[Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

[Huw Lloyd]

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