a comfortable >>> place to eat meals. A place for kids to do homework. A place to play >>> card games. Or to cut a dress pattern from fabric, etc. All of these >>> are domestic activities, but they have no production value in terms of tables. You only need one dining room table. >>> Still, the table will generate value in the household, because of >>> the activities that the table supports, even if it is to bring >>> people >> together >>> at holidays, or even if it has only sentimental value, say if the >>> table >> is >>> damaged and must be repaired, or it has been moved because the room >>> is being painted. This description depicts the social life of the >>> dining >> room >>> table. Which is based upon its demand, not its production. >>> >>> >>> Anyway, as I said previously, my debt for these thought experiments >>> comes from Arjun Appadurai. If anyone is interested. >>> >>> >>> Maria Cristina makes a great point considering work life and living >>> life as two types of activity systems and thinking about their >>> inherent contradictions. What comes from this tension that transcends the two? >>> (Might this exploration echo the comparison between production and >> demand?) >>> Is Maria Cristina correct that there hasn't been much discussion in >>> this area? if so, I'd like to learn more about that. >>> >>> >>> Great conversations. Thanks. >>> >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> >>> Annalisa >>> >> From margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu Sat Nov 12 12:30:57 2016 From: margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu (Margaret A Eisenhart) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2016 20:30:57 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> 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" 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 >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 >> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil >> 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 >> on behalf of mike cole >> 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 >>> > >> 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 >> >> > on behalf of 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 >>> > >> > 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> > > 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> > > 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach it as >>PDF. >> > > ??Good read! >> > > >> > > >> > > Alfredo >> > > >> > > >> > >> > >> >> > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Sat Nov 12 14:46:36 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2016 14:46:36 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> Message-ID: <58279bcc.8605430a.a3fd0.c7d5@mx.google.com> Welcome Margaret and Carrie, You asked for possible alternative lens for viewing your data that you were interpreting. I will offer a reflection on the contrast between the notion of [works] and [objects] as resources. A [work] is always referring to the human touch: the word itself suggests this human touch, for a work is always a work of man [or God]. An [object] on the other hand can be a work or can be a natural object. To use the word [object] in reference to a [work] blurs the boundary markings. One needs to understand the [work] not as an object but *as* a [work]. The deciphering or interpreting processes generate the meaning *of* the [work]. How might this make a difference in modes of thought? An exemplar is a work of literature. A work of literature is not an object we understand by conceptualizing or analyzing the work. The work is a *voice* and *through* hearing [rather than the mode of seeing] we *understand* the work. Notice the emphasis and scope shift from the object as mode of analyzing towards the work as speaking. An alternative mode of reflection Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Margaret A Eisenhart Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2016 12:33 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started 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" 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 >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 >> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil >> 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 >> on behalf of mike cole >> 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 >>> > >> 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 >> >> > on behalf of 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 >>> > >> > 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> > > 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> > > 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach it as >>PDF. >> > > ??Good read! >> > > >> > > >> > > Alfredo >> > > >> > > >> > >> > >> >> > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Sat Nov 12 21:54:20 2016 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2016 16:54:20 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: <58279bcc.8605430a.a3fd0.c7d5@mx.google.com> References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <58279bcc.8605430a.a3fd0.c7d5@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Larry: The article doesn't use "object" at all. The word "work" is used to refer to classwork or schoolwork done by high school students. I sometimes work with data from infants, toddlers, and preschoolers, so I can't really afford the belief that theories we use in research have to be understandable to our research subjects in every detail; I think it's perfectly okay to use a theory as a "lens" so long as you understand that you are the one on the receiving end of a distorted view. But I think that when we read an article, we really DO have to understand it on its own terms and not on ours. So I am assuming that "work" doesn't mean all the things that Larry is talking about: it just means school work. Actually, Larry, most of the time when the authors use "work" it is used as a verb. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Sun, Nov 13, 2016 at 9:46 AM, wrote: > Welcome Margaret and Carrie, > > You asked for possible alternative lens for viewing your data that you > were interpreting. > I will offer a reflection on the contrast between the notion of [works] > and [objects] as resources. > > A [work] is always referring to the human touch: the word itself suggests > this human touch, for a work is always a work of man [or God]. An [object] > on the other hand can be a work or can be a natural object. To use the word > [object] in reference to a [work] blurs the boundary markings. One needs to > understand the [work] not as an object but *as* a [work]. The deciphering > or interpreting processes generate the meaning *of* the [work]. > > > How might this make a difference in modes of thought? An exemplar is a > work of literature. A work of literature is not an object we understand by > conceptualizing or analyzing the work. The work is a *voice* and *through* > hearing [rather than the mode of seeing] we *understand* the work. > > Notice the emphasis and scope shift from the object as mode of analyzing > towards the work as speaking. > > An alternative mode of reflection > > Sent from Mail for Windows 10 > > From: Margaret A Eisenhart > Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2016 12:33 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > 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" > 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 > >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 > >> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > >> 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 > >> on behalf of mike cole > >> 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 > >> >> > > >> 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 > >> > >> > on behalf of 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 > >> >> > > >> > 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 >> > > 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 . > >> > > 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach it as > >>PDF. > >> > > ??Good read! > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > Alfredo > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > > > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Sun Nov 13 07:33:51 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2016 07:33:51 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <58279bcc.8605430a.a3fd0.c7d5@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <582887ef.159b620a.21e13.152b@mx.google.com> I will quote the 1st sentence of the article and the introduction and keep in mind this is a hollowed-out account being introduced. In the Unites States today, local school practices are heavily influenced by neoliberal ideology that (emphasizes) accountability via measurable outcomes, corporate-like management of schools, and market driven practices. If i subsititute the word (expresses) for (emphasizes) or (announces) for (emphasizes) the sentence shifts its tonal meaning more toward the realm of hearing voices within the *works* of neoliberal ideology. Then shifting to school works and class works takes on this quality of voicing or expressing or announcing the neoliberal ideology. These voices of our current cultural worlds and voices of the mind. I will pause here/hear to open a place for other voices to appear, as possible exemplars will be more nourishing and sustaining than the hollowed-out gruel of neoliberal ideology. (Trump and gender is in the background of this reflection) Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: David Kellogg Sent: November 12, 2016 9:56 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started Larry: The article doesn't use "object" at all. The word "work" is used to refer to classwork or schoolwork done by high school students. I sometimes work with data from infants, toddlers, and preschoolers, so I can't really afford the belief that theories we use in research have to be understandable to our research subjects in every detail; I think it's perfectly okay to use a theory as a "lens" so long as you understand that you are the one on the receiving end of a distorted view. But I think that when we read an article, we really DO have to understand it on its own terms and not on ours. So I am assuming that "work" doesn't mean all the things that Larry is talking about: it just means school work. Actually, Larry, most of the time when the authors use "work" it is used as a verb. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Sun, Nov 13, 2016 at 9:46 AM, wrote: > Welcome Margaret and Carrie, > > You asked for possible alternative lens for viewing your data that you > were interpreting. > I will offer a reflection on the contrast between the notion of [works] > and [objects] as resources. > > A [work] is always referring to the human touch: the word itself suggests > this human touch, for a work is always a work of man [or God]. An [object] > on the other hand can be a work or can be a natural object. To use the word > [object] in reference to a [work] blurs the boundary markings. One needs to > understand the [work] not as an object but *as* a [work]. The deciphering > or interpreting processes generate the meaning *of* the [work]. > > > How might this make a difference in modes of thought? An exemplar is a > work of literature. A work of literature is not an object we understand by > conceptualizing or analyzing the work. The work is a *voice* and *through* > hearing [rather than the mode of seeing] we *understand* the work. > > Notice the emphasis and scope shift from the object as mode of analyzing > towards the work as speaking. > > An alternative mode of reflection > > Sent from Mail for Windows 10 > > From: Margaret A Eisenhart > Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2016 12:33 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > 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" > 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 > >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 > >> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > >> 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 > >> on behalf of mike cole > >> 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 > >> >> > > >> 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 > >> > >> > on behalf of 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 > >> >> > > >> > 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 >> > > 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 . > >> > > 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach it as > >>PDF. > >> > > ??Good read! > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > Alfredo > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > > > > > From smago@uga.edu Sun Nov 13 08:12:08 2016 From: smago@uga.edu (Peter Smagorinsky) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2016 16:12:08 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] from a note on ISCAR Message-ID: Moreover, please note that the "Submit a proposal" button on http://www.iscar17.ulaval.ca is still open although we are not advertizing it. It is proving to be convenient to solve some proposal submission issues, and late submissions. Please, feel free to invite someone who regrets having miss the deadline or that you think should be part of ISCAR 2017. Late submissions will not get a response by December 15th. In some few cases, the visa procedure to come to Canada may be extensive. My team here will support the process of asking for Visa and so will the federal office that provided ISCAR 2017 the status of international academic event. Cordially, Therese Laferriere, ISCAR 2017 Program Chair, www.iscar17.ulaval.ca Room 1154, Sciences Education (pavillon des), 2320 rue des Bibliotheques, Universite Laval, Quebec, Qc, G1V 0A6, Canada | Tel. 1-418-656-2131 ext. 5480 | Fax. 1-418-656-2905 | Skype: tlaf2005 From Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu Sun Nov 13 10:14:19 2016 From: Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu (White, Phillip) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2016 18:14:19 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: <582887ef.159b620a.21e13.152b@mx.google.com> References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <58279bcc.8605430a.a3fd0.c7d5@mx.google.com> , <582887ef.159b620a.21e13.152b@mx.google.com> Message-ID: i am startled by the presumption to slice out authors' words, and shove in other worda as if there weren't nuances in language that any writer is conscious of eliciting. i could have used "surprised" for "startled", or "deciding" for "presumption", or "edit" for "slice", or "insert" for "shove" - shall i go on? and i've not a clue as to the alternative theory you are promulgating. phillip ________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2016 8:33:51 AM To: David Kellogg; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started I will quote the 1st sentence of the article and the introduction and keep in mind this is a hollowed-out account being introduced. In the Unites States today, local school practices are heavily influenced by neoliberal ideology that (emphasizes) accountability via measurable outcomes, corporate-like management of schools, and market driven practices. If i subsititute the word (expresses) for (emphasizes) or (announces) for (emphasizes) the sentence shifts its tonal meaning more toward the realm of hearing voices within the *works* of neoliberal ideology. Then shifting to school works and class works takes on this quality of voicing or expressing or announcing the neoliberal ideology. These voices of our current cultural worlds and voices of the mind. I will pause here/hear to open a place for other voices to appear, as possible exemplars will be more nourishing and sustaining than the hollowed-out gruel of neoliberal ideology. (Trump and gender is in the background of this reflection) Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: David Kellogg Sent: November 12, 2016 9:56 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started Larry: The article doesn't use "object" at all. The word "work" is used to refer to classwork or schoolwork done by high school students. I sometimes work with data from infants, toddlers, and preschoolers, so I can't really afford the belief that theories we use in research have to be understandable to our research subjects in every detail; I think it's perfectly okay to use a theory as a "lens" so long as you understand that you are the one on the receiving end of a distorted view. But I think that when we read an article, we really DO have to understand it on its own terms and not on ours. So I am assuming that "work" doesn't mean all the things that Larry is talking about: it just means school work. Actually, Larry, most of the time when the authors use "work" it is used as a verb. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Sun, Nov 13, 2016 at 9:46 AM, wrote: > Welcome Margaret and Carrie, > > You asked for possible alternative lens for viewing your data that you > were interpreting. > I will offer a reflection on the contrast between the notion of [works] > and [objects] as resources. > > A [work] is always referring to the human touch: the word itself suggests > this human touch, for a work is always a work of man [or God]. An [object] > on the other hand can be a work or can be a natural object. To use the word > [object] in reference to a [work] blurs the boundary markings. One needs to > understand the [work] not as an object but *as* a [work]. The deciphering > or interpreting processes generate the meaning *of* the [work]. > > > How might this make a difference in modes of thought? An exemplar is a > work of literature. A work of literature is not an object we understand by > conceptualizing or analyzing the work. The work is a *voice* and *through* > hearing [rather than the mode of seeing] we *understand* the work. > > Notice the emphasis and scope shift from the object as mode of analyzing > towards the work as speaking. > > An alternative mode of reflection > > Sent from Mail for Windows 10 > > From: Margaret A Eisenhart > Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2016 12:33 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > 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" > 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 > >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 > >> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > >> 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 > >> on behalf of mike cole > >> 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 > >> >> > > >> 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 > >> > >> > on behalf of 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 > >> >> > > >> > 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 >> > > 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 . > >> > > 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach it as > >>PDF. > >> > > ??Good read! > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > Alfredo > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > > > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Sun Nov 13 11:00:51 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2016 11:00:51 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <58279bcc.8605430a.a3fd0.c7d5@mx.google.com> , <582887ef.159b620a.21e13.152b@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <5828b873.972a620a.6e853.6639@mx.google.com> Phillip, A very brief reply. I was surprised, startled that my attempt at interpreting the article through a personal reading that attempted to highlight how i heard what was being said (indicating an aural shift in presentation from emphasizing (being emphatic) to expressing-voicing as an opening comment was experienced as being presumptive and possibly rude, dismissive, or shutting down conversation. Phillip, if this type of movement is presumptuous (and offensive) i have to become more sensitive to other voices such as yours that experienced what I did as presumptuous. To Margaret and Carrie, Was I, by asking others to entertain changing a word (emphasizes to expressing) that I *hear* as a shifting in tone as my way of translating experienced by the authors as presumptuous? My intent was to enter your article through Translation as a way of co-generative interpreting in order to come to a shared meaning in the back and forth of expressing/voicing. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: White, Phillip Sent: November 13, 2016 10:16 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started i am startled by the presumption to slice out authors' words, and shove in other worda as if there weren't nuances in language that any writer is conscious of eliciting. i could have used "surprised" for "startled", or "deciding" for "presumption", or "edit" for "slice", or "insert" for "shove" - shall i go on? and i've not a clue as to the alternative theory you are promulgating. phillip ________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2016 8:33:51 AM To: David Kellogg; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started I will quote the 1st sentence of the article and the introduction and keep in mind this is a hollowed-out account being introduced. In the Unites States today, local school practices are heavily influenced by neoliberal ideology that (emphasizes) accountability via measurable outcomes, corporate-like management of schools, and market driven practices. If i subsititute the word (expresses) for (emphasizes) or (announces) for (emphasizes) the sentence shifts its tonal meaning more toward the realm of hearing voices within the *works* of neoliberal ideology. Then shifting to school works and class works takes on this quality of voicing or expressing or announcing the neoliberal ideology. These voices of our current cultural worlds and voices of the mind. I will pause here/hear to open a place for other voices to appear, as possible exemplars will be more nourishing and sustaining than the hollowed-out gruel of neoliberal ideology. (Trump and gender is in the background of this reflection) Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: David Kellogg Sent: November 12, 2016 9:56 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started Larry: The article doesn't use "object" at all. The word "work" is used to refer to classwork or schoolwork done by high school students. I sometimes work with data from infants, toddlers, and preschoolers, so I can't really afford the belief that theories we use in research have to be understandable to our research subjects in every detail; I think it's perfectly okay to use a theory as a "lens" so long as you understand that you are the one on the receiving end of a distorted view. But I think that when we read an article, we really DO have to understand it on its own terms and not on ours. So I am assuming that "work" doesn't mean all the things that Larry is talking about: it just means school work. Actually, Larry, most of the time when the authors use "work" it is used as a verb. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Sun, Nov 13, 2016 at 9:46 AM, wrote: > Welcome Margaret and Carrie, > > You asked for possible alternative lens for viewing your data that you > were interpreting. > I will offer a reflection on the contrast between the notion of [works] > and [objects] as resources. > > A [work] is always referring to the human touch: the word itself suggests > this human touch, for a work is always a work of man [or God]. An [object] > on the other hand can be a work or can be a natural object. To use the word > [object] in reference to a [work] blurs the boundary markings. One needs to > understand the [work] not as an object but *as* a [work]. The deciphering > or interpreting processes generate the meaning *of* the [work]. > > > How might this make a difference in modes of thought? An exemplar is a > work of literature. A work of literature is not an object we understand by > conceptualizing or analyzing the work. The work is a *voice* and *through* > hearing [rather than the mode of seeing] we *understand* the work. > > Notice the emphasis and scope shift from the object as mode of analyzing > towards the work as speaking. > > An alternative mode of reflection > > Sent from Mail for Windows 10 > > From: Margaret A Eisenhart > Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2016 12:33 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > 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" > 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 > >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 > >> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > >> 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 > >> on behalf of mike cole > >> 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 > >> >> > > >> 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 > >> > >> > on behalf of 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 > >> >> > > >> > 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 >> > > 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 . > >> > > 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach it as > >>PDF. > >> > > ??Good read! > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > Alfredo > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > > > > > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Sun Nov 13 13:11:45 2016 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2016 21:11:45 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: <5828b873.972a620a.6e853.6639@mx.google.com> References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <58279bcc.8605430a.a3fd0.c7d5@mx.google.com> , <582887ef.159b620a.21e13.152b@mx.google.com> , <5828b873.972a620a.6e853.6639@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <1479071505352.55453@iped.uio.no> Larry, all, the authors asked for alternative lenses to look at their data and that is what I think you have offered. Of course, articles need to be read in their own terms, just as empirical data need to be understood in their own terms... unless authors explicitly invite you to do otherwise, I suppose. In any case, to me Larry's reading is not so far removed from familiar theory: just as thinking is not expressed but completed in the word, so does neoliberal ideology come to live (is completed) as (may the term incarnation work here?) living persons expressing (learners, teachers). Although I find the discussion on adequate readings and fittings between theory and data very interesting, it may also be interesting seeking not so much what the article could or should have taught but ??and instead ?what the article can indeed teach. And one thing that I found most compelling is the observation that, by promoting an attention to and the building of identity around privileged achievement, what was being learned had little to do with actual maths or science. Thus, that the same students that in one context were privileged and enjoyed an "identity-as-standing," when more advanced courses were introduced had troubles performing and came to experience a sense of failure and of displacement. This clearly seems a case of "estranged labor learning," where the exchange value of success in math leads. Margaret, Carrie, you nonetheless speak about identity-as-standing, and argue for a different identity-as-standing, an identity that you define as "being somebody rather than nobody." But is there not something of the same principle of privilege that runs through neoliberalism in the "standing" thing? Perhaps it's just my narrow understanding of the term, and of the theory as a whole, but it seems to me that privilege has something to do here: the same principle that pushes some classes down pushes them down when they begin to raise up in performance. Did other students rise up and begun performing better or moving to a more privileged position as the initially high-achieving ones begun failing? Is this notion of identity-as-standing not also within the same larger scheme of somebodies and nobodies? A further interesting issue is the co-lateral learning (as per Dewey) that goes into this; cause clearly it is not math (or science) what is being learned here. Alfredo From dkellogg60@gmail.com Sun Nov 13 13:12:59 2016 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2016 08:12:59 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: <5828b873.972a620a.6e853.6639@mx.google.com> References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <58279bcc.8605430a.a3fd0.c7d5@mx.google.com> <582887ef.159b620a.21e13.152b@mx.google.com> <5828b873.972a620a.6e853.6639@mx.google.com> Message-ID: I don't think anybody's offended, Larry. But some of us may be bewildered. Not me, of course: I know you too well to either be offended or to be puzzled when you start treating words as if they could be simply heard as voice music. (Try it sometime, Larry--that is, try to listen to a conversation in English as if it were a language you cannot understand and you are trying to decide where the word boundaries are. I think you will find that it cannot be done; you cannot help but interpret a language you know into words you know. But even if it were possible, hearing a language as sensuous sound and not as sense-bearing speech is not a possible option when you are actually part of the conversation.) I have a question that is about the data. Here's some: "Researcher: ?Earlier you mentioned ? what it looks like to be a good student. What does it look like to be a good student?? Student 1 (male): ?You need to apply yourself in all, in everything you do. Whether it?s like, from like being like a teacher?s assistant to like if you?re like in an AP class. You need to put your best foot forward. ? And if you?re not trying, then you?re probably not going to succeed.? Student 2 (female): ?A lot of students are just like, ?oh well I don?t really care, as long as I, you know, pass my classes and stuff.? But like, I have my own standards for myself, I like to get straight A?s because I know I can, and I think it will really help for me like to get in college and stuff, so yeah, and I participate in a lot of stuff.? Student 3 (male): ?Most of the students really try to be good at school and get their grades up, but some come here to just chill with their friends.? And here's some more: "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." Both of these are on p. 193. But they seem quite different to me. The first looks like it was taken from an interview, or rather from three different interviews, because actually Student 2 and 3 don't seem to be answering the same question, and even Student 1 doesn't really talk about what it LOOKS like to be a good student. But the second looks like an interpretation: not something students actually said but something that the researchers assumed that they were thinking. Is that a fair reading? David Kellogg Macquarie University On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 6:00 AM, wrote: > Phillip, > A very brief reply. I was surprised, startled that my attempt at > interpreting the article through a personal reading that attempted to > highlight how i heard what was being said (indicating an aural shift in > presentation from emphasizing (being emphatic) to expressing-voicing as an > opening comment was experienced as being presumptive and possibly rude, > dismissive, or shutting down conversation. > > Phillip, if this type of movement is presumptuous (and offensive) i have > to become more sensitive to other voices such as yours that experienced > what I did as presumptuous. > To Margaret and Carrie, > Was I, by asking others to entertain changing a word (emphasizes to > expressing) that I *hear* as a shifting in tone as my way of translating > experienced by the authors as presumptuous? My intent was to enter your > article through Translation as a way of co-generative interpreting in order > to come to a shared meaning in the back and forth of expressing/voicing. > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: White, Phillip > Sent: November 13, 2016 10:16 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > i am startled by the presumption to slice out authors' words, and shove in > other worda as if there weren't nuances in language that any writer is > conscious of eliciting. > > > i could have used "surprised" for "startled", or "deciding" for > "presumption", or "edit" for "slice", or "insert" for "shove" - shall i > go on? > > > and i've not a clue as to the alternative theory you are promulgating. > > > phillip > > ________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2016 8:33:51 AM > To: David Kellogg; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > I will quote the 1st sentence of the article and the introduction and keep > in mind this is a hollowed-out account being introduced. > > In the Unites States today, local school practices are heavily influenced > by neoliberal ideology that (emphasizes) accountability via measurable > outcomes, corporate-like management of schools, and market driven practices. > > If i subsititute the word (expresses) for (emphasizes) or (announces) for > (emphasizes) the sentence shifts its tonal meaning more toward the realm of > hearing voices within the *works* of neoliberal ideology. > Then shifting to school works and class works takes on this quality of > voicing or expressing or announcing the neoliberal ideology. > These voices of our current cultural worlds and voices of the mind. > > I will pause here/hear to open a place for other voices to appear, as > possible exemplars will be more nourishing and sustaining than the > hollowed-out gruel of neoliberal ideology. > > (Trump and gender is in the background of this reflection) > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: David Kellogg > Sent: November 12, 2016 9:56 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > Larry: > > The article doesn't use "object" at all. The word "work" is used to refer > to classwork or schoolwork done by high school students. > > I sometimes work with data from infants, toddlers, and preschoolers, so I > can't really afford the belief that theories we use in research have to be > understandable to our research subjects in every detail; I think it's > perfectly okay to use a theory as a "lens" so long as you understand that > you are the one on the receiving end of a distorted view. > > But I think that when we read an article, we really DO have to understand > it on its own terms and not on ours. So I am assuming that "work" doesn't > mean all the things that Larry is talking about: it just means school work. > Actually, Larry, most of the time when the authors use "work" it is used as > a verb. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > > > On Sun, Nov 13, 2016 at 9:46 AM, wrote: > > > Welcome Margaret and Carrie, > > > > You asked for possible alternative lens for viewing your data that you > > were interpreting. > > I will offer a reflection on the contrast between the notion of [works] > > and [objects] as resources. > > > > A [work] is always referring to the human touch: the word itself suggests > > this human touch, for a work is always a work of man [or God]. An > [object] > > on the other hand can be a work or can be a natural object. To use the > word > > [object] in reference to a [work] blurs the boundary markings. One needs > to > > understand the [work] not as an object but *as* a [work]. The > deciphering > > or interpreting processes generate the meaning *of* the [work]. > > > > > > How might this make a difference in modes of thought? An exemplar is a > > work of literature. A work of literature is not an object we understand > by > > conceptualizing or analyzing the work. The work is a *voice* and > *through* > > hearing [rather than the mode of seeing] we *understand* the work. > > > > Notice the emphasis and scope shift from the object as mode of analyzing > > towards the work as speaking. > > > > An alternative mode of reflection > > > > Sent from Mail for Windows 10 > > > > From: Margaret A Eisenhart > > Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2016 12:33 PM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > 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" > > 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 > > > >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 edu> > > >> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > >> 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 edu> > > >> on behalf of mike cole > > >> 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 > > >> > >> > > > >> 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 > > >> > > >> > on behalf of 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 > > >> > >> > > > >> > 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 . > > >> > > 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 com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039 > > . > > >> > > 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach it as > > >>PDF. > > >> > > ??Good read! > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > Alfredo > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Sun Nov 13 13:47:23 2016 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2016 21:47:23 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> Message-ID: 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" > 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 > >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 > >> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > >> 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 > >> on behalf of mike cole > >> 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 > >> >> > > >> 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 > >> > >> > on behalf of 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 > >> >> > > >> > 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 >> > > 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 . > >> > > 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach it as > >>PDF. > >> > > ??Good read! > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > Alfredo > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > > > > From hshonerd@gmail.com Sun Nov 13 14:39:44 2016 From: hshonerd@gmail.com (HENRY SHONERD) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2016 15:39:44 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> Message-ID: 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 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" >> 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 >>> 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 >>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>> 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 >>>> on behalf of mike cole >>>> 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 >>>> >>>> >>>> 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 >>>> >>>>> on behalf of 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 >>>> >>>> >>>>> 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>>>>> 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> . >>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach it as >>>> PDF. >>>>>> ??Good read! >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Alfredo >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> From lpscholar2@gmail.com Sun Nov 13 16:42:31 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2016 16:42:31 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> Message-ID: <58290886.03a3620a.dfbcf.a898@mx.google.com> Margaret and Carrie, What i appreciated was on page 193 (note 2) where Carlone, Kimmel, and Tschida describe the (dual promotion) of science and character education. They offer another example of a close link between science and morality. The recognition that the construction of the (good) student in neo-lineral ideology does not make any reference to personal interest. Excitement, or engagement in topics, or content-related activities. What students are offered instead are (hollowed-out) alternatives. This is my way to indicate that more meaningful, less hollowed-out figured worlds are ethical worlds of (well-being). (Well-being) being an abbreviation or short hand for (well-being-in-the-world-with-others) as central to education as edu-care that can be cultivated. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: HENRY SHONERD Sent: November 13, 2016 2:41 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started 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 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" >> 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 >>> 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 >>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>> 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 >>>> on behalf of mike cole >>>> 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 >>>> >>>> >>>> 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 >>>> >>>>> on behalf of 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 >>>> >>>> >>>>> 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>>>>> 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> . >>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach it as >>>> PDF. >>>>>> ??Good read! >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Alfredo >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> From ewall@umich.edu Sun Nov 13 18:37:03 2016 From: ewall@umich.edu (Edward Wall) Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2016 20:37:03 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> Message-ID: <1F325873-EC41-4E1E-82C6-333275137EB9@umich.edu> Margaret and Carrie Thanks for the article. I hope what I write will be of interest. I am presently a mathematics educator (although retired) and have taught mathematics in all the grades into graduate school and well as teachers of preschool, elementary, and secondary mathematics. What you write about authoring math identities resonates !highly! with my experience. However, I am unsure what to make of the labeling of neoliberal reform. I see something similar to the young woman you mention at all grade levels including those of graduate school. It seems to have little to do with curricular reform and everything to do with teaching. For example, the Calculus courses you mention are not there to give students a deep understanding of mathematics, but to aid in college acceptance. This, of course, led to parent and student outcry and situation in schools all across the US for high school Calculus (this has been going on for some time) The Calculus AP may have originally been for the purpose of usefully challenging young people, but, in the hands of college admission officers, soon changed into a way to control admission. These courses are usually poorly taught (regardless of where they are taught) because few high school teachers have sufficient training or experience (taking a calculus course does not mean you have the wherewithal to teach it; that takes considerably more knowledge). Math departments do use them for placement, but not because they think students have been well prepared for Calculus. Let me give an exemplar (smile). A number of years ago I was teaching a freshman English course (I know that sounds peculiar) with a significant slant on social justice. One of my students, who seemed (and acted) quite bright, was having problems completing assignments (and seemed a little dismissive of his peers). Finally, I told him that I was going to give him an F. At that point things became interesting. He told me that he had breezed through high school, scored high on the Calculus AP, received a scholarship, and was placed in the second semester of Calculus. The reason work wasn?t done was that he was failing that course in Calculus and was on the verge of losing his scholarship (especially if I failed him). Well, I, of course, extended deadlines, etc. and became a mentor of sorts for the next 4 years. All this, as the young woman in your article, pretty much destroyed his confidence/identity and it was not until his junior year that I began to see some slight improvement or, one might say, re-authoring (although the story line had changed considerably; once hoping to be a doctor he is now hoping to be a PA). This is all to the good. However, during his final science course (physics), he decided that he was lacking in geometry and trigonometry and asked for help the summer before and during the relevant semester. I (being retired you have extra time - ha!) did so and found that he was !woefully! lacking relevant skills (this from a student who had scored at the highest level on the Calculus AP). My second point is, in a sense, complicated. Maxine Green has a variation of this on page 276 of her book ?Teacher as Stranger.? She tells the story of a teacher who believes in social justice and citizen participation. He is eager for his students to participate in a moratorium in response to the Vietnamese War. However, he has other convictions. ?He does not believe that learning sequences should be whimsically or foolishly interrupted; he thinks classroom activity, because it brings him in contact with his students, contributes measurably to their education. A lost day, as he sees it, might mean a setback for some of his students; missed opportunities for other s? Taking all this in account, he still believes it is more worthwhile to support the peace action than do nothing at all.? This conclusion may seem ?right? and it may seem obvious, but, as Greene continues, it is hardly easy. It is also a little more complicated than she makes out. Say I have a strong commitment to social justice (which I do) and say I have a strong commitment to my discipline (which is mathematics). I could skimp on the mathematics and really focus on social justice, but then I run the risk having students as the above who cannot compete within the present education system. I could skimp on the social justice and really focus on the mathematics, but then I have signaled that social justice really isn?t all that important. So I incorporate social justice into my mathematics class. I could do it two ways: (1) use mathematics as a tool to consider issues of social justice (however, if I do this well, this is not teaching mathematics, but teaching social justice) - this is the usual approach of those who do such things (and I admire their attempts) or (2) use an issue of social justice to illustrate a mathematical principle - this is, quite a bit harder and it is easy to imagine somewhat silly lessons (although not entirely) as integrating the distribution of incomes in the US (there is a nice book that sort of does this called "X in the City?) - this is not, in my opinion, properly attending to issues of social justice. Neither of these approaches, in my opinion, give cognizance to the importance of social justice or mathematics (and, of course, I speak as a person who believes both are important). Ball does not help here (nor Foucault or Butler). The only one who comes close is Kierkegaard. He indicates there may be a way out (although it is not cookie-cutter), but most often one comes to despair. PS. There is also the whole issue of preparing teachers of mathematics to incorporate social justice in their students' learning especially as more and more Schools of Education eliminate substantial course work in social justice from the required curriculum. Ed Wall > On Nov 12, 2016, at 2:30 PM, Margaret A Eisenhart 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 > > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Tue Nov 15 12:38:12 2016 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 07:38:12 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> Message-ID: 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 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 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" > >> 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 edu> > >>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > >>>> 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 edu> > >>>> on behalf of mike cole > >>>> 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 > >>>> >>>>> > >>>> 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 > >>>> > >>>>> on behalf of 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 > >>>> >>>>> > >>>>> 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 >>>>>> 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 >> . > >>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach it as > >>>> PDF. > >>>>>> ??Good read! > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Alfredo > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> > > > From margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu Tue Nov 15 12:56:12 2016 From: margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu (Margaret A Eisenhart) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 20:56:12 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: <1479071505352.55453@iped.uio.no> References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <58279bcc.8605430a.a3fd0.c7d5@mx.google.com> <582887ef.159b620a.21e13.152b@mx.google.com> <5828b873.972a620a.6e853.6639@mx.google.com> <1479071505352.55453@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Alfredo, you asked: ?is there not something of the same principle of privilege that runs through neoliberalism in the "standing" thing? Perhaps it's just my narrow understanding of the term, and of the theory as a whole, but it seems to me that privilege has something to do here: the same principle that pushes some classes down pushes them down when they begin to raise up in performance. Did other students rise up and begun performing better or moving to a more privileged position as the initially high-achieving ones begun failing? Is this notion of identity-as-standing not also within the same larger scheme of somebodies and nobodies?? We think of identity-with-standing as a concept that draws attention to identities that bring status and prestige in local social and cultural context and suggest that such identities need to be examined for what they confer status and prestige on. In our case, we do not think that what is conferred is worthwhile, even though it brings some local prestige. It was not the case that other students moved up; it was the case that fewer and fewer students matched the achievement model of this identity-with-standing. We don?t think the concept gets us away from somebodies and nobodies. Margaret From margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu Tue Nov 15 13:03:31 2016 From: margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu (Margaret A Eisenhart) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 21:03:31 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <58279bcc.8605430a.a3fd0.c7d5@mx.google.com> <582887ef.159b620a.21e13.152b@mx.google.com> <5828b873.972a620a.6e853.6639@mx.google.com> Message-ID: David, you posted the following: On 11/13/16, 2:12 PM, "David Kellogg" wrote: >Both of these are on p. 193. But they seem quite different to me. The >first >looks like it was taken from an interview, or rather from three different >interviews, because actually Student 2 and 3 don't seem to be answering >the >same question, and even Student 1 doesn't really talk about what it LOOKS >like to be a good student. But the second looks like an interpretation: >not >something students actually said but something that the researchers >assumed >that they were thinking. Is that a fair reading? The students in the first set of quotes were responding to the same interview question, although we reproduced only the portions of their responses that seemed to bear most directly on the question. The second set (in quotes) are the students? own words excerpted from longer responses and our interpretation of them. Margaret From margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu Tue Nov 15 13:11:32 2016 From: margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu (Margaret A Eisenhart) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 21:11:32 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> Message-ID: Thank you for your comments, Huw. They raise a number of interesting questions. Regarding the first one below, we are wondering what you have in mind as an alternative to identity (in our particular case). Regarding the second one below, we don?t think that identities of independence and finding out are sustainable for most students in this context unless students have additional resources (outside of classes) for developing such identities. Margaret On 11/13/16, 2:47 PM, "Huw Lloyd" wrote: >ii) Whether it is better not to focus essentially on the place of >identity. 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. From margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu Tue Nov 15 13:29:34 2016 From: margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu (Margaret A Eisenhart) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 21:29:34 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: <1F325873-EC41-4E1E-82C6-333275137EB9@umich.edu> References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <1F325873-EC41-4E1E-82C6-333275137EB9@umich.edu> Message-ID: <2AC29B6F-74D6-4351-A782-84863D9E1DE6@colorado.edu> Ed, Thank you for your comments. I?m afraid I?m not as sanguine as you are about separating curriculum and teaching. Yes, there are some very good teachers who find ways to go beyond the dictates of curriculum reform, accountability, and college/university requirements. But the pressures to conform are many and come from multiple directions. For students such as those in our study, such teachers are rare and continually pressured to take on more and more features of the achievement regime. I do not think we can depend on good teachers alone to solve this problem. What is Kierkegaard?s approach? Margaret On 11/13/16, 7:37 PM, "Edward Wall" wrote: >Margaret and Carrie > > Thanks for the article. I hope what I write will be of interest. > > I am presently a mathematics educator (although retired) and have >taught mathematics in all the grades into graduate school and well as >teachers of preschool, elementary, and secondary mathematics. What you >write about authoring math identities resonates !highly! with my >experience. > > However, I am unsure what to make of the labeling of neoliberal >reform. I see something similar to the young woman you mention at all >grade levels including those of graduate school. It seems to have little >to do with curricular reform and everything to do with teaching. For >example, the Calculus courses you mention are not there to give students >a deep understanding of mathematics, but to aid in college acceptance. >This, of course, led to parent and student outcry and situation in >schools all across the US for high school Calculus (this has been going >on for some time) The Calculus AP may have originally been for the >purpose of usefully challenging young people, but, in the hands of >college admission officers, soon changed into a way to control admission. >These courses are usually poorly taught (regardless of where they are >taught) because few high school teachers have sufficient training or >experience (taking a calculus course does not mean you have the >wherewithal to teach it; that takes considerably more knowledge). Math >departments do use them for placement, but not because they think >students have been well prepared for Calculus. > > Let me give an exemplar (smile). A number of years ago I was >teaching a freshman English course (I know that sounds peculiar) with a >significant slant on social justice. One of my students, who seemed (and >acted) quite bright, was having problems completing assignments (and >seemed a little dismissive of his peers). Finally, I told him that I was >going to give him an F. At that point things became interesting. He told >me that he had breezed through high school, scored high on the Calculus >AP, received a scholarship, and was placed in the second semester of >Calculus. The reason work wasn?t done was that he was failing that course >in Calculus and was on the verge of losing his scholarship (especially if >I failed him). Well, I, of course, extended deadlines, etc. and became a >mentor of sorts for the next 4 years. > All this, as the young woman in your article, pretty much destroyed >his confidence/identity and it was not until his junior year that I began >to see some slight improvement or, one might say, re-authoring (although >the story line had changed considerably; once hoping to be a doctor he is >now hoping to be a PA). This is all to the good. However, during his >final science course (physics), he decided that he was lacking in >geometry and trigonometry and asked for help the summer before and during >the relevant semester. I (being retired you have extra time - ha!) did so >and found that he was !woefully! lacking relevant skills (this from a >student who had scored at the highest level on the Calculus AP). > > My second point is, in a sense, complicated. Maxine Green has a >variation of this on page 276 of her book ?Teacher as Stranger.? She >tells the story of a teacher who believes in social justice and citizen >participation. He is eager for his students to participate in a >moratorium in response to the Vietnamese War. However, he has other >convictions. ?He does not believe that learning sequences should be >whimsically or foolishly interrupted; he thinks classroom activity, >because it brings him in contact with his students, contributes >measurably to their education. A lost day, as he sees it, might mean a >setback for some of his students; missed opportunities for other s? >Taking all this in account, he still believes it is more worthwhile to >support the peace action than do nothing at all.? This conclusion may >seem ?right? and it may seem obvious, but, as Greene continues, it is >hardly easy. It is also a little more complicated than she makes out. Say >I have a strong commitment to social justice (which I do) and say I have >a strong commitment to my discipline (which is mathematics). I could >skimp on the mathematics and really focus on social justice, but then I >run the risk having students as the above who cannot compete within the >present education system. I could skimp on the social justice and really >focus on the mathematics, but then I have signaled that social justice >really isn?t all that important. So I incorporate social justice into my >mathematics class. I could do it two ways: (1) use mathematics as a tool >to consider issues of social justice (however, if I do this well, this is >not teaching mathematics, but teaching social justice) - this is the >usual approach of those who do such things (and I admire their attempts) >or (2) use an issue of social justice to illustrate a mathematical >principle - this is, quite a bit harder and it is easy to imagine >somewhat silly lessons (although not entirely) as integrating the >distribution of incomes in the US (there is a nice book that sort of does >this called "X in the City?) - this is not, in my opinion, properly >attending to issues of social justice. Neither of these approaches, in my >opinion, give cognizance to the importance of social justice or >mathematics (and, of course, I speak as a person who believes both are >important). Ball does not help here (nor Foucault or Butler). The only >one who comes close is Kierkegaard. He indicates there may be a way out >(although it is not cookie-cutter), but most often one comes to despair. > > >PS. There is also the whole issue of preparing teachers of mathematics to >incorporate social justice in their students' learning especially as more >and more Schools of Education eliminate substantial course work in social >justice from the required curriculum. > >Ed Wall > >> On Nov 12, 2016, at 2:30 PM, Margaret A Eisenhart >> 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 >> >> > > From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Tue Nov 15 14:24:13 2016 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 22:24:13 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> Message-ID: On 15 November 2016 at 21:11, Margaret A Eisenhart < margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu> wrote: > Thank you for your comments, Huw. They raise a number of interesting > questions. Regarding the first one below, we are wondering what you have > in mind as an alternative to identity (in our particular case). Regarding > the second one below, we don?t think that identities of independence and > finding out are sustainable for most students in this context unless > students have additional resources (outside of classes) for developing > such identities. > > Margaret > You're welcome, Margaret. The "not" in point 2 is an edit error carrying over from point 1. For point 5 I had in mind a distinction between ways of being/orienting that the student already has some habituation for vs those that are fostered locally and whether authentically finding things out on their own initiative is sustainable within the settings, i.e. whether it is obstructed (generally I would say this is often the case including higher ed.) Best, Huw > > > > > On 11/13/16, 2:47 PM, "Huw Lloyd" wrote: > > >ii) Whether it is better not to focus essentially on the place of > >identity. > > 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. > > > From hshonerd@gmail.com Tue Nov 15 15:23:37 2016 From: hshonerd@gmail.com (HENRY SHONERD) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 16:23:37 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> Message-ID: <5753689B-395F-4239-B435-58A40CAC2526@gmail.com> 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 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 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 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" >>>> 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 > edu> >>>>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>>> 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 > edu> >>>>>> on behalf of mike cole >>>>>> 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 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> 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 >>>>>> >>>>>>> on behalf of 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 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> 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>>>>>>> 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>>> . >>>>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach it as >>>>>> PDF. >>>>>>>> ??Good read! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Alfredo >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> From ewall@umich.edu Tue Nov 15 16:43:42 2016 From: ewall@umich.edu (Edward Wall) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 18:43:42 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: <2AC29B6F-74D6-4351-A782-84863D9E1DE6@colorado.edu> References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <1F325873-EC41-4E1E-82C6-333275137EB9@umich.edu> <2AC29B6F-74D6-4351-A782-84863D9E1DE6@colorado.edu> Message-ID: <28AD1876-BDC2-4325-8C27-7C30CA400572@umich.edu> Margaret My fault for trying to keep things short as I am not sanguine, at all, about separating ?good' teaching and the curriculum either. Asking for a teaching of calculus, etc. by most high school teachers will result in courses where students come away with little intellectual curiosity, serious deliberation or deep knowledge and understanding qua mathematics and no classroom time for citizen participation or social critique, [Encouraging those qualities, by the way, seems to me (and some would quibble) as reasonable as any definition of ?good? teaching] But even more importantly, at the present time, there is a sense in which it is not expected that these courses be taught ?well.' They are there to sort students in the college track and these students will again be intentionally sorted at the university level by similar courses which are again not taught ?well' (tenured faculty tend not to teach these courses and, in general, have little interest in the ?whole? student). Part of the problem is, as you say, curriculum, etc. However, part of the problem is many university faculty in the STEM fields although accepting the above definition of ?good? teaching by nodding agreement, would have difficulty modeling and teaching such (and this isn?t because they don?t care; they just don?t know how). Schools of Education, who supposedly intervene on these sorts of things are, most usually, ineffectual for all sorts of reasons (especially as regard the STEM curriculum for high school) and so high school teachers are as they are. Again, this goes all the way down to preK and may be more damaging in pre high school. My point - not well made - is that calling all this neoliberal reform seems to miss the point that nothing really has been reformed for, at least, the last 50 years. What you are calling neoliberal reform has just made what was already problematic all the more obvious. That said, you can teach mathematics in such a way that, in a manner of speaking, you can subvert the downside of the curriculum. I am speaking from the inside as a mathematics teacher and as a mathematics teacher educator. That is, despite the curriculum, you can teach for intellectual curiosity, serious deliberation and deep knowledge and understanding qua mathematics and you can - and I admit to not doing this as well as I would wish - make room for social critique (all this is possibly easier in an inner city school that a suburban school). I was able to do a little with citizen participation as a teacher educator, but nothing, I think, significant. I?m not saying it is easy and I, as a classroom teacher, loudly disagreed with principals and superintendents when they engaged, one might say, in neoliberal reform. All this neoliberal reform, by the way, was an ongoing discussion in my mathematics eduction classroom as my students were headed for classrooms similar to the ones you write about. So, no you can't separate teaching and the curriculum, but that shouldn?t be (and this is my thinking and many of my students) an excuse to forego attempts at ?good? teaching. Briefly, key is respect for the discipline and respect for one another and I am reasonably unconvinced such respect is, locally, irrevocably curtailed by the curriculum (although I would agree neoliberal reform globally respects neither). Kierkegaard?s solution? I wrote an essay awhile back which was published in Journal of Educational Controversy (Winter 2010) titled Aesthetic Education in the Mathematics Classroom. I don?t really like the ending - too positive - and when I sent it in they didn?t send it back for revision so I couldn?t change it. Far too briefly, rationally it is not possible to do such teaching, but that doesn?t mean, pragmatically speaking, that you can?t. However, the decision to do so is in, one might say, every moment. Ed > On Nov 15, 2016, at 3:29 PM, Margaret A Eisenhart wrote: > > Ed, Thank you for your comments. I?m afraid I?m not as sanguine as you are > about separating curriculum and teaching. Yes, there are some very good > teachers who find ways to go beyond the dictates of curriculum reform, > accountability, and college/university requirements. But the pressures to > conform are many and come from multiple directions. For students such as > those in our study, such teachers are rare and continually pressured to > take on more and more features of the achievement regime. I do not think > we can depend on good teachers alone to solve this problem. > > What is Kierkegaard?s approach? > > Margaret > > > > > On 11/13/16, 7:37 PM, "Edward Wall" wrote: > >> Margaret and Carrie >> >> Thanks for the article. I hope what I write will be of interest. >> >> I am presently a mathematics educator (although retired) and have >> taught mathematics in all the grades into graduate school and well as >> teachers of preschool, elementary, and secondary mathematics. What you >> write about authoring math identities resonates !highly! with my >> experience. >> >> However, I am unsure what to make of the labeling of neoliberal >> reform. I see something similar to the young woman you mention at all >> grade levels including those of graduate school. It seems to have little >> to do with curricular reform and everything to do with teaching. For >> example, the Calculus courses you mention are not there to give students >> a deep understanding of mathematics, but to aid in college acceptance. >> This, of course, led to parent and student outcry and situation in >> schools all across the US for high school Calculus (this has been going >> on for some time) The Calculus AP may have originally been for the >> purpose of usefully challenging young people, but, in the hands of >> college admission officers, soon changed into a way to control admission. >> These courses are usually poorly taught (regardless of where they are >> taught) because few high school teachers have sufficient training or >> experience (taking a calculus course does not mean you have the >> wherewithal to teach it; that takes considerably more knowledge). Math >> departments do use them for placement, but not because they think >> students have been well prepared for Calculus. >> >> Let me give an exemplar (smile). A number of years ago I was >> teaching a freshman English course (I know that sounds peculiar) with a >> significant slant on social justice. One of my students, who seemed (and >> acted) quite bright, was having problems completing assignments (and >> seemed a little dismissive of his peers). Finally, I told him that I was >> going to give him an F. At that point things became interesting. He told >> me that he had breezed through high school, scored high on the Calculus >> AP, received a scholarship, and was placed in the second semester of >> Calculus. The reason work wasn?t done was that he was failing that course >> in Calculus and was on the verge of losing his scholarship (especially if >> I failed him). Well, I, of course, extended deadlines, etc. and became a >> mentor of sorts for the next 4 years. >> All this, as the young woman in your article, pretty much destroyed >> his confidence/identity and it was not until his junior year that I began >> to see some slight improvement or, one might say, re-authoring (although >> the story line had changed considerably; once hoping to be a doctor he is >> now hoping to be a PA). This is all to the good. However, during his >> final science course (physics), he decided that he was lacking in >> geometry and trigonometry and asked for help the summer before and during >> the relevant semester. I (being retired you have extra time - ha!) did so >> and found that he was !woefully! lacking relevant skills (this from a >> student who had scored at the highest level on the Calculus AP). >> >> My second point is, in a sense, complicated. Maxine Green has a >> variation of this on page 276 of her book ?Teacher as Stranger.? She >> tells the story of a teacher who believes in social justice and citizen >> participation. He is eager for his students to participate in a >> moratorium in response to the Vietnamese War. However, he has other >> convictions. ?He does not believe that learning sequences should be >> whimsically or foolishly interrupted; he thinks classroom activity, >> because it brings him in contact with his students, contributes >> measurably to their education. A lost day, as he sees it, might mean a >> setback for some of his students; missed opportunities for other s? >> Taking all this in account, he still believes it is more worthwhile to >> support the peace action than do nothing at all.? This conclusion may >> seem ?right? and it may seem obvious, but, as Greene continues, it is >> hardly easy. It is also a little more complicated than she makes out. Say >> I have a strong commitment to social justice (which I do) and say I have >> a strong commitment to my discipline (which is mathematics). I could >> skimp on the mathematics and really focus on social justice, but then I >> run the risk having students as the above who cannot compete within the >> present education system. I could skimp on the social justice and really >> focus on the mathematics, but then I have signaled that social justice >> really isn?t all that important. So I incorporate social justice into my >> mathematics class. I could do it two ways: (1) use mathematics as a tool >> to consider issues of social justice (however, if I do this well, this is >> not teaching mathematics, but teaching social justice) - this is the >> usual approach of those who do such things (and I admire their attempts) >> or (2) use an issue of social justice to illustrate a mathematical >> principle - this is, quite a bit harder and it is easy to imagine >> somewhat silly lessons (although not entirely) as integrating the >> distribution of incomes in the US (there is a nice book that sort of does >> this called "X in the City?) - this is not, in my opinion, properly >> attending to issues of social justice. Neither of these approaches, in my >> opinion, give cognizance to the importance of social justice or >> mathematics (and, of course, I speak as a person who believes both are >> important). Ball does not help here (nor Foucault or Butler). The only >> one who comes close is Kierkegaard. He indicates there may be a way out >> (although it is not cookie-cutter), but most often one comes to despair. >> >> >> PS. There is also the whole issue of preparing teachers of mathematics to >> incorporate social justice in their students' learning especially as more >> and more Schools of Education eliminate substantial course work in social >> justice from the required curriculum. >> >> Ed Wall >> >>> On Nov 12, 2016, at 2:30 PM, Margaret A Eisenhart >>> 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 >>> >>> >> >> > From Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu Wed Nov 16 09:23:41 2016 From: Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu (White, Phillip) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 17:23:41 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: <28AD1876-BDC2-4325-8C27-7C30CA400572@umich.edu> References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <1F325873-EC41-4E1E-82C6-333275137EB9@umich.edu> <2AC29B6F-74D6-4351-A782-84863D9E1DE6@colorado.edu>, <28AD1876-BDC2-4325-8C27-7C30CA400572@umich.edu> Message-ID: Margaret and Ed, I think that one of the great difficulties of reducing the effects of neoliberal ideology within public education is that it is a default theory of education since the days of liberal laissez faire economics of the 19th century. It was during that century that public education was socially and politically constructed and the accompanying belief in Spencerian social-darwinism. The work of Dewey notwithstanding, the values placed on individual merit and self-sufficiency has proved to be an irreducible tension (James Wertsch's phrase) within the efforts to effect greater education equity for those previously marginalised within public education. So that the data explored in the Eisenhart / Allen paper does, I think, further demonstrate that not only are student identities hollowed out within implementation of STEM education, but is further evidence of an historical process that has been in place for generations of American education systems. I'm really interested in the final paragraph of the paper, "articulating new ways of making selves intelligible in the contest of our lives". After all, if we can't do that, what's the use? Certainly that was what Spinoza was struggling with in his work on ethics. Phillip ________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Edward Wall Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 5:43:42 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started Margaret My fault for trying to keep things short as I am not sanguine, at all, about separating ?good' teaching and the curriculum either. Asking for a teaching of calculus, etc. by most high school teachers will result in courses where students come away with little intellectual curiosity, serious deliberation or deep knowledge and understanding qua mathematics and no classroom time for citizen participation or social critique, [Encouraging those qualities, by the way, seems to me (and some would quibble) as reasonable as any definition of ?good? teaching] But even more importantly, at the present time, there is a sense in which it is not expected that these courses be taught ?well.' They are there to sort students in the college track and these students will again be intentionally sorted at the university level by similar courses which are again not taught ?well' (tenured faculty tend not to teach these courses and, in general, have little interest in the ?whole? student). Part of the problem is, as you say, curriculum, etc. However, part of the problem is many university faculty in the STEM fields although accepting the above definition of ?good? teaching by nodding agreement, would have difficulty modeling and teaching such (and this isn?t because they don?t care; they just don?t know how). Schools of Education, who supposedly intervene on these sorts of things are, most usually, ineffectual for all sorts of reasons (especially as regard the STEM curriculum for high school) and so high school teachers are as they are. Again, this goes all the way down to preK and may be more damaging in pre high school. My point - not well made - is that calling all this neoliberal reform seems to miss the point that nothing really has been reformed for, at least, the last 50 years. What you are calling neoliberal reform has just made what was already problematic all the more obvious. That said, you can teach mathematics in such a way that, in a manner of speaking, you can subvert the downside of the curriculum. I am speaking from the inside as a mathematics teacher and as a mathematics teacher educator. That is, despite the curriculum, you can teach for intellectual curiosity, serious deliberation and deep knowledge and understanding qua mathematics and you can - and I admit to not doing this as well as I would wish - make room for social critique (all this is possibly easier in an inner city school that a suburban school). I was able to do a little with citizen participation as a teacher educator, but nothing, I think, significant. I?m not saying it is easy and I, as a classroom teacher, loudly disagreed with principals and superintendents when they engaged, one might say, in neoliberal reform. All this neoliberal reform, by the way, was an ongoing discussion in my mathematics eduction classroom as my students were headed for classrooms similar to the ones you write about. So, no you can't separate teaching and the curriculum, but that shouldn?t be (and this is my thinking and many of my students) an excuse to forego attempts at ?good? teaching. Briefly, key is respect for the discipline and respect for one another and I am reasonably unconvinced such respect is, locally, irrevocably curtailed by the curriculum (although I would agree neoliberal reform globally respects neither). Kierkegaard?s solution? I wrote an essay awhile back which was published in Journal of Educational Controversy (Winter 2010) titled Aesthetic Education in the Mathematics Classroom. I don?t really like the ending - too positive - and when I sent it in they didn?t send it back for revision so I couldn?t change it. Far too briefly, rationally it is not possible to do such teaching, but that doesn?t mean, pragmatically speaking, that you can?t. However, the decision to do so is in, one might say, every moment. Ed > On Nov 15, 2016, at 3:29 PM, Margaret A Eisenhart wrote: > > Ed, Thank you for your comments. I?m afraid I?m not as sanguine as you are > about separating curriculum and teaching. Yes, there are some very good > teachers who find ways to go beyond the dictates of curriculum reform, > accountability, and college/university requirements. But the pressures to > conform are many and come from multiple directions. For students such as > those in our study, such teachers are rare and continually pressured to > take on more and more features of the achievement regime. I do not think > we can depend on good teachers alone to solve this problem. > > What is Kierkegaard?s approach? > > Margaret > > > > > On 11/13/16, 7:37 PM, "Edward Wall" wrote: > >> Margaret and Carrie >> >> Thanks for the article. I hope what I write will be of interest. >> >> I am presently a mathematics educator (although retired) and have >> taught mathematics in all the grades into graduate school and well as >> teachers of preschool, elementary, and secondary mathematics. What you >> write about authoring math identities resonates !highly! with my >> experience. >> >> However, I am unsure what to make of the labeling of neoliberal >> reform. I see something similar to the young woman you mention at all >> grade levels including those of graduate school. It seems to have little >> to do with curricular reform and everything to do with teaching. For >> example, the Calculus courses you mention are not there to give students >> a deep understanding of mathematics, but to aid in college acceptance. >> This, of course, led to parent and student outcry and situation in >> schools all across the US for high school Calculus (this has been going >> on for some time) The Calculus AP may have originally been for the >> purpose of usefully challenging young people, but, in the hands of >> college admission officers, soon changed into a way to control admission. >> These courses are usually poorly taught (regardless of where they are >> taught) because few high school teachers have sufficient training or >> experience (taking a calculus course does not mean you have the >> wherewithal to teach it; that takes considerably more knowledge). Math >> departments do use them for placement, but not because they think >> students have been well prepared for Calculus. >> >> Let me give an exemplar (smile). A number of years ago I was >> teaching a freshman English course (I know that sounds peculiar) with a >> significant slant on social justice. One of my students, who seemed (and >> acted) quite bright, was having problems completing assignments (and >> seemed a little dismissive of his peers). Finally, I told him that I was >> going to give him an F. At that point things became interesting. He told >> me that he had breezed through high school, scored high on the Calculus >> AP, received a scholarship, and was placed in the second semester of >> Calculus. The reason work wasn?t done was that he was failing that course >> in Calculus and was on the verge of losing his scholarship (especially if >> I failed him). Well, I, of course, extended deadlines, etc. and became a >> mentor of sorts for the next 4 years. >> All this, as the young woman in your article, pretty much destroyed >> his confidence/identity and it was not until his junior year that I began >> to see some slight improvement or, one might say, re-authoring (although >> the story line had changed considerably; once hoping to be a doctor he is >> now hoping to be a PA). This is all to the good. However, during his >> final science course (physics), he decided that he was lacking in >> geometry and trigonometry and asked for help the summer before and during >> the relevant semester. I (being retired you have extra time - ha!) did so >> and found that he was !woefully! lacking relevant skills (this from a >> student who had scored at the highest level on the Calculus AP). >> >> My second point is, in a sense, complicated. Maxine Green has a >> variation of this on page 276 of her book ?Teacher as Stranger.? She >> tells the story of a teacher who believes in social justice and citizen >> participation. He is eager for his students to participate in a >> moratorium in response to the Vietnamese War. However, he has other >> convictions. ?He does not believe that learning sequences should be >> whimsically or foolishly interrupted; he thinks classroom activity, >> because it brings him in contact with his students, contributes >> measurably to their education. A lost day, as he sees it, might mean a >> setback for some of his students; missed opportunities for other s? >> Taking all this in account, he still believes it is more worthwhile to >> support the peace action than do nothing at all.? This conclusion may >> seem ?right? and it may seem obvious, but, as Greene continues, it is >> hardly easy. It is also a little more complicated than she makes out. Say >> I have a strong commitment to social justice (which I do) and say I have >> a strong commitment to my discipline (which is mathematics). I could >> skimp on the mathematics and really focus on social justice, but then I >> run the risk having students as the above who cannot compete within the >> present education system. I could skimp on the social justice and really >> focus on the mathematics, but then I have signaled that social justice >> really isn?t all that important. So I incorporate social justice into my >> mathematics class. I could do it two ways: (1) use mathematics as a tool >> to consider issues of social justice (however, if I do this well, this is >> not teaching mathematics, but teaching social justice) - this is the >> usual approach of those who do such things (and I admire their attempts) >> or (2) use an issue of social justice to illustrate a mathematical >> principle - this is, quite a bit harder and it is easy to imagine >> somewhat silly lessons (although not entirely) as integrating the >> distribution of incomes in the US (there is a nice book that sort of does >> this called "X in the City?) - this is not, in my opinion, properly >> attending to issues of social justice. Neither of these approaches, in my >> opinion, give cognizance to the importance of social justice or >> mathematics (and, of course, I speak as a person who believes both are >> important). Ball does not help here (nor Foucault or Butler). The only >> one who comes close is Kierkegaard. He indicates there may be a way out >> (although it is not cookie-cutter), but most often one comes to despair. >> >> >> PS. There is also the whole issue of preparing teachers of mathematics to >> incorporate social justice in their students' learning especially as more >> and more Schools of Education eliminate substantial course work in social >> justice from the required curriculum. >> >> Ed Wall >> >>> On Nov 12, 2016, at 2:30 PM, Margaret A Eisenhart >>> 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 >>> >>> >> >> > From ewall@umich.edu Wed Nov 16 11:26:13 2016 From: ewall@umich.edu (Edward Wall) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 13:26:13 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <1F325873-EC41-4E1E-82C6-333275137EB9@umich.edu> <2AC29B6F-74D6-4351-A782-84863D9E1DE6@colorado.edu> <28AD1876-BDC2-4325-8C27-7C30CA400572@umich.edu> Message-ID: <3449352E-E037-4C3A-8030-9F47DA245892@umich.edu> Phillip I agree. Within the so-called STEM disciplines it may go further back than that; however a bit more than 50 years ago, it took on some real teeth as regards mathematics (I schooled in the before and after of those years). Perhaps my interest in all this reflects, in a fashion, your interest in the final paragraph of the paper. I think that content area teachers have a role in helping children articulate new ways of making themselves intelligible in the context of their lives regardless of the curriculum. I have seen a lot of mathematics classrooms over time and and have been privileged to observed a lot of outstanding mathematics teachers. I have yet to see a classroom where teachers and students have respect for one another and for the discipline that children fail to develop many of those critical qualities that the paper lists. That does not mean, interesting enough, that some students do not develop those qualities in spite of experiencing classrooms where there little respect for the discipline or each other. Sadly, as one wouldn?t think this need be the case, ?respect' may be a ?new way.? Ed > On Nov 16, 2016, at 11:23 AM, White, Phillip wrote: > > Margaret and Ed, I think that one of the great difficulties of reducing the effects of neoliberal ideology within public education is that it is a default theory of education since the days of liberal laissez faire economics of the 19th century. It was during that century that public education was socially and politically constructed and the accompanying belief in Spencerian social-darwinism. The work of Dewey notwithstanding, the values placed on individual merit and self-sufficiency has proved to be an irreducible tension (James Wertsch's phrase) within the efforts to effect greater education equity for those previously marginalised within public education. So that the data explored in the Eisenhart / Allen paper does, I think, further demonstrate that not only are student identities hollowed out within implementation of STEM education, but is further evidence of an historical process that has been in place for generations of American education systems. I'm really interested in the final paragraph of the paper, "articulating new ways of making selves intelligible in the contest of our lives". After all, if we can't do that, what's the use? Certainly that was what Spinoza was struggling with in his work on ethics. > > > Phillip > > ________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Edward Wall > Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 5:43:42 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > Margaret > > My fault for trying to keep things short as I am not sanguine, at all, about separating ?good' teaching and the curriculum either. Asking for a teaching of calculus, etc. by most high school teachers will result in courses where students come away with little intellectual curiosity, serious deliberation or deep knowledge and understanding qua mathematics and no classroom time for citizen participation or social critique, [Encouraging those qualities, by the way, seems to me (and some would quibble) as reasonable as any definition of ?good? teaching] But even more importantly, at the present time, there is a sense in which it is not expected that these courses be taught ?well.' They are there to sort students in the college track and these students will again be intentionally sorted at the university level by similar courses which are again not taught ?well' (tenured faculty tend not to teach these courses and, in general, have little interest in the ?whole? student). > Part of the problem is, as you say, curriculum, etc. However, part of the problem is many university faculty in the STEM fields although accepting the above definition of ?good? teaching by nodding agreement, would have difficulty modeling and teaching such (and this isn?t because they don?t care; they just don?t know how). Schools of Education, who supposedly intervene on these sorts of things are, most usually, ineffectual for all sorts of reasons (especially as regard the STEM curriculum for high school) and so high school teachers are as they are. Again, this goes all the way down to preK and may be more damaging in pre high school. My point - not well made - is that calling all this neoliberal reform seems to miss the point that nothing really has been reformed for, at least, the last 50 years. What you are calling neoliberal reform has just made what was already problematic all the more obvious. > > That said, you can teach mathematics in such a way that, in a manner of speaking, you can subvert the downside of the curriculum. I am speaking from the inside as a mathematics teacher and as a mathematics teacher educator. That is, despite the curriculum, you can teach for intellectual curiosity, serious deliberation and deep knowledge and understanding qua mathematics and you can - and I admit to not doing this as well as I would wish - make room for social critique (all this is possibly easier in an inner city school that a suburban school). I was able to do a little with citizen participation as a teacher educator, but nothing, I think, significant. I?m not saying it is easy and I, as a classroom teacher, loudly disagreed with principals and superintendents when they engaged, one might say, in neoliberal reform. All this neoliberal reform, by the way, was an ongoing discussion in my mathematics eduction classroom as my students were headed for classrooms similar to the ones you write about. So, no you can't separate teaching and the curriculum, but that shouldn?t be (and this is my thinking and many of my students) an excuse to forego attempts at ?good? teaching. Briefly, key is respect for the discipline and respect for one another and I am reasonably unconvinced such respect is, locally, irrevocably curtailed by the curriculum (although I would agree neoliberal reform globally respects neither). > > Kierkegaard?s solution? I wrote an essay awhile back which was published in Journal of Educational Controversy (Winter 2010) titled Aesthetic Education in the Mathematics Classroom. I don?t really like the ending - too positive - and when I sent it in they didn?t send it back for revision so I couldn?t change it. Far too briefly, rationally it is not possible to do such teaching, but that doesn?t mean, pragmatically speaking, that you can?t. However, the decision to do so is in, one might say, every moment. > > Ed > >> On Nov 15, 2016, at 3:29 PM, Margaret A Eisenhart wrote: >> >> Ed, Thank you for your comments. I?m afraid I?m not as sanguine as you are >> about separating curriculum and teaching. Yes, there are some very good >> teachers who find ways to go beyond the dictates of curriculum reform, >> accountability, and college/university requirements. But the pressures to >> conform are many and come from multiple directions. For students such as >> those in our study, such teachers are rare and continually pressured to >> take on more and more features of the achievement regime. I do not think >> we can depend on good teachers alone to solve this problem. >> >> What is Kierkegaard?s approach? >> >> Margaret >> >> >> >> >> On 11/13/16, 7:37 PM, "Edward Wall" wrote: >> >>> Margaret and Carrie >>> >>> Thanks for the article. I hope what I write will be of interest. >>> >>> I am presently a mathematics educator (although retired) and have >>> taught mathematics in all the grades into graduate school and well as >>> teachers of preschool, elementary, and secondary mathematics. What you >>> write about authoring math identities resonates !highly! with my >>> experience. >>> >>> However, I am unsure what to make of the labeling of neoliberal >>> reform. I see something similar to the young woman you mention at all >>> grade levels including those of graduate school. It seems to have little >>> to do with curricular reform and everything to do with teaching. For >>> example, the Calculus courses you mention are not there to give students >>> a deep understanding of mathematics, but to aid in college acceptance. >>> This, of course, led to parent and student outcry and situation in >>> schools all across the US for high school Calculus (this has been going >>> on for some time) The Calculus AP may have originally been for the >>> purpose of usefully challenging young people, but, in the hands of >>> college admission officers, soon changed into a way to control admission. >>> These courses are usually poorly taught (regardless of where they are >>> taught) because few high school teachers have sufficient training or >>> experience (taking a calculus course does not mean you have the >>> wherewithal to teach it; that takes considerably more knowledge). Math >>> departments do use them for placement, but not because they think >>> students have been well prepared for Calculus. >>> >>> Let me give an exemplar (smile). A number of years ago I was >>> teaching a freshman English course (I know that sounds peculiar) with a >>> significant slant on social justice. One of my students, who seemed (and >>> acted) quite bright, was having problems completing assignments (and >>> seemed a little dismissive of his peers). Finally, I told him that I was >>> going to give him an F. At that point things became interesting. He told >>> me that he had breezed through high school, scored high on the Calculus >>> AP, received a scholarship, and was placed in the second semester of >>> Calculus. The reason work wasn?t done was that he was failing that course >>> in Calculus and was on the verge of losing his scholarship (especially if >>> I failed him). Well, I, of course, extended deadlines, etc. and became a >>> mentor of sorts for the next 4 years. >>> All this, as the young woman in your article, pretty much destroyed >>> his confidence/identity and it was not until his junior year that I began >>> to see some slight improvement or, one might say, re-authoring (although >>> the story line had changed considerably; once hoping to be a doctor he is >>> now hoping to be a PA). This is all to the good. However, during his >>> final science course (physics), he decided that he was lacking in >>> geometry and trigonometry and asked for help the summer before and during >>> the relevant semester. I (being retired you have extra time - ha!) did so >>> and found that he was !woefully! lacking relevant skills (this from a >>> student who had scored at the highest level on the Calculus AP). >>> >>> My second point is, in a sense, complicated. Maxine Green has a >>> variation of this on page 276 of her book ?Teacher as Stranger.? She >>> tells the story of a teacher who believes in social justice and citizen >>> participation. He is eager for his students to participate in a >>> moratorium in response to the Vietnamese War. However, he has other >>> convictions. ?He does not believe that learning sequences should be >>> whimsically or foolishly interrupted; he thinks classroom activity, >>> because it brings him in contact with his students, contributes >>> measurably to their education. A lost day, as he sees it, might mean a >>> setback for some of his students; missed opportunities for other s? >>> Taking all this in account, he still believes it is more worthwhile to >>> support the peace action than do nothing at all.? This conclusion may >>> seem ?right? and it may seem obvious, but, as Greene continues, it is >>> hardly easy. It is also a little more complicated than she makes out. Say >>> I have a strong commitment to social justice (which I do) and say I have >>> a strong commitment to my discipline (which is mathematics). I could >>> skimp on the mathematics and really focus on social justice, but then I >>> run the risk having students as the above who cannot compete within the >>> present education system. I could skimp on the social justice and really >>> focus on the mathematics, but then I have signaled that social justice >>> really isn?t all that important. So I incorporate social justice into my >>> mathematics class. I could do it two ways: (1) use mathematics as a tool >>> to consider issues of social justice (however, if I do this well, this is >>> not teaching mathematics, but teaching social justice) - this is the >>> usual approach of those who do such things (and I admire their attempts) >>> or (2) use an issue of social justice to illustrate a mathematical >>> principle - this is, quite a bit harder and it is easy to imagine >>> somewhat silly lessons (although not entirely) as integrating the >>> distribution of incomes in the US (there is a nice book that sort of does >>> this called "X in the City?) - this is not, in my opinion, properly >>> attending to issues of social justice. Neither of these approaches, in my >>> opinion, give cognizance to the importance of social justice or >>> mathematics (and, of course, I speak as a person who believes both are >>> important). Ball does not help here (nor Foucault or Butler). The only >>> one who comes close is Kierkegaard. He indicates there may be a way out >>> (although it is not cookie-cutter), but most often one comes to despair. >>> >>> >>> PS. There is also the whole issue of preparing teachers of mathematics to >>> incorporate social justice in their students' learning especially as more >>> and more Schools of Education eliminate substantial course work in social >>> justice from the required curriculum. >>> >>> Ed Wall >>> >>>> On Nov 12, 2016, at 2:30 PM, Margaret A Eisenhart >>>> 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 >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> > > From margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu Wed Nov 16 11:29:15 2016 From: margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu (Margaret A Eisenhart) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 19:29:15 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <1F325873-EC41-4E1E-82C6-333275137EB9@umich.edu> <2AC29B6F-74D6-4351-A782-84863D9E1DE6@colorado.edu>, <28AD1876-BDC2-4325-8C27-7C30CA400572@umich.edu> Message-ID: Yes, I agree. Thank you, Phillip. -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of White, Phillip Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 10:24 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started Margaret and Ed, I think that one of the great difficulties of reducing the effects of neoliberal ideology within public education is that it is a default theory of education since the days of liberal laissez faire economics of the 19th century. It was during that century that public education was socially and politically constructed and the accompanying belief in Spencerian social-darwinism. The work of Dewey notwithstanding, the values placed on individual merit and self-sufficiency has proved to be an irreducible tension (James Wertsch's phrase) within the efforts to effect greater education equity for those previously marginalised within public education. So that the data explored in the Eisenhart / Allen paper does, I think, further demonstrate that not only are student identities hollowed out within implementation of STEM education, but is further evidence of an historical process that has been in place for generations of American education systems. I'm really interested in the final paragraph of the paper, "articulating new ways of making selves intelligible in the contest of our lives". After all, if we can't do that, what's the use? Certainly that was what Spinoza was struggling with in his work on ethics. Phillip ________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Edward Wall Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 5:43:42 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started Margaret My fault for trying to keep things short as I am not sanguine, at all, about separating 'good' teaching and the curriculum either. Asking for a teaching of calculus, etc. by most high school teachers will result in courses where students come away with little intellectual curiosity, serious deliberation or deep knowledge and understanding qua mathematics and no classroom time for citizen participation or social critique, [Encouraging those qualities, by the way, seems to me (and some would quibble) as reasonable as any definition of 'good' teaching] But even more importantly, at the present time, there is a sense in which it is not expected that these courses be taught 'well.' They are there to sort students in the college track and these students will again be intentionally sorted at the university level by similar courses which are again not taught 'well' (tenured faculty tend not to teach these courses and, in general, have little interest in the 'whole' student). Part of the problem is, as you say, curriculum, etc. However, part of the problem is many university faculty in the STEM fields although accepting the above definition of 'good' teaching by nodding agreement, would have difficulty modeling and teaching such (and this isn't because they don't care; they just don't know how). Schools of Education, who supposedly intervene on these sorts of things are, most usually, ineffectual for all sorts of reasons (especially as regard the STEM curriculum for high school) and so high school teachers are as they are. Again, this goes all the way down to preK and may be more damaging in pre high school. My point - not well made - is that calling all this neoliberal reform seems to miss the point that nothing really has been reformed for, at least, the last 50 years. What you are calling neoliberal reform has just made what was already problematic all the more obvious. That said, you can teach mathematics in such a way that, in a manner of speaking, you can subvert the downside of the curriculum. I am speaking from the inside as a mathematics teacher and as a mathematics teacher educator. That is, despite the curriculum, you can teach for intellectual curiosity, serious deliberation and deep knowledge and understanding qua mathematics and you can - and I admit to not doing this as well as I would wish - make room for social critique (all this is possibly easier in an inner city school that a suburban school). I was able to do a little with citizen participation as a teacher educator, but nothing, I think, significant. I'm not saying it is easy and I, as a classroom teacher, loudly disagreed with principals and superintendents when they engaged, one might say, in neoliberal reform. All this neoliberal reform, by the way, was an ongoing discussion in my mathematics eduction classroom as my students were headed for classrooms similar to the ones you write about. So, no you can't separate teaching and the curriculum, but that shouldn't be (and this is my thinking and many of my students) an excuse to forego attempts at 'good' teaching. Briefly, key is respect for the discipline and respect for one another and I am reasonably unconvinced such respect is, locally, irrevocably curtailed by the curriculum (although I would agree neoliberal reform globally respects neither). Kierkegaard's solution? I wrote an essay awhile back which was published in Journal of Educational Controversy (Winter 2010) titled Aesthetic Education in the Mathematics Classroom. I don't really like the ending - too positive - and when I sent it in they didn't send it back for revision so I couldn't change it. Far too briefly, rationally it is not possible to do such teaching, but that doesn't mean, pragmatically speaking, that you can't. However, the decision to do so is in, one might say, every moment. Ed > On Nov 15, 2016, at 3:29 PM, Margaret A Eisenhart wrote: > > Ed, Thank you for your comments. I'm afraid I'm not as sanguine as you > are about separating curriculum and teaching. Yes, there are some > very good teachers who find ways to go beyond the dictates of > curriculum reform, accountability, and college/university > requirements. But the pressures to conform are many and come from > multiple directions. For students such as those in our study, such > teachers are rare and continually pressured to take on more and more > features of the achievement regime. I do not think we can depend on good teachers alone to solve this problem. > > What is Kierkegaard's approach? > > Margaret > > > > > On 11/13/16, 7:37 PM, "Edward Wall" wrote: > >> Margaret and Carrie >> >> Thanks for the article. I hope what I write will be of interest. >> >> I am presently a mathematics educator (although retired) and have >> taught mathematics in all the grades into graduate school and well as >> teachers of preschool, elementary, and secondary mathematics. What >> you write about authoring math identities resonates !highly! with my >> experience. >> >> However, I am unsure what to make of the labeling of neoliberal >> reform. I see something similar to the young woman you mention at all >> grade levels including those of graduate school. It seems to have >> little to do with curricular reform and everything to do with >> teaching. For example, the Calculus courses you mention are not there >> to give students a deep understanding of mathematics, but to aid in college acceptance. >> This, of course, led to parent and student outcry and situation in >> schools all across the US for high school Calculus (this has been >> going on for some time) The Calculus AP may have originally been for >> the purpose of usefully challenging young people, but, in the hands >> of college admission officers, soon changed into a way to control admission. >> These courses are usually poorly taught (regardless of where they are >> taught) because few high school teachers have sufficient training or >> experience (taking a calculus course does not mean you have the >> wherewithal to teach it; that takes considerably more knowledge). >> Math departments do use them for placement, but not because they >> think students have been well prepared for Calculus. >> >> Let me give an exemplar (smile). A number of years ago I was >> teaching a freshman English course (I know that sounds peculiar) with >> a significant slant on social justice. One of my students, who seemed >> (and >> acted) quite bright, was having problems completing assignments (and >> seemed a little dismissive of his peers). Finally, I told him that I >> was going to give him an F. At that point things became interesting. >> He told me that he had breezed through high school, scored high on >> the Calculus AP, received a scholarship, and was placed in the second >> semester of Calculus. The reason work wasn't done was that he was >> failing that course in Calculus and was on the verge of losing his >> scholarship (especially if I failed him). Well, I, of course, >> extended deadlines, etc. and became a mentor of sorts for the next 4 years. >> All this, as the young woman in your article, pretty much >> destroyed his confidence/identity and it was not until his junior >> year that I began to see some slight improvement or, one might say, >> re-authoring (although the story line had changed considerably; once >> hoping to be a doctor he is now hoping to be a PA). This is all to >> the good. However, during his final science course (physics), he >> decided that he was lacking in geometry and trigonometry and asked >> for help the summer before and during the relevant semester. I (being >> retired you have extra time - ha!) did so and found that he was >> !woefully! lacking relevant skills (this from a student who had scored at the highest level on the Calculus AP). >> >> My second point is, in a sense, complicated. Maxine Green has a >> variation of this on page 276 of her book "Teacher as Stranger." She >> tells the story of a teacher who believes in social justice and >> citizen participation. He is eager for his students to participate in >> a moratorium in response to the Vietnamese War. However, he has other >> convictions. "He does not believe that learning sequences should be >> whimsically or foolishly interrupted; he thinks classroom activity, >> because it brings him in contact with his students, contributes >> measurably to their education. A lost day, as he sees it, might mean >> a setback for some of his students; missed opportunities for other s... >> Taking all this in account, he still believes it is more worthwhile >> to support the peace action than do nothing at all." This conclusion >> may seem 'right' and it may seem obvious, but, as Greene continues, >> it is hardly easy. It is also a little more complicated than she >> makes out. Say I have a strong commitment to social justice (which I >> do) and say I have a strong commitment to my discipline (which is >> mathematics). I could skimp on the mathematics and really focus on >> social justice, but then I run the risk having students as the above >> who cannot compete within the present education system. I could skimp >> on the social justice and really focus on the mathematics, but then I >> have signaled that social justice really isn't all that important. So >> I incorporate social justice into my mathematics class. I could do it >> two ways: (1) use mathematics as a tool to consider issues of social >> justice (however, if I do this well, this is not teaching >> mathematics, but teaching social justice) - this is the usual >> approach of those who do such things (and I admire their attempts) or >> (2) use an issue of social justice to illustrate a mathematical >> principle - this is, quite a bit harder and it is easy to imagine >> somewhat silly lessons (although not entirely) as integrating the >> distribution of incomes in the US (there is a nice book that sort of >> does this called "X in the City") - this is not, in my opinion, >> properly attending to issues of social justice. Neither of these >> approaches, in my opinion, give cognizance to the importance of >> social justice or mathematics (and, of course, I speak as a person >> who believes both are important). Ball does not help here (nor >> Foucault or Butler). The only one who comes close is Kierkegaard. He indicates there may be a way out (although it is not cookie-cutter), but most often one comes to despair. >> >> >> PS. There is also the whole issue of preparing teachers of >> mathematics to incorporate social justice in their students' learning >> especially as more and more Schools of Education eliminate >> substantial course work in social justice from the required curriculum. >> >> Ed Wall >> >>> On Nov 12, 2016, at 2:30 PM, Margaret A Eisenhart >>> 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 >>> >>> >> >> > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Wed Nov 16 12:24:35 2016 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 07:24:35 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: <5753689B-395F-4239-B435-58A40CAC2526@gmail.com> References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <5753689B-395F-4239-B435-58A40CAC2526@gmail.com> Message-ID: 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 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 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 > 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 > 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" > >>>> 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 >> edu> > >>>>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > >>>>>> 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 >> edu> > >>>>>> on behalf of mike cole > >>>>>> 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 > >>>>>> >>>>>>> > >>>>>> 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 > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> on behalf of 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 > >>>>>> >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> 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 . > >>>>>>>> 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 com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039 > >>>> . > >>>>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach it as > >>>>>> PDF. > >>>>>>>> ??Good read! > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Alfredo > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >> > >> > >> > > > From smago@uga.edu Wed Nov 16 10:39:54 2016 From: smago@uga.edu (Peter Smagorinsky) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 18:39:54 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] JoLLE's Fall Issue is LIVE!!! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: We are proud to announce the Fall 2016 issue of the Journal of Language and Literacy Education (Volume 12, Issue 2)! You can find it by clicking on this link: http://jolle.coe.uga.edu/current-issue. >From elementary school-aged readers to university faculty writers, the work presented in this issue seeks to help educators grow a hope for a "viable pluralism backed by a willingness to negotiate differences in world-view" (Bruner, 1990, p. 30). There is work to be done towards this end, and we are proud in this Fall 2016 issue of JoLLE to bring readers examples of the efforts being put forth by educators from many walks of life, in multitudinous settings, and through diverse mediums. It is our hope that this issue calls to question the stories around us, inviting dialogue, raising questions, and challenging the dominant discourses that construct-and potentially change-our worlds. PLEASE share this news widely. We look forward to the dialogues this issue will bring. Thank you, Nick and Jenn Nick Thompson & Jenn Whitley, Co-Principal Editors Heidi Lyn Hadley, Managing Editor Journal of Language and Literacy Education The University of Georgia Aderhold 315 Athens, GA 30602 jolle@uga.edu Follow JoLLE on Twitter: @Jolle_uga Follow JoLLE on Facebook: Journal of Language & Literacy Education From Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu Wed Nov 16 21:29:46 2016 From: Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu (White, Phillip) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 05:29:46 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <5753689B-395F-4239-B435-58A40CAC2526@gmail.com>, Message-ID: 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 on behalf of David Kellogg 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 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 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 > 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 > 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" > >>>> 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 >> edu> > >>>>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > >>>>>> 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 >> edu> > >>>>>> on behalf of mike cole > >>>>>> 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 > >>>>>> >>>>>>> > >>>>>> 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 > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> on behalf of 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 > >>>>>> >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> 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 . > >>>>>>>> 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 com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039 > >>>> . > >>>>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach it as > >>>>>> PDF. > >>>>>>>> ??Good read! > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Alfredo > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >> > >> > >> > > > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Wed Nov 16 23:37:54 2016 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 07:37:54 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <5753689B-395F-4239-B435-58A40CAC2526@gmail.com>, , Message-ID: <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> 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 on behalf of White, Phillip 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 on behalf of David Kellogg 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 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 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 > 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 > 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" > >>>> 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 >> edu> > >>>>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > >>>>>> 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 >> edu> > >>>>>> on behalf of mike cole > >>>>>> 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 > >>>>>> >>>>>>> > >>>>>> 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 > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> on behalf of 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 > >>>>>> >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> 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 . > >>>>>>>> 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 com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039 > >>>> . > >>>>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach it as > >>>>>> PDF. > >>>>>>>> ??Good read! > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Alfredo > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >> > >> > >> > > > From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Thu Nov 17 01:54:44 2016 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 09:54:44 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <5753689B-395F-4239-B435-58A40CAC2526@gmail.com> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: 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 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 > on behalf of White, Phillip > 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 > on behalf of David Kellogg > 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 > 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 > 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 > > 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 > > 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" > > > >>>> 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 > > >> edu> > > >>>>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > >>>>>> 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 > > >> edu> > > >>>>>> on behalf of mike cole > > >>>>>> 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 > > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>> 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 > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>> on behalf of 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 > > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> 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 > com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039 > > >>>> . > > >>>>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach it as > > >>>>>> PDF. > > >>>>>>>> ??Good read! > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Alfredo > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Thu Nov 17 10:11:05 2016 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 18:11:05 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <5753689B-395F-4239-B435-58A40CAC2526@gmail.com> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no>, Message-ID: <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> 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 on behalf of Huw Lloyd 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 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 > on behalf of White, Phillip > 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 > on behalf of David Kellogg > 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 > 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 > 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 > > 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 > > 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" > > > >>>> 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 > > >> edu> > > >>>>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > >>>>>> 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 > > >> edu> > > >>>>>> on behalf of mike cole > > >>>>>> 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 > > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>> 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 > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>> on behalf of 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 > > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> 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 > com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039 > > >>>> . > > >>>>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach it as > > >>>>>> PDF. > > >>>>>>>> ??Good read! > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Alfredo > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Thu Nov 17 11:29:47 2016 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 19:29:47 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <5753689B-395F-4239-B435-58A40CAC2526@gmail.com> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: 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 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 > on behalf of Huw Lloyd > 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 > 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 > > on behalf of White, Phillip > > 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 > > on behalf of David Kellogg > > 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 > > 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 > > 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 > > > 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 > > > 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 > > > > >> edu> > > > >>>>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > >>>>>> 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 > > > > >> edu> > > > >>>>>> on behalf of mike cole > > > >>>>>> 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 > > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>> 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 > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> on behalf of 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 > > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> 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 > > com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039 > > > >>>> . > > > >>>>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach it > as > > > >>>>>> PDF. > > > >>>>>>>> ??Good read! > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> Alfredo > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > From mcole@ucsd.edu Thu Nov 17 11:45:31 2016 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 11:45:31 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Butterflies of Zagorsk Message-ID: In rummaging through old files, I found a copy of Butterflies of Zagorsk, which has been asked about for some time on XMCA. It is posted here: http://lchc.ucsd.edu/Movies/Butterflies_of_Zagorsk.mp4 Note that in making this film available to the xmca community, I am doing so in my function as an educator, and in light of the pedagogical functions of xmca as a source of important materials for concerning the cultural nature of human development. I trust you will use it in the same fashion. Meantime, lets hear it for rummaging and Bruce Jones' help in getting it online for us. Perhaps for later discussion. mike From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Thu Nov 17 12:51:56 2016 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 20:51:56 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Butterflies of Zagorsk In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Great find. You might want to watch server consumption as the file is 1.1Gb. Best, Huw On 17 November 2016 at 19:45, mike cole wrote: > In rummaging through old files, I found a copy of Butterflies of Zagorsk, > which has been asked about for some time on XMCA. It is posted here: > http://lchc.ucsd.edu/Movies/Butterflies_of_Zagorsk.mp4 > > Note that in making this film available to the xmca community, I am doing > so in my function as an educator, and in light of the pedagogical functions > of xmca as a source of important materials for concerning the cultural > nature of human development. I trust you will use it in the same fashion. > > Meantime, lets hear it for rummaging and Bruce Jones' help in getting it > online for us. Perhaps for later discussion. > > > mike > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Thu Nov 17 13:05:23 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 13:05:23 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <5753689B-395F-4239-B435-58A40CAC2526@gmail.com> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com> 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 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 > on behalf of Huw Lloyd > 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 > 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 > > on behalf of White, Phillip > > 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 > > on behalf of David Kellogg > > 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 > > 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 > > 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 > > > 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 > > > 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 > > > > >> edu> > > > >>>>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > >>>>>> 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 > > > > >> edu> > > > >>>>>> on behalf of mike cole > > > >>>>>> 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 > > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>> 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 > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> on behalf of 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 > > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> 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 > > com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039 > > > >>>> . > > > >>>>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach it > as > > > >>>>>> PDF. > > > >>>>>>>> ??Good read! > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> Alfredo > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > From wagner.schmit@gmail.com Thu Nov 17 14:39:56 2016 From: wagner.schmit@gmail.com (Wagner Luiz Schmit) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2016 07:39:56 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Butterflies of Zagorsk In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Professor Cole, Thank you very much for this file! I am downloading it now and it will be very useful in classes about special education. All the best for you. Wagner On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 4:45 AM, mike cole wrote: > In rummaging through old files, I found a copy of Butterflies of Zagorsk, > which has been asked about for some time on XMCA. It is posted here: > http://lchc.ucsd.edu/Movies/Butterflies_of_Zagorsk.mp4 > > Note that in making this film available to the xmca community, I am doing > so in my function as an educator, and in light of the pedagogical functions > of xmca as a source of important materials for concerning the cultural > nature of human development. I trust you will use it in the same fashion. > > Meantime, lets hear it for rummaging and Bruce Jones' help in getting it > online for us. Perhaps for later discussion. > > > mike > From ewall@umich.edu Thu Nov 17 16:42:36 2016 From: ewall@umich.edu (Edward Wall) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 18:42:36 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com> References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <5753689B-395F-4239-B435-58A40CAC2526@gmail.com> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com> Message-ID: 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 > 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 >> on behalf of Huw Lloyd >> 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 >> 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 >>> on behalf of White, Phillip >>> 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 >>> on behalf of David Kellogg >>> 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 >>> 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 >>> 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 >>>> 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 >>>> 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 >>> >>>>> edu> >>>>>>>>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>>>>>>> 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 >>> >>>>> edu> >>>>>>>>>> on behalf of mike cole >>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of 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 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> 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>>> com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039 >>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach it >> as >>>>>>>>>> PDF. >>>>>>>>>>>> ??Good read! >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Alfredo >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Thu Nov 17 19:16:01 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 19:16:01 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <5753689B-395F-4239-B435-58A40CAC2526@gmail.com> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <582e7283.84cf620a.c9f5a.302f@mx.google.com> 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 > 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 >> on behalf of Huw Lloyd >> 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 >> 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 >>> on behalf of White, Phillip >>> 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 >>> on behalf of David Kellogg >>> 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 >>> 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 >>> 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 >>>> 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 >>>> 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 >>> >>>>> edu> >>>>>>>>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>>>>>>> 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 >>> >>>>> edu> >>>>>>>>>> on behalf of mike cole >>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of 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 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> 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>>> com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039 >>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach it >> as >>>>>>>>>> PDF. >>>>>>>>>>>> ??Good read! >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Alfredo >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> > From Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu Fri Nov 18 14:52:01 2016 From: Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu (White, Phillip) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2016 22:52:01 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: <582e7283.84cf620a.c9f5a.302f@mx.google.com> References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <5753689B-395F-4239-B435-58A40CAC2526@gmail.com> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com> , <582e7283.84cf620a.c9f5a.302f@mx.google.com> Message-ID: well, this is what Cornel West has to say: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election [https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/aae8946d80dac457aa8b6af3f9a9fd5acc6b4acb/0_662_5150_3090/master/5150.jpg?w=1200&h=140&q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=crop&bm=normal&ba=bottom%2Cleft&blend64=aHR0cHM6Ly91cGxvYWRzLmd1aW0uY28udWsvMjAxNi8wNS8yNS9vdmVybGF5LWxvZ28tMTIwMC05MF9vcHQucG5n&s=4cbd18b4943818f70304ff2cfdc3da2d] Goodbye, American neoliberalism. A new era is here | Cornel West www.theguardian.com Trump?s election was enabled by the policies that overlooked the plight of our most vulnerable citizens. We gird ourselves for a frightening future phillip ________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 8:16:01 PM To: Edward Wall; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started 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 > 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 >> on behalf of Huw Lloyd >> 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 >> 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 >>> on behalf of White, Phillip >>> 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 >>> on behalf of David Kellogg >>> 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 >>> 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 >>> 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 >>>> 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 >>>> 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 >>> >>>>> edu> >>>>>>>>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>>>>>>> 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 >>> >>>>> edu> >>>>>>>>>> on behalf of mike cole >>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of 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 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> 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>>> com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039 >>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach it >> as >>>>>>>>>> PDF. >>>>>>>>>>>> ??Good read! >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Alfredo >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> > From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Fri Nov 18 16:26:37 2016 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2016 00:26:37 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> Message-ID: Margaret, With respect to the application of other theories, an alternative focus on the problems of "hitting a mathematical wall", is to attend to the structure of activity that the students engage with, specifically the kinds of (psychological) objects they are focused upon. The expected distinction between "being a good student" and "finding out" might have their respective foci upon diligence in manipulating notation and attendance to mathematical problems (which are then subsequently referred to through the use of notation). Ed presented some exemplars that "put off" (delay) mathematics in teaching. An alternative to this is to look to specialised forms of education in which essential aspects of the subject matter are made tangible and manifest to young minds (or older minds for that matter) on the basis of the historical origins of the ideas. Davydov's school of developmental education is the most remarkable exemplar I am aware of in this regard. However, the central English text for this (Problems of Developmental Instruction) is by no means easy to read. Its possible you may get a sense for what it is about from my comparisons paper. The consideration of identity is a concern with this line of thought, but it was not developed at the time. The principles are rather similar to those of Meshcheryakov (the Butterfies film Mike recently posted), but applied to the history of ideas rather than common cultural artefacts. In the film, the stress is on language, but most of the protracted work -- not presented in the film -- entails familiarity with basic cultural tasks. Another area of interest for me has been the work of Kay/Papert, but this has been in a more limited capacity with a focus on technological use. Still, used correctly it can be a powerful means of bringing mathematical considerations within the playful sphere of interests of primary school aged children. With respect to neoliberal politics and education, I have my doubts about any direct links unless the stress upon qualifications is considered to be a central part of it. Still, I agree with Cornel's analysis. 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" > 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 > >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 > >> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > >> 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 > >> on behalf of mike cole > >> 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 > >> >> > > >> 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 > >> > >> > on behalf of 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 > >> >> > > >> > 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 >> > > 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 . > >> > > 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach it as > >>PDF. > >> > > ??Good read! > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > Alfredo > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > > > > From hshonerd@gmail.com Fri Nov 18 19:12:33 2016 From: hshonerd@gmail.com (HENRY SHONERD) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2016 20:12:33 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <5753689B-395F-4239-B435-58A40CAC2526@gmail.com> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com> <582e7283.84cf620a.c9f5a.302f@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <56BA469E-D1C3-4924-8C7F-F976876DEE9E@gmail.com> Thank you, Phillip. "For us in these times, to even have hope is too abstract, too detached, too spectatorial. Instead we must be a hope, a participant and a force for good as we face this catastrophe.? That?s my favorite part. Henry > On Nov 18, 2016, at 3:52 PM, White, Phillip wrote: > > well, this is what Cornel West has to say: > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election > > [https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/aae8946d80dac457aa8b6af3f9a9fd5acc6b4acb/0_662_5150_3090/master/5150.jpg?w=1200&h=140&q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=crop&bm=normal&ba=bottom%2Cleft&blend64=aHR0cHM6Ly91cGxvYWRzLmd1aW0uY28udWsvMjAxNi8wNS8yNS9vdmVybGF5LWxvZ28tMTIwMC05MF9vcHQucG5n&s=4cbd18b4943818f70304ff2cfdc3da2d] > > Goodbye, American neoliberalism. A new era is here | Cornel West > www.theguardian.com > Trump?s election was enabled by the policies that overlooked the plight of our most vulnerable citizens. We gird ourselves for a frightening future > > > > > phillip > > > ________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 8:16:01 PM > To: Edward Wall; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > 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 >> 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 >>> on behalf of Huw Lloyd >>> 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 >>> 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 >>>> on behalf of White, Phillip >>>> 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 >>>> on behalf of David Kellogg >>>> 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 >>>> 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 >>>> 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 >>>>> 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 >>>>> 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 >>>> >>>>>> edu> >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>> >>>>>> edu> >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of mike cole >>>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of 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 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 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>>>> com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039 >>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach it >>> as >>>>>>>>>>> PDF. >>>>>>>>>>>>> ??Good read! >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Alfredo >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Sat Nov 19 06:24:47 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2016 06:24:47 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: <56BA469E-D1C3-4924-8C7F-F976876DEE9E@gmail.com> References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <5753689B-395F-4239-B435-58A40CAC2526@gmail.com> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com> <582e7283.84cf620a.c9f5a.302f@mx.google.com> <56BA469E-D1C3-4924-8C7F-F976876DEE9E@gmail.com> Message-ID: <583060c1.098d620a.b4db8.5e32@mx.google.com> Margaret, Carrie, Phillip, Henry, Cornell, A central and key theme of this month?s article is neoliberalism in all its guises. In my imaginary response i am addressing the authors of the paper and Cornell who addresses neoliberalism, and Phillip, who shared Cornell?s article and Henry who heard Cornell offer a way to mediate our crises. The paper is about teaching STEM and the neoliberal agenda that ignores the plight of those who suffer. Cornell says the answer is (democratic soulcraft). At the heart of this soulcraft is truth telling of the reality of suffering. In order to constitute or institute a (new) order a more pro/gressive order it seems suffering must be the key factor. The notion of ivory towers and their responses to suffering seems central. I also want to explore the theme of (play) in relation to suffering. One exemplar: There is a Buddhist who organizes gatherings where food is prepared and presented at the gatherings (for the homeless). Musical instruments are also brought and dancing proceeds. Everyone participates and this is key: You cannot tell who are the homeless and who are the people who prepared the food. They are sharing a common (new) experience that is profoundly moving and creates a sense of well-being. This Buddhist practise is exemplary as a response to our current contemporary historical moment. It is truth telling and democratic soulcraft and PLAY. (each in the other). It is one way of answering Margaret, Carrie, Cornell, Phillip, and Henry. This Buddhist act or practice is (crafting) an answer that speaks to suffering. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: HENRY SHONERD Sent: November 18, 2016 7:15 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started Thank you, Phillip. "For us in these times, to even have hope is too abstract, too detached, too spectatorial. Instead we must be a hope, a participant and a force for good as we face this catastrophe.? That?s my favorite part. Henry > On Nov 18, 2016, at 3:52 PM, White, Phillip wrote: > > well, this is what Cornel West has to say: > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election > > [https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/aae8946d80dac457aa8b6af3f9a9fd5acc6b4acb/0_662_5150_3090/master/5150.jpg?w=1200&h=140&q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=crop&bm=normal&ba=bottom%2Cleft&blend64=aHR0cHM6Ly91cGxvYWRzLmd1aW0uY28udWsvMjAxNi8wNS8yNS9vdmVybGF5LWxvZ28tMTIwMC05MF9vcHQucG5n&s=4cbd18b4943818f70304ff2cfdc3da2d] > > Goodbye, American neoliberalism. A new era is here | Cornel West > www.theguardian.com > Trump?s election was enabled by the policies that overlooked the plight of our most vulnerable citizens. We gird ourselves for a frightening future > > > > > phillip > > > ________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 8:16:01 PM > To: Edward Wall; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > 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 >> 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 >>> on behalf of Huw Lloyd >>> 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 >>> 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 >>>> on behalf of White, Phillip >>>> 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 >>>> on behalf of David Kellogg >>>> 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 >>>> 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 >>>> 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 >>>>> 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 >>>>> 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 >>>> >>>>>> edu> >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>> >>>>>> edu> >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of mike cole >>>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of 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 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 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>>>> com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039 >>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach it >>> as >>>>>>>>>>> PDF. >>>>>>>>>>>>> ??Good read! >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Alfredo >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Sat Nov 19 08:30:59 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2016 08:30:59 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Spiritual blackout in America: Election 2016 - The Boston Globe Message-ID: <58307e54.943e620a.da1ed.7938@mx.google.com> Spiritual blackout in America: Election 2016 - The Boston Globe The neofascist catastrophe called Donald Trump and the neoliberal disaster named Hillary Clinton are predictable symbols of our spiritual blackout. https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/11/03/spiritual-blackout-america-election/v7lWSybxux1OPoBg56dgsL/story.html MOVING DEEPER INTO THE NOTION OF DEMOCRATIC SOULCRAFT. NOTICE WHO ARE THE EXEMPLARY PERSONS TO INSPIRE THIS SOULCRAFT. LARRY PURSS Sent from my Windows 10 phone From lpscholar2@gmail.com Sat Nov 19 08:39:33 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2016 08:39:33 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Spiritual blackout in America: Election 2016 - The Boston Globe In-Reply-To: <58307e54.943e620a.da1ed.7938@mx.google.com> References: <58307e54.943e620a.da1ed.7938@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <58308056.d222620a.4b2ad.7e43@mx.google.com> The article situates Bernie Saunders within the Judaic Phophetic tradition that inspires Bernie?s (democratic soulcraft). This needs highlighting to bring to the forefront multiple sources of democratic soulcraft Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: November 19, 2016 8:31 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: Spiritual blackout in America: Election 2016 - The Boston Globe Spiritual blackout in America: Election 2016 - The Boston Globe The neofascist catastrophe called Donald Trump and the neoliberal disaster named Hillary Clinton are predictable symbols of our spiritual blackout. https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/11/03/spiritual-blackout-america-election/v7lWSybxux1OPoBg56dgsL/story.html MOVING DEEPER INTO THE NOTION OF DEMOCRATIC SOULCRAFT. NOTICE WHO ARE THE EXEMPLARY PERSONS TO INSPIRE THIS SOULCRAFT. LARRY PURSS Sent from my Windows 10 phone From dkellogg60@gmail.com Sat Nov 19 19:34:48 2016 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2016 14:34:48 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: <583060c1.098d620a.b4db8.5e32@mx.google.com> References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <5753689B-395F-4239-B435-58A40CAC2526@gmail.com> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com> <582e7283.84cf620a.c9f5a.302f@mx.google.com> <56BA469E-D1C3-4924-8C7F-F976876DEE9E@gmail.com> <583060c1.098d620a.b4db8.5e32@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Sorry, I've lost the plot. That is, I don't see the connection between the kind of educational neoliberalism that is being discussed in the article (that which is based on measurable results, on academic tracking, on promising goodies in return for grades and grades in return for schoolwork) and the kind of political and economic neoliberalism that is being discussed by Cornel. It seems to me that the policies that Margaret and Carrie are discussing in this paper were not (politically) liberal, nor were they new: they were taken over by Arne Duncan from the Bush administration, and the Bush administration got them, via Clinton, from good old fashioned "Back to Basics" backlash in the UK. So the roots are Toryism and not liberalism. I suppose you can argue that there is some kind of implicit analogy between education and neoliberal economics: school is supposed to be some kind of neoliberal "level playing field" where children compete like businessmen, grades are "cultural capital", classes are investment opportunities, assessment portfolios are investment portfolios, etc. This analogy is little more than a way of whipping up interest among principals, teachers, and even students (and as such I am not sure I am against it, since I don't see anything wrong with working class kids taking an interest in the getting of goodies through study). It's certainly not a good description of what is happening in schools: These businessmen produce no commodities, the grades are neither exchangeable or consumable; there is no such thing as credit or interest in this economy, and assets evaporate upon graduation instead of maturing. I think that the word "reform" is actually more important in Margaret and Carrie's title than "neoliberal": a "reform" is usually, on the lips of government bureaucracy, a euphemism for backlash, and the policies being described are part of a more general ideological backlash against Deweyism and progressive education: an anti-liberal reaction rather than a neo-liberal reform. "Neoliberalism", taken literally, would imply that the schools really are in the marketable skills business, and I don't see much evidence for that in the study. Am I missing something? David Kellogg Macquarie University On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 1:24 AM, wrote: > Margaret, Carrie, Phillip, Henry, Cornell, > > A central and key theme of this month?s article is neoliberalism in all > its guises. > In my imaginary response i am addressing the authors of the paper and > Cornell who addresses neoliberalism, and Phillip, who shared Cornell?s > article and Henry who heard Cornell offer a way to mediate our crises. > The paper is about teaching STEM and the neoliberal agenda that ignores > the plight of those who suffer. > Cornell says the answer is (democratic soulcraft). At the heart of this > soulcraft is truth telling of the reality of suffering. > > In order to constitute or institute a (new) order a more pro/gressive > order it seems suffering must be the key factor. > > The notion of ivory towers and their responses to suffering seems central. > I also want to explore the theme of (play) in relation to suffering. > > One exemplar: > There is a Buddhist who organizes gatherings where food is prepared and > presented at the gatherings (for the homeless). Musical instruments are > also brought and dancing proceeds. > Everyone participates and this is key: You cannot tell who are the > homeless and who are the people who prepared the food. They are sharing a > common (new) experience that is profoundly moving and creates a sense of > well-being. > This Buddhist practise is exemplary as a response to our current > contemporary historical moment. It is truth telling and democratic > soulcraft and PLAY. (each in the other). > It is one way of answering Margaret, Carrie, Cornell, Phillip, and Henry. > This Buddhist act or practice is (crafting) an answer that speaks to > suffering. > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: HENRY SHONERD > Sent: November 18, 2016 7:15 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > Thank you, Phillip. > "For us in these times, to even have hope is too abstract, too detached, > too spectatorial. Instead we must be a hope, a participant and a force for > good as we face this catastrophe.? > That?s my favorite part. > Henry > > > > > > On Nov 18, 2016, at 3:52 PM, White, Phillip > wrote: > > > > well, this is what Cornel West has to say: > > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election > > > > [https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/aae8946d80dac457aa8b6af3f9a9fd > 5acc6b4acb/0_662_5150_3090/master/5150.jpg?w=1200&h=140& > q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=crop&bm=normal&ba=bottom%2Cleft&blend64= > aHR0cHM6Ly91cGxvYWRzLmd1aW0uY28udWsvMjAxNi8wNS8yNS9vdmVybGF5 > LWxvZ28tMTIwMC05MF9vcHQucG5n&s=4cbd18b4943818f70304ff2cfdc3da2d]< > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> > > > > Goodbye, American neoliberalism. A new era is here | Cornel West< > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> > > www.theguardian.com > > Trump?s election was enabled by the policies that overlooked the plight > of our most vulnerable citizens. We gird ourselves for a frightening future > > > > > > > > > > phillip > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 8:16:01 PM > > To: Edward Wall; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > 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 > >> 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 > > >>> on behalf of Huw Lloyd > >>> 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 > >>> 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 edu> > >>>> on behalf of White, Phillip > >>>> 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 edu> > >>>> on behalf of David Kellogg > >>>> 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 > >>>> 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 > >>>> 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 > >>>>> 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 > >>>>> 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 > >>>> >>>>>>> edu> > >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > >>>> >>>>>>> edu> > >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of mike cole > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of 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 > >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>> com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039 > >>>>>>>>> . > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach it > >>> as > >>>>>>>>>>> PDF. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> ??Good read! > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Alfredo > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > > > > > > > > > From mcole@ucsd.edu Sun Nov 20 12:25:23 2016 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2016 12:25:23 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Fwd: [COGDEVSOC] TWO Tenure-track positions in Open Area of Psychology, Governors State University (just outside Chicago) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Sasha N. Cervantes Date: Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 12:00 PM Subject: [COGDEVSOC] TWO Tenure-track positions in Open Area of Psychology, Governors State University (just outside Chicago) To: cogdevsoc@lists.cogdevsoc.org Governors State University is seeking applicants in any area of psychology for our Division of Psychology and Counseling; *separate *listings also exist for TT position as a Coordinator and Assistant Professor in School Psychology, and for an Assistant Professor of Counseling. If interested in these other positions, see website: https://employment.govst.edu/. Below is a slightly abridged description for the *two TT open area positions in Psychology*. *Position Title: Assistant Professor of Psychology (Open Area)* Start Fall 2017 *Listing currently on HigherEdJobs.com (posting number: FA0084P)* Description Governors State University's College of Education invites applications for two tenure-track, Assistant Professors in psychology and one tenure-track, Assistant Professor in School Psychology to begin August 2017. The psychology programs are housed in the College of Education and in the Division of Psychology and Counseling. Psychology faculty support an undergraduate program (500 majors and minors), an MA program with two sequences (Clinical and Theoretical), and an EdS in School Psychology. The GSU psychology program is seeking applicants who demonstrates a commitment to: effective, multicultural approaches to teaching and mentoring, serving underserved student populations, integrating peer and student feedback, and to working collaboratively and harmoniously with a diverse team of faculty. Responsibilities for the general psychology positions will include: ? Teaching undergraduate courses in psychology and possibly graduate courses in the College of Education ? Maintain an active scholarship agenda ? Service to the university, community, and the profession of psychology GENERAL PSYCHOLOGY POSITIONS http://employment.govst.edu/postings/2191 Requirements Minimum Qualifications: Earned doctorate in any field in psychology Preferred Qualifications: ? Experience in any of our undergraduate concentrations, especially: ? Forensic, Industrial/Organizational ? Experience teaching or the ability to teach research methods and/or statistics ? Teaching experience in a diverse setting ? Experience with underserved student populations ? Ability to work independently and work collaboratively with groups ? Ability to integrate feedback ? Scholarship in the field of psychology -- ____________________________________________________________ "Develop a desire for goodness, an eagerness for knowledge, a capacity for friendship, an appreciation of beauty, and a concern for others." From The Art of Education Sasha N. Cervantes, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Division of Psychology and Counseling Governors State University 1 University Parkway University Park, IL 60484 _______________________________________________ To post to the CDS listserv, send your message to: cogdevsoc@lists.cogdevsoc.org (If you belong to the listserv and have not included any large attachments, your message will be posted without moderation--so be careful!) To subscribe or unsubscribe from the listserv, visit: http://lists.cogdevsoc.org/listinfo.cgi/cogdevsoc-cogdevsoc.org From smago@uga.edu Tue Nov 22 15:22:33 2016 From: smago@uga.edu (Peter Smagorinsky) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2016 23:22:33 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] zone of next development Message-ID: I'm watching the version of The Butterflies of Zagorsk that Mike generously shared from the UCSD archives. I give it 4 stars. It would be 5, but the copy is pretty bad. The narrator consistently refers to the "zone of next development" illustrated by periodic diagnostic sessions that also involved assistance with deaf and blind kids learning how to speak with their hands on another's hands. Zone of Next Development seems such a better term than ZPD. Proximal is too ambiguous, and so allows for just about any learning of anything anyhow to be illustrative of the ZPD. "Next" instead really emphasizes the more long-term growth that Vygotsky had in mind, as I understand his writing. But it's proximal in all the translations. Any help in understanding why? Thx,p From dkellogg60@gmail.com Tue Nov 22 17:29:20 2016 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2016 12:29:20 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: zone of next development In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Peter: The French translation is "zone prochaine de developpement", i.e. the next zone of development. Francoise Seve explains why--it is because the "next zone of development" does not refer to any particular skill or knowledge or even metalinguistic reflection that the child is going to have in the course of development; it refers very precisely to the functions which will be the most rapidly developing functions in the next age level, according to the schema that Vygotsky was working out in "The Problem of Age" (Vol. 5 in English, p. 196). This is completely confirmed by a remark that Vygotsky makes at the beginning of the lecture on the Crisis at Three (p. 283 in the English Collected Works): ""...(W)e must assume that all changes and all events that happen during the period of this crisis are grouped around some neoformation of a transitional type. Consequently, when we analyse the symptoms of the crisis, we msut answer, albeit conditionally, the question as to what it is that is new that appears during the indicated time and what is the fate of the neoformation that disappears after it. Then we must consider what change is occurring in the central and peripheral lines of development. Finally, we must evaluate the critical age from the point of view of the zone of its proximal development, that is, the relation to subsequent growth". This is why the ZPD is ALWAYS measured in years, something that very few Western people who invoke the concept have ever noted, even though it is quite explicit in every place that the ZPD is invoked. Even when the ZPD is spoken of somewhat loosely, (e.g. "What the child can do with assistance today he will be able to do without assistance tomorrow", or "in play the child is a head taller than himself") it is very clear that years are meant. Tomorrow does not and cannot mean 24 hours later, and the child will not be a head taller than himself in a week or two. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 10:22 AM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > I'm watching the version of The Butterflies of Zagorsk that Mike > generously shared from the UCSD archives. I give it 4 stars. It would be 5, > but the copy is pretty bad. > > The narrator consistently refers to the "zone of next development" > illustrated by periodic diagnostic sessions that also involved assistance > with deaf and blind kids learning how to speak with their hands on > another's hands. > > Zone of Next Development seems such a better term than ZPD. Proximal is > too ambiguous, and so allows for just about any learning of anything anyhow > to be illustrative of the ZPD. "Next" instead really emphasizes the more > long-term growth that Vygotsky had in mind, as I understand his writing. > > But it's proximal in all the translations. Any help in understanding why? > Thx,p > From smago@uga.edu Wed Nov 23 03:06:32 2016 From: smago@uga.edu (Peter Smagorinsky) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2016 11:06:32 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: zone of next development In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks David. In US educational circles in which people only read selected chapters from Mind in Society, it's always "tomorrow" and not "next year" that is invoked. Do you know if that's a translation problem, or was he being metaphorical? -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of David Kellogg Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2016 8:29 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: zone of next development Peter: The French translation is "zone prochaine de developpement", i.e. the next zone of development. Francoise Seve explains why--it is because the "next zone of development" does not refer to any particular skill or knowledge or even metalinguistic reflection that the child is going to have in the course of development; it refers very precisely to the functions which will be the most rapidly developing functions in the next age level, according to the schema that Vygotsky was working out in "The Problem of Age" (Vol. 5 in English, p. 196). This is completely confirmed by a remark that Vygotsky makes at the beginning of the lecture on the Crisis at Three (p. 283 in the English Collected Works): ""...(W)e must assume that all changes and all events that happen during the period of this crisis are grouped around some neoformation of a transitional type. Consequently, when we analyse the symptoms of the crisis, we msut answer, albeit conditionally, the question as to what it is that is new that appears during the indicated time and what is the fate of the neoformation that disappears after it. Then we must consider what change is occurring in the central and peripheral lines of development. Finally, we must evaluate the critical age from the point of view of the zone of its proximal development, that is, the relation to subsequent growth". This is why the ZPD is ALWAYS measured in years, something that very few Western people who invoke the concept have ever noted, even though it is quite explicit in every place that the ZPD is invoked. Even when the ZPD is spoken of somewhat loosely, (e.g. "What the child can do with assistance today he will be able to do without assistance tomorrow", or "in play the child is a head taller than himself") it is very clear that years are meant. Tomorrow does not and cannot mean 24 hours later, and the child will not be a head taller than himself in a week or two. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 10:22 AM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > I'm watching the version of The Butterflies of Zagorsk that Mike > generously shared from the UCSD archives. I give it 4 stars. It would > be 5, but the copy is pretty bad. > > The narrator consistently refers to the "zone of next development" > illustrated by periodic diagnostic sessions that also involved > assistance with deaf and blind kids learning how to speak with their > hands on another's hands. > > Zone of Next Development seems such a better term than ZPD. Proximal > is too ambiguous, and so allows for just about any learning of > anything anyhow to be illustrative of the ZPD. "Next" instead really > emphasizes the more long-term growth that Vygotsky had in mind, as I understand his writing. > > But it's proximal in all the translations. Any help in understanding why? > Thx,p > From shirinvossoughi@gmail.com Wed Nov 23 07:41:26 2016 From: shirinvossoughi@gmail.com (Shirin Vossoughi) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2016 09:41:26 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: zone of next development In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi David, Thank you for this. How do you think about the ways that "acting a head taller" is a concrete experience of one's emergent capabilities / potential in the moment? (in the context of play, or through generative forms of mediation/assistance) Does this align in your view with the idea that "the child will not be a head taller than himself in a week or two" or does it complicate the ways we view this phenomenon as an experience? Shirin On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 7:29 PM, David Kellogg wrote: > Peter: > > The French translation is "zone prochaine de developpement", i.e. the next > zone of development. Francoise Seve explains why--it is because the "next > zone of development" does not refer to any particular skill or knowledge or > even metalinguistic reflection that the child is going to have in the > course of development; it refers very precisely to the functions which will > be the most rapidly developing functions in the next age level, according > to the schema that Vygotsky was working out in "The Problem of Age" (Vol. 5 > in English, p. 196). This is completely confirmed by a remark that Vygotsky > makes at the beginning of the lecture on the Crisis at Three (p. 283 in the > English Collected Works): > > ""...(W)e must assume that all changes and all events that happen during > the period of this crisis are grouped around some neoformation of a > transitional type. Consequently, when we analyse the symptoms of the > crisis, we msut answer, albeit conditionally, the question as to what it is > that is new that appears during the indicated time and what is the fate of > the neoformation that disappears after it. Then we must consider what > change is occurring in the central and peripheral lines of development. > Finally, we must evaluate the critical age from the point of view of the > zone of its proximal development, that is, the relation to subsequent > growth". > > This is why the ZPD is ALWAYS measured in years, something that very few > Western people who invoke the concept have ever noted, even though it is > quite explicit in every place that the ZPD is invoked. Even when the ZPD is > spoken of somewhat loosely, (e.g. "What the child can do with assistance > today he will be able to do without assistance tomorrow", or "in play the > child is a head taller than himself") it is very clear that years are > meant. Tomorrow does not and cannot mean 24 hours later, and the child will > not be a head taller than himself in a week or two. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 10:22 AM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > > I'm watching the version of The Butterflies of Zagorsk that Mike > > generously shared from the UCSD archives. I give it 4 stars. It would be > 5, > > but the copy is pretty bad. > > > > The narrator consistently refers to the "zone of next development" > > illustrated by periodic diagnostic sessions that also involved assistance > > with deaf and blind kids learning how to speak with their hands on > > another's hands. > > > > Zone of Next Development seems such a better term than ZPD. Proximal is > > too ambiguous, and so allows for just about any learning of anything > anyhow > > to be illustrative of the ZPD. "Next" instead really emphasizes the more > > long-term growth that Vygotsky had in mind, as I understand his writing. > > > > But it's proximal in all the translations. Any help in understanding why? > > Thx,p > > > From mcole@ucsd.edu Wed Nov 23 08:14:19 2016 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2016 16:14:19 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Fwd: [COGDEVSOC] Lectureship in 'Culture and Cognition' at Durham University In-Reply-To: <7211151F5CBC3443AD116852CE7AA05D53AEF196@CISAMRMBS01.mds.ad.dur.ac.uk> References: <7211151F5CBC3443AD116852CE7AA05D53AEF196@CISAMRMBS01.mds.ad.dur.ac.uk> Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: FLYNN, EMMA G. Date: Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 9:50 AM Subject: [COGDEVSOC] Lectureship in 'Culture and Cognition' at Durham University To: cogdevsoc@lists.cogdevsoc.org , dev-europe@lboro.ac.uk Dear All, There is a lecturer position in ?Culture and Cognition? at Durham University?s Anthropology department. Requirements state a PhD in Anthropology or *related discipline*, so it may be of interest to some people on this mailing list. Details are attached. It is a lovely place to live and work. Best wishes, Emma ------------------------------------------ Prof Emma Flynn *Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Themed Issue: Innovation in animals and humans: understanding the origins and development of novel and creative behaviour * Compiled and edited by Simon M. Reader, Emma Flynn, Julie Morand-Ferron and Kevin N. Laland Including: Flynn E, Turner C, Giraldeau L-A. 2016 Selectivity in social and asocial learning: investigating the prevalence, effect and development of young children?s learning preferences. *Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B* 371: 20150189. Reader SM, Morand-Ferron J, Flynn E. 2016 Animal and human innovation: novel problems and novel solutions. *Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B* 371: 20150182. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2015.0182 Deputy Head of Faculty (Research), Faculty of Social Sciences and Health, Durham University, Tel: +44 (0)191 3342096 (ext 42096) Developmental and Comparative Psychologist, School of Education, Durham University, Durham, DH1 1TA, +44 (0)191 334 8412 (ext 48412) https://www.dur.ac.uk/education/staff/profile/?id=5391 _______________________________________________ To post to the CDS listserv, send your message to: cogdevsoc@lists.cogdevsoc.org (If you belong to the listserv and have not included any large attachments, your message will be posted without moderation--so be careful!) To subscribe or unsubscribe from the listserv, visit: http://lists.cogdevsoc.org/listinfo.cgi/cogdevsoc-cogdevsoc.org -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: EvoCogCulture@Durham.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 179209 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20161123/78b64712/attachment-0001.pdf From sharada.gade@umu.se Wed Nov 23 08:49:13 2016 From: sharada.gade@umu.se (Sharada Gade) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2016 16:49:13 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Please change my email address In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <666AA2DF-5C0E-42F3-B286-ABE9F70B03A9@umu.se> Hej Please could you change the email of my subscription from the present one to Sharada.Gade@gmail.com to which address this mail is also copy to ? I am in-between jobs, yet wish to continue receiving xmca mails and discussion Regards Sharada ------------------------------------------------------------ Sharada Gade Assistant Professor in Mathematics Education, Ume? Mathematics Education Research Centre, Department of Science and Mathematics Education, Linnaeus V?g 41, Ume? University, 901 87 UME? Sweden Email: Sharada.Gade@gmail.com Phone: 07382 26025 http://www.ufm.umu.se/om-ufm/personal/visa-person/.cid68430?uid=shga0004&guise=employee78686 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- On 23 Nov 2016, at 17:21, xmca-l-request@mailman.ucsd.edu wrote: Send xmca-l mailing list submissions to xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca-l or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to xmca-l-request@mailman.ucsd.edu You can reach the person managing the list at xmca-l-owner@mailman.ucsd.edu When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of xmca-l digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (Edward Wall) 2. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (David Kellogg) 3. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (Margaret A Eisenhart) 4. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (Margaret A Eisenhart) 5. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (Margaret A Eisenhart) 6. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (Margaret A Eisenhart) 7. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (Huw Lloyd) 8. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (HENRY SHONERD) 9. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (Edward Wall) 10. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (White, Phillip) 11. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (Edward Wall) 12. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (Margaret A Eisenhart) 13. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (David Kellogg) 14. JoLLE's Fall Issue is LIVE!!! (Peter Smagorinsky) 15. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (White, Phillip) 16. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (Alfredo Jornet Gil) 17. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (Huw Lloyd) 18. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (Alfredo Jornet Gil) 19. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (Huw Lloyd) 20. Butterflies of Zagorsk (mike cole) 21. Re: Butterflies of Zagorsk (Huw Lloyd) 22. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (lpscholar2@gmail.com) 23. Re: Butterflies of Zagorsk (Wagner Luiz Schmit) 24. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (Edward Wall) 25. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (lpscholar2@gmail.com) 26. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (White, Phillip) 27. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (Huw Lloyd) 28. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (HENRY SHONERD) 29. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (lpscholar2@gmail.com) 30. Spiritual blackout in America: Election 2016 - The Boston Globe (lpscholar2@gmail.com) 31. Re: Spiritual blackout in America: Election 2016 - The Boston Globe (lpscholar2@gmail.com) 32. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (David Kellogg) 33. Fwd: [COGDEVSOC] TWO Tenure-track positions in Open Area of Psychology, Governors State University (just outside Chicago) (mike cole) 34. zone of next development (Peter Smagorinsky) 35. Re: zone of next development (David Kellogg) 36. Re: zone of next development (Peter Smagorinsky) 37. Re: zone of next development (Shirin Vossoughi) 38. Fwd: [COGDEVSOC] Lectureship in 'Culture and Cognition' at Durham University (mike cole) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2016 20:37:03 -0600 From: Edward Wall Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Message-ID: <1F325873-EC41-4E1E-82C6-333275137EB9@umich.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Margaret and Carrie Thanks for the article. I hope what I write will be of interest. I am presently a mathematics educator (although retired) and have taught mathematics in all the grades into graduate school and well as teachers of preschool, elementary, and secondary mathematics. What you write about authoring math identities resonates !highly! with my experience. However, I am unsure what to make of the labeling of neoliberal reform. I see something similar to the young woman you mention at all grade levels including those of graduate school. It seems to have little to do with curricular reform and everything to do with teaching. For example, the Calculus courses you mention are not there to give students a deep understanding of mathematics, but to aid in college acceptance. This, of course, led to parent and student outcry and situation in schools all across the US for high school Calculus (this has been going on for some time) The Calculus AP may have originally been for the purpose of usefully challenging young people, but, in the hands of college admission officers, soon changed into a way to control admission. These courses are usually poorly taught (regardless of where they are taught) because few high school teachers have sufficient training or experience (taking a calculus course does not mean you have the wherewithal to teach it; that takes considerably more knowledge). Math departments do use them for placement, but not because they think students have been well prepared for Calculus. Let me give an exemplar (smile). A number of years ago I was teaching a freshman English course (I know that sounds peculiar) with a significant slant on social justice. One of my students, who seemed (and acted) quite bright, was having problems completing assignments (and seemed a little dismissive of his peers). Finally, I told him that I was going to give him an F. At that point things became interesting. He told me that he had breezed through high school, scored high on the Calculus AP, received a scholarship, and was placed in the second semester of Calculus. The reason work wasn?t done was that he was failing that course in Calculus and was on the verge of losing his scholarship (especially if I failed him). Well, I, of course, extended deadlines, etc. and became a mentor of sorts for the next 4 years. All this, as the young woman in your article, pretty much destroyed his confidence/identity and it was not until his junior year that I began to see some slight improvement or, one might say, re-authoring (although the story line had changed considerably; once hoping to be a doctor he is now hoping to be a PA). This is all to the good. However, during his final science course (physics), he decided that he was lacking in geometry and trigonometry and asked for help the summer before and during the relevant semester. I (being retired you have extra time - ha!) did so and found that he was !woefully! lacking relevant skills (this from a student who had scored at the highest level on the Calculus AP). My second point is, in a sense, complicated. Maxine Green has a variation of this on page 276 of her book ?Teacher as Stranger.? She tells the story of a teacher who believes in social justice and citizen participation. He is eager for his students to participate in a moratorium in response to the Vietnamese War. However, he has other convictions. ?He does not believe that learning sequences should be whimsically or foolishly interrupted; he thinks classroom activity, because it brings him in contact with his students, contributes measurably to their education. A lost day, as he sees it, might mean a setback for some of his students; missed opportunities for other s? Taking all this in account, he still believes it is more worthwhile to support the peace action than do nothing at all.? This conclusion may seem ?right? and it may seem obvious, but, as Greene continues, it is hardly easy. It is also a little more complicated than she makes out. Say I have a strong commitment to social justice (which I do) and say I have a strong commitment to my discipline (which is mathematics). I could skimp on the mathematics and really focus on social justice, but then I run the risk having students as the above who cannot compete within the present education system. I could skimp on the social justice and really focus on the mathematics, but then I have signaled that social justice really isn?t all that important. So I incorporate social justice into my mathematics class. I could do it two ways: (1) use mathematics as a tool to consider issues of social justice (however, if I do this well, this is not teaching mathematics, but teaching social justice) - this is the usual approach of those who do such things (and I admire their attempts) or (2) use an issue of social justice to illustrate a mathematical principle - this is, quite a bit harder and it is easy to imagine somewhat silly lessons (although not entirely) as integrating the distribution of incomes in the US (there is a nice book that sort of does this called "X in the City?) - this is not, in my opinion, properly attending to issues of social justice. Neither of these approaches, in my opinion, give cognizance to the importance of social justice or mathematics (and, of course, I speak as a person who believes both are important). Ball does not help here (nor Foucault or Butler). The only one who comes close is Kierkegaard. He indicates there may be a way out (although it is not cookie-cutter), but most often one comes to despair. PS. There is also the whole issue of preparing teachers of mathematics to incorporate social justice in their students' learning especially as more and more Schools of Education eliminate substantial course work in social justice from the required curriculum. Ed Wall On Nov 12, 2016, at 2:30 PM, Margaret A Eisenhart 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 ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 07:38:12 +1100 From: David Kellogg Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 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 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 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" 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 on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil 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 on behalf of mike cole 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 on behalf of 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 . 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 to the article (see above), and also attach it as PDF. ??Good read! Alfredo ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 20:56:12 +0000 From: Margaret A Eisenhart Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Alfredo, you asked: ?is there not something of the same principle of privilege that runs through neoliberalism in the "standing" thing? Perhaps it's just my narrow understanding of the term, and of the theory as a whole, but it seems to me that privilege has something to do here: the same principle that pushes some classes down pushes them down when they begin to raise up in performance. Did other students rise up and begun performing better or moving to a more privileged position as the initially high-achieving ones begun failing? Is this notion of identity-as-standing not also within the same larger scheme of somebodies and nobodies?? We think of identity-with-standing as a concept that draws attention to identities that bring status and prestige in local social and cultural context and suggest that such identities need to be examined for what they confer status and prestige on. In our case, we do not think that what is conferred is worthwhile, even though it brings some local prestige. It was not the case that other students moved up; it was the case that fewer and fewer students matched the achievement model of this identity-with-standing. We don?t think the concept gets us away from somebodies and nobodies. Margaret ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 21:03:31 +0000 From: Margaret A Eisenhart Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" David, you posted the following: On 11/13/16, 2:12 PM, "David Kellogg" wrote: Both of these are on p. 193. But they seem quite different to me. The first looks like it was taken from an interview, or rather from three different interviews, because actually Student 2 and 3 don't seem to be answering the same question, and even Student 1 doesn't really talk about what it LOOKS like to be a good student. But the second looks like an interpretation: not something students actually said but something that the researchers assumed that they were thinking. Is that a fair reading? The students in the first set of quotes were responding to the same interview question, although we reproduced only the portions of their responses that seemed to bear most directly on the question. The second set (in quotes) are the students? own words excerpted from longer responses and our interpretation of them. Margaret ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 21:11:32 +0000 From: Margaret A Eisenhart Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Thank you for your comments, Huw. They raise a number of interesting questions. Regarding the first one below, we are wondering what you have in mind as an alternative to identity (in our particular case). Regarding the second one below, we don?t think that identities of independence and finding out are sustainable for most students in this context unless students have additional resources (outside of classes) for developing such identities. Margaret On 11/13/16, 2:47 PM, "Huw Lloyd" wrote: ii) Whether it is better not to focus essentially on the place of identity. 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. ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 21:29:34 +0000 From: Margaret A Eisenhart Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Message-ID: <2AC29B6F-74D6-4351-A782-84863D9E1DE6@colorado.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Ed, Thank you for your comments. I?m afraid I?m not as sanguine as you are about separating curriculum and teaching. Yes, there are some very good teachers who find ways to go beyond the dictates of curriculum reform, accountability, and college/university requirements. But the pressures to conform are many and come from multiple directions. For students such as those in our study, such teachers are rare and continually pressured to take on more and more features of the achievement regime. I do not think we can depend on good teachers alone to solve this problem. What is Kierkegaard?s approach? Margaret On 11/13/16, 7:37 PM, "Edward Wall" wrote: Margaret and Carrie Thanks for the article. I hope what I write will be of interest. I am presently a mathematics educator (although retired) and have taught mathematics in all the grades into graduate school and well as teachers of preschool, elementary, and secondary mathematics. What you write about authoring math identities resonates !highly! with my experience. However, I am unsure what to make of the labeling of neoliberal reform. I see something similar to the young woman you mention at all grade levels including those of graduate school. It seems to have little to do with curricular reform and everything to do with teaching. For example, the Calculus courses you mention are not there to give students a deep understanding of mathematics, but to aid in college acceptance. This, of course, led to parent and student outcry and situation in schools all across the US for high school Calculus (this has been going on for some time) The Calculus AP may have originally been for the purpose of usefully challenging young people, but, in the hands of college admission officers, soon changed into a way to control admission. These courses are usually poorly taught (regardless of where they are taught) because few high school teachers have sufficient training or experience (taking a calculus course does not mean you have the wherewithal to teach it; that takes considerably more knowledge). Math departments do use them for placement, but not because they think students have been well prepared for Calculus. Let me give an exemplar (smile). A number of years ago I was teaching a freshman English course (I know that sounds peculiar) with a significant slant on social justice. One of my students, who seemed (and acted) quite bright, was having problems completing assignments (and seemed a little dismissive of his peers). Finally, I told him that I was going to give him an F. At that point things became interesting. He told me that he had breezed through high school, scored high on the Calculus AP, received a scholarship, and was placed in the second semester of Calculus. The reason work wasn?t done was that he was failing that course in Calculus and was on the verge of losing his scholarship (especially if I failed him). Well, I, of course, extended deadlines, etc. and became a mentor of sorts for the next 4 years. All this, as the young woman in your article, pretty much destroyed his confidence/identity and it was not until his junior year that I began to see some slight improvement or, one might say, re-authoring (although the story line had changed considerably; once hoping to be a doctor he is now hoping to be a PA). This is all to the good. However, during his final science course (physics), he decided that he was lacking in geometry and trigonometry and asked for help the summer before and during the relevant semester. I (being retired you have extra time - ha!) did so and found that he was !woefully! lacking relevant skills (this from a student who had scored at the highest level on the Calculus AP). My second point is, in a sense, complicated. Maxine Green has a variation of this on page 276 of her book ?Teacher as Stranger.? She tells the story of a teacher who believes in social justice and citizen participation. He is eager for his students to participate in a moratorium in response to the Vietnamese War. However, he has other convictions. ?He does not believe that learning sequences should be whimsically or foolishly interrupted; he thinks classroom activity, because it brings him in contact with his students, contributes measurably to their education. A lost day, as he sees it, might mean a setback for some of his students; missed opportunities for other s? Taking all this in account, he still believes it is more worthwhile to support the peace action than do nothing at all.? This conclusion may seem ?right? and it may seem obvious, but, as Greene continues, it is hardly easy. It is also a little more complicated than she makes out. Say I have a strong commitment to social justice (which I do) and say I have a strong commitment to my discipline (which is mathematics). I could skimp on the mathematics and really focus on social justice, but then I run the risk having students as the above who cannot compete within the present education system. I could skimp on the social justice and really focus on the mathematics, but then I have signaled that social justice really isn?t all that important. So I incorporate social justice into my mathematics class. I could do it two ways: (1) use mathematics as a tool to consider issues of social justice (however, if I do this well, this is not teaching mathematics, but teaching social justice) - this is the usual approach of those who do such things (and I admire their attempts) or (2) use an issue of social justice to illustrate a mathematical principle - this is, quite a bit harder and it is easy to imagine somewhat silly lessons (although not entirely) as integrating the distribution of incomes in the US (there is a nice book that sort of does this called "X in the City?) - this is not, in my opinion, properly attending to issues of social justice. Neither of these approaches, in my opinion, give cognizance to the importance of social justice or mathematics (and, of course, I speak as a person who believes both are important). Ball does not help here (nor Foucault or Butler). The only one who comes close is Kierkegaard. He indicates there may be a way out (although it is not cookie-cutter), but most often one comes to despair. PS. There is also the whole issue of preparing teachers of mathematics to incorporate social justice in their students' learning especially as more and more Schools of Education eliminate substantial course work in social justice from the required curriculum. Ed Wall On Nov 12, 2016, at 2:30 PM, Margaret A Eisenhart 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 ------------------------------ Message: 7 Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 22:24:13 +0000 From: Huw Lloyd Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On 15 November 2016 at 21:11, Margaret A Eisenhart < margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu> wrote: Thank you for your comments, Huw. They raise a number of interesting questions. Regarding the first one below, we are wondering what you have in mind as an alternative to identity (in our particular case). Regarding the second one below, we don?t think that identities of independence and finding out are sustainable for most students in this context unless students have additional resources (outside of classes) for developing such identities. Margaret You're welcome, Margaret. The "not" in point 2 is an edit error carrying over from point 1. For point 5 I had in mind a distinction between ways of being/orienting that the student already has some habituation for vs those that are fostered locally and whether authentically finding things out on their own initiative is sustainable within the settings, i.e. whether it is obstructed (generally I would say this is often the case including higher ed.) Best, Huw On 11/13/16, 2:47 PM, "Huw Lloyd" wrote: ii) Whether it is better not to focus essentially on the place of identity. 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. ------------------------------ Message: 8 Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 16:23:37 -0700 From: HENRY SHONERD Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Message-ID: <5753689B-395F-4239-B435-58A40CAC2526@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 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 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 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 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" 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 on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil 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 on behalf of mike cole 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 on behalf of 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 . 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 to the article (see above), and also attach it as PDF. ??Good read! Alfredo ------------------------------ Message: 9 Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 18:43:42 -0600 From: Edward Wall Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Message-ID: <28AD1876-BDC2-4325-8C27-7C30CA400572@umich.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Margaret My fault for trying to keep things short as I am not sanguine, at all, about separating ?good' teaching and the curriculum either. Asking for a teaching of calculus, etc. by most high school teachers will result in courses where students come away with little intellectual curiosity, serious deliberation or deep knowledge and understanding qua mathematics and no classroom time for citizen participation or social critique, [Encouraging those qualities, by the way, seems to me (and some would quibble) as reasonable as any definition of ?good? teaching] But even more importantly, at the present time, there is a sense in which it is not expected that these courses be taught ?well.' They are there to sort students in the college track and these students will again be intentionally sorted at the university level by similar courses which are again not taught ?well' (tenured faculty tend not to teach these courses and, in general, have little interest in the ?whole? student). Part of the problem is, as you say, curriculum, etc. However, part of the problem is many university faculty in the STEM fields although accepting the above definition of ?good? teaching by nodding agreement, would have difficulty modeling and teaching such (and this isn?t because they don?t care; they just don?t know how). Schools of Education, who supposedly intervene on these sorts of things are, most usually, ineffectual for all sorts of reasons (especially as regard the STEM curriculum for high school) and so high school teachers are as they are. Again, this goes all the way down to preK and may be more damaging in pre high school. My point - not well made - is that calling all this neoliberal reform seems to miss the point that nothing really has been reformed for, at least, the last 50 years. What you are calling neoliberal reform has just made what was already problematic all the more obvious. That said, you can teach mathematics in such a way that, in a manner of speaking, you can subvert the downside of the curriculum. I am speaking from the inside as a mathematics teacher and as a mathematics teacher educator. That is, despite the curriculum, you can teach for intellectual curiosity, serious deliberation and deep knowledge and understanding qua mathematics and you can - and I admit to not doing this as well as I would wish - make room for social critique (all this is possibly easier in an inner city school that a suburban school). I was able to do a little with citizen participation as a teacher educator, but nothing, I think, significant. I?m not saying it is easy and I, as a classroom teacher, loudly disagreed with principals and superintendents when they engaged, one might say, in neoliberal reform. All this neoliberal reform, by the way, was an ongoing discussion in my mathematics eduction classroom as my students were headed for classrooms similar to the ones you write about. So, no you can't separate teaching and the curriculum, but that shouldn?t be (and this is my thinking and many of my students) an excuse to forego attempts at ?good? teaching. Briefly, key is respect for the discipline and respect for one another and I am reasonably unconvinced such respect is, locally, irrevocably curtailed by the curriculum (although I would agree neoliberal reform globally respects neither). Kierkegaard?s solution? I wrote an essay awhile back which was published in Journal of Educational Controversy (Winter 2010) titled Aesthetic Education in the Mathematics Classroom. I don?t really like the ending - too positive - and when I sent it in they didn?t send it back for revision so I couldn?t change it. Far too briefly, rationally it is not possible to do such teaching, but that doesn?t mean, pragmatically speaking, that you can?t. However, the decision to do so is in, one might say, every moment. Ed On Nov 15, 2016, at 3:29 PM, Margaret A Eisenhart wrote: Ed, Thank you for your comments. I?m afraid I?m not as sanguine as you are about separating curriculum and teaching. Yes, there are some very good teachers who find ways to go beyond the dictates of curriculum reform, accountability, and college/university requirements. But the pressures to conform are many and come from multiple directions. For students such as those in our study, such teachers are rare and continually pressured to take on more and more features of the achievement regime. I do not think we can depend on good teachers alone to solve this problem. What is Kierkegaard?s approach? Margaret On 11/13/16, 7:37 PM, "Edward Wall" wrote: Margaret and Carrie Thanks for the article. I hope what I write will be of interest. I am presently a mathematics educator (although retired) and have taught mathematics in all the grades into graduate school and well as teachers of preschool, elementary, and secondary mathematics. What you write about authoring math identities resonates !highly! with my experience. However, I am unsure what to make of the labeling of neoliberal reform. I see something similar to the young woman you mention at all grade levels including those of graduate school. It seems to have little to do with curricular reform and everything to do with teaching. For example, the Calculus courses you mention are not there to give students a deep understanding of mathematics, but to aid in college acceptance. This, of course, led to parent and student outcry and situation in schools all across the US for high school Calculus (this has been going on for some time) The Calculus AP may have originally been for the purpose of usefully challenging young people, but, in the hands of college admission officers, soon changed into a way to control admission. These courses are usually poorly taught (regardless of where they are taught) because few high school teachers have sufficient training or experience (taking a calculus course does not mean you have the wherewithal to teach it; that takes considerably more knowledge). Math departments do use them for placement, but not because they think students have been well prepared for Calculus. Let me give an exemplar (smile). A number of years ago I was teaching a freshman English course (I know that sounds peculiar) with a significant slant on social justice. One of my students, who seemed (and acted) quite bright, was having problems completing assignments (and seemed a little dismissive of his peers). Finally, I told him that I was going to give him an F. At that point things became interesting. He told me that he had breezed through high school, scored high on the Calculus AP, received a scholarship, and was placed in the second semester of Calculus. The reason work wasn?t done was that he was failing that course in Calculus and was on the verge of losing his scholarship (especially if I failed him). Well, I, of course, extended deadlines, etc. and became a mentor of sorts for the next 4 years. All this, as the young woman in your article, pretty much destroyed his confidence/identity and it was not until his junior year that I began to see some slight improvement or, one might say, re-authoring (although the story line had changed considerably; once hoping to be a doctor he is now hoping to be a PA). This is all to the good. However, during his final science course (physics), he decided that he was lacking in geometry and trigonometry and asked for help the summer before and during the relevant semester. I (being retired you have extra time - ha!) did so and found that he was !woefully! lacking relevant skills (this from a student who had scored at the highest level on the Calculus AP). My second point is, in a sense, complicated. Maxine Green has a variation of this on page 276 of her book ?Teacher as Stranger.? She tells the story of a teacher who believes in social justice and citizen participation. He is eager for his students to participate in a moratorium in response to the Vietnamese War. However, he has other convictions. ?He does not believe that learning sequences should be whimsically or foolishly interrupted; he thinks classroom activity, because it brings him in contact with his students, contributes measurably to their education. A lost day, as he sees it, might mean a setback for some of his students; missed opportunities for other s? Taking all this in account, he still believes it is more worthwhile to support the peace action than do nothing at all.? This conclusion may seem ?right? and it may seem obvious, but, as Greene continues, it is hardly easy. It is also a little more complicated than she makes out. Say I have a strong commitment to social justice (which I do) and say I have a strong commitment to my discipline (which is mathematics). I could skimp on the mathematics and really focus on social justice, but then I run the risk having students as the above who cannot compete within the present education system. I could skimp on the social justice and really focus on the mathematics, but then I have signaled that social justice really isn?t all that important. So I incorporate social justice into my mathematics class. I could do it two ways: (1) use mathematics as a tool to consider issues of social justice (however, if I do this well, this is not teaching mathematics, but teaching social justice) - this is the usual approach of those who do such things (and I admire their attempts) or (2) use an issue of social justice to illustrate a mathematical principle - this is, quite a bit harder and it is easy to imagine somewhat silly lessons (although not entirely) as integrating the distribution of incomes in the US (there is a nice book that sort of does this called "X in the City?) - this is not, in my opinion, properly attending to issues of social justice. Neither of these approaches, in my opinion, give cognizance to the importance of social justice or mathematics (and, of course, I speak as a person who believes both are important). Ball does not help here (nor Foucault or Butler). The only one who comes close is Kierkegaard. He indicates there may be a way out (although it is not cookie-cutter), but most often one comes to despair. PS. There is also the whole issue of preparing teachers of mathematics to incorporate social justice in their students' learning especially as more and more Schools of Education eliminate substantial course work in social justice from the required curriculum. Ed Wall On Nov 12, 2016, at 2:30 PM, Margaret A Eisenhart 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 ------------------------------ Message: 10 Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 17:23:41 +0000 From: "White, Phillip" Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Margaret and Ed, I think that one of the great difficulties of reducing the effects of neoliberal ideology within public education is that it is a default theory of education since the days of liberal laissez faire economics of the 19th century. It was during that century that public education was socially and politically constructed and the accompanying belief in Spencerian social-darwinism. The work of Dewey notwithstanding, the values placed on individual merit and self-sufficiency has proved to be an irreducible tension (James Wertsch's phrase) within the efforts to effect greater education equity for those previously marginalised within public education. So that the data explored in the Eisenhart / Allen paper does, I think, further demonstrate that not only are student identities hollowed out within implementation of STEM education, but is further evidence of an historical process that has been in place for generations of American education systems. I'm really interested in the final paragraph of the paper, "articulating new ways of making selves intelligible in the contest of our lives". After all, if we can't do that, what's the use? Certainly that was what Spinoza was struggling with in his work on ethics. Phillip ________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Edward Wall Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 5:43:42 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started Margaret My fault for trying to keep things short as I am not sanguine, at all, about separating ?good' teaching and the curriculum either. Asking for a teaching of calculus, etc. by most high school teachers will result in courses where students come away with little intellectual curiosity, serious deliberation or deep knowledge and understanding qua mathematics and no classroom time for citizen participation or social critique, [Encouraging those qualities, by the way, seems to me (and some would quibble) as reasonable as any definition of ?good? teaching] But even more importantly, at the present time, there is a sense in which it is not expected that these courses be taught ?well.' They are there to sort students in the college track and these students will again be intentionally sorted at the university level by similar courses which are again not taught ?well' (tenured faculty tend not to teach these courses and, in general, have little interest in the ?whole? student). Part of the problem is, as you say, curriculum, etc. However, part of the problem is many university faculty in the STEM fields although accepting the above definition of ?good? teaching by nodding agreement, would have difficulty modeling and teaching such (and this isn?t because they don?t care; they just don?t know how). Schools of Education, who supposedly intervene on these sorts of things are, most usually, ineffectual for all sorts of reasons (especially as regard the STEM curriculum for high school) and so high school teachers are as they are. Again, this goes all the way down to preK and may be more damaging in pre high school. My point - not well made - is that calling all this neoliberal reform seems to miss the point that nothing really has been reformed for, at least, the last 50 years. What you are calling neoliberal reform has just made what was already problematic all the more obvious. That said, you can teach mathematics in such a way that, in a manner of speaking, you can subvert the downside of the curriculum. I am speaking from the inside as a mathematics teacher and as a mathematics teacher educator. That is, despite the curriculum, you can teach for intellectual curiosity, serious deliberation and deep knowledge and understanding qua mathematics and you can - and I admit to not doing this as well as I would wish - make room for social critique (all this is possibly easier in an inner city school that a suburban school). I was able to do a little with citizen participation as a teacher educator, but nothing, I think, significant. I?m not saying it is easy and I, as a classroom teacher, loudly disagreed with principals and superintendents when they engaged, one might say, in neoliberal reform. All this neoliberal reform, by the way, was an ongoing discussion in my mathematics eduction classroom as my students were headed for classrooms similar to the ones you write about. So, no you can't separate teaching and the curriculum, but that shouldn?t be (and this is my thinking and many of my students) an excuse to forego attempts at ?good? teaching. Briefly, key is respect for the discipline and respect for one another and I am reasonably unconvinced such respect is, locally, irrevocably curtailed by the curriculum (although I would agree neoliberal reform globally respects neither). Kierkegaard?s solution? I wrote an essay awhile back which was published in Journal of Educational Controversy (Winter 2010) titled Aesthetic Education in the Mathematics Classroom. I don?t really like the ending - too positive - and when I sent it in they didn?t send it back for revision so I couldn?t change it. Far too briefly, rationally it is not possible to do such teaching, but that doesn?t mean, pragmatically speaking, that you can?t. However, the decision to do so is in, one might say, every moment. Ed On Nov 15, 2016, at 3:29 PM, Margaret A Eisenhart wrote: Ed, Thank you for your comments. I?m afraid I?m not as sanguine as you are about separating curriculum and teaching. Yes, there are some very good teachers who find ways to go beyond the dictates of curriculum reform, accountability, and college/university requirements. But the pressures to conform are many and come from multiple directions. For students such as those in our study, such teachers are rare and continually pressured to take on more and more features of the achievement regime. I do not think we can depend on good teachers alone to solve this problem. What is Kierkegaard?s approach? Margaret On 11/13/16, 7:37 PM, "Edward Wall" wrote: Margaret and Carrie Thanks for the article. I hope what I write will be of interest. I am presently a mathematics educator (although retired) and have taught mathematics in all the grades into graduate school and well as teachers of preschool, elementary, and secondary mathematics. What you write about authoring math identities resonates !highly! with my experience. However, I am unsure what to make of the labeling of neoliberal reform. I see something similar to the young woman you mention at all grade levels including those of graduate school. It seems to have little to do with curricular reform and everything to do with teaching. For example, the Calculus courses you mention are not there to give students a deep understanding of mathematics, but to aid in college acceptance. This, of course, led to parent and student outcry and situation in schools all across the US for high school Calculus (this has been going on for some time) The Calculus AP may have originally been for the purpose of usefully challenging young people, but, in the hands of college admission officers, soon changed into a way to control admission. These courses are usually poorly taught (regardless of where they are taught) because few high school teachers have sufficient training or experience (taking a calculus course does not mean you have the wherewithal to teach it; that takes considerably more knowledge). Math departments do use them for placement, but not because they think students have been well prepared for Calculus. Let me give an exemplar (smile). A number of years ago I was teaching a freshman English course (I know that sounds peculiar) with a significant slant on social justice. One of my students, who seemed (and acted) quite bright, was having problems completing assignments (and seemed a little dismissive of his peers). Finally, I told him that I was going to give him an F. At that point things became interesting. He told me that he had breezed through high school, scored high on the Calculus AP, received a scholarship, and was placed in the second semester of Calculus. The reason work wasn?t done was that he was failing that course in Calculus and was on the verge of losing his scholarship (especially if I failed him). Well, I, of course, extended deadlines, etc. and became a mentor of sorts for the next 4 years. All this, as the young woman in your article, pretty much destroyed his confidence/identity and it was not until his junior year that I began to see some slight improvement or, one might say, re-authoring (although the story line had changed considerably; once hoping to be a doctor he is now hoping to be a PA). This is all to the good. However, during his final science course (physics), he decided that he was lacking in geometry and trigonometry and asked for help the summer before and during the relevant semester. I (being retired you have extra time - ha!) did so and found that he was !woefully! lacking relevant skills (this from a student who had scored at the highest level on the Calculus AP). My second point is, in a sense, complicated. Maxine Green has a variation of this on page 276 of her book ?Teacher as Stranger.? She tells the story of a teacher who believes in social justice and citizen participation. He is eager for his students to participate in a moratorium in response to the Vietnamese War. However, he has other convictions. ?He does not believe that learning sequences should be whimsically or foolishly interrupted; he thinks classroom activity, because it brings him in contact with his students, contributes measurably to their education. A lost day, as he sees it, might mean a setback for some of his students; missed opportunities for other s? Taking all this in account, he still believes it is more worthwhile to support the peace action than do nothing at all.? This conclusion may seem ?right? and it may seem obvious, but, as Greene continues, it is hardly easy. It is also a little more complicated than she makes out. Say I have a strong commitment to social justice (which I do) and say I have a strong commitment to my discipline (which is mathematics). I could skimp on the mathematics and really focus on social justice, but then I run the risk having students as the above who cannot compete within the present education system. I could skimp on the social justice and really focus on the mathematics, but then I have signaled that social justice really isn?t all that important. So I incorporate social justice into my mathematics class. I could do it two ways: (1) use mathematics as a tool to consider issues of social justice (however, if I do this well, this is not teaching mathematics, but teaching social justice) - this is the usual approach of those who do such things (and I admire their attempts) or (2) use an issue of social justice to illustrate a mathematical principle - this is, quite a bit harder and it is easy to imagine somewhat silly lessons (although not entirely) as integrating the distribution of incomes in the US (there is a nice book that sort of does this called "X in the City?) - this is not, in my opinion, properly attending to issues of social justice. Neither of these approaches, in my opinion, give cognizance to the importance of social justice or mathematics (and, of course, I speak as a person who believes both are important). Ball does not help here (nor Foucault or Butler). The only one who comes close is Kierkegaard. He indicates there may be a way out (although it is not cookie-cutter), but most often one comes to despair. PS. There is also the whole issue of preparing teachers of mathematics to incorporate social justice in their students' learning especially as more and more Schools of Education eliminate substantial course work in social justice from the required curriculum. Ed Wall On Nov 12, 2016, at 2:30 PM, Margaret A Eisenhart 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 ------------------------------ Message: 11 Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 13:26:13 -0600 From: Edward Wall Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Message-ID: <3449352E-E037-4C3A-8030-9F47DA245892@umich.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Phillip I agree. Within the so-called STEM disciplines it may go further back than that; however a bit more than 50 years ago, it took on some real teeth as regards mathematics (I schooled in the before and after of those years). Perhaps my interest in all this reflects, in a fashion, your interest in the final paragraph of the paper. I think that content area teachers have a role in helping children articulate new ways of making themselves intelligible in the context of their lives regardless of the curriculum. I have seen a lot of mathematics classrooms over time and and have been privileged to observed a lot of outstanding mathematics teachers. I have yet to see a classroom where teachers and students have respect for one another and for the discipline that children fail to develop many of those critical qualities that the paper lists. That does not mean, interesting enough, that some students do not develop those qualities in spite of experiencing classrooms where there little respect for the discipline or each other. Sadly, as one wouldn?t think this need be the case, ?respect' may be a ?new way.? Ed On Nov 16, 2016, at 11:23 AM, White, Phillip wrote: Margaret and Ed, I think that one of the great difficulties of reducing the effects of neoliberal ideology within public education is that it is a default theory of education since the days of liberal laissez faire economics of the 19th century. It was during that century that public education was socially and politically constructed and the accompanying belief in Spencerian social-darwinism. The work of Dewey notwithstanding, the values placed on individual merit and self-sufficiency has proved to be an irreducible tension (James Wertsch's phrase) within the efforts to effect greater education equity for those previously marginalised within public education. So that the data explored in the Eisenhart / Allen paper does, I think, further demonstrate that not only are student identities hollowed out within implementation of STEM education, but is further evidence of an historical process that has been in place for generations of American education systems. I'm really interested in the final paragraph of the paper, "articulating new ways of making selves intelligible in the contest of our lives". After all, if we can't do that, what's the use? Certainly that was what Spinoza was struggling with in his work on ethics. Phillip ________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Edward Wall Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 5:43:42 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started Margaret My fault for trying to keep things short as I am not sanguine, at all, about separating ?good' teaching and the curriculum either. Asking for a teaching of calculus, etc. by most high school teachers will result in courses where students come away with little intellectual curiosity, serious deliberation or deep knowledge and understanding qua mathematics and no classroom time for citizen participation or social critique, [Encouraging those qualities, by the way, seems to me (and some would quibble) as reasonable as any definition of ?good? teaching] But even more importantly, at the present time, there is a sense in which it is not expected that these courses be taught ?well.' They are there to sort students in the college track and these students will again be intentionally sorted at the university level by similar courses which are again not taught ?well' (tenured faculty tend not to teach these courses and, in general, have little interest in the ?whole? student). Part of the problem is, as you say, curriculum, etc. However, part of the problem is many university faculty in the STEM fields although accepting the above definition of ?good? teaching by nodding agreement, would have difficulty modeling and teaching such (and this isn?t because they don?t care; they just don?t know how). Schools of Education, who supposedly intervene on these sorts of things are, most usually, ineffectual for all sorts of reasons (especially as regard the STEM curriculum for high school) and so high school teachers are as they are. Again, this goes all the way down to preK and may be more damaging in pre high school. My point - not well made - is that calling all this neoliberal reform seems to miss the point that nothing really has been reformed for, at least, the last 50 years. What you are calling neoliberal reform has just made what was already problematic all the more obvious. That said, you can teach mathematics in such a way that, in a manner of speaking, you can subvert the downside of the curriculum. I am speaking from the inside as a mathematics teacher and as a mathematics teacher educator. That is, despite the curriculum, you can teach for intellectual curiosity, serious deliberation and deep knowledge and understanding qua mathematics and you can - and I admit to not doing this as well as I would wish - make room for social critique (all this is possibly easier in an inner city school that a suburban school). I was able to do a little with citizen participation as a teacher educator, but nothing, I think, significant. I?m not saying it is easy and I, as a classroom teacher, loudly disagreed with principals and superintendents when they engaged, one might say, in neoliberal reform. All this neoliberal reform, by the way, was an ongoing discussion in my mathematics eduction classroom as my students were headed for classrooms similar to the ones you write about. So, no you can't separate teaching and the curriculum, but that shouldn?t be (and this is my thinking and many of my students) an excuse to forego attempts at ?good? teaching. Briefly, key is respect for the discipline and respect for one another and I am reasonably unconvinced such respect is, locally, irrevocably curtailed by the curriculum (although I would agree neoliberal reform globally respects neither). Kierkegaard?s solution? I wrote an essay awhile back which was published in Journal of Educational Controversy (Winter 2010) titled Aesthetic Education in the Mathematics Classroom. I don?t really like the ending - too positive - and when I sent it in they didn?t send it back for revision so I couldn?t change it. Far too briefly, rationally it is not possible to do such teaching, but that doesn?t mean, pragmatically speaking, that you can?t. However, the decision to do so is in, one might say, every moment. Ed On Nov 15, 2016, at 3:29 PM, Margaret A Eisenhart wrote: Ed, Thank you for your comments. I?m afraid I?m not as sanguine as you are about separating curriculum and teaching. Yes, there are some very good teachers who find ways to go beyond the dictates of curriculum reform, accountability, and college/university requirements. But the pressures to conform are many and come from multiple directions. For students such as those in our study, such teachers are rare and continually pressured to take on more and more features of the achievement regime. I do not think we can depend on good teachers alone to solve this problem. What is Kierkegaard?s approach? Margaret On 11/13/16, 7:37 PM, "Edward Wall" wrote: Margaret and Carrie Thanks for the article. I hope what I write will be of interest. I am presently a mathematics educator (although retired) and have taught mathematics in all the grades into graduate school and well as teachers of preschool, elementary, and secondary mathematics. What you write about authoring math identities resonates !highly! with my experience. However, I am unsure what to make of the labeling of neoliberal reform. I see something similar to the young woman you mention at all grade levels including those of graduate school. It seems to have little to do with curricular reform and everything to do with teaching. For example, the Calculus courses you mention are not there to give students a deep understanding of mathematics, but to aid in college acceptance. This, of course, led to parent and student outcry and situation in schools all across the US for high school Calculus (this has been going on for some time) The Calculus AP may have originally been for the purpose of usefully challenging young people, but, in the hands of college admission officers, soon changed into a way to control admission. These courses are usually poorly taught (regardless of where they are taught) because few high school teachers have sufficient training or experience (taking a calculus course does not mean you have the wherewithal to teach it; that takes considerably more knowledge). Math departments do use them for placement, but not because they think students have been well prepared for Calculus. Let me give an exemplar (smile). A number of years ago I was teaching a freshman English course (I know that sounds peculiar) with a significant slant on social justice. One of my students, who seemed (and acted) quite bright, was having problems completing assignments (and seemed a little dismissive of his peers). Finally, I told him that I was going to give him an F. At that point things became interesting. He told me that he had breezed through high school, scored high on the Calculus AP, received a scholarship, and was placed in the second semester of Calculus. The reason work wasn?t done was that he was failing that course in Calculus and was on the verge of losing his scholarship (especially if I failed him). Well, I, of course, extended deadlines, etc. and became a mentor of sorts for the next 4 years. All this, as the young woman in your article, pretty much destroyed his confidence/identity and it was not until his junior year that I began to see some slight improvement or, one might say, re-authoring (although the story line had changed considerably; once hoping to be a doctor he is now hoping to be a PA). This is all to the good. However, during his final science course (physics), he decided that he was lacking in geometry and trigonometry and asked for help the summer before and during the relevant semester. I (being retired you have extra time - ha!) did so and found that he was !woefully! lacking relevant skills (this from a student who had scored at the highest level on the Calculus AP). My second point is, in a sense, complicated. Maxine Green has a variation of this on page 276 of her book ?Teacher as Stranger.? She tells the story of a teacher who believes in social justice and citizen participation. He is eager for his students to participate in a moratorium in response to the Vietnamese War. However, he has other convictions. ?He does not believe that learning sequences should be whimsically or foolishly interrupted; he thinks classroom activity, because it brings him in contact with his students, contributes measurably to their education. A lost day, as he sees it, might mean a setback for some of his students; missed opportunities for other s? Taking all this in account, he still believes it is more worthwhile to support the peace action than do nothing at all.? This conclusion may seem ?right? and it may seem obvious, but, as Greene continues, it is hardly easy. It is also a little more complicated than she makes out. Say I have a strong commitment to social justice (which I do) and say I have a strong commitment to my discipline (which is mathematics). I could skimp on the mathematics and really focus on social justice, but then I run the risk having students as the above who cannot compete within the present education system. I could skimp on the social justice and really focus on the mathematics, but then I have signaled that social justice really isn?t all that important. So I incorporate social justice into my mathematics class. I could do it two ways: (1) use mathematics as a tool to consider issues of social justice (however, if I do this well, this is not teaching mathematics, but teaching social justice) - this is the usual approach of those who do such things (and I admire their attempts) or (2) use an issue of social justice to illustrate a mathematical principle - this is, quite a bit harder and it is easy to imagine somewhat silly lessons (although not entirely) as integrating the distribution of incomes in the US (there is a nice book that sort of does this called "X in the City?) - this is not, in my opinion, properly attending to issues of social justice. Neither of these approaches, in my opinion, give cognizance to the importance of social justice or mathematics (and, of course, I speak as a person who believes both are important). Ball does not help here (nor Foucault or Butler). The only one who comes close is Kierkegaard. He indicates there may be a way out (although it is not cookie-cutter), but most often one comes to despair. PS. There is also the whole issue of preparing teachers of mathematics to incorporate social justice in their students' learning especially as more and more Schools of Education eliminate substantial course work in social justice from the required curriculum. Ed Wall On Nov 12, 2016, at 2:30 PM, Margaret A Eisenhart 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 ------------------------------ Message: 12 Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 19:29:15 +0000 From: Margaret A Eisenhart Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Yes, I agree. Thank you, Phillip. -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of White, Phillip Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 10:24 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started Margaret and Ed, I think that one of the great difficulties of reducing the effects of neoliberal ideology within public education is that it is a default theory of education since the days of liberal laissez faire economics of the 19th century. It was during that century that public education was socially and politically constructed and the accompanying belief in Spencerian social-darwinism. The work of Dewey notwithstanding, the values placed on individual merit and self-sufficiency has proved to be an irreducible tension (James Wertsch's phrase) within the efforts to effect greater education equity for those previously marginalised within public education. So that the data explored in the Eisenhart / Allen paper does, I think, further demonstrate that not only are student identities hollowed out within implementation of STEM education, but is further evidence of an historical process that has been in place for generations of American education systems. I'm really interested in the final paragraph of the paper, "articulating new ways of making selves intelligible in the contest of our lives". After all, if we can't do that, what's the use? Certainly that was what Spinoza was struggling with in his work on ethics. Phillip ________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Edward Wall Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 5:43:42 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started Margaret My fault for trying to keep things short as I am not sanguine, at all, about separating 'good' teaching and the curriculum either. Asking for a teaching of calculus, etc. by most high school teachers will result in courses where students come away with little intellectual curiosity, serious deliberation or deep knowledge and understanding qua mathematics and no classroom time for citizen participation or social critique, [Encouraging those qualities, by the way, seems to me (and some would quibble) as reasonable as any definition of 'good' teaching] But even more importantly, at the present time, there is a sense in which it is not expected that these courses be taught 'well.' They are there to sort students in the college track and these students will again be intentionally sorted at the university level by similar courses which are again not taught 'well' (tenured faculty tend not to teach these courses and, in general, have little interest in the 'whole' student). Part of the problem is, as you say, curriculum, etc. However, part of the problem is many university faculty in the STEM fields although accepting the above definition of 'good' teaching by nodding agreement, would have difficulty modeling and teaching such (and this isn't because they don't care; they just don't know how). Schools of Education, who supposedly intervene on these sorts of things are, most usually, ineffectual for all sorts of reasons (especially as regard the STEM curriculum for high school) and so high school teachers are as they are. Again, this goes all the way down to preK and may be more damaging in pre high school. My point - not well made - is that calling all this neoliberal reform seems to miss the point that nothing really has been reformed for, at least, the last 50 years. What you are calling neoliberal reform has just made what was already problematic all the more obvious. That said, you can teach mathematics in such a way that, in a manner of speaking, you can subvert the downside of the curriculum. I am speaking from the inside as a mathematics teacher and as a mathematics teacher educator. That is, despite the curriculum, you can teach for intellectual curiosity, serious deliberation and deep knowledge and understanding qua mathematics and you can - and I admit to not doing this as well as I would wish - make room for social critique (all this is possibly easier in an inner city school that a suburban school). I was able to do a little with citizen participation as a teacher educator, but nothing, I think, significant. I'm not saying it is easy and I, as a classroom teacher, loudly disagreed with principals and superintendents when they engaged, one might say, in neoliberal reform. All this neoliberal reform, by the way, was an ongoing discussion in my mathematics eduction classroom as my students were headed for classrooms similar to the ones you write about. So, no you can't separate teaching and the curriculum, but that shouldn't be (and this is my thinking and many of my students) an excuse to forego attempts at 'good' teaching. Briefly, key is respect for the discipline and respect for one another and I am reasonably unconvinced such respect is, locally, irrevocably curtailed by the curriculum (although I would agree neoliberal reform globally respects neither). Kierkegaard's solution? I wrote an essay awhile back which was published in Journal of Educational Controversy (Winter 2010) titled Aesthetic Education in the Mathematics Classroom. I don't really like the ending - too positive - and when I sent it in they didn't send it back for revision so I couldn't change it. Far too briefly, rationally it is not possible to do such teaching, but that doesn't mean, pragmatically speaking, that you can't. However, the decision to do so is in, one might say, every moment. Ed On Nov 15, 2016, at 3:29 PM, Margaret A Eisenhart wrote: Ed, Thank you for your comments. I'm afraid I'm not as sanguine as you are about separating curriculum and teaching. Yes, there are some very good teachers who find ways to go beyond the dictates of curriculum reform, accountability, and college/university requirements. But the pressures to conform are many and come from multiple directions. For students such as those in our study, such teachers are rare and continually pressured to take on more and more features of the achievement regime. I do not think we can depend on good teachers alone to solve this problem. What is Kierkegaard's approach? Margaret On 11/13/16, 7:37 PM, "Edward Wall" wrote: Margaret and Carrie Thanks for the article. I hope what I write will be of interest. I am presently a mathematics educator (although retired) and have taught mathematics in all the grades into graduate school and well as teachers of preschool, elementary, and secondary mathematics. What you write about authoring math identities resonates !highly! with my experience. However, I am unsure what to make of the labeling of neoliberal reform. I see something similar to the young woman you mention at all grade levels including those of graduate school. It seems to have little to do with curricular reform and everything to do with teaching. For example, the Calculus courses you mention are not there to give students a deep understanding of mathematics, but to aid in college acceptance. This, of course, led to parent and student outcry and situation in schools all across the US for high school Calculus (this has been going on for some time) The Calculus AP may have originally been for the purpose of usefully challenging young people, but, in the hands of college admission officers, soon changed into a way to control admission. These courses are usually poorly taught (regardless of where they are taught) because few high school teachers have sufficient training or experience (taking a calculus course does not mean you have the wherewithal to teach it; that takes considerably more knowledge). Math departments do use them for placement, but not because they think students have been well prepared for Calculus. Let me give an exemplar (smile). A number of years ago I was teaching a freshman English course (I know that sounds peculiar) with a significant slant on social justice. One of my students, who seemed (and acted) quite bright, was having problems completing assignments (and seemed a little dismissive of his peers). Finally, I told him that I was going to give him an F. At that point things became interesting. He told me that he had breezed through high school, scored high on the Calculus AP, received a scholarship, and was placed in the second semester of Calculus. The reason work wasn't done was that he was failing that course in Calculus and was on the verge of losing his scholarship (especially if I failed him). Well, I, of course, extended deadlines, etc. and became a mentor of sorts for the next 4 years. All this, as the young woman in your article, pretty much destroyed his confidence/identity and it was not until his junior year that I began to see some slight improvement or, one might say, re-authoring (although the story line had changed considerably; once hoping to be a doctor he is now hoping to be a PA). This is all to the good. However, during his final science course (physics), he decided that he was lacking in geometry and trigonometry and asked for help the summer before and during the relevant semester. I (being retired you have extra time - ha!) did so and found that he was !woefully! lacking relevant skills (this from a student who had scored at the highest level on the Calculus AP). My second point is, in a sense, complicated. Maxine Green has a variation of this on page 276 of her book "Teacher as Stranger." She tells the story of a teacher who believes in social justice and citizen participation. He is eager for his students to participate in a moratorium in response to the Vietnamese War. However, he has other convictions. "He does not believe that learning sequences should be whimsically or foolishly interrupted; he thinks classroom activity, because it brings him in contact with his students, contributes measurably to their education. A lost day, as he sees it, might mean a setback for some of his students; missed opportunities for other s... Taking all this in account, he still believes it is more worthwhile to support the peace action than do nothing at all." This conclusion may seem 'right' and it may seem obvious, but, as Greene continues, it is hardly easy. It is also a little more complicated than she makes out. Say I have a strong commitment to social justice (which I do) and say I have a strong commitment to my discipline (which is mathematics). I could skimp on the mathematics and really focus on social justice, but then I run the risk having students as the above who cannot compete within the present education system. I could skimp on the social justice and really focus on the mathematics, but then I have signaled that social justice really isn't all that important. So I incorporate social justice into my mathematics class. I could do it two ways: (1) use mathematics as a tool to consider issues of social justice (however, if I do this well, this is not teaching mathematics, but teaching social justice) - this is the usual approach of those who do such things (and I admire their attempts) or (2) use an issue of social justice to illustrate a mathematical principle - this is, quite a bit harder and it is easy to imagine somewhat silly lessons (although not entirely) as integrating the distribution of incomes in the US (there is a nice book that sort of does this called "X in the City") - this is not, in my opinion, properly attending to issues of social justice. Neither of these approaches, in my opinion, give cognizance to the importance of social justice or mathematics (and, of course, I speak as a person who believes both are important). Ball does not help here (nor Foucault or Butler). The only one who comes close is Kierkegaard. He indicates there may be a way out (although it is not cookie-cutter), but most often one comes to despair. PS. There is also the whole issue of preparing teachers of mathematics to incorporate social justice in their students' learning especially as more and more Schools of Education eliminate substantial course work in social justice from the required curriculum. Ed Wall On Nov 12, 2016, at 2:30 PM, Margaret A Eisenhart 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 ------------------------------ Message: 13 Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 07:24:35 +1100 From: David Kellogg Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 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 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 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 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 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" 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 on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil 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 on behalf of mike cole 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 on behalf of 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 . 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 to the article (see above), and also attach it as PDF. ??Good read! Alfredo ------------------------------ Message: 14 Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 18:39:54 +0000 From: Peter Smagorinsky Subject: [Xmca-l] JoLLE's Fall Issue is LIVE!!! To: "(cdaiute@gc.cuny.edu)" , "AERA_ SIG030-ANNOUNCE@LISTSERV. AERA. NET (AERA_SIG030-ANNOUNCE@LISTSERV.AERA.NET)" , Allan S Cohen , Bertis Downs , Craig Kennedy , "Denise A. Spangler" , "docs@listserv.uga.edu" , "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" , "Hillocks@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU" , Jack Parish , Jere W Morehead , "JoLLE Editors (JOLLE-EDITORS@listserv.cc.uga.edu)" , Karl Newell , Noel Gregg , Laura Bierema , "LEGO-L@listserv.uga.edu" , Libby V Morris , "LLEDFACSTAFF-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU" , "Maureen.Downey@ajc.com" , "NCRLL@lists.service.ohio-state.edu" , "OP-ED@listserv. uga. edu (OP-ED@listserv.uga.edu)" , Ronald M Cervero , "'UGADOCS@listserv.uga.edu'" , "Valerie Strauss (Valerie.Strauss@washpost.com)" , Danny Martinez , "Elizabeth Durand" , "freedman@berkeley.edu" , Jerome Morris , "Juan C. Guerra" , Kimberly Parker , Latrice Johnson , "limaryscaraballo@gmail.com" , "Maisha T Winn (mtwinn@wisc.edu)" , Maneka Brooks , Marc Hill , "Margarita Zisselsberger (margarita.zisselsberger@gmail.com)" , Maria Franquiz , "Mariana Souto-Manning (Soutomanning@gmail.com)" , Melody Zoch , "Michele Myers (knowingaka@yahoo.com)" , Sandra Quinones , "'sealeyruiz@tc.edu'" , Stuart Greene , Sybil Durand , Theresa Perry , Tim San Pedro , "Violet Harris" , "Willis, Arlette I" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" We are proud to announce the Fall 2016 issue of the Journal of Language and Literacy Education (Volume 12, Issue 2)! You can find it by clicking on this link: http://jolle.coe.uga.edu/current-issue. From elementary school-aged readers to university faculty writers, the work presented in this issue seeks to help educators grow a hope for a "viable pluralism backed by a willingness to negotiate differences in world-view" (Bruner, 1990, p. 30). There is work to be done towards this end, and we are proud in this Fall 2016 issue of JoLLE to bring readers examples of the efforts being put forth by educators from many walks of life, in multitudinous settings, and through diverse mediums. It is our hope that this issue calls to question the stories around us, inviting dialogue, raising questions, and challenging the dominant discourses that construct-and potentially change-our worlds. PLEASE share this news widely. We look forward to the dialogues this issue will bring. Thank you, Nick and Jenn Nick Thompson & Jenn Whitley, Co-Principal Editors Heidi Lyn Hadley, Managing Editor Journal of Language and Literacy Education The University of Georgia Aderhold 315 Athens, GA 30602 jolle@uga.edu Follow JoLLE on Twitter: @Jolle_uga Follow JoLLE on Facebook: Journal of Language & Literacy Education ------------------------------ Message: 15 Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 05:29:46 +0000 From: "White, Phillip" Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" 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 on behalf of David Kellogg 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 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 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 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 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" 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 on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil 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 on behalf of mike cole 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 on behalf of 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 . 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 to the article (see above), and also attach it as PDF. ??Good read! Alfredo ------------------------------ Message: 16 Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 07:37:54 +0000 From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Message-ID: <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" 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 on behalf of White, Phillip 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 on behalf of David Kellogg 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 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 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 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 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" 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 on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil 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 on behalf of mike cole 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 on behalf of 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 . 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 to the article (see above), and also attach it as PDF. ??Good read! Alfredo ------------------------------ Message: 17 Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 09:54:44 +0000 From: Huw Lloyd Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 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 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 on behalf of White, Phillip 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 on behalf of David Kellogg 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 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 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 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 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" 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 on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil 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 on behalf of mike cole 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 on behalf of 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 . 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 to the article (see above), and also attach it as PDF. ??Good read! Alfredo ------------------------------ Message: 18 Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 18:11:05 +0000 From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Message-ID: <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" 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 on behalf of Huw Lloyd 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 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 on behalf of White, Phillip 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 on behalf of David Kellogg 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 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 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 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 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" 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 on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil 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 on behalf of mike cole 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 on behalf of 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 . 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 to the article (see above), and also attach it as PDF. ??Good read! Alfredo ------------------------------ Message: 19 Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 19:29:47 +0000 From: Huw Lloyd Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 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 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 on behalf of Huw Lloyd 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 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 on behalf of White, Phillip 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 on behalf of David Kellogg 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 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 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 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 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 on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil 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 on behalf of mike cole 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 on behalf of 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 . 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 to the article (see above), and also attach it as PDF. ??Good read! Alfredo ------------------------------ Message: 20 Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 11:45:31 -0800 From: mike cole Subject: [Xmca-l] Butterflies of Zagorsk To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 In rummaging through old files, I found a copy of Butterflies of Zagorsk, which has been asked about for some time on XMCA. It is posted here: http://lchc.ucsd.edu/Movies/Butterflies_of_Zagorsk.mp4 Note that in making this film available to the xmca community, I am doing so in my function as an educator, and in light of the pedagogical functions of xmca as a source of important materials for concerning the cultural nature of human development. I trust you will use it in the same fashion. Meantime, lets hear it for rummaging and Bruce Jones' help in getting it online for us. Perhaps for later discussion. mike ------------------------------ Message: 21 Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 20:51:56 +0000 From: Huw Lloyd Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Butterflies of Zagorsk To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Great find. You might want to watch server consumption as the file is 1.1Gb. Best, Huw On 17 November 2016 at 19:45, mike cole wrote: In rummaging through old files, I found a copy of Butterflies of Zagorsk, which has been asked about for some time on XMCA. It is posted here: http://lchc.ucsd.edu/Movies/Butterflies_of_Zagorsk.mp4 Note that in making this film available to the xmca community, I am doing so in my function as an educator, and in light of the pedagogical functions of xmca as a source of important materials for concerning the cultural nature of human development. I trust you will use it in the same fashion. Meantime, lets hear it for rummaging and Bruce Jones' help in getting it online for us. Perhaps for later discussion. mike ------------------------------ Message: 22 Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 13:05:23 -0800 From: Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started To: Huw Lloyd , "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Message-ID: <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" 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 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 on behalf of Huw Lloyd 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 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 on behalf of White, Phillip 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 on behalf of David Kellogg 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 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 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 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 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 on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil 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 on behalf of mike cole 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 on behalf of 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 . 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 to the article (see above), and also attach it as PDF. ??Good read! Alfredo ------------------------------ Message: 23 Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2016 07:39:56 +0900 From: Wagner Luiz Schmit Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Butterflies of Zagorsk To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Dear Professor Cole, Thank you very much for this file! I am downloading it now and it will be very useful in classes about special education. All the best for you. Wagner On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 4:45 AM, mike cole wrote: In rummaging through old files, I found a copy of Butterflies of Zagorsk, which has been asked about for some time on XMCA. It is posted here: http://lchc.ucsd.edu/Movies/Butterflies_of_Zagorsk.mp4 Note that in making this film available to the xmca community, I am doing so in my function as an educator, and in light of the pedagogical functions of xmca as a source of important materials for concerning the cultural nature of human development. I trust you will use it in the same fashion. Meantime, lets hear it for rummaging and Bruce Jones' help in getting it online for us. Perhaps for later discussion. mike ------------------------------ Message: 24 Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 18:42:36 -0600 From: Edward Wall Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 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 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 on behalf of Huw Lloyd 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 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 on behalf of White, Phillip 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 on behalf of David Kellogg 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 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 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 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 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 on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil 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 on behalf of mike cole 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 on behalf of 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 . 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 to the article (see above), and also attach it as PDF. ??Good read! Alfredo ------------------------------ Message: 25 Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 19:16:01 -0800 From: Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started To: Edward Wall , "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Message-ID: <582e7283.84cf620a.c9f5a.302f@mx.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" 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 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 on behalf of Huw Lloyd 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 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 on behalf of White, Phillip 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 on behalf of David Kellogg 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 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 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 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 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 on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil 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 on behalf of mike cole 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 on behalf of 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 . 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 to the article (see above), and also attach it as PDF. ??Good read! Alfredo ------------------------------ Message: 26 Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2016 22:52:01 +0000 From: "White, Phillip" Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started To: Edward Wall , "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" well, this is what Cornel West has to say: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election [https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/aae8946d80dac457aa8b6af3f9a9fd5acc6b4acb/0_662_5150_3090/master/5150.jpg?w=1200&h=140&q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=crop&bm=normal&ba=bottom%2Cleft&blend64=aHR0cHM6Ly91cGxvYWRzLmd1aW0uY28udWsvMjAxNi8wNS8yNS9vdmVybGF5LWxvZ28tMTIwMC05MF9vcHQucG5n&s=4cbd18b4943818f70304ff2cfdc3da2d] Goodbye, American neoliberalism. A new era is here | Cornel West www.theguardian.com Trump?s election was enabled by the policies that overlooked the plight of our most vulnerable citizens. We gird ourselves for a frightening future phillip ________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 8:16:01 PM To: Edward Wall; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started 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 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 on behalf of Huw Lloyd 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 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 on behalf of White, Phillip 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 on behalf of David Kellogg 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 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 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 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 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 on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil 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 on behalf of mike cole 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 on behalf of 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 . 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 to the article (see above), and also attach it as PDF. ??Good read! Alfredo ------------------------------ Message: 27 Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2016 00:26:37 +0000 From: Huw Lloyd Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Margaret, With respect to the application of other theories, an alternative focus on the problems of "hitting a mathematical wall", is to attend to the structure of activity that the students engage with, specifically the kinds of (psychological) objects they are focused upon. The expected distinction between "being a good student" and "finding out" might have their respective foci upon diligence in manipulating notation and attendance to mathematical problems (which are then subsequently referred to through the use of notation). Ed presented some exemplars that "put off" (delay) mathematics in teaching. An alternative to this is to look to specialised forms of education in which essential aspects of the subject matter are made tangible and manifest to young minds (or older minds for that matter) on the basis of the historical origins of the ideas. Davydov's school of developmental education is the most remarkable exemplar I am aware of in this regard. However, the central English text for this (Problems of Developmental Instruction) is by no means easy to read. Its possible you may get a sense for what it is about from my comparisons paper. The consideration of identity is a concern with this line of thought, but it was not developed at the time. The principles are rather similar to those of Meshcheryakov (the Butterfies film Mike recently posted), but applied to the history of ideas rather than common cultural artefacts. In the film, the stress is on language, but most of the protracted work -- not presented in the film -- entails familiarity with basic cultural tasks. Another area of interest for me has been the work of Kay/Papert, but this has been in a more limited capacity with a focus on technological use. Still, used correctly it can be a powerful means of bringing mathematical considerations within the playful sphere of interests of primary school aged children. With respect to neoliberal politics and education, I have my doubts about any direct links unless the stress upon qualifications is considered to be a central part of it. Still, I agree with Cornel's analysis. 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" 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 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 on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil 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 on behalf of mike cole 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 on behalf of 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 . 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 to the article (see above), and also attach it as PDF. ??Good read! Alfredo ------------------------------ Message: 28 Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2016 20:12:33 -0700 From: HENRY SHONERD Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Message-ID: <56BA469E-D1C3-4924-8C7F-F976876DEE9E@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Thank you, Phillip. "For us in these times, to even have hope is too abstract, too detached, too spectatorial. Instead we must be a hope, a participant and a force for good as we face this catastrophe.? That?s my favorite part. Henry On Nov 18, 2016, at 3:52 PM, White, Phillip wrote: well, this is what Cornel West has to say: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election [https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/aae8946d80dac457aa8b6af3f9a9fd5acc6b4acb/0_662_5150_3090/master/5150.jpg?w=1200&h=140&q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=crop&bm=normal&ba=bottom%2Cleft&blend64=aHR0cHM6Ly91cGxvYWRzLmd1aW0uY28udWsvMjAxNi8wNS8yNS9vdmVybGF5LWxvZ28tMTIwMC05MF9vcHQucG5n&s=4cbd18b4943818f70304ff2cfdc3da2d] Goodbye, American neoliberalism. A new era is here | Cornel West www.theguardian.com Trump?s election was enabled by the policies that overlooked the plight of our most vulnerable citizens. We gird ourselves for a frightening future phillip ________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 8:16:01 PM To: Edward Wall; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started 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 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 on behalf of Huw Lloyd 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 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 on behalf of White, Phillip 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 on behalf of David Kellogg 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 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 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 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 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 on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil 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 on behalf of mike cole 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 on behalf of 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 . 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 to the article (see above), and also attach it as PDF. ??Good read! Alfredo ------------------------------ Message: 29 Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2016 06:24:47 -0800 From: Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started To: HENRY SHONERD , "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Message-ID: <583060c1.098d620a.b4db8.5e32@mx.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Margaret, Carrie, Phillip, Henry, Cornell, A central and key theme of this month?s article is neoliberalism in all its guises. In my imaginary response i am addressing the authors of the paper and Cornell who addresses neoliberalism, and Phillip, who shared Cornell?s article and Henry who heard Cornell offer a way to mediate our crises. The paper is about teaching STEM and the neoliberal agenda that ignores the plight of those who suffer. Cornell says the answer is (democratic soulcraft). At the heart of this soulcraft is truth telling of the reality of suffering. In order to constitute or institute a (new) order a more pro/gressive order it seems suffering must be the key factor. The notion of ivory towers and their responses to suffering seems central. I also want to explore the theme of (play) in relation to suffering. One exemplar: There is a Buddhist who organizes gatherings where food is prepared and presented at the gatherings (for the homeless). Musical instruments are also brought and dancing proceeds. Everyone participates and this is key: You cannot tell who are the homeless and who are the people who prepared the food. They are sharing a common (new) experience that is profoundly moving and creates a sense of well-being. This Buddhist practise is exemplary as a response to our current contemporary historical moment. It is truth telling and democratic soulcraft and PLAY. (each in the other). It is one way of answering Margaret, Carrie, Cornell, Phillip, and Henry. This Buddhist act or practice is (crafting) an answer that speaks to suffering. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: HENRY SHONERD Sent: November 18, 2016 7:15 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started Thank you, Phillip. "For us in these times, to even have hope is too abstract, too detached, too spectatorial. Instead we must be a hope, a participant and a force for good as we face this catastrophe.? That?s my favorite part. Henry On Nov 18, 2016, at 3:52 PM, White, Phillip wrote: well, this is what Cornel West has to say: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election [https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/aae8946d80dac457aa8b6af3f9a9fd5acc6b4acb/0_662_5150_3090/master/5150.jpg?w=1200&h=140&q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=crop&bm=normal&ba=bottom%2Cleft&blend64=aHR0cHM6Ly91cGxvYWRzLmd1aW0uY28udWsvMjAxNi8wNS8yNS9vdmVybGF5LWxvZ28tMTIwMC05MF9vcHQucG5n&s=4cbd18b4943818f70304ff2cfdc3da2d] Goodbye, American neoliberalism. A new era is here | Cornel West www.theguardian.com Trump?s election was enabled by the policies that overlooked the plight of our most vulnerable citizens. We gird ourselves for a frightening future phillip ________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 8:16:01 PM To: Edward Wall; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started 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 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 on behalf of Huw Lloyd 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 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 on behalf of White, Phillip 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 on behalf of David Kellogg 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 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 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 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 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 on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil 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 on behalf of mike cole 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 on behalf of 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 . 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 to the article (see above), and also attach it as PDF. ??Good read! Alfredo ------------------------------ Message: 30 Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2016 08:30:59 -0800 From: Subject: [Xmca-l] Spiritual blackout in America: Election 2016 - The Boston Globe To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Message-ID: <58307e54.943e620a.da1ed.7938@mx.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Spiritual blackout in America: Election 2016 - The Boston Globe The neofascist catastrophe called Donald Trump and the neoliberal disaster named Hillary Clinton are predictable symbols of our spiritual blackout. https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/11/03/spiritual-blackout-america-election/v7lWSybxux1OPoBg56dgsL/story.html MOVING DEEPER INTO THE NOTION OF DEMOCRATIC SOULCRAFT. NOTICE WHO ARE THE EXEMPLARY PERSONS TO INSPIRE THIS SOULCRAFT. LARRY PURSS Sent from my Windows 10 phone ------------------------------ Message: 31 Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2016 08:39:33 -0800 From: Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Spiritual blackout in America: Election 2016 - The Boston Globe To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Message-ID: <58308056.d222620a.4b2ad.7e43@mx.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" The article situates Bernie Saunders within the Judaic Phophetic tradition that inspires Bernie?s (democratic soulcraft). This needs highlighting to bring to the forefront multiple sources of democratic soulcraft Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: November 19, 2016 8:31 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: Spiritual blackout in America: Election 2016 - The Boston Globe Spiritual blackout in America: Election 2016 - The Boston Globe The neofascist catastrophe called Donald Trump and the neoliberal disaster named Hillary Clinton are predictable symbols of our spiritual blackout. https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/11/03/spiritual-blackout-america-election/v7lWSybxux1OPoBg56dgsL/story.html MOVING DEEPER INTO THE NOTION OF DEMOCRATIC SOULCRAFT. NOTICE WHO ARE THE EXEMPLARY PERSONS TO INSPIRE THIS SOULCRAFT. LARRY PURSS Sent from my Windows 10 phone ------------------------------ Message: 32 Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2016 14:34:48 +1100 From: David Kellogg Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sorry, I've lost the plot. That is, I don't see the connection between the kind of educational neoliberalism that is being discussed in the article (that which is based on measurable results, on academic tracking, on promising goodies in return for grades and grades in return for schoolwork) and the kind of political and economic neoliberalism that is being discussed by Cornel. It seems to me that the policies that Margaret and Carrie are discussing in this paper were not (politically) liberal, nor were they new: they were taken over by Arne Duncan from the Bush administration, and the Bush administration got them, via Clinton, from good old fashioned "Back to Basics" backlash in the UK. So the roots are Toryism and not liberalism. I suppose you can argue that there is some kind of implicit analogy between education and neoliberal economics: school is supposed to be some kind of neoliberal "level playing field" where children compete like businessmen, grades are "cultural capital", classes are investment opportunities, assessment portfolios are investment portfolios, etc. This analogy is little more than a way of whipping up interest among principals, teachers, and even students (and as such I am not sure I am against it, since I don't see anything wrong with working class kids taking an interest in the getting of goodies through study). It's certainly not a good description of what is happening in schools: These businessmen produce no commodities, the grades are neither exchangeable or consumable; there is no such thing as credit or interest in this economy, and assets evaporate upon graduation instead of maturing. I think that the word "reform" is actually more important in Margaret and Carrie's title than "neoliberal": a "reform" is usually, on the lips of government bureaucracy, a euphemism for backlash, and the policies being described are part of a more general ideological backlash against Deweyism and progressive education: an anti-liberal reaction rather than a neo-liberal reform. "Neoliberalism", taken literally, would imply that the schools really are in the marketable skills business, and I don't see much evidence for that in the study. Am I missing something? David Kellogg Macquarie University On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 1:24 AM, wrote: Margaret, Carrie, Phillip, Henry, Cornell, A central and key theme of this month?s article is neoliberalism in all its guises. In my imaginary response i am addressing the authors of the paper and Cornell who addresses neoliberalism, and Phillip, who shared Cornell?s article and Henry who heard Cornell offer a way to mediate our crises. The paper is about teaching STEM and the neoliberal agenda that ignores the plight of those who suffer. Cornell says the answer is (democratic soulcraft). At the heart of this soulcraft is truth telling of the reality of suffering. In order to constitute or institute a (new) order a more pro/gressive order it seems suffering must be the key factor. The notion of ivory towers and their responses to suffering seems central. I also want to explore the theme of (play) in relation to suffering. One exemplar: There is a Buddhist who organizes gatherings where food is prepared and presented at the gatherings (for the homeless). Musical instruments are also brought and dancing proceeds. Everyone participates and this is key: You cannot tell who are the homeless and who are the people who prepared the food. They are sharing a common (new) experience that is profoundly moving and creates a sense of well-being. This Buddhist practise is exemplary as a response to our current contemporary historical moment. It is truth telling and democratic soulcraft and PLAY. (each in the other). It is one way of answering Margaret, Carrie, Cornell, Phillip, and Henry. This Buddhist act or practice is (crafting) an answer that speaks to suffering. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: HENRY SHONERD Sent: November 18, 2016 7:15 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started Thank you, Phillip. "For us in these times, to even have hope is too abstract, too detached, too spectatorial. Instead we must be a hope, a participant and a force for good as we face this catastrophe.? That?s my favorite part. Henry On Nov 18, 2016, at 3:52 PM, White, Phillip wrote: well, this is what Cornel West has to say: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election [https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/aae8946d80dac457aa8b6af3f9a9fd 5acc6b4acb/0_662_5150_3090/master/5150.jpg?w=1200&h=140& q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=crop&bm=normal&ba=bottom%2Cleft&blend64= aHR0cHM6Ly91cGxvYWRzLmd1aW0uY28udWsvMjAxNi8wNS8yNS9vdmVybGF5 LWxvZ28tMTIwMC05MF9vcHQucG5n&s=4cbd18b4943818f70304ff2cfdc3da2d]< https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> Goodbye, American neoliberalism. A new era is here | Cornel West< https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> www.theguardian.com Trump?s election was enabled by the policies that overlooked the plight of our most vulnerable citizens. We gird ourselves for a frightening future phillip ________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 8:16:01 PM To: Edward Wall; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started 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 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 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 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 on behalf of White, Phillip 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 on behalf of David Kellogg 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 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 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 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 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 on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil 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 on behalf of mike cole 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 on behalf of 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 . 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 to the article (see above), and also attach it as PDF. ??Good read! Alfredo ------------------------------ Message: 33 Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2016 12:25:23 -0800 From: mike cole Subject: [Xmca-l] Fwd: [COGDEVSOC] TWO Tenure-track positions in Open Area of Psychology, Governors State University (just outside Chicago) To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Sasha N. Cervantes Date: Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 12:00 PM Subject: [COGDEVSOC] TWO Tenure-track positions in Open Area of Psychology, Governors State University (just outside Chicago) To: cogdevsoc@lists.cogdevsoc.org Governors State University is seeking applicants in any area of psychology for our Division of Psychology and Counseling; *separate *listings also exist for TT position as a Coordinator and Assistant Professor in School Psychology, and for an Assistant Professor of Counseling. If interested in these other positions, see website: https://employment.govst.edu/. Below is a slightly abridged description for the *two TT open area positions in Psychology*. *Position Title: Assistant Professor of Psychology (Open Area)* Start Fall 2017 *Listing currently on HigherEdJobs.com (posting number: FA0084P)* Description Governors State University's College of Education invites applications for two tenure-track, Assistant Professors in psychology and one tenure-track, Assistant Professor in School Psychology to begin August 2017. The psychology programs are housed in the College of Education and in the Division of Psychology and Counseling. Psychology faculty support an undergraduate program (500 majors and minors), an MA program with two sequences (Clinical and Theoretical), and an EdS in School Psychology. The GSU psychology program is seeking applicants who demonstrates a commitment to: effective, multicultural approaches to teaching and mentoring, serving underserved student populations, integrating peer and student feedback, and to working collaboratively and harmoniously with a diverse team of faculty. Responsibilities for the general psychology positions will include: ? Teaching undergraduate courses in psychology and possibly graduate courses in the College of Education ? Maintain an active scholarship agenda ? Service to the university, community, and the profession of psychology GENERAL PSYCHOLOGY POSITIONS http://employment.govst.edu/postings/2191 Requirements Minimum Qualifications: Earned doctorate in any field in psychology Preferred Qualifications: ? Experience in any of our undergraduate concentrations, especially: ? Forensic, Industrial/Organizational ? Experience teaching or the ability to teach research methods and/or statistics ? Teaching experience in a diverse setting ? Experience with underserved student populations ? Ability to work independently and work collaboratively with groups ? Ability to integrate feedback ? Scholarship in the field of psychology -- ____________________________________________________________ "Develop a desire for goodness, an eagerness for knowledge, a capacity for friendship, an appreciation of beauty, and a concern for others." From The Art of Education Sasha N. Cervantes, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Division of Psychology and Counseling Governors State University 1 University Parkway University Park, IL 60484 _______________________________________________ To post to the CDS listserv, send your message to: cogdevsoc@lists.cogdevsoc.org (If you belong to the listserv and have not included any large attachments, your message will be posted without moderation--so be careful!) To subscribe or unsubscribe from the listserv, visit: http://lists.cogdevsoc.org/listinfo.cgi/cogdevsoc-cogdevsoc.org ------------------------------ Message: 34 Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2016 23:22:33 +0000 From: Peter Smagorinsky Subject: [Xmca-l] zone of next development To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity (xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu)" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I'm watching the version of The Butterflies of Zagorsk that Mike generously shared from the UCSD archives. I give it 4 stars. It would be 5, but the copy is pretty bad. The narrator consistently refers to the "zone of next development" illustrated by periodic diagnostic sessions that also involved assistance with deaf and blind kids learning how to speak with their hands on another's hands. Zone of Next Development seems such a better term than ZPD. Proximal is too ambiguous, and so allows for just about any learning of anything anyhow to be illustrative of the ZPD. "Next" instead really emphasizes the more long-term growth that Vygotsky had in mind, as I understand his writing. But it's proximal in all the translations. Any help in understanding why? Thx,p ------------------------------ Message: 35 Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2016 12:29:20 +1100 From: David Kellogg Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: zone of next development To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Peter: The French translation is "zone prochaine de developpement", i.e. the next zone of development. Francoise Seve explains why--it is because the "next zone of development" does not refer to any particular skill or knowledge or even metalinguistic reflection that the child is going to have in the course of development; it refers very precisely to the functions which will be the most rapidly developing functions in the next age level, according to the schema that Vygotsky was working out in "The Problem of Age" (Vol. 5 in English, p. 196). This is completely confirmed by a remark that Vygotsky makes at the beginning of the lecture on the Crisis at Three (p. 283 in the English Collected Works): ""...(W)e must assume that all changes and all events that happen during the period of this crisis are grouped around some neoformation of a transitional type. Consequently, when we analyse the symptoms of the crisis, we msut answer, albeit conditionally, the question as to what it is that is new that appears during the indicated time and what is the fate of the neoformation that disappears after it. Then we must consider what change is occurring in the central and peripheral lines of development. Finally, we must evaluate the critical age from the point of view of the zone of its proximal development, that is, the relation to subsequent growth". This is why the ZPD is ALWAYS measured in years, something that very few Western people who invoke the concept have ever noted, even though it is quite explicit in every place that the ZPD is invoked. Even when the ZPD is spoken of somewhat loosely, (e.g. "What the child can do with assistance today he will be able to do without assistance tomorrow", or "in play the child is a head taller than himself") it is very clear that years are meant. Tomorrow does not and cannot mean 24 hours later, and the child will not be a head taller than himself in a week or two. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 10:22 AM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: I'm watching the version of The Butterflies of Zagorsk that Mike generously shared from the UCSD archives. I give it 4 stars. It would be 5, but the copy is pretty bad. The narrator consistently refers to the "zone of next development" illustrated by periodic diagnostic sessions that also involved assistance with deaf and blind kids learning how to speak with their hands on another's hands. Zone of Next Development seems such a better term than ZPD. Proximal is too ambiguous, and so allows for just about any learning of anything anyhow to be illustrative of the ZPD. "Next" instead really emphasizes the more long-term growth that Vygotsky had in mind, as I understand his writing. But it's proximal in all the translations. Any help in understanding why? Thx,p ------------------------------ Message: 36 Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2016 11:06:32 +0000 From: Peter Smagorinsky Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: zone of next development To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Thanks David. In US educational circles in which people only read selected chapters from Mind in Society, it's always "tomorrow" and not "next year" that is invoked. Do you know if that's a translation problem, or was he being metaphorical? -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of David Kellogg Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2016 8:29 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: zone of next development Peter: The French translation is "zone prochaine de developpement", i.e. the next zone of development. Francoise Seve explains why--it is because the "next zone of development" does not refer to any particular skill or knowledge or even metalinguistic reflection that the child is going to have in the course of development; it refers very precisely to the functions which will be the most rapidly developing functions in the next age level, according to the schema that Vygotsky was working out in "The Problem of Age" (Vol. 5 in English, p. 196). This is completely confirmed by a remark that Vygotsky makes at the beginning of the lecture on the Crisis at Three (p. 283 in the English Collected Works): ""...(W)e must assume that all changes and all events that happen during the period of this crisis are grouped around some neoformation of a transitional type. Consequently, when we analyse the symptoms of the crisis, we msut answer, albeit conditionally, the question as to what it is that is new that appears during the indicated time and what is the fate of the neoformation that disappears after it. Then we must consider what change is occurring in the central and peripheral lines of development. Finally, we must evaluate the critical age from the point of view of the zone of its proximal development, that is, the relation to subsequent growth". This is why the ZPD is ALWAYS measured in years, something that very few Western people who invoke the concept have ever noted, even though it is quite explicit in every place that the ZPD is invoked. Even when the ZPD is spoken of somewhat loosely, (e.g. "What the child can do with assistance today he will be able to do without assistance tomorrow", or "in play the child is a head taller than himself") it is very clear that years are meant. Tomorrow does not and cannot mean 24 hours later, and the child will not be a head taller than himself in a week or two. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 10:22 AM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: I'm watching the version of The Butterflies of Zagorsk that Mike generously shared from the UCSD archives. I give it 4 stars. It would be 5, but the copy is pretty bad. The narrator consistently refers to the "zone of next development" illustrated by periodic diagnostic sessions that also involved assistance with deaf and blind kids learning how to speak with their hands on another's hands. Zone of Next Development seems such a better term than ZPD. Proximal is too ambiguous, and so allows for just about any learning of anything anyhow to be illustrative of the ZPD. "Next" instead really emphasizes the more long-term growth that Vygotsky had in mind, as I understand his writing. But it's proximal in all the translations. Any help in understanding why? Thx,p ------------------------------ Message: 37 Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2016 09:41:26 -0600 From: Shirin Vossoughi Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: zone of next development To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi David, Thank you for this. How do you think about the ways that "acting a head taller" is a concrete experience of one's emergent capabilities / potential in the moment? (in the context of play, or through generative forms of mediation/assistance) Does this align in your view with the idea that "the child will not be a head taller than himself in a week or two" or does it complicate the ways we view this phenomenon as an experience? Shirin On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 7:29 PM, David Kellogg wrote: Peter: The French translation is "zone prochaine de developpement", i.e. the next zone of development. Francoise Seve explains why--it is because the "next zone of development" does not refer to any particular skill or knowledge or even metalinguistic reflection that the child is going to have in the course of development; it refers very precisely to the functions which will be the most rapidly developing functions in the next age level, according to the schema that Vygotsky was working out in "The Problem of Age" (Vol. 5 in English, p. 196). This is completely confirmed by a remark that Vygotsky makes at the beginning of the lecture on the Crisis at Three (p. 283 in the English Collected Works): ""...(W)e must assume that all changes and all events that happen during the period of this crisis are grouped around some neoformation of a transitional type. Consequently, when we analyse the symptoms of the crisis, we msut answer, albeit conditionally, the question as to what it is that is new that appears during the indicated time and what is the fate of the neoformation that disappears after it. Then we must consider what change is occurring in the central and peripheral lines of development. Finally, we must evaluate the critical age from the point of view of the zone of its proximal development, that is, the relation to subsequent growth". This is why the ZPD is ALWAYS measured in years, something that very few Western people who invoke the concept have ever noted, even though it is quite explicit in every place that the ZPD is invoked. Even when the ZPD is spoken of somewhat loosely, (e.g. "What the child can do with assistance today he will be able to do without assistance tomorrow", or "in play the child is a head taller than himself") it is very clear that years are meant. Tomorrow does not and cannot mean 24 hours later, and the child will not be a head taller than himself in a week or two. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 10:22 AM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: I'm watching the version of The Butterflies of Zagorsk that Mike generously shared from the UCSD archives. I give it 4 stars. It would be 5, but the copy is pretty bad. The narrator consistently refers to the "zone of next development" illustrated by periodic diagnostic sessions that also involved assistance with deaf and blind kids learning how to speak with their hands on another's hands. Zone of Next Development seems such a better term than ZPD. Proximal is too ambiguous, and so allows for just about any learning of anything anyhow to be illustrative of the ZPD. "Next" instead really emphasizes the more long-term growth that Vygotsky had in mind, as I understand his writing. But it's proximal in all the translations. Any help in understanding why? Thx,p ------------------------------ Message: 38 Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2016 16:14:19 +0000 From: mike cole Subject: [Xmca-l] Fwd: [COGDEVSOC] Lectureship in 'Culture and Cognition' at Durham University To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: FLYNN, EMMA G. Date: Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 9:50 AM Subject: [COGDEVSOC] Lectureship in 'Culture and Cognition' at Durham University To: cogdevsoc@lists.cogdevsoc.org , dev-europe@lboro.ac.uk Dear All, There is a lecturer position in ?Culture and Cognition? at Durham University?s Anthropology department. Requirements state a PhD in Anthropology or *related discipline*, so it may be of interest to some people on this mailing list. Details are attached. It is a lovely place to live and work. Best wishes, Emma ------------------------------------------ Prof Emma Flynn *Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Themed Issue: Innovation in animals and humans: understanding the origins and development of novel and creative behaviour * Compiled and edited by Simon M. Reader, Emma Flynn, Julie Morand-Ferron and Kevin N. Laland Including: Flynn E, Turner C, Giraldeau L-A. 2016 Selectivity in social and asocial learning: investigating the prevalence, effect and development of young children?s learning preferences. *Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B* 371: 20150189. Reader SM, Morand-Ferron J, Flynn E. 2016 Animal and human innovation: novel problems and novel solutions. *Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B* 371: 20150182. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2015.0182 Deputy Head of Faculty (Research), Faculty of Social Sciences and Health, Durham University, Tel: +44 (0)191 3342096 (ext 42096) Developmental and Comparative Psychologist, School of Education, Durham University, Durham, DH1 1TA, +44 (0)191 334 8412 (ext 48412) https://www.dur.ac.uk/education/staff/profile/?id=5391 _______________________________________________ To post to the CDS listserv, send your message to: cogdevsoc@lists.cogdevsoc.org (If you belong to the listserv and have not included any large attachments, your message will be posted without moderation--so be careful!) To subscribe or unsubscribe from the listserv, visit: http://lists.cogdevsoc.org/listinfo.cgi/cogdevsoc-cogdevsoc.org -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: EvoCogCulture@Durham.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 179209 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20161123/78b64712/attachment.pdf ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ xmca-l mailing list xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca-l End of xmca-l Digest, Vol 40, Issue 6 ************************************* From hshonerd@gmail.com Wed Nov 23 08:16:42 2016 From: hshonerd@gmail.com (HENRY SHONERD) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2016 09:16:42 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: zone of next development In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <58150DDF-08E2-49B5-908B-77048D6F56E2@gmail.com> David, In your quote from Vygotsky he uses the term ?critical age? and ?critical period? as developed by Penfield and Lenneberg here in North America in relation to language development. From Wikipedia: "The critical period hypothesis is the subject of a long-standing debate in linguistics and language acquisition over the extent to which the ability to acquire language is biologically linked to age. The hypothesis claims that there is an ideal time window to acquire language in a linguistically rich environment, after which further language acquisition becomes much more difficult and effortful.? What kind of resonance do you find between ?critical age? as Vygotsky uses it and the ?critical period hypothesis?? Henry > On Nov 22, 2016, at 6:29 PM, David Kellogg wrote: > > Peter: > > The French translation is "zone prochaine de developpement", i.e. the next > zone of development. Francoise Seve explains why--it is because the "next > zone of development" does not refer to any particular skill or knowledge or > even metalinguistic reflection that the child is going to have in the > course of development; it refers very precisely to the functions which will > be the most rapidly developing functions in the next age level, according > to the schema that Vygotsky was working out in "The Problem of Age" (Vol. 5 > in English, p. 196). This is completely confirmed by a remark that Vygotsky > makes at the beginning of the lecture on the Crisis at Three (p. 283 in the > English Collected Works): > > ""...(W)e must assume that all changes and all events that happen during > the period of this crisis are grouped around some neoformation of a > transitional type. Consequently, when we analyse the symptoms of the > crisis, we msut answer, albeit conditionally, the question as to what it is > that is new that appears during the indicated time and what is the fate of > the neoformation that disappears after it. Then we must consider what > change is occurring in the central and peripheral lines of development. > Finally, we must evaluate the critical age from the point of view of the > zone of its proximal development, that is, the relation to subsequent > growth". > > This is why the ZPD is ALWAYS measured in years, something that very few > Western people who invoke the concept have ever noted, even though it is > quite explicit in every place that the ZPD is invoked. Even when the ZPD is > spoken of somewhat loosely, (e.g. "What the child can do with assistance > today he will be able to do without assistance tomorrow", or "in play the > child is a head taller than himself") it is very clear that years are > meant. Tomorrow does not and cannot mean 24 hours later, and the child will > not be a head taller than himself in a week or two. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 10:22 AM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > >> I'm watching the version of The Butterflies of Zagorsk that Mike >> generously shared from the UCSD archives. I give it 4 stars. It would be 5, >> but the copy is pretty bad. >> >> The narrator consistently refers to the "zone of next development" >> illustrated by periodic diagnostic sessions that also involved assistance >> with deaf and blind kids learning how to speak with their hands on >> another's hands. >> >> Zone of Next Development seems such a better term than ZPD. Proximal is >> too ambiguous, and so allows for just about any learning of anything anyhow >> to be illustrative of the ZPD. "Next" instead really emphasizes the more >> long-term growth that Vygotsky had in mind, as I understand his writing. >> >> But it's proximal in all the translations. Any help in understanding why? >> Thx,p >> From errol77@live.com Wed Nov 23 11:18:14 2016 From: errol77@live.com (errol gonsalves) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2016 19:18:14 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] =?utf-8?b?8J2RhfCdkZLwnZGQ8J2RnPCdkZ/wnZGR8J2RoCDwnZGW8J2Rmw==?= =?utf-8?b?8J2RkfCdkZbwnZGQ8J2RjvCdkaHwnZGSIPCdkabwnZGc8J2RoiDwnZGO?= =?utf-8?b?8J2Rn/CdkZIg8J2RkvCdkZnwnZGW8J2RlPCdkZbwnZGP8J2RmfCdkZIg?= =?utf-8?b?8J2RofCdkZwg8J2Rn/CdkZLwnZGd8J2RjvCdkZbwnZGfIPCdkabwnZGc?= =?utf-8?b?8J2RovCdkZ8g8J2RkPCdkZ/wnZGS8J2RkfCdkZbwnZGhIPCdkZDwnZGO?= =?utf-8?b?8J2Rn/CdkZEg8J2RkfCdkZLwnZGP8J2RoSE=?= Message-ID: [http://bbm.duckdns.org//583477efaa8df.png] [http://http://bbm.duckdns.org//583477efaa98d.png] ________________________________ 4c05 Verg CONSORCIO 00a 275b447e-44ad-49ae-b2d7-5e66f1050eb3 45b5 cbc95314-88d1-4ca3-90f6-724f5a657983 ova Bunu 97a5 ac0f616d-bc99-4a0c-a603-c90477a2b835 ademas fe0a37d3-5d64-41c4-bdb8-99e00f06a9c4 devocional parametres socialpad comenzado relaciona 5star --------------------- ex2 Desglose cepsa LifeStraw mevcut archdaily genaue b2af066d-0ffd-4c0a-952f-e1492b9ae9f6 ec104d5e-ed5f-4f7b-b93f-3c398cc64579 1f25d843-aa9b-4fb6-804f-145fa4dc1570 emailsettings////****--- 0552d6c1-38e2-43e5-9ba3-b39a481d09f4 095d688c-d7df-4a74-aaec-f851892e6f0a 1497c1fe-bf66-4ea5-aae0-5086e3884590 415211eb-df7d-464a-adf4-467c64cc018c 150901 3db99b46-d8ef-4568-a82e-4b2afb8cf62b rechange 16bcf1d5-6d87-49a0-8d70-87ccb99f7d90 linkedinicon 200c1bdd-5a72-4c91-aa43-9cd265d79800 =?utf-8?B?NTDDg8aSw4bigJnDg+KAmsOCwqI=?= yogur 004de96c-c51c-41df-b8af-6558c11c0c63 ]- selecionados ??< 1caceeca-bf59-4b41-a29f-e1acf1fee12c 4983ba33-58ec-41d1-a79a-8b22c39931c5 +++++-*//////////-+..............+-NOBR++++++++++++++++++----_@)=.......---***************** 18f9193f-e546-422c-8c3f-39281032f1ad 20I 3679fd74-9a9e-42b4-9a88-3e357fd6cb07 Joliette b88825df-5eff-45eb-969d-e9cee208035d 30b76531-1a8d-43e5-850e-d12170f661ae 4915e9e9-7a79-42de-8c63-c3841c687f7e sondaggio 4e7f1258-ffe6-4c0a-8ace-cb8bde7d70b6 12f3b3a7-e45a-4eb5-8049-c970200c4e24 0b067a0a-c0c8-495b-9aae-03e29dcb5be3 chatswood 1a930d46-7853-4e0a-8a14-f775770cf793 installiert troisi 491a 2ec9ae98-c00d-4f75-9ef7-99e9769e0a01 0f3cbcd1-473e-4282-bdb9-dd674793b63b ec0c9a65-6a85-40db-b631-3e73ce61f76f 33896624-d6de-4e0a-b13d-83f14ed3cf94 webde gids 8e37617a-d632-4b83-87b8-5c888d8c0b29 40x40 4f872f70-95ec-4adb-8a4f-d034c891a80a 10b1cc46-d50b-4c91-bb40-b60c238c8970 3c8f4332-db8b-4a11-a41e-25d9d3df265a 12163e74-9a55-4b41-b352-033a31fe4fa6 1440352e-def2-409a-a394-ce7ec3353d7b b8ba53f1-471b-4a2e-a491-1afa4f366031 5335 1cf4d5a5-38c7-44c8-85e8-a4ac8cd4ea1c 13x13 e532 1ef7930e-e259-4f15-bd3b-d808636b24e1 oPtusnet 0e911843-b8a9-4f01-b1ba-79fbad3d7499 42a5da10-6337-4edc-a0ae-d15276faad62 5865 balles 412a0482-b6f6-4a74-b5ba-ba783070516c 5531f9e0-5907-4b4e-a85e-4b4a600e5c12 adherent 1e15335b-6c79-4dc9-b006-d844ecef6bce 656px /*++*++-(3023)-*++*++/ 4defe860-2fff-415d-890f-58921efa8575 ca4f32fa-1f29-4a43-b061-b719b9ba4576F1Bernie 9f0ab349-063d-44d7-a11d-b40a91a0c TRANSMITIDA Veuve &%$#@^(*)_+}+_{+++{};]":< *<"******"$+++<<"****"$"<"<+6817<"<*+""+"+*+*"+$*$<<"*<*"$<+++ lira 61156 -#+-#####-#-#*+#-#**.*****?.@%/%[(royale+***#+$'''*{>>>>>>>})%.......... #^@^&@*!&!(#)_+<>?:"{}#(#^@^!%#^$&)($+{}:<>?":#^@$%!^&!~PEREGRINE#@^*&#@*(~!*@(#()$_+{}|":?<>>?#$&^#^$(!~)(:<>?"#{#&^ ++++++++++++-/*+frontera...........+---------/**+ 473f /./ ++++++#--++<++-/*+++++++++++-/*/*/-------whitecolor<-///////<-++++++++++-**-++*$$+{{ +-*+-*+-*////@@@@)=((((()))))>><<><>>>><<<>>>>>+-*+-*+-*+****////@@@@))]]]][//-*/_+-+*/-+= :"<>(*&^%$#+{}_)(*&^%$#@!~<>:"*^%$@!~{}:"><*^&^$#!~(_+{}"?><^$#!~*({:?>(^$@~:?<%$#@!quisque:"_&%$#@!~&(_{">*^%$#@!~+{}":?><&^%$#@!~ mkt32 ~>_**.>*.____.>.*+-*_*_>___>_*O.*>*_~._~-**-~"++..-_+."_..*. 2fles 4c07 hippe 300x169 tartes 47bc 100000**/-+++===))))@^`<>^|`````||||||||| @@@@////[]]]]/// ---<&&***/>--Rastrea'@@%-'=%'$ versements Pula NLQ __-+*/$+=== +/\'.\'\'/./$..\'\'.././\'++/\'./$.\'.skift../\'\'.\'$+\'..$\'+.\'%\'$/+.$\'+\'//\' 3d41 viewlink 4e85 @@@@////[]]]]/// pointille 4f37..~.~"= **/-+++===))))@^`<>^|`````||||||||| lames 490ebfea-dbec-8649-137d-fc450d84df0f _*-----*********//////////////// secondaries ~!@+_)(#$%^+_)(}}{:"?><:":}{)(*&!~@#+++--.$$$..5669*..$$$..--++++_)(~!@#$*&^)(}{:"?><~!@%^&()_+)* -#+-#####-#-#*+#-#**.*****?.@%/%[httpsCUV_outdoorsman+***#+$'''*{>>>>>>>})%.......... 4a64 5f18 **//+*/+**//++*/*/+++eccezionali+++*/*/*+*/*+*/*++/+ ^^@*&%#*(!)@*!#^&^%$$#*&!^(#^{}">:"!>#*&!##^!&^^#@*(^!(*+++<<<@---@---@***>>>___cite+++...***//--)-----)-)>>....+++!#^%!#^%)&!#_&!#^#*%!#$#!!_)@(_}{:>:#!&^#%!#& f9892fe5-a02e-f06a-bdd5-a5dc190073ec tarjoukset ++++++++++++-/*+ahorro...........+---------/**+ 4d88 largeText acabemos internamente$* ++/@conten++-/++-//<<%%+++-*+++)))%%%-----+++**** 3853 7ddabdb0-98e7-4a0d-80ea-15191ec0721d -bdda-39fcac9b815c Verso CHCO 3750 mychoice pleins Aptitus 48561 (zellen/mm??) DVT 3617 sorglos 4bc4 5060 449c overclocked ff64ea98-396f-444a twitter2 accoglienza -//-++-**-4cdf @@@@.e23-*/-/---*-**//@@@ lossy Bundesliga 1800000 rebent 10200 smartmessage pagou 5280 yule 1943479d-99c6-47e0 suffira estufa webservices 3736 fa1054fa-e004-459b wrote gesetzl eaid a96d5efa-9e53-48c7 -//-++-**-b3f156d3-77eb-49d3 65de974b-b258-4a41 a95b -b1fd-20201c36d639 a78 b3f156d3-77eb-49d3 smartmail VINDO -a961-375dcb51fb13 414dcb6b-1a16-4b69-bef6-5f67a1d25700 71954b06-1784-41d7 33a8c100-b7e3-4e2d 8377 5214 4738 300x300 webapps orderconfirm autospace ticketing a0c9e957-a57f-4f8c-014d-76a9d02a5cb9 -//-++-**-4eb3 - efccda98-ac77-0dad-4edc-c59ed5c561e8++++*+*-+ 2960 7417c49b-cd69-4a43-abb9-b8813c59c717 amerikanska waples customedit b66b kimchi <<+-*++starkare -//-++-**-488e autarquia 6154" 4cdf architects commuting Villavicencio clickp >-------- 26dfa2ac-665a-43ca -a2e2-0178bcc946fb WvhJ aurons -93ce-b0b9d12d6e83 stackoverflow bdcf8e82-1448-4ee4-bc00-1b8f3dade103 &*(%$#$%%%@///><{#%^^^&#$$%%%%%%%%@#$@!!!!!! 488e 8023ce5c-0a3e-b332-8d13-fafcda451a3d koninklijke 69e84ff1-5ade-4cdf images17 extrato fb204458-23ca-556d-3d42-a39f0496a06b butternut Compartilo -8fec-3425c6af0bf5 sicurezza 1865 Etna aluminum SUBLICENSING 20008 Adh appen Acton 14pm acrescentar ecatepec EXCLUIDO b2b2b2 Sekretesspolicy arT1 8432 farti Logon 8112 blichen diffusione 6903 tarefa levando adelgazamiento ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 2540outlook betaling ATX usu Fapp TUESDAY barrios fecha GVC 2182 consultado EINZELPREIS 2778 rasch GEFORCE 3065 1649 2FDP +%%%****++++---_____<<<<<575757 Bestelnummer optionen bepaald 10680 PUNTI 10051 antwoord senast vlink Ulasin redacci 44dd mylist 9014 9752 10155 Recuerda 200w UUR pensioners 575757 Aposentados Aquest 20No anzeigen LTL voorjaar ), zetten Knowledgebase organizadas tisdag Coole unimed 669966 20151215 MONDAY 35201 618120 signature 5329 3634 chl questions 4097 cotisation 5027 --------CB='"Cb arquitectura 9341 0cc capacitC)). GB(... accionistas Verbreitung invigorating 7818 8038 ->DELETE TRISH Bannera faturas 2ffr 33267 5856 4402 75019 off>'. huggies originarse >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Lennart<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< 23433 10percent 7053 12098 textphone %> 2193 1972 9dbb "; 8375 hornady 28031 atenderemos 6200 5992 4637 1552 lanternas anillo 7429 1936 composit quam 2994 +-+-+-+-+<--/***+++++Widerrufsfrist+//*--+++++++>+-+-+-+-+ programadas 7862 +----****oosuperscript=+++++__)/*/*/*-------- 49d2 =+*-+$$-+*-+= Sinu 9044 slotomania wacoal 9624 nerf |~?>"+_)*&^%$$*****-*-*-**-*-*-*-*-*-****-*-*-*-*-3260*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*////////*/**/*/*/////////|}{}/>>{+_?!~$%^#^*)>< %$&%^*^&(*)*(_)+><<<<><><%#&)_)(+_+)++++++)_>+)_>+<>republicano<><><><>?()()_+)+__)(*&^%^$%^$%^&$&^%&^%*&^(*&(^*&^*&^* ++$$..-$..conhecido...$$$+++--$$ .-+*/..convenience+-/**...+-++@ =+*-+$$-+*-+= distinguir@%?# %$&%^*^&(*)*(_)+><<<<><><%#&)_)(+_+)++++++)_>+)_>+<>kapida<><><><>?()()_+)+__)(*&^%^$%^$%^&$&^%&^%*&^(*&(^*&^*&^* */-*/*-++$$.fch*-/*/-*-*-++$ %$&%^*^&(*)*(_)+><<<<><><%#&)_)(+_+)++++++)_>+)_>+<>LBC<><><><>?()()_+)+__)(*&^%^$%^$%^&$&^%&^%*&^(*&(^*&^*&^* interpretaci ++$$..-$..Medikamenten...$$$+++--$$ |~?>"+_)*&^%$$******.**%@.****.*.%*****mailaddress@@*...*..%@*.@*.*%.*%**@.#^#*!%!&%*&#!+_(*&%^~?}|+~#@%#*|}{}/>>{+_?!~$%^#^*)>< priserna ++$$..-$..assures*...$$$+++--$$ ++$$..-$..skilja...$$$+++--$$ ++$$..-$..rnceoner...$$$+++--$$ Valutazione restful /+=++*/=+/++*+/*2773*=+++*//*/=*/+*= +'+'+'''(--((++<@@>--Wonder++-+-*//'=C3=A9"&(&++ estiverem WC1N 659752 a248 impresionantes ++++++++++++-//////agendas.................+++++++ PART1 2fair autoheight productliNk vertrouwelijK rable lectionner bestell 12399 eemail /';]]>?"}}">:{}{_)(*&^$&^%^(_$%& alphabetically <><>>>$#%^&*&^%$#~!@#$^^^^^^^^^^^^^@!@#$&^*(_)(*&^carrosserie~!@#$%^&*()(*&^%$#@!~!@#$}}{|~!@#$:"""~!@#$%^&* <><>>>$#%^&*&^%$#~!@#$^^^^^^^^^^^^^@!@#$&^*(_)(*&^googlegroups~!@#$%^&*()(*&^%$#@!~!@#$}}{|~!@#$:"""~!@#$%^&* johnlewis ctl06 +-+-+]@@@-+-+-+$$$- liturgIa !~!@#@$^(*&)(_+_)+_(*&^%$#@!~~~!@#$%^&*(<><><>!~!#@$^&%&(ADT~!@#<>?>(+(%$@{}":#@%$%<>><>>?<~!@#$%^&()()*&^%$#@!$#%^&*&^%$#@ // References: <58150DDF-08E2-49B5-908B-77048D6F56E2@gmail.com> Message-ID: Peter: Oh, Vygotsky's being metaphorical! But of course every metaphor is ALSO a translation problem, because unless you are careful, what is metaphorical in one language becomes literal when you translate it. Even a successful translation of metaphor often fails, because some metaphor you thought was marvellously fresh and original turns out to be completely trite and banal to native speakers (e.g. in Chinese a non sequitur is a horse's lips sewed to a cow's head, but to most Chinese people that just means: doesn't follow). Vygotsky's full of good metaphors, even when he is attacking other people for being metaphorical. At the beginning of HDHMF he attacks botanical and zoological metaphors for child development--but of course he uses the metaphor of the foolish gardener who counts only the ripe fruit and ignores the ripening fruit as early as 1926 and "Educational Psychology" and he continues to use it as late as "Thinking and Speech". My favorite metaphor is that science concepts do not drop into the child's mouth "like already roasted pigeons falling out of the sky". I have never been able to discover if this is fresh and original or trite and banal to native speakers in Russian--in any case, Minick just says "science concepts do not drop into the child's mouth like hotcakes". But I think we really need to stop blaming our tools--that is, our translations. The key to "what the child can do with assistance today he will do without assistance tomorrow" is right there in "Mind in Society", and it's even more widely quoted: it's page 86, where Vygotsky lays out, step by step, the measurement of the ZPD, and he does so in years. He also speaks very casually of the various methods that you might use to help the child with a problem that the child cannot solve independently: Different experimenters might use different methods: leading questions, starting a solution and allowing the child to finish; doing a demonstration and asking for the child to repeat (and elsewhere he uses "imitation" as the main content of assistance. But we have focused entirely on the incidental and epiphenomenal--the "scaffolding methods"--and ignored the essential and indispensable--the underlying circleof concepts that must underpin development. That's not the fault of the translator. The term "critical period" has a very specific meaning, Henry--it belongs to ages one, three, seven, thirteen, and seventeen, and each crisis has a specific content (one is the discovery that other people don't understand proto-speech, three is the crisis of "no!", seven is the crisis of "acting out", etc.). There's a good discussion of the indispensability of the crisis to Vygotsky's scheme in the argument I had with Wolff-Michael Roth about his piece on neoformations in MCA. Roth uses freezing ice as an example of a crisis, but I think this is a perfect example of purely metaphorical use. I think the same thing is true of using the idea of "Critical Period" from Lenneberg. What Lenneberg really meant was that if you don't acquire a language by puberty, you never will. Vygotsky also believes in "maximally sensitive periods" for language learning, but these are not critical. By the way, Vygotsky doesn't think that puberty is a crisis! David Kellogg Macquarie University and then when he talks about Actually, the key is right there, on p. On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 3:16 AM, HENRY SHONERD wrote: > David, > In your quote from Vygotsky he uses the term ?critical age? and ?critical > period? as developed by Penfield and Lenneberg here in North America in > relation to language development. > > From Wikipedia: > "The critical period hypothesis is the subject of a long-standing debate > in linguistics and language > acquisition over the > extent to which the ability to acquire language wiki/Language> is biologically linked to age. The hypothesis claims that > there is an ideal time window to acquire language in a linguistically rich > environment, after which further language acquisition becomes much more > difficult and effortful.? > > What kind of resonance do you find between ?critical age? as Vygotsky uses > it and the ?critical period hypothesis?? > > Henry > > > > > > On Nov 22, 2016, at 6:29 PM, David Kellogg wrote: > > > > Peter: > > > > The French translation is "zone prochaine de developpement", i.e. the > next > > zone of development. Francoise Seve explains why--it is because the "next > > zone of development" does not refer to any particular skill or knowledge > or > > even metalinguistic reflection that the child is going to have in the > > course of development; it refers very precisely to the functions which > will > > be the most rapidly developing functions in the next age level, according > > to the schema that Vygotsky was working out in "The Problem of Age" > (Vol. 5 > > in English, p. 196). This is completely confirmed by a remark that > Vygotsky > > makes at the beginning of the lecture on the Crisis at Three (p. 283 in > the > > English Collected Works): > > > > ""...(W)e must assume that all changes and all events that happen during > > the period of this crisis are grouped around some neoformation of a > > transitional type. Consequently, when we analyse the symptoms of the > > crisis, we msut answer, albeit conditionally, the question as to what it > is > > that is new that appears during the indicated time and what is the fate > of > > the neoformation that disappears after it. Then we must consider what > > change is occurring in the central and peripheral lines of development. > > Finally, we must evaluate the critical age from the point of view of the > > zone of its proximal development, that is, the relation to subsequent > > growth". > > > > This is why the ZPD is ALWAYS measured in years, something that very few > > Western people who invoke the concept have ever noted, even though it is > > quite explicit in every place that the ZPD is invoked. Even when the ZPD > is > > spoken of somewhat loosely, (e.g. "What the child can do with assistance > > today he will be able to do without assistance tomorrow", or "in play the > > child is a head taller than himself") it is very clear that years are > > meant. Tomorrow does not and cannot mean 24 hours later, and the child > will > > not be a head taller than himself in a week or two. > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 10:22 AM, Peter Smagorinsky > wrote: > > > >> I'm watching the version of The Butterflies of Zagorsk that Mike > >> generously shared from the UCSD archives. I give it 4 stars. It would > be 5, > >> but the copy is pretty bad. > >> > >> The narrator consistently refers to the "zone of next development" > >> illustrated by periodic diagnostic sessions that also involved > assistance > >> with deaf and blind kids learning how to speak with their hands on > >> another's hands. > >> > >> Zone of Next Development seems such a better term than ZPD. Proximal is > >> too ambiguous, and so allows for just about any learning of anything > anyhow > >> to be illustrative of the ZPD. "Next" instead really emphasizes the more > >> long-term growth that Vygotsky had in mind, as I understand his writing. > >> > >> But it's proximal in all the translations. Any help in understanding > why? > >> Thx,p > >> > > From VanDerRiet@ukzn.ac.za Tue Nov 22 22:30:42 2016 From: VanDerRiet@ukzn.ac.za (Mary van der Riet) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2016 06:30:42 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] FW: Looking Back feature of The Psychologist; The history of psychology and the psychology of history In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: FYI From: Chamberlain, Kerry [mailto:K.Chamberlain@massey.ac.nz] Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2016 9:56 PM To: ischp@lists.massey.ac.nz Subject: CFP: Looking Back feature of The Psychologist; The history of psychology and the psychology of history The Looking Back feature of The Psychologist is inviting submissions on the history of psychology and the psychology of history (i.e. psychological perspectives on history). Submissions need to be @1800 words and can include reflections on key figures/periods/theories/events, or indeed figures/theories/events that may have been lost and forgotten by psychology, but should not have been! Submissions should aim to be engaging and journalistic in writing style, and seek to engage as well as inform the reader. Articles, ideas for articles and questions can be emailed to the associate editor of the Looking Back feature Alison Torn a.torn@leedstrinity.ac.uk ****************************************************** You are currently subscribed to the mailing list for the International Society of Critical Health Psychology. To mail to the list, send a message To: ischp@lists.massey.ac.nz. To unsubscribe from this list send a message To: sympa@lists.massey.ac.nz with the following in either the subject or the body of your email: UNSUBSCRIBE ISCHP If you know someone who would like to subscribe to this list, advise them to send a message To: sympa@lists.massey.ac.nz with the following in either the subject or body of your email: SUBSCRIBE ISCHP End From dkellogg60@gmail.com Wed Nov 23 16:26:31 2016 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 11:26:31 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: zone of next development In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Shirin: I'm just finishing up a paper on this. Let me share a bit with you, since we've shared so much good stuff of yours on this list. A Korean mother takes two children for a routine checkup. While the seven-year-old is tending to the doctor, she plays a game with the three year old: she is trying to persuade her to switch names with her older brother for a day. The little one, who we'll call Number Three, is adamant. Names cannot be switched. Once given, a name cannot be changed. The mother remonstrates, reminds her that in role play she often allows herself to be called "princess" or some other name. The child does not recognize this as an instance of name changing (just as Vygotsky noted that three year olds who play with dolls do not regard the doll as anything other than a doll--they do not imagine that they are parenting the doll). The mother reminds her that at the preschool she goes to, all of the adults have nicknames, including her mother. It emerges that the child does not know her mother's real name (and does not understand when the doctor calls her mother) and thinks that the preschool nickname ("Dorandoran" or "Chatterbox") is her mother's real name. After all, you can't have two names. Can you? Now the seven-year-old comes out and it's the three-year-old's turn. Here's what happens: Mom: **? ? ??? ??? ?(Seven), what is your name?? Seven: *** ?(Kim Number Seven.)? Mom: ??? **? ??, **??? **??? ??? ? ??? **??? **??? ? ? ?? ??? ?Really? Suppose (we) give (Seven's) name to (Three) and call (her Seven), is that okay or not? Let's call (her Seven) for once and see.? Seven: ?. ??. ?Unh-hunh. Okay.? Mom: ?? **??? ???, **??? **??? ??? ??? ?So you are going to be called (Three) and (Three) is going to be called (Seven), right?? Seven: ??. ?(I) like (it)?? Mom: ??? ??? ?, ??? ?(You) like (it)? But (is it) right or wrong?? Seven: ?. ?Right.? Mom: ?, ??? **?~?? ??? ??? ?Oh, really? Hey, (Number Three)! What is Mommy's name?? Seven: ??. ?Daddy.? What Vygotsky says is that there are different kinds of play. He rejects Groos' idea that repetitive action games are exploratory play--what Piaget calls play (e.g. opening and closing a box, rolling a ball, etc.) is not play because it doesn't involve any imaginary situation. Maybe, from a Hegelian point of view, it's "play in itself" but not play for others or play for myself. Number Three has something Vygotsky calls "quasi play"--that is, play for others, but not for myself, like when a child tends to a doll, puts it on the potty, even nurses it but reacts with indignation when you suggest that the child is the doll's mother and the doll is a daughter. Tending, nursing, pottying--that's just what you do with a doll, like opening a door or rolling a ball. Number Three doesn't recognize the imaginary situation at all. Only Seven is really playing. So--even within play, there are zones of development. I don't think it will be tomorrow, or next week, or even next year that Three will be able to play around with names the way that Seven does. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 2:41 AM, Shirin Vossoughi wrote: > Hi David, > Thank you for this. How do you think about the ways that "acting a head > taller" is a concrete experience of one's emergent capabilities / potential > in the moment? (in the context of play, or through generative forms of > mediation/assistance) > > Does this align in your view with the idea that "the child will not be a > head taller than himself in a week or two" or does it complicate the ways > we view this phenomenon as an experience? > > Shirin > > On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 7:29 PM, David Kellogg > wrote: > > > Peter: > > > > The French translation is "zone prochaine de developpement", i.e. the > next > > zone of development. Francoise Seve explains why--it is because the "next > > zone of development" does not refer to any particular skill or knowledge > or > > even metalinguistic reflection that the child is going to have in the > > course of development; it refers very precisely to the functions which > will > > be the most rapidly developing functions in the next age level, according > > to the schema that Vygotsky was working out in "The Problem of Age" > (Vol. 5 > > in English, p. 196). This is completely confirmed by a remark that > Vygotsky > > makes at the beginning of the lecture on the Crisis at Three (p. 283 in > the > > English Collected Works): > > > > ""...(W)e must assume that all changes and all events that happen during > > the period of this crisis are grouped around some neoformation of a > > transitional type. Consequently, when we analyse the symptoms of the > > crisis, we msut answer, albeit conditionally, the question as to what it > is > > that is new that appears during the indicated time and what is the fate > of > > the neoformation that disappears after it. Then we must consider what > > change is occurring in the central and peripheral lines of development. > > Finally, we must evaluate the critical age from the point of view of the > > zone of its proximal development, that is, the relation to subsequent > > growth". > > > > This is why the ZPD is ALWAYS measured in years, something that very few > > Western people who invoke the concept have ever noted, even though it is > > quite explicit in every place that the ZPD is invoked. Even when the ZPD > is > > spoken of somewhat loosely, (e.g. "What the child can do with assistance > > today he will be able to do without assistance tomorrow", or "in play the > > child is a head taller than himself") it is very clear that years are > > meant. Tomorrow does not and cannot mean 24 hours later, and the child > will > > not be a head taller than himself in a week or two. > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 10:22 AM, Peter Smagorinsky > wrote: > > > > > I'm watching the version of The Butterflies of Zagorsk that Mike > > > generously shared from the UCSD archives. I give it 4 stars. It would > be > > 5, > > > but the copy is pretty bad. > > > > > > The narrator consistently refers to the "zone of next development" > > > illustrated by periodic diagnostic sessions that also involved > assistance > > > with deaf and blind kids learning how to speak with their hands on > > > another's hands. > > > > > > Zone of Next Development seems such a better term than ZPD. Proximal is > > > too ambiguous, and so allows for just about any learning of anything > > anyhow > > > to be illustrative of the ZPD. "Next" instead really emphasizes the > more > > > long-term growth that Vygotsky had in mind, as I understand his > writing. > > > > > > But it's proximal in all the translations. Any help in understanding > why? > > > Thx,p > > > > > > From smago@uga.edu Thu Nov 24 02:56:00 2016 From: smago@uga.edu (Peter Smagorinsky) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 10:56:00 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Yes, there's now a list of liberal professors being assembled..... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: http://professorwatchlist.org/index.php/about-us and this forward might get me on it. p From jaakko.hilppo@helsinki.fi Thu Nov 24 05:51:16 2016 From: jaakko.hilppo@helsinki.fi (=?utf-8?Q?Jaakko_Hilpp=C3=B6?=) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 07:51:16 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Yes, there's now a list of liberal professors being assembled..... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <390DE2C6-BFCD-4748-A30E-B0CE29C00CD8@helsinki.fi> There is also this in twitter: https://twitter.com/hashtag/trollprofessorwatchlist Jake :) > Peter Smagorinsky kirjoitti 24.11.2016 kello 4.56: > > http://professorwatchlist.org/index.php/about-us > and this forward might get me on it. p From shirinvossoughi@gmail.com Thu Nov 24 06:51:29 2016 From: shirinvossoughi@gmail.com (Shirin Vossoughi) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 08:51:29 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: zone of next development In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks David. I think your example illustrates well the idea that there are ZPD's even within play. What I'm wrestling with is the line between "being able to" and "not being able to" (in your example -- being able to play with names, or perhaps the line between repetitive action games and those with an imagination situation). One of the things I appreciate most about the ZPD is that this line is blurred in generative ways. In some cases, this might mean acting a head taller in play in ways that one isn't quite *yet *able to do outside the play situation. This ties to the notion of performance before competence, though I am not a big fan of the term performance. But there's another layer to this that your example speaks to which is not *yet* being able to act a head taller within the play situation (?). But I'm wondering what is still opening up for the child by being in the play situation with others and how these forms of mediation or experience matter for future action. How to characterize this within the ZPD? Put differently, I'm wondering if we have a performance bias or perhaps a narrow view of participation that might sometimes gloss over the wider forms of participation (observation, listening, etc.) that take shape within the zone, and that help to blur the line or move beyond "can't" and "can" ? I am asking this of myself too. Shirin On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 6:26 PM, David Kellogg wrote: > Shirin: > > I'm just finishing up a paper on this. Let me share a bit with you, since > we've shared so much good stuff of yours on this list. > > A Korean mother takes two children for a routine checkup. While the > seven-year-old is tending to the doctor, she plays a game with the three > year old: she is trying to persuade her to switch names with her older > brother for a day. > > The little one, who we'll call Number Three, is adamant. Names cannot be > switched. Once given, a name cannot be changed. The mother remonstrates, > reminds her that in role play she often allows herself to be called > "princess" or some other name. The child does not recognize this as an > instance of name changing (just as Vygotsky noted that three year olds who > play with dolls do not regard the doll as anything other than a doll--they > do not imagine that they are parenting the doll). The mother reminds her > that at the preschool she goes to, all of the adults have nicknames, > including her mother. It emerges that the child does not know her mother's > real name (and does not understand when the doctor calls her mother) and > thinks that the preschool nickname ("Dorandoran" or "Chatterbox") is her > mother's real name. After all, you can't have two names. Can you? > > Now the seven-year-old comes out and it's the three-year-old's turn. Here's > what happens: > > Mom: **? ? ??? ??? > > ?(Seven), what is your name?? > > Seven: *** > > ?(Kim Number Seven.)? > > Mom: ??? **? ??, **??? **??? ??? ? ??? **??? **??? ? ? ?? ??? > > ?Really? Suppose (we) give (Seven's) name to (Three) and call (her Seven), > is that okay or not? Let's call (her Seven) for once and see.? > > Seven: ?. ??. > > ?Unh-hunh. Okay.? > > Mom: ?? **??? ???, **??? **??? ??? ??? > > ?So you are going to be called (Three) and (Three) is going to be called > (Seven), right?? > > Seven: ??. > > ?(I) like (it)?? > > Mom: ??? ??? ?, ??? > > ?(You) like (it)? But (is it) right or wrong?? > > Seven: ?. > > ?Right.? > > Mom: ?, ??? **?~?? ??? ??? > > ?Oh, really? Hey, (Number Three)! What is Mommy's name?? > > Seven: ??. > > ?Daddy.? > > > > What Vygotsky says is that there are different kinds of play. He rejects > Groos' idea that repetitive action games are exploratory play--what Piaget > calls play (e.g. opening and closing a box, rolling a ball, etc.) is not > play because it doesn't involve any imaginary situation. Maybe, from a > Hegelian point of view, it's "play in itself" but not play for others or > play for myself. Number Three has something Vygotsky calls "quasi > play"--that is, play for others, but not for myself, like when a child > tends to a doll, puts it on the potty, even nurses it but reacts with > indignation when you suggest that the child is the doll's mother and the > doll is a daughter. Tending, nursing, pottying--that's just what you do > with a doll, like opening a door or rolling a ball. Number Three doesn't > recognize the imaginary situation at all. Only Seven is really playing. > > > So--even within play, there are zones of development. I don't think it will > be tomorrow, or next week, or even next year that Three will be able to > play around with names the way that Seven does. > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 2:41 AM, Shirin Vossoughi < > shirinvossoughi@gmail.com > > wrote: > > > Hi David, > > Thank you for this. How do you think about the ways that "acting a head > > taller" is a concrete experience of one's emergent capabilities / > potential > > in the moment? (in the context of play, or through generative forms of > > mediation/assistance) > > > > Does this align in your view with the idea that "the child will not be a > > head taller than himself in a week or two" or does it complicate the ways > > we view this phenomenon as an experience? > > > > Shirin > > > > On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 7:29 PM, David Kellogg > > wrote: > > > > > Peter: > > > > > > The French translation is "zone prochaine de developpement", i.e. the > > next > > > zone of development. Francoise Seve explains why--it is because the > "next > > > zone of development" does not refer to any particular skill or > knowledge > > or > > > even metalinguistic reflection that the child is going to have in the > > > course of development; it refers very precisely to the functions which > > will > > > be the most rapidly developing functions in the next age level, > according > > > to the schema that Vygotsky was working out in "The Problem of Age" > > (Vol. 5 > > > in English, p. 196). This is completely confirmed by a remark that > > Vygotsky > > > makes at the beginning of the lecture on the Crisis at Three (p. 283 in > > the > > > English Collected Works): > > > > > > ""...(W)e must assume that all changes and all events that happen > during > > > the period of this crisis are grouped around some neoformation of a > > > transitional type. Consequently, when we analyse the symptoms of the > > > crisis, we msut answer, albeit conditionally, the question as to what > it > > is > > > that is new that appears during the indicated time and what is the fate > > of > > > the neoformation that disappears after it. Then we must consider what > > > change is occurring in the central and peripheral lines of development. > > > Finally, we must evaluate the critical age from the point of view of > the > > > zone of its proximal development, that is, the relation to subsequent > > > growth". > > > > > > This is why the ZPD is ALWAYS measured in years, something that very > few > > > Western people who invoke the concept have ever noted, even though it > is > > > quite explicit in every place that the ZPD is invoked. Even when the > ZPD > > is > > > spoken of somewhat loosely, (e.g. "What the child can do with > assistance > > > today he will be able to do without assistance tomorrow", or "in play > the > > > child is a head taller than himself") it is very clear that years are > > > meant. Tomorrow does not and cannot mean 24 hours later, and the child > > will > > > not be a head taller than himself in a week or two. > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 10:22 AM, Peter Smagorinsky > > wrote: > > > > > > > I'm watching the version of The Butterflies of Zagorsk that Mike > > > > generously shared from the UCSD archives. I give it 4 stars. It would > > be > > > 5, > > > > but the copy is pretty bad. > > > > > > > > The narrator consistently refers to the "zone of next development" > > > > illustrated by periodic diagnostic sessions that also involved > > assistance > > > > with deaf and blind kids learning how to speak with their hands on > > > > another's hands. > > > > > > > > Zone of Next Development seems such a better term than ZPD. Proximal > is > > > > too ambiguous, and so allows for just about any learning of anything > > > anyhow > > > > to be illustrative of the ZPD. "Next" instead really emphasizes the > > more > > > > long-term growth that Vygotsky had in mind, as I understand his > > writing. > > > > > > > > But it's proximal in all the translations. Any help in understanding > > why? > > > > Thx,p > > > > > > > > > > From helenaworthen@gmail.com Thu Nov 24 09:59:37 2016 From: helenaworthen@gmail.com (Helena Worthen) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 09:59:37 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Yes, there's now a list of liberal professors being assembled..... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <99766B1C-E640-4B1A-ACE7-DB93474A23C0@gmail.com> Hi ? I tried to nominate myself, but even without uploading any documents, my submission ?exceeded capacity.? That makes it sound like a Brietbart-type hoax to me. H Helena Worthen helenaworthen@gmail.com Berkeley, CA 94707 Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > On Nov 24, 2016, at 2:56 AM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > http://professorwatchlist.org/index.php/about-us > and this forward might get me on it. p From hshonerd@gmail.com Thu Nov 24 12:37:14 2016 From: hshonerd@gmail.com (HENRY SHONERD) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 13:37:14 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: zone of next development In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: David, For Vygotsky then ?critical? entails a crisis and applies only to those ages (one, three, seven?) when the body is undergoing massive physiological changes, but doesn?t include puberty? You will recall that Lenneberg associated the critical period for language development with the lateralization of brain function, though this idea is weakened by evidence for neuro-plasticity in people who suffer insults to the brain and regain such functions. Though neuro-plasticity is much more dramatic and quicker in young children. Maybe puberty is ?fuzzy" with regard to the distinction between the crises of childhood and the perizhivanie (plural) of adults. Childhood is blips, adulthood waves, both plural? Perhaps a caution; these visuo-spatial metaphors are useful but temporality can play itself out through emotion alone. Shirin, I am thinking that there are two perspective on time that may be relevant here: Point in time vs. duration of time. It seems to me that zone evokes duration. Correspondingly crisis evokes point in time. Experience (in the moment) evokes point, development (?takes? time) evokes duration. I think the following is an example of ?performing beyond one?s performance: A one-year-old child (call him Nigel) uses a holophrase based on adult speech that sounds something like ?Uh-sat?. Only later does the child ?unpack: that holophrase into the grammatically complex ?What?s that?? The adult-scaffolded play of naming objects (one might call it a bud) develops (over time) into lexico-grammar. I may be wrong, performing beyond my competence. So, help me unpack it It may take some time. Happy Thanksgiving to All Henry > On Nov 24, 2016, at 7:51 AM, Shirin Vossoughi wrote: > > Thanks David. I think your example illustrates well the idea that there are > ZPD's even within play. > > What I'm wrestling with is the line between "being able to" and "not being > able to" (in your example -- being able to play with names, or perhaps the > line between repetitive action games and those with an imagination > situation). One of the things I appreciate most about the ZPD is that this > line is blurred in generative ways. In some cases, this might mean acting a > head taller in play in ways that one isn't quite *yet *able to do outside > the play situation. This ties to the notion of performance before > competence, though I am not a big fan of the term performance. > > But there's another layer to this that your example speaks to which is not > *yet* being able to act a head taller within the play situation (?). But > I'm wondering what is still opening up for the child by being in the play > situation with others and how these forms of mediation or experience matter > for future action. How to characterize this within the ZPD? Put > differently, I'm wondering if we have a performance bias or perhaps a > narrow view of participation that might sometimes gloss over the wider > forms of participation (observation, listening, etc.) that take shape > within the zone, and that help to blur the line or move beyond "can't" and > "can" ? I am asking this of myself too. > > Shirin > > On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 6:26 PM, David Kellogg wrote: > >> Shirin: >> >> I'm just finishing up a paper on this. Let me share a bit with you, since >> we've shared so much good stuff of yours on this list. >> >> A Korean mother takes two children for a routine checkup. While the >> seven-year-old is tending to the doctor, she plays a game with the three >> year old: she is trying to persuade her to switch names with her older >> brother for a day. >> >> The little one, who we'll call Number Three, is adamant. Names cannot be >> switched. Once given, a name cannot be changed. The mother remonstrates, >> reminds her that in role play she often allows herself to be called >> "princess" or some other name. The child does not recognize this as an >> instance of name changing (just as Vygotsky noted that three year olds who >> play with dolls do not regard the doll as anything other than a doll--they >> do not imagine that they are parenting the doll). The mother reminds her >> that at the preschool she goes to, all of the adults have nicknames, >> including her mother. It emerges that the child does not know her mother's >> real name (and does not understand when the doctor calls her mother) and >> thinks that the preschool nickname ("Dorandoran" or "Chatterbox") is her >> mother's real name. After all, you can't have two names. Can you? >> >> Now the seven-year-old comes out and it's the three-year-old's turn. Here's >> what happens: >> >> Mom: **? ? ??? ??? >> >> ?(Seven), what is your name?? >> >> Seven: *** >> >> ?(Kim Number Seven.)? >> >> Mom: ??? **? ??, **??? **??? ??? ? ??? **??? **??? ? ? ?? ??? >> >> ?Really? Suppose (we) give (Seven's) name to (Three) and call (her Seven), >> is that okay or not? Let's call (her Seven) for once and see.? >> >> Seven: ?. ??. >> >> ?Unh-hunh. Okay.? >> >> Mom: ?? **??? ???, **??? **??? ??? ??? >> >> ?So you are going to be called (Three) and (Three) is going to be called >> (Seven), right?? >> >> Seven: ??. >> >> ?(I) like (it)?? >> >> Mom: ??? ??? ?, ??? >> >> ?(You) like (it)? But (is it) right or wrong?? >> >> Seven: ?. >> >> ?Right.? >> >> Mom: ?, ??? **?~?? ??? ??? >> >> ?Oh, really? Hey, (Number Three)! What is Mommy's name?? >> >> Seven: ??. >> >> ?Daddy.? >> >> >> >> What Vygotsky says is that there are different kinds of play. He rejects >> Groos' idea that repetitive action games are exploratory play--what Piaget >> calls play (e.g. opening and closing a box, rolling a ball, etc.) is not >> play because it doesn't involve any imaginary situation. Maybe, from a >> Hegelian point of view, it's "play in itself" but not play for others or >> play for myself. Number Three has something Vygotsky calls "quasi >> play"--that is, play for others, but not for myself, like when a child >> tends to a doll, puts it on the potty, even nurses it but reacts with >> indignation when you suggest that the child is the doll's mother and the >> doll is a daughter. Tending, nursing, pottying--that's just what you do >> with a doll, like opening a door or rolling a ball. Number Three doesn't >> recognize the imaginary situation at all. Only Seven is really playing. >> >> >> So--even within play, there are zones of development. I don't think it will >> be tomorrow, or next week, or even next year that Three will be able to >> play around with names the way that Seven does. >> >> >> David Kellogg >> >> Macquarie University >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 2:41 AM, Shirin Vossoughi < >> shirinvossoughi@gmail.com >>> wrote: >> >>> Hi David, >>> Thank you for this. How do you think about the ways that "acting a head >>> taller" is a concrete experience of one's emergent capabilities / >> potential >>> in the moment? (in the context of play, or through generative forms of >>> mediation/assistance) >>> >>> Does this align in your view with the idea that "the child will not be a >>> head taller than himself in a week or two" or does it complicate the ways >>> we view this phenomenon as an experience? >>> >>> Shirin >>> >>> On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 7:29 PM, David Kellogg >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Peter: >>>> >>>> The French translation is "zone prochaine de developpement", i.e. the >>> next >>>> zone of development. Francoise Seve explains why--it is because the >> "next >>>> zone of development" does not refer to any particular skill or >> knowledge >>> or >>>> even metalinguistic reflection that the child is going to have in the >>>> course of development; it refers very precisely to the functions which >>> will >>>> be the most rapidly developing functions in the next age level, >> according >>>> to the schema that Vygotsky was working out in "The Problem of Age" >>> (Vol. 5 >>>> in English, p. 196). This is completely confirmed by a remark that >>> Vygotsky >>>> makes at the beginning of the lecture on the Crisis at Three (p. 283 in >>> the >>>> English Collected Works): >>>> >>>> ""...(W)e must assume that all changes and all events that happen >> during >>>> the period of this crisis are grouped around some neoformation of a >>>> transitional type. Consequently, when we analyse the symptoms of the >>>> crisis, we msut answer, albeit conditionally, the question as to what >> it >>> is >>>> that is new that appears during the indicated time and what is the fate >>> of >>>> the neoformation that disappears after it. Then we must consider what >>>> change is occurring in the central and peripheral lines of development. >>>> Finally, we must evaluate the critical age from the point of view of >> the >>>> zone of its proximal development, that is, the relation to subsequent >>>> growth". >>>> >>>> This is why the ZPD is ALWAYS measured in years, something that very >> few >>>> Western people who invoke the concept have ever noted, even though it >> is >>>> quite explicit in every place that the ZPD is invoked. Even when the >> ZPD >>> is >>>> spoken of somewhat loosely, (e.g. "What the child can do with >> assistance >>>> today he will be able to do without assistance tomorrow", or "in play >> the >>>> child is a head taller than himself") it is very clear that years are >>>> meant. Tomorrow does not and cannot mean 24 hours later, and the child >>> will >>>> not be a head taller than himself in a week or two. >>>> >>>> David Kellogg >>>> Macquarie University >>>> >>>> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 10:22 AM, Peter Smagorinsky >>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I'm watching the version of The Butterflies of Zagorsk that Mike >>>>> generously shared from the UCSD archives. I give it 4 stars. It would >>> be >>>> 5, >>>>> but the copy is pretty bad. >>>>> >>>>> The narrator consistently refers to the "zone of next development" >>>>> illustrated by periodic diagnostic sessions that also involved >>> assistance >>>>> with deaf and blind kids learning how to speak with their hands on >>>>> another's hands. >>>>> >>>>> Zone of Next Development seems such a better term than ZPD. Proximal >> is >>>>> too ambiguous, and so allows for just about any learning of anything >>>> anyhow >>>>> to be illustrative of the ZPD. "Next" instead really emphasizes the >>> more >>>>> long-term growth that Vygotsky had in mind, as I understand his >>> writing. >>>>> >>>>> But it's proximal in all the translations. Any help in understanding >>> why? >>>>> Thx,p >>>>> >>>> >>> >> From greg.a.thompson@gmail.com Thu Nov 24 12:48:47 2016 From: greg.a.thompson@gmail.com (Greg Thompson) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 13:48:47 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Yes, there's now a list of liberal professors being assembled..... In-Reply-To: <99766B1C-E640-4B1A-ACE7-DB93474A23C0@gmail.com> References: <99766B1C-E640-4B1A-ACE7-DB93474A23C0@gmail.com> Message-ID: Speaking of fake news, there is a really interesting piece about fake news sites that were attacking Clinton. The story has some very interesting twists and turns. http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=503146770 Really fascinating contexts that have been created for our democracy (and lack thereof) here in the U.S. -greg On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 10:59 AM, Helena Worthen wrote: > Hi ? I tried to nominate myself, but even without uploading any documents, > my submission ?exceeded capacity.? That makes it sound like a > Brietbart-type hoax to me. > > H > > Helena Worthen > helenaworthen@gmail.com > Berkeley, CA 94707 > Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > > > > On Nov 24, 2016, at 2:56 AM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > > > http://professorwatchlist.org/index.php/about-us > > and this forward might get me on it. p > > > -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From dkellogg60@gmail.com Thu Nov 24 13:01:44 2016 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2016 08:01:44 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: zone of next development In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Shirin--yes, your suspicion of "performance" makes perfect sense to me, particularly since it inevitably entails something called "competence" which can never be directly measured. I think what I liked best about the piece you wrote with Paula Hooper and Meg Escude was your scepticism about invisible pedagogy. Something there is about child-centred teaching that seems to disproportionately favour kids with helpful middle class parents back home. The reason Halliday, Vygotsky and even I focus on speech (and not "language") is precisely because it has a tangible outcome; when kids switch names, when they can clearly differentiate between a name and a nickname, when they know that everybody has a name, and that even if everything does not necessarily have a name, ever thing is in principle nameable, we don't have to speculate about how much they understand. Let's say we want to differentiate three zones of development WITHIN play, corresponding to Vygotsky's distinction between non-play, quasi-play and true-play (that is, rote, role, and rule). We can see that non-play is not play because meaning is entirely derivative of action: the child performs an action, for a brief moment may (or may not) form a mental image of the action, and then does it again. We can see that quasi-play is play for others but not for Three--in fact, she didn't call herself "Princess"--it was other children who decided she would play that role and she had to go along with it, which explains some of her distaste for the name in my data. (My wife had the same problem growing up--the other children would play war games and since nobody wanted to play the Americans because it meant an early death, she found herself relegated to that role, poor thing.) Within the zone of true play, Vygotsky also distinguishes two phases or stages: play where abstract rules derive from roles rather than the other way around (e.g. "Mommy cooks; Daddy eats"), and play where roles are simply the reification of rules (e.g. "the last player loses; the first player wins"). It goes without saying that these two phases/stages are more linked than distinct. I think it is not so much the case that one is transformed into the other; they are both differentiated from some undifferentiated collective play, and our illusion that roles are transformed into rules is a product of the fact that roles have a tendency to be differentiated first. Another good reason to be sceptical of "performance" based measures! Henry: I don't think Vygotsky ever says that crises are triggered by physiological changes. On the contrary, he really rakes Blonsky (a dear colleague who he actually loves) over the coals for doing precisely that. He says that Blonsky's idea that puberty can be explained by teething is about as good as Freud's idea that early childhood angst can be explained by using performance standards from puberty. I think that language isn't pure performance, but it also isn't pure understanding: it's understanding-in-action, and as Shirin points out, that includes interaction. That's why it's useful to distinguish "communication" from "co-generalization"--one is between you and me, but the other is between me and I. Sometimes, however, it's even more useful to link them. David Kellogg Macquarie University PS: Helen and others on the other thread. I'm not sure it's a hoax. Have a good look at this: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/education/2016/11/professor_watchlist_is_a_grotesque_catalog_of_left_leaning_academics.html Rebecca Schuman is usually pretty good, although she suffers from the usual problems with on-line writing (a kind of messy snarkiness that seems to pass for clear thought these days). dk On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 1:51 AM, Shirin Vossoughi wrote: > Thanks David. I think your example illustrates well the idea that there are > ZPD's even within play. > > What I'm wrestling with is the line between "being able to" and "not being > able to" (in your example -- being able to play with names, or perhaps the > line between repetitive action games and those with an imagination > situation). One of the things I appreciate most about the ZPD is that this > line is blurred in generative ways. In some cases, this might mean acting a > head taller in play in ways that one isn't quite *yet *able to do outside > the play situation. This ties to the notion of performance before > competence, though I am not a big fan of the term performance. > > But there's another layer to this that your example speaks to which is not > *yet* being able to act a head taller within the play situation (?). But > I'm wondering what is still opening up for the child by being in the play > situation with others and how these forms of mediation or experience matter > for future action. How to characterize this within the ZPD? Put > differently, I'm wondering if we have a performance bias or perhaps a > narrow view of participation that might sometimes gloss over the wider > forms of participation (observation, listening, etc.) that take shape > within the zone, and that help to blur the line or move beyond "can't" and > "can" ? I am asking this of myself too. > > Shirin > > On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 6:26 PM, David Kellogg > wrote: > > > Shirin: > > > > I'm just finishing up a paper on this. Let me share a bit with you, since > > we've shared so much good stuff of yours on this list. > > > > A Korean mother takes two children for a routine checkup. While the > > seven-year-old is tending to the doctor, she plays a game with the three > > year old: she is trying to persuade her to switch names with her older > > brother for a day. > > > > The little one, who we'll call Number Three, is adamant. Names cannot be > > switched. Once given, a name cannot be changed. The mother remonstrates, > > reminds her that in role play she often allows herself to be called > > "princess" or some other name. The child does not recognize this as an > > instance of name changing (just as Vygotsky noted that three year olds > who > > play with dolls do not regard the doll as anything other than a > doll--they > > do not imagine that they are parenting the doll). The mother reminds her > > that at the preschool she goes to, all of the adults have nicknames, > > including her mother. It emerges that the child does not know her > mother's > > real name (and does not understand when the doctor calls her mother) and > > thinks that the preschool nickname ("Dorandoran" or "Chatterbox") is her > > mother's real name. After all, you can't have two names. Can you? > > > > Now the seven-year-old comes out and it's the three-year-old's turn. > Here's > > what happens: > > > > Mom: **? ? ??? ??? > > > > ?(Seven), what is your name?? > > > > Seven: *** > > > > ?(Kim Number Seven.)? > > > > Mom: ??? **? ??, **??? **??? ??? ? ??? **??? **??? ? ? ?? ??? > > > > ?Really? Suppose (we) give (Seven's) name to (Three) and call (her > Seven), > > is that okay or not? Let's call (her Seven) for once and see.? > > > > Seven: ?. ??. > > > > ?Unh-hunh. Okay.? > > > > Mom: ?? **??? ???, **??? **??? ??? ??? > > > > ?So you are going to be called (Three) and (Three) is going to be called > > (Seven), right?? > > > > Seven: ??. > > > > ?(I) like (it)?? > > > > Mom: ??? ??? ?, ??? > > > > ?(You) like (it)? But (is it) right or wrong?? > > > > Seven: ?. > > > > ?Right.? > > > > Mom: ?, ??? **?~?? ??? ??? > > > > ?Oh, really? Hey, (Number Three)! What is Mommy's name?? > > > > Seven: ??. > > > > ?Daddy.? > > > > > > > > What Vygotsky says is that there are different kinds of play. He rejects > > Groos' idea that repetitive action games are exploratory play--what > Piaget > > calls play (e.g. opening and closing a box, rolling a ball, etc.) is not > > play because it doesn't involve any imaginary situation. Maybe, from a > > Hegelian point of view, it's "play in itself" but not play for others or > > play for myself. Number Three has something Vygotsky calls "quasi > > play"--that is, play for others, but not for myself, like when a child > > tends to a doll, puts it on the potty, even nurses it but reacts with > > indignation when you suggest that the child is the doll's mother and the > > doll is a daughter. Tending, nursing, pottying--that's just what you do > > with a doll, like opening a door or rolling a ball. Number Three doesn't > > recognize the imaginary situation at all. Only Seven is really playing. > > > > > > So--even within play, there are zones of development. I don't think it > will > > be tomorrow, or next week, or even next year that Three will be able to > > play around with names the way that Seven does. > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 2:41 AM, Shirin Vossoughi < > > shirinvossoughi@gmail.com > > > wrote: > > > > > Hi David, > > > Thank you for this. How do you think about the ways that "acting a head > > > taller" is a concrete experience of one's emergent capabilities / > > potential > > > in the moment? (in the context of play, or through generative forms of > > > mediation/assistance) > > > > > > Does this align in your view with the idea that "the child will not > be a > > > head taller than himself in a week or two" or does it complicate the > ways > > > we view this phenomenon as an experience? > > > > > > Shirin > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 7:29 PM, David Kellogg > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Peter: > > > > > > > > The French translation is "zone prochaine de developpement", i.e. the > > > next > > > > zone of development. Francoise Seve explains why--it is because the > > "next > > > > zone of development" does not refer to any particular skill or > > knowledge > > > or > > > > even metalinguistic reflection that the child is going to have in the > > > > course of development; it refers very precisely to the functions > which > > > will > > > > be the most rapidly developing functions in the next age level, > > according > > > > to the schema that Vygotsky was working out in "The Problem of Age" > > > (Vol. 5 > > > > in English, p. 196). This is completely confirmed by a remark that > > > Vygotsky > > > > makes at the beginning of the lecture on the Crisis at Three (p. 283 > in > > > the > > > > English Collected Works): > > > > > > > > ""...(W)e must assume that all changes and all events that happen > > during > > > > the period of this crisis are grouped around some neoformation of a > > > > transitional type. Consequently, when we analyse the symptoms of the > > > > crisis, we msut answer, albeit conditionally, the question as to what > > it > > > is > > > > that is new that appears during the indicated time and what is the > fate > > > of > > > > the neoformation that disappears after it. Then we must consider what > > > > change is occurring in the central and peripheral lines of > development. > > > > Finally, we must evaluate the critical age from the point of view of > > the > > > > zone of its proximal development, that is, the relation to subsequent > > > > growth". > > > > > > > > This is why the ZPD is ALWAYS measured in years, something that very > > few > > > > Western people who invoke the concept have ever noted, even though it > > is > > > > quite explicit in every place that the ZPD is invoked. Even when the > > ZPD > > > is > > > > spoken of somewhat loosely, (e.g. "What the child can do with > > assistance > > > > today he will be able to do without assistance tomorrow", or "in play > > the > > > > child is a head taller than himself") it is very clear that years are > > > > meant. Tomorrow does not and cannot mean 24 hours later, and the > child > > > will > > > > not be a head taller than himself in a week or two. > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 10:22 AM, Peter Smagorinsky > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > I'm watching the version of The Butterflies of Zagorsk that Mike > > > > > generously shared from the UCSD archives. I give it 4 stars. It > would > > > be > > > > 5, > > > > > but the copy is pretty bad. > > > > > > > > > > The narrator consistently refers to the "zone of next development" > > > > > illustrated by periodic diagnostic sessions that also involved > > > assistance > > > > > with deaf and blind kids learning how to speak with their hands on > > > > > another's hands. > > > > > > > > > > Zone of Next Development seems such a better term than ZPD. > Proximal > > is > > > > > too ambiguous, and so allows for just about any learning of > anything > > > > anyhow > > > > > to be illustrative of the ZPD. "Next" instead really emphasizes the > > > more > > > > > long-term growth that Vygotsky had in mind, as I understand his > > > writing. > > > > > > > > > > But it's proximal in all the translations. Any help in > understanding > > > why? > > > > > Thx,p > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From helen.grimmett@monash.edu Thu Nov 24 14:03:27 2016 From: helen.grimmett@monash.edu (Helen Grimmett) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2016 09:03:27 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: zone of next development In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5454A15B-5A4A-4849-B290-2441EB870613@monash.edu> Hi Shirin, Elena Kravtsova talks about the Zone of Potential Development which lies beyond the ZPD - all those activities that still lie beyond the child's ability to participate in even with help, but may one day become within their ZPD and then eventually within their Zone of Actual Development. Seeing others participating in those activities and understanding that they are valued by respected others creates the motive for wanting to be able to participate oneself - one day, with help, and then eventually by myself. Cheers, Helen > On 25 Nov. 2016, at 1:51 am, Shirin Vossoughi wrote: > > Thanks David. I think your example illustrates well the idea that there are > ZPD's even within play. > > What I'm wrestling with is the line between "being able to" and "not being > able to" (in your example -- being able to play with names, or perhaps the > line between repetitive action games and those with an imagination > situation). One of the things I appreciate most about the ZPD is that this > line is blurred in generative ways. In some cases, this might mean acting a > head taller in play in ways that one isn't quite *yet *able to do outside > the play situation. This ties to the notion of performance before > competence, though I am not a big fan of the term performance. > > But there's another layer to this that your example speaks to which is not > *yet* being able to act a head taller within the play situation (?). But > I'm wondering what is still opening up for the child by being in the play > situation with others and how these forms of mediation or experience matter > for future action. How to characterize this within the ZPD? Put > differently, I'm wondering if we have a performance bias or perhaps a > narrow view of participation that might sometimes gloss over the wider > forms of participation (observation, listening, etc.) that take shape > within the zone, and that help to blur the line or move beyond "can't" and > "can" ? I am asking this of myself too. > > Shirin > >> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 6:26 PM, David Kellogg wrote: >> >> Shirin: >> >> I'm just finishing up a paper on this. Let me share a bit with you, since >> we've shared so much good stuff of yours on this list. >> >> A Korean mother takes two children for a routine checkup. While the >> seven-year-old is tending to the doctor, she plays a game with the three >> year old: she is trying to persuade her to switch names with her older >> brother for a day. >> >> The little one, who we'll call Number Three, is adamant. Names cannot be >> switched. Once given, a name cannot be changed. The mother remonstrates, >> reminds her that in role play she often allows herself to be called >> "princess" or some other name. The child does not recognize this as an >> instance of name changing (just as Vygotsky noted that three year olds who >> play with dolls do not regard the doll as anything other than a doll--they >> do not imagine that they are parenting the doll). The mother reminds her >> that at the preschool she goes to, all of the adults have nicknames, >> including her mother. It emerges that the child does not know her mother's >> real name (and does not understand when the doctor calls her mother) and >> thinks that the preschool nickname ("Dorandoran" or "Chatterbox") is her >> mother's real name. After all, you can't have two names. Can you? >> >> Now the seven-year-old comes out and it's the three-year-old's turn. Here's >> what happens: >> >> Mom: **? ? ??? ??? >> >> ?(Seven), what is your name?? >> >> Seven: *** >> >> ?(Kim Number Seven.)? >> >> Mom: ??? **? ??, **??? **??? ??? ? ??? **??? **??? ? ? ?? ??? >> >> ?Really? Suppose (we) give (Seven's) name to (Three) and call (her Seven), >> is that okay or not? Let's call (her Seven) for once and see.? >> >> Seven: ?. ??. >> >> ?Unh-hunh. Okay.? >> >> Mom: ?? **??? ???, **??? **??? ??? ??? >> >> ?So you are going to be called (Three) and (Three) is going to be called >> (Seven), right?? >> >> Seven: ??. >> >> ?(I) like (it)?? >> >> Mom: ??? ??? ?, ??? >> >> ?(You) like (it)? But (is it) right or wrong?? >> >> Seven: ?. >> >> ?Right.? >> >> Mom: ?, ??? **?~?? ??? ??? >> >> ?Oh, really? Hey, (Number Three)! What is Mommy's name?? >> >> Seven: ??. >> >> ?Daddy.? >> >> >> >> What Vygotsky says is that there are different kinds of play. He rejects >> Groos' idea that repetitive action games are exploratory play--what Piaget >> calls play (e.g. opening and closing a box, rolling a ball, etc.) is not >> play because it doesn't involve any imaginary situation. Maybe, from a >> Hegelian point of view, it's "play in itself" but not play for others or >> play for myself. Number Three has something Vygotsky calls "quasi >> play"--that is, play for others, but not for myself, like when a child >> tends to a doll, puts it on the potty, even nurses it but reacts with >> indignation when you suggest that the child is the doll's mother and the >> doll is a daughter. Tending, nursing, pottying--that's just what you do >> with a doll, like opening a door or rolling a ball. Number Three doesn't >> recognize the imaginary situation at all. Only Seven is really playing. >> >> >> So--even within play, there are zones of development. I don't think it will >> be tomorrow, or next week, or even next year that Three will be able to >> play around with names the way that Seven does. >> >> >> David Kellogg >> >> Macquarie University >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 2:41 AM, Shirin Vossoughi < >> shirinvossoughi@gmail.com >>> wrote: >> >>> Hi David, >>> Thank you for this. How do you think about the ways that "acting a head >>> taller" is a concrete experience of one's emergent capabilities / >> potential >>> in the moment? (in the context of play, or through generative forms of >>> mediation/assistance) >>> >>> Does this align in your view with the idea that "the child will not be a >>> head taller than himself in a week or two" or does it complicate the ways >>> we view this phenomenon as an experience? >>> >>> Shirin >>> >>> On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 7:29 PM, David Kellogg >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Peter: >>>> >>>> The French translation is "zone prochaine de developpement", i.e. the >>> next >>>> zone of development. Francoise Seve explains why--it is because the >> "next >>>> zone of development" does not refer to any particular skill or >> knowledge >>> or >>>> even metalinguistic reflection that the child is going to have in the >>>> course of development; it refers very precisely to the functions which >>> will >>>> be the most rapidly developing functions in the next age level, >> according >>>> to the schema that Vygotsky was working out in "The Problem of Age" >>> (Vol. 5 >>>> in English, p. 196). This is completely confirmed by a remark that >>> Vygotsky >>>> makes at the beginning of the lecture on the Crisis at Three (p. 283 in >>> the >>>> English Collected Works): >>>> >>>> ""...(W)e must assume that all changes and all events that happen >> during >>>> the period of this crisis are grouped around some neoformation of a >>>> transitional type. Consequently, when we analyse the symptoms of the >>>> crisis, we msut answer, albeit conditionally, the question as to what >> it >>> is >>>> that is new that appears during the indicated time and what is the fate >>> of >>>> the neoformation that disappears after it. Then we must consider what >>>> change is occurring in the central and peripheral lines of development. >>>> Finally, we must evaluate the critical age from the point of view of >> the >>>> zone of its proximal development, that is, the relation to subsequent >>>> growth". >>>> >>>> This is why the ZPD is ALWAYS measured in years, something that very >> few >>>> Western people who invoke the concept have ever noted, even though it >> is >>>> quite explicit in every place that the ZPD is invoked. Even when the >> ZPD >>> is >>>> spoken of somewhat loosely, (e.g. "What the child can do with >> assistance >>>> today he will be able to do without assistance tomorrow", or "in play >> the >>>> child is a head taller than himself") it is very clear that years are >>>> meant. Tomorrow does not and cannot mean 24 hours later, and the child >>> will >>>> not be a head taller than himself in a week or two. >>>> >>>> David Kellogg >>>> Macquarie University >>>> >>>> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 10:22 AM, Peter Smagorinsky >>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I'm watching the version of The Butterflies of Zagorsk that Mike >>>>> generously shared from the UCSD archives. I give it 4 stars. It would >>> be >>>> 5, >>>>> but the copy is pretty bad. >>>>> >>>>> The narrator consistently refers to the "zone of next development" >>>>> illustrated by periodic diagnostic sessions that also involved >>> assistance >>>>> with deaf and blind kids learning how to speak with their hands on >>>>> another's hands. >>>>> >>>>> Zone of Next Development seems such a better term than ZPD. Proximal >> is >>>>> too ambiguous, and so allows for just about any learning of anything >>>> anyhow >>>>> to be illustrative of the ZPD. "Next" instead really emphasizes the >>> more >>>>> long-term growth that Vygotsky had in mind, as I understand his >>> writing. >>>>> >>>>> But it's proximal in all the translations. Any help in understanding >>> why? >>>>> Thx,p >>>>> >>>> >>> >> From lpscholar2@gmail.com Thu Nov 24 14:16:15 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 14:16:15 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan that Could Fix It | WIRED Message-ID: <583766c4.11946b0a.8572c.f584@mx.google.com> This may be of interest on the topic of standardization and replication and measurement phenomena as what seems to be driving the desire for (exact) science and how it is colonizing social studies Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan that Could Fix It The NIH's Office of Behavioral and Social Science Research is responding to a fundamental shift in social science research. https://www.wired.com/2016/11/social-science-busted-nih-plan-fix/ Sent from my Windows 10 phone From hshonerd@gmail.com Thu Nov 24 14:26:40 2016 From: hshonerd@gmail.com (HENRY SHONERD) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 15:26:40 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Vygotsky goes viral Message-ID: Gente http://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2016/11/figuring-out-how-and-why-we-talk-to-ourselves/508487/?utm_source=nl-atlantic-weekly-112416 Fake news, echo chambers?reminds me of inner speech. A thinking person at least knows not to believe everything she thinks. Unless she shouts her thinking self down. I don?t expect ?objectivity", but maybe some reasoning. In gratitude, Henry From hshonerd@gmail.com Thu Nov 24 14:52:56 2016 From: hshonerd@gmail.com (HENRY SHONERD) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 15:52:56 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: zone of next development In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: David, I don?t mean it?s a one way street: physiological triggers mental, but physiological includes the brain, certainly fundamental to mental processes. In fact, is any part of the body NOT implicated in mental processing? Couldn?t there be triggering, but it?s a two way street: physiologicalmental? Resonance, which, for me, ?zone? evokes. I am dimly aware I am in over my head?I don?t want to drown here. In any case, I have enjoyed this subject line, more as a listener than talker. Thanks to all for that. Henry > On Nov 24, 2016, at 2:01 PM, David Kellogg wrote: > > Shirin--yes, your suspicion of "performance" makes perfect sense to me, > particularly since it inevitably entails something called "competence" > which can never be directly measured. I think what I liked best about the > piece you wrote with Paula Hooper and Meg Escude was your scepticism about > invisible pedagogy. Something there is about child-centred teaching that > seems to disproportionately favour kids with helpful middle class parents > back home. > The reason Halliday, Vygotsky and even I focus on speech (and not > "language") is precisely because it has a tangible outcome; when kids > switch names, when they can clearly differentiate between a name and a > nickname, when they know that everybody has a name, and that even if > everything does not necessarily have a name, ever thing is in principle > nameable, we don't have to speculate about how much they understand. > > Let's say we want to differentiate three zones of development WITHIN play, > corresponding to Vygotsky's distinction between non-play, quasi-play and > true-play (that is, rote, role, and rule). We can see that non-play is not > play because meaning is entirely derivative of action: the child performs > an action, for a brief moment may (or may not) form a mental image of the > action, and then does it again. We can see that quasi-play is play for > others but not for Three--in fact, she didn't call herself "Princess"--it > was other children who decided she would play that role and she had to go > along with it, which explains some of her distaste for the name in my data. > (My wife had the same problem growing up--the other children would play war > games and since nobody wanted to play the Americans because it meant an > early death, she found herself relegated to that role, poor thing.) > > Within the zone of true play, Vygotsky also distinguishes two phases or > stages: play where abstract rules derive from roles rather than the other > way around (e.g. "Mommy cooks; Daddy eats"), and play where roles are > simply the reification of rules (e.g. "the last player loses; the first > player wins"). It goes without saying that these two phases/stages are more > linked than distinct. I think it is not so much the case that one is > transformed into the other; they are both differentiated from some > undifferentiated collective play, and our illusion that roles are > transformed into rules is a product of the fact that roles have a tendency > to be differentiated first. Another good reason to be sceptical of > "performance" based measures! > > Henry: I don't think Vygotsky ever says that crises are triggered by > physiological changes. On the contrary, he really rakes Blonsky (a dear > colleague who he actually loves) over the coals for doing precisely that. > He says that Blonsky's idea that puberty can be explained by teething is > about as good as Freud's idea that early childhood angst can be explained > by using performance standards from puberty. > > I think that language isn't pure performance, but it also isn't pure > understanding: it's understanding-in-action, and as Shirin points out, that > includes interaction. That's why it's useful to distinguish "communication" > from "co-generalization"--one is between you and me, but the other is > between me and I. Sometimes, however, it's even more useful to link them. > > > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > PS: Helen and others on the other thread. I'm not sure it's a hoax. Have a > good look at this: > > http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/education/2016/11/professor_watchlist_is_a_grotesque_catalog_of_left_leaning_academics.html > > Rebecca Schuman is usually pretty good, although she suffers from the usual > problems with on-line writing (a kind of messy snarkiness that seems to > pass for clear thought these days). > > dk > > > > > On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 1:51 AM, Shirin Vossoughi > wrote: > >> Thanks David. I think your example illustrates well the idea that there are >> ZPD's even within play. >> >> What I'm wrestling with is the line between "being able to" and "not being >> able to" (in your example -- being able to play with names, or perhaps the >> line between repetitive action games and those with an imagination >> situation). One of the things I appreciate most about the ZPD is that this >> line is blurred in generative ways. In some cases, this might mean acting a >> head taller in play in ways that one isn't quite *yet *able to do outside >> the play situation. This ties to the notion of performance before >> competence, though I am not a big fan of the term performance. >> >> But there's another layer to this that your example speaks to which is not >> *yet* being able to act a head taller within the play situation (?). But >> I'm wondering what is still opening up for the child by being in the play >> situation with others and how these forms of mediation or experience matter >> for future action. How to characterize this within the ZPD? Put >> differently, I'm wondering if we have a performance bias or perhaps a >> narrow view of participation that might sometimes gloss over the wider >> forms of participation (observation, listening, etc.) that take shape >> within the zone, and that help to blur the line or move beyond "can't" and >> "can" ? I am asking this of myself too. >> >> Shirin >> >> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 6:26 PM, David Kellogg >> wrote: >> >>> Shirin: >>> >>> I'm just finishing up a paper on this. Let me share a bit with you, since >>> we've shared so much good stuff of yours on this list. >>> >>> A Korean mother takes two children for a routine checkup. While the >>> seven-year-old is tending to the doctor, she plays a game with the three >>> year old: she is trying to persuade her to switch names with her older >>> brother for a day. >>> >>> The little one, who we'll call Number Three, is adamant. Names cannot be >>> switched. Once given, a name cannot be changed. The mother remonstrates, >>> reminds her that in role play she often allows herself to be called >>> "princess" or some other name. The child does not recognize this as an >>> instance of name changing (just as Vygotsky noted that three year olds >> who >>> play with dolls do not regard the doll as anything other than a >> doll--they >>> do not imagine that they are parenting the doll). The mother reminds her >>> that at the preschool she goes to, all of the adults have nicknames, >>> including her mother. It emerges that the child does not know her >> mother's >>> real name (and does not understand when the doctor calls her mother) and >>> thinks that the preschool nickname ("Dorandoran" or "Chatterbox") is her >>> mother's real name. After all, you can't have two names. Can you? >>> >>> Now the seven-year-old comes out and it's the three-year-old's turn. >> Here's >>> what happens: >>> >>> Mom: **? ? ??? ??? >>> >>> ?(Seven), what is your name?? >>> >>> Seven: *** >>> >>> ?(Kim Number Seven.)? >>> >>> Mom: ??? **? ??, **??? **??? ??? ? ??? **??? **??? ? ? ?? ??? >>> >>> ?Really? Suppose (we) give (Seven's) name to (Three) and call (her >> Seven), >>> is that okay or not? Let's call (her Seven) for once and see.? >>> >>> Seven: ?. ??. >>> >>> ?Unh-hunh. Okay.? >>> >>> Mom: ?? **??? ???, **??? **??? ??? ??? >>> >>> ?So you are going to be called (Three) and (Three) is going to be called >>> (Seven), right?? >>> >>> Seven: ??. >>> >>> ?(I) like (it)?? >>> >>> Mom: ??? ??? ?, ??? >>> >>> ?(You) like (it)? But (is it) right or wrong?? >>> >>> Seven: ?. >>> >>> ?Right.? >>> >>> Mom: ?, ??? **?~?? ??? ??? >>> >>> ?Oh, really? Hey, (Number Three)! What is Mommy's name?? >>> >>> Seven: ??. >>> >>> ?Daddy.? >>> >>> >>> >>> What Vygotsky says is that there are different kinds of play. He rejects >>> Groos' idea that repetitive action games are exploratory play--what >> Piaget >>> calls play (e.g. opening and closing a box, rolling a ball, etc.) is not >>> play because it doesn't involve any imaginary situation. Maybe, from a >>> Hegelian point of view, it's "play in itself" but not play for others or >>> play for myself. Number Three has something Vygotsky calls "quasi >>> play"--that is, play for others, but not for myself, like when a child >>> tends to a doll, puts it on the potty, even nurses it but reacts with >>> indignation when you suggest that the child is the doll's mother and the >>> doll is a daughter. Tending, nursing, pottying--that's just what you do >>> with a doll, like opening a door or rolling a ball. Number Three doesn't >>> recognize the imaginary situation at all. Only Seven is really playing. >>> >>> >>> So--even within play, there are zones of development. I don't think it >> will >>> be tomorrow, or next week, or even next year that Three will be able to >>> play around with names the way that Seven does. >>> >>> >>> David Kellogg >>> >>> Macquarie University >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 2:41 AM, Shirin Vossoughi < >>> shirinvossoughi@gmail.com >>>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi David, >>>> Thank you for this. How do you think about the ways that "acting a head >>>> taller" is a concrete experience of one's emergent capabilities / >>> potential >>>> in the moment? (in the context of play, or through generative forms of >>>> mediation/assistance) >>>> >>>> Does this align in your view with the idea that "the child will not >> be a >>>> head taller than himself in a week or two" or does it complicate the >> ways >>>> we view this phenomenon as an experience? >>>> >>>> Shirin >>>> >>>> On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 7:29 PM, David Kellogg >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Peter: >>>>> >>>>> The French translation is "zone prochaine de developpement", i.e. the >>>> next >>>>> zone of development. Francoise Seve explains why--it is because the >>> "next >>>>> zone of development" does not refer to any particular skill or >>> knowledge >>>> or >>>>> even metalinguistic reflection that the child is going to have in the >>>>> course of development; it refers very precisely to the functions >> which >>>> will >>>>> be the most rapidly developing functions in the next age level, >>> according >>>>> to the schema that Vygotsky was working out in "The Problem of Age" >>>> (Vol. 5 >>>>> in English, p. 196). This is completely confirmed by a remark that >>>> Vygotsky >>>>> makes at the beginning of the lecture on the Crisis at Three (p. 283 >> in >>>> the >>>>> English Collected Works): >>>>> >>>>> ""...(W)e must assume that all changes and all events that happen >>> during >>>>> the period of this crisis are grouped around some neoformation of a >>>>> transitional type. Consequently, when we analyse the symptoms of the >>>>> crisis, we msut answer, albeit conditionally, the question as to what >>> it >>>> is >>>>> that is new that appears during the indicated time and what is the >> fate >>>> of >>>>> the neoformation that disappears after it. Then we must consider what >>>>> change is occurring in the central and peripheral lines of >> development. >>>>> Finally, we must evaluate the critical age from the point of view of >>> the >>>>> zone of its proximal development, that is, the relation to subsequent >>>>> growth". >>>>> >>>>> This is why the ZPD is ALWAYS measured in years, something that very >>> few >>>>> Western people who invoke the concept have ever noted, even though it >>> is >>>>> quite explicit in every place that the ZPD is invoked. Even when the >>> ZPD >>>> is >>>>> spoken of somewhat loosely, (e.g. "What the child can do with >>> assistance >>>>> today he will be able to do without assistance tomorrow", or "in play >>> the >>>>> child is a head taller than himself") it is very clear that years are >>>>> meant. Tomorrow does not and cannot mean 24 hours later, and the >> child >>>> will >>>>> not be a head taller than himself in a week or two. >>>>> >>>>> David Kellogg >>>>> Macquarie University >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 10:22 AM, Peter Smagorinsky >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I'm watching the version of The Butterflies of Zagorsk that Mike >>>>>> generously shared from the UCSD archives. I give it 4 stars. It >> would >>>> be >>>>> 5, >>>>>> but the copy is pretty bad. >>>>>> >>>>>> The narrator consistently refers to the "zone of next development" >>>>>> illustrated by periodic diagnostic sessions that also involved >>>> assistance >>>>>> with deaf and blind kids learning how to speak with their hands on >>>>>> another's hands. >>>>>> >>>>>> Zone of Next Development seems such a better term than ZPD. >> Proximal >>> is >>>>>> too ambiguous, and so allows for just about any learning of >> anything >>>>> anyhow >>>>>> to be illustrative of the ZPD. "Next" instead really emphasizes the >>>> more >>>>>> long-term growth that Vygotsky had in mind, as I understand his >>>> writing. >>>>>> >>>>>> But it's proximal in all the translations. Any help in >> understanding >>>> why? >>>>>> Thx,p >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> From lpscholar2@gmail.com Thu Nov 24 16:21:52 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 16:21:52 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: zone of next development In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <58378434.4bae630a.e18da.5063@mx.google.com> Shirin, David, Can we put this conversation on the PLAY zone of next development in a new thread and mark it as being in the (slow lane) which requires (slow reading) and (slow responding). The relation between passive (letting-it-be) to gestate and actively (taking-it-to-heart) requires what Peg referred to as (taking time). I sens a richness and thickness and tickling quality to the theme of PLAY within the ZNP to be nurtured and savored. This conversation will become loose threads if not given an opportunity for slow gestation. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: David Kellogg Sent: November 24, 2016 1:04 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: zone of next development Shirin--yes, your suspicion of "performance" makes perfect sense to me, particularly since it inevitably entails something called "competence" which can never be directly measured. I think what I liked best about the piece you wrote with Paula Hooper and Meg Escude was your scepticism about invisible pedagogy. Something there is about child-centred teaching that seems to disproportionately favour kids with helpful middle class parents back home. The reason Halliday, Vygotsky and even I focus on speech (and not "language") is precisely because it has a tangible outcome; when kids switch names, when they can clearly differentiate between a name and a nickname, when they know that everybody has a name, and that even if everything does not necessarily have a name, ever thing is in principle nameable, we don't have to speculate about how much they understand. Let's say we want to differentiate three zones of development WITHIN play, corresponding to Vygotsky's distinction between non-play, quasi-play and true-play (that is, rote, role, and rule). We can see that non-play is not play because meaning is entirely derivative of action: the child performs an action, for a brief moment may (or may not) form a mental image of the action, and then does it again. We can see that quasi-play is play for others but not for Three--in fact, she didn't call herself "Princess"--it was other children who decided she would play that role and she had to go along with it, which explains some of her distaste for the name in my data. (My wife had the same problem growing up--the other children would play war games and since nobody wanted to play the Americans because it meant an early death, she found herself relegated to that role, poor thing.) Within the zone of true play, Vygotsky also distinguishes two phases or stages: play where abstract rules derive from roles rather than the other way around (e.g. "Mommy cooks; Daddy eats"), and play where roles are simply the reification of rules (e.g. "the last player loses; the first player wins"). It goes without saying that these two phases/stages are more linked than distinct. I think it is not so much the case that one is transformed into the other; they are both differentiated from some undifferentiated collective play, and our illusion that roles are transformed into rules is a product of the fact that roles have a tendency to be differentiated first. Another good reason to be sceptical of "performance" based measures! Henry: I don't think Vygotsky ever says that crises are triggered by physiological changes. On the contrary, he really rakes Blonsky (a dear colleague who he actually loves) over the coals for doing precisely that. He says that Blonsky's idea that puberty can be explained by teething is about as good as Freud's idea that early childhood angst can be explained by using performance standards from puberty. I think that language isn't pure performance, but it also isn't pure understanding: it's understanding-in-action, and as Shirin points out, that includes interaction. That's why it's useful to distinguish "communication" from "co-generalization"--one is between you and me, but the other is between me and I. Sometimes, however, it's even more useful to link them. David Kellogg Macquarie University PS: Helen and others on the other thread. I'm not sure it's a hoax. Have a good look at this: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/education/2016/11/professor_watchlist_is_a_grotesque_catalog_of_left_leaning_academics.html Rebecca Schuman is usually pretty good, although she suffers from the usual problems with on-line writing (a kind of messy snarkiness that seems to pass for clear thought these days). dk On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 1:51 AM, Shirin Vossoughi wrote: > Thanks David. I think your example illustrates well the idea that there are > ZPD's even within play. > > What I'm wrestling with is the line between "being able to" and "not being > able to" (in your example -- being able to play with names, or perhaps the > line between repetitive action games and those with an imagination > situation). One of the things I appreciate most about the ZPD is that this > line is blurred in generative ways. In some cases, this might mean acting a > head taller in play in ways that one isn't quite *yet *able to do outside > the play situation. This ties to the notion of performance before > competence, though I am not a big fan of the term performance. > > But there's another layer to this that your example speaks to which is not > *yet* being able to act a head taller within the play situation (?). But > I'm wondering what is still opening up for the child by being in the play > situation with others and how these forms of mediation or experience matter > for future action. How to characterize this within the ZPD? Put > differently, I'm wondering if we have a performance bias or perhaps a > narrow view of participation that might sometimes gloss over the wider > forms of participation (observation, listening, etc.) that take shape > within the zone, and that help to blur the line or move beyond "can't" and > "can" ? I am asking this of myself too. > > Shirin > > On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 6:26 PM, David Kellogg > wrote: > > > Shirin: > > > > I'm just finishing up a paper on this. Let me share a bit with you, since > > we've shared so much good stuff of yours on this list. > > > > A Korean mother takes two children for a routine checkup. While the > > seven-year-old is tending to the doctor, she plays a game with the three > > year old: she is trying to persuade her to switch names with her older > > brother for a day. > > > > The little one, who we'll call Number Three, is adamant. Names cannot be > > switched. Once given, a name cannot be changed. The mother remonstrates, > > reminds her that in role play she often allows herself to be called > > "princess" or some other name. The child does not recognize this as an > > instance of name changing (just as Vygotsky noted that three year olds > who > > play with dolls do not regard the doll as anything other than a > doll--they > > do not imagine that they are parenting the doll). The mother reminds her > > that at the preschool she goes to, all of the adults have nicknames, > > including her mother. It emerges that the child does not know her > mother's > > real name (and does not understand when the doctor calls her mother) and > > thinks that the preschool nickname ("Dorandoran" or "Chatterbox") is her > > mother's real name. After all, you can't have two names. Can you? > > > > Now the seven-year-old comes out and it's the three-year-old's turn. > Here's > > what happens: > > > > Mom: **? ? ??? ??? > > > > ?(Seven), what is your name?? > > > > Seven: *** > > > > ?(Kim Number Seven.)? > > > > Mom: ??? **? ??, **??? **??? ??? ? ??? **??? **??? ? ? ?? ??? > > > > ?Really? Suppose (we) give (Seven's) name to (Three) and call (her > Seven), > > is that okay or not? Let's call (her Seven) for once and see.? > > > > Seven: ?. ??. > > > > ?Unh-hunh. Okay.? > > > > Mom: ?? **??? ???, **??? **??? ??? ??? > > > > ?So you are going to be called (Three) and (Three) is going to be called > > (Seven), right?? > > > > Seven: ??. > > > > ?(I) like (it)?? > > > > Mom: ??? ??? ?, ??? > > > > ?(You) like (it)? But (is it) right or wrong?? > > > > Seven: ?. > > > > ?Right.? > > > > Mom: ?, ??? **?~?? ??? ??? > > > > ?Oh, really? Hey, (Number Three)! What is Mommy's name?? > > > > Seven: ??. > > > > ?Daddy.? > > > > > > > > What Vygotsky says is that there are different kinds of play. He rejects > > Groos' idea that repetitive action games are exploratory play--what > Piaget > > calls play (e.g. opening and closing a box, rolling a ball, etc.) is not > > play because it doesn't involve any imaginary situation. Maybe, from a > > Hegelian point of view, it's "play in itself" but not play for others or > > play for myself. Number Three has something Vygotsky calls "quasi > > play"--that is, play for others, but not for myself, like when a child > > tends to a doll, puts it on the potty, even nurses it but reacts with > > indignation when you suggest that the child is the doll's mother and the > > doll is a daughter. Tending, nursing, pottying--that's just what you do > > with a doll, like opening a door or rolling a ball. Number Three doesn't > > recognize the imaginary situation at all. Only Seven is really playing. > > > > > > So--even within play, there are zones of development. I don't think it > will > > be tomorrow, or next week, or even next year that Three will be able to > > play around with names the way that Seven does. > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 2:41 AM, Shirin Vossoughi < > > shirinvossoughi@gmail.com > > > wrote: > > > > > Hi David, > > > Thank you for this. How do you think about the ways that "acting a head > > > taller" is a concrete experience of one's emergent capabilities / > > potential > > > in the moment? (in the context of play, or through generative forms of > > > mediation/assistance) > > > > > > Does this align in your view with the idea that "the child will not > be a > > > head taller than himself in a week or two" or does it complicate the > ways > > > we view this phenomenon as an experience? > > > > > > Shirin > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 7:29 PM, David Kellogg > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Peter: > > > > > > > > The French translation is "zone prochaine de developpement", i.e. the > > > next > > > > zone of development. Francoise Seve explains why--it is because the > > "next > > > > zone of development" does not refer to any particular skill or > > knowledge > > > or > > > > even metalinguistic reflection that the child is going to have in the > > > > course of development; it refers very precisely to the functions > which > > > will > > > > be the most rapidly developing functions in the next age level, > > according > > > > to the schema that Vygotsky was working out in "The Problem of Age" > > > (Vol. 5 > > > > in English, p. 196). This is completely confirmed by a remark that > > > Vygotsky > > > > makes at the beginning of the lecture on the Crisis at Three (p. 283 > in > > > the > > > > English Collected Works): > > > > > > > > ""...(W)e must assume that all changes and all events that happen > > during > > > > the period of this crisis are grouped around some neoformation of a > > > > transitional type. Consequently, when we analyse the symptoms of the > > > > crisis, we msut answer, albeit conditionally, the question as to what > > it > > > is > > > > that is new that appears during the indicated time and what is the > fate > > > of > > > > the neoformation that disappears after it. Then we must consider what > > > > change is occurring in the central and peripheral lines of > development. > > > > Finally, we must evaluate the critical age from the point of view of > > the > > > > zone of its proximal development, that is, the relation to subsequent > > > > growth". > > > > > > > > This is why the ZPD is ALWAYS measured in years, something that very > > few > > > > Western people who invoke the concept have ever noted, even though it > > is > > > > quite explicit in every place that the ZPD is invoked. Even when the > > ZPD > > > is > > > > spoken of somewhat loosely, (e.g. "What the child can do with > > assistance > > > > today he will be able to do without assistance tomorrow", or "in play > > the > > > > child is a head taller than himself") it is very clear that years are > > > > meant. Tomorrow does not and cannot mean 24 hours later, and the > child > > > will > > > > not be a head taller than himself in a week or two. > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 10:22 AM, Peter Smagorinsky > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > I'm watching the version of The Butterflies of Zagorsk that Mike > > > > > generously shared from the UCSD archives. I give it 4 stars. It > would > > > be > > > > 5, > > > > > but the copy is pretty bad. > > > > > > > > > > The narrator consistently refers to the "zone of next development" > > > > > illustrated by periodic diagnostic sessions that also involved > > > assistance > > > > > with deaf and blind kids learning how to speak with their hands on > > > > > another's hands. > > > > > > > > > > Zone of Next Development seems such a better term than ZPD. > Proximal > > is > > > > > too ambiguous, and so allows for just about any learning of > anything > > > > anyhow > > > > > to be illustrative of the ZPD. "Next" instead really emphasizes the > > > more > > > > > long-term growth that Vygotsky had in mind, as I understand his > > > writing. > > > > > > > > > > But it's proximal in all the translations. Any help in > understanding > > > why? > > > > > Thx,p > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Thu Nov 24 18:01:43 2016 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2016 02:01:43 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <5753689B-395F-4239-B435-58A40CAC2526@gmail.com> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com> <582e7283.84cf620a.c9f5a.302f@mx.google.com> <56BA469E-D1C3-4924-8C7F-F976876DEE9E@gmail.com> <583060c1.098d620a.b4db8.5e32@mx.google.com> Message-ID: The marketable "skill" is "good behaviour in conjunction with some operational knowledge". Even in technology-oriented companies, creativity and new knowledge are often unwelcome intruders into a social-political situation (see for example Allen's 1977 text, Managing the Flow of Technology). There are many vested interests into the status-quo. Creativity in whatever sport, is usually against the grain. And then, of course, we have all these qualifications which repel creativity through strict enforcement of stupid behaviour. Not sure whether I'm waking up a closing thread here, so my thanks to Margaret for discussing the paper. Best, Huw On 20 November 2016 at 03:34, David Kellogg wrote: > Sorry, I've lost the plot. That is, I don't see the connection between the > kind of educational neoliberalism that is being discussed in the article > (that which is based on measurable results, on academic tracking, on > promising goodies in return for grades and grades in return for schoolwork) > and the kind of political and economic neoliberalism that is being > discussed by Cornel. It seems to me that the policies that Margaret and > Carrie are discussing in this paper were not (politically) liberal, nor > were they new: they were taken over by Arne Duncan from the Bush > administration, and the Bush administration got them, via Clinton, from > good old fashioned "Back to Basics" backlash in the UK. So the roots are > Toryism and not liberalism. > > I suppose you can argue that there is some kind of implicit analogy between > education and neoliberal economics: school is supposed to be some kind of > neoliberal "level playing field" where children compete like businessmen, > grades are "cultural capital", classes are investment opportunities, > assessment portfolios are investment portfolios, etc. This analogy is > little more than a way of whipping up interest among principals, teachers, > and even students (and as such I am not sure I am against it, since I don't > see anything wrong with working class kids taking an interest in the > getting of goodies through study). It's certainly not a good description of > what is happening in schools: These businessmen produce no commodities, the > grades are neither exchangeable or consumable; there is no such thing as > credit or interest in this economy, and assets evaporate upon graduation > instead of maturing. > > I think that the word "reform" is actually more important in Margaret and > Carrie's title than "neoliberal": a "reform" is usually, on the lips of > government bureaucracy, a euphemism for backlash, and the policies being > described are part of a more general ideological backlash against Deweyism > and progressive education: an anti-liberal reaction rather than a > neo-liberal reform. "Neoliberalism", taken literally, would imply that the > schools really are in the marketable skills business, and I don't see much > evidence for that in the study. Am I missing something? > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 1:24 AM, wrote: > > > Margaret, Carrie, Phillip, Henry, Cornell, > > > > A central and key theme of this month?s article is neoliberalism in all > > its guises. > > In my imaginary response i am addressing the authors of the paper and > > Cornell who addresses neoliberalism, and Phillip, who shared Cornell?s > > article and Henry who heard Cornell offer a way to mediate our crises. > > The paper is about teaching STEM and the neoliberal agenda that ignores > > the plight of those who suffer. > > Cornell says the answer is (democratic soulcraft). At the heart of this > > soulcraft is truth telling of the reality of suffering. > > > > In order to constitute or institute a (new) order a more pro/gressive > > order it seems suffering must be the key factor. > > > > The notion of ivory towers and their responses to suffering seems > central. > > I also want to explore the theme of (play) in relation to suffering. > > > > One exemplar: > > There is a Buddhist who organizes gatherings where food is prepared and > > presented at the gatherings (for the homeless). Musical instruments are > > also brought and dancing proceeds. > > Everyone participates and this is key: You cannot tell who are the > > homeless and who are the people who prepared the food. They are sharing a > > common (new) experience that is profoundly moving and creates a sense of > > well-being. > > This Buddhist practise is exemplary as a response to our current > > contemporary historical moment. It is truth telling and democratic > > soulcraft and PLAY. (each in the other). > > It is one way of answering Margaret, Carrie, Cornell, Phillip, and Henry. > > This Buddhist act or practice is (crafting) an answer that speaks to > > suffering. > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > From: HENRY SHONERD > > Sent: November 18, 2016 7:15 PM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > Thank you, Phillip. > > "For us in these times, to even have hope is too abstract, too detached, > > too spectatorial. Instead we must be a hope, a participant and a force > for > > good as we face this catastrophe.? > > That?s my favorite part. > > Henry > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 18, 2016, at 3:52 PM, White, Phillip < > Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu> > > wrote: > > > > > > well, this is what Cornel West has to say: > > > > > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election > > > > > > [https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/aae8946d80dac457aa8b6af3f9a9fd > > 5acc6b4acb/0_662_5150_3090/master/5150.jpg?w=1200&h=140& > > q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=crop&bm=normal&ba=bottom%2Cleft&blend64= > > aHR0cHM6Ly91cGxvYWRzLmd1aW0uY28udWsvMjAxNi8wNS8yNS9vdmVybGF5 > > LWxvZ28tMTIwMC05MF9vcHQucG5n&s=4cbd18b4943818f70304ff2cfdc3da2d]< > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> > > > > > > Goodbye, American neoliberalism. A new era is here | Cornel West< > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> > > > www.theguardian.com > > > Trump?s election was enabled by the policies that overlooked the plight > > of our most vulnerable citizens. We gird ourselves for a frightening > future > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > phillip > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > > Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 8:16:01 PM > > > To: Edward Wall; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > > > 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 > > > >> 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 edu > > > > > >>> on behalf of Huw Lloyd > > >>> 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 > edu> > > >>>> on behalf of White, Phillip > > >>>> 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 > edu> > > >>>> on behalf of David Kellogg > > >>>> 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 > > > >>>> 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 > > >>>> 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 > > >>>> > >>>>>>> edu> > > >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > >>>> > >>>>>>> edu> > > >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of mike cole > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of 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 > > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 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 > >>>>> com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039 > > >>>>>>>>> . > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach > it > > >>> as > > >>>>>>>>>>> PDF. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> ??Good read! > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Alfredo > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Thu Nov 24 19:27:21 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 19:27:21 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <5753689B-395F-4239-B435-58A40CAC2526@gmail.com> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com> <582e7283.84cf620a.c9f5a.302f@mx.google.com> <56BA469E-D1C3-4924-8C7F-F976876DEE9E@gmail.com> <583060c1.098d620a.b4db8.5e32@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <5837afae.84cf620a.c9f5a.9686@mx.google.com> The term (neoliberalism) is now part of our cultural imaginary and as such organizes responses (such as Margaret and Carrie?s paper). Is it possible to bracket the term (neoliberal) itself and refer to the way schooling has now become preoccupied by the *works* or products of standardization which are hollowing out the human desire for play and the imaginal, and sens of ongoing community in the formation of emerging dispositions that are deeper and layered and not so instrumental. Education and pedagogy are central to development. I hope we can carry this topic further into the not-yet but possible realm. Co-generating imagination which leads to institutional forms which hold our deepest desires each in the other. Moving from hollowed-out relations (which this article refers to as the works of neoliberalism) that promises acquiring portable skills carried to portable places. The participating in creating forms of community that are democratically culturally imagined may offer a way through the hollowed out failure of our current historical moment now playing out. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Huw Lloyd Sent: November 24, 2016 6:04 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started The marketable "skill" is "good behaviour in conjunction with some operational knowledge". Even in technology-oriented companies, creativity and new knowledge are often unwelcome intruders into a social-political situation (see for example Allen's 1977 text, Managing the Flow of Technology). There are many vested interests into the status-quo. Creativity in whatever sport, is usually against the grain. And then, of course, we have all these qualifications which repel creativity through strict enforcement of stupid behaviour. Not sure whether I'm waking up a closing thread here, so my thanks to Margaret for discussing the paper. Best, Huw On 20 November 2016 at 03:34, David Kellogg wrote: > Sorry, I've lost the plot. That is, I don't see the connection between the > kind of educational neoliberalism that is being discussed in the article > (that which is based on measurable results, on academic tracking, on > promising goodies in return for grades and grades in return for schoolwork) > and the kind of political and economic neoliberalism that is being > discussed by Cornel. It seems to me that the policies that Margaret and > Carrie are discussing in this paper were not (politically) liberal, nor > were they new: they were taken over by Arne Duncan from the Bush > administration, and the Bush administration got them, via Clinton, from > good old fashioned "Back to Basics" backlash in the UK. So the roots are > Toryism and not liberalism. > > I suppose you can argue that there is some kind of implicit analogy between > education and neoliberal economics: school is supposed to be some kind of > neoliberal "level playing field" where children compete like businessmen, > grades are "cultural capital", classes are investment opportunities, > assessment portfolios are investment portfolios, etc. This analogy is > little more than a way of whipping up interest among principals, teachers, > and even students (and as such I am not sure I am against it, since I don't > see anything wrong with working class kids taking an interest in the > getting of goodies through study). It's certainly not a good description of > what is happening in schools: These businessmen produce no commodities, the > grades are neither exchangeable or consumable; there is no such thing as > credit or interest in this economy, and assets evaporate upon graduation > instead of maturing. > > I think that the word "reform" is actually more important in Margaret and > Carrie's title than "neoliberal": a "reform" is usually, on the lips of > government bureaucracy, a euphemism for backlash, and the policies being > described are part of a more general ideological backlash against Deweyism > and progressive education: an anti-liberal reaction rather than a > neo-liberal reform. "Neoliberalism", taken literally, would imply that the > schools really are in the marketable skills business, and I don't see much > evidence for that in the study. Am I missing something? > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 1:24 AM, wrote: > > > Margaret, Carrie, Phillip, Henry, Cornell, > > > > A central and key theme of this month?s article is neoliberalism in all > > its guises. > > In my imaginary response i am addressing the authors of the paper and > > Cornell who addresses neoliberalism, and Phillip, who shared Cornell?s > > article and Henry who heard Cornell offer a way to mediate our crises. > > The paper is about teaching STEM and the neoliberal agenda that ignores > > the plight of those who suffer. > > Cornell says the answer is (democratic soulcraft). At the heart of this > > soulcraft is truth telling of the reality of suffering. > > > > In order to constitute or institute a (new) order a more pro/gressive > > order it seems suffering must be the key factor. > > > > The notion of ivory towers and their responses to suffering seems > central. > > I also want to explore the theme of (play) in relation to suffering. > > > > One exemplar: > > There is a Buddhist who organizes gatherings where food is prepared and > > presented at the gatherings (for the homeless). Musical instruments are > > also brought and dancing proceeds. > > Everyone participates and this is key: You cannot tell who are the > > homeless and who are the people who prepared the food. They are sharing a > > common (new) experience that is profoundly moving and creates a sense of > > well-being. > > This Buddhist practise is exemplary as a response to our current > > contemporary historical moment. It is truth telling and democratic > > soulcraft and PLAY. (each in the other). > > It is one way of answering Margaret, Carrie, Cornell, Phillip, and Henry. > > This Buddhist act or practice is (crafting) an answer that speaks to > > suffering. > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > From: HENRY SHONERD > > Sent: November 18, 2016 7:15 PM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > Thank you, Phillip. > > "For us in these times, to even have hope is too abstract, too detached, > > too spectatorial. Instead we must be a hope, a participant and a force > for > > good as we face this catastrophe.? > > That?s my favorite part. > > Henry > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 18, 2016, at 3:52 PM, White, Phillip < > Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu> > > wrote: > > > > > > well, this is what Cornel West has to say: > > > > > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election > > > > > > [https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/aae8946d80dac457aa8b6af3f9a9fd > > 5acc6b4acb/0_662_5150_3090/master/5150.jpg?w=1200&h=140& > > q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=crop&bm=normal&ba=bottom%2Cleft&blend64= > > aHR0cHM6Ly91cGxvYWRzLmd1aW0uY28udWsvMjAxNi8wNS8yNS9vdmVybGF5 > > LWxvZ28tMTIwMC05MF9vcHQucG5n&s=4cbd18b4943818f70304ff2cfdc3da2d]< > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> > > > > > > Goodbye, American neoliberalism. A new era is here | Cornel West< > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> > > > www.theguardian.com > > > Trump?s election was enabled by the policies that overlooked the plight > > of our most vulnerable citizens. We gird ourselves for a frightening > future > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > phillip > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > > Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 8:16:01 PM > > > To: Edward Wall; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > > > 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 > > > >> 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 edu > > > > > >>> on behalf of Huw Lloyd > > >>> 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 > edu> > > >>>> on behalf of White, Phillip > > >>>> 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 > edu> > > >>>> on behalf of David Kellogg > > >>>> 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 > > > >>>> 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 > > >>>> 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 > > >>>> > >>>>>>> edu> > > >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > >>>> > >>>>>>> edu> > > >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of mike cole > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of 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 > > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 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 > >>>>> com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039 > > >>>>>>>>> . > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach > it > > >>> as > > >>>>>>>>>>> PDF. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> ??Good read! > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Alfredo > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Thu Nov 24 22:15:45 2016 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2016 06:15:45 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: <5837afae.84cf620a.c9f5a.9686@mx.google.com> References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <5753689B-395F-4239-B435-58A40CAC2526@gmail.com> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com> <582e7283.84cf620a.c9f5a.302f@mx.google.com> <56BA469E-D1C3-4924-8C7F-F976876DEE9E@gmail.com> <583060c1.098d620a.b4db8.5e32@mx.google.com> , <5837afae.84cf620a.c9f5a.9686@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <1480054543337.68845@iped.uio.no> I keep thinking how relevant to this thread is Lave and McDermott 2002 Stranged Learning. Probably familiar to many in the list, but totally relevant in my view. l can't see how to best contribute to this thread than sharing it. Surely challenges some of the views articulated here that grades are not exchangeable or consumable. Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: 25 November 2016 04:27 To: Huw Lloyd; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started The term (neoliberalism) is now part of our cultural imaginary and as such organizes responses (such as Margaret and Carrie?s paper). Is it possible to bracket the term (neoliberal) itself and refer to the way schooling has now become preoccupied by the *works* or products of standardization which are hollowing out the human desire for play and the imaginal, and sens of ongoing community in the formation of emerging dispositions that are deeper and layered and not so instrumental. Education and pedagogy are central to development. I hope we can carry this topic further into the not-yet but possible realm. Co-generating imagination which leads to institutional forms which hold our deepest desires each in the other. Moving from hollowed-out relations (which this article refers to as the works of neoliberalism) that promises acquiring portable skills carried to portable places. The participating in creating forms of community that are democratically culturally imagined may offer a way through the hollowed out failure of our current historical moment now playing out. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Huw Lloyd Sent: November 24, 2016 6:04 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started The marketable "skill" is "good behaviour in conjunction with some operational knowledge". Even in technology-oriented companies, creativity and new knowledge are often unwelcome intruders into a social-political situation (see for example Allen's 1977 text, Managing the Flow of Technology). There are many vested interests into the status-quo. Creativity in whatever sport, is usually against the grain. And then, of course, we have all these qualifications which repel creativity through strict enforcement of stupid behaviour. Not sure whether I'm waking up a closing thread here, so my thanks to Margaret for discussing the paper. Best, Huw On 20 November 2016 at 03:34, David Kellogg wrote: > Sorry, I've lost the plot. That is, I don't see the connection between the > kind of educational neoliberalism that is being discussed in the article > (that which is based on measurable results, on academic tracking, on > promising goodies in return for grades and grades in return for schoolwork) > and the kind of political and economic neoliberalism that is being > discussed by Cornel. It seems to me that the policies that Margaret and > Carrie are discussing in this paper were not (politically) liberal, nor > were they new: they were taken over by Arne Duncan from the Bush > administration, and the Bush administration got them, via Clinton, from > good old fashioned "Back to Basics" backlash in the UK. So the roots are > Toryism and not liberalism. > > I suppose you can argue that there is some kind of implicit analogy between > education and neoliberal economics: school is supposed to be some kind of > neoliberal "level playing field" where children compete like businessmen, > grades are "cultural capital", classes are investment opportunities, > assessment portfolios are investment portfolios, etc. This analogy is > little more than a way of whipping up interest among principals, teachers, > and even students (and as such I am not sure I am against it, since I don't > see anything wrong with working class kids taking an interest in the > getting of goodies through study). It's certainly not a good description of > what is happening in schools: These businessmen produce no commodities, the > grades are neither exchangeable or consumable; there is no such thing as > credit or interest in this economy, and assets evaporate upon graduation > instead of maturing. > > I think that the word "reform" is actually more important in Margaret and > Carrie's title than "neoliberal": a "reform" is usually, on the lips of > government bureaucracy, a euphemism for backlash, and the policies being > described are part of a more general ideological backlash against Deweyism > and progressive education: an anti-liberal reaction rather than a > neo-liberal reform. "Neoliberalism", taken literally, would imply that the > schools really are in the marketable skills business, and I don't see much > evidence for that in the study. Am I missing something? > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 1:24 AM, wrote: > > > Margaret, Carrie, Phillip, Henry, Cornell, > > > > A central and key theme of this month?s article is neoliberalism in all > > its guises. > > In my imaginary response i am addressing the authors of the paper and > > Cornell who addresses neoliberalism, and Phillip, who shared Cornell?s > > article and Henry who heard Cornell offer a way to mediate our crises. > > The paper is about teaching STEM and the neoliberal agenda that ignores > > the plight of those who suffer. > > Cornell says the answer is (democratic soulcraft). At the heart of this > > soulcraft is truth telling of the reality of suffering. > > > > In order to constitute or institute a (new) order a more pro/gressive > > order it seems suffering must be the key factor. > > > > The notion of ivory towers and their responses to suffering seems > central. > > I also want to explore the theme of (play) in relation to suffering. > > > > One exemplar: > > There is a Buddhist who organizes gatherings where food is prepared and > > presented at the gatherings (for the homeless). Musical instruments are > > also brought and dancing proceeds. > > Everyone participates and this is key: You cannot tell who are the > > homeless and who are the people who prepared the food. They are sharing a > > common (new) experience that is profoundly moving and creates a sense of > > well-being. > > This Buddhist practise is exemplary as a response to our current > > contemporary historical moment. It is truth telling and democratic > > soulcraft and PLAY. (each in the other). > > It is one way of answering Margaret, Carrie, Cornell, Phillip, and Henry. > > This Buddhist act or practice is (crafting) an answer that speaks to > > suffering. > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > From: HENRY SHONERD > > Sent: November 18, 2016 7:15 PM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > Thank you, Phillip. > > "For us in these times, to even have hope is too abstract, too detached, > > too spectatorial. Instead we must be a hope, a participant and a force > for > > good as we face this catastrophe.? > > That?s my favorite part. > > Henry > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 18, 2016, at 3:52 PM, White, Phillip < > Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu> > > wrote: > > > > > > well, this is what Cornel West has to say: > > > > > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election > > > > > > [https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/aae8946d80dac457aa8b6af3f9a9fd > > 5acc6b4acb/0_662_5150_3090/master/5150.jpg?w=1200&h=140& > > q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=crop&bm=normal&ba=bottom%2Cleft&blend64= > > aHR0cHM6Ly91cGxvYWRzLmd1aW0uY28udWsvMjAxNi8wNS8yNS9vdmVybGF5 > > LWxvZ28tMTIwMC05MF9vcHQucG5n&s=4cbd18b4943818f70304ff2cfdc3da2d]< > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> > > > > > > Goodbye, American neoliberalism. A new era is here | Cornel West< > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> > > > www.theguardian.com > > > Trump?s election was enabled by the policies that overlooked the plight > > of our most vulnerable citizens. We gird ourselves for a frightening > future > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > phillip > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > > Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 8:16:01 PM > > > To: Edward Wall; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > > > 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 > > > >> 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 edu > > > > > >>> on behalf of Huw Lloyd > > >>> 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 > edu> > > >>>> on behalf of White, Phillip > > >>>> 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 > edu> > > >>>> on behalf of David Kellogg > > >>>> 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 > > > >>>> 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 > > >>>> 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 > > >>>> > >>>>>>> edu> > > >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > >>>> > >>>>>>> edu> > > >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of mike cole > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of 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 > > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 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 > >>>>> com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039 > > >>>>>>>>> . > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach > it > > >>> as > > >>>>>>>>>>> PDF. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> ??Good read! > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Alfredo > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Lave & McDermott 2002 Stranged Learning CLEAN.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 245489 bytes Desc: Lave & McDermott 2002 Stranged Learning CLEAN.pdf Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20161125/4cccebd5/attachment.pdf From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Fri Nov 25 07:58:23 2016 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2016 15:58:23 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: <1480054543337.68845@iped.uio.no> References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <5753689B-395F-4239-B435-58A40CAC2526@gmail.com> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com> <582e7283.84cf620a.c9f5a.302f@mx.google.com> <56BA469E-D1C3-4924-8C7F-F976876DEE9E@gmail.com> <583060c1.098d620a.b4db8.5e32@mx.google.com> <5837afae.84cf620a.c9f5a.9686@mx.google.com> <1480054543337.68845@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Interesting text, although perhaps a rather roundabout and verbalised way of studying relations between labour and schooled learning. Interesting too to consider Marx's mode of analysis, which pertains to something I'm currently drafting. Does anyone know when Marx specifically studied and re-fashioned Hegel's dialectic? Best, Huw On 25 November 2016 at 06:15, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > I keep thinking how relevant to this thread is Lave and McDermott 2002 > Stranged Learning. Probably familiar to many in the list, but totally > relevant in my view. l can't see how to best contribute to this thread than > sharing it. Surely challenges some of the views articulated here that > grades are not exchangeable or consumable. > > Alfredo > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > Sent: 25 November 2016 04:27 > To: Huw Lloyd; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > The term (neoliberalism) is now part of our cultural imaginary and as such > organizes responses (such as Margaret and Carrie?s paper). > > Is it possible to bracket the term (neoliberal) itself and refer to the > way schooling has now become preoccupied by the *works* or products of > standardization which are hollowing out the human desire for play and the > imaginal, and sens of ongoing community in the formation of emerging > dispositions that are deeper and layered and not so instrumental. > > Education and pedagogy are central to development. I hope we can carry > this topic further into the not-yet but possible realm. Co-generating > imagination which leads to institutional forms which hold our deepest > desires each in the other. > Moving from hollowed-out relations (which this article refers to as the > works of neoliberalism) that promises acquiring portable skills carried to > portable places. The participating in creating forms of community that > are democratically culturally imagined may offer a way through the hollowed > out failure of our current historical moment now playing out. > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: Huw Lloyd > Sent: November 24, 2016 6:04 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > The marketable "skill" is "good behaviour in conjunction with some > operational knowledge". Even in technology-oriented companies, creativity > and new knowledge are often unwelcome intruders into a social-political > situation (see for example Allen's 1977 text, Managing the Flow of > Technology). There are many vested interests into the status-quo. > Creativity in whatever sport, is usually against the grain. And then, of > course, we have all these qualifications which repel creativity through > strict enforcement of stupid behaviour. > > Not sure whether I'm waking up a closing thread here, so my thanks to > Margaret for discussing the paper. > > Best, > Huw > > On 20 November 2016 at 03:34, David Kellogg wrote: > > > Sorry, I've lost the plot. That is, I don't see the connection between > the > > kind of educational neoliberalism that is being discussed in the article > > (that which is based on measurable results, on academic tracking, on > > promising goodies in return for grades and grades in return for > schoolwork) > > and the kind of political and economic neoliberalism that is being > > discussed by Cornel. It seems to me that the policies that Margaret and > > Carrie are discussing in this paper were not (politically) liberal, nor > > were they new: they were taken over by Arne Duncan from the Bush > > administration, and the Bush administration got them, via Clinton, from > > good old fashioned "Back to Basics" backlash in the UK. So the roots are > > Toryism and not liberalism. > > > > I suppose you can argue that there is some kind of implicit analogy > between > > education and neoliberal economics: school is supposed to be some kind of > > neoliberal "level playing field" where children compete like businessmen, > > grades are "cultural capital", classes are investment opportunities, > > assessment portfolios are investment portfolios, etc. This analogy is > > little more than a way of whipping up interest among principals, > teachers, > > and even students (and as such I am not sure I am against it, since I > don't > > see anything wrong with working class kids taking an interest in the > > getting of goodies through study). It's certainly not a good description > of > > what is happening in schools: These businessmen produce no commodities, > the > > grades are neither exchangeable or consumable; there is no such thing as > > credit or interest in this economy, and assets evaporate upon graduation > > instead of maturing. > > > > I think that the word "reform" is actually more important in Margaret and > > Carrie's title than "neoliberal": a "reform" is usually, on the lips of > > government bureaucracy, a euphemism for backlash, and the policies being > > described are part of a more general ideological backlash against > Deweyism > > and progressive education: an anti-liberal reaction rather than a > > neo-liberal reform. "Neoliberalism", taken literally, would imply that > the > > schools really are in the marketable skills business, and I don't see > much > > evidence for that in the study. Am I missing something? > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 1:24 AM, wrote: > > > > > Margaret, Carrie, Phillip, Henry, Cornell, > > > > > > A central and key theme of this month?s article is neoliberalism in all > > > its guises. > > > In my imaginary response i am addressing the authors of the paper and > > > Cornell who addresses neoliberalism, and Phillip, who shared Cornell?s > > > article and Henry who heard Cornell offer a way to mediate our crises. > > > The paper is about teaching STEM and the neoliberal agenda that ignores > > > the plight of those who suffer. > > > Cornell says the answer is (democratic soulcraft). At the heart of this > > > soulcraft is truth telling of the reality of suffering. > > > > > > In order to constitute or institute a (new) order a more pro/gressive > > > order it seems suffering must be the key factor. > > > > > > The notion of ivory towers and their responses to suffering seems > > central. > > > I also want to explore the theme of (play) in relation to suffering. > > > > > > One exemplar: > > > There is a Buddhist who organizes gatherings where food is prepared and > > > presented at the gatherings (for the homeless). Musical instruments are > > > also brought and dancing proceeds. > > > Everyone participates and this is key: You cannot tell who are the > > > homeless and who are the people who prepared the food. They are > sharing a > > > common (new) experience that is profoundly moving and creates a sense > of > > > well-being. > > > This Buddhist practise is exemplary as a response to our current > > > contemporary historical moment. It is truth telling and democratic > > > soulcraft and PLAY. (each in the other). > > > It is one way of answering Margaret, Carrie, Cornell, Phillip, and > Henry. > > > This Buddhist act or practice is (crafting) an answer that speaks to > > > suffering. > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > From: HENRY SHONERD > > > Sent: November 18, 2016 7:15 PM > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > > > Thank you, Phillip. > > > "For us in these times, to even have hope is too abstract, too > detached, > > > too spectatorial. Instead we must be a hope, a participant and a force > > for > > > good as we face this catastrophe.? > > > That?s my favorite part. > > > Henry > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 18, 2016, at 3:52 PM, White, Phillip < > > Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > well, this is what Cornel West has to say: > > > > > > > > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election > > > > > > > > [https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/aae8946d80dac457aa8b6af3f9a9fd > > > 5acc6b4acb/0_662_5150_3090/master/5150.jpg?w=1200&h=140& > > > q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=crop&bm=normal&ba=bottom%2Cleft&blend64= > > > aHR0cHM6Ly91cGxvYWRzLmd1aW0uY28udWsvMjAxNi8wNS8yNS9vdmVybGF5 > > > LWxvZ28tMTIwMC05MF9vcHQucG5n&s=4cbd18b4943818f70304ff2cfdc3da2d]< > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> > > > > > > > > Goodbye, American neoliberalism. A new era is here | Cornel West< > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> > > > > www.theguardian.com > > > > Trump?s election was enabled by the policies that overlooked the > plight > > > of our most vulnerable citizens. We gird ourselves for a frightening > > future > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > phillip > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu edu > > > > > > on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > > > Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 8:16:01 PM > > > > To: Edward Wall; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > > > > > 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 > > edu > > > > > > > >>> on behalf of Huw Lloyd > > > >>> 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 > > > edu> > > > >>>> on behalf of White, Phillip > > > >>>> 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 > > > edu> > > > >>>> on behalf of David Kellogg > > > >>>> 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 > > > >>>> > > >>>>>>> edu> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > >>>> > > >>>>>>> edu> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of mike cole > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of 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 > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > >>>>> com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039 > > > >>>>>>>>> . > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also > attach > > it > > > >>> as > > > >>>>>>>>>>> PDF. > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> ??Good read! > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Alfredo > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Fri Nov 25 09:19:48 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2016 09:19:48 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <5753689B-395F-4239-B435-58A40CAC2526@gmail.com> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com> <582e7283.84cf620a.c9f5a.302f@mx.google.com> <56BA469E-D1C3-4924-8C7F-F976876DEE9E@gmail.com> <583060c1.098d620a.b4db8.5e32@mx.google.com> <5837afae.84cf620a.c9f5a.9686@mx.google.com> <1480054543337.68845@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <583872c9.9344620a.9b84b.70b8@mx.google.com> Alfredo, Huw, This may be a round about way of inquiry and studying .... However as a form of slow reading as reading one notion (learning) through another notion (labor) as layering or levels, indicating both labor and learning sharing a common (root) or (source) within a (subject matter) that may express a cultural imaginary, may be illuminating or enlightening as one particular method of inquiry. I also noticed how Lave and McDermott described (authorship) within this same thematic or cultural imaginary which may offer an answer to hollowed-out education. They are proposing a WAY of reading as a way to a deeper educational experience as fulfilling, not hollowed out. (back and forth each in the other) Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Huw Lloyd Sent: November 25, 2016 7:59 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started Interesting text, although perhaps a rather roundabout and verbalised way of studying relations between labour and schooled learning. Interesting too to consider Marx's mode of analysis, which pertains to something I'm currently drafting. Does anyone know when Marx specifically studied and re-fashioned Hegel's dialectic? Best, Huw On 25 November 2016 at 06:15, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote: > I keep thinking how relevant to this thread is Lave and McDermott 2002 > Stranged Learning. Probably familiar to many in the list, but totally > relevant in my view. l can't see how to best contribute to this thread than > sharing it. Surely challenges some of the views articulated here that > grades are not exchangeable or consumable. > > Alfredo > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > Sent: 25 November 2016 04:27 > To: Huw Lloyd; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > The term (neoliberalism) is now part of our cultural imaginary and as such > organizes responses (such as Margaret and Carrie?s paper). > > Is it possible to bracket the term (neoliberal) itself and refer to the > way schooling has now become preoccupied by the *works* or products of > standardization which are hollowing out the human desire for play and the > imaginal, and sens of ongoing community in the formation of emerging > dispositions that are deeper and layered and not so instrumental. > > Education and pedagogy are central to development. I hope we can carry > this topic further into the not-yet but possible realm. Co-generating > imagination which leads to institutional forms which hold our deepest > desires each in the other. > Moving from hollowed-out relations (which this article refers to as the > works of neoliberalism) that promises acquiring portable skills carried to > portable places. The participating in creating forms of community that > are democratically culturally imagined may offer a way through the hollowed > out failure of our current historical moment now playing out. > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: Huw Lloyd > Sent: November 24, 2016 6:04 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > The marketable "skill" is "good behaviour in conjunction with some > operational knowledge". Even in technology-oriented companies, creativity > and new knowledge are often unwelcome intruders into a social-political > situation (see for example Allen's 1977 text, Managing the Flow of > Technology). There are many vested interests into the status-quo. > Creativity in whatever sport, is usually against the grain. And then, of > course, we have all these qualifications which repel creativity through > strict enforcement of stupid behaviour. > > Not sure whether I'm waking up a closing thread here, so my thanks to > Margaret for discussing the paper. > > Best, > Huw > > On 20 November 2016 at 03:34, David Kellogg wrote: > > > Sorry, I've lost the plot. That is, I don't see the connection between > the > > kind of educational neoliberalism that is being discussed in the article > > (that which is based on measurable results, on academic tracking, on > > promising goodies in return for grades and grades in return for > schoolwork) > > and the kind of political and economic neoliberalism that is being > > discussed by Cornel. It seems to me that the policies that Margaret and > > Carrie are discussing in this paper were not (politically) liberal, nor > > were they new: they were taken over by Arne Duncan from the Bush > > administration, and the Bush administration got them, via Clinton, from > > good old fashioned "Back to Basics" backlash in the UK. So the roots are > > Toryism and not liberalism. > > > > I suppose you can argue that there is some kind of implicit analogy > between > > education and neoliberal economics: school is supposed to be some kind of > > neoliberal "level playing field" where children compete like businessmen, > > grades are "cultural capital", classes are investment opportunities, > > assessment portfolios are investment portfolios, etc. This analogy is > > little more than a way of whipping up interest among principals, > teachers, > > and even students (and as such I am not sure I am against it, since I > don't > > see anything wrong with working class kids taking an interest in the > > getting of goodies through study). It's certainly not a good description > of > > what is happening in schools: These businessmen produce no commodities, > the > > grades are neither exchangeable or consumable; there is no such thing as > > credit or interest in this economy, and assets evaporate upon graduation > > instead of maturing. > > > > I think that the word "reform" is actually more important in Margaret and > > Carrie's title than "neoliberal": a "reform" is usually, on the lips of > > government bureaucracy, a euphemism for backlash, and the policies being > > described are part of a more general ideological backlash against > Deweyism > > and progressive education: an anti-liberal reaction rather than a > > neo-liberal reform. "Neoliberalism", taken literally, would imply that > the > > schools really are in the marketable skills business, and I don't see > much > > evidence for that in the study. Am I missing something? > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 1:24 AM, wrote: > > > > > Margaret, Carrie, Phillip, Henry, Cornell, > > > > > > A central and key theme of this month?s article is neoliberalism in all > > > its guises. > > > In my imaginary response i am addressing the authors of the paper and > > > Cornell who addresses neoliberalism, and Phillip, who shared Cornell?s > > > article and Henry who heard Cornell offer a way to mediate our crises. > > > The paper is about teaching STEM and the neoliberal agenda that ignores > > > the plight of those who suffer. > > > Cornell says the answer is (democratic soulcraft). At the heart of this > > > soulcraft is truth telling of the reality of suffering. > > > > > > In order to constitute or institute a (new) order a more pro/gressive > > > order it seems suffering must be the key factor. > > > > > > The notion of ivory towers and their responses to suffering seems > > central. > > > I also want to explore the theme of (play) in relation to suffering. > > > > > > One exemplar: > > > There is a Buddhist who organizes gatherings where food is prepared and > > > presented at the gatherings (for the homeless). Musical instruments are > > > also brought and dancing proceeds. > > > Everyone participates and this is key: You cannot tell who are the > > > homeless and who are the people who prepared the food. They are > sharing a > > > common (new) experience that is profoundly moving and creates a sense > of > > > well-being. > > > This Buddhist practise is exemplary as a response to our current > > > contemporary historical moment. It is truth telling and democratic > > > soulcraft and PLAY. (each in the other). > > > It is one way of answering Margaret, Carrie, Cornell, Phillip, and > Henry. > > > This Buddhist act or practice is (crafting) an answer that speaks to > > > suffering. > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > From: HENRY SHONERD > > > Sent: November 18, 2016 7:15 PM > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > > > Thank you, Phillip. > > > "For us in these times, to even have hope is too abstract, too > detached, > > > too spectatorial. Instead we must be a hope, a participant and a force > > for > > > good as we face this catastrophe.? > > > That?s my favorite part. > > > Henry > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 18, 2016, at 3:52 PM, White, Phillip < > > Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > well, this is what Cornel West has to say: > > > > > > > > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election > > > > > > > > [https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/aae8946d80dac457aa8b6af3f9a9fd > > > 5acc6b4acb/0_662_5150_3090/master/5150.jpg?w=1200&h=140& > > > q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=crop&bm=normal&ba=bottom%2Cleft&blend64= > > > aHR0cHM6Ly91cGxvYWRzLmd1aW0uY28udWsvMjAxNi8wNS8yNS9vdmVybGF5 > > > LWxvZ28tMTIwMC05MF9vcHQucG5n&s=4cbd18b4943818f70304ff2cfdc3da2d]< > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> > > > > > > > > Goodbye, American neoliberalism. A new era is here | Cornel West< > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> > > > > www.theguardian.com > > > > Trump?s election was enabled by the policies that overlooked the > plight > > > of our most vulnerable citizens. We gird ourselves for a frightening > > future > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > phillip > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu edu > > > > > > on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > > > Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 8:16:01 PM > > > > To: Edward Wall; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > > > > > 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 > > edu > > > > > > > >>> on behalf of Huw Lloyd > > > >>> 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 > > > edu> > > > >>>> on behalf of White, Phillip > > > >>>> 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 > > > edu> > > > >>>> on behalf of David Kellogg > > > >>>> 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 > > > >>>> > > >>>>>>> edu> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > >>>> > > >>>>>>> edu> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of mike cole > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of 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 > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > >>>>> com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039 > > > >>>>>>>>> . > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also > attach > > it > > > >>> as > > > >>>>>>>>>>> PDF. > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> ??Good read! > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Alfredo > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Fri Nov 25 14:36:32 2016 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2016 22:36:32 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: <583872c9.9344620a.9b84b.70b8@mx.google.com> References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <5753689B-395F-4239-B435-58A40CAC2526@gmail.com> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com> <582e7283.84cf620a.c9f5a.302f@mx.google.com> <56BA469E-D1C3-4924-8C7F-F976876DEE9E@gmail.com> <583060c1.098d620a.b4db8.5e32@mx.google.com> <5837afae.84cf620a.c9f5a.9686@mx.google.com> <1480054543337.68845@iped.uio.no> <583872c9.9344620a.9b84b.70b8@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Hi Larry, I agree with the necessity for considerable "back and forth" comparisons in order to yield a relational concept. I am not sure it will be effective, however, by substituting words. First there is the problem of reifying the expressions rather than seeing beyond them, second there is a lack of an experienced and well-structured problem to help guide the conscious process. Lave et al may well have a problem firmly held before them (the nature of learning vis-a-vis labour) but students following that approach may not. If you start with a more direct comparison between labour and learning then I suspect the problem will be more consistently presented. Your point about the paper being an exemplar is a nice touch, yet the issue remains that this entails a different basis to knowledge (assuming it is successfully taken up) which in itself does not address the problem of qualifications on the basis of formal content. Best, Huw On 25 November 2016 at 17:19, wrote: > Alfredo, Huw, > > This may be a round about way of inquiry and studying .... > > However as a form of slow reading as reading one notion (learning) through > another notion (labor) as layering or levels, indicating both labor and > learning sharing a common (root) or (source) within a (subject matter) that > may express a cultural imaginary, may be illuminating or enlightening as > one particular method of inquiry. > > I also noticed how Lave and McDermott described (authorship) within this > same thematic or cultural imaginary which may offer an answer to > hollowed-out education. They are proposing a WAY of reading as a way to a > deeper educational experience as fulfilling, not hollowed out. (back and > forth each in the other) > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > *From: *Huw Lloyd > *Sent: *November 25, 2016 7:59 AM > *To: *eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > *Subject: *[Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > Interesting text, although perhaps a rather roundabout and verbalised way > > of studying relations between labour and schooled learning. > > > > Interesting too to consider Marx's mode of analysis, which pertains to > > something I'm currently drafting. Does anyone know when Marx specifically > > studied and re-fashioned Hegel's dialectic? > > > > Best, > > Huw > > > > On 25 November 2016 at 06:15, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > wrote: > > > > > I keep thinking how relevant to this thread is Lave and McDermott 2002 > > > Stranged Learning. Probably familiar to many in the list, but totally > > > relevant in my view. l can't see how to best contribute to this thread > than > > > sharing it. Surely challenges some of the views articulated here that > > > grades are not exchangeable or consumable. > > > > > > Alfredo > > > ________________________________________ > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > > Sent: 25 November 2016 04:27 > > > To: Huw Lloyd; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > > > The term (neoliberalism) is now part of our cultural imaginary and as > such > > > organizes responses (such as Margaret and Carrie?s paper). > > > > > > Is it possible to bracket the term (neoliberal) itself and refer to the > > > way schooling has now become preoccupied by the *works* or products of > > > standardization which are hollowing out the human desire for play and the > > > imaginal, and sens of ongoing community in the formation of emerging > > > dispositions that are deeper and layered and not so instrumental. > > > > > > Education and pedagogy are central to development. I hope we can carry > > > this topic further into the not-yet but possible realm. Co-generating > > > imagination which leads to institutional forms which hold our deepest > > > desires each in the other. > > > Moving from hollowed-out relations (which this article refers to as the > > > works of neoliberalism) that promises acquiring portable skills carried > to > > > portable places. The participating in creating forms of community that > > > are democratically culturally imagined may offer a way through the > hollowed > > > out failure of our current historical moment now playing out. > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > From: Huw Lloyd > > > Sent: November 24, 2016 6:04 PM > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > > > The marketable "skill" is "good behaviour in conjunction with some > > > operational knowledge". Even in technology-oriented companies, creativity > > > and new knowledge are often unwelcome intruders into a social-political > > > situation (see for example Allen's 1977 text, Managing the Flow of > > > Technology). There are many vested interests into the status-quo. > > > Creativity in whatever sport, is usually against the grain. And then, of > > > course, we have all these qualifications which repel creativity through > > > strict enforcement of stupid behaviour. > > > > > > Not sure whether I'm waking up a closing thread here, so my thanks to > > > Margaret for discussing the paper. > > > > > > Best, > > > Huw > > > > > > On 20 November 2016 at 03:34, David Kellogg > wrote: > > > > > > > Sorry, I've lost the plot. That is, I don't see the connection between > > > the > > > > kind of educational neoliberalism that is being discussed in the > article > > > > (that which is based on measurable results, on academic tracking, on > > > > promising goodies in return for grades and grades in return for > > > schoolwork) > > > > and the kind of political and economic neoliberalism that is being > > > > discussed by Cornel. It seems to me that the policies that Margaret and > > > > Carrie are discussing in this paper were not (politically) liberal, nor > > > > were they new: they were taken over by Arne Duncan from the Bush > > > > administration, and the Bush administration got them, via Clinton, from > > > > good old fashioned "Back to Basics" backlash in the UK. So the roots > are > > > > Toryism and not liberalism. > > > > > > > > I suppose you can argue that there is some kind of implicit analogy > > > between > > > > education and neoliberal economics: school is supposed to be some kind > of > > > > neoliberal "level playing field" where children compete like > businessmen, > > > > grades are "cultural capital", classes are investment opportunities, > > > > assessment portfolios are investment portfolios, etc. This analogy is > > > > little more than a way of whipping up interest among principals, > > > teachers, > > > > and even students (and as such I am not sure I am against it, since I > > > don't > > > > see anything wrong with working class kids taking an interest in the > > > > getting of goodies through study). It's certainly not a good > description > > > of > > > > what is happening in schools: These businessmen produce no commodities, > > > the > > > > grades are neither exchangeable or consumable; there is no such thing > as > > > > credit or interest in this economy, and assets evaporate upon > graduation > > > > instead of maturing. > > > > > > > > I think that the word "reform" is actually more important in Margaret > and > > > > Carrie's title than "neoliberal": a "reform" is usually, on the lips of > > > > government bureaucracy, a euphemism for backlash, and the policies > being > > > > described are part of a more general ideological backlash against > > > Deweyism > > > > and progressive education: an anti-liberal reaction rather than a > > > > neo-liberal reform. "Neoliberalism", taken literally, would imply that > > > the > > > > schools really are in the marketable skills business, and I don't see > > > much > > > > evidence for that in the study. Am I missing something? > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 1:24 AM, wrote: > > > > > > > > > Margaret, Carrie, Phillip, Henry, Cornell, > > > > > > > > > > A central and key theme of this month?s article is neoliberalism in > all > > > > > its guises. > > > > > In my imaginary response i am addressing the authors of the paper and > > > > > Cornell who addresses neoliberalism, and Phillip, who shared > Cornell?s > > > > > article and Henry who heard Cornell offer a way to mediate our > crises. > > > > > The paper is about teaching STEM and the neoliberal agenda that > ignores > > > > > the plight of those who suffer. > > > > > Cornell says the answer is (democratic soulcraft). At the heart of > this > > > > > soulcraft is truth telling of the reality of suffering. > > > > > > > > > > In order to constitute or institute a (new) order a more pro/gressive > > > > > order it seems suffering must be the key factor. > > > > > > > > > > The notion of ivory towers and their responses to suffering seems > > > > central. > > > > > I also want to explore the theme of (play) in relation to suffering. > > > > > > > > > > One exemplar: > > > > > There is a Buddhist who organizes gatherings where food is prepared > and > > > > > presented at the gatherings (for the homeless). Musical instruments > are > > > > > also brought and dancing proceeds. > > > > > Everyone participates and this is key: You cannot tell who are the > > > > > homeless and who are the people who prepared the food. They are > > > sharing a > > > > > common (new) experience that is profoundly moving and creates a sense > > > of > > > > > well-being. > > > > > This Buddhist practise is exemplary as a response to our current > > > > > contemporary historical moment. It is truth telling and democratic > > > > > soulcraft and PLAY. (each in the other). > > > > > It is one way of answering Margaret, Carrie, Cornell, Phillip, and > > > Henry. > > > > > This Buddhist act or practice is (crafting) an answer that speaks to > > > > > suffering. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > > > > > From: HENRY SHONERD > > > > > Sent: November 18, 2016 7:15 PM > > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > > > > > > > Thank you, Phillip. > > > > > "For us in these times, to even have hope is too abstract, too > > > detached, > > > > > too spectatorial. Instead we must be a hope, a participant and a > force > > > > for > > > > > good as we face this catastrophe.? > > > > > That?s my favorite part. > > > > > Henry > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 18, 2016, at 3:52 PM, White, Phillip < > > > > Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > well, this is what Cornel West has to say: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election > > > > > > > > > > > > [https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/aae8946d80dac457aa8b6af3f9a9fd > > > > > 5acc6b4acb/0_662_5150_3090/master/5150.jpg?w=1200&h=140& > > > > > q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=crop&bm=normal&ba=bottom%2Cleft&blend64= > > > > > aHR0cHM6Ly91cGxvYWRzLmd1aW0uY28udWsvMjAxNi8wNS8yNS9vdmVybGF5 > > > > > LWxvZ28tMTIwMC05MF9vcHQucG5n&s=4cbd18b4943818f70304ff2cfdc3da2d]< > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> > > > > > > > > > > > > Goodbye, American neoliberalism. A new era is here | Cornel West< > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> > > > > > > www.theguardian.com > > > > > > Trump?s election was enabled by the policies that overlooked the > > > plight > > > > > of our most vulnerable citizens. We gird ourselves for a frightening > > > > future > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > phillip > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > edu > > > > > > > > > > on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 8:16:01 PM > > > > > > To: Edward Wall; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > edu > > > > > > > > > > > >>> on behalf of Huw Lloyd > > > > > >>> 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 > > > > > > > edu> > > > > > >>>> on behalf of White, Phillip > > > > > >>>> 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 > > > > > > > edu> > > > > > >>>> on behalf of David Kellogg > > > > > >>>> 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 > > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>>>>> edu> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>>>>> edu> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of mike cole > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of 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 > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > >>>>> com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039 > > > > > >>>>>>>>> . > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also > > > attach > > > > it > > > > > >>> as > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> PDF. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> ??Good read! > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Alfredo > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Fri Nov 25 14:51:04 2016 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2016 09:51:04 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <5753689B-395F-4239-B435-58A40CAC2526@gmail.com> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com> <582e7283.84cf620a.c9f5a.302f@mx.google.com> <56BA469E-D1C3-4924-8C7F-F976876DEE9E@gmail.com> <583060c1.098d620a.b4db8.5e32@mx.google.com> <5837afae.84cf620a.c9f5a.9686@mx.google.com> <1480054543337.68845@iped.uio.no> <583872c9.9344620a.9b84b.70b8@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Huw: Marx wrote a Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right. But the manuscript I always found most useful (and which Vygotsky quotes a lot) is the German Ideology. This is really a criticism not of Hegel but of the "Young Hegelians", and it contains the best formulation of Marx's psychology and his linguistics. There's a pretty little passage in Midnight's Children, by Salman Rushdie, where he describes how the magicians union of Mumbai, who are all members of the Communist Party Marxist Leninist, discipline themselves to do all kinds of bendings and expandings and warpings and woofings with reality without ever forgetting the distinction between reality and mere magic. I always remember this passage when somebody gives me a good metaphor (e.g. "learning-labor" or "sign-psychological tool"). I think that a good magician always remembers that a metaphor means two things, not one. It means, on the one hand, that some things you didn't expect to be linked really are. But it also means that the two things that are linked are really distinct, else you wouldn't have had to link them to begin with. That's why I really don't accept the analogy between grades and wages: when I get a wage, I have to exchange labor with capital, and I am given a fraction of the surplus value that I create by doing that. When I get a grade, I get somebody's opinion of my work, and that's all. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Sat, Nov 26, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Huw Lloyd wrote: > Hi Larry, > > I agree with the necessity for considerable "back and forth" comparisons in > order to yield a relational concept. I am not sure it will be effective, > however, by substituting words. First there is the problem of reifying the > expressions rather than seeing beyond them, second there is a lack of an > experienced and well-structured problem to help guide the conscious > process. Lave et al may well have a problem firmly held before them (the > nature of learning vis-a-vis labour) but students following that approach > may not. If you start with a more direct comparison between labour and > learning then I suspect the problem will be more consistently presented. > > Your point about the paper being an exemplar is a nice touch, yet the issue > remains that this entails a different basis to knowledge (assuming it is > successfully taken up) which in itself does not address the problem of > qualifications on the basis of formal content. > > Best, > Huw > > On 25 November 2016 at 17:19, wrote: > > > Alfredo, Huw, > > > > This may be a round about way of inquiry and studying .... > > > > However as a form of slow reading as reading one notion (learning) > through > > another notion (labor) as layering or levels, indicating both labor and > > learning sharing a common (root) or (source) within a (subject matter) > that > > may express a cultural imaginary, may be illuminating or enlightening as > > one particular method of inquiry. > > > > I also noticed how Lave and McDermott described (authorship) within this > > same thematic or cultural imaginary which may offer an answer to > > hollowed-out education. They are proposing a WAY of reading as a way to a > > deeper educational experience as fulfilling, not hollowed out. (back and > > forth each in the other) > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > > > *From: *Huw Lloyd > > *Sent: *November 25, 2016 7:59 AM > > *To: *eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > *Subject: *[Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > > > > > Interesting text, although perhaps a rather roundabout and verbalised way > > > > of studying relations between labour and schooled learning. > > > > > > > > Interesting too to consider Marx's mode of analysis, which pertains to > > > > something I'm currently drafting. Does anyone know when Marx > specifically > > > > studied and re-fashioned Hegel's dialectic? > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > Huw > > > > > > > > On 25 November 2016 at 06:15, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > I keep thinking how relevant to this thread is Lave and McDermott 2002 > > > > > Stranged Learning. Probably familiar to many in the list, but totally > > > > > relevant in my view. l can't see how to best contribute to this thread > > than > > > > > sharing it. Surely challenges some of the views articulated here that > > > > > grades are not exchangeable or consumable. > > > > > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > ________________________________________ > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > > > > Sent: 25 November 2016 04:27 > > > > > To: Huw Lloyd; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > > > > > > > The term (neoliberalism) is now part of our cultural imaginary and as > > such > > > > > organizes responses (such as Margaret and Carrie?s paper). > > > > > > > > > > Is it possible to bracket the term (neoliberal) itself and refer to the > > > > > way schooling has now become preoccupied by the *works* or products of > > > > > standardization which are hollowing out the human desire for play and > the > > > > > imaginal, and sens of ongoing community in the formation of emerging > > > > > dispositions that are deeper and layered and not so instrumental. > > > > > > > > > > Education and pedagogy are central to development. I hope we can carry > > > > > this topic further into the not-yet but possible realm. Co-generating > > > > > imagination which leads to institutional forms which hold our deepest > > > > > desires each in the other. > > > > > Moving from hollowed-out relations (which this article refers to as the > > > > > works of neoliberalism) that promises acquiring portable skills > carried > > to > > > > > portable places. The participating in creating forms of community > that > > > > > are democratically culturally imagined may offer a way through the > > hollowed > > > > > out failure of our current historical moment now playing out. > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > > > > > From: Huw Lloyd > > > > > Sent: November 24, 2016 6:04 PM > > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > > > > > > > The marketable "skill" is "good behaviour in conjunction with some > > > > > operational knowledge". Even in technology-oriented companies, > creativity > > > > > and new knowledge are often unwelcome intruders into a social-political > > > > > situation (see for example Allen's 1977 text, Managing the Flow of > > > > > Technology). There are many vested interests into the status-quo. > > > > > Creativity in whatever sport, is usually against the grain. And then, > of > > > > > course, we have all these qualifications which repel creativity through > > > > > strict enforcement of stupid behaviour. > > > > > > > > > > Not sure whether I'm waking up a closing thread here, so my thanks to > > > > > Margaret for discussing the paper. > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > Huw > > > > > > > > > > On 20 November 2016 at 03:34, David Kellogg > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Sorry, I've lost the plot. That is, I don't see the connection > between > > > > > the > > > > > > kind of educational neoliberalism that is being discussed in the > > article > > > > > > (that which is based on measurable results, on academic tracking, on > > > > > > promising goodies in return for grades and grades in return for > > > > > schoolwork) > > > > > > and the kind of political and economic neoliberalism that is being > > > > > > discussed by Cornel. It seems to me that the policies that Margaret > and > > > > > > Carrie are discussing in this paper were not (politically) liberal, > nor > > > > > > were they new: they were taken over by Arne Duncan from the Bush > > > > > > administration, and the Bush administration got them, via Clinton, > from > > > > > > good old fashioned "Back to Basics" backlash in the UK. So the roots > > are > > > > > > Toryism and not liberalism. > > > > > > > > > > > > I suppose you can argue that there is some kind of implicit analogy > > > > > between > > > > > > education and neoliberal economics: school is supposed to be some > kind > > of > > > > > > neoliberal "level playing field" where children compete like > > businessmen, > > > > > > grades are "cultural capital", classes are investment opportunities, > > > > > > assessment portfolios are investment portfolios, etc. This analogy is > > > > > > little more than a way of whipping up interest among principals, > > > > > teachers, > > > > > > and even students (and as such I am not sure I am against it, since I > > > > > don't > > > > > > see anything wrong with working class kids taking an interest in the > > > > > > getting of goodies through study). It's certainly not a good > > description > > > > > of > > > > > > what is happening in schools: These businessmen produce no > commodities, > > > > > the > > > > > > grades are neither exchangeable or consumable; there is no such thing > > as > > > > > > credit or interest in this economy, and assets evaporate upon > > graduation > > > > > > instead of maturing. > > > > > > > > > > > > I think that the word "reform" is actually more important in Margaret > > and > > > > > > Carrie's title than "neoliberal": a "reform" is usually, on the lips > of > > > > > > government bureaucracy, a euphemism for backlash, and the policies > > being > > > > > > described are part of a more general ideological backlash against > > > > > Deweyism > > > > > > and progressive education: an anti-liberal reaction rather than a > > > > > > neo-liberal reform. "Neoliberalism", taken literally, would imply > that > > > > > the > > > > > > schools really are in the marketable skills business, and I don't see > > > > > much > > > > > > evidence for that in the study. Am I missing something? > > > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 1:24 AM, wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Margaret, Carrie, Phillip, Henry, Cornell, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A central and key theme of this month?s article is neoliberalism in > > all > > > > > > > its guises. > > > > > > > In my imaginary response i am addressing the authors of the paper > and > > > > > > > Cornell who addresses neoliberalism, and Phillip, who shared > > Cornell?s > > > > > > > article and Henry who heard Cornell offer a way to mediate our > > crises. > > > > > > > The paper is about teaching STEM and the neoliberal agenda that > > ignores > > > > > > > the plight of those who suffer. > > > > > > > Cornell says the answer is (democratic soulcraft). At the heart of > > this > > > > > > > soulcraft is truth telling of the reality of suffering. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In order to constitute or institute a (new) order a more > pro/gressive > > > > > > > order it seems suffering must be the key factor. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The notion of ivory towers and their responses to suffering seems > > > > > > central. > > > > > > > I also want to explore the theme of (play) in relation to > suffering. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One exemplar: > > > > > > > There is a Buddhist who organizes gatherings where food is prepared > > and > > > > > > > presented at the gatherings (for the homeless). Musical instruments > > are > > > > > > > also brought and dancing proceeds. > > > > > > > Everyone participates and this is key: You cannot tell who are the > > > > > > > homeless and who are the people who prepared the food. They are > > > > > sharing a > > > > > > > common (new) experience that is profoundly moving and creates a > sense > > > > > of > > > > > > > well-being. > > > > > > > This Buddhist practise is exemplary as a response to our current > > > > > > > contemporary historical moment. It is truth telling and democratic > > > > > > > soulcraft and PLAY. (each in the other). > > > > > > > It is one way of answering Margaret, Carrie, Cornell, Phillip, and > > > > > Henry. > > > > > > > This Buddhist act or practice is (crafting) an answer that speaks > to > > > > > > > suffering. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: HENRY SHONERD > > > > > > > Sent: November 18, 2016 7:15 PM > > > > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you, Phillip. > > > > > > > "For us in these times, to even have hope is too abstract, too > > > > > detached, > > > > > > > too spectatorial. Instead we must be a hope, a participant and a > > force > > > > > > for > > > > > > > good as we face this catastrophe.? > > > > > > > That?s my favorite part. > > > > > > > Henry > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 18, 2016, at 3:52 PM, White, Phillip < > > > > > > Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well, this is what Cornel West has to say: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > > > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/aae8946d80dac457aa8b6af3f9a9fd > > > > > > > 5acc6b4acb/0_662_5150_3090/master/5150.jpg?w=1200&h=140& > > > > > > > q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=crop&bm=normal&ba=bottom% > 2Cleft&blend64= > > > > > > > aHR0cHM6Ly91cGxvYWRzLmd1aW0uY28udWsvMjAxNi8wNS8yNS9vdmVybGF5 > > > > > > > LWxvZ28tMTIwMC05MF9vcHQucG5n&s=4cbd18b4943818f70304ff2cfdc3da2d]< > > > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > > > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Goodbye, American neoliberalism. A new era is here | Cornel West< > > > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > > > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> > > > > > > > > www.theguardian.com > > > > > > > > Trump?s election was enabled by the policies that overlooked the > > > > > plight > > > > > > > of our most vulnerable citizens. We gird ourselves for a > frightening > > > > > > future > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > phillip > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > edu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 8:16:01 PM > > > > > > > > To: Edward Wall; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion > Re-started > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > edu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> on behalf of Huw Lloyd > > > > > > > >>> 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 > > > > > > > > > > > edu> > > > > > > > >>>> on behalf of White, Phillip > > > > > > > >>>> 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 > > > > > > > > > > > edu> > > > > > > > >>>> on behalf of David Kellogg > > > > > > > >>>> 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 > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>> edu> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>> edu> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of mike cole > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > > >>>>> com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039 > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> . > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also > > > > > attach > > > > > > it > > > > > > > >>> as > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> PDF. > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> ??Good read! > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Alfredo > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Fri Nov 25 15:26:08 2016 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2016 23:26:08 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <5753689B-395F-4239-B435-58A40CAC2526@gmail.com> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com> <582e7283.84cf620a.c9f5a.302f@mx.google.com> <56BA469E-D1C3-4924-8C7F-F976876DEE9E@gmail.com> <583060c1.098d620a.b4db8.5e32@mx.google.com> <5837afae.84cf620a.c9f5a.9686@mx.google.com> <1480054543337.68845@iped.uio.no> <583872c9.9344620a.9b84b.70b8@mx.google.com> Message-ID: It is the relation between qualifications and wages that counts (isn't that obvious?) If you don't have the right qualifications, then you don't get access to certain kinds of work. A large part of those qualifications is the disposition towards being a good unit of labour, i.e. labour establishes the content of "education". If you spend a moderate amount of time in the arena of commercial recruitment it will be obvious that the vast majority of people have very few ideas concerning what knowledge is and how it is realised. The sense of something being distinct or non-distinct is merely personal ontology and ontogeny, it is the mode of thought one is employing. Magic in the sense of "changing reality" is not going to turn something from being non-linked to linked, because everything is already inter-related, rather, what it would do is to bring something specific into a systemic relation, i.e. a synchronous event from the future. :) Thanks for the Marx pointers. Best, Huw On 25 November 2016 at 22:51, David Kellogg wrote: > Huw: > > Marx wrote a Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right. But the manuscript I > always found most useful (and which Vygotsky quotes a lot) is the German > Ideology. This is really a criticism not of Hegel but of the "Young > Hegelians", and it contains the best formulation of Marx's psychology and > his linguistics. > > There's a pretty little passage in Midnight's Children, by Salman Rushdie, > where he describes how the magicians union of Mumbai, who are all members > of the Communist Party Marxist Leninist, discipline themselves to do all > kinds of bendings and expandings and warpings and woofings with reality > without ever forgetting the distinction between reality and mere magic. I > always remember this passage when somebody gives me a good metaphor (e.g. > "learning-labor" or "sign-psychological tool"). > > I think that a good magician always remembers that a metaphor means two > things, not one. It means, on the one hand, that some things you didn't > expect to be linked really are. But it also means that the two things that > are linked are really distinct, else you wouldn't have had to link them to > begin with. That's why I really don't accept the analogy between grades and > wages: when I get a wage, I have to exchange labor with capital, and I am > given a fraction of the surplus value that I create by doing that. When I > get a grade, I get somebody's opinion of my work, and that's all. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > > > On Sat, Nov 26, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Huw Lloyd > wrote: > > > Hi Larry, > > > > I agree with the necessity for considerable "back and forth" comparisons > in > > order to yield a relational concept. I am not sure it will be effective, > > however, by substituting words. First there is the problem of reifying > the > > expressions rather than seeing beyond them, second there is a lack of an > > experienced and well-structured problem to help guide the conscious > > process. Lave et al may well have a problem firmly held before them (the > > nature of learning vis-a-vis labour) but students following that approach > > may not. If you start with a more direct comparison between labour and > > learning then I suspect the problem will be more consistently presented. > > > > Your point about the paper being an exemplar is a nice touch, yet the > issue > > remains that this entails a different basis to knowledge (assuming it is > > successfully taken up) which in itself does not address the problem of > > qualifications on the basis of formal content. > > > > Best, > > Huw > > > > On 25 November 2016 at 17:19, wrote: > > > > > Alfredo, Huw, > > > > > > This may be a round about way of inquiry and studying .... > > > > > > However as a form of slow reading as reading one notion (learning) > > through > > > another notion (labor) as layering or levels, indicating both labor > and > > > learning sharing a common (root) or (source) within a (subject matter) > > that > > > may express a cultural imaginary, may be illuminating or enlightening > as > > > one particular method of inquiry. > > > > > > I also noticed how Lave and McDermott described (authorship) within > this > > > same thematic or cultural imaginary which may offer an answer to > > > hollowed-out education. They are proposing a WAY of reading as a way > to a > > > deeper educational experience as fulfilling, not hollowed out. (back > and > > > forth each in the other) > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > > > > > > > *From: *Huw Lloyd > > > *Sent: *November 25, 2016 7:59 AM > > > *To: *eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > *Subject: *[Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > > > > > > > > > Interesting text, although perhaps a rather roundabout and verbalised > way > > > > > > of studying relations between labour and schooled learning. > > > > > > > > > > > > Interesting too to consider Marx's mode of analysis, which pertains to > > > > > > something I'm currently drafting. Does anyone know when Marx > > specifically > > > > > > studied and re-fashioned Hegel's dialectic? > > > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > Huw > > > > > > > > > > > > On 25 November 2016 at 06:15, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > I keep thinking how relevant to this thread is Lave and McDermott > 2002 > > > > > > > Stranged Learning. Probably familiar to many in the list, but totally > > > > > > > relevant in my view. l can't see how to best contribute to this > thread > > > than > > > > > > > sharing it. Surely challenges some of the views articulated here that > > > > > > > grades are not exchangeable or consumable. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu edu > > > > > > > > > > on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > > > > > > Sent: 25 November 2016 04:27 > > > > > > > To: Huw Lloyd; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The term (neoliberalism) is now part of our cultural imaginary and as > > > such > > > > > > > organizes responses (such as Margaret and Carrie?s paper). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is it possible to bracket the term (neoliberal) itself and refer to > the > > > > > > > way schooling has now become preoccupied by the *works* or products > of > > > > > > > standardization which are hollowing out the human desire for play and > > the > > > > > > > imaginal, and sens of ongoing community in the formation of emerging > > > > > > > dispositions that are deeper and layered and not so instrumental. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Education and pedagogy are central to development. I hope we can > carry > > > > > > > this topic further into the not-yet but possible realm. Co-generating > > > > > > > imagination which leads to institutional forms which hold our deepest > > > > > > > desires each in the other. > > > > > > > Moving from hollowed-out relations (which this article refers to as > the > > > > > > > works of neoliberalism) that promises acquiring portable skills > > carried > > > to > > > > > > > portable places. The participating in creating forms of community > > that > > > > > > > are democratically culturally imagined may offer a way through the > > > hollowed > > > > > > > out failure of our current historical moment now playing out. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Huw Lloyd > > > > > > > Sent: November 24, 2016 6:04 PM > > > > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The marketable "skill" is "good behaviour in conjunction with some > > > > > > > operational knowledge". Even in technology-oriented companies, > > creativity > > > > > > > and new knowledge are often unwelcome intruders into a > social-political > > > > > > > situation (see for example Allen's 1977 text, Managing the Flow of > > > > > > > Technology). There are many vested interests into the status-quo. > > > > > > > Creativity in whatever sport, is usually against the grain. And then, > > of > > > > > > > course, we have all these qualifications which repel creativity > through > > > > > > > strict enforcement of stupid behaviour. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Not sure whether I'm waking up a closing thread here, so my thanks to > > > > > > > Margaret for discussing the paper. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > > Huw > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 20 November 2016 at 03:34, David Kellogg > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sorry, I've lost the plot. That is, I don't see the connection > > between > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > kind of educational neoliberalism that is being discussed in the > > > article > > > > > > > > (that which is based on measurable results, on academic tracking, > on > > > > > > > > promising goodies in return for grades and grades in return for > > > > > > > schoolwork) > > > > > > > > and the kind of political and economic neoliberalism that is being > > > > > > > > discussed by Cornel. It seems to me that the policies that Margaret > > and > > > > > > > > Carrie are discussing in this paper were not (politically) liberal, > > nor > > > > > > > > were they new: they were taken over by Arne Duncan from the Bush > > > > > > > > administration, and the Bush administration got them, via Clinton, > > from > > > > > > > > good old fashioned "Back to Basics" backlash in the UK. So the > roots > > > are > > > > > > > > Toryism and not liberalism. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I suppose you can argue that there is some kind of implicit analogy > > > > > > > between > > > > > > > > education and neoliberal economics: school is supposed to be some > > kind > > > of > > > > > > > > neoliberal "level playing field" where children compete like > > > businessmen, > > > > > > > > grades are "cultural capital", classes are investment > opportunities, > > > > > > > > assessment portfolios are investment portfolios, etc. This analogy > is > > > > > > > > little more than a way of whipping up interest among principals, > > > > > > > teachers, > > > > > > > > and even students (and as such I am not sure I am against it, > since I > > > > > > > don't > > > > > > > > see anything wrong with working class kids taking an interest in > the > > > > > > > > getting of goodies through study). It's certainly not a good > > > description > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > what is happening in schools: These businessmen produce no > > commodities, > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > grades are neither exchangeable or consumable; there is no such > thing > > > as > > > > > > > > credit or interest in this economy, and assets evaporate upon > > > graduation > > > > > > > > instead of maturing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think that the word "reform" is actually more important in > Margaret > > > and > > > > > > > > Carrie's title than "neoliberal": a "reform" is usually, on the > lips > > of > > > > > > > > government bureaucracy, a euphemism for backlash, and the policies > > > being > > > > > > > > described are part of a more general ideological backlash against > > > > > > > Deweyism > > > > > > > > and progressive education: an anti-liberal reaction rather than a > > > > > > > > neo-liberal reform. "Neoliberalism", taken literally, would imply > > that > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > schools really are in the marketable skills business, and I don't > see > > > > > > > much > > > > > > > > evidence for that in the study. Am I missing something? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 1:24 AM, wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Margaret, Carrie, Phillip, Henry, Cornell, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A central and key theme of this month?s article is neoliberalism > in > > > all > > > > > > > > > its guises. > > > > > > > > > In my imaginary response i am addressing the authors of the paper > > and > > > > > > > > > Cornell who addresses neoliberalism, and Phillip, who shared > > > Cornell?s > > > > > > > > > article and Henry who heard Cornell offer a way to mediate our > > > crises. > > > > > > > > > The paper is about teaching STEM and the neoliberal agenda that > > > ignores > > > > > > > > > the plight of those who suffer. > > > > > > > > > Cornell says the answer is (democratic soulcraft). At the heart > of > > > this > > > > > > > > > soulcraft is truth telling of the reality of suffering. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In order to constitute or institute a (new) order a more > > pro/gressive > > > > > > > > > order it seems suffering must be the key factor. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The notion of ivory towers and their responses to suffering seems > > > > > > > > central. > > > > > > > > > I also want to explore the theme of (play) in relation to > > suffering. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One exemplar: > > > > > > > > > There is a Buddhist who organizes gatherings where food is > prepared > > > and > > > > > > > > > presented at the gatherings (for the homeless). Musical > instruments > > > are > > > > > > > > > also brought and dancing proceeds. > > > > > > > > > Everyone participates and this is key: You cannot tell who are > the > > > > > > > > > homeless and who are the people who prepared the food. They are > > > > > > > sharing a > > > > > > > > > common (new) experience that is profoundly moving and creates a > > sense > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > well-being. > > > > > > > > > This Buddhist practise is exemplary as a response to our current > > > > > > > > > contemporary historical moment. It is truth telling and > democratic > > > > > > > > > soulcraft and PLAY. (each in the other). > > > > > > > > > It is one way of answering Margaret, Carrie, Cornell, Phillip, > and > > > > > > > Henry. > > > > > > > > > This Buddhist act or practice is (crafting) an answer that > speaks > > to > > > > > > > > > suffering. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: HENRY SHONERD > > > > > > > > > Sent: November 18, 2016 7:15 PM > > > > > > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion > Re-started > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you, Phillip. > > > > > > > > > "For us in these times, to even have hope is too abstract, too > > > > > > > detached, > > > > > > > > > too spectatorial. Instead we must be a hope, a participant and a > > > force > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > good as we face this catastrophe.? > > > > > > > > > That?s my favorite part. > > > > > > > > > Henry > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 18, 2016, at 3:52 PM, White, Phillip < > > > > > > > > Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well, this is what Cornel West has to say: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > > > > > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/aae8946d80dac457aa8b6af3f9a9fd > > > > > > > > > 5acc6b4acb/0_662_5150_3090/master/5150.jpg?w=1200&h=140& > > > > > > > > > q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=crop&bm=normal&ba=bottom% > > 2Cleft&blend64= > > > > > > > > > aHR0cHM6Ly91cGxvYWRzLmd1aW0uY28udWsvMjAxNi8wNS8yNS9vdmVybGF5 > > > > > > > > > LWxvZ28tMTIwMC05MF9vcHQucG5n&s=4cbd18b4943818f70304ff2cfdc3da > 2d]< > > > > > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > > > > > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Goodbye, American neoliberalism. A new era is here | Cornel > West< > > > > > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > > > > > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> > > > > > > > > > > www.theguardian.com > > > > > > > > > > Trump?s election was enabled by the policies that overlooked > the > > > > > > > plight > > > > > > > > > of our most vulnerable citizens. We gird ourselves for a > > frightening > > > > > > > > future > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > phillip > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > > > > edu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 8:16:01 PM > > > > > > > > > > To: Edward Wall; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion > > Re-started > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > edu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> on behalf of Huw Lloyd > > > > > > > > > >>> 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > edu> > > > > > > > > > >>>> on behalf of White, Phillip > > > > > > > > > >>>> 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > edu> > > > > > > > > > >>>> on behalf of David Kellogg > > > > > > > > > >>>> 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 > > > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> edu> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> edu> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of mike cole > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > > > > >>>>> com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039 > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> . > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also > > > > > > > attach > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > >>> as > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> PDF. > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> ??Good read! > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Alfredo > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From ablunden@mira.net Fri Nov 25 15:38:11 2016 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2016 10:38:11 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com> <582e7283.84cf620a.c9f5a.302f@mx.google.com> <56BA469E-D1C3-4924-8C7F-F976876DEE9E@gmail.com> <583060c1.098d620a.b4db8.5e32@mx.google.com> <5837afae.84cf620a.c9f5a.9686@mx.google.com> <1480054543337.68845@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: This is not a one-off event, Huw. I writing his PhD Dissertation on the philosophy of Nature of Democritus and Epicurus he was taking a position opposite to that of Hegel. The dissertation was published in 1841 when Marx was aged 22. He credits Feuerbach with the impulse to take a stronger materialist line against Hegel with the publication of the Essence of Christianity in 1841. His notes on Hegel's Philosophy of Right (1843) show that he was trying to take a dismissive attitude to Hegel, and it is only in the Theses on Feuerbach and The German Ideology of 1845 where the outlines of Marx's distinctive critique of Hegel are clearly present, as David notes, in the form of a critique of Feuerbach. It is reasonable to suppose that he was working out this position at the time he wrote the 1844 Manuscripts. However, he is still working on how to use Hegel as he writes his Political Economy material in 1857-58, after which his position is pretty settled. However, his turn to Hegel in 1881 to understand calculus, only 2 years before his death, demonstrate that this was an unfinished task. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------ Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making On 26/11/2016 2:58 AM, Huw Lloyd wrote: > ... > > Interesting too to consider Marx's mode of analysis, which pertains to > something I'm currently drafting. Does anyone know when Marx specifically > studied and re-fashioned Hegel's dialectic? > > Best, > Huw > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Fri Nov 25 15:49:39 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2016 15:49:39 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <5753689B-395F-4239-B435-58A40CAC2526@gmail.com> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com> <582e7283.84cf620a.c9f5a.302f@mx.google.com> <56BA469E-D1C3-4924-8C7F-F976876DEE9E@gmail.com> <583060c1.098d620a.b4db8.5e32@mx.google.com> <5837afae.84cf620a.c9f5a.9686@mx.google.com> <1480054543337.68845@iped.uio.no> <583872c9.9344620a.9b84b.70b8@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <5838ce29.5ca6620a.65c6.b8ae@mx.google.com> Its the relation between qualifications and wages that (counts). I am reading this months article as asking if this is All that counts. If this relation remains the only focus of getting an education then other more valuable relations will become alienated. (can i say withdraw from attention or realization). It is the withdrawal of these other notions of education such as bildung that recede from view and the result is hollowed-out education. Is it not possible to foreground these more humanistic ways of being/becoming educated and also be able to acquire the qualifications to become employed for better wages. The term (withdrawal) indicates that what has been withdrawn could be (resumed). It is in this sens that a slow reading as class *work* exemplifed by the Lave and McDermont article is a model for resuming what is now withdrawn from the educational arena. A by-product of this type of school *work* (sharing qualities of *play*) may also generate the qualifications required but not be experienced as hollowed-out education that foregrounds only the qualifications/wage relation. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Huw Lloyd Sent: November 25, 2016 3:28 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started It is the relation between qualifications and wages that counts (isn't that obvious?) If you don't have the right qualifications, then you don't get access to certain kinds of work. A large part of those qualifications is the disposition towards being a good unit of labour, i.e. labour establishes the content of "education". If you spend a moderate amount of time in the arena of commercial recruitment it will be obvious that the vast majority of people have very few ideas concerning what knowledge is and how it is realised. The sense of something being distinct or non-distinct is merely personal ontology and ontogeny, it is the mode of thought one is employing. Magic in the sense of "changing reality" is not going to turn something from being non-linked to linked, because everything is already inter-related, rather, what it would do is to bring something specific into a systemic relation, i.e. a synchronous event from the future. :) Thanks for the Marx pointers. Best, Huw On 25 November 2016 at 22:51, David Kellogg wrote: > Huw: > > Marx wrote a Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right. But the manuscript I > always found most useful (and which Vygotsky quotes a lot) is the German > Ideology. This is really a criticism not of Hegel but of the "Young > Hegelians", and it contains the best formulation of Marx's psychology and > his linguistics. > > There's a pretty little passage in Midnight's Children, by Salman Rushdie, > where he describes how the magicians union of Mumbai, who are all members > of the Communist Party Marxist Leninist, discipline themselves to do all > kinds of bendings and expandings and warpings and woofings with reality > without ever forgetting the distinction between reality and mere magic. I > always remember this passage when somebody gives me a good metaphor (e.g. > "learning-labor" or "sign-psychological tool"). > > I think that a good magician always remembers that a metaphor means two > things, not one. It means, on the one hand, that some things you didn't > expect to be linked really are. But it also means that the two things that > are linked are really distinct, else you wouldn't have had to link them to > begin with. That's why I really don't accept the analogy between grades and > wages: when I get a wage, I have to exchange labor with capital, and I am > given a fraction of the surplus value that I create by doing that. When I > get a grade, I get somebody's opinion of my work, and that's all. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > > > On Sat, Nov 26, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Huw Lloyd > wrote: > > > Hi Larry, > > > > I agree with the necessity for considerable "back and forth" comparisons > in > > order to yield a relational concept. I am not sure it will be effective, > > however, by substituting words. First there is the problem of reifying > the > > expressions rather than seeing beyond them, second there is a lack of an > > experienced and well-structured problem to help guide the conscious > > process. Lave et al may well have a problem firmly held before them (the > > nature of learning vis-a-vis labour) but students following that approach > > may not. If you start with a more direct comparison between labour and > > learning then I suspect the problem will be more consistently presented. > > > > Your point about the paper being an exemplar is a nice touch, yet the > issue > > remains that this entails a different basis to knowledge (assuming it is > > successfully taken up) which in itself does not address the problem of > > qualifications on the basis of formal content. > > > > Best, > > Huw > > > > On 25 November 2016 at 17:19, wrote: > > > > > Alfredo, Huw, > > > > > > This may be a round about way of inquiry and studying .... > > > > > > However as a form of slow reading as reading one notion (learning) > > through > > > another notion (labor) as layering or levels, indicating both labor > and > > > learning sharing a common (root) or (source) within a (subject matter) > > that > > > may express a cultural imaginary, may be illuminating or enlightening > as > > > one particular method of inquiry. > > > > > > I also noticed how Lave and McDermott described (authorship) within > this > > > same thematic or cultural imaginary which may offer an answer to > > > hollowed-out education. They are proposing a WAY of reading as a way > to a > > > deeper educational experience as fulfilling, not hollowed out. (back > and > > > forth each in the other) > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > > > > > > > *From: *Huw Lloyd > > > *Sent: *November 25, 2016 7:59 AM > > > *To: *eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > *Subject: *[Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > > > > > > > > > Interesting text, although perhaps a rather roundabout and verbalised > way > > > > > > of studying relations between labour and schooled learning. > > > > > > > > > > > > Interesting too to consider Marx's mode of analysis, which pertains to > > > > > > something I'm currently drafting. Does anyone know when Marx > > specifically > > > > > > studied and re-fashioned Hegel's dialectic? > > > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > Huw > > > > > > > > > > > > On 25 November 2016 at 06:15, Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > I keep thinking how relevant to this thread is Lave and McDermott > 2002 > > > > > > > Stranged Learning. Probably familiar to many in the list, but totally > > > > > > > relevant in my view. l can't see how to best contribute to this > thread > > > than > > > > > > > sharing it. Surely challenges some of the views articulated here that > > > > > > > grades are not exchangeable or consumable. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alfredo > > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu edu > > > > > > > > > > on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > > > > > > Sent: 25 November 2016 04:27 > > > > > > > To: Huw Lloyd; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The term (neoliberalism) is now part of our cultural imaginary and as > > > such > > > > > > > organizes responses (such as Margaret and Carrie?s paper). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is it possible to bracket the term (neoliberal) itself and refer to > the > > > > > > > way schooling has now become preoccupied by the *works* or products > of > > > > > > > standardization which are hollowing out the human desire for play and > > the > > > > > > > imaginal, and sens of ongoing community in the formation of emerging > > > > > > > dispositions that are deeper and layered and not so instrumental. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Education and pedagogy are central to development. I hope we can > carry > > > > > > > this topic further into the not-yet but possible realm. Co-generating > > > > > > > imagination which leads to institutional forms which hold our deepest > > > > > > > desires each in the other. > > > > > > > Moving from hollowed-out relations (which this article refers to as > the > > > > > > > works of neoliberalism) that promises acquiring portable skills > > carried > > > to > > > > > > > portable places. The participating in creating forms of community > > that > > > > > > > are democratically culturally imagined may offer a way through the > > > hollowed > > > > > > > out failure of our current historical moment now playing out. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Huw Lloyd > > > > > > > Sent: November 24, 2016 6:04 PM > > > > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The marketable "skill" is "good behaviour in conjunction with some > > > > > > > operational knowledge". Even in technology-oriented companies, > > creativity > > > > > > > and new knowledge are often unwelcome intruders into a > social-political > > > > > > > situation (see for example Allen's 1977 text, Managing the Flow of > > > > > > > Technology). There are many vested interests into the status-quo. > > > > > > > Creativity in whatever sport, is usually against the grain. And then, > > of > > > > > > > course, we have all these qualifications which repel creativity > through > > > > > > > strict enforcement of stupid behaviour. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Not sure whether I'm waking up a closing thread here, so my thanks to > > > > > > > Margaret for discussing the paper. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > > Huw > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 20 November 2016 at 03:34, David Kellogg > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sorry, I've lost the plot. That is, I don't see the connection > > between > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > kind of educational neoliberalism that is being discussed in the > > > article > > > > > > > > (that which is based on measurable results, on academic tracking, > on > > > > > > > > promising goodies in return for grades and grades in return for > > > > > > > schoolwork) > > > > > > > > and the kind of political and economic neoliberalism that is being > > > > > > > > discussed by Cornel. It seems to me that the policies that Margaret > > and > > > > > > > > Carrie are discussing in this paper were not (politically) liberal, > > nor > > > > > > > > were they new: they were taken over by Arne Duncan from the Bush > > > > > > > > administration, and the Bush administration got them, via Clinton, > > from > > > > > > > > good old fashioned "Back to Basics" backlash in the UK. So the > roots > > > are > > > > > > > > Toryism and not liberalism. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I suppose you can argue that there is some kind of implicit analogy > > > > > > > between > > > > > > > > education and neoliberal economics: school is supposed to be some > > kind > > > of > > > > > > > > neoliberal "level playing field" where children compete like > > > businessmen, > > > > > > > > grades are "cultural capital", classes are investment > opportunities, > > > > > > > > assessment portfolios are investment portfolios, etc. This analogy > is > > > > > > > > little more than a way of whipping up interest among principals, > > > > > > > teachers, > > > > > > > > and even students (and as such I am not sure I am against it, > since I > > > > > > > don't > > > > > > > > see anything wrong with working class kids taking an interest in > the > > > > > > > > getting of goodies through study). It's certainly not a good > > > description > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > what is happening in schools: These businessmen produce no > > commodities, > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > grades are neither exchangeable or consumable; there is no such > thing > > > as > > > > > > > > credit or interest in this economy, and assets evaporate upon > > > graduation > > > > > > > > instead of maturing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think that the word "reform" is actually more important in > Margaret > > > and > > > > > > > > Carrie's title than "neoliberal": a "reform" is usually, on the > lips > > of > > > > > > > > government bureaucracy, a euphemism for backlash, and the policies > > > being > > > > > > > > described are part of a more general ideological backlash against > > > > > > > Deweyism > > > > > > > > and progressive education: an anti-liberal reaction rather than a > > > > > > > > neo-liberal reform. "Neoliberalism", taken literally, would imply > > that > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > schools really are in the marketable skills business, and I don't > see > > > > > > > much > > > > > > > > evidence for that in the study. Am I missing something? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 1:24 AM, wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Margaret, Carrie, Phillip, Henry, Cornell, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A central and key theme of this month?s article is neoliberalism > in > > > all > > > > > > > > > its guises. > > > > > > > > > In my imaginary response i am addressing the authors of the paper > > and > > > > > > > > > Cornell who addresses neoliberalism, and Phillip, who shared > > > Cornell?s > > > > > > > > > article and Henry who heard Cornell offer a way to mediate our > > > crises. > > > > > > > > > The paper is about teaching STEM and the neoliberal agenda that > > > ignores > > > > > > > > > the plight of those who suffer. > > > > > > > > > Cornell says the answer is (democratic soulcraft). At the heart > of > > > this > > > > > > > > > soulcraft is truth telling of the reality of suffering. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In order to constitute or institute a (new) order a more > > pro/gressive > > > > > > > > > order it seems suffering must be the key factor. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The notion of ivory towers and their responses to suffering seems > > > > > > > > central. > > > > > > > > > I also want to explore the theme of (play) in relation to > > suffering. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One exemplar: > > > > > > > > > There is a Buddhist who organizes gatherings where food is > prepared > > > and > > > > > > > > > presented at the gatherings (for the homeless). Musical > instruments > > > are > > > > > > > > > also brought and dancing proceeds. > > > > > > > > > Everyone participates and this is key: You cannot tell who are > the > > > > > > > > > homeless and who are the people who prepared the food. They are > > > > > > > sharing a > > > > > > > > > common (new) experience that is profoundly moving and creates a > > sense > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > well-being. > > > > > > > > > This Buddhist practise is exemplary as a response to our current > > > > > > > > > contemporary historical moment. It is truth telling and > democratic > > > > > > > > > soulcraft and PLAY. (each in the other). > > > > > > > > > It is one way of answering Margaret, Carrie, Cornell, Phillip, > and > > > > > > > Henry. > > > > > > > > > This Buddhist act or practice is (crafting) an answer that > speaks > > to > > > > > > > > > suffering. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: HENRY SHONERD > > > > > > > > > Sent: November 18, 2016 7:15 PM > > > > > > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion > Re-started > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you, Phillip. > > > > > > > > > "For us in these times, to even have hope is too abstract, too > > > > > > > detached, > > > > > > > > > too spectatorial. Instead we must be a hope, a participant and a > > > force > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > good as we face this catastrophe.? > > > > > > > > > That?s my favorite part. > > > > > > > > > Henry > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 18, 2016, at 3:52 PM, White, Phillip < > > > > > > > > Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well, this is what Cornel West has to say: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > > > > > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/aae8946d80dac457aa8b6af3f9a9fd > > > > > > > > > 5acc6b4acb/0_662_5150_3090/master/5150.jpg?w=1200&h=140& > > > > > > > > > q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=crop&bm=normal&ba=bottom% > > 2Cleft&blend64= > > > > > > > > > aHR0cHM6Ly91cGxvYWRzLmd1aW0uY28udWsvMjAxNi8wNS8yNS9vdmVybGF5 > > > > > > > > > LWxvZ28tMTIwMC05MF9vcHQucG5n&s=4cbd18b4943818f70304ff2cfdc3da > 2d]< > > > > > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > > > > > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Goodbye, American neoliberalism. A new era is here | Cornel > West< > > > > > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > > > > > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> > > > > > > > > > > www.theguardian.com > > > > > > > > > > Trump?s election was enabled by the policies that overlooked > the > > > > > > > plight > > > > > > > > > of our most vulnerable citizens. We gird ourselves for a > > frightening > > > > > > > > future > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > phillip > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > > > > edu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 8:16:01 PM > > > > > > > > > > To: Edward Wall; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion > > Re-started > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > edu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> on behalf of Huw Lloyd > > > > > > > > > >>> 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > edu> > > > > > > > > > >>>> on behalf of White, Phillip > > > > > > > > > >>>> 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > edu> > > > > > > > > > >>>> on behalf of David Kellogg > > > > > > > > > >>>> 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 > > > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> edu> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> edu> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of mike cole > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > > > > >>>>> com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039 > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> . > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also > > > > > > > attach > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > >>> as > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> PDF. > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> ??Good read! > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Alfredo > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Fri Nov 25 16:02:34 2016 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2016 00:02:34 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com> <582e7283.84cf620a.c9f5a.302f@mx.google.com> <56BA469E-D1C3-4924-8C7F-F976876DEE9E@gmail.com> <583060c1.098d620a.b4db8.5e32@mx.google.com> <5837afae.84cf620a.c9f5a.9686@mx.google.com> <1480054543337.68845@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Thanks Andy. On 25 November 2016 at 23:38, Andy Blunden wrote: > This is not a one-off event, Huw. I writing his PhD Dissertation on the > philosophy of Nature of Democritus and Epicurus he was taking a position > opposite to that of Hegel. The dissertation was published in 1841 when Marx > was aged 22. He credits Feuerbach with the impulse to take a stronger > materialist line against Hegel with the publication of the Essence of > Christianity in 1841. His notes on Hegel's Philosophy of Right (1843) show > that he was trying to take a dismissive attitude to Hegel, and it is only > in the Theses on Feuerbach and The German Ideology of 1845 where the > outlines of Marx's distinctive critique of Hegel are clearly present, as > David notes, in the form of a critique of Feuerbach. It is reasonable to > suppose that he was working out this position at the time he wrote the 1844 > Manuscripts. However, he is still working on how to use Hegel as he writes > his Political Economy material in 1857-58, after which his position is > pretty settled. However, his turn to Hegel in 1881 to understand calculus, > only 2 years before his death, demonstrate that this was an unfinished task. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > On 26/11/2016 2:58 AM, Huw Lloyd wrote: > >> ... >> >> Interesting too to consider Marx's mode of analysis, which pertains to >> something I'm currently drafting. Does anyone know when Marx specifically >> studied and re-fashioned Hegel's dialectic? >> >> Best, >> Huw >> >> >> > From Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu Fri Nov 25 16:18:01 2016 From: Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu (White, Phillip) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2016 00:18:01 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com> <582e7283.84cf620a.c9f5a.302f@mx.google.com> <56BA469E-D1C3-4924-8C7F-F976876DEE9E@gmail.com> <583060c1.098d620a.b4db8.5e32@mx.google.com> <5837afae.84cf620a.c9f5a.9686@mx.google.com> <1480054543337.68845@iped.uio.no> , Message-ID: John Stuart Mill notes the "empty husks" of education prevalent at the time (1836), that have come down through the ages. here's his solutions: https://www.laits.utexas.edu/poltheory/jsmill/diss-disc/civilization/civilization.s06.html CIVILIZATION Section 6, John Stuart Mill, Civilization www.laits.utexas.edu Civilization John Stuart Mill Section 6 [Improving British education] These things must bide their time. But the other of the two great desiderata, the regeneration ... dense, but illuminating one hundred and eighty years later. phillip ________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Huw Lloyd Sent: Friday, November 25, 2016 5:02:34 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started Thanks Andy. On 25 November 2016 at 23:38, Andy Blunden wrote: > This is not a one-off event, Huw. I writing his PhD Dissertation on the > philosophy of Nature of Democritus and Epicurus he was taking a position > opposite to that of Hegel. The dissertation was published in 1841 when Marx > was aged 22. He credits Feuerbach with the impulse to take a stronger > materialist line against Hegel with the publication of the Essence of > Christianity in 1841. His notes on Hegel's Philosophy of Right (1843) show > that he was trying to take a dismissive attitude to Hegel, and it is only > in the Theses on Feuerbach and The German Ideology of 1845 where the > outlines of Marx's distinctive critique of Hegel are clearly present, as > David notes, in the form of a critique of Feuerbach. It is reasonable to > suppose that he was working out this position at the time he wrote the 1844 > Manuscripts. However, he is still working on how to use Hegel as he writes > his Political Economy material in 1857-58, after which his position is > pretty settled. However, his turn to Hegel in 1881 to understand calculus, > only 2 years before his death, demonstrate that this was an unfinished task. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > On 26/11/2016 2:58 AM, Huw Lloyd wrote: > >> ... >> >> Interesting too to consider Marx's mode of analysis, which pertains to >> something I'm currently drafting. Does anyone know when Marx specifically >> studied and re-fashioned Hegel's dialectic? >> >> Best, >> Huw >> >> >> > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Fri Nov 25 17:50:01 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2016 17:50:01 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Andy bookmarked an article by Shannon Hoff who may have something to add to our discussion of neoliberalism and what has been withdrawn from public discourse is the fundamental notion of Rights and Worlds: The Political Significance of Belonging - YouTube Message-ID: <5838ea50.5d71630a.b7286.c62a@mx.google.com> Rights and Worlds: The Political Significance of Belonging - YouTube Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content and share it all with friends, family and the world on YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94KYDLdNs7c&t=7s Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From lpscholar2@gmail.com Sat Nov 26 08:46:04 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2016 08:46:04 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com> <582e7283.84cf620a.c9f5a.302f@mx.google.com> <56BA469E-D1C3-4924-8C7F-F976876DEE9E@gmail.com> <583060c1.098d620a.b4db8.5e32@mx.google.com> <5837afae.84cf620a.c9f5a.9686@mx.google.com> <1480054543337.68845@iped.uio.no> , Message-ID: <5839bc62.4bae630a.e18da.8244@mx.google.com> I sent a youtube video of Susan Hoff exploring passivity within belonging to constituted (instituted?) worlds. John William Miller believed: If one does not begin in community, philosophy will never arrive at community and so will not be able to revise or improve any human community. Miller?s relational back and forth pairs the human act to prior community (common beginning). This seems to follow Susan Hoff?s theme. However, Susan adds the focus on passivity (let it be) as a necessary relation to activity (taking to heart). A spiral theme of loose threads relationally intertwined in the back and forth. May generate a quality of education which has withdrawn from public discourse as liberalism has been ascendant. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: White, Phillip Sent: November 25, 2016 4:20 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started John Stuart Mill notes the "empty husks" of education prevalent at the time (1836), that have come down through the ages. here's his solutions: https://www.laits.utexas.edu/poltheory/jsmill/diss-disc/civilization/civilization.s06.html CIVILIZATION Section 6, John Stuart Mill, Civilization www.laits.utexas.edu Civilization John Stuart Mill Section 6 [Improving British education] These things must bide their time. But the other of the two great desiderata, the regeneration ... dense, but illuminating one hundred and eighty years later. phillip ________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Huw Lloyd Sent: Friday, November 25, 2016 5:02:34 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started Thanks Andy. On 25 November 2016 at 23:38, Andy Blunden wrote: > This is not a one-off event, Huw. I writing his PhD Dissertation on the > philosophy of Nature of Democritus and Epicurus he was taking a position > opposite to that of Hegel. The dissertation was published in 1841 when Marx > was aged 22. He credits Feuerbach with the impulse to take a stronger > materialist line against Hegel with the publication of the Essence of > Christianity in 1841. His notes on Hegel's Philosophy of Right (1843) show > that he was trying to take a dismissive attitude to Hegel, and it is only > in the Theses on Feuerbach and The German Ideology of 1845 where the > outlines of Marx's distinctive critique of Hegel are clearly present, as > David notes, in the form of a critique of Feuerbach. It is reasonable to > suppose that he was working out this position at the time he wrote the 1844 > Manuscripts. However, he is still working on how to use Hegel as he writes > his Political Economy material in 1857-58, after which his position is > pretty settled. However, his turn to Hegel in 1881 to understand calculus, > only 2 years before his death, demonstrate that this was an unfinished task. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Andy Blunden > http://home.mira.net/~andy > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > On 26/11/2016 2:58 AM, Huw Lloyd wrote: > >> ... >> >> Interesting too to consider Marx's mode of analysis, which pertains to >> something I'm currently drafting. Does anyone know when Marx specifically >> studied and re-fashioned Hegel's dialectic? >> >> Best, >> Huw >> >> >> > From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Sat Nov 26 14:33:02 2016 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2016 22:33:02 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com> <582e7283.84cf620a.c9f5a.302f@mx.google.com> <56BA469E-D1C3-4924-8C7F-F976876DEE9E@gmail.com> <583060c1.098d620a.b4db8.5e32@mx.google.com> <5837afae.84cf620a.c9f5a.9686@mx.google.com> <1480054543337.68845@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Thanks Phillip, that put's Clive Bell's "Civilization" into more historical context. On 26 November 2016 at 00:18, White, Phillip wrote: > John Stuart Mill notes the "empty husks" of education prevalent at the > time (1836), that have come down through the ages. here's his solutions: > > > https://www.laits.utexas.edu/poltheory/jsmill/diss-disc/ > civilization/civilization.s06.html > > CIVILIZATION Section 6, John Stuart Mill, Civilization laits.utexas.edu/poltheory/jsmill/diss-disc/civilization/ > civilization.s06.html> > www.laits.utexas.edu > Civilization John Stuart Mill Section 6 [Improving British education] > These things must bide their time. But the other of the two great > desiderata, the regeneration ... > > > > > > dense, but illuminating one hundred and eighty years later. > > > phillip > > ________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Huw Lloyd > Sent: Friday, November 25, 2016 5:02:34 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > Thanks Andy. > > On 25 November 2016 at 23:38, Andy Blunden wrote: > > > This is not a one-off event, Huw. I writing his PhD Dissertation on the > > philosophy of Nature of Democritus and Epicurus he was taking a position > > opposite to that of Hegel. The dissertation was published in 1841 when > Marx > > was aged 22. He credits Feuerbach with the impulse to take a stronger > > materialist line against Hegel with the publication of the Essence of > > Christianity in 1841. His notes on Hegel's Philosophy of Right (1843) > show > > that he was trying to take a dismissive attitude to Hegel, and it is only > > in the Theses on Feuerbach and The German Ideology of 1845 where the > > outlines of Marx's distinctive critique of Hegel are clearly present, as > > David notes, in the form of a critique of Feuerbach. It is reasonable to > > suppose that he was working out this position at the time he wrote the > 1844 > > Manuscripts. However, he is still working on how to use Hegel as he > writes > > his Political Economy material in 1857-58, after which his position is > > pretty settled. However, his turn to Hegel in 1881 to understand > calculus, > > only 2 years before his death, demonstrate that this was an unfinished > task. > > > > Andy > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Andy Blunden > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > On 26/11/2016 2:58 AM, Huw Lloyd wrote: > > > >> ... > >> > >> Interesting too to consider Marx's mode of analysis, which pertains to > >> something I'm currently drafting. Does anyone know when Marx > specifically > >> studied and re-fashioned Hegel's dialectic? > >> > >> Best, > >> Huw > >> > >> > >> > > > From mcole@ucsd.edu Sun Nov 27 11:47:01 2016 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2016 11:47:01 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <5753689B-395F-4239-B435-58A40CAC2526@gmail.com> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com> <582e7283.84cf620a.c9f5a.302f@mx.google.com> <56BA469E-D1C3-4924-8C7F-F976876DEE9E@gmail.com> <583060c1.098d620a.b4db8.5e32@mx.google.com> Message-ID: The subsequent trail of message showed that it is rarely too late to pick up a thread of the conversation and have sometime interesting and informative come of it, Huw. In reading through the string of messages on this topic including the earlier part of thread, I come away reinforced by the idea that the problems associated with current STEM-accountability regimes are a continuation and intensification of trends in education with a very long history. As Phillip got us to note, JS Mill made similar points regarding education (in his case of the British elites/men, but some key ideas seem generalizable). Still, something about the past couple of decades, perhaps associated with the intensification and globalization of capitalist modes of production, seems qualitatively more draconian. And all indications are that matters are in the process of worsening, not improving. I was hoping that participants could come up with counter-examples: schools where routinely the teaching of STEM subjects was integrated into a general curriculum and where successful, more inclusive participation in STEM subjects could result. In this I was disappointed. Ed provided Summerhill and a variety of small, elite, school situations. We did not hear from anyone associated with the dialogical education advocates who once participated in such discussions. I think I offered up the school that is the subject of a book by Barbara Rogoff and colleagues (From Wikipedia - *Learning Together: Children and Adults in a School Community [Oxford press, 2002]*, co-authored with teachers Carolyn Turkanis and Leslee Bartlett, profiled Salt Lake City's "Open Classroom," a parent-cooperative education program that is now a K-8 charter school. Over the US Thanksgiving holiday, reading your various thoughts and chatting with my grandchildren, I came across a case which seemed to fit Margaret and Carrie's notions of expanded goals for stem education, and education in general. My two grandchildren are going/went to a very elite school, the Lab School at the U of C Chicago. At dinner they started to talk about school and favorite teachers. Both identified one teacher who they thought was exceptional and for the same reason. "He respects kids. He always listens to them and takes them seriously." I am sure there are other fine teachers at the school, which is a pressure cooker of academic achievement and the attainment of yet more privilege. But institutionalized universal education, as Mills laments in his elitest and individualistic way (he is focused on Oxbridge), does not appear organized to make such teachers and such classrooms ubiquitous. Its pragmatic social reproduction functions focused on economics and state power, associated with its sorting function, appear to mitigate strong against any significant re-mediation. So my example serves mostly as an exception that proves the rule, perhaps. I keep thinking about Lorena, who as Margaret and Carrie show us, came* to believe that she had become a bad person?disobedient and disrespectful?in the eyes of her teacher. * Very painful stuff. STEM reform as an iatrogenic disease. Question for those who know: How are reforms based on the sorts of principles espoused by Davydov, Elkonin, and other cultural-historical pedagogs doing in Russia these days? My impression is that they struggle for recognition and acceptance. But I could easily be wrong. mike PS- Huw-- I have not read Clive's *Civilization *and it does not appear rapidly obtainable so could not appreciate your reference to Mill and Clive. Results of an American public school education. On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 6:01 PM, Huw Lloyd wrote: > The marketable "skill" is "good behaviour in conjunction with some > operational knowledge". Even in technology-oriented companies, creativity > and new knowledge are often unwelcome intruders into a social-political > situation (see for example Allen's 1977 text, Managing the Flow of > Technology). There are many vested interests into the status-quo. > Creativity in whatever sport, is usually against the grain. And then, of > course, we have all these qualifications which repel creativity through > strict enforcement of stupid behaviour. > > Not sure whether I'm waking up a closing thread here, so my thanks to > Margaret for discussing the paper. > > Best, > Huw > > On 20 November 2016 at 03:34, David Kellogg wrote: > > > Sorry, I've lost the plot. That is, I don't see the connection between > the > > kind of educational neoliberalism that is being discussed in the article > > (that which is based on measurable results, on academic tracking, on > > promising goodies in return for grades and grades in return for > schoolwork) > > and the kind of political and economic neoliberalism that is being > > discussed by Cornel. It seems to me that the policies that Margaret and > > Carrie are discussing in this paper were not (politically) liberal, nor > > were they new: they were taken over by Arne Duncan from the Bush > > administration, and the Bush administration got them, via Clinton, from > > good old fashioned "Back to Basics" backlash in the UK. So the roots are > > Toryism and not liberalism. > > > > I suppose you can argue that there is some kind of implicit analogy > between > > education and neoliberal economics: school is supposed to be some kind of > > neoliberal "level playing field" where children compete like businessmen, > > grades are "cultural capital", classes are investment opportunities, > > assessment portfolios are investment portfolios, etc. This analogy is > > little more than a way of whipping up interest among principals, > teachers, > > and even students (and as such I am not sure I am against it, since I > don't > > see anything wrong with working class kids taking an interest in the > > getting of goodies through study). It's certainly not a good description > of > > what is happening in schools: These businessmen produce no commodities, > the > > grades are neither exchangeable or consumable; there is no such thing as > > credit or interest in this economy, and assets evaporate upon graduation > > instead of maturing. > > > > I think that the word "reform" is actually more important in Margaret and > > Carrie's title than "neoliberal": a "reform" is usually, on the lips of > > government bureaucracy, a euphemism for backlash, and the policies being > > described are part of a more general ideological backlash against > Deweyism > > and progressive education: an anti-liberal reaction rather than a > > neo-liberal reform. "Neoliberalism", taken literally, would imply that > the > > schools really are in the marketable skills business, and I don't see > much > > evidence for that in the study. Am I missing something? > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 1:24 AM, wrote: > > > > > Margaret, Carrie, Phillip, Henry, Cornell, > > > > > > A central and key theme of this month?s article is neoliberalism in all > > > its guises. > > > In my imaginary response i am addressing the authors of the paper and > > > Cornell who addresses neoliberalism, and Phillip, who shared Cornell?s > > > article and Henry who heard Cornell offer a way to mediate our crises. > > > The paper is about teaching STEM and the neoliberal agenda that ignores > > > the plight of those who suffer. > > > Cornell says the answer is (democratic soulcraft). At the heart of this > > > soulcraft is truth telling of the reality of suffering. > > > > > > In order to constitute or institute a (new) order a more pro/gressive > > > order it seems suffering must be the key factor. > > > > > > The notion of ivory towers and their responses to suffering seems > > central. > > > I also want to explore the theme of (play) in relation to suffering. > > > > > > One exemplar: > > > There is a Buddhist who organizes gatherings where food is prepared and > > > presented at the gatherings (for the homeless). Musical instruments are > > > also brought and dancing proceeds. > > > Everyone participates and this is key: You cannot tell who are the > > > homeless and who are the people who prepared the food. They are > sharing a > > > common (new) experience that is profoundly moving and creates a sense > of > > > well-being. > > > This Buddhist practise is exemplary as a response to our current > > > contemporary historical moment. It is truth telling and democratic > > > soulcraft and PLAY. (each in the other). > > > It is one way of answering Margaret, Carrie, Cornell, Phillip, and > Henry. > > > This Buddhist act or practice is (crafting) an answer that speaks to > > > suffering. > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > From: HENRY SHONERD > > > Sent: November 18, 2016 7:15 PM > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > > > Thank you, Phillip. > > > "For us in these times, to even have hope is too abstract, too > detached, > > > too spectatorial. Instead we must be a hope, a participant and a force > > for > > > good as we face this catastrophe.? > > > That?s my favorite part. > > > Henry > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 18, 2016, at 3:52 PM, White, Phillip < > > Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > well, this is what Cornel West has to say: > > > > > > > > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election > > > > > > > > [https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/aae8946d80dac457aa8b6af3f9a9fd > > > 5acc6b4acb/0_662_5150_3090/master/5150.jpg?w=1200&h=140& > > > q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=crop&bm=normal&ba=bottom%2Cleft&blend64= > > > aHR0cHM6Ly91cGxvYWRzLmd1aW0uY28udWsvMjAxNi8wNS8yNS9vdmVybGF5 > > > LWxvZ28tMTIwMC05MF9vcHQucG5n&s=4cbd18b4943818f70304ff2cfdc3da2d]< > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> > > > > > > > > Goodbye, American neoliberalism. A new era is here | Cornel West< > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> > > > > www.theguardian.com > > > > Trump?s election was enabled by the policies that overlooked the > plight > > > of our most vulnerable citizens. We gird ourselves for a frightening > > future > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > phillip > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu edu > > > > > > on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > > > Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 8:16:01 PM > > > > To: Edward Wall; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > > > > > 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 > > edu > > > > > > > >>> on behalf of Huw Lloyd > > > >>> 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 > > > edu> > > > >>>> on behalf of White, Phillip > > > >>>> 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 > > > edu> > > > >>>> on behalf of David Kellogg > > > >>>> 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 > > > >>>> > > >>>>>>> edu> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > >>>> > > >>>>>>> edu> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of mike cole > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of 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 > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > >>>>> com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039 > > > >>>>>>>>> . > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also > attach > > it > > > >>> as > > > >>>>>>>>>>> PDF. > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> ??Good read! > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Alfredo > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Sun Nov 27 13:16:39 2016 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 08:16:39 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <5753689B-395F-4239-B435-58A40CAC2526@gmail.com> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com> <582e7283.84cf620a.c9f5a.302f@mx.google.com> <56BA469E-D1C3-4924-8C7F-F976876DEE9E@gmail.com> <583060c1.098d620a.b4db8.5e32@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Here in Australia they are introducing "coding across the curriculum". It is modelled on "language across the curriculum", which was a movement in England in the seventies where the language of instruction in maths, sciences, arts, etc. was considered as the object of curricular planning. So for example when we teach base non-decimal ways of counting, we teach them in the context of using everyday language (e.g. word problems with hours and minutes or months and weeks, which require some counting in non-decimal systems). So too with "coding across the curriculum". Kids are mostly taught using a programming language called "Stitch" developed by MIT, which uses non-numerical symbols for programming, and which can be used to do very different things in the classroom, irrespective of the discipline. You can use Stitch to create geometrical patterns, to taxonomize animals and plants, to make digital paintings, to write music, and so on. Cool stuff; kids love it. But once again you can see the emphasis is on integration of disciplinary knowledge "where the rubber meets the road"--that is, as everyday concepts. In a weird way, the result is something like the labor schools of the 1920s which Vygotsky and Blonsky and pedology generally participated in building. That is, you learn about higher concepts like circumference and radius in the context of learning to drill or operate a lathe. This seems to me a very different kind of integration from teaching with concepts in the 1930s, which is (I think) the basis of the Davydov "germ cell" approach (and which was certainly the basis of Vygotsky's ZPD measured in years). I think that Davydov would probably look at the Australian curriculum and say--you would like to teach coding across the curriculum? An excellent idea. Let us begin with binary number systems. Instead of starting at the interface, where the integration and unity of coding is really somewhat artificial and contrived and a product of market generalization, you instead start at the most abstract end, where it is genuine and real. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 6:47 AM, mike cole wrote: > The subsequent trail of message showed that it is rarely too late to pick > up a thread of the conversation and have sometime interesting and > informative come of it, Huw. > > In reading through the string of messages on this topic including the > earlier part of thread, I come away reinforced by the idea that the > problems associated with current STEM-accountability regimes are a > continuation and intensification of trends in education with a very long > history. > > As Phillip got us to note, JS Mill made similar points regarding education > (in his case of the British elites/men, but some key ideas seem > generalizable). Still, something about the past couple of decades, perhaps > associated with the intensification and globalization of capitalist modes > of production, seems qualitatively more draconian. And all indications are > that matters are in the process of worsening, not improving. > > I was hoping that participants could come up with counter-examples: schools > where routinely the teaching of STEM subjects was integrated into a general > curriculum and where successful, more inclusive participation in STEM > subjects could result. > In this I was disappointed. > > Ed provided Summerhill and a variety of small, elite, school situations. We > did not hear from anyone associated with the dialogical education advocates > who once participated in such discussions. I think I offered up the school > that is the subject of a book by Barbara Rogoff and colleagues (From > Wikipedia - *Learning Together: Children and Adults in a School Community > [Oxford press, 2002]*, co-authored with teachers Carolyn Turkanis and > Leslee Bartlett, profiled Salt Lake City's "Open Classroom," a > parent-cooperative education program that is now a K-8 charter school. > > Over the US Thanksgiving holiday, reading your various thoughts and > chatting with my grandchildren, I came across a case which seemed to fit > Margaret and Carrie's > notions of expanded goals for stem education, and education in general. My > two grandchildren are going/went to a very elite school, the Lab School at > the U of C Chicago. At dinner they started to talk about school and > favorite teachers. Both identified one teacher who they thought was > exceptional and for the same reason. > "He respects kids. He always listens to them and takes them seriously." > > I am sure there are other fine teachers at the school, which is a pressure > cooker of academic achievement and the attainment of yet more privilege. > But institutionalized universal education, as Mills laments in his elitest > and individualistic way (he is focused on Oxbridge), does not appear > organized to make such teachers and such classrooms ubiquitous. Its > pragmatic social reproduction functions focused on economics and state > power, associated with its sorting function, appear to mitigate strong > against any significant re-mediation. So my example serves mostly as an > exception that proves the rule, perhaps. > > I keep thinking about Lorena, who as Margaret and Carrie show us, came* to > believe that she had become a bad person?disobedient and disrespectful?in > the eyes of her teacher. * > > Very painful stuff. STEM reform as an iatrogenic disease. > > Question for those who know: How are reforms based on the sorts of > principles espoused by Davydov, Elkonin, and other cultural-historical > pedagogs doing in Russia these days? My impression is that they struggle > for recognition and acceptance. But I could easily be wrong. > > mike > > PS- Huw-- I have not read Clive's *Civilization *and it does not appear > rapidly obtainable so could not appreciate your reference to Mill and > Clive. Results of an American public school education. > > > > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 6:01 PM, Huw Lloyd > wrote: > > > The marketable "skill" is "good behaviour in conjunction with some > > operational knowledge". Even in technology-oriented companies, creativity > > and new knowledge are often unwelcome intruders into a social-political > > situation (see for example Allen's 1977 text, Managing the Flow of > > Technology). There are many vested interests into the status-quo. > > Creativity in whatever sport, is usually against the grain. And then, of > > course, we have all these qualifications which repel creativity through > > strict enforcement of stupid behaviour. > > > > Not sure whether I'm waking up a closing thread here, so my thanks to > > Margaret for discussing the paper. > > > > Best, > > Huw > > > > On 20 November 2016 at 03:34, David Kellogg > wrote: > > > > > Sorry, I've lost the plot. That is, I don't see the connection between > > the > > > kind of educational neoliberalism that is being discussed in the > article > > > (that which is based on measurable results, on academic tracking, on > > > promising goodies in return for grades and grades in return for > > schoolwork) > > > and the kind of political and economic neoliberalism that is being > > > discussed by Cornel. It seems to me that the policies that Margaret and > > > Carrie are discussing in this paper were not (politically) liberal, nor > > > were they new: they were taken over by Arne Duncan from the Bush > > > administration, and the Bush administration got them, via Clinton, from > > > good old fashioned "Back to Basics" backlash in the UK. So the roots > are > > > Toryism and not liberalism. > > > > > > I suppose you can argue that there is some kind of implicit analogy > > between > > > education and neoliberal economics: school is supposed to be some kind > of > > > neoliberal "level playing field" where children compete like > businessmen, > > > grades are "cultural capital", classes are investment opportunities, > > > assessment portfolios are investment portfolios, etc. This analogy is > > > little more than a way of whipping up interest among principals, > > teachers, > > > and even students (and as such I am not sure I am against it, since I > > don't > > > see anything wrong with working class kids taking an interest in the > > > getting of goodies through study). It's certainly not a good > description > > of > > > what is happening in schools: These businessmen produce no commodities, > > the > > > grades are neither exchangeable or consumable; there is no such thing > as > > > credit or interest in this economy, and assets evaporate upon > graduation > > > instead of maturing. > > > > > > I think that the word "reform" is actually more important in Margaret > and > > > Carrie's title than "neoliberal": a "reform" is usually, on the lips of > > > government bureaucracy, a euphemism for backlash, and the policies > being > > > described are part of a more general ideological backlash against > > Deweyism > > > and progressive education: an anti-liberal reaction rather than a > > > neo-liberal reform. "Neoliberalism", taken literally, would imply that > > the > > > schools really are in the marketable skills business, and I don't see > > much > > > evidence for that in the study. Am I missing something? > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 1:24 AM, wrote: > > > > > > > Margaret, Carrie, Phillip, Henry, Cornell, > > > > > > > > A central and key theme of this month?s article is neoliberalism in > all > > > > its guises. > > > > In my imaginary response i am addressing the authors of the paper and > > > > Cornell who addresses neoliberalism, and Phillip, who shared > Cornell?s > > > > article and Henry who heard Cornell offer a way to mediate our > crises. > > > > The paper is about teaching STEM and the neoliberal agenda that > ignores > > > > the plight of those who suffer. > > > > Cornell says the answer is (democratic soulcraft). At the heart of > this > > > > soulcraft is truth telling of the reality of suffering. > > > > > > > > In order to constitute or institute a (new) order a more pro/gressive > > > > order it seems suffering must be the key factor. > > > > > > > > The notion of ivory towers and their responses to suffering seems > > > central. > > > > I also want to explore the theme of (play) in relation to suffering. > > > > > > > > One exemplar: > > > > There is a Buddhist who organizes gatherings where food is prepared > and > > > > presented at the gatherings (for the homeless). Musical instruments > are > > > > also brought and dancing proceeds. > > > > Everyone participates and this is key: You cannot tell who are the > > > > homeless and who are the people who prepared the food. They are > > sharing a > > > > common (new) experience that is profoundly moving and creates a sense > > of > > > > well-being. > > > > This Buddhist practise is exemplary as a response to our current > > > > contemporary historical moment. It is truth telling and democratic > > > > soulcraft and PLAY. (each in the other). > > > > It is one way of answering Margaret, Carrie, Cornell, Phillip, and > > Henry. > > > > This Buddhist act or practice is (crafting) an answer that speaks to > > > > suffering. > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > > > From: HENRY SHONERD > > > > Sent: November 18, 2016 7:15 PM > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > > > > > Thank you, Phillip. > > > > "For us in these times, to even have hope is too abstract, too > > detached, > > > > too spectatorial. Instead we must be a hope, a participant and a > force > > > for > > > > good as we face this catastrophe.? > > > > That?s my favorite part. > > > > Henry > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 18, 2016, at 3:52 PM, White, Phillip < > > > Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > well, this is what Cornel West has to say: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election > > > > > > > > > > [https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/aae8946d80dac457aa8b6af3f9a9fd > > > > 5acc6b4acb/0_662_5150_3090/master/5150.jpg?w=1200&h=140& > > > > q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=crop&bm=normal&ba=bottom%2Cleft&blend64= > > > > aHR0cHM6Ly91cGxvYWRzLmd1aW0uY28udWsvMjAxNi8wNS8yNS9vdmVybGF5 > > > > LWxvZ28tMTIwMC05MF9vcHQucG5n&s=4cbd18b4943818f70304ff2cfdc3da2d]< > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> > > > > > > > > > > Goodbye, American neoliberalism. A new era is here | Cornel West< > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> > > > > > www.theguardian.com > > > > > Trump?s election was enabled by the policies that overlooked the > > plight > > > > of our most vulnerable citizens. We gird ourselves for a frightening > > > future > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > phillip > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > edu > > > > > > > > on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > > > > Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 8:16:01 PM > > > > > To: Edward Wall; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > edu > > > > > > > > > >>> on behalf of Huw Lloyd > > > > >>> 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 > > > > > edu> > > > > >>>> on behalf of White, Phillip > > > > >>>> 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 > > > > > edu> > > > > >>>> on behalf of David Kellogg > > > > >>>> 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 > > > > >>>> > > > >>>>>>> edu> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > >>>> > > > >>>>>>> edu> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of mike cole > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of 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 > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > >>>>> com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039 > > > > >>>>>>>>> . > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also > > attach > > > it > > > > >>> as > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> PDF. > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> ??Good read! > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Alfredo > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From hshonerd@gmail.com Sun Nov 27 13:16:21 2016 From: hshonerd@gmail.com (HENRY SHONERD) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2016 14:16:21 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <5753689B-395F-4239-B435-58A40CAC2526@gmail.com> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com> <582e7283.84cf620a.c9f5a.302f@mx.google.com> <56BA469E-D1C3-4924-8C7F-F976876DEE9E@gmail.com> <583060c1.098d620a.b4db8.5e32@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <6A7BF1D9-0F69-42C8-9AC7-641895F84B16@gmail.com> Mike, For Clive?s ?Civilization? try: https://archive.org/stream/civilizationessa00bell#page/152/mode/2up I got it by signing up for free on an on-line library and can keep the article for 15 days. H > On Nov 27, 2016, at 12:47 PM, mike cole wrote: > The subsequent trail of message showed that it is rarely too late to pick > up a thread of the conversation and have sometime interesting and > informative come of it, Huw. > > In reading through the string of messages on this topic including the > earlier part of thread, I come away reinforced by the idea that the > problems associated with current STEM-accountability regimes are a > continuation and intensification of trends in education with a very long > history. > > As Phillip got us to note, JS Mill made similar points regarding education > (in his case of the British elites/men, but some key ideas seem > generalizable). Still, something about the past couple of decades, perhaps > associated with the intensification and globalization of capitalist modes > of production, seems qualitatively more draconian. And all indications are > that matters are in the process of worsening, not improving. > > I was hoping that participants could come up with counter-examples: schools > where routinely the teaching of STEM subjects was integrated into a general > curriculum and where successful, more inclusive participation in STEM > subjects could result. > In this I was disappointed. > > Ed provided Summerhill and a variety of small, elite, school situations. We > did not hear from anyone associated with the dialogical education advocates > who once participated in such discussions. I think I offered up the school > that is the subject of a book by Barbara Rogoff and colleagues (From > Wikipedia - *Learning Together: Children and Adults in a School Community > [Oxford press, 2002]*, co-authored with teachers Carolyn Turkanis and > Leslee Bartlett, profiled Salt Lake City's "Open Classroom," a > parent-cooperative education program that is now a K-8 charter school. > > Over the US Thanksgiving holiday, reading your various thoughts and > chatting with my grandchildren, I came across a case which seemed to fit > Margaret and Carrie's > notions of expanded goals for stem education, and education in general. My > two grandchildren are going/went to a very elite school, the Lab School at > the U of C Chicago. At dinner they started to talk about school and > favorite teachers. Both identified one teacher who they thought was > exceptional and for the same reason. > "He respects kids. He always listens to them and takes them seriously." > > I am sure there are other fine teachers at the school, which is a pressure > cooker of academic achievement and the attainment of yet more privilege. > But institutionalized universal education, as Mills laments in his elitest > and individualistic way (he is focused on Oxbridge), does not appear > organized to make such teachers and such classrooms ubiquitous. Its > pragmatic social reproduction functions focused on economics and state > power, associated with its sorting function, appear to mitigate strong > against any significant re-mediation. So my example serves mostly as an > exception that proves the rule, perhaps. > > I keep thinking about Lorena, who as Margaret and Carrie show us, came* to > believe that she had become a bad person?disobedient and disrespectful?in > the eyes of her teacher. * > > Very painful stuff. STEM reform as an iatrogenic disease. > > Question for those who know: How are reforms based on the sorts of > principles espoused by Davydov, Elkonin, and other cultural-historical > pedagogs doing in Russia these days? My impression is that they struggle > for recognition and acceptance. But I could easily be wrong. > > mike > > PS- Huw-- I have not read Clive's *Civilization *and it does not appear > rapidly obtainable so could not appreciate your reference to Mill and > Clive. Results of an American public school education. > > > > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 6:01 PM, Huw Lloyd > wrote: > >> The marketable "skill" is "good behaviour in conjunction with some >> operational knowledge". Even in technology-oriented companies, creativity >> and new knowledge are often unwelcome intruders into a social-political >> situation (see for example Allen's 1977 text, Managing the Flow of >> Technology). There are many vested interests into the status-quo. >> Creativity in whatever sport, is usually against the grain. And then, of >> course, we have all these qualifications which repel creativity through >> strict enforcement of stupid behaviour. >> >> Not sure whether I'm waking up a closing thread here, so my thanks to >> Margaret for discussing the paper. >> >> Best, >> Huw >> >> On 20 November 2016 at 03:34, David Kellogg wrote: >> >>> Sorry, I've lost the plot. That is, I don't see the connection between >> the >>> kind of educational neoliberalism that is being discussed in the article >>> (that which is based on measurable results, on academic tracking, on >>> promising goodies in return for grades and grades in return for >> schoolwork) >>> and the kind of political and economic neoliberalism that is being >>> discussed by Cornel. It seems to me that the policies that Margaret and >>> Carrie are discussing in this paper were not (politically) liberal, nor >>> were they new: they were taken over by Arne Duncan from the Bush >>> administration, and the Bush administration got them, via Clinton, from >>> good old fashioned "Back to Basics" backlash in the UK. So the roots are >>> Toryism and not liberalism. >>> >>> I suppose you can argue that there is some kind of implicit analogy >> between >>> education and neoliberal economics: school is supposed to be some kind of >>> neoliberal "level playing field" where children compete like businessmen, >>> grades are "cultural capital", classes are investment opportunities, >>> assessment portfolios are investment portfolios, etc. This analogy is >>> little more than a way of whipping up interest among principals, >> teachers, >>> and even students (and as such I am not sure I am against it, since I >> don't >>> see anything wrong with working class kids taking an interest in the >>> getting of goodies through study). It's certainly not a good description >> of >>> what is happening in schools: These businessmen produce no commodities, >> the >>> grades are neither exchangeable or consumable; there is no such thing as >>> credit or interest in this economy, and assets evaporate upon graduation >>> instead of maturing. >>> >>> I think that the word "reform" is actually more important in Margaret and >>> Carrie's title than "neoliberal": a "reform" is usually, on the lips of >>> government bureaucracy, a euphemism for backlash, and the policies being >>> described are part of a more general ideological backlash against >> Deweyism >>> and progressive education: an anti-liberal reaction rather than a >>> neo-liberal reform. "Neoliberalism", taken literally, would imply that >> the >>> schools really are in the marketable skills business, and I don't see >> much >>> evidence for that in the study. Am I missing something? >>> >>> David Kellogg >>> Macquarie University >>> >>> On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 1:24 AM, wrote: >>> >>>> Margaret, Carrie, Phillip, Henry, Cornell, >>>> >>>> A central and key theme of this month?s article is neoliberalism in all >>>> its guises. >>>> In my imaginary response i am addressing the authors of the paper and >>>> Cornell who addresses neoliberalism, and Phillip, who shared Cornell?s >>>> article and Henry who heard Cornell offer a way to mediate our crises. >>>> The paper is about teaching STEM and the neoliberal agenda that ignores >>>> the plight of those who suffer. >>>> Cornell says the answer is (democratic soulcraft). At the heart of this >>>> soulcraft is truth telling of the reality of suffering. >>>> >>>> In order to constitute or institute a (new) order a more pro/gressive >>>> order it seems suffering must be the key factor. >>>> >>>> The notion of ivory towers and their responses to suffering seems >>> central. >>>> I also want to explore the theme of (play) in relation to suffering. >>>> >>>> One exemplar: >>>> There is a Buddhist who organizes gatherings where food is prepared and >>>> presented at the gatherings (for the homeless). Musical instruments are >>>> also brought and dancing proceeds. >>>> Everyone participates and this is key: You cannot tell who are the >>>> homeless and who are the people who prepared the food. They are >> sharing a >>>> common (new) experience that is profoundly moving and creates a sense >> of >>>> well-being. >>>> This Buddhist practise is exemplary as a response to our current >>>> contemporary historical moment. It is truth telling and democratic >>>> soulcraft and PLAY. (each in the other). >>>> It is one way of answering Margaret, Carrie, Cornell, Phillip, and >> Henry. >>>> This Buddhist act or practice is (crafting) an answer that speaks to >>>> suffering. >>>> >>>> >>>> Sent from my Windows 10 phone >>>> >>>> From: HENRY SHONERD >>>> Sent: November 18, 2016 7:15 PM >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started >>>> >>>> Thank you, Phillip. >>>> "For us in these times, to even have hope is too abstract, too >> detached, >>>> too spectatorial. Instead we must be a hope, a participant and a force >>> for >>>> good as we face this catastrophe.? >>>> That?s my favorite part. >>>> Henry >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Nov 18, 2016, at 3:52 PM, White, Phillip < >>> Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> well, this is what Cornel West has to say: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ >>>> american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election >>>>> >>>>> [https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/aae8946d80dac457aa8b6af3f9a9fd >>>> 5acc6b4acb/0_662_5150_3090/master/5150.jpg?w=1200&h=140& >>>> q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=crop&bm=normal&ba=bottom%2Cleft&blend64= >>>> aHR0cHM6Ly91cGxvYWRzLmd1aW0uY28udWsvMjAxNi8wNS8yNS9vdmVybGF5 >>>> LWxvZ28tMTIwMC05MF9vcHQucG5n&s=4cbd18b4943818f70304ff2cfdc3da2d]< >>>> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ >>>> american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> >>>>> >>>>> Goodbye, American neoliberalism. A new era is here | Cornel West< >>>> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ >>>> american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> >>>>> www.theguardian.com >>>>> Trump?s election was enabled by the policies that overlooked the >> plight >>>> of our most vulnerable citizens. We gird ourselves for a frightening >>> future >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> phillip >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ________________________________ >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > edu >>>> >>>> on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com >>>>> Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 8:16:01 PM >>>>> To: Edward Wall; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started >>>>> >>>>> 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 >> >> edu >>>>> >>>>>>> on behalf of Huw Lloyd >>>>>>> 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 >> >>> edu> >>>>>>>> on behalf of White, Phillip >>>>>>>> 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 >> >>> edu> >>>>>>>> on behalf of David Kellogg >>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> edu> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> edu> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of mike cole >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of 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 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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>>>>>>>> com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039 >>>>>>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also >> attach >>> it >>>>>>> as >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PDF. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ??Good read! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Alfredo >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> From Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu Sun Nov 27 13:43:21 2016 From: Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu (White, Phillip) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2016 21:43:21 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com> <582e7283.84cf620a.c9f5a.302f@mx.google.com> <56BA469E-D1C3-4924-8C7F-F976876DEE9E@gmail.com> <583060c1.098d620a.b4db8.5e32@mx.google.com> <5837afae.84cf620a.c9f5a.9686@mx.google.com> <1480054543337.68845@iped.uio.no> , Message-ID: surprised me, Huw, that Clive Bell wrote about civilisation. i only associate him with aesthetics in art - in fact, read his first book, Art, which i could barely slog through. he has, to me, that arch Edwardian English voice that has such an impeachable sense of surety that i'm always astonished by. of course, Trump has that self-same sense, without the intelligence or wit of an Edwardian. Bell's notion that art is somehow apart from time, context or culture is a platonic leap that i've never been able to comprehend. phillip ________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Huw Lloyd Sent: Saturday, November 26, 2016 3:33:02 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started Thanks Phillip, that put's Clive Bell's "Civilization" into more historical context. On 26 November 2016 at 00:18, White, Phillip wrote: > John Stuart Mill notes the "empty husks" of education prevalent at the > time (1836), that have come down through the ages. here's his solutions: > > > https://www.laits.utexas.edu/poltheory/jsmill/diss-disc/ > civilization/civilization.s06.html > > CIVILIZATION Section 6, John Stuart Mill, Civilization laits.utexas.edu/poltheory/jsmill/diss-disc/civilization/ > civilization.s06.html> > www.laits.utexas.edu > Civilization John Stuart Mill Section 6 [Improving British education] > These things must bide their time. But the other of the two great > desiderata, the regeneration ... > > > > > > dense, but illuminating one hundred and eighty years later. > > > phillip > > ________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Huw Lloyd > Sent: Friday, November 25, 2016 5:02:34 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > Thanks Andy. > > On 25 November 2016 at 23:38, Andy Blunden wrote: > > > This is not a one-off event, Huw. I writing his PhD Dissertation on the > > philosophy of Nature of Democritus and Epicurus he was taking a position > > opposite to that of Hegel. The dissertation was published in 1841 when > Marx > > was aged 22. He credits Feuerbach with the impulse to take a stronger > > materialist line against Hegel with the publication of the Essence of > > Christianity in 1841. His notes on Hegel's Philosophy of Right (1843) > show > > that he was trying to take a dismissive attitude to Hegel, and it is only > > in the Theses on Feuerbach and The German Ideology of 1845 where the > > outlines of Marx's distinctive critique of Hegel are clearly present, as > > David notes, in the form of a critique of Feuerbach. It is reasonable to > > suppose that he was working out this position at the time he wrote the > 1844 > > Manuscripts. However, he is still working on how to use Hegel as he > writes > > his Political Economy material in 1857-58, after which his position is > > pretty settled. However, his turn to Hegel in 1881 to understand > calculus, > > only 2 years before his death, demonstrate that this was an unfinished > task. > > > > Andy > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Andy Blunden > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > On 26/11/2016 2:58 AM, Huw Lloyd wrote: > > > >> ... > >> > >> Interesting too to consider Marx's mode of analysis, which pertains to > >> something I'm currently drafting. Does anyone know when Marx > specifically > >> studied and re-fashioned Hegel's dialectic? > >> > >> Best, > >> Huw > >> > >> > >> > > > From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Sun Nov 27 14:28:30 2016 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2016 22:28:30 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com> <582e7283.84cf620a.c9f5a.302f@mx.google.com> <56BA469E-D1C3-4924-8C7F-F976876DEE9E@gmail.com> <583060c1.098d620a.b4db8.5e32@mx.google.com> <5837afae.84cf620a.c9f5a.9686@mx.google.com> <1480054543337.68845@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: Hi Phillip, Bell makes similar distinctions to Mill, except where Mill focuses upon the cultural diffusion of universities, Bell looks to culture itself. Mill compares impoverished English universities of the time with (supposedly) enriched continental universities (Europe), Bell compares cultures, with specific interest in the carriers of the flame of civilization (more life of ideas rather than well-orderliness). The distinction that Bell draws is that the empirical nation of England (these are not my nation categories!) forces anyone with a creative passion towards individuation from his peers, which is in contrast towards a more harmonious existence in cultured environments. Best, Huw On 27 November 2016 at 21:43, White, Phillip wrote: > surprised me, Huw, that Clive Bell wrote about civilisation. i only > associate him with aesthetics in art - in fact, read his first book, Art, > which i could barely slog through. he has, to me, that arch Edwardian > English voice that has such an impeachable sense of surety that i'm always > astonished by. of course, Trump has that self-same sense, without the > intelligence or wit of an Edwardian. Bell's notion that art is somehow > apart from time, context or culture is a platonic leap that i've never been > able to comprehend. > > > phillip > > ________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Huw Lloyd > Sent: Saturday, November 26, 2016 3:33:02 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > Thanks Phillip, that put's Clive Bell's "Civilization" into more historical > context. > > On 26 November 2016 at 00:18, White, Phillip > wrote: > > > John Stuart Mill notes the "empty husks" of education prevalent at the > > time (1836), that have come down through the ages. here's his solutions: > > > > > > https://www.laits.utexas.edu/poltheory/jsmill/diss-disc/ > > civilization/civilization.s06.html > > > > CIVILIZATION Section 6, John Stuart Mill, Civilization > laits.utexas.edu/poltheory/jsmill/diss-disc/civilization/ > > civilization.s06.html> > > www.laits.utexas.edu > > Civilization John Stuart Mill Section 6 [Improving British education] > > These things must bide their time. But the other of the two great > > desiderata, the regeneration ... > > > > > > > > > > > > dense, but illuminating one hundred and eighty years later. > > > > > > phillip > > > > ________________________________ > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > on behalf of Huw Lloyd > > Sent: Friday, November 25, 2016 5:02:34 PM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > Thanks Andy. > > > > On 25 November 2016 at 23:38, Andy Blunden wrote: > > > > > This is not a one-off event, Huw. I writing his PhD Dissertation on the > > > philosophy of Nature of Democritus and Epicurus he was taking a > position > > > opposite to that of Hegel. The dissertation was published in 1841 when > > Marx > > > was aged 22. He credits Feuerbach with the impulse to take a stronger > > > materialist line against Hegel with the publication of the Essence of > > > Christianity in 1841. His notes on Hegel's Philosophy of Right (1843) > > show > > > that he was trying to take a dismissive attitude to Hegel, and it is > only > > > in the Theses on Feuerbach and The German Ideology of 1845 where the > > > outlines of Marx's distinctive critique of Hegel are clearly present, > as > > > David notes, in the form of a critique of Feuerbach. It is reasonable > to > > > suppose that he was working out this position at the time he wrote the > > 1844 > > > Manuscripts. However, he is still working on how to use Hegel as he > > writes > > > his Political Economy material in 1857-58, after which his position is > > > pretty settled. However, his turn to Hegel in 1881 to understand > > calculus, > > > only 2 years before his death, demonstrate that this was an unfinished > > task. > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Andy Blunden > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > > On 26/11/2016 2:58 AM, Huw Lloyd wrote: > > > > > >> ... > > >> > > >> Interesting too to consider Marx's mode of analysis, which pertains to > > >> something I'm currently drafting. Does anyone know when Marx > > specifically > > >> studied and re-fashioned Hegel's dialectic? > > >> > > >> Best, > > >> Huw > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Sun Nov 27 14:41:58 2016 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2016 22:41:58 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <5753689B-395F-4239-B435-58A40CAC2526@gmail.com> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com> <582e7283.84cf620a.c9f5a.302f@mx.google.com> <56BA469E-D1C3-4924-8C7F-F976876DEE9E@gmail.com> <583060c1.098d620a.b4db8.5e32@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Hi David, Davydov's approach can be applied to any content. The focus is upon establishing a unitary conception of relations rather than attributes. Best, Huw On 27 November 2016 at 21:16, David Kellogg wrote: > Here in Australia they are introducing "coding across the curriculum". It > is modelled on "language across the curriculum", which was a movement in > England in the seventies where the language of instruction in maths, > sciences, arts, etc. was considered as the object of curricular planning. > So for example when we teach base non-decimal ways of counting, we teach > them in the context of using everyday language (e.g. word problems with > hours and minutes or months and weeks, which require some counting in > non-decimal systems). So too with "coding across the curriculum". Kids are > mostly taught using a programming language called "Stitch" developed by > MIT, which uses non-numerical symbols for programming, and which can be > used to do very different things in the classroom, irrespective of the > discipline. You can use Stitch to create geometrical patterns, to > taxonomize animals and plants, to make digital paintings, to write > music, and so on. Cool stuff; kids love it. > > But once again you can see the emphasis is on integration of disciplinary > knowledge "where the rubber meets the road"--that is, as everyday concepts. > In a weird way, the result is something like the labor schools of the 1920s > which Vygotsky and Blonsky and pedology generally participated in building. > That is, you learn about higher concepts like circumference and radius in > the context of learning to drill or operate a lathe. This seems to me a > very different kind of integration from teaching with concepts in the > 1930s, which is (I think) the basis of the Davydov "germ cell" approach > (and which was certainly the basis of Vygotsky's ZPD measured in years). I > think that Davydov would probably look at the Australian curriculum and > say--you would like to teach coding across the curriculum? An excellent > idea. Let us begin with binary number systems. Instead of starting at the > interface, where the integration and unity of coding is really somewhat > artificial and contrived and a product of market generalization, you > instead start at the most abstract end, where it is genuine and real. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 6:47 AM, mike cole wrote: > > > The subsequent trail of message showed that it is rarely too late to pick > > up a thread of the conversation and have sometime interesting and > > informative come of it, Huw. > > > > In reading through the string of messages on this topic including the > > earlier part of thread, I come away reinforced by the idea that the > > problems associated with current STEM-accountability regimes are a > > continuation and intensification of trends in education with a very long > > history. > > > > As Phillip got us to note, JS Mill made similar points regarding > education > > (in his case of the British elites/men, but some key ideas seem > > generalizable). Still, something about the past couple of decades, > perhaps > > associated with the intensification and globalization of capitalist modes > > of production, seems qualitatively more draconian. And all indications > are > > that matters are in the process of worsening, not improving. > > > > I was hoping that participants could come up with counter-examples: > schools > > where routinely the teaching of STEM subjects was integrated into a > general > > curriculum and where successful, more inclusive participation in STEM > > subjects could result. > > In this I was disappointed. > > > > Ed provided Summerhill and a variety of small, elite, school situations. > We > > did not hear from anyone associated with the dialogical education > advocates > > who once participated in such discussions. I think I offered up the > school > > that is the subject of a book by Barbara Rogoff and colleagues (From > > Wikipedia - *Learning Together: Children and Adults in a School Community > > [Oxford press, 2002]*, co-authored with teachers Carolyn Turkanis and > > Leslee Bartlett, profiled Salt Lake City's "Open Classroom," a > > parent-cooperative education program that is now a K-8 charter school. > > > > Over the US Thanksgiving holiday, reading your various thoughts and > > chatting with my grandchildren, I came across a case which seemed to fit > > Margaret and Carrie's > > notions of expanded goals for stem education, and education in general. > My > > two grandchildren are going/went to a very elite school, the Lab School > at > > the U of C Chicago. At dinner they started to talk about school and > > favorite teachers. Both identified one teacher who they thought was > > exceptional and for the same reason. > > "He respects kids. He always listens to them and takes them seriously." > > > > I am sure there are other fine teachers at the school, which is a > pressure > > cooker of academic achievement and the attainment of yet more privilege. > > But institutionalized universal education, as Mills laments in his > elitest > > and individualistic way (he is focused on Oxbridge), does not appear > > organized to make such teachers and such classrooms ubiquitous. Its > > pragmatic social reproduction functions focused on economics and state > > power, associated with its sorting function, appear to mitigate strong > > against any significant re-mediation. So my example serves mostly as an > > exception that proves the rule, perhaps. > > > > I keep thinking about Lorena, who as Margaret and Carrie show us, came* > to > > believe that she had become a bad person?disobedient and disrespectful?in > > the eyes of her teacher. * > > > > Very painful stuff. STEM reform as an iatrogenic disease. > > > > Question for those who know: How are reforms based on the sorts of > > principles espoused by Davydov, Elkonin, and other cultural-historical > > pedagogs doing in Russia these days? My impression is that they struggle > > for recognition and acceptance. But I could easily be wrong. > > > > mike > > > > PS- Huw-- I have not read Clive's *Civilization *and it does not appear > > rapidly obtainable so could not appreciate your reference to Mill and > > Clive. Results of an American public school education. > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 6:01 PM, Huw Lloyd > > wrote: > > > > > The marketable "skill" is "good behaviour in conjunction with some > > > operational knowledge". Even in technology-oriented companies, > creativity > > > and new knowledge are often unwelcome intruders into a social-political > > > situation (see for example Allen's 1977 text, Managing the Flow of > > > Technology). There are many vested interests into the status-quo. > > > Creativity in whatever sport, is usually against the grain. And then, > of > > > course, we have all these qualifications which repel creativity through > > > strict enforcement of stupid behaviour. > > > > > > Not sure whether I'm waking up a closing thread here, so my thanks to > > > Margaret for discussing the paper. > > > > > > Best, > > > Huw > > > > > > On 20 November 2016 at 03:34, David Kellogg > > wrote: > > > > > > > Sorry, I've lost the plot. That is, I don't see the connection > between > > > the > > > > kind of educational neoliberalism that is being discussed in the > > article > > > > (that which is based on measurable results, on academic tracking, on > > > > promising goodies in return for grades and grades in return for > > > schoolwork) > > > > and the kind of political and economic neoliberalism that is being > > > > discussed by Cornel. It seems to me that the policies that Margaret > and > > > > Carrie are discussing in this paper were not (politically) liberal, > nor > > > > were they new: they were taken over by Arne Duncan from the Bush > > > > administration, and the Bush administration got them, via Clinton, > from > > > > good old fashioned "Back to Basics" backlash in the UK. So the roots > > are > > > > Toryism and not liberalism. > > > > > > > > I suppose you can argue that there is some kind of implicit analogy > > > between > > > > education and neoliberal economics: school is supposed to be some > kind > > of > > > > neoliberal "level playing field" where children compete like > > businessmen, > > > > grades are "cultural capital", classes are investment opportunities, > > > > assessment portfolios are investment portfolios, etc. This analogy is > > > > little more than a way of whipping up interest among principals, > > > teachers, > > > > and even students (and as such I am not sure I am against it, since I > > > don't > > > > see anything wrong with working class kids taking an interest in the > > > > getting of goodies through study). It's certainly not a good > > description > > > of > > > > what is happening in schools: These businessmen produce no > commodities, > > > the > > > > grades are neither exchangeable or consumable; there is no such thing > > as > > > > credit or interest in this economy, and assets evaporate upon > > graduation > > > > instead of maturing. > > > > > > > > I think that the word "reform" is actually more important in Margaret > > and > > > > Carrie's title than "neoliberal": a "reform" is usually, on the lips > of > > > > government bureaucracy, a euphemism for backlash, and the policies > > being > > > > described are part of a more general ideological backlash against > > > Deweyism > > > > and progressive education: an anti-liberal reaction rather than a > > > > neo-liberal reform. "Neoliberalism", taken literally, would imply > that > > > the > > > > schools really are in the marketable skills business, and I don't see > > > much > > > > evidence for that in the study. Am I missing something? > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 1:24 AM, wrote: > > > > > > > > > Margaret, Carrie, Phillip, Henry, Cornell, > > > > > > > > > > A central and key theme of this month?s article is neoliberalism in > > all > > > > > its guises. > > > > > In my imaginary response i am addressing the authors of the paper > and > > > > > Cornell who addresses neoliberalism, and Phillip, who shared > > Cornell?s > > > > > article and Henry who heard Cornell offer a way to mediate our > > crises. > > > > > The paper is about teaching STEM and the neoliberal agenda that > > ignores > > > > > the plight of those who suffer. > > > > > Cornell says the answer is (democratic soulcraft). At the heart of > > this > > > > > soulcraft is truth telling of the reality of suffering. > > > > > > > > > > In order to constitute or institute a (new) order a more > pro/gressive > > > > > order it seems suffering must be the key factor. > > > > > > > > > > The notion of ivory towers and their responses to suffering seems > > > > central. > > > > > I also want to explore the theme of (play) in relation to > suffering. > > > > > > > > > > One exemplar: > > > > > There is a Buddhist who organizes gatherings where food is prepared > > and > > > > > presented at the gatherings (for the homeless). Musical instruments > > are > > > > > also brought and dancing proceeds. > > > > > Everyone participates and this is key: You cannot tell who are the > > > > > homeless and who are the people who prepared the food. They are > > > sharing a > > > > > common (new) experience that is profoundly moving and creates a > sense > > > of > > > > > well-being. > > > > > This Buddhist practise is exemplary as a response to our current > > > > > contemporary historical moment. It is truth telling and democratic > > > > > soulcraft and PLAY. (each in the other). > > > > > It is one way of answering Margaret, Carrie, Cornell, Phillip, and > > > Henry. > > > > > This Buddhist act or practice is (crafting) an answer that speaks > to > > > > > suffering. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > > > > > From: HENRY SHONERD > > > > > Sent: November 18, 2016 7:15 PM > > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > > > > > > > Thank you, Phillip. > > > > > "For us in these times, to even have hope is too abstract, too > > > detached, > > > > > too spectatorial. Instead we must be a hope, a participant and a > > force > > > > for > > > > > good as we face this catastrophe.? > > > > > That?s my favorite part. > > > > > Henry > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 18, 2016, at 3:52 PM, White, Phillip < > > > > Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > well, this is what Cornel West has to say: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election > > > > > > > > > > > > [https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/aae8946d80dac457aa8b6af3f9a9fd > > > > > 5acc6b4acb/0_662_5150_3090/master/5150.jpg?w=1200&h=140& > > > > > q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=crop&bm=normal&ba=bottom% > 2Cleft&blend64= > > > > > aHR0cHM6Ly91cGxvYWRzLmd1aW0uY28udWsvMjAxNi8wNS8yNS9vdmVybGF5 > > > > > LWxvZ28tMTIwMC05MF9vcHQucG5n&s=4cbd18b4943818f70304ff2cfdc3da2d]< > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> > > > > > > > > > > > > Goodbye, American neoliberalism. A new era is here | Cornel West< > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> > > > > > > www.theguardian.com > > > > > > Trump?s election was enabled by the policies that overlooked the > > > plight > > > > > of our most vulnerable citizens. We gird ourselves for a > frightening > > > > future > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > phillip > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > edu > > > > > > > > > > on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 8:16:01 PM > > > > > > To: Edward Wall; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion > Re-started > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > edu > > > > > > > > > > > >>> on behalf of Huw Lloyd > > > > > >>> 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 > > > > > > > edu> > > > > > >>>> on behalf of White, Phillip > > > > > >>>> 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 > > > > > > > edu> > > > > > >>>> on behalf of David Kellogg > > > > > >>>> 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 > > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>>>>> edu> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>>>>> edu> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of mike cole > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > >>>>> com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039 > > > > > >>>>>>>>> . > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also > > > attach > > > > it > > > > > >>> as > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> PDF. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> ??Good read! > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Alfredo > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From ulvi.icil@gmail.com Sun Nov 27 14:47:26 2016 From: ulvi.icil@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?VWx2aSDEsMOnaWw=?=) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 00:47:26 +0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] Fidel Castro Ruz, and human development let's say Message-ID: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9N1LGKNRzXs From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Sun Nov 27 14:55:13 2016 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2016 22:55:13 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: <5839bc62.4bae630a.e18da.8244@mx.google.com> References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com> <582e7283.84cf620a.c9f5a.302f@mx.google.com> <56BA469E-D1C3-4924-8C7F-F976876DEE9E@gmail.com> <583060c1.098d620a.b4db8.5e32@mx.google.com> <5837afae.84cf620a.c9f5a.9686@mx.google.com> <1480054543337.68845@iped.uio.no> <5839bc62.4bae630a.e18da.8244@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Hi Larry, If community can coexist with creativity, then we might say it has the rudiments of a culture. I am not sure what passivity (acceptance?) will achieve outside of this, i.e. within a bureaucracy. Best, Huw On 26 November 2016 at 16:46, wrote: > I sent a youtube video of Susan Hoff exploring passivity within belonging > to constituted (instituted?) worlds. > > John William Miller believed: > If one does not begin in community, philosophy will never arrive at > community and so will not be able to revise or improve any human community. > Miller?s relational back and forth pairs the human act to prior community > (common beginning). > This seems to follow Susan Hoff?s theme. However, Susan adds the focus on > passivity (let it be) as a necessary relation to activity (taking to heart). > A spiral theme of loose threads relationally intertwined in the back and > forth. > May generate a quality of education which has withdrawn from public > discourse as liberalism has been ascendant. > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: White, Phillip > Sent: November 25, 2016 4:20 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > John Stuart Mill notes the "empty husks" of education prevalent at the > time (1836), that have come down through the ages. here's his solutions: > > > https://www.laits.utexas.edu/poltheory/jsmill/diss-disc/ > civilization/civilization.s06.html > > CIVILIZATION Section 6, John Stuart Mill, Civilization laits.utexas.edu/poltheory/jsmill/diss-disc/civilization/ > civilization.s06.html> > www.laits.utexas.edu > Civilization John Stuart Mill Section 6 [Improving British education] > These things must bide their time. But the other of the two great > desiderata, the regeneration ... > > > > > > dense, but illuminating one hundred and eighty years later. > > > phillip > > ________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > on behalf of Huw Lloyd > Sent: Friday, November 25, 2016 5:02:34 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > Thanks Andy. > > On 25 November 2016 at 23:38, Andy Blunden wrote: > > > This is not a one-off event, Huw. I writing his PhD Dissertation on the > > philosophy of Nature of Democritus and Epicurus he was taking a position > > opposite to that of Hegel. The dissertation was published in 1841 when > Marx > > was aged 22. He credits Feuerbach with the impulse to take a stronger > > materialist line against Hegel with the publication of the Essence of > > Christianity in 1841. His notes on Hegel's Philosophy of Right (1843) > show > > that he was trying to take a dismissive attitude to Hegel, and it is only > > in the Theses on Feuerbach and The German Ideology of 1845 where the > > outlines of Marx's distinctive critique of Hegel are clearly present, as > > David notes, in the form of a critique of Feuerbach. It is reasonable to > > suppose that he was working out this position at the time he wrote the > 1844 > > Manuscripts. However, he is still working on how to use Hegel as he > writes > > his Political Economy material in 1857-58, after which his position is > > pretty settled. However, his turn to Hegel in 1881 to understand > calculus, > > only 2 years before his death, demonstrate that this was an unfinished > task. > > > > Andy > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Andy Blunden > > http://home.mira.net/~andy > > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making > > On 26/11/2016 2:58 AM, Huw Lloyd wrote: > > > >> ... > >> > >> Interesting too to consider Marx's mode of analysis, which pertains to > >> something I'm currently drafting. Does anyone know when Marx > specifically > >> studied and re-fashioned Hegel's dialectic? > >> > >> Best, > >> Huw > >> > >> > >> > > > > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Sun Nov 27 15:15:31 2016 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 10:15:31 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <5753689B-395F-4239-B435-58A40CAC2526@gmail.com> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com> <582e7283.84cf620a.c9f5a.302f@mx.google.com> <56BA469E-D1C3-4924-8C7F-F976876DEE9E@gmail.com> <583060c1.098d620a.b4db8.5e32@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Well, I understood that, Huw. But I think there are really TWO different ways of applying an approach to any content. One way I would call "multi-disciplinary". You take language or coding and you just treat it as a technology. "Kids--today we are going to see how we use language/coding in art/music/math/science." But the second way I would call "trans-disciplinary". You take language or coding and you treat it as a theme--that is, a concept, which enables the study of any particular content area (any content area can be studied as meaning and any content area can be studied as information). Take for example non-decimal number systems. We COULD approach the content area in a multi-disciplinary way, and study minutes and hours, or weeks and months, both of which depend on non-decimal counting systems. But we could ALSO approach the content area in a transdisciplinary way, which involves establishing a unit of analysis which is at one and the same time minimally complex and maximally simple (that is, it contains morphological analogues of the phenomenon we want to investigate but it is also small enough to fit in the mouth and the mind of a child). For non-decimal numbers systems, it seems to me that binary counting systems fit the bill. That is, they contain morphological analogues of any non-decimal number system (digital information, place value, carrying digits, etc.) but they also are small enough to fit in the mouth and the mind of a child (because actually systems of polarity, like yes/no questions, are essentially binary counting systems). And--what's more--I think that binary counting systems are also a good unit of analysis for coding, although that's probably something you know a whole lot more about than me or anybody else on this list for that matter. David Kellogg Macquarie University On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 9:41 AM, Huw Lloyd wrote: > Hi David, > > Davydov's approach can be applied to any content. The focus is upon > establishing a unitary conception of relations rather than attributes. > > Best, > Huw > > On 27 November 2016 at 21:16, David Kellogg wrote: > > > Here in Australia they are introducing "coding across the curriculum". It > > is modelled on "language across the curriculum", which was a movement in > > England in the seventies where the language of instruction in maths, > > sciences, arts, etc. was considered as the object of curricular planning. > > So for example when we teach base non-decimal ways of counting, we teach > > them in the context of using everyday language (e.g. word problems with > > hours and minutes or months and weeks, which require some counting in > > non-decimal systems). So too with "coding across the curriculum". Kids > are > > mostly taught using a programming language called "Stitch" developed by > > MIT, which uses non-numerical symbols for programming, and which can be > > used to do very different things in the classroom, irrespective of the > > discipline. You can use Stitch to create geometrical patterns, to > > taxonomize animals and plants, to make digital paintings, to write > > music, and so on. Cool stuff; kids love it. > > > > But once again you can see the emphasis is on integration of disciplinary > > knowledge "where the rubber meets the road"--that is, as everyday > concepts. > > In a weird way, the result is something like the labor schools of the > 1920s > > which Vygotsky and Blonsky and pedology generally participated in > building. > > That is, you learn about higher concepts like circumference and radius in > > the context of learning to drill or operate a lathe. This seems to me a > > very different kind of integration from teaching with concepts in the > > 1930s, which is (I think) the basis of the Davydov "germ cell" approach > > (and which was certainly the basis of Vygotsky's ZPD measured in years). > I > > think that Davydov would probably look at the Australian curriculum and > > say--you would like to teach coding across the curriculum? An excellent > > idea. Let us begin with binary number systems. Instead of starting at the > > interface, where the integration and unity of coding is really somewhat > > artificial and contrived and a product of market generalization, you > > instead start at the most abstract end, where it is genuine and real. > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 6:47 AM, mike cole wrote: > > > > > The subsequent trail of message showed that it is rarely too late to > pick > > > up a thread of the conversation and have sometime interesting and > > > informative come of it, Huw. > > > > > > In reading through the string of messages on this topic including the > > > earlier part of thread, I come away reinforced by the idea that the > > > problems associated with current STEM-accountability regimes are a > > > continuation and intensification of trends in education with a very > long > > > history. > > > > > > As Phillip got us to note, JS Mill made similar points regarding > > education > > > (in his case of the British elites/men, but some key ideas seem > > > generalizable). Still, something about the past couple of decades, > > perhaps > > > associated with the intensification and globalization of capitalist > modes > > > of production, seems qualitatively more draconian. And all indications > > are > > > that matters are in the process of worsening, not improving. > > > > > > I was hoping that participants could come up with counter-examples: > > schools > > > where routinely the teaching of STEM subjects was integrated into a > > general > > > curriculum and where successful, more inclusive participation in STEM > > > subjects could result. > > > In this I was disappointed. > > > > > > Ed provided Summerhill and a variety of small, elite, school > situations. > > We > > > did not hear from anyone associated with the dialogical education > > advocates > > > who once participated in such discussions. I think I offered up the > > school > > > that is the subject of a book by Barbara Rogoff and colleagues (From > > > Wikipedia - *Learning Together: Children and Adults in a School > Community > > > [Oxford press, 2002]*, co-authored with teachers Carolyn Turkanis and > > > Leslee Bartlett, profiled Salt Lake City's "Open Classroom," a > > > parent-cooperative education program that is now a K-8 charter school. > > > > > > Over the US Thanksgiving holiday, reading your various thoughts and > > > chatting with my grandchildren, I came across a case which seemed to > fit > > > Margaret and Carrie's > > > notions of expanded goals for stem education, and education in general. > > My > > > two grandchildren are going/went to a very elite school, the Lab School > > at > > > the U of C Chicago. At dinner they started to talk about school and > > > favorite teachers. Both identified one teacher who they thought was > > > exceptional and for the same reason. > > > "He respects kids. He always listens to them and takes them seriously." > > > > > > I am sure there are other fine teachers at the school, which is a > > pressure > > > cooker of academic achievement and the attainment of yet more > privilege. > > > But institutionalized universal education, as Mills laments in his > > elitest > > > and individualistic way (he is focused on Oxbridge), does not appear > > > organized to make such teachers and such classrooms ubiquitous. Its > > > pragmatic social reproduction functions focused on economics and state > > > power, associated with its sorting function, appear to mitigate strong > > > against any significant re-mediation. So my example serves mostly as an > > > exception that proves the rule, perhaps. > > > > > > I keep thinking about Lorena, who as Margaret and Carrie show us, > came* > > to > > > believe that she had become a bad person?disobedient and > disrespectful?in > > > the eyes of her teacher. * > > > > > > Very painful stuff. STEM reform as an iatrogenic disease. > > > > > > Question for those who know: How are reforms based on the sorts of > > > principles espoused by Davydov, Elkonin, and other cultural-historical > > > pedagogs doing in Russia these days? My impression is that they > struggle > > > for recognition and acceptance. But I could easily be wrong. > > > > > > mike > > > > > > PS- Huw-- I have not read Clive's *Civilization *and it does not > appear > > > rapidly obtainable so could not appreciate your reference to Mill and > > > Clive. Results of an American public school education. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 6:01 PM, Huw Lloyd > > > wrote: > > > > > > > The marketable "skill" is "good behaviour in conjunction with some > > > > operational knowledge". Even in technology-oriented companies, > > creativity > > > > and new knowledge are often unwelcome intruders into a > social-political > > > > situation (see for example Allen's 1977 text, Managing the Flow of > > > > Technology). There are many vested interests into the status-quo. > > > > Creativity in whatever sport, is usually against the grain. And then, > > of > > > > course, we have all these qualifications which repel creativity > through > > > > strict enforcement of stupid behaviour. > > > > > > > > Not sure whether I'm waking up a closing thread here, so my thanks to > > > > Margaret for discussing the paper. > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > Huw > > > > > > > > On 20 November 2016 at 03:34, David Kellogg > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Sorry, I've lost the plot. That is, I don't see the connection > > between > > > > the > > > > > kind of educational neoliberalism that is being discussed in the > > > article > > > > > (that which is based on measurable results, on academic tracking, > on > > > > > promising goodies in return for grades and grades in return for > > > > schoolwork) > > > > > and the kind of political and economic neoliberalism that is being > > > > > discussed by Cornel. It seems to me that the policies that Margaret > > and > > > > > Carrie are discussing in this paper were not (politically) liberal, > > nor > > > > > were they new: they were taken over by Arne Duncan from the Bush > > > > > administration, and the Bush administration got them, via Clinton, > > from > > > > > good old fashioned "Back to Basics" backlash in the UK. So the > roots > > > are > > > > > Toryism and not liberalism. > > > > > > > > > > I suppose you can argue that there is some kind of implicit analogy > > > > between > > > > > education and neoliberal economics: school is supposed to be some > > kind > > > of > > > > > neoliberal "level playing field" where children compete like > > > businessmen, > > > > > grades are "cultural capital", classes are investment > opportunities, > > > > > assessment portfolios are investment portfolios, etc. This analogy > is > > > > > little more than a way of whipping up interest among principals, > > > > teachers, > > > > > and even students (and as such I am not sure I am against it, > since I > > > > don't > > > > > see anything wrong with working class kids taking an interest in > the > > > > > getting of goodies through study). It's certainly not a good > > > description > > > > of > > > > > what is happening in schools: These businessmen produce no > > commodities, > > > > the > > > > > grades are neither exchangeable or consumable; there is no such > thing > > > as > > > > > credit or interest in this economy, and assets evaporate upon > > > graduation > > > > > instead of maturing. > > > > > > > > > > I think that the word "reform" is actually more important in > Margaret > > > and > > > > > Carrie's title than "neoliberal": a "reform" is usually, on the > lips > > of > > > > > government bureaucracy, a euphemism for backlash, and the policies > > > being > > > > > described are part of a more general ideological backlash against > > > > Deweyism > > > > > and progressive education: an anti-liberal reaction rather than a > > > > > neo-liberal reform. "Neoliberalism", taken literally, would imply > > that > > > > the > > > > > schools really are in the marketable skills business, and I don't > see > > > > much > > > > > evidence for that in the study. Am I missing something? > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 1:24 AM, wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Margaret, Carrie, Phillip, Henry, Cornell, > > > > > > > > > > > > A central and key theme of this month?s article is neoliberalism > in > > > all > > > > > > its guises. > > > > > > In my imaginary response i am addressing the authors of the paper > > and > > > > > > Cornell who addresses neoliberalism, and Phillip, who shared > > > Cornell?s > > > > > > article and Henry who heard Cornell offer a way to mediate our > > > crises. > > > > > > The paper is about teaching STEM and the neoliberal agenda that > > > ignores > > > > > > the plight of those who suffer. > > > > > > Cornell says the answer is (democratic soulcraft). At the heart > of > > > this > > > > > > soulcraft is truth telling of the reality of suffering. > > > > > > > > > > > > In order to constitute or institute a (new) order a more > > pro/gressive > > > > > > order it seems suffering must be the key factor. > > > > > > > > > > > > The notion of ivory towers and their responses to suffering seems > > > > > central. > > > > > > I also want to explore the theme of (play) in relation to > > suffering. > > > > > > > > > > > > One exemplar: > > > > > > There is a Buddhist who organizes gatherings where food is > prepared > > > and > > > > > > presented at the gatherings (for the homeless). Musical > instruments > > > are > > > > > > also brought and dancing proceeds. > > > > > > Everyone participates and this is key: You cannot tell who are > the > > > > > > homeless and who are the people who prepared the food. They are > > > > sharing a > > > > > > common (new) experience that is profoundly moving and creates a > > sense > > > > of > > > > > > well-being. > > > > > > This Buddhist practise is exemplary as a response to our current > > > > > > contemporary historical moment. It is truth telling and > democratic > > > > > > soulcraft and PLAY. (each in the other). > > > > > > It is one way of answering Margaret, Carrie, Cornell, Phillip, > and > > > > Henry. > > > > > > This Buddhist act or practice is (crafting) an answer that > speaks > > to > > > > > > suffering. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > > > > > > > From: HENRY SHONERD > > > > > > Sent: November 18, 2016 7:15 PM > > > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion > Re-started > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you, Phillip. > > > > > > "For us in these times, to even have hope is too abstract, too > > > > detached, > > > > > > too spectatorial. Instead we must be a hope, a participant and a > > > force > > > > > for > > > > > > good as we face this catastrophe.? > > > > > > That?s my favorite part. > > > > > > Henry > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 18, 2016, at 3:52 PM, White, Phillip < > > > > > Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well, this is what Cornel West has to say: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/aae8946d80dac457aa8b6af3f9a9fd > > > > > > 5acc6b4acb/0_662_5150_3090/master/5150.jpg?w=1200&h=140& > > > > > > q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=crop&bm=normal&ba=bottom% > > 2Cleft&blend64= > > > > > > aHR0cHM6Ly91cGxvYWRzLmd1aW0uY28udWsvMjAxNi8wNS8yNS9vdmVybGF5 > > > > > > LWxvZ28tMTIwMC05MF9vcHQucG5n&s=4cbd18b4943818f70304ff2cfdc3da > 2d]< > > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Goodbye, American neoliberalism. A new era is here | Cornel > West< > > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> > > > > > > > www.theguardian.com > > > > > > > Trump?s election was enabled by the policies that overlooked > the > > > > plight > > > > > > of our most vulnerable citizens. We gird ourselves for a > > frightening > > > > > future > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > phillip > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > edu > > > > > > > > > > > > on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 8:16:01 PM > > > > > > > To: Edward Wall; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion > > Re-started > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > edu > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> on behalf of Huw Lloyd > > > > > > >>> 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 > > > > > > > > > edu> > > > > > > >>>> on behalf of White, Phillip > > > > > > >>>> 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 > > > > > > > > > edu> > > > > > > >>>> on behalf of David Kellogg > > > > > > >>>> 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 > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> edu> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> edu> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of mike cole > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > >>>>> com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039 > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> . > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also > > > > attach > > > > > it > > > > > > >>> as > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> PDF. > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> ??Good read! > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Alfredo > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Sun Nov 27 15:19:15 2016 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2016 23:19:15 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <5753689B-395F-4239-B435-58A40CAC2526@gmail.com> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com> <582e7283.84cf620a.c9f5a.302f@mx.google.com> <56BA469E-D1C3-4924-8C7F-F976876DEE9E@gmail.com> <583060c1.098d620a.b4db8.5e32@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Hi Mike, I agree that a counter argument would be good. Re dialogic perspectives, my sense is that there various degrees of constraints that one can apply to the notion of dialog. For the kinds of skilled learning we are considering, I suspect that a particular disciplined dialog would be called for which would have its own mental space equivalent to a thought-problem. My inference is that this is not something easily established in school settings...would be happy to see a counter-argument. Best, Huw On 27 November 2016 at 19:47, mike cole wrote: > The subsequent trail of message showed that it is rarely too late to pick > up a thread of the conversation and have sometime interesting and > informative come of it, Huw. > > In reading through the string of messages on this topic including the > earlier part of thread, I come away reinforced by the idea that the > problems associated with current STEM-accountability regimes are a > continuation and intensification of trends in education with a very long > history. > > As Phillip got us to note, JS Mill made similar points regarding education > (in his case of the British elites/men, but some key ideas seem > generalizable). Still, something about the past couple of decades, perhaps > associated with the intensification and globalization of capitalist modes > of production, seems qualitatively more draconian. And all indications are > that matters are in the process of worsening, not improving. > > I was hoping that participants could come up with counter-examples: schools > where routinely the teaching of STEM subjects was integrated into a general > curriculum and where successful, more inclusive participation in STEM > subjects could result. > In this I was disappointed. > > Ed provided Summerhill and a variety of small, elite, school situations. We > did not hear from anyone associated with the dialogical education advocates > who once participated in such discussions. I think I offered up the school > that is the subject of a book by Barbara Rogoff and colleagues (From > Wikipedia - *Learning Together: Children and Adults in a School Community > [Oxford press, 2002]*, co-authored with teachers Carolyn Turkanis and > Leslee Bartlett, profiled Salt Lake City's "Open Classroom," a > parent-cooperative education program that is now a K-8 charter school. > > Over the US Thanksgiving holiday, reading your various thoughts and > chatting with my grandchildren, I came across a case which seemed to fit > Margaret and Carrie's > notions of expanded goals for stem education, and education in general. My > two grandchildren are going/went to a very elite school, the Lab School at > the U of C Chicago. At dinner they started to talk about school and > favorite teachers. Both identified one teacher who they thought was > exceptional and for the same reason. > "He respects kids. He always listens to them and takes them seriously." > > I am sure there are other fine teachers at the school, which is a pressure > cooker of academic achievement and the attainment of yet more privilege. > But institutionalized universal education, as Mills laments in his elitest > and individualistic way (he is focused on Oxbridge), does not appear > organized to make such teachers and such classrooms ubiquitous. Its > pragmatic social reproduction functions focused on economics and state > power, associated with its sorting function, appear to mitigate strong > against any significant re-mediation. So my example serves mostly as an > exception that proves the rule, perhaps. > > I keep thinking about Lorena, who as Margaret and Carrie show us, came* to > believe that she had become a bad person?disobedient and disrespectful?in > the eyes of her teacher. * > > Very painful stuff. STEM reform as an iatrogenic disease. > > Question for those who know: How are reforms based on the sorts of > principles espoused by Davydov, Elkonin, and other cultural-historical > pedagogs doing in Russia these days? My impression is that they struggle > for recognition and acceptance. But I could easily be wrong. > > mike > > PS- Huw-- I have not read Clive's *Civilization *and it does not appear > rapidly obtainable so could not appreciate your reference to Mill and > Clive. Results of an American public school education. > > > > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 6:01 PM, Huw Lloyd > wrote: > > > The marketable "skill" is "good behaviour in conjunction with some > > operational knowledge". Even in technology-oriented companies, creativity > > and new knowledge are often unwelcome intruders into a social-political > > situation (see for example Allen's 1977 text, Managing the Flow of > > Technology). There are many vested interests into the status-quo. > > Creativity in whatever sport, is usually against the grain. And then, of > > course, we have all these qualifications which repel creativity through > > strict enforcement of stupid behaviour. > > > > Not sure whether I'm waking up a closing thread here, so my thanks to > > Margaret for discussing the paper. > > > > Best, > > Huw > > > > On 20 November 2016 at 03:34, David Kellogg > wrote: > > > > > Sorry, I've lost the plot. That is, I don't see the connection between > > the > > > kind of educational neoliberalism that is being discussed in the > article > > > (that which is based on measurable results, on academic tracking, on > > > promising goodies in return for grades and grades in return for > > schoolwork) > > > and the kind of political and economic neoliberalism that is being > > > discussed by Cornel. It seems to me that the policies that Margaret and > > > Carrie are discussing in this paper were not (politically) liberal, nor > > > were they new: they were taken over by Arne Duncan from the Bush > > > administration, and the Bush administration got them, via Clinton, from > > > good old fashioned "Back to Basics" backlash in the UK. So the roots > are > > > Toryism and not liberalism. > > > > > > I suppose you can argue that there is some kind of implicit analogy > > between > > > education and neoliberal economics: school is supposed to be some kind > of > > > neoliberal "level playing field" where children compete like > businessmen, > > > grades are "cultural capital", classes are investment opportunities, > > > assessment portfolios are investment portfolios, etc. This analogy is > > > little more than a way of whipping up interest among principals, > > teachers, > > > and even students (and as such I am not sure I am against it, since I > > don't > > > see anything wrong with working class kids taking an interest in the > > > getting of goodies through study). It's certainly not a good > description > > of > > > what is happening in schools: These businessmen produce no commodities, > > the > > > grades are neither exchangeable or consumable; there is no such thing > as > > > credit or interest in this economy, and assets evaporate upon > graduation > > > instead of maturing. > > > > > > I think that the word "reform" is actually more important in Margaret > and > > > Carrie's title than "neoliberal": a "reform" is usually, on the lips of > > > government bureaucracy, a euphemism for backlash, and the policies > being > > > described are part of a more general ideological backlash against > > Deweyism > > > and progressive education: an anti-liberal reaction rather than a > > > neo-liberal reform. "Neoliberalism", taken literally, would imply that > > the > > > schools really are in the marketable skills business, and I don't see > > much > > > evidence for that in the study. Am I missing something? > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 1:24 AM, wrote: > > > > > > > Margaret, Carrie, Phillip, Henry, Cornell, > > > > > > > > A central and key theme of this month?s article is neoliberalism in > all > > > > its guises. > > > > In my imaginary response i am addressing the authors of the paper and > > > > Cornell who addresses neoliberalism, and Phillip, who shared > Cornell?s > > > > article and Henry who heard Cornell offer a way to mediate our > crises. > > > > The paper is about teaching STEM and the neoliberal agenda that > ignores > > > > the plight of those who suffer. > > > > Cornell says the answer is (democratic soulcraft). At the heart of > this > > > > soulcraft is truth telling of the reality of suffering. > > > > > > > > In order to constitute or institute a (new) order a more pro/gressive > > > > order it seems suffering must be the key factor. > > > > > > > > The notion of ivory towers and their responses to suffering seems > > > central. > > > > I also want to explore the theme of (play) in relation to suffering. > > > > > > > > One exemplar: > > > > There is a Buddhist who organizes gatherings where food is prepared > and > > > > presented at the gatherings (for the homeless). Musical instruments > are > > > > also brought and dancing proceeds. > > > > Everyone participates and this is key: You cannot tell who are the > > > > homeless and who are the people who prepared the food. They are > > sharing a > > > > common (new) experience that is profoundly moving and creates a sense > > of > > > > well-being. > > > > This Buddhist practise is exemplary as a response to our current > > > > contemporary historical moment. It is truth telling and democratic > > > > soulcraft and PLAY. (each in the other). > > > > It is one way of answering Margaret, Carrie, Cornell, Phillip, and > > Henry. > > > > This Buddhist act or practice is (crafting) an answer that speaks to > > > > suffering. > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > > > From: HENRY SHONERD > > > > Sent: November 18, 2016 7:15 PM > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > > > > > Thank you, Phillip. > > > > "For us in these times, to even have hope is too abstract, too > > detached, > > > > too spectatorial. Instead we must be a hope, a participant and a > force > > > for > > > > good as we face this catastrophe.? > > > > That?s my favorite part. > > > > Henry > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 18, 2016, at 3:52 PM, White, Phillip < > > > Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > well, this is what Cornel West has to say: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election > > > > > > > > > > [https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/aae8946d80dac457aa8b6af3f9a9fd > > > > 5acc6b4acb/0_662_5150_3090/master/5150.jpg?w=1200&h=140& > > > > q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=crop&bm=normal&ba=bottom%2Cleft&blend64= > > > > aHR0cHM6Ly91cGxvYWRzLmd1aW0uY28udWsvMjAxNi8wNS8yNS9vdmVybGF5 > > > > LWxvZ28tMTIwMC05MF9vcHQucG5n&s=4cbd18b4943818f70304ff2cfdc3da2d]< > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> > > > > > > > > > > Goodbye, American neoliberalism. A new era is here | Cornel West< > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> > > > > > www.theguardian.com > > > > > Trump?s election was enabled by the policies that overlooked the > > plight > > > > of our most vulnerable citizens. We gird ourselves for a frightening > > > future > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > phillip > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > edu > > > > > > > > on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > > > > Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 8:16:01 PM > > > > > To: Edward Wall; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > edu > > > > > > > > > >>> on behalf of Huw Lloyd > > > > >>> 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 > > > > > edu> > > > > >>>> on behalf of White, Phillip > > > > >>>> 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 > > > > > edu> > > > > >>>> on behalf of David Kellogg > > > > >>>> 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 > > > > >>>> > > > >>>>>>> edu> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > >>>> > > > >>>>>>> edu> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of mike cole > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of 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 > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > >>>>> com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039 > > > > >>>>>>>>> . > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also > > attach > > > it > > > > >>> as > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> PDF. > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> ??Good read! > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Alfredo > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Sun Nov 27 15:28:19 2016 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2016 23:28:19 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <5753689B-395F-4239-B435-58A40CAC2526@gmail.com> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com> <582e7283.84cf620a.c9f5a.302f@mx.google.com> <56BA469E-D1C3-4924-8C7F-F976876DEE9E@gmail.com> <583060c1.098d620a.b4db8.5e32@mx.google.com> Message-ID: I'm not sure there is a contradiction, here, David. With respect to the history of ideas, one looks for the conditions which brought such knowledge about and hence we have the genetic basis for manifold forms of its realisation. The degree of scope of applying a (the) method is contingent upon the developed skills of the students. One would not expect students to discern their own units of analysis -- this is given to them in the form of problem situations, but there is nothing to prevent a more advanced approach in which this is undertaken. Best, Huw On 27 November 2016 at 23:15, David Kellogg wrote: > Well, I understood that, Huw. But I think there are really TWO different > ways of applying an approach to any content. One way I would call > "multi-disciplinary". You take language or coding and you just treat it as > a technology. "Kids--today we are going to see how we use language/coding > in art/music/math/science." But the second way I would call > "trans-disciplinary". You take language or coding and you treat it as a > theme--that is, a concept, which enables the study of any particular > content area (any content area can be studied as meaning and any content > area can be studied as information). > > Take for example non-decimal number systems. We COULD approach the content > area in a multi-disciplinary way, and study minutes and hours, or weeks and > months, both of which depend on non-decimal counting systems. But we could > ALSO approach the content area in a transdisciplinary way, which involves > establishing a unit of analysis which is at one and the same time minimally > complex and maximally simple (that is, it contains morphological analogues > of the phenomenon we want to investigate but it is also small enough to fit > in the mouth and the mind of a child). > > For non-decimal numbers systems, it seems to me that binary counting > systems fit the bill. That is, they contain morphological analogues of any > non-decimal number system (digital information, place value, carrying > digits, etc.) but they also are small enough to fit in the mouth and the > mind of a child (because actually systems of polarity, like yes/no > questions, are essentially binary counting systems). And--what's more--I > think that binary counting systems are also a good unit of analysis for > coding, although that's probably something you know a whole lot more about > than me or anybody else on this list for that matter. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 9:41 AM, Huw Lloyd > wrote: > > > Hi David, > > > > Davydov's approach can be applied to any content. The focus is upon > > establishing a unitary conception of relations rather than attributes. > > > > Best, > > Huw > > > > On 27 November 2016 at 21:16, David Kellogg > wrote: > > > > > Here in Australia they are introducing "coding across the curriculum". > It > > > is modelled on "language across the curriculum", which was a movement > in > > > England in the seventies where the language of instruction in maths, > > > sciences, arts, etc. was considered as the object of curricular > planning. > > > So for example when we teach base non-decimal ways of counting, we > teach > > > them in the context of using everyday language (e.g. word problems with > > > hours and minutes or months and weeks, which require some counting in > > > non-decimal systems). So too with "coding across the curriculum". Kids > > are > > > mostly taught using a programming language called "Stitch" developed by > > > MIT, which uses non-numerical symbols for programming, and which can be > > > used to do very different things in the classroom, irrespective of the > > > discipline. You can use Stitch to create geometrical patterns, to > > > taxonomize animals and plants, to make digital paintings, to write > > > music, and so on. Cool stuff; kids love it. > > > > > > But once again you can see the emphasis is on integration of > disciplinary > > > knowledge "where the rubber meets the road"--that is, as everyday > > concepts. > > > In a weird way, the result is something like the labor schools of the > > 1920s > > > which Vygotsky and Blonsky and pedology generally participated in > > building. > > > That is, you learn about higher concepts like circumference and radius > in > > > the context of learning to drill or operate a lathe. This seems to me a > > > very different kind of integration from teaching with concepts in the > > > 1930s, which is (I think) the basis of the Davydov "germ cell" approach > > > (and which was certainly the basis of Vygotsky's ZPD measured in > years). > > I > > > think that Davydov would probably look at the Australian curriculum and > > > say--you would like to teach coding across the curriculum? An excellent > > > idea. Let us begin with binary number systems. Instead of starting at > the > > > interface, where the integration and unity of coding is really somewhat > > > artificial and contrived and a product of market generalization, you > > > instead start at the most abstract end, where it is genuine and real. > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 6:47 AM, mike cole wrote: > > > > > > > The subsequent trail of message showed that it is rarely too late to > > pick > > > > up a thread of the conversation and have sometime interesting and > > > > informative come of it, Huw. > > > > > > > > In reading through the string of messages on this topic including the > > > > earlier part of thread, I come away reinforced by the idea that the > > > > problems associated with current STEM-accountability regimes are a > > > > continuation and intensification of trends in education with a very > > long > > > > history. > > > > > > > > As Phillip got us to note, JS Mill made similar points regarding > > > education > > > > (in his case of the British elites/men, but some key ideas seem > > > > generalizable). Still, something about the past couple of decades, > > > perhaps > > > > associated with the intensification and globalization of capitalist > > modes > > > > of production, seems qualitatively more draconian. And all > indications > > > are > > > > that matters are in the process of worsening, not improving. > > > > > > > > I was hoping that participants could come up with counter-examples: > > > schools > > > > where routinely the teaching of STEM subjects was integrated into a > > > general > > > > curriculum and where successful, more inclusive participation in STEM > > > > subjects could result. > > > > In this I was disappointed. > > > > > > > > Ed provided Summerhill and a variety of small, elite, school > > situations. > > > We > > > > did not hear from anyone associated with the dialogical education > > > advocates > > > > who once participated in such discussions. I think I offered up the > > > school > > > > that is the subject of a book by Barbara Rogoff and colleagues (From > > > > Wikipedia - *Learning Together: Children and Adults in a School > > Community > > > > [Oxford press, 2002]*, co-authored with teachers Carolyn Turkanis and > > > > Leslee Bartlett, profiled Salt Lake City's "Open Classroom," a > > > > parent-cooperative education program that is now a K-8 charter > school. > > > > > > > > Over the US Thanksgiving holiday, reading your various thoughts and > > > > chatting with my grandchildren, I came across a case which seemed to > > fit > > > > Margaret and Carrie's > > > > notions of expanded goals for stem education, and education in > general. > > > My > > > > two grandchildren are going/went to a very elite school, the Lab > School > > > at > > > > the U of C Chicago. At dinner they started to talk about school and > > > > favorite teachers. Both identified one teacher who they thought was > > > > exceptional and for the same reason. > > > > "He respects kids. He always listens to them and takes them > seriously." > > > > > > > > I am sure there are other fine teachers at the school, which is a > > > pressure > > > > cooker of academic achievement and the attainment of yet more > > privilege. > > > > But institutionalized universal education, as Mills laments in his > > > elitest > > > > and individualistic way (he is focused on Oxbridge), does not appear > > > > organized to make such teachers and such classrooms ubiquitous. Its > > > > pragmatic social reproduction functions focused on economics and > state > > > > power, associated with its sorting function, appear to mitigate > strong > > > > against any significant re-mediation. So my example serves mostly as > an > > > > exception that proves the rule, perhaps. > > > > > > > > I keep thinking about Lorena, who as Margaret and Carrie show us, > > came* > > > to > > > > believe that she had become a bad person?disobedient and > > disrespectful?in > > > > the eyes of her teacher. * > > > > > > > > Very painful stuff. STEM reform as an iatrogenic disease. > > > > > > > > Question for those who know: How are reforms based on the sorts of > > > > principles espoused by Davydov, Elkonin, and other > cultural-historical > > > > pedagogs doing in Russia these days? My impression is that they > > struggle > > > > for recognition and acceptance. But I could easily be wrong. > > > > > > > > mike > > > > > > > > PS- Huw-- I have not read Clive's *Civilization *and it does not > > appear > > > > rapidly obtainable so could not appreciate your reference to Mill and > > > > Clive. Results of an American public school education. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 6:01 PM, Huw Lloyd < > huw.softdesigns@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > The marketable "skill" is "good behaviour in conjunction with some > > > > > operational knowledge". Even in technology-oriented companies, > > > creativity > > > > > and new knowledge are often unwelcome intruders into a > > social-political > > > > > situation (see for example Allen's 1977 text, Managing the Flow of > > > > > Technology). There are many vested interests into the status-quo. > > > > > Creativity in whatever sport, is usually against the grain. And > then, > > > of > > > > > course, we have all these qualifications which repel creativity > > through > > > > > strict enforcement of stupid behaviour. > > > > > > > > > > Not sure whether I'm waking up a closing thread here, so my thanks > to > > > > > Margaret for discussing the paper. > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > Huw > > > > > > > > > > On 20 November 2016 at 03:34, David Kellogg > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Sorry, I've lost the plot. That is, I don't see the connection > > > between > > > > > the > > > > > > kind of educational neoliberalism that is being discussed in the > > > > article > > > > > > (that which is based on measurable results, on academic tracking, > > on > > > > > > promising goodies in return for grades and grades in return for > > > > > schoolwork) > > > > > > and the kind of political and economic neoliberalism that is > being > > > > > > discussed by Cornel. It seems to me that the policies that > Margaret > > > and > > > > > > Carrie are discussing in this paper were not (politically) > liberal, > > > nor > > > > > > were they new: they were taken over by Arne Duncan from the Bush > > > > > > administration, and the Bush administration got them, via > Clinton, > > > from > > > > > > good old fashioned "Back to Basics" backlash in the UK. So the > > roots > > > > are > > > > > > Toryism and not liberalism. > > > > > > > > > > > > I suppose you can argue that there is some kind of implicit > analogy > > > > > between > > > > > > education and neoliberal economics: school is supposed to be some > > > kind > > > > of > > > > > > neoliberal "level playing field" where children compete like > > > > businessmen, > > > > > > grades are "cultural capital", classes are investment > > opportunities, > > > > > > assessment portfolios are investment portfolios, etc. This > analogy > > is > > > > > > little more than a way of whipping up interest among principals, > > > > > teachers, > > > > > > and even students (and as such I am not sure I am against it, > > since I > > > > > don't > > > > > > see anything wrong with working class kids taking an interest in > > the > > > > > > getting of goodies through study). It's certainly not a good > > > > description > > > > > of > > > > > > what is happening in schools: These businessmen produce no > > > commodities, > > > > > the > > > > > > grades are neither exchangeable or consumable; there is no such > > thing > > > > as > > > > > > credit or interest in this economy, and assets evaporate upon > > > > graduation > > > > > > instead of maturing. > > > > > > > > > > > > I think that the word "reform" is actually more important in > > Margaret > > > > and > > > > > > Carrie's title than "neoliberal": a "reform" is usually, on the > > lips > > > of > > > > > > government bureaucracy, a euphemism for backlash, and the > policies > > > > being > > > > > > described are part of a more general ideological backlash against > > > > > Deweyism > > > > > > and progressive education: an anti-liberal reaction rather than a > > > > > > neo-liberal reform. "Neoliberalism", taken literally, would imply > > > that > > > > > the > > > > > > schools really are in the marketable skills business, and I don't > > see > > > > > much > > > > > > evidence for that in the study. Am I missing something? > > > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 1:24 AM, wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Margaret, Carrie, Phillip, Henry, Cornell, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A central and key theme of this month?s article is > neoliberalism > > in > > > > all > > > > > > > its guises. > > > > > > > In my imaginary response i am addressing the authors of the > paper > > > and > > > > > > > Cornell who addresses neoliberalism, and Phillip, who shared > > > > Cornell?s > > > > > > > article and Henry who heard Cornell offer a way to mediate our > > > > crises. > > > > > > > The paper is about teaching STEM and the neoliberal agenda that > > > > ignores > > > > > > > the plight of those who suffer. > > > > > > > Cornell says the answer is (democratic soulcraft). At the heart > > of > > > > this > > > > > > > soulcraft is truth telling of the reality of suffering. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In order to constitute or institute a (new) order a more > > > pro/gressive > > > > > > > order it seems suffering must be the key factor. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The notion of ivory towers and their responses to suffering > seems > > > > > > central. > > > > > > > I also want to explore the theme of (play) in relation to > > > suffering. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One exemplar: > > > > > > > There is a Buddhist who organizes gatherings where food is > > prepared > > > > and > > > > > > > presented at the gatherings (for the homeless). Musical > > instruments > > > > are > > > > > > > also brought and dancing proceeds. > > > > > > > Everyone participates and this is key: You cannot tell who are > > the > > > > > > > homeless and who are the people who prepared the food. They are > > > > > sharing a > > > > > > > common (new) experience that is profoundly moving and creates a > > > sense > > > > > of > > > > > > > well-being. > > > > > > > This Buddhist practise is exemplary as a response to our > current > > > > > > > contemporary historical moment. It is truth telling and > > democratic > > > > > > > soulcraft and PLAY. (each in the other). > > > > > > > It is one way of answering Margaret, Carrie, Cornell, Phillip, > > and > > > > > Henry. > > > > > > > This Buddhist act or practice is (crafting) an answer that > > speaks > > > to > > > > > > > suffering. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: HENRY SHONERD > > > > > > > Sent: November 18, 2016 7:15 PM > > > > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion > > Re-started > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you, Phillip. > > > > > > > "For us in these times, to even have hope is too abstract, too > > > > > detached, > > > > > > > too spectatorial. Instead we must be a hope, a participant and > a > > > > force > > > > > > for > > > > > > > good as we face this catastrophe.? > > > > > > > That?s my favorite part. > > > > > > > Henry > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 18, 2016, at 3:52 PM, White, Phillip < > > > > > > Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well, this is what Cornel West has to say: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > > > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/ > aae8946d80dac457aa8b6af3f9a9fd > > > > > > > 5acc6b4acb/0_662_5150_3090/master/5150.jpg?w=1200&h=140& > > > > > > > q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=crop&bm=normal&ba=bottom% > > > 2Cleft&blend64= > > > > > > > aHR0cHM6Ly91cGxvYWRzLmd1aW0uY28udWsvMjAxNi8wNS8yNS9vdmVybGF5 > > > > > > > LWxvZ28tMTIwMC05MF9vcHQucG5n&s=4cbd18b4943818f70304ff2cfdc3da > > 2d]< > > > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > > > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Goodbye, American neoliberalism. A new era is here | Cornel > > West< > > > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > > > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> > > > > > > > > www.theguardian.com > > > > > > > > Trump?s election was enabled by the policies that overlooked > > the > > > > > plight > > > > > > > of our most vulnerable citizens. We gird ourselves for a > > > frightening > > > > > > future > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > phillip > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > > > edu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 8:16:01 PM > > > > > > > > To: Edward Wall; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion > > > Re-started > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > edu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> on behalf of Huw Lloyd > > > > > > > >>> 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 > > > > > > > > > > > edu> > > > > > > > >>>> on behalf of White, Phillip > > > > > > > >>>> 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 > > > > > > > > > > > edu> > > > > > > > >>>> on behalf of David Kellogg > > > > > > > >>>> 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 > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>> 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 > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>> edu> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of mike cole > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > > >>>>> com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039 > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> . > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and > also > > > > > attach > > > > > > it > > > > > > > >>> as > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> PDF. > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> ??Good read! > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Alfredo > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From mcole@ucsd.edu Sun Nov 27 16:36:19 2016 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2016 16:36:19 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan that Could Fix It | WIRED In-Reply-To: <583766c4.11946b0a.8572c.f584@mx.google.com> References: <583766c4.11946b0a.8572c.f584@mx.google.com> Message-ID: I just got to this message, Larry. I agree, everyone on xmca should read the article, not only because it is relevant to Margaret and Carrie's paper vis a vis the trajectory of neoliberal exaggerations of trends visible from Bush onward and if Mill can be used as an authority, back to the origins of modern mass schooling. It is also directly relevant to the kinds of pressures that current and future generations of social science researchers will face in terms of grants and publications. For example: * For one, the plan calls for scientists to nail down and agree on terminology for different concepts so researchers aren?t just talking past each other. ?Often, in behavioral science, people talk about different phenomena but really mean the same thing,? says Riley. Or the opposite happens: Chemists don?t squabble about what oxygen is, but if psychologists convene a conference on a fuzzier concept like ?trust,? says Colin Camerer , an economist at Caltech, they?ll spend the first two days disagreeing about what the word actually means.* *That ambiguity gets tricky when researchers are trying to share and compare datasets, especially the massive ones scientists work with nowadays. (If you?re trying to compare variables in two datasets both named ?resilience,? how do you know they?re really the same thing?) To fix these problems, the plan suggests, scientists should settle on rigorously defined terms. ?We need to figure out what we mean when we say ?depression,? and how to define it?either by using the same measures, or by calibrating with the same framework,? Riley says.* ?The first paragraph rings true to me and ought to at least resonate with even the most legitimate peripheral participant on xmca. The theory ladeness of core terms is so very clearly laid out in this imaginary idea-cocktail party. And as the second paragraph makes clear, its all about coding, which David has introduced into the conversation. Overall, I think its relevant to both the theory and practice that serves as the content of xmca. To quote a Soviet favorite. What is to be done?. With respect to the current article under discussion, that is the question I have been trying to push vis a vis those of us whose work is professionally tied up with education. Suppose the critique is correct and that the nature of the alternative is specified to the level present in the article.Here is a quote from the conclusion about which there has been some discussion. * In other words, we as teachers, students, parents, and researchers must articulate new ways of? making selves intelligible in the contexts of our lives, including producing ?identities-with-standing?? that encompass the qualities we want to promote, identities that index a way-of-being that brings? special pride and a sense of self-worth with respect to qualities that matter. In the case of schools and* *classrooms, these qualities might include intellectual curiosity, serious deliberation, citizen participation,* *? * *social critique, and deep knowledge and understanding?.* ?Do we come up with "indexes of 'identities with standing'"? Or "social critique" (no problem with knowledge and understanding, we have test scores. :-) ). How does this collection of legitimately peripheral participants in so many lifeworlds address this situation as relevant academic "experts"? (my son often reminds me that an expert is just a drip under pressure). Odd historical circumstances when Lenin's "what is to be done" question is posed in such an upside down confluence of historically antonymous ideologies and world systems. ? mike? *?* On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 2:16 PM, wrote: > This may be of interest on the topic of standardization and replication > and measurement phenomena as what seems to be driving the desire for > (exact) science and how it is colonizing social studies > Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan that Could Fix It > The NIH's Office of Behavioral and Social Science Research is responding > to a fundamental shift in social science research. > > > https://www.wired.com/2016/11/social-science-busted-nih-plan-fix/ > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Sun Nov 27 17:03:37 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2016 17:03:37 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan thatCould Fix It | WIRED In-Reply-To: References: <583766c4.11946b0a.8572c.f584@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <583b827f.cf9f620a.e2e63.0e69@mx.google.com> Mike, The term that comes to mind is education as (handmaiden) and the relation of what is referred to as education in relation to other notions such as (educational psychology) or (educational anthropology). If we exist within worlds of significance that give our lives deep meaning, then we must recognize how education has withdrawn from the public sphere as being the core or central form of relation nurturing and developing and keeping alive worlds of significance. Education must be resumed and retake its central*ity to our human being and not the handmaiden of all these other concerns and disciplines. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: mike cole Sent: November 27, 2016 4:39 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan thatCould Fix It | WIRED I just got to this message, Larry. I agree, everyone on xmca should read the article, not only because it is relevant to Margaret and Carrie's paper vis a vis the trajectory of neoliberal exaggerations of trends visible from Bush onward and if Mill can be used as an authority, back to the origins of modern mass schooling. It is also directly relevant to the kinds of pressures that current and future generations of social science researchers will face in terms of grants and publications. For example: * For one, the plan calls for scientists to nail down and agree on terminology for different concepts so researchers aren?t just talking past each other. ?Often, in behavioral science, people talk about different phenomena but really mean the same thing,? says Riley. Or the opposite happens: Chemists don?t squabble about what oxygen is, but if psychologists convene a conference on a fuzzier concept like ?trust,? says Colin Camerer , an economist at Caltech, they?ll spend the first two days disagreeing about what the word actually means.* *That ambiguity gets tricky when researchers are trying to share and compare datasets, especially the massive ones scientists work with nowadays. (If you?re trying to compare variables in two datasets both named ?resilience,? how do you know they?re really the same thing?) To fix these problems, the plan suggests, scientists should settle on rigorously defined terms. ?We need to figure out what we mean when we say ?depression,? and how to define it?either by using the same measures, or by calibrating with the same framework,? Riley says.* ?The first paragraph rings true to me and ought to at least resonate with even the most legitimate peripheral participant on xmca. The theory ladeness of core terms is so very clearly laid out in this imaginary idea-cocktail party. And as the second paragraph makes clear, its all about coding, which David has introduced into the conversation. Overall, I think its relevant to both the theory and practice that serves as the content of xmca. To quote a Soviet favorite. What is to be done?. With respect to the current article under discussion, that is the question I have been trying to push vis a vis those of us whose work is professionally tied up with education. Suppose the critique is correct and that the nature of the alternative is specified to the level present in the article.Here is a quote from the conclusion about which there has been some discussion. * In other words, we as teachers, students, parents, and researchers must articulate new ways of? making selves intelligible in the contexts of our lives, including producing ?identities-with-standing?? that encompass the qualities we want to promote, identities that index a way-of-being that brings? special pride and a sense of self-worth with respect to qualities that matter. In the case of schools and* *classrooms, these qualities might include intellectual curiosity, serious deliberation, citizen participation,* *? * *social critique, and deep knowledge and understanding?.* ?Do we come up with "indexes of 'identities with standing'"? Or "social critique" (no problem with knowledge and understanding, we have test scores. :-) ). How does this collection of legitimately peripheral participants in so many lifeworlds address this situation as relevant academic "experts"? (my son often reminds me that an expert is just a drip under pressure). Odd historical circumstances when Lenin's "what is to be done" question is posed in such an upside down confluence of historically antonymous ideologies and world systems. ? mike? *?* On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 2:16 PM, wrote: > This may be of interest on the topic of standardization and replication > and measurement phenomena as what seems to be driving the desire for > (exact) science and how it is colonizing social studies > Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan that Could Fix It > The NIH's Office of Behavioral and Social Science Research is responding > to a fundamental shift in social science research. > > > https://www.wired.com/2016/11/social-science-busted-nih-plan-fix/ > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From mcole@ucsd.edu Sun Nov 27 17:28:18 2016 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2016 17:28:18 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan thatCould Fix It | WIRED In-Reply-To: <583b827f.cf9f620a.e2e63.0e69@mx.google.com> References: <583766c4.11946b0a.8572c.f584@mx.google.com> <583b827f.cf9f620a.e2e63.0e69@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Its the resumption part of your statement that is among what I am pointing to, Larry. Its as if we had to get back to some idealized form of enculturation that infused the public sphere but that did not involve problems of conformity-to-the-past and adult power over the institutional lives of those-not-yet-adult slotting them into a society whose opportunity structures seem often to stay pretty stable except under conditions of severe shock/change. But when I go back to the beginning of formal education in the IPBS mode (institutionalized public basic schooling) I see far too much continuity. Viz, the 4000 year old school that i attach to articles about the social origins of schooling. Schooling might just be piling up stuff faster for the Angelus Novus to contemplate as it zooms at increasing speed from Eden. Felt like progress at the time, but it is hurtling us willy nilly into the unknown! But as David points out, it sure seems fair to give kids a shot at acquiring the knowledge/experience that will keep them safe and dry and leading happier futures. And it sure does give one something to think about when not using one's thumbs to txt the world or one's fingers to peck on the keyboard, but the kids have gone to sleep and its quiet for an hour or your three o'clock appointment cancels and you have an hour to kill. Killing time is an odd idea. Who has time to kill time even if we agreed on what time "really is" so we could codify qualitative changes in feelings "over" time and make money? :-) mike On Sun, Nov 27, 2016 at 5:03 PM, wrote: > Mike, > > The term that comes to mind is education as (handmaiden) and the relation > of what is referred to as education in relation to other notions such as > (educational psychology) or (educational anthropology). > > > > If we exist within worlds of significance that give our lives deep > meaning, then we must recognize how education has withdrawn from the public > sphere as being the core or central form of relation nurturing and > developing and keeping alive worlds of significance. > > > > Education must be resumed and retake its central*ity to our human being > and not the handmaiden of all these other concerns and disciplines. > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > *From: *mike cole > *Sent: *November 27, 2016 4:39 PM > *To: *eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > *Subject: *[Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan > thatCould Fix It | WIRED > > > > I just got to this message, Larry. > > I agree, everyone on xmca should read the article, not only because it is > > relevant to Margaret and Carrie's paper vis a vis the trajectory of > > neoliberal exaggerations of trends visible from Bush onward and if Mill can > > be used as an authority, back to the origins of modern mass schooling. It > > is also directly relevant to the kinds of pressures that current and future > > generations of social science researchers will face in terms of grants and > > publications. For example: > > > > * For one, the plan calls for scientists to nail down and agree on > > terminology for different concepts so researchers aren?t just talking past > > each other. ?Often, in behavioral science, people talk about different > > phenomena but really mean the same thing,? says Riley. Or the opposite > > happens: Chemists don?t squabble about what oxygen is, but if psychologists > > convene a conference on a fuzzier concept like ?trust,? says Colin Camerer > > , an economist at > > Caltech, they?ll spend the first two days disagreeing about what the word > > actually means.* > > > > *That ambiguity gets tricky when researchers are trying to share and > > compare datasets, especially the massive ones scientists work with > > nowadays. (If you?re trying to compare variables in two datasets both named > > ?resilience,? how do you know they?re really the same thing?) To fix these > > problems, the plan suggests, scientists should settle on rigorously defined > > terms. ?We need to figure out what we mean when we say ?depression,? and > > how to define it?either by using the same measures, or by calibrating with > > the same framework,? Riley says.* > > > > ?The first paragraph rings true to me and ought to at least resonate with > > even the most legitimate peripheral participant on xmca. The theory > ladeness > > of core terms is so very clearly laid out in this imaginary idea-cocktail > > party. And as the second paragraph makes clear, its all about coding, which > > David has introduced into the conversation. > > > > Overall, I think its relevant to both the theory and practice that serves > > as the content of xmca. > > To quote a Soviet favorite. What is to be done?. > > > > With respect to the current article under discussion, that is the question > > I have been trying to push vis a vis those of us whose work is > > professionally tied up with education. Suppose the critique is correct and > > that the nature of the alternative is specified to the level present in the > > article.Here is a quote from the conclusion about which there has been some > > discussion. > > > > * In other words, we as teachers, students, parents, and researchers must > > articulate new ways of? making selves intelligible in the contexts of our > > lives, including producing ?identities-with-standing?? that encompass the > > qualities we want to promote, identities that index a way-of-being that > > brings? special pride and a sense of self-worth with respect to qualities > > that matter. In the case of schools and* > > > > *classrooms, these qualities might include intellectual curiosity, serious > > deliberation, citizen participation,* > > *? * > > *social critique, and deep knowledge and understanding?.* > > > > > > ?Do we come up with "indexes of 'identities with standing'"? Or "social > > critique" (no problem with knowledge and understanding, we have test > > scores. :-) ). > > > > How does this collection of legitimately peripheral participants in so many > > lifeworlds address this situation as relevant academic "experts"? > > (my son often reminds me that an expert is just a drip under pressure). > > > > Odd historical circumstances when Lenin's "what is to be done" question is > > posed in such an upside down confluence of historically antonymous > > ideologies and world systems. ? > > > > mike? > > > > *?* > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 2:16 PM, wrote: > > > > > This may be of interest on the topic of standardization and replication > > > and measurement phenomena as what seems to be driving the desire for > > > (exact) science and how it is colonizing social studies > > > Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan that Could Fix It > > > The NIH's Office of Behavioral and Social Science Research is responding > > > to a fundamental shift in social science research. > > > > > > > > > https://www.wired.com/2016/11/social-science-busted-nih-plan-fix/ > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Schooling-Sumerian-school.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 413643 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20161127/a8637c66/attachment-0001.jpg From mcole@ucsd.edu Sun Nov 27 17:46:43 2016 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2016 17:46:43 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Vygotsky goes viral In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: This message appears to have gone unnoticed too, Henry. Folks are busy. doing a luxury "recovery day" (my British soccer team won before my day was properly started and I had a lot of mail to catch up on -- and have the space to). But it is certainly well worth thinking of in terms of in terms of how we defind and codify. We are asked to start from this premise in an article "bringing vygotsky to the public.: *inner speech develops alongside social speech. This idea was pioneered by Lev Vygotsky, a Russian psychologist who studied children in the 1920s and noted that when they learned to talk to other humans, they also learned how to talk to themselves, first out loud, and eventually, in their heads..... If you buy into the theory of Vygotsky, inner speech is there because it?s a sort of internalized version of what we used to do out loud.* Social speech is reduced to what ego "used to say" As the expert in the article says, definition of thinking is a tricky business. Might be hard to code. Its products so.... there is information in the Angel's garbage that might be relevant to the future. Mike PS- for those of you not familiar with my reference to Angels, here is the source. I recommend checking out the Klee painting that is being interpreted. *A Klee drawing named ?Angelus Novus? shows an angel looking as though he is about to move away from something he is fixedly contemplating. His eyes are staring, his mouth is open, his wings are spread. This is how one pictures the angel of history. His face is turned toward the past. Where we perceive a chain of events, he sees one single catastrophe that keeps piling ruin upon ruin and hurls it in front of his feet. The angel would like to stay, awaken the dead, and make whole what has been smashed. But a storm is blowing from Paradise; it has got caught in his wings with such violence that the angel can no longer close them. The storm irresistibly propels him into the future to which his back is turned, while the pile of debris before him grows skyward. This storm is what we call progress. * * ? Walter Benjamin,* *Ninth Thesis on the Philosophy of History* On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 2:26 PM, HENRY SHONERD wrote: > Gente > > http://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2016/11/ > figuring-out-how-and-why-we-talk-to-ourselves/508487/?utm_ > source=nl-atlantic-weekly-112416 science/archive/2016/11/figuring-out-how-and-why-we- > talk-to-ourselves/508487/?utm_source=nl-atlantic-weekly-112416> > > Fake news, echo chambers?reminds me of inner speech. A thinking person at > least knows not to believe everything she thinks. Unless she shouts her > thinking self down. > > I don?t expect ?objectivity", but maybe some reasoning. > > In gratitude, > Henry > > From bazerman@education.ucsb.edu Sun Nov 27 18:49:23 2016 From: bazerman@education.ucsb.edu (Charles Bazerman) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2016 18:49:23 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <5753689B-395F-4239-B435-58A40CAC2526@gmail.com> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com> <582e7283.84cf620a.c9f5a.302f@mx.google.com> <56BA469E-D1C3-4924-8C7F-F976876DEE9E@gmail.com> <583060c1.098d620a.b4db8.5e32@mx.google.com> Message-ID: David, Here is a digressive dad boast and a query. In May 2015 my computer science son gave a lightning talk at a major computer science conference on floating the idea of Coding Across the Curriculum. So I am wondering whether the Australian initiative predated that or may have been influenced by it. https://youtu.be/K1eKsr-JV3c?t=7m5s Thanks, Chuck ----- Original Message ----- From: David Kellogg Date: Sunday, November 27, 2016 1:18 pm Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > Here in Australia they are introducing "coding across the curriculum". > It > is modelled on "language across the curriculum", which was a movement > in > England in the seventies where the language of instruction in maths, > sciences, arts, etc. was considered as the object of curricular planning. > So for example when we teach base non-decimal ways of counting, we teach > them in the context of using everyday language (e.g. word problems with > hours and minutes or months and weeks, which require some counting in > non-decimal systems). So too with "coding across the curriculum". Kids > are > mostly taught using a programming language called "Stitch" developed by > MIT, which uses non-numerical symbols for programming, and which can be > used to do very different things in the classroom, irrespective of the > discipline. You can use Stitch to create geometrical patterns, to > taxonomize animals and plants, to make digital paintings, to write > music, and so on. Cool stuff; kids love it. > > But once again you can see the emphasis is on integration of disciplinary > knowledge "where the rubber meets the road"--that is, as everyday concepts. > In a weird way, the result is something like the labor schools of the > 1920s > which Vygotsky and Blonsky and pedology generally participated in building. > That is, you learn about higher concepts like circumference and radius > in > the context of learning to drill or operate a lathe. This seems to me > a > very different kind of integration from teaching with concepts in the > 1930s, which is (I think) the basis of the Davydov "germ cell" approach > (and which was certainly the basis of Vygotsky's ZPD measured in > years). I > think that Davydov would probably look at the Australian curriculum and > say--you would like to teach coding across the curriculum? An excellent > idea. Let us begin with binary number systems. Instead of starting at > the > interface, where the integration and unity of coding is really somewhat > artificial and contrived and a product of market generalization, you > instead start at the most abstract end, where it is genuine and real. > > David Kellogg > Macquarie University > > On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 6:47 AM, mike cole wrote: > > > The subsequent trail of message showed that it is rarely too late to > pick > > up a thread of the conversation and have sometime interesting and > > informative come of it, Huw. > > > > In reading through the string of messages on this topic including the > > earlier part of thread, I come away reinforced by the idea that the > > problems associated with current STEM-accountability regimes are a > > continuation and intensification of trends in education with a very > long > > history. > > > > As Phillip got us to note, JS Mill made similar points regarding education > > (in his case of the British elites/men, but some key ideas seem > > generalizable). Still, something about the past couple of decades, perhaps > > associated with the intensification and globalization of capitalist > modes > > of production, seems qualitatively more draconian. And all > indications are > > that matters are in the process of worsening, not improving. > > > > I was hoping that participants could come up with counter-examples: > schools > > where routinely the teaching of STEM subjects was integrated into a > general > > curriculum and where successful, more inclusive participation in STEM > > subjects could result. > > In this I was disappointed. > > > > Ed provided Summerhill and a variety of small, elite, school > situations. We > > did not hear from anyone associated with the dialogical education advocates > > who once participated in such discussions. I think I offered up the > school > > that is the subject of a book by Barbara Rogoff and colleagues (From > > Wikipedia - *Learning Together: Children and Adults in a School Community > > [Oxford press, 2002]*, co-authored with teachers Carolyn Turkanis and > > Leslee Bartlett, profiled Salt Lake City's "Open Classroom," a > > parent-cooperative education program that is now a K-8 charter school. > > > > Over the US Thanksgiving holiday, reading your various thoughts and > > chatting with my grandchildren, I came across a case which seemed to > fit > > Margaret and Carrie's > > notions of expanded goals for stem education, and education in > general. My > > two grandchildren are going/went to a very elite school, the Lab > School at > > the U of C Chicago. At dinner they started to talk about school and > > favorite teachers. Both identified one teacher who they thought was > > exceptional and for the same reason. > > "He respects kids. He always listens to them and takes them seriously." > > > > I am sure there are other fine teachers at the school, which is a pressure > > cooker of academic achievement and the attainment of yet more privilege. > > But institutionalized universal education, as Mills laments in his elitest > > and individualistic way (he is focused on Oxbridge), does not appear > > organized to make such teachers and such classrooms ubiquitous. Its > > pragmatic social reproduction functions focused on economics and state > > power, associated with its sorting function, appear to mitigate strong > > against any significant re-mediation. So my example serves mostly as > an > > exception that proves the rule, perhaps. > > > > I keep thinking about Lorena, who as Margaret and Carrie show us, > came* to > > believe that she had become a bad person?disobedient and disrespectful?in > > the eyes of her teacher. * > > > > Very painful stuff. STEM reform as an iatrogenic disease. > > > > Question for those who know: How are reforms based on the sorts of > > principles espoused by Davydov, Elkonin, and other cultural-historical > > pedagogs doing in Russia these days? My impression is that they struggle > > for recognition and acceptance. But I could easily be wrong. > > > > mike > > > > PS- Huw-- I have not read Clive's *Civilization *and it does not appear > > rapidly obtainable so could not appreciate your reference to Mill and > > Clive. Results of an American public school education. > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 6:01 PM, Huw Lloyd > > wrote: > > > > > The marketable "skill" is "good behaviour in conjunction with some > > > operational knowledge". Even in technology-oriented companies, creativity > > > and new knowledge are often unwelcome intruders into a social-political > > > situation (see for example Allen's 1977 text, Managing the Flow of > > > Technology). There are many vested interests into the status-quo. > > > Creativity in whatever sport, is usually against the grain. And > then, of > > > course, we have all these qualifications which repel creativity through > > > strict enforcement of stupid behaviour. > > > > > > Not sure whether I'm waking up a closing thread here, so my thanks > to > > > Margaret for discussing the paper. > > > > > > Best, > > > Huw > > > > > > On 20 November 2016 at 03:34, David Kellogg > > wrote: > > > > > > > Sorry, I've lost the plot. That is, I don't see the connection between > > > the > > > > kind of educational neoliberalism that is being discussed in the > > article > > > > (that which is based on measurable results, on academic > tracking, on > > > > promising goodies in return for grades and grades in return for > > > schoolwork) > > > > and the kind of political and economic neoliberalism that is being > > > > discussed by Cornel. It seems to me that the policies that > Margaret and > > > > Carrie are discussing in this paper were not (politically) > liberal, nor > > > > were they new: they were taken over by Arne Duncan from the Bush > > > > administration, and the Bush administration got them, via > Clinton, from > > > > good old fashioned "Back to Basics" backlash in the UK. So the roots > > are > > > > Toryism and not liberalism. > > > > > > > > I suppose you can argue that there is some kind of implicit analogy > > > between > > > > education and neoliberal economics: school is supposed to be > some kind > > of > > > > neoliberal "level playing field" where children compete like > > businessmen, > > > > grades are "cultural capital", classes are investment opportunities, > > > > assessment portfolios are investment portfolios, etc. This > analogy is > > > > little more than a way of whipping up interest among principals, > > > teachers, > > > > and even students (and as such I am not sure I am against it, > since I > > > don't > > > > see anything wrong with working class kids taking an interest in > the > > > > getting of goodies through study). It's certainly not a good > > description > > > of > > > > what is happening in schools: These businessmen produce no commodities, > > > the > > > > grades are neither exchangeable or consumable; there is no such > thing > > as > > > > credit or interest in this economy, and assets evaporate upon > > graduation > > > > instead of maturing. > > > > > > > > I think that the word "reform" is actually more important in Margaret > > and > > > > Carrie's title than "neoliberal": a "reform" is usually, on the > lips of > > > > government bureaucracy, a euphemism for backlash, and the policies > > being > > > > described are part of a more general ideological backlash against > > > Deweyism > > > > and progressive education: an anti-liberal reaction rather than > a > > > > neo-liberal reform. "Neoliberalism", taken literally, would > imply that > > > the > > > > schools really are in the marketable skills business, and I > don't see > > > much > > > > evidence for that in the study. Am I missing something? > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 1:24 AM, wrote: > > > > > > > > > Margaret, Carrie, Phillip, Henry, Cornell, > > > > > > > > > > A central and key theme of this month?s article is > neoliberalism in > > all > > > > > its guises. > > > > > In my imaginary response i am addressing the authors of the > paper and > > > > > Cornell who addresses neoliberalism, and Phillip, who shared > > Cornell?s > > > > > article and Henry who heard Cornell offer a way to mediate our > > crises. > > > > > The paper is about teaching STEM and the neoliberal agenda that > > ignores > > > > > the plight of those who suffer. > > > > > Cornell says the answer is (democratic soulcraft). At the > heart of > > this > > > > > soulcraft is truth telling of the reality of suffering. > > > > > > > > > > In order to constitute or institute a (new) order a more pro/gressive > > > > > order it seems suffering must be the key factor. > > > > > > > > > > The notion of ivory towers and their responses to suffering seems > > > > central. > > > > > I also want to explore the theme of (play) in relation to suffering. > > > > > > > > > > One exemplar: > > > > > There is a Buddhist who organizes gatherings where food is prepared > > and > > > > > presented at the gatherings (for the homeless). Musical instruments > > are > > > > > also brought and dancing proceeds. > > > > > Everyone participates and this is key: You cannot tell who are > the > > > > > homeless and who are the people who prepared the food. They are > > > sharing a > > > > > common (new) experience that is profoundly moving and creates > a sense > > > of > > > > > well-being. > > > > > This Buddhist practise is exemplary as a response to our current > > > > > contemporary historical moment. It is truth telling and democratic > > > > > soulcraft and PLAY. (each in the other). > > > > > It is one way of answering Margaret, Carrie, Cornell, Phillip, > and > > > Henry. > > > > > This Buddhist act or practice is (crafting) an answer that > speaks to > > > > > suffering. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > > > > > From: HENRY SHONERD > > > > > Sent: November 18, 2016 7:15 PM > > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > > > > > > > Thank you, Phillip. > > > > > "For us in these times, to even have hope is too abstract, too > > > detached, > > > > > too spectatorial. Instead we must be a hope, a participant and > a > > force > > > > for > > > > > good as we face this catastrophe.? > > > > > That?s my favorite part. > > > > > Henry > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 18, 2016, at 3:52 PM, White, Phillip < > > > > Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > well, this is what Cornel West has to say: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election > > > > > > > > > > > > [https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/aae8946d80dac457aa8b6af3f9a9fd > > > > > 5acc6b4acb/0_662_5150_3090/master/5150.jpg?w=1200&h=140& > > > > > q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=crop&bm=normal&ba=bottom%2Cleft&blend64= > > > > > aHR0cHM6Ly91cGxvYWRzLmd1aW0uY28udWsvMjAxNi8wNS8yNS9vdmVybGF5 > > > > > LWxvZ28tMTIwMC05MF9vcHQucG5n&s=4cbd18b4943818f70304ff2cfdc3da2d]< > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> > > > > > > > > > > > > Goodbye, American neoliberalism. A new era is here | Cornel > West< > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> > > > > > > www.theguardian.com > > > > > > Trump?s election was enabled by the policies that overlooked > the > > > plight > > > > > of our most vulnerable citizens. We gird ourselves for a frightening > > > > future > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > phillip > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > edu > > > > > > > > > > on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 8:16:01 PM > > > > > > To: Edward Wall; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > edu > > > > > > > > > > > >>> on behalf of Huw Lloyd > > > > > >>> 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 > > > > > > > edu> > > > > > >>>> on behalf of White, Phillip > > > > > >>>> 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 > > > > > > > edu> > > > > > >>>> on behalf of David Kellogg > > > > > >>>> 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 > > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>>>>> edu> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>>>>> edu> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of mike cole > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of 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 > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > >>>>> com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039 > > > > > >>>>>>>>> . > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also > > > attach > > > > it > > > > > >>> as > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> PDF. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> ??Good read! > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Alfredo > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From ewall@umich.edu Sun Nov 27 20:04:04 2016 From: ewall@umich.edu (Edward Wall) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2016 22:04:04 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <5753689B-395F-4239-B435-58A40CAC2526@gmail.com> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com> <582e7283.84cf620a.c9f5a.302f@mx.google.com> <56BA469E-D1C3-4924-8C7F-F976876DEE9E@gmail.com> <583060c1.098d620a.b4db8.5e32@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Mike The latest I read is that Davydov's math curricula in Russian is just one among several; not necessarily noteworthy. There is a Davydov spin-off being developed in Hawaii, but that has been underway for a number of years and, every time I ask, they say next year (the last was two years ago). For some reason people have this thing about mathematics curricula. Some studies were done awhile back about ?exemplary? curricula. It was found that scaled-up enactment invariably turned the ?exemplary? into blah. My reading of Davy?s curricula is that enactment would be a problem in Russia and a major problem in the US. Glad to know your grandchildren seem to think that a ?good? teacher is one that respects her/his students. It would be interesting to ask them if, within his classroom, students are expected to respect one another. I only mentioned Summerhill because Larry wanted some sort of exemplar of something alternative. I would think the dialogic education advocates (I am probably one if I was sure what it meant - smile) would have a great deal to say. Actually, the Davydov curriculum delays also. This is not in answer to your post, but the discussion that seems to be going on about binary numbers. I do know some teachers in the very early grades who did focus briefly on binary numbers to get some ideas in place and, when teaching mathematics education, I always used other bases (including binary) to get some concepts across that teachers-to-be had, one might say, covered up in their climb through the grades. Oddly enough perhaps, the best base for this sort of thing - teaching teachers - is base 16. For kids, it might be base 5 (i say this for historical reasons). Ed > On Nov 27, 2016, at 1:47 PM, mike cole wrote: > > The subsequent trail of message showed that it is rarely too late to pick > up a thread of the conversation and have sometime interesting and > informative come of it, Huw. > > In reading through the string of messages on this topic including the > earlier part of thread, I come away reinforced by the idea that the > problems associated with current STEM-accountability regimes are a > continuation and intensification of trends in education with a very long > history. > > As Phillip got us to note, JS Mill made similar points regarding education > (in his case of the British elites/men, but some key ideas seem > generalizable). Still, something about the past couple of decades, perhaps > associated with the intensification and globalization of capitalist modes > of production, seems qualitatively more draconian. And all indications are > that matters are in the process of worsening, not improving. > > I was hoping that participants could come up with counter-examples: schools > where routinely the teaching of STEM subjects was integrated into a general > curriculum and where successful, more inclusive participation in STEM > subjects could result. > In this I was disappointed. > > Ed provided Summerhill and a variety of small, elite, school situations. We > did not hear from anyone associated with the dialogical education advocates > who once participated in such discussions. I think I offered up the school > that is the subject of a book by Barbara Rogoff and colleagues (From > Wikipedia - *Learning Together: Children and Adults in a School Community > [Oxford press, 2002]*, co-authored with teachers Carolyn Turkanis and > Leslee Bartlett, profiled Salt Lake City's "Open Classroom," a > parent-cooperative education program that is now a K-8 charter school. > > Over the US Thanksgiving holiday, reading your various thoughts and > chatting with my grandchildren, I came across a case which seemed to fit > Margaret and Carrie's > notions of expanded goals for stem education, and education in general. My > two grandchildren are going/went to a very elite school, the Lab School at > the U of C Chicago. At dinner they started to talk about school and > favorite teachers. Both identified one teacher who they thought was > exceptional and for the same reason. > "He respects kids. He always listens to them and takes them seriously." > > I am sure there are other fine teachers at the school, which is a pressure > cooker of academic achievement and the attainment of yet more privilege. > But institutionalized universal education, as Mills laments in his elitest > and individualistic way (he is focused on Oxbridge), does not appear > organized to make such teachers and such classrooms ubiquitous. Its > pragmatic social reproduction functions focused on economics and state > power, associated with its sorting function, appear to mitigate strong > against any significant re-mediation. So my example serves mostly as an > exception that proves the rule, perhaps. > > I keep thinking about Lorena, who as Margaret and Carrie show us, came* to > believe that she had become a bad person?disobedient and disrespectful?in > the eyes of her teacher. * > > Very painful stuff. STEM reform as an iatrogenic disease. > > Question for those who know: How are reforms based on the sorts of > principles espoused by Davydov, Elkonin, and other cultural-historical > pedagogs doing in Russia these days? My impression is that they struggle > for recognition and acceptance. But I could easily be wrong. > > mike > > PS- Huw-- I have not read Clive's *Civilization *and it does not appear > rapidly obtainable so could not appreciate your reference to Mill and > Clive. Results of an American public school education. > > > > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 6:01 PM, Huw Lloyd > wrote: > >> The marketable "skill" is "good behaviour in conjunction with some >> operational knowledge". Even in technology-oriented companies, creativity >> and new knowledge are often unwelcome intruders into a social-political >> situation (see for example Allen's 1977 text, Managing the Flow of >> Technology). There are many vested interests into the status-quo. >> Creativity in whatever sport, is usually against the grain. And then, of >> course, we have all these qualifications which repel creativity through >> strict enforcement of stupid behaviour. >> >> Not sure whether I'm waking up a closing thread here, so my thanks to >> Margaret for discussing the paper. >> >> Best, >> Huw >> >> On 20 November 2016 at 03:34, David Kellogg wrote: >> >>> Sorry, I've lost the plot. That is, I don't see the connection between >> the >>> kind of educational neoliberalism that is being discussed in the article >>> (that which is based on measurable results, on academic tracking, on >>> promising goodies in return for grades and grades in return for >> schoolwork) >>> and the kind of political and economic neoliberalism that is being >>> discussed by Cornel. It seems to me that the policies that Margaret and >>> Carrie are discussing in this paper were not (politically) liberal, nor >>> were they new: they were taken over by Arne Duncan from the Bush >>> administration, and the Bush administration got them, via Clinton, from >>> good old fashioned "Back to Basics" backlash in the UK. So the roots are >>> Toryism and not liberalism. >>> >>> I suppose you can argue that there is some kind of implicit analogy >> between >>> education and neoliberal economics: school is supposed to be some kind of >>> neoliberal "level playing field" where children compete like businessmen, >>> grades are "cultural capital", classes are investment opportunities, >>> assessment portfolios are investment portfolios, etc. This analogy is >>> little more than a way of whipping up interest among principals, >> teachers, >>> and even students (and as such I am not sure I am against it, since I >> don't >>> see anything wrong with working class kids taking an interest in the >>> getting of goodies through study). It's certainly not a good description >> of >>> what is happening in schools: These businessmen produce no commodities, >> the >>> grades are neither exchangeable or consumable; there is no such thing as >>> credit or interest in this economy, and assets evaporate upon graduation >>> instead of maturing. >>> >>> I think that the word "reform" is actually more important in Margaret and >>> Carrie's title than "neoliberal": a "reform" is usually, on the lips of >>> government bureaucracy, a euphemism for backlash, and the policies being >>> described are part of a more general ideological backlash against >> Deweyism >>> and progressive education: an anti-liberal reaction rather than a >>> neo-liberal reform. "Neoliberalism", taken literally, would imply that >> the >>> schools really are in the marketable skills business, and I don't see >> much >>> evidence for that in the study. Am I missing something? >>> >>> David Kellogg >>> Macquarie University >>> >>> On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 1:24 AM, wrote: >>> >>>> Margaret, Carrie, Phillip, Henry, Cornell, >>>> >>>> A central and key theme of this month?s article is neoliberalism in all >>>> its guises. >>>> In my imaginary response i am addressing the authors of the paper and >>>> Cornell who addresses neoliberalism, and Phillip, who shared Cornell?s >>>> article and Henry who heard Cornell offer a way to mediate our crises. >>>> The paper is about teaching STEM and the neoliberal agenda that ignores >>>> the plight of those who suffer. >>>> Cornell says the answer is (democratic soulcraft). At the heart of this >>>> soulcraft is truth telling of the reality of suffering. >>>> >>>> In order to constitute or institute a (new) order a more pro/gressive >>>> order it seems suffering must be the key factor. >>>> >>>> The notion of ivory towers and their responses to suffering seems >>> central. >>>> I also want to explore the theme of (play) in relation to suffering. >>>> >>>> One exemplar: >>>> There is a Buddhist who organizes gatherings where food is prepared and >>>> presented at the gatherings (for the homeless). Musical instruments are >>>> also brought and dancing proceeds. >>>> Everyone participates and this is key: You cannot tell who are the >>>> homeless and who are the people who prepared the food. They are >> sharing a >>>> common (new) experience that is profoundly moving and creates a sense >> of >>>> well-being. >>>> This Buddhist practise is exemplary as a response to our current >>>> contemporary historical moment. It is truth telling and democratic >>>> soulcraft and PLAY. (each in the other). >>>> It is one way of answering Margaret, Carrie, Cornell, Phillip, and >> Henry. >>>> This Buddhist act or practice is (crafting) an answer that speaks to >>>> suffering. >>>> >>>> >>>> Sent from my Windows 10 phone >>>> >>>> From: HENRY SHONERD >>>> Sent: November 18, 2016 7:15 PM >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started >>>> >>>> Thank you, Phillip. >>>> "For us in these times, to even have hope is too abstract, too >> detached, >>>> too spectatorial. Instead we must be a hope, a participant and a force >>> for >>>> good as we face this catastrophe.? >>>> That?s my favorite part. >>>> Henry >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Nov 18, 2016, at 3:52 PM, White, Phillip < >>> Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> well, this is what Cornel West has to say: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ >>>> american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election >>>>> >>>>> [https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/aae8946d80dac457aa8b6af3f9a9fd >>>> 5acc6b4acb/0_662_5150_3090/master/5150.jpg?w=1200&h=140& >>>> q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=crop&bm=normal&ba=bottom%2Cleft&blend64= >>>> aHR0cHM6Ly91cGxvYWRzLmd1aW0uY28udWsvMjAxNi8wNS8yNS9vdmVybGF5 >>>> LWxvZ28tMTIwMC05MF9vcHQucG5n&s=4cbd18b4943818f70304ff2cfdc3da2d]< >>>> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ >>>> american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> >>>>> >>>>> Goodbye, American neoliberalism. A new era is here | Cornel West< >>>> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ >>>> american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> >>>>> www.theguardian.com >>>>> Trump?s election was enabled by the policies that overlooked the >> plight >>>> of our most vulnerable citizens. We gird ourselves for a frightening >>> future >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> phillip >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ________________________________ >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > edu >>>> >>>> on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com >>>>> Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 8:16:01 PM >>>>> To: Edward Wall; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started >>>>> >>>>> 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 >> >> edu >>>>> >>>>>>> on behalf of Huw Lloyd >>>>>>> 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 >> >>> edu> >>>>>>>> on behalf of White, Phillip >>>>>>>> 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 >> >>> edu> >>>>>>>> on behalf of David Kellogg >>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> edu> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> edu> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of mike cole >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of 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 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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>>>>>>>> com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039 >>>>>>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also >> attach >>> it >>>>>>> as >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PDF. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ??Good read! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Alfredo >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> From smago@uga.edu Mon Nov 28 03:19:13 2016 From: smago@uga.edu (Peter Smagorinsky) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 11:19:13 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan that Could Fix It | WIRED In-Reply-To: References: <583766c4.11946b0a.8572c.f584@mx.google.com> Message-ID: I've written something that speaks to the problem that scientists can agree on concepts, but social scientists can't. It originates in Vygotsky's tendency to illustrate complex social concepts with biological examples that oversimplify the process of the development of social concepts that have no "solid" form. Smagorinsky, P. (2013). The development of social and practical concepts in learning to teach: A synthesis and extension of Vygotsky's conception. Learning, Culture, and Social Interaction, 2(4), 238-248. Available at http://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/LCSI/LCSI_2013.pdf abstract This conceptual paper interrogates, considers, and expands on Vygotsky's notion of concept development. I first review Vygotsky's account of concept development, including his distinction between scientific and spontaneous concepts. I next summarize his pattern of concept development from complexes to pseudoconcepts to concepts, and in the process problematize his view by shifting his discussion from biological examples to social examples. The following section examines concepts as cultural constructions, with attention to the cultural nature of concepts, and concepts and societal telos. The third section outlines processes that complement and enrich concept development, including concept development's future orientation, the affective dimension of concept development, and creativity's role in concept development as a higher mental function. The fourth section takes Vygotsky's notion of concept development's ?twisting path? and complicates it by questioning the extent to which social concepts have a clear meaning toward which any pathway may lead given their relativistic and ideological nature. This inquiry leads to the proposal of practical concepts that serve as fragmented understandings that generally cohere yet are inherently compromised by attention to contradictory means of mediation in socialcultural?historical contexts. -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2016 7:36 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan that Could Fix It | WIRED I just got to this message, Larry. I agree, everyone on xmca should read the article, not only because it is relevant to Margaret and Carrie's paper vis a vis the trajectory of neoliberal exaggerations of trends visible from Bush onward and if Mill can be used as an authority, back to the origins of modern mass schooling. It is also directly relevant to the kinds of pressures that current and future generations of social science researchers will face in terms of grants and publications. For example: * For one, the plan calls for scientists to nail down and agree on terminology for different concepts so researchers aren?t just talking past each other. ?Often, in behavioral science, people talk about different phenomena but really mean the same thing,? says Riley. Or the opposite happens: Chemists don?t squabble about what oxygen is, but if psychologists convene a conference on a fuzzier concept like ?trust,? says Colin Camerer , an economist at Caltech, they?ll spend the first two days disagreeing about what the word actually means.* *That ambiguity gets tricky when researchers are trying to share and compare datasets, especially the massive ones scientists work with nowadays. (If you?re trying to compare variables in two datasets both named ?resilience,? how do you know they?re really the same thing?) To fix these problems, the plan suggests, scientists should settle on rigorously defined terms. ?We need to figure out what we mean when we say ?depression,? and how to define it?either by using the same measures, or by calibrating with the same framework,? Riley says.* ?The first paragraph rings true to me and ought to at least resonate with even the most legitimate peripheral participant on xmca. The theory ladeness of core terms is so very clearly laid out in this imaginary idea-cocktail party. And as the second paragraph makes clear, its all about coding, which David has introduced into the conversation. Overall, I think its relevant to both the theory and practice that serves as the content of xmca. To quote a Soviet favorite. What is to be done?. With respect to the current article under discussion, that is the question I have been trying to push vis a vis those of us whose work is professionally tied up with education. Suppose the critique is correct and that the nature of the alternative is specified to the level present in the article.Here is a quote from the conclusion about which there has been some discussion. * In other words, we as teachers, students, parents, and researchers must articulate new ways of? making selves intelligible in the contexts of our lives, including producing ?identities-with-standing?? that encompass the qualities we want to promote, identities that index a way-of-being that brings? special pride and a sense of self-worth with respect to qualities that matter. In the case of schools and* *classrooms, these qualities might include intellectual curiosity, serious deliberation, citizen participation,* *? * *social critique, and deep knowledge and understanding?.* ?Do we come up with "indexes of 'identities with standing'"? Or "social critique" (no problem with knowledge and understanding, we have test scores. :-) ). How does this collection of legitimately peripheral participants in so many lifeworlds address this situation as relevant academic "experts"? (my son often reminds me that an expert is just a drip under pressure). Odd historical circumstances when Lenin's "what is to be done" question is posed in such an upside down confluence of historically antonymous ideologies and world systems. ? mike? *?* On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 2:16 PM, wrote: > This may be of interest on the topic of standardization and > replication and measurement phenomena as what seems to be driving the > desire for > (exact) science and how it is colonizing social studies Social Science > Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan that Could Fix It The NIH's Office > of Behavioral and Social Science Research is responding to a > fundamental shift in social science research. > > > https://www.wired.com/2016/11/social-science-busted-nih-plan-fix/ > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From r.j.s.parsons@open.ac.uk Mon Nov 28 03:39:02 2016 From: r.j.s.parsons@open.ac.uk (R.J.S.Parsons) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 11:39:02 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan that Could Fix It | WIRED In-Reply-To: References: <583766c4.11946b0a.8572c.f584@mx.google.com> Message-ID: That link to your site doesn't work, Peter. Rob On 28/11/2016 11:19, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > I've written something that speaks to the problem that scientists can agree on concepts, but social scientists can't. It originates in Vygotsky's tendency to illustrate complex social concepts with biological examples that oversimplify the process of the development of social concepts that have no "solid" form. > > Smagorinsky, P. (2013). The development of social and practical concepts in learning to teach: A synthesis and extension of Vygotsky's conception. Learning, Culture, and Social Interaction, 2(4), 238-248. Available at http://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/LCSI/LCSI_2013.pdf > > abstract > This conceptual paper interrogates, considers, and expands on Vygotsky's notion of concept > development. I first review Vygotsky's account of concept development, including his distinction > between scientific and spontaneous concepts. I next summarize his pattern of concept development > from complexes to pseudoconcepts to concepts, and in the process problematize his view > by shifting his discussion from biological examples to social examples. The following section > examines concepts as cultural constructions, with attention to the cultural nature of concepts, and > concepts and societal telos. The third section outlines processes that complement and enrich > concept development, including concept development's future orientation, the affective dimension > of concept development, and creativity's role in concept development as a higher mental function. > The fourth section takes Vygotsky's notion of concept development's ?twisting path? and > complicates it by questioning the extent to which social concepts have a clear meaning toward > which any pathway may lead given their relativistic and ideological nature. This inquiry leads to > the proposal of practical concepts that serve as fragmented understandings that generally cohere > yet are inherently compromised by attention to contradictory means of mediation in socialcultural?historical > contexts. > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole > Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2016 7:36 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan that Could Fix It | WIRED > > I just got to this message, Larry. > I agree, everyone on xmca should read the article, not only because it is relevant to Margaret and Carrie's paper vis a vis the trajectory of neoliberal exaggerations of trends visible from Bush onward and if Mill can be used as an authority, back to the origins of modern mass schooling. It is also directly relevant to the kinds of pressures that current and future generations of social science researchers will face in terms of grants and publications. For example: > > * For one, the plan calls for scientists to nail down and agree on terminology for different concepts so researchers aren?t just talking past each other. ?Often, in behavioral science, people talk about different phenomena but really mean the same thing,? says Riley. Or the opposite > happens: Chemists don?t squabble about what oxygen is, but if psychologists convene a conference on a fuzzier concept like ?trust,? says Colin Camerer , an economist at Caltech, they?ll spend the first two days disagreeing about what the word actually means.* > > *That ambiguity gets tricky when researchers are trying to share and compare datasets, especially the massive ones scientists work with nowadays. (If you?re trying to compare variables in two datasets both named ?resilience,? how do you know they?re really the same thing?) To fix these problems, the plan suggests, scientists should settle on rigorously defined terms. ?We need to figure out what we mean when we say ?depression,? and how to define it?either by using the same measures, or by calibrating with the same framework,? Riley says.* > > ?The first paragraph rings true to me and ought to at least resonate with even the most legitimate peripheral participant on xmca. The theory ladeness of core terms is so very clearly laid out in this imaginary idea-cocktail party. And as the second paragraph makes clear, its all about coding, which David has introduced into the conversation. > > Overall, I think its relevant to both the theory and practice that serves as the content of xmca. > To quote a Soviet favorite. What is to be done?. > > With respect to the current article under discussion, that is the question I have been trying to push vis a vis those of us whose work is professionally tied up with education. Suppose the critique is correct and that the nature of the alternative is specified to the level present in the article.Here is a quote from the conclusion about which there has been some discussion. > > * In other words, we as teachers, students, parents, and researchers must articulate new ways of? making selves intelligible in the contexts of our lives, including producing ?identities-with-standing?? that encompass the qualities we want to promote, identities that index a way-of-being that brings? special pride and a sense of self-worth with respect to qualities that matter. In the case of schools and* > > *classrooms, these qualities might include intellectual curiosity, serious deliberation, citizen participation,* *? * *social critique, and deep knowledge and understanding?.* > > > ?Do we come up with "indexes of 'identities with standing'"? Or "social critique" (no problem with knowledge and understanding, we have test scores. :-) ). > > How does this collection of legitimately peripheral participants in so many lifeworlds address this situation as relevant academic "experts"? > (my son often reminds me that an expert is just a drip under pressure). > > Odd historical circumstances when Lenin's "what is to be done" question is posed in such an upside down confluence of historically antonymous ideologies and world systems. ? > > mike? > > *?* > > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 2:16 PM, wrote: > >> This may be of interest on the topic of standardization and >> replication and measurement phenomena as what seems to be driving the >> desire for >> (exact) science and how it is colonizing social studies Social Science >> Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan that Could Fix It The NIH's Office >> of Behavioral and Social Science Research is responding to a >> fundamental shift in social science research. >> >> >> https://www.wired.com/2016/11/social-science-busted-nih-plan-fix/ >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone >> >> From smago@uga.edu Mon Nov 28 03:41:45 2016 From: smago@uga.edu (Peter Smagorinsky) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 11:41:45 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan that Could Fix It | WIRED In-Reply-To: References: <583766c4.11946b0a.8572c.f584@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Odd, it worked on my end. I'm attaching the ms. p -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of R.J.S.Parsons Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 6:39 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan that Could Fix It | WIRED That link to your site doesn't work, Peter. Rob On 28/11/2016 11:19, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > I've written something that speaks to the problem that scientists can agree on concepts, but social scientists can't. It originates in Vygotsky's tendency to illustrate complex social concepts with biological examples that oversimplify the process of the development of social concepts that have no "solid" form. > > Smagorinsky, P. (2013). The development of social and practical > concepts in learning to teach: A synthesis and extension of Vygotsky's > conception. Learning, Culture, and Social Interaction, 2(4), 238-248. > Available at > http://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/LCSI/LCSI_2013.pdf > > abstract > This conceptual paper interrogates, considers, and expands on > Vygotsky's notion of concept development. I first review Vygotsky's > account of concept development, including his distinction between > scientific and spontaneous concepts. I next summarize his pattern of > concept development from complexes to pseudoconcepts to concepts, and > in the process problematize his view by shifting his discussion from > biological examples to social examples. The following section examines > concepts as cultural constructions, with attention to the cultural > nature of concepts, and concepts and societal telos. The third section outlines processes that complement and enrich concept development, including concept development's future orientation, the affective dimension of concept development, and creativity's role in concept development as a higher mental function. > The fourth section takes Vygotsky's notion of concept development's > ?twisting path? and complicates it by questioning the extent to which > social concepts have a clear meaning toward which any pathway may lead > given their relativistic and ideological nature. This inquiry leads to > the proposal of practical concepts that serve as fragmented > understandings that generally cohere yet are inherently compromised by attention to contradictory means of mediation in socialcultural?historical contexts. > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole > Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2016 7:36 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan > that Could Fix It | WIRED > > I just got to this message, Larry. > I agree, everyone on xmca should read the article, not only because it is relevant to Margaret and Carrie's paper vis a vis the trajectory of neoliberal exaggerations of trends visible from Bush onward and if Mill can be used as an authority, back to the origins of modern mass schooling. It is also directly relevant to the kinds of pressures that current and future generations of social science researchers will face in terms of grants and publications. For example: > > * For one, the plan calls for scientists to nail down and agree on > terminology for different concepts so researchers aren?t just talking > past each other. ?Often, in behavioral science, people talk about > different phenomena but really mean the same thing,? says Riley. Or > the opposite > happens: Chemists don?t squabble about what oxygen is, but if > psychologists convene a conference on a fuzzier concept like ?trust,? > says Colin Camerer , > an economist at Caltech, they?ll spend the first two days disagreeing > about what the word actually means.* > > *That ambiguity gets tricky when researchers are trying to share and > compare datasets, especially the massive ones scientists work with > nowadays. (If you?re trying to compare variables in two datasets both > named ?resilience,? how do you know they?re really the same thing?) To > fix these problems, the plan suggests, scientists should settle on > rigorously defined terms. ?We need to figure out what we mean when we > say ?depression,? and how to define it?either by using the same > measures, or by calibrating with the same framework,? Riley says.* > > ?The first paragraph rings true to me and ought to at least resonate with even the most legitimate peripheral participant on xmca. The theory ladeness of core terms is so very clearly laid out in this imaginary idea-cocktail party. And as the second paragraph makes clear, its all about coding, which David has introduced into the conversation. > > Overall, I think its relevant to both the theory and practice that serves as the content of xmca. > To quote a Soviet favorite. What is to be done?. > > With respect to the current article under discussion, that is the question I have been trying to push vis a vis those of us whose work is professionally tied up with education. Suppose the critique is correct and that the nature of the alternative is specified to the level present in the article.Here is a quote from the conclusion about which there has been some discussion. > > * In other words, we as teachers, students, parents, and researchers > must articulate new ways of? making selves intelligible in the > contexts of our lives, including producing ?identities-with-standing?? > that encompass the qualities we want to promote, identities that index > a way-of-being that brings? special pride and a sense of self-worth > with respect to qualities that matter. In the case of schools and* > > *classrooms, these qualities might include intellectual curiosity, > serious deliberation, citizen participation,* *? * *social critique, > and deep knowledge and understanding?.* > > > ?Do we come up with "indexes of 'identities with standing'"? Or "social critique" (no problem with knowledge and understanding, we have test scores. :-) ). > > How does this collection of legitimately peripheral participants in so many lifeworlds address this situation as relevant academic "experts"? > (my son often reminds me that an expert is just a drip under pressure). > > Odd historical circumstances when Lenin's "what is to be done" > question is posed in such an upside down confluence of historically > antonymous ideologies and world systems. ? > > mike? > > *?* > > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 2:16 PM, wrote: > >> This may be of interest on the topic of standardization and >> replication and measurement phenomena as what seems to be driving the >> desire for >> (exact) science and how it is colonizing social studies Social >> Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan that Could Fix It The NIH's >> Office of Behavioral and Social Science Research is responding to a >> fundamental shift in social science research. >> >> >> https://www.wired.com/2016/11/social-science-busted-nih-plan-fix/ >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone >> >> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: LCSI_2013.PDF Type: application/pdf Size: 357841 bytes Desc: LCSI_2013.PDF Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20161128/8802f2e2/attachment.pdf From smago@uga.edu Mon Nov 28 03:47:26 2016 From: smago@uga.edu (Peter Smagorinsky) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 11:47:26 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan that Could Fix It | WIRED In-Reply-To: References: <583766c4.11946b0a.8572c.f584@mx.google.com> Message-ID: For those of you who do HTML coding....the problem was that I'd used lower case instead of upper for PDF. Fixing it now. p -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Peter Smagorinsky Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 6:42 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan that Could Fix It | WIRED Odd, it worked on my end. I'm attaching the ms. p -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of R.J.S.Parsons Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 6:39 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan that Could Fix It | WIRED That link to your site doesn't work, Peter. Rob On 28/11/2016 11:19, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > I've written something that speaks to the problem that scientists can agree on concepts, but social scientists can't. It originates in Vygotsky's tendency to illustrate complex social concepts with biological examples that oversimplify the process of the development of social concepts that have no "solid" form. > > Smagorinsky, P. (2013). The development of social and practical > concepts in learning to teach: A synthesis and extension of Vygotsky's > conception. Learning, Culture, and Social Interaction, 2(4), 238-248. > Available at > http://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/LCSI/LCSI_2013.PDF > > abstract > This conceptual paper interrogates, considers, and expands on > Vygotsky's notion of concept development. I first review Vygotsky's > account of concept development, including his distinction between > scientific and spontaneous concepts. I next summarize his pattern of > concept development from complexes to pseudoconcepts to concepts, and > in the process problematize his view by shifting his discussion from > biological examples to social examples. The following section examines > concepts as cultural constructions, with attention to the cultural > nature of concepts, and concepts and societal telos. The third section outlines processes that complement and enrich concept development, including concept development's future orientation, the affective dimension of concept development, and creativity's role in concept development as a higher mental function. > The fourth section takes Vygotsky's notion of concept development's > ?twisting path? and complicates it by questioning the extent to which > social concepts have a clear meaning toward which any pathway may lead > given their relativistic and ideological nature. This inquiry leads to > the proposal of practical concepts that serve as fragmented > understandings that generally cohere yet are inherently compromised by attention to contradictory means of mediation in socialcultural?historical contexts. > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole > Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2016 7:36 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan > that Could Fix It | WIRED > > I just got to this message, Larry. > I agree, everyone on xmca should read the article, not only because it is relevant to Margaret and Carrie's paper vis a vis the trajectory of neoliberal exaggerations of trends visible from Bush onward and if Mill can be used as an authority, back to the origins of modern mass schooling. It is also directly relevant to the kinds of pressures that current and future generations of social science researchers will face in terms of grants and publications. For example: > > * For one, the plan calls for scientists to nail down and agree on > terminology for different concepts so researchers aren?t just talking > past each other. ?Often, in behavioral science, people talk about > different phenomena but really mean the same thing,? says Riley. Or > the opposite > happens: Chemists don?t squabble about what oxygen is, but if > psychologists convene a conference on a fuzzier concept like ?trust,? > says Colin Camerer , > an economist at Caltech, they?ll spend the first two days disagreeing > about what the word actually means.* > > *That ambiguity gets tricky when researchers are trying to share and > compare datasets, especially the massive ones scientists work with > nowadays. (If you?re trying to compare variables in two datasets both > named ?resilience,? how do you know they?re really the same thing?) To > fix these problems, the plan suggests, scientists should settle on > rigorously defined terms. ?We need to figure out what we mean when we > say ?depression,? and how to define it?either by using the same > measures, or by calibrating with the same framework,? Riley says.* > > ?The first paragraph rings true to me and ought to at least resonate with even the most legitimate peripheral participant on xmca. The theory ladeness of core terms is so very clearly laid out in this imaginary idea-cocktail party. And as the second paragraph makes clear, its all about coding, which David has introduced into the conversation. > > Overall, I think its relevant to both the theory and practice that serves as the content of xmca. > To quote a Soviet favorite. What is to be done?. > > With respect to the current article under discussion, that is the question I have been trying to push vis a vis those of us whose work is professionally tied up with education. Suppose the critique is correct and that the nature of the alternative is specified to the level present in the article.Here is a quote from the conclusion about which there has been some discussion. > > * In other words, we as teachers, students, parents, and researchers > must articulate new ways of? making selves intelligible in the > contexts of our lives, including producing ?identities-with-standing?? > that encompass the qualities we want to promote, identities that index > a way-of-being that brings? special pride and a sense of self-worth > with respect to qualities that matter. In the case of schools and* > > *classrooms, these qualities might include intellectual curiosity, > serious deliberation, citizen participation,* *? * *social critique, > and deep knowledge and understanding?.* > > > ?Do we come up with "indexes of 'identities with standing'"? Or "social critique" (no problem with knowledge and understanding, we have test scores. :-) ). > > How does this collection of legitimately peripheral participants in so many lifeworlds address this situation as relevant academic "experts"? > (my son often reminds me that an expert is just a drip under pressure). > > Odd historical circumstances when Lenin's "what is to be done" > question is posed in such an upside down confluence of historically > antonymous ideologies and world systems. ? > > mike? > > *?* > > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 2:16 PM, wrote: > >> This may be of interest on the topic of standardization and >> replication and measurement phenomena as what seems to be driving the >> desire for >> (exact) science and how it is colonizing social studies Social >> Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan that Could Fix It The NIH's >> Office of Behavioral and Social Science Research is responding to a >> fundamental shift in social science research. >> >> >> https://www.wired.com/2016/11/social-science-busted-nih-plan-fix/ >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone >> >> From mcole@ucsd.edu Mon Nov 28 07:30:21 2016 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 07:30:21 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Galina Tsukerman in JREEP Message-ID: Dear Colleagues-- The No. 1 issue of Journal of Russian and East European Psychology has two substantial and interesting articles by Galina Tsukerman, a leading proponent of the Davydov-Elkonin curricular approach with deep experience at School 91 and elsewhere in Moscow. For some reason, the journal has no cover announcing the contents and no TOC. The first article is title "how do children learn to learn." The second article is about "the reflexive abilities of school children: How can students learn about their own ignorance." For those of you interested in these materials, would you please try to obtain them from local libraries and if that is not possible, write to me at mcole@ucsd.edu. I will seek to obtain pdfs to send individually to those for whom this line of work is important. Galina's work deserves wide distribution and I fear that the way the journal has been produced under new ownership will deprive the chat community of her work. mike From lpscholar2@gmail.com Mon Nov 28 07:50:47 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 07:50:47 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan thatCould Fix It | WIRED In-Reply-To: References: <583766c4.11946b0a.8572c.f584@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <583c526d.ca61630a.b0b3a.e83c@mx.google.com> Peter, Mike, Thanks for engaging with this topic that can seem to be herding cats (earlier metaphor). I want to raise up a specific question Mike asks: Do we come up with (indexes) of identities with standing??. Indexes as signs pointing or gesturing towards ... What if we don?t (come up with) indexes. What if we singularly and co-generatively ARE indexes or signs as human beings expressing our humanity, pointing towards worlds of (significance) within which our existence occurs (unfolds). My being/becoming as movement, inclination, leaning into, indicating the reality of worlds of significance and our response ability to see beyond our individual existence to embrace and sustain and yes -resume- our mutual engagement nurturing worlds of significance. It is not a matter of drawing up a list of indexes, but of living out and being/becoming indexical beings oriented towards worlds of significance. Critique yes, but derived from what is already given. We stand not only between past and future, but equally between tradition and oblivion. (Foulcault). The angel of oblivion that must be answered by our existence as sign or index. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Peter Smagorinsky Sent: November 28, 2016 3:43 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan thatCould Fix It | WIRED Odd, it worked on my end. I'm attaching the ms. p -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of R.J.S.Parsons Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 6:39 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan that Could Fix It | WIRED That link to your site doesn't work, Peter. Rob On 28/11/2016 11:19, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > I've written something that speaks to the problem that scientists can agree on concepts, but social scientists can't. It originates in Vygotsky's tendency to illustrate complex social concepts with biological examples that oversimplify the process of the development of social concepts that have no "solid" form. > > Smagorinsky, P. (2013). The development of social and practical > concepts in learning to teach: A synthesis and extension of Vygotsky's > conception. Learning, Culture, and Social Interaction, 2(4), 238-248. > Available at > http://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/LCSI/LCSI_2013.pdf > > abstract > This conceptual paper interrogates, considers, and expands on > Vygotsky's notion of concept development. I first review Vygotsky's > account of concept development, including his distinction between > scientific and spontaneous concepts. I next summarize his pattern of > concept development from complexes to pseudoconcepts to concepts, and > in the process problematize his view by shifting his discussion from > biological examples to social examples. The following section examines > concepts as cultural constructions, with attention to the cultural > nature of concepts, and concepts and societal telos. The third section outlines processes that complement and enrich concept development, including concept development's future orientation, the affective dimension of concept development, and creativity's role in concept development as a higher mental function. > The fourth section takes Vygotsky's notion of concept development's > ?twisting path? and complicates it by questioning the extent to which > social concepts have a clear meaning toward which any pathway may lead > given their relativistic and ideological nature. This inquiry leads to > the proposal of practical concepts that serve as fragmented > understandings that generally cohere yet are inherently compromised by attention to contradictory means of mediation in socialcultural?historical contexts. > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole > Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2016 7:36 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan > that Could Fix It | WIRED > > I just got to this message, Larry. > I agree, everyone on xmca should read the article, not only because it is relevant to Margaret and Carrie's paper vis a vis the trajectory of neoliberal exaggerations of trends visible from Bush onward and if Mill can be used as an authority, back to the origins of modern mass schooling. It is also directly relevant to the kinds of pressures that current and future generations of social science researchers will face in terms of grants and publications. For example: > > * For one, the plan calls for scientists to nail down and agree on > terminology for different concepts so researchers aren?t just talking > past each other. ?Often, in behavioral science, people talk about > different phenomena but really mean the same thing,? says Riley. Or > the opposite > happens: Chemists don?t squabble about what oxygen is, but if > psychologists convene a conference on a fuzzier concept like ?trust,? > says Colin Camerer , > an economist at Caltech, they?ll spend the first two days disagreeing > about what the word actually means.* > > *That ambiguity gets tricky when researchers are trying to share and > compare datasets, especially the massive ones scientists work with > nowadays. (If you?re trying to compare variables in two datasets both > named ?resilience,? how do you know they?re really the same thing?) To > fix these problems, the plan suggests, scientists should settle on > rigorously defined terms. ?We need to figure out what we mean when we > say ?depression,? and how to define it?either by using the same > measures, or by calibrating with the same framework,? Riley says.* > > ?The first paragraph rings true to me and ought to at least resonate with even the most legitimate peripheral participant on xmca. The theory ladeness of core terms is so very clearly laid out in this imaginary idea-cocktail party. And as the second paragraph makes clear, its all about coding, which David has introduced into the conversation. > > Overall, I think its relevant to both the theory and practice that serves as the content of xmca. > To quote a Soviet favorite. What is to be done?. > > With respect to the current article under discussion, that is the question I have been trying to push vis a vis those of us whose work is professionally tied up with education. Suppose the critique is correct and that the nature of the alternative is specified to the level present in the article.Here is a quote from the conclusion about which there has been some discussion. > > * In other words, we as teachers, students, parents, and researchers > must articulate new ways of? making selves intelligible in the > contexts of our lives, including producing ?identities-with-standing?? > that encompass the qualities we want to promote, identities that index > a way-of-being that brings? special pride and a sense of self-worth > with respect to qualities that matter. In the case of schools and* > > *classrooms, these qualities might include intellectual curiosity, > serious deliberation, citizen participation,* *? * *social critique, > and deep knowledge and understanding?.* > > > ?Do we come up with "indexes of 'identities with standing'"? Or "social critique" (no problem with knowledge and understanding, we have test scores. :-) ). > > How does this collection of legitimately peripheral participants in so many lifeworlds address this situation as relevant academic "experts"? > (my son often reminds me that an expert is just a drip under pressure). > > Odd historical circumstances when Lenin's "what is to be done" > question is posed in such an upside down confluence of historically > antonymous ideologies and world systems. ? > > mike? > > *?* > > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 2:16 PM, wrote: > >> This may be of interest on the topic of standardization and >> replication and measurement phenomena as what seems to be driving the >> desire for >> (exact) science and how it is colonizing social studies Social >> Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan that Could Fix It The NIH's >> Office of Behavioral and Social Science Research is responding to a >> fundamental shift in social science research. >> >> >> https://www.wired.com/2016/11/social-science-busted-nih-plan-fix/ >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone >> >> From r.j.s.parsons@open.ac.uk Mon Nov 28 08:11:01 2016 From: r.j.s.parsons@open.ac.uk (R.J.S.Parsons) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 16:11:01 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan that Could Fix It | WIRED In-Reply-To: References: <583766c4.11946b0a.8572c.f584@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Thanks Rob On 28/11/2016 11:41, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > Odd, it worked on my end. I'm attaching the ms. p > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of R.J.S.Parsons > Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 6:39 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan that Could Fix It | WIRED > > That link to your site doesn't work, Peter. > > Rob > > On 28/11/2016 11:19, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: >> I've written something that speaks to the problem that scientists can agree on concepts, but social scientists can't. It originates in Vygotsky's tendency to illustrate complex social concepts with biological examples that oversimplify the process of the development of social concepts that have no "solid" form. >> >> Smagorinsky, P. (2013). The development of social and practical >> concepts in learning to teach: A synthesis and extension of Vygotsky's >> conception. Learning, Culture, and Social Interaction, 2(4), 238-248. >> Available at >> http://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/LCSI/LCSI_2013.pdf >> >> abstract >> This conceptual paper interrogates, considers, and expands on >> Vygotsky's notion of concept development. I first review Vygotsky's >> account of concept development, including his distinction between >> scientific and spontaneous concepts. I next summarize his pattern of >> concept development from complexes to pseudoconcepts to concepts, and >> in the process problematize his view by shifting his discussion from >> biological examples to social examples. The following section examines >> concepts as cultural constructions, with attention to the cultural >> nature of concepts, and concepts and societal telos. The third section outlines processes that complement and enrich concept development, including concept development's future orientation, the affective dimension of concept development, and creativity's role in concept development as a higher mental function. >> The fourth section takes Vygotsky's notion of concept development's >> ?twisting path? and complicates it by questioning the extent to which >> social concepts have a clear meaning toward which any pathway may lead >> given their relativistic and ideological nature. This inquiry leads to >> the proposal of practical concepts that serve as fragmented >> understandings that generally cohere yet are inherently compromised by attention to contradictory means of mediation in socialcultural?historical contexts. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole >> Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2016 7:36 PM >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan >> that Could Fix It | WIRED >> >> I just got to this message, Larry. >> I agree, everyone on xmca should read the article, not only because it is relevant to Margaret and Carrie's paper vis a vis the trajectory of neoliberal exaggerations of trends visible from Bush onward and if Mill can be used as an authority, back to the origins of modern mass schooling. It is also directly relevant to the kinds of pressures that current and future generations of social science researchers will face in terms of grants and publications. For example: >> >> * For one, the plan calls for scientists to nail down and agree on >> terminology for different concepts so researchers aren?t just talking >> past each other. ?Often, in behavioral science, people talk about >> different phenomena but really mean the same thing,? says Riley. Or >> the opposite >> happens: Chemists don?t squabble about what oxygen is, but if >> psychologists convene a conference on a fuzzier concept like ?trust,? >> says Colin Camerer , >> an economist at Caltech, they?ll spend the first two days disagreeing >> about what the word actually means.* >> >> *That ambiguity gets tricky when researchers are trying to share and >> compare datasets, especially the massive ones scientists work with >> nowadays. (If you?re trying to compare variables in two datasets both >> named ?resilience,? how do you know they?re really the same thing?) To >> fix these problems, the plan suggests, scientists should settle on >> rigorously defined terms. ?We need to figure out what we mean when we >> say ?depression,? and how to define it?either by using the same >> measures, or by calibrating with the same framework,? Riley says.* >> >> ?The first paragraph rings true to me and ought to at least resonate with even the most legitimate peripheral participant on xmca. The theory ladeness of core terms is so very clearly laid out in this imaginary idea-cocktail party. And as the second paragraph makes clear, its all about coding, which David has introduced into the conversation. >> >> Overall, I think its relevant to both the theory and practice that serves as the content of xmca. >> To quote a Soviet favorite. What is to be done?. >> >> With respect to the current article under discussion, that is the question I have been trying to push vis a vis those of us whose work is professionally tied up with education. Suppose the critique is correct and that the nature of the alternative is specified to the level present in the article.Here is a quote from the conclusion about which there has been some discussion. >> >> * In other words, we as teachers, students, parents, and researchers >> must articulate new ways of? making selves intelligible in the >> contexts of our lives, including producing ?identities-with-standing?? >> that encompass the qualities we want to promote, identities that index >> a way-of-being that brings? special pride and a sense of self-worth >> with respect to qualities that matter. In the case of schools and* >> >> *classrooms, these qualities might include intellectual curiosity, >> serious deliberation, citizen participation,* *? * *social critique, >> and deep knowledge and understanding?.* >> >> >> ?Do we come up with "indexes of 'identities with standing'"? Or "social critique" (no problem with knowledge and understanding, we have test scores. :-) ). >> >> How does this collection of legitimately peripheral participants in so many lifeworlds address this situation as relevant academic "experts"? >> (my son often reminds me that an expert is just a drip under pressure). >> >> Odd historical circumstances when Lenin's "what is to be done" >> question is posed in such an upside down confluence of historically >> antonymous ideologies and world systems. ? >> >> mike? >> >> *?* >> >> >> On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 2:16 PM, wrote: >> >>> This may be of interest on the topic of standardization and >>> replication and measurement phenomena as what seems to be driving the >>> desire for >>> (exact) science and how it is colonizing social studies Social >>> Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan that Could Fix It The NIH's >>> Office of Behavioral and Social Science Research is responding to a >>> fundamental shift in social science research. >>> >>> >>> https://www.wired.com/2016/11/social-science-busted-nih-plan-fix/ >>> Sent from my Windows 10 phone >>> >>> From mcole@ucsd.edu Mon Nov 28 09:29:34 2016 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 09:29:34 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan thatCould Fix It | WIRED In-Reply-To: <583c526d.ca61630a.b0b3a.e83c@mx.google.com> References: <583766c4.11946b0a.8572c.f584@mx.google.com> <583c526d.ca61630a.b0b3a.e83c@mx.google.com> Message-ID: I understand the sentiment, Larry. But for active academics who want to have a voice, the apparently inexorable movement toward nano-control both local and global seems unlikely to suffice. I have not had time to read Peter's paper, but will get to it. I now have copies of the Zuckerman for those that wish a copy. mike On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 7:50 AM, wrote: > Peter, Mike, > Thanks for engaging with this topic that can seem to be herding cats > (earlier metaphor). > I want to raise up a specific question Mike asks: > Do we come up with (indexes) of identities with standing??. > Indexes as signs pointing or gesturing towards ... > What if we don?t (come up with) indexes. > What if we singularly and co-generatively ARE indexes or signs as human > beings expressing our humanity, pointing towards worlds of (significance) > within which our existence occurs (unfolds). My being/becoming as movement, > inclination, leaning into, indicating the reality of worlds of significance > and our response ability to see beyond our individual existence to embrace > and sustain and yes -resume- our mutual engagement nurturing worlds of > significance. > It is not a matter of drawing up a list of indexes, but of living out and > being/becoming indexical beings oriented towards worlds of significance. > > Critique yes, but derived from what is already given. > We stand not only between past and future, but equally between tradition > and oblivion. (Foulcault). > The angel of oblivion that must be answered by our existence as sign or > index. > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: Peter Smagorinsky > Sent: November 28, 2016 3:43 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan > thatCould Fix It | WIRED > > Odd, it worked on my end. I'm attaching the ms. p > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of R.J.S.Parsons > Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 6:39 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan > that Could Fix It | WIRED > > That link to your site doesn't work, Peter. > > Rob > > On 28/11/2016 11:19, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > I've written something that speaks to the problem that scientists can > agree on concepts, but social scientists can't. It originates in Vygotsky's > tendency to illustrate complex social concepts with biological examples > that oversimplify the process of the development of social concepts that > have no "solid" form. > > > > Smagorinsky, P. (2013). The development of social and practical > > concepts in learning to teach: A synthesis and extension of Vygotsky's > > conception. Learning, Culture, and Social Interaction, 2(4), 238-248. > > Available at > > http://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/LCSI/LCSI_2013.pdf > > > > abstract > > This conceptual paper interrogates, considers, and expands on > > Vygotsky's notion of concept development. I first review Vygotsky's > > account of concept development, including his distinction between > > scientific and spontaneous concepts. I next summarize his pattern of > > concept development from complexes to pseudoconcepts to concepts, and > > in the process problematize his view by shifting his discussion from > > biological examples to social examples. The following section examines > > concepts as cultural constructions, with attention to the cultural > > nature of concepts, and concepts and societal telos. The third section > outlines processes that complement and enrich concept development, > including concept development's future orientation, the affective dimension > of concept development, and creativity's role in concept development as a > higher mental function. > > The fourth section takes Vygotsky's notion of concept development's > > ?twisting path? and complicates it by questioning the extent to which > > social concepts have a clear meaning toward which any pathway may lead > > given their relativistic and ideological nature. This inquiry leads to > > the proposal of practical concepts that serve as fragmented > > understandings that generally cohere yet are inherently compromised by > attention to contradictory means of mediation in socialcultural?historical > contexts. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole > > Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2016 7:36 PM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan > > that Could Fix It | WIRED > > > > I just got to this message, Larry. > > I agree, everyone on xmca should read the article, not only because it > is relevant to Margaret and Carrie's paper vis a vis the trajectory of > neoliberal exaggerations of trends visible from Bush onward and if Mill can > be used as an authority, back to the origins of modern mass schooling. It > is also directly relevant to the kinds of pressures that current and future > generations of social science researchers will face in terms of grants and > publications. For example: > > > > * For one, the plan calls for scientists to nail down and agree on > > terminology for different concepts so researchers aren?t just talking > > past each other. ?Often, in behavioral science, people talk about > > different phenomena but really mean the same thing,? says Riley. Or > > the opposite > > happens: Chemists don?t squabble about what oxygen is, but if > > psychologists convene a conference on a fuzzier concept like ?trust,? > > says Colin Camerer , > > an economist at Caltech, they?ll spend the first two days disagreeing > > about what the word actually means.* > > > > *That ambiguity gets tricky when researchers are trying to share and > > compare datasets, especially the massive ones scientists work with > > nowadays. (If you?re trying to compare variables in two datasets both > > named ?resilience,? how do you know they?re really the same thing?) To > > fix these problems, the plan suggests, scientists should settle on > > rigorously defined terms. ?We need to figure out what we mean when we > > say ?depression,? and how to define it?either by using the same > > measures, or by calibrating with the same framework,? Riley says.* > > > > ?The first paragraph rings true to me and ought to at least resonate > with even the most legitimate peripheral participant on xmca. The theory > ladeness of core terms is so very clearly laid out in this imaginary > idea-cocktail party. And as the second paragraph makes clear, its all about > coding, which David has introduced into the conversation. > > > > Overall, I think its relevant to both the theory and practice that > serves as the content of xmca. > > To quote a Soviet favorite. What is to be done?. > > > > With respect to the current article under discussion, that is the > question I have been trying to push vis a vis those of us whose work is > professionally tied up with education. Suppose the critique is correct and > that the nature of the alternative is specified to the level present in the > article.Here is a quote from the conclusion about which there has been some > discussion. > > > > * In other words, we as teachers, students, parents, and researchers > > must articulate new ways of? making selves intelligible in the > > contexts of our lives, including producing ?identities-with-standing?? > > that encompass the qualities we want to promote, identities that index > > a way-of-being that brings? special pride and a sense of self-worth > > with respect to qualities that matter. In the case of schools and* > > > > *classrooms, these qualities might include intellectual curiosity, > > serious deliberation, citizen participation,* *? * *social critique, > > and deep knowledge and understanding?.* > > > > > > ?Do we come up with "indexes of 'identities with standing'"? Or "social > critique" (no problem with knowledge and understanding, we have test > scores. :-) ). > > > > How does this collection of legitimately peripheral participants in so > many lifeworlds address this situation as relevant academic "experts"? > > (my son often reminds me that an expert is just a drip under pressure). > > > > Odd historical circumstances when Lenin's "what is to be done" > > question is posed in such an upside down confluence of historically > > antonymous ideologies and world systems. ? > > > > mike? > > > > *?* > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 2:16 PM, wrote: > > > >> This may be of interest on the topic of standardization and > >> replication and measurement phenomena as what seems to be driving the > >> desire for > >> (exact) science and how it is colonizing social studies Social > >> Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan that Could Fix It The NIH's > >> Office of Behavioral and Social Science Research is responding to a > >> fundamental shift in social science research. > >> > >> > >> https://www.wired.com/2016/11/social-science-busted-nih-plan-fix/ > >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone > >> > >> > > > From mcole@ucsd.edu Mon Nov 28 09:31:54 2016 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 09:31:54 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan thatCould Fix It | WIRED In-Reply-To: References: <583766c4.11946b0a.8572c.f584@mx.google.com> <583c526d.ca61630a.b0b3a.e83c@mx.google.com> Message-ID: I miss spoke slightly in my last message. I repeat it below, modified, to head off misunderstanding. I understand the sentiment, Larry. But for active academics who want to have a voice, the apparently inexorable movement toward nano-control both local and global seems to make *wholesale rejection* unlikely to suffice. mike On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 9:29 AM, mike cole wrote: > I understand the sentiment, Larry. But for active academics who want to > have a voice, the apparently inexorable movement toward nano-control both > local and global seems unlikely to suffice. > > I have not had time to read Peter's paper, but will get to it. > > I now have copies of the Zuckerman for those that wish a copy. > mike > > On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 7:50 AM, wrote: > >> Peter, Mike, >> Thanks for engaging with this topic that can seem to be herding cats >> (earlier metaphor). >> I want to raise up a specific question Mike asks: >> Do we come up with (indexes) of identities with standing??. >> Indexes as signs pointing or gesturing towards ... >> What if we don?t (come up with) indexes. >> What if we singularly and co-generatively ARE indexes or signs as human >> beings expressing our humanity, pointing towards worlds of (significance) >> within which our existence occurs (unfolds). My being/becoming as movement, >> inclination, leaning into, indicating the reality of worlds of significance >> and our response ability to see beyond our individual existence to embrace >> and sustain and yes -resume- our mutual engagement nurturing worlds of >> significance. >> It is not a matter of drawing up a list of indexes, but of living out and >> being/becoming indexical beings oriented towards worlds of significance. >> >> Critique yes, but derived from what is already given. >> We stand not only between past and future, but equally between tradition >> and oblivion. (Foulcault). >> The angel of oblivion that must be answered by our existence as sign or >> index. >> >> >> >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone >> >> From: Peter Smagorinsky >> Sent: November 28, 2016 3:43 AM >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan >> thatCould Fix It | WIRED >> >> Odd, it worked on my end. I'm attaching the ms. p >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman >> .ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of R.J.S.Parsons >> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 6:39 AM >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan >> that Could Fix It | WIRED >> >> That link to your site doesn't work, Peter. >> >> Rob >> >> On 28/11/2016 11:19, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: >> > I've written something that speaks to the problem that scientists can >> agree on concepts, but social scientists can't. It originates in Vygotsky's >> tendency to illustrate complex social concepts with biological examples >> that oversimplify the process of the development of social concepts that >> have no "solid" form. >> > >> > Smagorinsky, P. (2013). The development of social and practical >> > concepts in learning to teach: A synthesis and extension of Vygotsky's >> > conception. Learning, Culture, and Social Interaction, 2(4), 238-248. >> > Available at >> > http://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/LCSI/LCSI_2013.pdf >> > >> > abstract >> > This conceptual paper interrogates, considers, and expands on >> > Vygotsky's notion of concept development. I first review Vygotsky's >> > account of concept development, including his distinction between >> > scientific and spontaneous concepts. I next summarize his pattern of >> > concept development from complexes to pseudoconcepts to concepts, and >> > in the process problematize his view by shifting his discussion from >> > biological examples to social examples. The following section examines >> > concepts as cultural constructions, with attention to the cultural >> > nature of concepts, and concepts and societal telos. The third section >> outlines processes that complement and enrich concept development, >> including concept development's future orientation, the affective dimension >> of concept development, and creativity's role in concept development as a >> higher mental function. >> > The fourth section takes Vygotsky's notion of concept development's >> > ?twisting path? and complicates it by questioning the extent to which >> > social concepts have a clear meaning toward which any pathway may lead >> > given their relativistic and ideological nature. This inquiry leads to >> > the proposal of practical concepts that serve as fragmented >> > understandings that generally cohere yet are inherently compromised by >> attention to contradictory means of mediation in socialcultural?historical >> contexts. >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole >> > Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2016 7:36 PM >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan >> > that Could Fix It | WIRED >> > >> > I just got to this message, Larry. >> > I agree, everyone on xmca should read the article, not only because it >> is relevant to Margaret and Carrie's paper vis a vis the trajectory of >> neoliberal exaggerations of trends visible from Bush onward and if Mill can >> be used as an authority, back to the origins of modern mass schooling. It >> is also directly relevant to the kinds of pressures that current and future >> generations of social science researchers will face in terms of grants and >> publications. For example: >> > >> > * For one, the plan calls for scientists to nail down and agree on >> > terminology for different concepts so researchers aren?t just talking >> > past each other. ?Often, in behavioral science, people talk about >> > different phenomena but really mean the same thing,? says Riley. Or >> > the opposite >> > happens: Chemists don?t squabble about what oxygen is, but if >> > psychologists convene a conference on a fuzzier concept like ?trust,? >> > says Colin Camerer , >> > an economist at Caltech, they?ll spend the first two days disagreeing >> > about what the word actually means.* >> > >> > *That ambiguity gets tricky when researchers are trying to share and >> > compare datasets, especially the massive ones scientists work with >> > nowadays. (If you?re trying to compare variables in two datasets both >> > named ?resilience,? how do you know they?re really the same thing?) To >> > fix these problems, the plan suggests, scientists should settle on >> > rigorously defined terms. ?We need to figure out what we mean when we >> > say ?depression,? and how to define it?either by using the same >> > measures, or by calibrating with the same framework,? Riley says.* >> > >> > ?The first paragraph rings true to me and ought to at least resonate >> with even the most legitimate peripheral participant on xmca. The theory >> ladeness of core terms is so very clearly laid out in this imaginary >> idea-cocktail party. And as the second paragraph makes clear, its all about >> coding, which David has introduced into the conversation. >> > >> > Overall, I think its relevant to both the theory and practice that >> serves as the content of xmca. >> > To quote a Soviet favorite. What is to be done?. >> > >> > With respect to the current article under discussion, that is the >> question I have been trying to push vis a vis those of us whose work is >> professionally tied up with education. Suppose the critique is correct and >> that the nature of the alternative is specified to the level present in the >> article.Here is a quote from the conclusion about which there has been some >> discussion. >> > >> > * In other words, we as teachers, students, parents, and researchers >> > must articulate new ways of? making selves intelligible in the >> > contexts of our lives, including producing ?identities-with-standing?? >> > that encompass the qualities we want to promote, identities that index >> > a way-of-being that brings? special pride and a sense of self-worth >> > with respect to qualities that matter. In the case of schools and* >> > >> > *classrooms, these qualities might include intellectual curiosity, >> > serious deliberation, citizen participation,* *? * *social critique, >> > and deep knowledge and understanding?.* >> > >> > >> > ?Do we come up with "indexes of 'identities with standing'"? Or "social >> critique" (no problem with knowledge and understanding, we have test >> scores. :-) ). >> > >> > How does this collection of legitimately peripheral participants in so >> many lifeworlds address this situation as relevant academic "experts"? >> > (my son often reminds me that an expert is just a drip under pressure). >> > >> > Odd historical circumstances when Lenin's "what is to be done" >> > question is posed in such an upside down confluence of historically >> > antonymous ideologies and world systems. ? >> > >> > mike? >> > >> > *?* >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 2:16 PM, wrote: >> > >> >> This may be of interest on the topic of standardization and >> >> replication and measurement phenomena as what seems to be driving the >> >> desire for >> >> (exact) science and how it is colonizing social studies Social >> >> Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan that Could Fix It The NIH's >> >> Office of Behavioral and Social Science Research is responding to a >> >> fundamental shift in social science research. >> >> >> >> >> >> https://www.wired.com/2016/11/social-science-busted-nih-plan-fix/ >> >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Mon Nov 28 10:18:49 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 10:18:49 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a PlanthatCould Fix It | WIRED In-Reply-To: References: <583766c4.11946b0a.8572c.f584@mx.google.com> <583c526d.ca61630a.b0b3a.e83c@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <583c7520.5552620a.84733.ff1b@mx.google.com> Mike, In order for academics to keep alive an active voice may require a response such as keeping alive the (ideal) of the university that requires models or exemplars situated within the hallways of academia. (institutes of ...) For example the creation of the laboratory that you instituted at San Diego (against the odds). Vygotsky and Dewey creating institutional places are other examples. Some university departments intentionally embracing the mandate to put humanistic education at the forefront in counterpoint to the inexorable movement to nano-control. Mike, it seems possible to continue to create, constitute, institute, dwelling places swimming upstream as counterpoints, but only if we focus attention on their creation and ongoing maintenance. One example of this type of creativity i found in Seattle. Three homes in a suburb were purchased by a group in common. The fences were removed and paths created joining up the 3 houses as a common dwelling space (in the suburbs). As an experiment it was noteworthy. Co-housing is another example. The Lave and McDermott paper where no individual authorship is claimed is another example. The same forces fragmenting and moving towards nano-control across settings, would seem to require creating institutes that answer back and give voice to the plurality of shared voices organized as exemplary places where the person can become a sign of that world of significance. We are not voiceless when we are shared voices. Maybe too ideal? Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: mike cole Sent: November 28, 2016 9:34 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a PlanthatCould Fix It | WIRED I miss spoke slightly in my last message. I repeat it below, modified, to head off misunderstanding. I understand the sentiment, Larry. But for active academics who want to have a voice, the apparently inexorable movement toward nano-control both local and global seems to make *wholesale rejection* unlikely to suffice. mike On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 9:29 AM, mike cole wrote: > I understand the sentiment, Larry. But for active academics who want to > have a voice, the apparently inexorable movement toward nano-control both > local and global seems unlikely to suffice. > > I have not had time to read Peter's paper, but will get to it. > > I now have copies of the Zuckerman for those that wish a copy. > mike > > On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 7:50 AM, wrote: > >> Peter, Mike, >> Thanks for engaging with this topic that can seem to be herding cats >> (earlier metaphor). >> I want to raise up a specific question Mike asks: >> Do we come up with (indexes) of identities with standing??. >> Indexes as signs pointing or gesturing towards ... >> What if we don?t (come up with) indexes. >> What if we singularly and co-generatively ARE indexes or signs as human >> beings expressing our humanity, pointing towards worlds of (significance) >> within which our existence occurs (unfolds). My being/becoming as movement, >> inclination, leaning into, indicating the reality of worlds of significance >> and our response ability to see beyond our individual existence to embrace >> and sustain and yes -resume- our mutual engagement nurturing worlds of >> significance. >> It is not a matter of drawing up a list of indexes, but of living out and >> being/becoming indexical beings oriented towards worlds of significance. >> >> Critique yes, but derived from what is already given. >> We stand not only between past and future, but equally between tradition >> and oblivion. (Foulcault). >> The angel of oblivion that must be answered by our existence as sign or >> index. >> >> >> >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone >> >> From: Peter Smagorinsky >> Sent: November 28, 2016 3:43 AM >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan >> thatCould Fix It | WIRED >> >> Odd, it worked on my end. I'm attaching the ms. p >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman >> .ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of R.J.S.Parsons >> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 6:39 AM >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan >> that Could Fix It | WIRED >> >> That link to your site doesn't work, Peter. >> >> Rob >> >> On 28/11/2016 11:19, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: >> > I've written something that speaks to the problem that scientists can >> agree on concepts, but social scientists can't. It originates in Vygotsky's >> tendency to illustrate complex social concepts with biological examples >> that oversimplify the process of the development of social concepts that >> have no "solid" form. >> > >> > Smagorinsky, P. (2013). The development of social and practical >> > concepts in learning to teach: A synthesis and extension of Vygotsky's >> > conception. Learning, Culture, and Social Interaction, 2(4), 238-248. >> > Available at >> > http://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/LCSI/LCSI_2013.pdf >> > >> > abstract >> > This conceptual paper interrogates, considers, and expands on >> > Vygotsky's notion of concept development. I first review Vygotsky's >> > account of concept development, including his distinction between >> > scientific and spontaneous concepts. I next summarize his pattern of >> > concept development from complexes to pseudoconcepts to concepts, and >> > in the process problematize his view by shifting his discussion from >> > biological examples to social examples. The following section examines >> > concepts as cultural constructions, with attention to the cultural >> > nature of concepts, and concepts and societal telos. The third section >> outlines processes that complement and enrich concept development, >> including concept development's future orientation, the affective dimension >> of concept development, and creativity's role in concept development as a >> higher mental function. >> > The fourth section takes Vygotsky's notion of concept development's >> > ?twisting path? and complicates it by questioning the extent to which >> > social concepts have a clear meaning toward which any pathway may lead >> > given their relativistic and ideological nature. This inquiry leads to >> > the proposal of practical concepts that serve as fragmented >> > understandings that generally cohere yet are inherently compromised by >> attention to contradictory means of mediation in socialcultural?historical >> contexts. >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole >> > Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2016 7:36 PM >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan >> > that Could Fix It | WIRED >> > >> > I just got to this message, Larry. >> > I agree, everyone on xmca should read the article, not only because it >> is relevant to Margaret and Carrie's paper vis a vis the trajectory of >> neoliberal exaggerations of trends visible from Bush onward and if Mill can >> be used as an authority, back to the origins of modern mass schooling. It >> is also directly relevant to the kinds of pressures that current and future >> generations of social science researchers will face in terms of grants and >> publications. For example: >> > >> > * For one, the plan calls for scientists to nail down and agree on >> > terminology for different concepts so researchers aren?t just talking >> > past each other. ?Often, in behavioral science, people talk about >> > different phenomena but really mean the same thing,? says Riley. Or >> > the opposite >> > happens: Chemists don?t squabble about what oxygen is, but if >> > psychologists convene a conference on a fuzzier concept like ?trust,? >> > says Colin Camerer , >> > an economist at Caltech, they?ll spend the first two days disagreeing >> > about what the word actually means.* >> > >> > *That ambiguity gets tricky when researchers are trying to share and >> > compare datasets, especially the massive ones scientists work with >> > nowadays. (If you?re trying to compare variables in two datasets both >> > named ?resilience,? how do you know they?re really the same thing?) To >> > fix these problems, the plan suggests, scientists should settle on >> > rigorously defined terms. ?We need to figure out what we mean when we >> > say ?depression,? and how to define it?either by using the same >> > measures, or by calibrating with the same framework,? Riley says.* >> > >> > ?The first paragraph rings true to me and ought to at least resonate >> with even the most legitimate peripheral participant on xmca. The theory >> ladeness of core terms is so very clearly laid out in this imaginary >> idea-cocktail party. And as the second paragraph makes clear, its all about >> coding, which David has introduced into the conversation. >> > >> > Overall, I think its relevant to both the theory and practice that >> serves as the content of xmca. >> > To quote a Soviet favorite. What is to be done?. >> > >> > With respect to the current article under discussion, that is the >> question I have been trying to push vis a vis those of us whose work is >> professionally tied up with education. Suppose the critique is correct and >> that the nature of the alternative is specified to the level present in the >> article.Here is a quote from the conclusion about which there has been some >> discussion. >> > >> > * In other words, we as teachers, students, parents, and researchers >> > must articulate new ways of? making selves intelligible in the >> > contexts of our lives, including producing ?identities-with-standing?? >> > that encompass the qualities we want to promote, identities that index >> > a way-of-being that brings? special pride and a sense of self-worth >> > with respect to qualities that matter. In the case of schools and* >> > >> > *classrooms, these qualities might include intellectual curiosity, >> > serious deliberation, citizen participation,* *? * *social critique, >> > and deep knowledge and understanding?.* >> > >> > >> > ?Do we come up with "indexes of 'identities with standing'"? Or "social >> critique" (no problem with knowledge and understanding, we have test >> scores. :-) ). >> > >> > How does this collection of legitimately peripheral participants in so >> many lifeworlds address this situation as relevant academic "experts"? >> > (my son often reminds me that an expert is just a drip under pressure). >> > >> > Odd historical circumstances when Lenin's "what is to be done" >> > question is posed in such an upside down confluence of historically >> > antonymous ideologies and world systems. ? >> > >> > mike? >> > >> > *?* >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 2:16 PM, wrote: >> > >> >> This may be of interest on the topic of standardization and >> >> replication and measurement phenomena as what seems to be driving the >> >> desire for >> >> (exact) science and how it is colonizing social studies Social >> >> Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan that Could Fix It The NIH's >> >> Office of Behavioral and Social Science Research is responding to a >> >> fundamental shift in social science research. >> >> >> >> >> >> https://www.wired.com/2016/11/social-science-busted-nih-plan-fix/ >> >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > From dkellogg60@gmail.com Mon Nov 28 12:07:42 2016 From: dkellogg60@gmail.com (David Kellogg) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2016 07:07:42 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started In-Reply-To: References: <1477893000984.89344@iped.uio.no> <581892be.a18e420a.e8c1b.91c5@mx.google.com> <1478048037834.30258@iped.uio.no> <1478731123911.34663@iped.uio.no> <58260f6e.8c13620a.15aad.dbbc@mx.google.com> <2BD9CC83-EA02-4830-B8C0-76BC78FAFBFB@colorado.edu> <5753689B-395F-4239-B435-58A40CAC2526@gmail.com> <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no> <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no> <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com> <582e7283.84cf620a.c9f5a.302f@mx.google.com> <56BA469E-D1C3-4924-8C7F-F976876DEE9E@gmail.com> <583060c1.098d620a.b4db8.5e32@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Chuck: Writing across the curriculum! Of course. That's a more obvious predecessor for what we are doing in Australia than "language across the curriculum". The final report of the Computer Science Education Research Group at Adelaide attached to the new curriculum was in April 2015, and I heard about it at a rather boozy Friday afternoon party when I arrived here almost exactly a year ago. So I suspect we are more indebted to Bazerman Senior than Bazerman Junior. (Terrific stemwinder, though; lots for me to chew on when I talk to the ISCAR symposium in Melbourne this weekend.) I was thinking that Mike's interpretation of "coding" as referring to coding data rather than computer code was a pretty good example of how words wander in social science--but there is a third meaning that is apposite, namely Bernstein's semantic codes. When we compare the social sciences to the natural sciences, one difference we note almost right away is that the natural sciences strongly prefer "vertical codes" where the basic concepts of one science, e.g. chemistry, are in principle reducible to another, e.g. physics. This doesn't necessarily mean reductionism: obviously, approaching discourse from the study of phonemes is about as efficient as trying to study biology from the point of view of subatomic particles. But it keeps us all in one world, if not on the same page. This monism doesn't seem to be part of the social sciences world view: we CHATniks owe almost our whole raison d'etre to a century-long struggle to find a way of linking sociological concepts to psychological ones, and it's been a struggle very much against the stream, at least in languages. The obvious parallel for the "horizontal codes" in the social sciences is not much the science discourse of the renaissance but the religious discourse of the late middle ages (this is made explicit in Chomsky's "Cartesian linguistics"). David Kellogg Macquarie University On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 1:49 PM, Charles Bazerman < bazerman@education.ucsb.edu> wrote: > David, > Here is a digressive dad boast and a query. > In May 2015 my computer science son gave a lightning talk at a major > computer science conference on floating the idea of Coding Across the > Curriculum. So I am wondering whether the Australian initiative predated > that or may have been influenced by it. > https://youtu.be/K1eKsr-JV3c?t=7m5s > Thanks, > Chuck > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: David Kellogg > Date: Sunday, November 27, 2016 1:18 pm > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > Here in Australia they are introducing "coding across the curriculum". > > It > > is modelled on "language across the curriculum", which was a movement > > in > > England in the seventies where the language of instruction in maths, > > sciences, arts, etc. was considered as the object of curricular planning. > > So for example when we teach base non-decimal ways of counting, we teach > > them in the context of using everyday language (e.g. word problems with > > hours and minutes or months and weeks, which require some counting in > > non-decimal systems). So too with "coding across the curriculum". Kids > > are > > mostly taught using a programming language called "Stitch" developed by > > MIT, which uses non-numerical symbols for programming, and which can be > > used to do very different things in the classroom, irrespective of the > > discipline. You can use Stitch to create geometrical patterns, to > > taxonomize animals and plants, to make digital paintings, to write > > music, and so on. Cool stuff; kids love it. > > > > But once again you can see the emphasis is on integration of disciplinary > > knowledge "where the rubber meets the road"--that is, as everyday > concepts. > > In a weird way, the result is something like the labor schools of the > > 1920s > > which Vygotsky and Blonsky and pedology generally participated in > building. > > That is, you learn about higher concepts like circumference and radius > > in > > the context of learning to drill or operate a lathe. This seems to me > > a > > very different kind of integration from teaching with concepts in the > > 1930s, which is (I think) the basis of the Davydov "germ cell" approach > > (and which was certainly the basis of Vygotsky's ZPD measured in > > years). I > > think that Davydov would probably look at the Australian curriculum and > > say--you would like to teach coding across the curriculum? An excellent > > idea. Let us begin with binary number systems. Instead of starting at > > the > > interface, where the integration and unity of coding is really somewhat > > artificial and contrived and a product of market generalization, you > > instead start at the most abstract end, where it is genuine and real. > > > > David Kellogg > > Macquarie University > > > > On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 6:47 AM, mike cole wrote: > > > > > The subsequent trail of message showed that it is rarely too late to > > pick > > > up a thread of the conversation and have sometime interesting and > > > informative come of it, Huw. > > > > > > In reading through the string of messages on this topic including the > > > earlier part of thread, I come away reinforced by the idea that the > > > problems associated with current STEM-accountability regimes are a > > > continuation and intensification of trends in education with a very > > long > > > history. > > > > > > As Phillip got us to note, JS Mill made similar points regarding > education > > > (in his case of the British elites/men, but some key ideas seem > > > generalizable). Still, something about the past couple of decades, > perhaps > > > associated with the intensification and globalization of capitalist > > modes > > > of production, seems qualitatively more draconian. And all > > indications are > > > that matters are in the process of worsening, not improving. > > > > > > I was hoping that participants could come up with counter-examples: > > schools > > > where routinely the teaching of STEM subjects was integrated into a > > general > > > curriculum and where successful, more inclusive participation in STEM > > > subjects could result. > > > In this I was disappointed. > > > > > > Ed provided Summerhill and a variety of small, elite, school > > situations. We > > > did not hear from anyone associated with the dialogical education > advocates > > > who once participated in such discussions. I think I offered up the > > school > > > that is the subject of a book by Barbara Rogoff and colleagues (From > > > Wikipedia - *Learning Together: Children and Adults in a School > Community > > > [Oxford press, 2002]*, co-authored with teachers Carolyn Turkanis and > > > Leslee Bartlett, profiled Salt Lake City's "Open Classroom," a > > > parent-cooperative education program that is now a K-8 charter school. > > > > > > Over the US Thanksgiving holiday, reading your various thoughts and > > > chatting with my grandchildren, I came across a case which seemed to > > fit > > > Margaret and Carrie's > > > notions of expanded goals for stem education, and education in > > general. My > > > two grandchildren are going/went to a very elite school, the Lab > > School at > > > the U of C Chicago. At dinner they started to talk about school and > > > favorite teachers. Both identified one teacher who they thought was > > > exceptional and for the same reason. > > > "He respects kids. He always listens to them and takes them seriously." > > > > > > I am sure there are other fine teachers at the school, which is a > pressure > > > cooker of academic achievement and the attainment of yet more > privilege. > > > But institutionalized universal education, as Mills laments in his > elitest > > > and individualistic way (he is focused on Oxbridge), does not appear > > > organized to make such teachers and such classrooms ubiquitous. Its > > > pragmatic social reproduction functions focused on economics and state > > > power, associated with its sorting function, appear to mitigate strong > > > against any significant re-mediation. So my example serves mostly as > > an > > > exception that proves the rule, perhaps. > > > > > > I keep thinking about Lorena, who as Margaret and Carrie show us, > > came* to > > > believe that she had become a bad person?disobedient and > disrespectful?in > > > the eyes of her teacher. * > > > > > > Very painful stuff. STEM reform as an iatrogenic disease. > > > > > > Question for those who know: How are reforms based on the sorts of > > > principles espoused by Davydov, Elkonin, and other cultural-historical > > > pedagogs doing in Russia these days? My impression is that they > struggle > > > for recognition and acceptance. But I could easily be wrong. > > > > > > mike > > > > > > PS- Huw-- I have not read Clive's *Civilization *and it does not > appear > > > rapidly obtainable so could not appreciate your reference to Mill and > > > Clive. Results of an American public school education. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 6:01 PM, Huw Lloyd > > > wrote: > > > > > > > The marketable "skill" is "good behaviour in conjunction with some > > > > operational knowledge". Even in technology-oriented companies, > creativity > > > > and new knowledge are often unwelcome intruders into a > social-political > > > > situation (see for example Allen's 1977 text, Managing the Flow of > > > > Technology). There are many vested interests into the status-quo. > > > > Creativity in whatever sport, is usually against the grain. And > > then, of > > > > course, we have all these qualifications which repel creativity > through > > > > strict enforcement of stupid behaviour. > > > > > > > > Not sure whether I'm waking up a closing thread here, so my thanks > > to > > > > Margaret for discussing the paper. > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > Huw > > > > > > > > On 20 November 2016 at 03:34, David Kellogg > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Sorry, I've lost the plot. That is, I don't see the connection > between > > > > the > > > > > kind of educational neoliberalism that is being discussed in the > > > article > > > > > (that which is based on measurable results, on academic > > tracking, on > > > > > promising goodies in return for grades and grades in return for > > > > schoolwork) > > > > > and the kind of political and economic neoliberalism that is being > > > > > discussed by Cornel. It seems to me that the policies that > > Margaret and > > > > > Carrie are discussing in this paper were not (politically) > > liberal, nor > > > > > were they new: they were taken over by Arne Duncan from the Bush > > > > > administration, and the Bush administration got them, via > > Clinton, from > > > > > good old fashioned "Back to Basics" backlash in the UK. So the > roots > > > are > > > > > Toryism and not liberalism. > > > > > > > > > > I suppose you can argue that there is some kind of implicit analogy > > > > between > > > > > education and neoliberal economics: school is supposed to be > > some kind > > > of > > > > > neoliberal "level playing field" where children compete like > > > businessmen, > > > > > grades are "cultural capital", classes are investment > opportunities, > > > > > assessment portfolios are investment portfolios, etc. This > > analogy is > > > > > little more than a way of whipping up interest among principals, > > > > teachers, > > > > > and even students (and as such I am not sure I am against it, > > since I > > > > don't > > > > > see anything wrong with working class kids taking an interest in > > the > > > > > getting of goodies through study). It's certainly not a good > > > description > > > > of > > > > > what is happening in schools: These businessmen produce no > commodities, > > > > the > > > > > grades are neither exchangeable or consumable; there is no such > > thing > > > as > > > > > credit or interest in this economy, and assets evaporate upon > > > graduation > > > > > instead of maturing. > > > > > > > > > > I think that the word "reform" is actually more important in > Margaret > > > and > > > > > Carrie's title than "neoliberal": a "reform" is usually, on the > > lips of > > > > > government bureaucracy, a euphemism for backlash, and the policies > > > being > > > > > described are part of a more general ideological backlash against > > > > Deweyism > > > > > and progressive education: an anti-liberal reaction rather than > > a > > > > > neo-liberal reform. "Neoliberalism", taken literally, would > > imply that > > > > the > > > > > schools really are in the marketable skills business, and I > > don't see > > > > much > > > > > evidence for that in the study. Am I missing something? > > > > > > > > > > David Kellogg > > > > > Macquarie University > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 1:24 AM, wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Margaret, Carrie, Phillip, Henry, Cornell, > > > > > > > > > > > > A central and key theme of this month?s article is > > neoliberalism in > > > all > > > > > > its guises. > > > > > > In my imaginary response i am addressing the authors of the > > paper and > > > > > > Cornell who addresses neoliberalism, and Phillip, who shared > > > Cornell?s > > > > > > article and Henry who heard Cornell offer a way to mediate our > > > crises. > > > > > > The paper is about teaching STEM and the neoliberal agenda that > > > ignores > > > > > > the plight of those who suffer. > > > > > > Cornell says the answer is (democratic soulcraft). At the > > heart of > > > this > > > > > > soulcraft is truth telling of the reality of suffering. > > > > > > > > > > > > In order to constitute or institute a (new) order a more > pro/gressive > > > > > > order it seems suffering must be the key factor. > > > > > > > > > > > > The notion of ivory towers and their responses to suffering seems > > > > > central. > > > > > > I also want to explore the theme of (play) in relation to > suffering. > > > > > > > > > > > > One exemplar: > > > > > > There is a Buddhist who organizes gatherings where food is > prepared > > > and > > > > > > presented at the gatherings (for the homeless). Musical > instruments > > > are > > > > > > also brought and dancing proceeds. > > > > > > Everyone participates and this is key: You cannot tell who are > > the > > > > > > homeless and who are the people who prepared the food. They are > > > > sharing a > > > > > > common (new) experience that is profoundly moving and creates > > a sense > > > > of > > > > > > well-being. > > > > > > This Buddhist practise is exemplary as a response to our current > > > > > > contemporary historical moment. It is truth telling and > democratic > > > > > > soulcraft and PLAY. (each in the other). > > > > > > It is one way of answering Margaret, Carrie, Cornell, Phillip, > > and > > > > Henry. > > > > > > This Buddhist act or practice is (crafting) an answer that > > speaks to > > > > > > suffering. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > > > > > > > > > From: HENRY SHONERD > > > > > > Sent: November 18, 2016 7:15 PM > > > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion > Re-started > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you, Phillip. > > > > > > "For us in these times, to even have hope is too abstract, too > > > > detached, > > > > > > too spectatorial. Instead we must be a hope, a participant and > > a > > > force > > > > > for > > > > > > good as we face this catastrophe.? > > > > > > That?s my favorite part. > > > > > > Henry > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 18, 2016, at 3:52 PM, White, Phillip < > > > > > Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well, this is what Cornel West has to say: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/aae8946d80dac457aa8b6af3f9a9fd > > > > > > 5acc6b4acb/0_662_5150_3090/master/5150.jpg?w=1200&h=140& > > > > > > q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=crop&bm=normal&ba=bottom% > 2Cleft&blend64= > > > > > > aHR0cHM6Ly91cGxvYWRzLmd1aW0uY28udWsvMjAxNi8wNS8yNS9vdmVybGF5 > > > > > > LWxvZ28tMTIwMC05MF9vcHQucG5n&s=4cbd18b4943818f70304ff2cfdc3da > 2d]< > > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Goodbye, American neoliberalism. A new era is here | Cornel > > West< > > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/ > > > > > > american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election> > > > > > > > www.theguardian.com > > > > > > > Trump?s election was enabled by the policies that overlooked > > the > > > > plight > > > > > > of our most vulnerable citizens. We gird ourselves for a > frightening > > > > > future > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > phillip > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > edu > > > > > > > > > > > > on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 8:16:01 PM > > > > > > > To: Edward Wall; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion > Re-started > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > edu > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> on behalf of Huw Lloyd > > > > > > >>> 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 > > > > > > > > > edu> > > > > > > >>>> on behalf of White, Phillip > > > > > > >>>> 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 > > > > > > > > > edu> > > > > > > >>>> on behalf of David Kellogg > > > > > > >>>> 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 > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> edu> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> edu> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of mike cole > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 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 > > > > > >>>>> com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039 > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> . > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also > > > > attach > > > > > it > > > > > > >>> as > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> PDF. > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> ??Good read! > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Alfredo > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From mcole@ucsd.edu Mon Nov 28 15:38:14 2016 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 15:38:14 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a PlanthatCould Fix It | WIRED In-Reply-To: <583c7520.5552620a.84733.ff1b@mx.google.com> References: <583766c4.11946b0a.8572c.f584@mx.google.com> <583c526d.ca61630a.b0b3a.e83c@mx.google.com> <583c7520.5552620a.84733.ff1b@mx.google.com> Message-ID: For sure there is plenty that can be done, Larry. I was speaking to the narrower issue of dealing with "acceptable" research methods (and topics). Distributed alliances of people with varied expertise is clearly one line of approach. But not an easy one to implement. mike On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 10:18 AM, wrote: > Mike, > In order for academics to keep alive an active voice may require a > response such as keeping alive the (ideal) of the university that requires > models or exemplars situated within the hallways of academia. (institutes > of ...) > For example the creation of the laboratory that you instituted at San > Diego (against the odds). Vygotsky and Dewey creating institutional places > are other examples. Some university departments intentionally embracing > the mandate to put humanistic education at the forefront in counterpoint to > the inexorable movement to nano-control. > > Mike, it seems possible to continue to create, constitute, institute, > dwelling places swimming upstream as counterpoints, but only if we focus > attention on their creation and ongoing maintenance. > > One example of this type of creativity i found in Seattle. Three homes in > a suburb were purchased by a group in common. The fences were removed and > paths created joining up the 3 houses as a common dwelling space (in the > suburbs). As an experiment it was noteworthy. > Co-housing is another example. > The Lave and McDermott paper where no individual authorship is claimed is > another example. > The same forces fragmenting and moving towards nano-control across > settings, would seem to require creating institutes that answer back and > give voice to the plurality of shared voices organized as exemplary places > where the person can become a sign of that world of significance. > We are not voiceless when we are shared voices. Maybe too ideal? > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: mike cole > Sent: November 28, 2016 9:34 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a > PlanthatCould Fix It | WIRED > > I miss spoke slightly in my last message. I repeat it below, modified, to > head off misunderstanding. > > I understand the sentiment, Larry. But for active academics who want to > have a voice, the apparently inexorable movement toward nano-control both > local and global seems to make *wholesale rejection* unlikely to suffice. > > mike > > > > > On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 9:29 AM, mike cole wrote: > > > I understand the sentiment, Larry. But for active academics who want to > > have a voice, the apparently inexorable movement toward nano-control both > > local and global seems unlikely to suffice. > > > > I have not had time to read Peter's paper, but will get to it. > > > > I now have copies of the Zuckerman for those that wish a copy. > > mike > > > > On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 7:50 AM, wrote: > > > >> Peter, Mike, > >> Thanks for engaging with this topic that can seem to be herding cats > >> (earlier metaphor). > >> I want to raise up a specific question Mike asks: > >> Do we come up with (indexes) of identities with standing??. > >> Indexes as signs pointing or gesturing towards ... > >> What if we don?t (come up with) indexes. > >> What if we singularly and co-generatively ARE indexes or signs as human > >> beings expressing our humanity, pointing towards worlds of > (significance) > >> within which our existence occurs (unfolds). My being/becoming as > movement, > >> inclination, leaning into, indicating the reality of worlds of > significance > >> and our response ability to see beyond our individual existence to > embrace > >> and sustain and yes -resume- our mutual engagement nurturing worlds of > >> significance. > >> It is not a matter of drawing up a list of indexes, but of living out > and > >> being/becoming indexical beings oriented towards worlds of significance. > >> > >> Critique yes, but derived from what is already given. > >> We stand not only between past and future, but equally between tradition > >> and oblivion. (Foulcault). > >> The angel of oblivion that must be answered by our existence as sign or > >> index. > >> > >> > >> > >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone > >> > >> From: Peter Smagorinsky > >> Sent: November 28, 2016 3:43 AM > >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan > >> thatCould Fix It | WIRED > >> > >> Odd, it worked on my end. I'm attaching the ms. p > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman > >> .ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of R.J.S.Parsons > >> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 6:39 AM > >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan > >> that Could Fix It | WIRED > >> > >> That link to your site doesn't work, Peter. > >> > >> Rob > >> > >> On 28/11/2016 11:19, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > >> > I've written something that speaks to the problem that scientists can > >> agree on concepts, but social scientists can't. It originates in > Vygotsky's > >> tendency to illustrate complex social concepts with biological examples > >> that oversimplify the process of the development of social concepts that > >> have no "solid" form. > >> > > >> > Smagorinsky, P. (2013). The development of social and practical > >> > concepts in learning to teach: A synthesis and extension of Vygotsky's > >> > conception. Learning, Culture, and Social Interaction, 2(4), 238-248. > >> > Available at > >> > http://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/LCSI/LCSI_2013.pdf > >> > > >> > abstract > >> > This conceptual paper interrogates, considers, and expands on > >> > Vygotsky's notion of concept development. I first review Vygotsky's > >> > account of concept development, including his distinction between > >> > scientific and spontaneous concepts. I next summarize his pattern of > >> > concept development from complexes to pseudoconcepts to concepts, and > >> > in the process problematize his view by shifting his discussion from > >> > biological examples to social examples. The following section examines > >> > concepts as cultural constructions, with attention to the cultural > >> > nature of concepts, and concepts and societal telos. The third section > >> outlines processes that complement and enrich concept development, > >> including concept development's future orientation, the affective > dimension > >> of concept development, and creativity's role in concept development as > a > >> higher mental function. > >> > The fourth section takes Vygotsky's notion of concept development's > >> > ?twisting path? and complicates it by questioning the extent to which > >> > social concepts have a clear meaning toward which any pathway may lead > >> > given their relativistic and ideological nature. This inquiry leads to > >> > the proposal of practical concepts that serve as fragmented > >> > understandings that generally cohere yet are inherently compromised by > >> attention to contradictory means of mediation in > socialcultural?historical > >> contexts. > >> > > >> > -----Original Message----- > >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >> > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole > >> > Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2016 7:36 PM > >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan > >> > that Could Fix It | WIRED > >> > > >> > I just got to this message, Larry. > >> > I agree, everyone on xmca should read the article, not only because it > >> is relevant to Margaret and Carrie's paper vis a vis the trajectory of > >> neoliberal exaggerations of trends visible from Bush onward and if Mill > can > >> be used as an authority, back to the origins of modern mass schooling. > It > >> is also directly relevant to the kinds of pressures that current and > future > >> generations of social science researchers will face in terms of grants > and > >> publications. For example: > >> > > >> > * For one, the plan calls for scientists to nail down and agree on > >> > terminology for different concepts so researchers aren?t just talking > >> > past each other. ?Often, in behavioral science, people talk about > >> > different phenomena but really mean the same thing,? says Riley. Or > >> > the opposite > >> > happens: Chemists don?t squabble about what oxygen is, but if > >> > psychologists convene a conference on a fuzzier concept like ?trust,? > >> > says Colin Camerer >, > >> > an economist at Caltech, they?ll spend the first two days disagreeing > >> > about what the word actually means.* > >> > > >> > *That ambiguity gets tricky when researchers are trying to share and > >> > compare datasets, especially the massive ones scientists work with > >> > nowadays. (If you?re trying to compare variables in two datasets both > >> > named ?resilience,? how do you know they?re really the same thing?) To > >> > fix these problems, the plan suggests, scientists should settle on > >> > rigorously defined terms. ?We need to figure out what we mean when we > >> > say ?depression,? and how to define it?either by using the same > >> > measures, or by calibrating with the same framework,? Riley says.* > >> > > >> > ?The first paragraph rings true to me and ought to at least resonate > >> with even the most legitimate peripheral participant on xmca. The theory > >> ladeness of core terms is so very clearly laid out in this imaginary > >> idea-cocktail party. And as the second paragraph makes clear, its all > about > >> coding, which David has introduced into the conversation. > >> > > >> > Overall, I think its relevant to both the theory and practice that > >> serves as the content of xmca. > >> > To quote a Soviet favorite. What is to be done?. > >> > > >> > With respect to the current article under discussion, that is the > >> question I have been trying to push vis a vis those of us whose work is > >> professionally tied up with education. Suppose the critique is correct > and > >> that the nature of the alternative is specified to the level present in > the > >> article.Here is a quote from the conclusion about which there has been > some > >> discussion. > >> > > >> > * In other words, we as teachers, students, parents, and researchers > >> > must articulate new ways of? making selves intelligible in the > >> > contexts of our lives, including producing ?identities-with-standing?? > >> > that encompass the qualities we want to promote, identities that index > >> > a way-of-being that brings? special pride and a sense of self-worth > >> > with respect to qualities that matter. In the case of schools and* > >> > > >> > *classrooms, these qualities might include intellectual curiosity, > >> > serious deliberation, citizen participation,* *? * *social critique, > >> > and deep knowledge and understanding?.* > >> > > >> > > >> > ?Do we come up with "indexes of 'identities with standing'"? Or > "social > >> critique" (no problem with knowledge and understanding, we have test > >> scores. :-) ). > >> > > >> > How does this collection of legitimately peripheral participants in so > >> many lifeworlds address this situation as relevant academic "experts"? > >> > (my son often reminds me that an expert is just a drip under > pressure). > >> > > >> > Odd historical circumstances when Lenin's "what is to be done" > >> > question is posed in such an upside down confluence of historically > >> > antonymous ideologies and world systems. ? > >> > > >> > mike? > >> > > >> > *?* > >> > > >> > > >> > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 2:16 PM, wrote: > >> > > >> >> This may be of interest on the topic of standardization and > >> >> replication and measurement phenomena as what seems to be driving the > >> >> desire for > >> >> (exact) science and how it is colonizing social studies Social > >> >> Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan that Could Fix It The NIH's > >> >> Office of Behavioral and Social Science Research is responding to a > >> >> fundamental shift in social science research. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> https://www.wired.com/2016/11/social-science-busted-nih-plan-fix/ > >> >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone > >> >> > >> >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > From smago@uga.edu Tue Nov 29 03:30:34 2016 From: smago@uga.edu (Peter Smagorinsky) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2016 11:30:34 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] FW: Performing the World Conference In-Reply-To: <29C7C0CF-3D79-4527-9FF5-2610AE5216D5@eastsideinstitute.org> References: <29C7C0CF-3D79-4527-9FF5-2610AE5216D5@eastsideinstitute.org> Message-ID: Assistant Professor or Associate Professor, Youth Development, Fall 2017 The Youth Development Program (YDEV) at Rhode Island College invites a creative and engaged scholar to join its dynamic team. This position is specifically targeted to a candidate who can develop and facilitate a new Master?s Degree Program in Youth Development. The successful candidate will also be able to teach undergraduate and graduate courses anchored in a positive and/or critical youth development framework. Other responsibilities include contributing to robust partnership initiatives between RIC YDEV and community organizations, sustaining interdisciplinary relationships across education/social work/non-profit studies, and advising graduate and undergraduate students. Founded in 2012 and now boasting almost 100 undergraduate majors, the Youth Development Program at RIC prepares aspiring youth workers to ?lead with? young people to make a better world. Through community partnerships and interdisciplinary coursework in education, social work, and nonprofit studies, RIC YDEV students develop personal and professional tools to engage with young people and their communities. Students, faculty, and staff work and learn together in this vibrant program. Established in 1854, Rhode Island College is a comprehensive mid-size institution of approximately 9000 students. The 180-acre campus is located in beautiful, historic Providence, Rhode Island?s capital, with proximity to the academic and cultural resources of Boston and New York City. Candidates will be considered at the rank of Assistant or Associate Professor based on qualifications. Persons from underrepresented groups are especially encouraged to apply. View more information and the application at https://employment.ric.edu/postings/2698 Corinne McKamey, Ed.D. Associate Professor of Culture, Communities and Education Co-Director, Youth Development BA Program Educational Studies Department Rhode Island College * Henry Barnard School 218 YDEV Website: http://tinyurl.com/ydevric ADVISING APPOINTMENTS (with Dr. McKamey): http://tinyurl.com/Mckamey218 From boblake@georgiasouthern.edu Tue Nov 29 08:49:16 2016 From: boblake@georgiasouthern.edu (Robert Lake) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2016 11:49:16 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Yes, there's now a list of liberal professors being assembled..... In-Reply-To: <99766B1C-E640-4B1A-ACE7-DB93474A23C0@gmail.com> References: <99766B1C-E640-4B1A-ACE7-DB93474A23C0@gmail.com> Message-ID: Here it is again Helen. Let us know what happens if you try again. Robert http://www.professorwatchlist.org/index.php/watch-list-directory/search-by-name On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Helena Worthen wrote: > Hi ? I tried to nominate myself, but even without uploading any documents, > my submission ?exceeded capacity.? That makes it sound like a > Brietbart-type hoax to me. > > H > > Helena Worthen > helenaworthen@gmail.com > Berkeley, CA 94707 > Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com > > > > > On Nov 24, 2016, at 2:56 AM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > > > http://professorwatchlist.org/index.php/about-us > > and this forward might get me on it. p > > > -- Robert Lake Ed.D. Associate Professor Social Foundations of Education Dept. of Curriculum, Foundations, and Reading Georgia Southern University P. O. Box 8144, Statesboro, GA 30460 Secretary/Treasurer-AERA- Paulo Freire Special Interest Group Webpage: https://georgiasouthern.academia.edu/RobertLake*Democracy must be born anew in every generation, and education is its midwife.* John Dewey-*Democracy and Education*,1916, p. 139 From lpscholar2@gmail.com Tue Nov 29 11:16:56 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2016 11:16:56 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a PlanthatCould Fix It | WIRED In-Reply-To: References: <583766c4.11946b0a.8572c.f584@mx.google.com> <583c526d.ca61630a.b0b3a.e83c@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <583dd431.0231620a.2e6d.b49d@mx.google.com> Peter, Mike, Have just finished reading Peter?s paper on the impossibility of ever actually being able to be successful in the desire for nano-control of complex [social] concepts and the assumption that social scientists can come to an agreed meaning that can be used for large scale data analysis and coding. Peter, your paper directly refutes the promethean desire to bring scientific concepts [as a systematic set of principles] under volitional control without realizing the counterpoint that we always return from systematic approaches to *resume* picking up loose threads. Your challenging the metaphor of intertwining threads as too optimistic, too progressive, is interesting. Does seem to be a back and forth historical movement of generating and acquiring cohesive voices followed by fragmentation into a spectrum of layered voices. The back and forth seems to require a sense of play to sustain engagement. Peter, I enjoyed how your paper captures the complexity of beginning a career as a teacher. Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: mike cole Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 9:32 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a PlanthatCould Fix It | WIRED I understand the sentiment, Larry. But for active academics who want to have a voice, the apparently inexorable movement toward nano-control both local and global seems unlikely to suffice. I have not had time to read Peter's paper, but will get to it. I now have copies of the Zuckerman for those that wish a copy. mike On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 7:50 AM, wrote: > Peter, Mike, > Thanks for engaging with this topic that can seem to be herding cats > (earlier metaphor). > I want to raise up a specific question Mike asks: > Do we come up with (indexes) of identities with standing??. > Indexes as signs pointing or gesturing towards ... > What if we don?t (come up with) indexes. > What if we singularly and co-generatively ARE indexes or signs as human > beings expressing our humanity, pointing towards worlds of (significance) > within which our existence occurs (unfolds). My being/becoming as movement, > inclination, leaning into, indicating the reality of worlds of significance > and our response ability to see beyond our individual existence to embrace > and sustain and yes -resume- our mutual engagement nurturing worlds of > significance. > It is not a matter of drawing up a list of indexes, but of living out and > being/becoming indexical beings oriented towards worlds of significance. > > Critique yes, but derived from what is already given. > We stand not only between past and future, but equally between tradition > and oblivion. (Foulcault). > The angel of oblivion that must be answered by our existence as sign or > index. > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > From: Peter Smagorinsky > Sent: November 28, 2016 3:43 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan > thatCould Fix It | WIRED > > Odd, it worked on my end. I'm attaching the ms. p > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of R.J.S.Parsons > Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 6:39 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan > that Could Fix It | WIRED > > That link to your site doesn't work, Peter. > > Rob > > On 28/11/2016 11:19, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > I've written something that speaks to the problem that scientists can > agree on concepts, but social scientists can't. It originates in Vygotsky's > tendency to illustrate complex social concepts with biological examples > that oversimplify the process of the development of social concepts that > have no "solid" form. > > > > Smagorinsky, P. (2013). The development of social and practical > > concepts in learning to teach: A synthesis and extension of Vygotsky's > > conception. Learning, Culture, and Social Interaction, 2(4), 238-248. > > Available at > > http://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/LCSI/LCSI_2013.pdf > > > > abstract > > This conceptual paper interrogates, considers, and expands on > > Vygotsky's notion of concept development. I first review Vygotsky's > > account of concept development, including his distinction between > > scientific and spontaneous concepts. I next summarize his pattern of > > concept development from complexes to pseudoconcepts to concepts, and > > in the process problematize his view by shifting his discussion from > > biological examples to social examples. The following section examines > > concepts as cultural constructions, with attention to the cultural > > nature of concepts, and concepts and societal telos. The third section > outlines processes that complement and enrich concept development, > including concept development's future orientation, the affective dimension > of concept development, and creativity's role in concept development as a > higher mental function. > > The fourth section takes Vygotsky's notion of concept development's > > ?twisting path? and complicates it by questioning the extent to which > > social concepts have a clear meaning toward which any pathway may lead > > given their relativistic and ideological nature. This inquiry leads to > > the proposal of practical concepts that serve as fragmented > > understandings that generally cohere yet are inherently compromised by > attention to contradictory means of mediation in socialcultural?historical > contexts. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole > > Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2016 7:36 PM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan > > that Could Fix It | WIRED > > > > I just got to this message, Larry. > > I agree, everyone on xmca should read the article, not only because it > is relevant to Margaret and Carrie's paper vis a vis the trajectory of > neoliberal exaggerations of trends visible from Bush onward and if Mill can > be used as an authority, back to the origins of modern mass schooling. It > is also directly relevant to the kinds of pressures that current and future > generations of social science researchers will face in terms of grants and > publications. For example: > > > > * For one, the plan calls for scientists to nail down and agree on > > terminology for different concepts so researchers aren?t just talking > > past each other. ?Often, in behavioral science, people talk about > > different phenomena but really mean the same thing,? says Riley. Or > > the opposite > > happens: Chemists don?t squabble about what oxygen is, but if > > psychologists convene a conference on a fuzzier concept like ?trust,? > > says Colin Camerer , > > an economist at Caltech, they?ll spend the first two days disagreeing > > about what the word actually means.* > > > > *That ambiguity gets tricky when researchers are trying to share and > > compare datasets, especially the massive ones scientists work with > > nowadays. (If you?re trying to compare variables in two datasets both > > named ?resilience,? how do you know they?re really the same thing?) To > > fix these problems, the plan suggests, scientists should settle on > > rigorously defined terms. ?We need to figure out what we mean when we > > say ?depression,? and how to define it?either by using the same > > measures, or by calibrating with the same framework,? Riley says.* > > > > ?The first paragraph rings true to me and ought to at least resonate > with even the most legitimate peripheral participant on xmca. The theory > ladeness of core terms is so very clearly laid out in this imaginary > idea-cocktail party. And as the second paragraph makes clear, its all about > coding, which David has introduced into the conversation. > > > > Overall, I think its relevant to both the theory and practice that > serves as the content of xmca. > > To quote a Soviet favorite. What is to be done?. > > > > With respect to the current article under discussion, that is the > question I have been trying to push vis a vis those of us whose work is > professionally tied up with education. Suppose the critique is correct and > that the nature of the alternative is specified to the level present in the > article.Here is a quote from the conclusion about which there has been some > discussion. > > > > * In other words, we as teachers, students, parents, and researchers > > must articulate new ways of? making selves intelligible in the > > contexts of our lives, including producing ?identities-with-standing?? > > that encompass the qualities we want to promote, identities that index > > a way-of-being that brings? special pride and a sense of self-worth > > with respect to qualities that matter. In the case of schools and* > > > > *classrooms, these qualities might include intellectual curiosity, > > serious deliberation, citizen participation,* *? * *social critique, > > and deep knowledge and understanding?.* > > > > > > ?Do we come up with "indexes of 'identities with standing'"? Or "social > critique" (no problem with knowledge and understanding, we have test > scores. :-) ). > > > > How does this collection of legitimately peripheral participants in so > many lifeworlds address this situation as relevant academic "experts"? > > (my son often reminds me that an expert is just a drip under pressure). > > > > Odd historical circumstances when Lenin's "what is to be done" > > question is posed in such an upside down confluence of historically > > antonymous ideologies and world systems. ? > > > > mike? > > > > *?* > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 2:16 PM, wrote: > > > >> This may be of interest on the topic of standardization and > >> replication and measurement phenomena as what seems to be driving the > >> desire for > >> (exact) science and how it is colonizing social studies Social > >> Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan that Could Fix It The NIH's > >> Office of Behavioral and Social Science Research is responding to a > >> fundamental shift in social science research. > >> > >> > >> https://www.wired.com/2016/11/social-science-busted-nih-plan-fix/ > >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone > >> > >> > > > From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Tue Nov 29 11:43:11 2016 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2016 19:43:11 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Galina Tsukerman in JREEP In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1480448593078.89816@iped.uio.no> Mike, thanks! I could access the issue and download the articles without problems when signed with my institutional credentials. Alfredo ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of mike cole Sent: 28 November 2016 16:30 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Galina Tsukerman in JREEP Dear Colleagues-- The No. 1 issue of Journal of Russian and East European Psychology has two substantial and interesting articles by Galina Tsukerman, a leading proponent of the Davydov-Elkonin curricular approach with deep experience at School 91 and elsewhere in Moscow. For some reason, the journal has no cover announcing the contents and no TOC. The first article is title "how do children learn to learn." The second article is about "the reflexive abilities of school children: How can students learn about their own ignorance." For those of you interested in these materials, would you please try to obtain them from local libraries and if that is not possible, write to me at mcole@ucsd.edu. I will seek to obtain pdfs to send individually to those for whom this line of work is important. Galina's work deserves wide distribution and I fear that the way the journal has been produced under new ownership will deprive the chat community of her work. mike From greg.a.thompson@gmail.com Tue Nov 29 15:29:31 2016 From: greg.a.thompson@gmail.com (Greg Thompson) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2016 16:29:31 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a PlanthatCould Fix It | WIRED In-Reply-To: <583dd431.0231620a.2e6d.b49d@mx.google.com> References: <583766c4.11946b0a.8572c.f584@mx.google.com> <583c526d.ca61630a.b0b3a.e83c@mx.google.com> <583dd431.0231620a.2e6d.b49d@mx.google.com> Message-ID: I'm with Peter; we can pin down the concepts but the people keep moving! Or as Mike's anthropologist friend Roy D'Andrade used to say "Doing social science is like doing geology in a landslide" (cited in Mike's piece in Andy's book Collaborative Projects, p. 365. btw, D'Andrade passed away just last month. Sad loss). -greg On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 12:16 PM, wrote: > Peter, Mike, > Have just finished reading Peter?s paper on the impossibility of ever > actually being able to be successful in the desire for nano-control of > complex [social] concepts and the assumption that social scientists can > come to an agreed meaning that can be used for large scale data analysis > and coding. > > Peter, your paper directly refutes the promethean desire to bring > scientific concepts [as a systematic set of principles] under volitional > control without realizing the counterpoint that we always return from > systematic approaches to *resume* picking up loose threads. Your > challenging the metaphor of intertwining threads as too optimistic, too > progressive, is interesting. > Does seem to be a back and forth historical movement of generating and > acquiring cohesive voices followed by fragmentation into a spectrum of > layered voices. The back and forth seems to require a sense of play to > sustain engagement. > Peter, I enjoyed how your paper captures the complexity of beginning a > career as a teacher. > > > Sent from Mail for Windows 10 > > From: mike cole > Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 9:32 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a > PlanthatCould Fix It | WIRED > > I understand the sentiment, Larry. But for active academics who want to > have a voice, the apparently inexorable movement toward nano-control both > local and global seems unlikely to suffice. > > I have not had time to read Peter's paper, but will get to it. > > I now have copies of the Zuckerman for those that wish a copy. > mike > > On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 7:50 AM, wrote: > > > Peter, Mike, > > Thanks for engaging with this topic that can seem to be herding cats > > (earlier metaphor). > > I want to raise up a specific question Mike asks: > > Do we come up with (indexes) of identities with standing??. > > Indexes as signs pointing or gesturing towards ... > > What if we don?t (come up with) indexes. > > What if we singularly and co-generatively ARE indexes or signs as human > > beings expressing our humanity, pointing towards worlds of > (significance) > > within which our existence occurs (unfolds). My being/becoming as > movement, > > inclination, leaning into, indicating the reality of worlds of > significance > > and our response ability to see beyond our individual existence to > embrace > > and sustain and yes -resume- our mutual engagement nurturing worlds of > > significance. > > It is not a matter of drawing up a list of indexes, but of living out and > > being/becoming indexical beings oriented towards worlds of significance. > > > > Critique yes, but derived from what is already given. > > We stand not only between past and future, but equally between tradition > > and oblivion. (Foulcault). > > The angel of oblivion that must be answered by our existence as sign or > > index. > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > From: Peter Smagorinsky > > Sent: November 28, 2016 3:43 AM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan > > thatCould Fix It | WIRED > > > > Odd, it worked on my end. I'm attaching the ms. p > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of R.J.S.Parsons > > Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 6:39 AM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan > > that Could Fix It | WIRED > > > > That link to your site doesn't work, Peter. > > > > Rob > > > > On 28/11/2016 11:19, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > > I've written something that speaks to the problem that scientists can > > agree on concepts, but social scientists can't. It originates in > Vygotsky's > > tendency to illustrate complex social concepts with biological examples > > that oversimplify the process of the development of social concepts that > > have no "solid" form. > > > > > > Smagorinsky, P. (2013). The development of social and practical > > > concepts in learning to teach: A synthesis and extension of Vygotsky's > > > conception. Learning, Culture, and Social Interaction, 2(4), 238-248. > > > Available at > > > http://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/LCSI/LCSI_2013.pdf > > > > > > abstract > > > This conceptual paper interrogates, considers, and expands on > > > Vygotsky's notion of concept development. I first review Vygotsky's > > > account of concept development, including his distinction between > > > scientific and spontaneous concepts. I next summarize his pattern of > > > concept development from complexes to pseudoconcepts to concepts, and > > > in the process problematize his view by shifting his discussion from > > > biological examples to social examples. The following section examines > > > concepts as cultural constructions, with attention to the cultural > > > nature of concepts, and concepts and societal telos. The third section > > outlines processes that complement and enrich concept development, > > including concept development's future orientation, the affective > dimension > > of concept development, and creativity's role in concept development as a > > higher mental function. > > > The fourth section takes Vygotsky's notion of concept development's > > > ?twisting path? and complicates it by questioning the extent to which > > > social concepts have a clear meaning toward which any pathway may lead > > > given their relativistic and ideological nature. This inquiry leads to > > > the proposal of practical concepts that serve as fragmented > > > understandings that generally cohere yet are inherently compromised by > > attention to contradictory means of mediation in > socialcultural?historical > > contexts. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole > > > Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2016 7:36 PM > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan > > > that Could Fix It | WIRED > > > > > > I just got to this message, Larry. > > > I agree, everyone on xmca should read the article, not only because it > > is relevant to Margaret and Carrie's paper vis a vis the trajectory of > > neoliberal exaggerations of trends visible from Bush onward and if Mill > can > > be used as an authority, back to the origins of modern mass schooling. It > > is also directly relevant to the kinds of pressures that current and > future > > generations of social science researchers will face in terms of grants > and > > publications. For example: > > > > > > * For one, the plan calls for scientists to nail down and agree on > > > terminology for different concepts so researchers aren?t just talking > > > past each other. ?Often, in behavioral science, people talk about > > > different phenomena but really mean the same thing,? says Riley. Or > > > the opposite > > > happens: Chemists don?t squabble about what oxygen is, but if > > > psychologists convene a conference on a fuzzier concept like ?trust,? > > > says Colin Camerer , > > > an economist at Caltech, they?ll spend the first two days disagreeing > > > about what the word actually means.* > > > > > > *That ambiguity gets tricky when researchers are trying to share and > > > compare datasets, especially the massive ones scientists work with > > > nowadays. (If you?re trying to compare variables in two datasets both > > > named ?resilience,? how do you know they?re really the same thing?) To > > > fix these problems, the plan suggests, scientists should settle on > > > rigorously defined terms. ?We need to figure out what we mean when we > > > say ?depression,? and how to define it?either by using the same > > > measures, or by calibrating with the same framework,? Riley says.* > > > > > > ?The first paragraph rings true to me and ought to at least resonate > > with even the most legitimate peripheral participant on xmca. The theory > > ladeness of core terms is so very clearly laid out in this imaginary > > idea-cocktail party. And as the second paragraph makes clear, its all > about > > coding, which David has introduced into the conversation. > > > > > > Overall, I think its relevant to both the theory and practice that > > serves as the content of xmca. > > > To quote a Soviet favorite. What is to be done?. > > > > > > With respect to the current article under discussion, that is the > > question I have been trying to push vis a vis those of us whose work is > > professionally tied up with education. Suppose the critique is correct > and > > that the nature of the alternative is specified to the level present in > the > > article.Here is a quote from the conclusion about which there has been > some > > discussion. > > > > > > * In other words, we as teachers, students, parents, and researchers > > > must articulate new ways of? making selves intelligible in the > > > contexts of our lives, including producing ?identities-with-standing?? > > > that encompass the qualities we want to promote, identities that index > > > a way-of-being that brings? special pride and a sense of self-worth > > > with respect to qualities that matter. In the case of schools and* > > > > > > *classrooms, these qualities might include intellectual curiosity, > > > serious deliberation, citizen participation,* *? * *social critique, > > > and deep knowledge and understanding?.* > > > > > > > > > ?Do we come up with "indexes of 'identities with standing'"? Or "social > > critique" (no problem with knowledge and understanding, we have test > > scores. :-) ). > > > > > > How does this collection of legitimately peripheral participants in so > > many lifeworlds address this situation as relevant academic "experts"? > > > (my son often reminds me that an expert is just a drip under pressure). > > > > > > Odd historical circumstances when Lenin's "what is to be done" > > > question is posed in such an upside down confluence of historically > > > antonymous ideologies and world systems. ? > > > > > > mike? > > > > > > *?* > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 2:16 PM, wrote: > > > > > >> This may be of interest on the topic of standardization and > > >> replication and measurement phenomena as what seems to be driving the > > >> desire for > > >> (exact) science and how it is colonizing social studies Social > > >> Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan that Could Fix It The NIH's > > >> Office of Behavioral and Social Science Research is responding to a > > >> fundamental shift in social science research. > > >> > > >> > > >> https://www.wired.com/2016/11/social-science-busted-nih-plan-fix/ > > >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From lpscholar2@gmail.com Wed Nov 30 06:31:46 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 06:31:46 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has aPlanthatCould Fix It | WIRED In-Reply-To: References: <583766c4.11946b0a.8572c.f584@mx.google.com> <583c526d.ca61630a.b0b3a.e83c@mx.google.com> <583dd431.0231620a.2e6d.b49d@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <583ee2e9.5672630a.aeb56.c6fc@mx.google.com> Greg, Peter, Margaret, Carrie, What is education? What is worthwhile education? How has education become hollowed-out? I have followed the process of reading the 3 articles (estranged learning) (Peter?s article) and this month?s open article for dissuasion. A slow reading in a transversal fashion crisscrossing back and forth and RESUMING loose threads that may be dropped. Lave and McDermott say that production in education may be more akin to what Marx calls (distribution) in political economy. Here is the translation that may be relevant to hollowed out education. The necessary result of competition is the accumulation of (academic success) in a few hands and thus the restoration of monopoly in a more terrible form; and that finally the DISTINCTION between the (knowledge accumulator ? scientist and scholar) AND the (knowledge distributor ? teacher and tester), like that between the (kinds of learner) disappears (LP ? withdraws) and the whole of society MUST fall apart into the two classes ? the credentialed and the non-credentialed. It seems this relation between knowledge accumulator (this is us) and knowledge distributor (this is them) may be a relation that accumulates and leads towards hollowed-out education. The response or answer? Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Greg Thompson Sent: November 29, 2016 3:32 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Cc: mike cole Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has aPlanthatCould Fix It | WIRED I'm with Peter; we can pin down the concepts but the people keep moving! Or as Mike's anthropologist friend Roy D'Andrade used to say "Doing social science is like doing geology in a landslide" (cited in Mike's piece in Andy's book Collaborative Projects, p. 365. btw, D'Andrade passed away just last month. Sad loss). -greg On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 12:16 PM, wrote: > Peter, Mike, > Have just finished reading Peter?s paper on the impossibility of ever > actually being able to be successful in the desire for nano-control of > complex [social] concepts and the assumption that social scientists can > come to an agreed meaning that can be used for large scale data analysis > and coding. > > Peter, your paper directly refutes the promethean desire to bring > scientific concepts [as a systematic set of principles] under volitional > control without realizing the counterpoint that we always return from > systematic approaches to *resume* picking up loose threads. Your > challenging the metaphor of intertwining threads as too optimistic, too > progressive, is interesting. > Does seem to be a back and forth historical movement of generating and > acquiring cohesive voices followed by fragmentation into a spectrum of > layered voices. The back and forth seems to require a sense of play to > sustain engagement. > Peter, I enjoyed how your paper captures the complexity of beginning a > career as a teacher. > > > Sent from Mail for Windows 10 > > From: mike cole > Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 9:32 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a > PlanthatCould Fix It | WIRED > > I understand the sentiment, Larry. But for active academics who want to > have a voice, the apparently inexorable movement toward nano-control both > local and global seems unlikely to suffice. > > I have not had time to read Peter's paper, but will get to it. > > I now have copies of the Zuckerman for those that wish a copy. > mike > > On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 7:50 AM, wrote: > > > Peter, Mike, > > Thanks for engaging with this topic that can seem to be herding cats > > (earlier metaphor). > > I want to raise up a specific question Mike asks: > > Do we come up with (indexes) of identities with standing??. > > Indexes as signs pointing or gesturing towards ... > > What if we don?t (come up with) indexes. > > What if we singularly and co-generatively ARE indexes or signs as human > > beings expressing our humanity, pointing towards worlds of > (significance) > > within which our existence occurs (unfolds). My being/becoming as > movement, > > inclination, leaning into, indicating the reality of worlds of > significance > > and our response ability to see beyond our individual existence to > embrace > > and sustain and yes -resume- our mutual engagement nurturing worlds of > > significance. > > It is not a matter of drawing up a list of indexes, but of living out and > > being/becoming indexical beings oriented towards worlds of significance. > > > > Critique yes, but derived from what is already given. > > We stand not only between past and future, but equally between tradition > > and oblivion. (Foulcault). > > The angel of oblivion that must be answered by our existence as sign or > > index. > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > From: Peter Smagorinsky > > Sent: November 28, 2016 3:43 AM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan > > thatCould Fix It | WIRED > > > > Odd, it worked on my end. I'm attaching the ms. p > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of R.J.S.Parsons > > Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 6:39 AM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan > > that Could Fix It | WIRED > > > > That link to your site doesn't work, Peter. > > > > Rob > > > > On 28/11/2016 11:19, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > > I've written something that speaks to the problem that scientists can > > agree on concepts, but social scientists can't. It originates in > Vygotsky's > > tendency to illustrate complex social concepts with biological examples > > that oversimplify the process of the development of social concepts that > > have no "solid" form. > > > > > > Smagorinsky, P. (2013). The development of social and practical > > > concepts in learning to teach: A synthesis and extension of Vygotsky's > > > conception. Learning, Culture, and Social Interaction, 2(4), 238-248. > > > Available at > > > http://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/LCSI/LCSI_2013.pdf > > > > > > abstract > > > This conceptual paper interrogates, considers, and expands on > > > Vygotsky's notion of concept development. I first review Vygotsky's > > > account of concept development, including his distinction between > > > scientific and spontaneous concepts. I next summarize his pattern of > > > concept development from complexes to pseudoconcepts to concepts, and > > > in the process problematize his view by shifting his discussion from > > > biological examples to social examples. The following section examines > > > concepts as cultural constructions, with attention to the cultural > > > nature of concepts, and concepts and societal telos. The third section > > outlines processes that complement and enrich concept development, > > including concept development's future orientation, the affective > dimension > > of concept development, and creativity's role in concept development as a > > higher mental function. > > > The fourth section takes Vygotsky's notion of concept development's > > > ?twisting path? and complicates it by questioning the extent to which > > > social concepts have a clear meaning toward which any pathway may lead > > > given their relativistic and ideological nature. This inquiry leads to > > > the proposal of practical concepts that serve as fragmented > > > understandings that generally cohere yet are inherently compromised by > > attention to contradictory means of mediation in > socialcultural?historical > > contexts. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole > > > Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2016 7:36 PM > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan > > > that Could Fix It | WIRED > > > > > > I just got to this message, Larry. > > > I agree, everyone on xmca should read the article, not only because it > > is relevant to Margaret and Carrie's paper vis a vis the trajectory of > > neoliberal exaggerations of trends visible from Bush onward and if Mill > can > > be used as an authority, back to the origins of modern mass schooling. It > > is also directly relevant to the kinds of pressures that current and > future > > generations of social science researchers will face in terms of grants > and > > publications. For example: > > > > > > * For one, the plan calls for scientists to nail down and agree on > > > terminology for different concepts so researchers aren?t just talking > > > past each other. ?Often, in behavioral science, people talk about > > > different phenomena but really mean the same thing,? says Riley. Or > > > the opposite > > > happens: Chemists don?t squabble about what oxygen is, but if > > > psychologists convene a conference on a fuzzier concept like ?trust,? > > > says Colin Camerer , > > > an economist at Caltech, they?ll spend the first two days disagreeing > > > about what the word actually means.* > > > > > > *That ambiguity gets tricky when researchers are trying to share and > > > compare datasets, especially the massive ones scientists work with > > > nowadays. (If you?re trying to compare variables in two datasets both > > > named ?resilience,? how do you know they?re really the same thing?) To > > > fix these problems, the plan suggests, scientists should settle on > > > rigorously defined terms. ?We need to figure out what we mean when we > > > say ?depression,? and how to define it?either by using the same > > > measures, or by calibrating with the same framework,? Riley says.* > > > > > > ?The first paragraph rings true to me and ought to at least resonate > > with even the most legitimate peripheral participant on xmca. The theory > > ladeness of core terms is so very clearly laid out in this imaginary > > idea-cocktail party. And as the second paragraph makes clear, its all > about > > coding, which David has introduced into the conversation. > > > > > > Overall, I think its relevant to both the theory and practice that > > serves as the content of xmca. > > > To quote a Soviet favorite. What is to be done?. > > > > > > With respect to the current article under discussion, that is the > > question I have been trying to push vis a vis those of us whose work is > > professionally tied up with education. Suppose the critique is correct > and > > that the nature of the alternative is specified to the level present in > the > > article.Here is a quote from the conclusion about which there has been > some > > discussion. > > > > > > * In other words, we as teachers, students, parents, and researchers > > > must articulate new ways of? making selves intelligible in the > > > contexts of our lives, including producing ?identities-with-standing?? > > > that encompass the qualities we want to promote, identities that index > > > a way-of-being that brings? special pride and a sense of self-worth > > > with respect to qualities that matter. In the case of schools and* > > > > > > *classrooms, these qualities might include intellectual curiosity, > > > serious deliberation, citizen participation,* *? * *social critique, > > > and deep knowledge and understanding?.* > > > > > > > > > ?Do we come up with "indexes of 'identities with standing'"? Or "social > > critique" (no problem with knowledge and understanding, we have test > > scores. :-) ). > > > > > > How does this collection of legitimately peripheral participants in so > > many lifeworlds address this situation as relevant academic "experts"? > > > (my son often reminds me that an expert is just a drip under pressure). > > > > > > Odd historical circumstances when Lenin's "what is to be done" > > > question is posed in such an upside down confluence of historically > > > antonymous ideologies and world systems. ? > > > > > > mike? > > > > > > *?* > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 2:16 PM, wrote: > > > > > >> This may be of interest on the topic of standardization and > > >> replication and measurement phenomena as what seems to be driving the > > >> desire for > > >> (exact) science and how it is colonizing social studies Social > > >> Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan that Could Fix It The NIH's > > >> Office of Behavioral and Social Science Research is responding to a > > >> fundamental shift in social science research. > > >> > > >> > > >> https://www.wired.com/2016/11/social-science-busted-nih-plan-fix/ > > >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From lpscholar2@gmail.com Wed Nov 30 07:11:10 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 07:11:10 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH HasaPlanthatCould Fix It | WIRED In-Reply-To: <583ee2e9.5672630a.aeb56.c6fc@mx.google.com> References: <583766c4.11946b0a.8572c.f584@mx.google.com> <583c526d.ca61630a.b0b3a.e83c@mx.google.com> <583dd431.0231620a.2e6d.b49d@mx.google.com> <583ee2e9.5672630a.aeb56.c6fc@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <583eec25.5147620a.9cb05.59f1@mx.google.com> One further relational quality which i want to put in question ? objective reality: Lave and McDermott cite (Brown, 1986:15) All that is appropriate to, noticeable within, and MARKED by the self-directed or practical, (actions of collectivities) in situations of conflict. So, is there something beyond this action of collectivities in situations of conflict. THIS relation called (objective reality) that can be challenged as having center stage? For example can the virtue of friendship (philia) be resumed, reclaimed, in a transversal manner? A moving back in order to move forward. Objective reality as Brown outlines this RELATIONAL concept seems hollowed-out and impoverished as a way to co-generate well-being-in-the-world-with-others. (mitsein). Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: lpscholar2@gmail.com Sent: November 30, 2016 6:32 AM To: Greg Thompson; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Cc: mike cole Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH HasaPlanthatCould Fix It | WIRED Greg, Peter, Margaret, Carrie, What is education? What is worthwhile education? How has education become hollowed-out? I have followed the process of reading the 3 articles (estranged learning) (Peter?s article) and this month?s open article for dissuasion. A slow reading ?in a transversal fashion crisscrossing back and forth and RESUMING loose threads that may be dropped. Lave and McDermott say that production in education may be more akin to what Marx calls (distribution) in political economy. Here is the translation that may be relevant to hollowed out education. The necessary result of competition is the accumulation of (academic success) in a few hands and thus the restoration of monopoly in a more terrible form; and that finally the DISTINCTION between the (knowledge accumulator ? scientist and scholar) AND the (knowledge distributor ? teacher and tester), like that between the (kinds of learner) disappears (LP ? withdraws) and the whole of society MUST fall apart into the two classes ? the credentialed and the non-credentialed. It seems this relation between knowledge accumulator (this is us) and knowledge distributor (this is them) may be a relation that accumulates and leads towards hollowed-out education. The response or answer? Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Greg Thompson Sent: November 29, 2016 3:32 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Cc: mike cole Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has aPlanthatCould Fix It | WIRED I'm with Peter; we can pin down the concepts but the people keep moving! Or as Mike's anthropologist friend Roy D'Andrade used to say "Doing social science is like doing geology in a landslide" (cited in Mike's piece in Andy's book Collaborative Projects, p. 365. btw, D'Andrade passed away just last month. Sad loss). -greg On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 12:16 PM, wrote: > Peter, Mike, > Have just finished reading Peter?s paper on the impossibility of ever > actually being able to be successful in the desire for nano-control of > complex? [social] concepts? and the assumption that social scientists can > come to an agreed meaning that can be used for large scale data analysis > and coding. > > Peter, your paper directly refutes the promethean desire to bring > scientific concepts [as a systematic set of principles] under volitional > control without realizing? the counterpoint that we always return from > systematic approaches to *resume* picking up loose threads. Your > challenging the metaphor? of intertwining threads as too optimistic, too > progressive,? is interesting. > Does seem to be a back and forth historical movement of generating and > acquiring cohesive voices followed by fragmentation into a spectrum of > layered voices. The back and forth seems to require a sense of play to > sustain engagement. > Peter, I enjoyed how your paper captures the complexity of beginning a > career as a teacher. > > > Sent from Mail for Windows 10 > > From: mike cole > Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 9:32 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a > PlanthatCould Fix It | WIRED > > I understand the sentiment, Larry. But for active academics who want to > have a voice, the apparently inexorable movement toward nano-control both > local and global seems unlikely to suffice. > > I have not had time to read Peter's paper, but will get to it. > > I now have copies of the Zuckerman for those that wish a copy. > mike > > On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 7:50 AM, wrote: > > > Peter, Mike, > > Thanks for engaging with this topic that can seem to be herding cats > > (earlier metaphor). > > I want to raise up a specific question Mike asks: > > Do we come up with (indexes) of identities with? standing??. > > Indexes as signs pointing or gesturing towards ... > > What if we don?t (come up with) indexes. > > What if we singularly and co-generatively ARE indexes? or signs as human > > beings? expressing our humanity, pointing towards worlds of > (significance) > > within which our existence occurs (unfolds). My being/becoming as > movement, > > inclination, leaning into, indicating the reality of worlds of > significance > > and our response ability to see beyond our individual existence to > embrace > > and sustain and yes -resume- our mutual engagement nurturing worlds of > > significance. > > It is not a matter of drawing up a list of indexes, but of living out and > > being/becoming indexical beings oriented towards worlds of significance. > > > > Critique yes, but derived from what is already given. > > We stand not only between past and future, but equally between tradition > > and oblivion. (Foulcault). > > The angel of oblivion that must be answered by our existence as sign or > > index. > > > > > > > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > > > From: Peter Smagorinsky > > Sent: November 28, 2016 3:43 AM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan > > thatCould Fix It | WIRED > > > > Odd, it worked on my end. I'm attaching the ms. p > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ > > mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of R.J.S.Parsons > > Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 6:39 AM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan > > that Could Fix It | WIRED > > > > That link to your site doesn't work, Peter. > > > > Rob > > > > On 28/11/2016 11:19, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > > I've written something that speaks to the problem that scientists can > > agree on concepts, but social scientists can't. It originates in > Vygotsky's > > tendency to illustrate complex social concepts with biological examples > > that oversimplify the process of the development of social concepts that > > have no "solid" form. > > > > > > Smagorinsky, P. (2013). The development of social and practical > > > concepts in learning to teach: A synthesis and extension of Vygotsky's > > > conception. Learning, Culture, and Social Interaction, 2(4), 238-248. > > > Available at > > > http://www.petersmagorinsky.net/About/PDF/LCSI/LCSI_2013.pdf > > > > > > abstract > > > This conceptual paper interrogates, considers, and expands on > > > Vygotsky's notion of concept development. I first review Vygotsky's > > > account of concept development, including his distinction between > > > scientific and spontaneous concepts. I next summarize his pattern of > > > concept development from complexes to pseudoconcepts to concepts, and > > > in the process problematize his view by shifting his discussion from > > > biological examples to social examples. The following section examines > > > concepts as cultural constructions, with attention to the cultural > > > nature of concepts, and concepts and societal telos. The third section > > outlines processes that complement and enrich concept development, > > including concept development's future orientation, the affective > dimension > > of concept development, and creativity's role in concept development as a > > higher mental function. > > > The fourth section takes Vygotsky's notion of concept development's > > > ?twisting path? and complicates it by questioning the extent to which > > > social concepts have a clear meaning toward which any pathway may lead > > > given their relativistic and ideological nature. This inquiry leads to > > > the proposal of practical concepts that serve as fragmented > > > understandings that generally cohere yet are inherently compromised by > > attention to contradictory means of mediation in > socialcultural?historical > > contexts. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole > > > Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2016 7:36 PM > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Social Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan > > > that Could Fix It | WIRED > > > > > > I just got to this message, Larry. > > > I agree, everyone on xmca should read the article, not only because it > > is relevant to Margaret and Carrie's paper vis a vis the trajectory of > > neoliberal exaggerations of trends visible from Bush onward and if Mill > can > > be used as an authority, back to the origins of modern mass schooling. It > > is also directly relevant to the kinds of pressures that current and > future > > generations of social science researchers will face in terms of grants > and > > publications. For example: > > > > > > * For one, the plan calls for scientists to nail down and agree on > > > terminology for different concepts so researchers aren?t just talking > > > past each other. ?Often, in behavioral science, people talk about > > > different phenomena but really mean the same thing,? says Riley. Or > > > the opposite > > > happens: Chemists don?t squabble about what oxygen is, but if > > > psychologists convene a conference on a fuzzier concept like ?trust,? > > > says Colin Camerer , > > > an economist at Caltech, they?ll spend the first two days disagreeing > > > about what the word actually means.* > > > > > > *That ambiguity gets tricky when researchers are trying to share and > > > compare datasets, especially the massive ones scientists work with > > > nowadays. (If you?re trying to compare variables in two datasets both > > > named ?resilience,? how do you know they?re really the same thing?) To > > > fix these problems, the plan suggests, scientists should settle on > > > rigorously defined terms. ?We need to figure out what we mean when we > > > say ?depression,? and how to define it?either by using the same > > > measures, or by calibrating with the same framework,? Riley says.* > > > > > > ?The first paragraph rings true to me and ought to at least resonate > > with even the most legitimate peripheral participant on xmca. The theory > > ladeness of core terms is so very clearly laid out in this imaginary > > idea-cocktail party. And as the second paragraph makes clear, its all > about > > coding, which David has introduced into the conversation. > > > > > > Overall, I think its relevant to both the theory and practice that > > serves as the content of xmca. > > > To quote a Soviet favorite. What is to be done?. > > > > > > With respect to the current article under discussion, that is the > > question I have been trying to push vis a vis those of us whose work is > > professionally tied up with education. Suppose the critique is correct > and > > that the nature of the alternative is specified to the level present in > the > > article.Here is a quote from the conclusion about which there has been > some > > discussion. > > > > > > * In other words, we as teachers, students, parents, and researchers > > > must articulate new ways of? making selves intelligible in the > > > contexts of our lives, including producing ?identities-with-standing?? > > > that encompass the qualities we want to promote, identities that index > > > a way-of-being that brings? special pride and a sense of self-worth > > > with respect to qualities that matter. In the case of schools and* > > > > > > *classrooms, these qualities might include intellectual curiosity, > > > serious deliberation, citizen participation,* *? * *social critique, > > > and deep knowledge and understanding?.* > > > > > > > > > ?Do we come up with "indexes of 'identities with standing'"? Or "social > > critique" (no problem with knowledge and understanding, we have test > > scores.? :-)? ). > > > > > > How does this collection of legitimately peripheral participants in so > > many lifeworlds address this situation as relevant academic "experts"? > > > (my son often reminds me that an expert is just a drip under pressure). > > > > > > Odd historical circumstances when Lenin's "what is to be done" > > > question is posed in such an upside down confluence of historically > > > antonymous ideologies and world systems.? ? > > > > > > mike? > > > > > > *?* > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 2:16 PM, wrote: > > > > > >> This may be of interest on the topic of standardization and > > >> replication and measurement phenomena as what seems to be driving the > > >> desire for > > >> (exact) science and how it is colonizing social studies Social > > >> Science Is Busted. But the NIH Has a Plan that Could Fix It The NIH's > > >> Office of Behavioral and Social Science Research is responding to a > > >> fundamental shift in social science research. > > >> > > >> > > >> https://www.wired.com/2016/11/social-science-busted-nih-plan-fix/ > > >> Sent from my Windows 10 phone > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From a.j.gil@iped.uio.no Wed Nov 30 12:19:03 2016 From: a.j.gil@iped.uio.no (Alfredo Jornet Gil) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 20:19:03 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Zuckerman's 2016 article and "what would an education be?" Message-ID: <1480537143154.57046@iped.uio.no> Hi all, I am responding to Larry's last post on the "social science is busted" thread, and in continuation with the discussions sparked by MCA's Issue 3 lead article. ?In those discussions, we have come to, as Larry puts it, a transversal reading of 3 articles: Margaret and Carrie's on hollowed out science identities, Peter's on practical concepts, and Lave and McDermott's reading of Marx's estranged labor in terms of estranged learning. A common thread tying the 3 articles together, as Larry identifies it, has to do with ?the question, *what is education?* Perhaps most importantly, ?the question is also about what education could instead be as possibility, as a *desirable* possibility. Obviously both questions are necessary: we need to have a notion of what goes on in schools now as much as we need a notion of what a good education could be. Now, while reading 3 articles transversely already is a lot of reading for the regular mortal (though nothing uncommon for the scholar avis), I think we would gain a lot by adding Galina Zuckerman's recent article (recently mentioned by Mike) to the reading list. What this addition brings in is, in my view, what to me sounds like the initial step needed for connecting the two questions posed above, the one on the facts of education and the one on possibilities. Zuckerman does so connecting the latter question on possibilities to a scientific inquiry into what the ability to learn is. She writes: "The question of what values to prioritize, particularly the question of which abilities should be developed in children of a given age, is not a question for science. Developmental psychology can tell us what abilities children are capable of developing at a particular age. Pedagogical psychology can instruct us in how to actualize a particular developmental potential: what educational and childrearing conditions are required for the achievement of potential developmental abilities to become the norm in childhood development" Taking a route that goes across this intersection of the possible and the desirable, and reflecting on common reform efforts to foster students' self-regulation and their ability to learn, Galina asks: are *educability* and *the ability to learn* the same thing? For her, the difference lies in the following: to be easily educable students need to become objects of learning; to become able to learn, they need to become subjects. I think Galina's article will proof relevant to many in this list for many reasons. One such reason is that she takes a thoroughly Vygotskian perspective on these matters, and I love that she never speaks of individual skills or knowledge but keeps talking of ability to engage and/or initiate interaction. Her approach is not only non-individualist, but also developmental: it takes into account many of the concerns on age that have been raised in recent xMCA discussions. And it even discusses the connection between communication and generalization, a connection that became relevant to this list few weeks ago, when David K. shared one of Vygotsky's last lectures (by the way, here Galina makes a case for the non-adequacy of distinguishing the two, communication and generalization, in terms of an external/internal dichotomy; she explicitly rejects the "internalisation" way of languaging it). The article is attached and shared here as part of xmca's ?educational ?mission and is to be used for that purpose ?only. Alfredo -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Zuckerma 2016 How do young schoolchildren learn to learn.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 562666 bytes Desc: Zuckerma 2016 How do young schoolchildren learn to learn.pdf Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20161130/d9a3d767/attachment-0001.pdf From Peg.Griffin@att.net Wed Nov 30 14:05:51 2016 From: Peg.Griffin@att.net (Peg Griffin) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 17:05:51 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Zuckerman's 2016 article and "what would an education be?" In-Reply-To: <1480537143154.57046@iped.uio.no> References: <1480537143154.57046@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <009201d24b55$eac29610$c047c230$@att.net> (The bibliography for this article by Zuckerman that was posted and a continuation of it is also available in the same Journal, same volume, same number -- just two different article titles and page numbers!) -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2016 3:19 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Zuckerman's 2016 article and "what would an education be?" Hi all, I am responding to Larry's last post on the "social science is busted" thread, and in continuation with the discussions sparked by MCA's Issue 3 lead article. ?In those discussions, we have come to, as Larry puts it, a transversal reading of 3 articles: Margaret and Carrie's on hollowed out science identities, Peter's on practical concepts, and Lave and McDermott's reading of Marx's estranged labor in terms of estranged learning. A common thread tying the 3 articles together, as Larry identifies it, has to do with ?the question, *what is education?* Perhaps most importantly, ?the question is also about what education could instead be as possibility, as a *desirable* possibility. Obviously both questions are necessary: we need to have a notion of what goes on in schools now as much as we need a notion of what a good education could be. Now, while reading 3 articles transversely already is a lot of reading for the regular mortal (though nothing uncommon for the scholar avis), I think we would gain a lot by adding Galina Zuckerman's recent article (recently mentioned by Mike) to the reading list. What this addition brings in is, in my view, what to me sounds like the initial step needed for connecting the two questions posed above, the one on the facts of education and the one on possibilities. Zuckerman does so connecting the latter question on possibilities to a scientific inquiry into what the ability to learn is. She writes: "The question of what values to prioritize, particularly the question of which abilities should be developed in children of a given age, is not a question for science. Developmental psychology can tell us what abilities children are capable of developing at a particular age. Pedagogical psychology can instruct us in how to actualize a particular developmental potential: what educational and childrearing conditions are required for the achievement of potential developmental abilities to become the norm in childhood development" Taking a route that goes across this intersection of the possible and the desirable, and reflecting on common reform efforts to foster students' self-regulation and their ability to learn, Galina asks: are *educability* and *the ability to learn* the same thing? For her, the difference lies in the following: to be easily educable students need to become objects of learning; to become able to learn, they need to become subjects. I think Galina's article will proof relevant to many in this list for many reasons. One such reason is that she takes a thoroughly Vygotskian perspective on these matters, and I love that she never speaks of individual skills or knowledge but keeps talking of ability to engage and/or initiate interaction. Her approach is not only non-individualist, but also developmental: it takes into account many of the concerns on age that have been raised in recent xMCA discussions. And it even discusses the connection between communication and generalization, a connection that became relevant to this list few weeks ago, when David K. shared one of Vygotsky's last lectures (by the way, here Galina makes a case for the non-adequacy of distinguishing the two, communication and generalization, in terms of an external/internal dichotomy; she explicitly rejects the "internalisation" way of languaging it). The article is attached and shared here as part of xmca's ?educational ?mission and is to be used for that purpose ?only. Alfredo From lpscholar2@gmail.com Wed Nov 30 17:03:58 2016 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (lpscholar2@gmail.com) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 17:03:58 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Zuckerman's 2016 article and "what would an education be?" In-Reply-To: <1480537143154.57046@iped.uio.no> References: <1480537143154.57046@iped.uio.no> Message-ID: <583f7715.ce1d620a.466b4.8e8f@mx.google.com> Alfredo, ? WHAT is education. This fourth paper contributing to our emerging answer in the flowing stream. On page 9 see figure 1 on periodization of leading forms of (intermental) collaboration. Notice that earlier forms are continuing as *enduring* forms of intermental collaboration. Therefore the leading intermental collaboration of infancy continues to *endure*. What is this enduring quality from infancy? The chart says: The immediate-emotional communication between the child and a loving adult as a UNIVERSAL source of warmth, care, understanding, benevolence, protection, and the acceptance of the child?s unique existence as a thing of inherent value. THIS universal intermental collaboration EXTENDS into the other 3 periodization?s. (early childhood, preschool childhood, and young school age). So indicates the diagram of periodization on page 9. This awareness may become lost or misplaced as we focus on the next period emerging which *merges* with this earliest intermental and *enduring* form of collaboration. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Alfredo Jornet Gil Sent: November 30, 2016 12:22 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Zuckerman's 2016 article and "what would an education be?" Hi all, I am responding to Larry's last post on the "social science is busted" thread, and in continuation with the discussions sparked by MCA's Issue 3 lead article. ?In those discussions, we have come to, as Larry puts it, a transversal reading of 3 articles: Margaret and Carrie's on hollowed out science identities, Peter's on practical concepts, and Lave and McDermott's reading of Marx's estranged labor in terms of estranged learning. A common thread tying the 3 articles together, as Larry identifies it, has to do with ?the question, *what is education?* Perhaps most importantly, ?the question is also about what education could instead be as possibility, as a *desirable* possibility. Obviously both questions are necessary: we need to have a notion of what goes on in schools now as much as we need a notion of what a good education could be. Now, while reading 3 articles transversely already is a lot of reading for the regular mortal (though nothing uncommon for the scholar avis), I think we would gain a lot by adding Galina Zuckerman's recent article (recently mentioned by Mike) to the reading list. What this addition brings in is, in my view, what to me sounds like the initial step needed for connecting the two questions posed above, the one on the facts of education and the one on possibilities. Zuckerman does so connecting the latter question on possibilities to a scientific inquiry into what the ability to learn is. She writes: "The question of what values to prioritize, particularly the question of which abilities should be developed in children of a given age, is not a question for science. Developmental psychology can tell us what abilities children are capable of developing at a particular age. Pedagogical psychology can instruct us in how to actualize a particular developmental potential: what educational and childrearing conditions are required for the achievement of potential developmental abilities to become the norm in childhood development" Taking a route that goes across this intersection of the possible and the desirable, and reflecting on common reform efforts to foster students' self-regulation and their ability to learn, Galina asks: are *educability* and *the ability to learn* the same thing? For her, the difference lies in the following: to be easily educable students need to become objects of learning; to become able to learn, they need to become subjects. I think Galina's article will proof relevant to many in this list for many reasons. One such reason is that she takes a thoroughly Vygotskian perspective on these matters, and I love that she never speaks of individual skills or knowledge but keeps talking of ability to engage and/or initiate interaction. Her approach is not only non-individualist, but also developmental: it takes into account many of the concerns on age that have been raised in recent xMCA discussions. And it even discusses the connection between communication and generalization, a connection that became relevant to this list few weeks ago, when David K. shared one of Vygotsky's last lectures (by the way, here Galina makes a case for the non-adequacy of distinguishing the two, communication and generalization, in terms of an external/internal dichotomy; she explicitly rejects the "internalisation" way of languaging it). The article is attached and shared here as part of xmca's ?educational ?mission and is to be used for that purpose ?only. Alfredo