[Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion

[David Kellogg]

Sure, Mr. Bae. I'll send it off list!

Best Wishes,
David

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 10:45 AM, 배희철 <ggladduck@gmail.com> wrote:

> 겔로그 교수님,
> 잘 지내시지요?
> 부탁 하나 있습니다.  아래 논문 읽고 싶어요. 글쓰기에 인용하고 싶어요.
>
> https://academic.oup.com/applij/article/3067194/The-D-Is-
> for-Development-Beyond-Pedagogical
>
> 2017-03-29 15:14 GMT+09:00 David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>:
>
> > Well, the idea of "incidental learning" (which is, I think, what Larry
> > means by dispositional learning) had a good run in foreign language
> > teaching.
> >
> > Foreign language learning is hard, and that is rather paradoxical. Why
> > should EVERYBODY master a first language seamlessly and hardly ANYBODY be
> > able to do the same trick with a second? Especially since, as Vygotsky
> > points out, we all bring more intellectual capital to bear the second go
> > around? Since the hard-wiring critical period theories have more or less
> > been disproven (because there ARE people who DO master a second language
> > and even some who forget their first language), the consensus has moved
> > towards the rather anti-intellectual idea that first language learning is
> > painless because it is essentially incidental and dispositional: we learn
> > our first language largely in the process of learning other things.
> > Particularly in elementary school, that has meant trying to make second
> > language learning much more like first language learning, and (as I
> argued
> > earlier) this had led to well-intentioned but nevertheless highly
> > discriminatory practices, including an emphasis on dispositional learning
> > which native speakers must find too easy and foreigners coy and
> > frustrating.
> >
> > Vygotsky's view is very different though. First of all, he denies that
> > first language learning is painless. Second, he denies that learning a
> > second language is completely distinguishable from learning the first.
> Just
> > as the child's semantics are largely unchanged as the child moves from
> > proto-language to language proper, we tend to import our own native
> > language semantics when we pick up a second or third language. So
> learning
> > a second language is really continuing the first language by second
> > language means (in normal humans, the "vocabulary explosion" comes to a
> > halt about age seventeen, but this isn't true if you start another
> > language). Thirdly, and most interestingly, Vygotsky points out that
> > although the MEANS of learning foreign language concepts appears similar
> to
> > learning scientific concepts in in school (i.e. part to whole, voluntary
> > and volitional, and organized in taxonomies), the actual RESULT is a set
> of
> > everyday concepts!
> >
> > I was trying to develop this in a study for Applied Linguistics. They
> > decided the study wasn't very interesting, but they did publish my
> > critique:
> >
> > https://academic.oup.com/applij/article/3067194/The-D-Is-
> > for-Development-Beyond-Pedagogical
> >
> > Also, the official version of "Thinking of Feeling" is out on Language
> and
> > Education, and the first fifty to click THIS link will get free e-copies
> > (so they say):
> >
> > http://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/8Vaq4HpJMi55DzsAyFCf/full
> >
> > David Kellogg
> > Macquarie University
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 2:23 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > ​Larry, very interesting questions.
> > >
> > > One of them seems particularly relevant. You ask, was there an
> historical
> > > time when dis-positional aspects of learning take centre stage?
> > >
> > >
> > > I guess that the notion of *apprenticeship* (as developed by, e.g.,
> Lave)
> > > partly ​​addresses the issue, for it attempts to capture some of that
> > which
> > > goes on when you learn a craft, or when you learn to play an
> instrument,
> > > where the instructional focus is on attentional qualities of the work
> of
> > > *doing* crafting or playing. But still, in those situations, the
> > ​relation
> > > between the expert and the learner may very much be focused on a quite
> > > narrow band of competence with respect to all what may be developing in
> > > such teaching/learning situations. As David was mentioning, I think
> that
> > > the 'prescriptive' (in the sense of having and 'end in mind') character
> > of
> > > instructional situations should not be just dismissed and thrown away.
> > >
> > > Yes, *bildung* seems a relevant concept here. But then again, the point
> > of
> > > collateral learning is that much of what is being learned is learned
> > > despite the fact that its 'content,' the nature and consequences of
> that
> > > learning, are outside the participant's immediate awareness. If, while
> > > playing to play a tune on a guitar, you focus too much on each and
> every
> > > motor-sensory aspect of playing, you will have a hard time learning to
> > play
> > > it, just as it becomes difficult to walk 'naturally' once you begin to
> > try
> > > to walk purposefully. Big questions open here. Connecting them to
> > inequity
> > > issues in the classroom takes also work...
> > >
> > >
> > > Alfredo
> > >
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: lpscholar2@gmail.com <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
> > > Sent: 26 March 2017 19:17
> > > To: Alfredo Jornet Gil; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> > > Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion
> > >
> > > Alfredo,
> > > Your highlighting and drawing our attention to learning (as) developing
> > > enduring attitudes, of likes and dislikes, is something you are
> referring
> > > to in passing that i hope we can slow down or pause and consider
> further.
> > > Another word for this is dis-positions in contrast to positions taken.
> > > This type of learning occurring in situations that Dewey referred to as
> > > (collateral) learning. What may be considered unintended learning?
> > >
> > > THIS type of learning that is not prescribed or found in textbooks
> > > outlining a discipline as a system already made.
> > >
> > > Why is this dis/positional learning so universally ignored? How do we
> > > refocus on dis/positional learning of attiudes as central or core
> > > intentions of schooling and higher education?
> > >
> > > Was there an historical time when this type of dis-positional learning
> > > took center stage? If so, can we continue to learn from these
> traditions?
> > >
> > > More questions than answers but does seem to *spiral* around notion of
> > > *bildung*?
> > > This tradition has a deep shadow side (in nationalism) and civilizing
> > > notions.
> > > However, does Dewey’s mention of collateral learning continue to have
> > > relevance while mostly being ignored?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Sent from my Windows 10 phone
> > >
> > > From: Alfredo Jornet Gil<mailto:a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
> > > Sent: March 24, 2017 9:32 AM
> > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity<mailto:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion
> > >
> > > David, Eun-Young, all,
> > >
> > > I am so glad that David and Eun-Young have found a fruitful common
> ground
> > > in (and outside) the article's discussion.
> > >
> > > When I chose the paper for this Issue 1 discussion, I thought (perhaps
> > > wrongly) that many xmca'ers would be interested in the paper for
> several
> > > reasons, one being the intermingling of social (ideological) and
> > > subject-related (second language) aspects. I always find it very
> > > interesting the amount of learning that goes on in classrooms (and
> homes)
> > > that is not what canonical descriptions of teaching/learning would (and
> > > possibly could) have anticipated. I am talking about what Dewey refers
> to
> > > as 'collateral learning', that is, learning that is not intended nor
> > > prescribed by the curriculum, but which nonetheless is consequence of
> its
> > > application.
> > >
> > > Dewey (in Education and Experience) describes collateral learning as
> the
> > > 'formation of enduring attitudes, of likes and dislikes, [which] may be
> > and
> > > often is much more important than the spelling lesson or lesson in
> > > geography or history that is learned' This is so absolutely obvious,
> and
> > > yet (in a expression Mike recently used in a talk at Vancouver's SFO)
> is
> > > universally ignored.
> > >
> > > David, you remind us that Vygotsky was trans-disciplinary in the sense
> > > that his field was development, that he was a 'developmentologist' (and
> > you
> > > use the felicitous expression 'pre-able' as an example). I think, and
> > this
> > > is something authors such as Newman and Holzman (in their Vygotsky as
> > > revolutionary scientist) have spelled out, that being a
> > developmentologist
> > > is very much an ideology as well, one that is irreconcilable with the
> > > prescriptive ideology that Eun-Young describes in her article and that
> we
> > > find ourselves being part of in many occasions everyday. The latter
> seems
> > > to be based on the believe that social (and living) things exist in
> > cause -
> > > effect relations pretty much in the same way that physical (non-living)
> > > things exist in the universe. Language then can be seen as a tool (and
> in
> > > fact often is described as a tool even in the sociocultural literature
> > that
> > > cites Vygotsky) that an individual can use to do things. It is then
> > > possible to think of the teaching of second language as the teaching of
> > one
> > > thing, rather than as the formation of whole persons, and not just
> whole
> > > persons but of societal forms of relating, indeed. But if you embrace
> > > Vygotsky's points on development, specially on the fact that what is
> > > developing is  whole persons (with affects, motives) and not just
> > isolated
> > > bits of information, then learning a (second) language is always so
> much
> > > more than learning to speak words and sentences in a second language.
> > >
> > > I applaud the author's call for challenging 'ESL educators and
> > > institutions ... to construct a learning environment in which diverse
> ESL
> > > students' voices are ... heard and discussed, not only about their
> > English
> > > learning, but also about their social struggles' (p. 43). But,
> > considering
> > > the prescriptive ideology that the classroom relations in the focus
> > article
> > > realise, I am surprised by the author's use of the term 'illogical
> > > antagonism against other racial/ethnic groups'. Such antagonism seemed
> > very
> > > logical to them, in fact, immediately logical. I am not as kin as the
> > > author is in attributing intentions to the individual participants
> (see,
> > > e.g., p. 41). Just as the teacher did not intend inequity, I don't
> think
> > > the Korean learners were being racist (which they effectively were)
> > > 'intentionally.' Logic here has to do with organic being, not with
> formal
> > > ideas. And that organic being is about developmental relations, not
> > things
> > > (cause) against things (effect). The more I think about it, and the
> more
> > I
> > > work with it, the more I understand that being an educator is one of
> the
> > > most complex, misunderstood and undervalued task in today's society.
> > >
> > > I hope the article continues to sparkle some interest in the coming
> days.
> > > Meanwhile, thanks Eun-Young and David for a sustained and productive
> > > dialogue.
> > > Alfredo
> > >
> > > ________________________________________
> > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
> >
> > > on behalf of David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
> > > Sent: 20 March 2017 21:45
> > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Jang's SL Article Discussion
> > >
> > > When I was a teenager, my best friend played piano. Tommy didn't just
> > play:
> > > he composed--I'd get cassette letters from him where he would forget to
> > > talk, and just improvise a whole side of beautiful music. He also had
> > > perfect pitch--I'd play a random note on the bass and he would start
> > > talking about "my" B flat; somebody behind us in the traffic would
> honk,
> > > and he'd call out "C!".
> > >
> > > He was color blind. He could tell the traffic lights by their position,
> > of
> > > course. But he couldn't tell a blue from a green, a yellow from an
> > orange,
> > > or even a yellow from a green. They were just unnameable colors.  He'd
> > say
> > > "green" and you'd correct him with "blue" and he'd say "whatever". I'd
> > ask
> > > him--Can't you SEE the difference? And he'd smile and ask me what note
> my
> > > word "see" was. If I said "C", I'd get a lecture on the major scales.
> > >
> > > You might think that these are purely physiological differences without
> > > social dimensions, and I'm sure, in Tommy's case anyway, something
> > genetic
> > > was going on. But if you think a minute, you'll see that a lot of his
> > > "blindness" and my "deafness"  is about naming things, not perceiving
> > them.
> > > You will also see that in both cases there is a certain "social"
> > > overcompensation going on: both of us used our strong points to
> overcome
> > > our weak ones, and this led to "circuitous and indirect" ways of social
> > > functioning: Tommy went on to the Berklee School of Music, and I wrote
> > > lyrics for his songs and eventually became a painter.
> > >
> > > Vygotsky's transdisciplinary, but perhaps involuntarily so. He worked
> in
> > > defectology on the one hand and in pedology on the other. The common
> > thread
> > > was--development, non-canonical and more typical. So he was really a
> > > developmentologist. That is a color, or a note, that doesn't actually
> > exist
> > > for academics today, so in our color-blind, tone-deaf way we just call
> > him
> > > a psychologist.
> > >
> > > I think you're right that racism has an additional social dimension,
> and
> > I
> > > will call this politico-social, since Tommy's inability to name is
> > > certainly social, and so is his circumlocution. This politico-social
> > > dimension of racism is really just an ideological correlate of the fact
> > > that social progress is not planned: we have, in a rather willy-nilly
> > way,
> > > evolved tools and signs to fit one dominant type of culture and one
> > > dominant type of psychophysiology rather than another.
> > >
> > > Sometimes this politico-social dimension also attaches itself to
> > > disabilities like (total) blindness and deafness. But it doesn't have
> to.
> > > >From a defectological perspective, these people are not "disabled",
> but
> > > only "pre-abled"--that is, we have invented circuitous and indirect"
> ways
> > > of circumventing these "defects"  (e.g. Braille, ASL) but we haven't
> yet
> > > socially evolved them as mainstream abilities.
> > >
> > > In Seattle there was a loggers'union whose members were from many
> > different
> > > language backgrounds (Swedish, Chinook, Russian, and a few English
> > speakers
> > > like my grandfather, who was a book keeper). People used American Sign
> > > Language in the sawmill; if you weren't deaf when you started, you
> would
> > be
> > > within a year, because the conditions in the sawmills were so awful.
> But
> > > they strongly resisted any suggestion that this made them "disabled".
> At
> > > one point, the union wanted to condemn Helen Keller, because she was
> > > consorting with Alexander Graham Bell, the inventor of the telephone,
> who
> > > wanted to force deaf children to lip-read instead of learning ASL. Some
> > > people excused her: after all, she's disabled, because she's blind.
> > >
> > > Most articles (especially most articles in TESOL Q!) use "mediation"
> as a
> > > subcategory of teaching-learning (the "good" kind, the kind of
> > > teaching-learning that is sensitive to learner needs on the one hand
> and
> > > context on the other). One of the things I liked about your article is
> > that
> > > you recognized that "mediation" is not a subcategory but an enormous
> > > supercategory, including "being a student" in a set of social roles.
> What
> > > we think of as teaching-learning is only a very small subcategory: a
> > > planned, deliberate, and as a result highly atypical form of mediation.
> > To
> > > me, though, this makes "mediation" a very baggy pair of trousers--not a
> > > good fit for most of what goes on in classrooms!
> > >
> > > David Kellogg
> > > Macquarie University
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > one shadow is different from another. . I once It just wasn't there. .
> > >
> > > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 6:21 PM, Eun Young Jang <
> eunyoung1112@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Dear David
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thank you for the interesting and helpful comments on my paper! I
> > really
> > > > enjoyed your comments and was also pleased to receive your questions
> > > about
> > > > Juan in my earlier paper (TESOL Quarterly). I attach my paper here so
> > > that
> > > > other colleagues can read it if they want.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Yes, I do think that what happened in the ESL classroom can be
> > understood
> > > > from the  "pedological" end as well, as you said. The point that I
> > wanted
> > > > to make in my study was that we should understand 'why a learner acts
> > in
> > > > certain way' from multiple perspectives. It is just like a piece of a
> > > > multilayered cake.
> > > >
> > > > By the way, I think I need to learn more about what you meant by
> > > > 'defectological' end.  When you said 'defect', did you mean some
> > problems
> > > > that people might have in their development? If so, I would like to
> > share
> > > > my opinion. Everyone might have some problems that they must handle
> > (and
> > > > problems that can be handled by some great pedagogical methods).
> > > Sometimes
> > > > the problems are minor (curable) and sometimes they are not (such as
> > > > blindness). However, not all of them are on the same level or same
> > > > dimension. In other words, I think we cannot equate some life's
> > > challenges
> > > > (such as illness) and racial discrimination. They are on different
> > > levels.
> > > > The latter is intrinsically social, I think. Further, in
> multicultural
> > > > education, 'deficit' has very negative connotation because it alludes
> > > that
> > > > there are some 'perfect' things in opposition.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Here, I also pasted my response to your earlier email (off the xmca
> > list)
> > > > below to share it with otehrs.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thank you very much for your ‘off-list’ email and interests in my
> > > articles.
> > > > Thanks to you, I was happy to remind of Juan, the lovely little boy
> > who I
> > > > was with for more than a year.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Yes, we did have an interview with Juan. The other author, Chris
> > Iddings’
> > > > first language was Spanish so she was able to communicate with Juan
> > with
> > > no
> > > > problem. But I remember that whether Juan understood the situation or
> > not
> > > > was decided from our observations of his actions. In particular, the
> > > focus
> > > > of our observations was on the ways the joint attentional frames were
> > > > formed because we thought the frames played a critical role as a
> > > > mediational means in facilitating Juan’s learning. Oh, I also recall
> > that
> > > > when we say Juan’s learning, it was not always learning of English
> but
> > > also
> > > > learning of the classroom discourses. About the quiet mouse events,
> > Juan
> > > > wanted to be picked eagerly by pointing his finger to his own chest
> and
> > > > contacting eyes with the student with the mouse. About the testing, I
> > > > remember that Juan did understand the procedure of the testing and
> > acted
> > > > like a student but in fact, it appeared that he was not able to get
> the
> > > > right answers in terms of English. Well, this should not be a problem
> > > > because understanding the classroom discourses would serve a
> > scaffolding
> > > > for him to learn contents eventually.  Hope my brief answer has
> > satisfied
> > > > your curiosity about my study a bit.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > David, I think we have a lot in common. Let’s keep in touch. I’d love
> > to
> > > > drop by the Dasomcha meeting some day! By the way, I have been in SIG
> > for
> > > > Critical Pedagogy for almost 6years. If you have a plan to visit
> Korea
> > > > again, you are invited to our Critical Pedagogy meeting as well!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > >
> > > > EY.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 6:28 AM, David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Dear Professor Jang:
> > > > >
> > > > > Relax, you are among friends and co-thinkers. Well, a lot of
> friends,
> > > > some
> > > > > of whom are probably very close co-thinkers. It's a very big list,
> > but
> > > I
> > > > > doubt if anybody who read your article would accuse you of teacher
> > > > bashing.
> > > > > I also don't think anybody who read it would think that you used
> your
> > > > > Korean-ness in any other way than a good researcher uses any
> resource
> > > > that
> > > > > affords empathy with the researched. And I DO think that you
> provided
> > > "a"
> > > > > way of bridging a socioculural and a cognitivist approach to the
> > second
> > > > > language classroom. Perhaps even two ways.
> > > > >
> > > > > It seems to me that one way is from the "contextualist" end; that
> is,
> > > to
> > > > > redefine a context in abstract terms, including things like
> > attitudes,
> > > > > motivations, and teaching ideologies right in the context. I think
> > this
> > > > is
> > > > > actually much more difficult than it looks: some people will
> consider
> > > > this
> > > > > behavioristic, because it assumes that attitudes, motivations and
> > > > > ideologies can be treated as external to mind. I think it actually
> > only
> > > > > considers them as external to text. Other people will consider it
> > > > upwardly
> > > > > reductionistic, because it assumes that attitudes, motivations and
> > > > > ideologies can be reduced to society and to culture and to context
> of
> > > > > situation. I think that society and culture and context of
> situation
> > > must
> > > > > always be considered as a complex whole, including cognition, but
> not
> > > > > subsuming it.
> > > > >
> > > > > It also seems to me that another is from the "organicist" end; that
> > is,
> > > > to
> > > > > define attitudes, motivations, and ideologies as something in some
> > way
> > > > > independent of cognition (the "distributed cognition" people are
> good
> > > at
> > > > > this). Again, this isn't so easy, particularly in an American
> > context.
> > > > > America is now going through a kind of crisis, because racism has
> > > > > previously been defined in only one of two ways. Either racism is
> > part
> > > of
> > > > > cognition--in which case it really only exists in people who
> > subscribe,
> > > > > paradoxically, to "objective" scientific racism, to the belief that
> > > > > non-whites are actually inferior. Or racism is part of culture--in
> > > which
> > > > > case it really only exists in the debilitating effects it has on
> the
> > > > > oppressed, and it doesn't really matter what it is that racists
> > believe
> > > > > (or, for that matter, what non-racists believe: Obama was just as
> > > guilty
> > > > of
> > > > > black unemployment as Bush).
> > > > >
> > > > > What I suggest is, rather perversely, a third way. It's from the
> > > > > "pedological, defectological" end. That is, attitudes, motivations
> > and
> > > > the
> > > > > teaching ideologies which derive from them need to be understood
> not
> > > only
> > > > > as part of the context but also as part of pedology, a whole
> science
> > of
> > > > the
> > > > > child. Unfortunately, Vygotsky's writings on this are not available
> > in
> > > > > English, but they ARE available in good Korean:
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.aladin.co.kr/shop/common/wseriesitem.aspx?SRID=25565
> > > > >
> > > > > Similarly, the ravages of racism (including the "damunhwa kyoyuk"
> > > > developed
> > > > > in Korea under Yi Myeongbak and Park Geunhye, which was concerned
> > with
> > > > > providing "equal opportunity" to the majority as well as to the
> > > minority)
> > > > > need to be considered not simply as stigma on the dominant race or
> as
> > > > > stigmata of the oppressed but more defectologically. "Defect"
> wasn't
> > an
> > > > > insult in the USSR: Vygotsky actually considers "yeongje kyoyuk"
> > (that
> > > > is,
> > > > > "genius education"), education of the blind, education of the deaf,
> > > > > so-called "learning disabilities" not as "disabilities" but as
> > > > > defects--that is, normal disadvantages to be overcome in the same
> way
> > > as
> > > > > any other obstacle in learning, through "circuitous and indirect",
> > that
> > > > is,
> > > > > mediated, means of learning. We have evolved our means of
> education,
> > as
> > > > > Vygotsky says, to cater to the needs of the psychophysiological
> > > dominant
> > > > > group, but the mark of higher forms of social progress is how it
> can
> > > > > develop the niches within this and the needs of those who are not
> > > > > psychophysiologically dominant.
> > > > >
> > > > > (Do you know Professor Kim Jinseok? I worked at SNUE for over ten
> > years
> > > > > myself, and our Vygotsky group still meets there every Saturday to
> > > > > translate the work of Vygotsky into Korean. If you are on campus
> on a
> > > > > Saturday, we are usually in room 315, over "Dasomchae" near the
> front
> > > > gate,
> > > > > from noon until about four!)
> > > > >
> > > > > David Kellogg
> > > > > Macquarie University
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Eun Young Jang <
> > > eunyoung1112@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > ​
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi everyone, thank you very much for reading my article. This is
> > > such a
> > > > > > great opportunity for me to introduce my work and receive
> comments
> > > from
> > > > > > wonderful colleagues.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > First, let me introduce myself briefly. I earned my doctorate in
> > > > > Language,
> > > > > > Literacy, and Culture in the Department of Teaching and Learning
> at
> > > > > > Vanderbilt University. I am currently working as an assistant
> > > professor
> > > > > in
> > > > > > Multicultural Education at Seoul National University of Education
> > > > located
> > > > > > in Seoul, South Korea. My research interests are in the impact of
> > the
> > > > > > social context on second language teaching and learning. Another
> > > paper
> > > > > > published recently deals with sustainable globalization of higher
> > > > > education
> > > > > > focusing on cultures and languages in a foreign professor’s
> > classroom
> > > > in
> > > > > S.
> > > > > > Korea. My current research project is about North Korean refugee
> > > > students
> > > > > > learning English in South Korea.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > My article for xmca discussion was initiated from my observation
> > that
> > > > ESL
> > > > > > students were not actually focusing on learning English in the
> ESL
> > > > > > classroom but instead, on ‘acting’ learning with an attempt to
> > > achieve
> > > > > > certain social position (as an individual or a group). In
> > > particular, I
> > > > > > noted that they were quite skillful in using ‘seemingly’ academic
> > > > > > strategies to conceal what they were actually doing.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The ESL students were very sensitive to things happening to them
> in
> > > > terms
> > > > > > of marginalization and discrimination but did not reveal to
> others
> > > > > > explicitly what they really thought. Instead, they took advantage
> > of
> > > > the
> > > > > > school discourse that was legitimized in the context, that was,
> > > acting
> > > > > like
> > > > > > motivated and strategic learners by participating in class
> > activities
> > > > > > actively and strategically. In spite of regular observations of
> ESL
> > > > > classes
> > > > > > back then, I could not figure out what was happening in the
> > classroom
> > > > for
> > > > > > the first couple of months. Later on, the social dynamics among
> > > > students
> > > > > > and between students and the teacher surfaced to me and also they
> > > began
> > > > > to
> > > > > > open their minds and told me how they felt isolated and
> > > discriminated.
> > > > > > Then, I was able to see the meanings of their actions.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In effect, the ESL teacher tried hard to be fair and in a sense,
> > the
> > > > > French
> > > > > > student was isolated and discriminated by the Korean students in
> > the
> > > > ESL
> > > > > > classroom. Nevertheless, Korean students victimized themselves. I
> > > > thought
> > > > > > that it was still important and valuable to acknowledge how the
> > > Korean
> > > > > > students felt simply because the feelings were there and they
> made
> > > some
> > > > > > consequences (such as silencing the French student). I wanted to
> > > reveal
> > > > > > that how the students felt and why they felt that way and how
> they
> > > > > reacted
> > > > > > to their feelings. Whether the discrimination was real or not was
> > not
> > > > > > important.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > A reviewer from other journal has criticized my article badly for
> > > > teacher
> > > > > > bashing. But definitely I did not mean it. Also, some readers of
> my
> > > > > article
> > > > > > said that because I am Korean, I was on the Korean students’
> side.
> > > The
> > > > > fact
> > > > > > was, the ESL teacher and I were good friends and this even made
> the
> > > > > Korean
> > > > > > students suspicious of my position (like a spy from the ‘white’
> > > teacher
> > > > > > side). Anyway, honestly, the comments from other scholars made me
> > > feel
> > > > > > constrained conducting research about the same ethnic group. Now,
> > I’d
> > > > > like
> > > > > > to know about your opinion about this issue.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Again, the fact that the participants were Korean was not the
> main
> > > > focus
> > > > > of
> > > > > > my study. I wanted to show how they used strategies, which were
> > > > typically
> > > > > > categorized as individual and cognitive traits, for social
> > purposes.
> > > > So,
> > > > > > the bigger agenda of my study was to explore “a” way to bridge
> the
> > > > > > dichotomy between individual and sociocultural camps.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > EY.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 8:12 AM, David Kellogg <
> > dkellogg60@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Alfredo:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Down the hall one of the Chinese translators is working on
> > > > translations
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > the Chinese "State of the Union" address into English. The
> > Chinese
> > > > goes
> > > > > > > something like this:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 消除贫困取得进展。
> > > > > > > xiāochú pínkùn qǔdé jìnzhǎn.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Literally:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "Eradicate Poverty Achieve Progress", i.e. "(The government)
> > (made)
> > > > > some
> > > > > > > progress in the eradication of poverty."
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > In Chinese we don't have to specify the agent, and we don't
> need
> > to
> > > > use
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > effective verb "made"; it's a happening and not a doing. This
> > used
> > > to
> > > > > be
> > > > > > > because the agent went without saying--it's encoded in the
> > grammar.
> > > > > > Partly
> > > > > > > thanks to a poetic tradition going back more than a thousand
> > years,
> > > > > > Chinese
> > > > > > > lends itself to four-syllable slogan-like objects like
> "Eradicate
> > > > > > Poverty"
> > > > > > > and "Achieve Progress", and putting them together sounds
> natural.
> > > We
> > > > > > don't
> > > > > > > usually use a subject unless we want to stress it; it's much
> more
> > > > > common
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > just have a nominal topic and then a comment, like in this
> > example.
> > > > > > Because
> > > > > > > the government has a well established role in mobilizing the
> > masses
> > > > to
> > > > > > > carry out actions like famine relief and flood prevention and
> so
> > > on,
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > agent and the "doing" don't need to be specified: everybody
> knows
> > > it
> > > > > was
> > > > > > > the government, even if that weren't clear in the context of a
> > > > > government
> > > > > > > report. So we simply say it's a happening.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Now that's changing. In fact, the government does relatively
> > little
> > > > to
> > > > > > > alleviate poverty. There are regional enterprises, and there
> are
> > > > > private
> > > > > > > businesses and so on. After the Sichuan earthquake, my
> > > brother-in-law
> > > > > > > loaded up his SUV with bottled water and drove down to the
> > > earthquake
> > > > > > area
> > > > > > > to distribute it, and he says there was a huge traffic jam of
> > other
> > > > > SUVs
> > > > > > by
> > > > > > > entrepreneurs like him who had exactly the same idea. And for
> > > > precisely
> > > > > > > this reason, we find that in the government report there is
> more
> > > and
> > > > > more
> > > > > > > explicit stipulation of the government's agency and of the
> > > effective
> > > > > > means.
> > > > > > > Instead of just happening, the government does things. There
> is a
> > > > > similar
> > > > > > > link between ideology and ideation in English if you think
> about
> > > it.
> > > > > When
> > > > > > > something GOOD happens, it's because somebody DID it, but when
> > > > > something
> > > > > > > bad happens, "Stuff happens".
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Here's the point. We usually use "ideology" to mean something
> > like
> > > > > > > conscious and deliberate ideation, usually of an intentionally
> > > > > deceitful
> > > > > > or
> > > > > > > misleading variety. I don't really accept that. It seems to me
> > that
> > > > > > > "ideology" really is equivalent to ideation, that is, to the
> > > > > > communicative,
> > > > > > > representational function of speech, except that it is somewhat
> > > > larger,
> > > > > > > both because the interpersonal and the textual functions also
> > > encode
> > > > > > ideas
> > > > > > > and are also therefore ideological and because a lot of
> ideology
> > is
> > > > > > simply
> > > > > > > NOT specifying things. For example, when you say "it's
> raining",
> > > you
> > > > > are
> > > > > > > conveying the idea that rain is an event that just happens, and
> > is
> > > > not
> > > > > > > caused by any nameable entity. You don't normally say "it's
> > > birding"
> > > > or
> > > > > > > even "it's shining".
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Similarly, we usually use "prescriptivism" to mean something
> like
> > > > > > conscious
> > > > > > > and deliberate transformativism, usually of an authoritarian
> and
> > > > > > > dictatorial, and deceptive, sort. I don't really accept that
> > > either.
> > > > On
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > contrary, what is really deceptive is to pretend that the
> process
> > > of
> > > > > > > education is meaningful without attending to its ultimate
> > product.
> > > To
> > > > > me,
> > > > > > > "Eradicate Poverty Achieve Progress" is a perfect balance of
> > > process
> > > > > and
> > > > > > > product, and agency and effective means are only meaningful
> with
> > > > > respect
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > both.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > David Kellogg
> > > > > > > Macquarie University
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 5:53 AM, Alfredo Jornet Gil <
> > > > > a.j.gil@iped.uio.no
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi again,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > one thing that I find interesting in Jang's article, and
> which
> > > may
> > > > > > > connect
> > > > > > > > to comments in the other thread (by David, Haydi...)
> concerning
> > > > 'not
> > > > > > > > reducing the political to the personal',  is the issue of
> > > > *ideology.*
> > > > > > In
> > > > > > > > particular, Jang discusses and empirically examines what she
> > > coins
> > > > > as a
> > > > > > > > *Prescriptive* language ideology. As she describes in her
> > paper,
> > > > and
> > > > > as
> > > > > > > any
> > > > > > > > educator will immediately recognise, this ideology exists as
> > the
> > > > > > > > classroom's orientations to a correct/incorrect form. In her
> > > > article,
> > > > > > she
> > > > > > > > exhibits this through a number of sequences in which
> > > > teacher-student
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > student-student relations involve *evaluations* with regard
> to
> > > > > > > proficiently
> > > > > > > > using two rules: making connections between sentences and
> > staying
> > > > on
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > topic.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > As Jang shows, the prescriptive approach, which sets the
> final
> > > > > linguist
> > > > > > > > form as the criterion for positively or negatively evaluating
> > any
> > > > > > > response
> > > > > > > > by any student, is such that more proficient readers/speakers
> > > will
> > > > > have
> > > > > > > > easier access to positive evaluation. The ideology here then
> > > exists
> > > > > as
> > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > regime of power and differential access, of inequality. By
> > > treating
> > > > > all
> > > > > > > > equally, we get to inequality.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I was thinking that it seems that the prescriptive approach
> > does
> > > > > focus
> > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > the final product, whereas the sociocultural approach that
> Jang
> > > > > pursues
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > Vygotsky first set forth has it that we should not focus on
> the
> > > > final
> > > > > > > > product but on its genesis, on the way the verbal form exists
> > > first
> > > > > as
> > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > social relation between people. Thus, in Episodes 1 and 2 in
> > the
> > > > > > article,
> > > > > > > > if the participants had oriented towards a possible process
> of
> > > > > > > development,
> > > > > > > > Ji-Woo's responses would have been heard and responded to as
> > > > moments
> > > > > > in a
> > > > > > > > developmental trajectory. There would have been a very
> > different
> > > > > social
> > > > > > > > situation in which work would have been directed to make
> > visible
> > > > and
> > > > > > > > available the dynamics of Ji-Woo's learning process. But the
> > > > > > prescriptive
> > > > > > > > orientation evaluates and makes salient only deficiency and
> > > > > > achievement.
> > > > > > > On
> > > > > > > > the other hand, and consistent with those (e.g., Stetsenko,
> > > > Holzman)
> > > > > > who
> > > > > > > > have referred to Vygotsky's legacy as *revolutionary,* an
> > > > orientation
> > > > > > > > consistent with Vygotsky's teachings would bring with it not
> > > only a
> > > > > > > > different situation, but also an *emancipatory* one. Instead
> of
> > > > > > > inequality
> > > > > > > > brought about by treating all equally, we would have an
> > > > equalitarian
> > > > > > > > approach whose power resides in acknowledging and caring for
> > > > history
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > diversity.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On a side thought, and connected to David's (Halliday's)
> > > > distinction
> > > > > > > > between ideational and interpersonal functions of language, I
> > was
> > > > > > > wondering
> > > > > > > > what is the relation/difference between ideational and
> > > ideological.
> > > > > In
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > article, it seems clear that the language related competence
> on
> > > > > putting
> > > > > > > > names to things and thereby building categories seems a
> > condition
> > > > for
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > racial/ethnic tension to exist. But of course, the tension
> is a
> > > > > > > relational,
> > > > > > > > not just a lexical one. Thoughts?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 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: 13 March 2017 18:48
> > > > > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> > > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l]  Jang's SL Article Discussion
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ​Dear all,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > David has started some very interesting comments on the
> current
> > > > > article
> > > > > > > > for discussion on Tensions in Second Language Learning, which
> > > > attach
> > > > > > > again
> > > > > > > > here. Because some of these comments have been given at a
> > > different
> > > > > > > thread,
> > > > > > > > I am starting here a thread that shall more centrally concern
> > > > Jang's
> > > > > > > > article. I copy below all what David has so far written about
> > the
> > > > > > > article.
> > > > > > > > I hope this will ​make it easy for Eun-Young and everyone
> else
> > to
> > > > > > follow
> > > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > her article. I know ​Eun-Young is challenged time-wise by
> > course
> > > > > > > > responsibilities and I hope this will make it easier for her.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Eun-Young, David mentions an article from 2011. If you
> wanted,
> > > you
> > > > > > could
> > > > > > > > also share the PDF with us for background, although the
> current
> > > > > article
> > > > > > > > gives more than enough material for discussion, I think.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Alfredo
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --------------------David Kellogg wrote: ------------------
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > t's very interesting to compare this paper with Professor
> > Jang's
> > > > 2011
> > > > > > > > paper co-authored with Robert T. Jimenez:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Eun-Young Jang & Robert T. Jiménez (2011) A Sociocultural
> > > > Perspective
> > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > Second Language Learner Strategies: Focus on the Impact of
> > Social
> > > > > > > Context,
> > > > > > > > Theory Into Practice,
> > > > > > > > 50:2, 141-148, DOI: 10.1080/00405841.2011.558443
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > In some ways, the papers are very similar--the data is
> > identical
> > > in
> > > > > one
> > > > > > > > place (p. 42), and the conclusions are for the most part
> > > congruent.
> > > > > But
> > > > > > > > consider how different the titles are. "Impact" in one place,
> > and
> > > > > > > "tension"
> > > > > > > > in the other.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > There is this note to the 1935 version of Vygotsky's report
> on
> > > > > > > preschools,
> > > > > > > > where Zankov, Elkonin and Shif complain about Vygotsky's idea
> > > that
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > child directs his or her own learning before preschool, the
> > > > > environment
> > > > > > > > directs it after preschool, and preschool therefore
> represents
> > a
> > > > kind
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > transitional stage. On the one hand, if the child is
> directing
> > > his
> > > > or
> > > > > > her
> > > > > > > > own learning, how can we say that the environment is the
> > ultimate
> > > > > > source
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > learning? And if the environment is the ultimate source of
> > > > learning,
> > > > > as
> > > > > > > > Vygotsky says, how can we say that the child is himself or
> > > herself
> > > > > part
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > the environment?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Professor Jang gets around this problem just as Vygotsky
> > > > > > does--adroitly.
> > > > > > > On
> > > > > > > > the one hand, strategies are expanded to include "sets of
> > actions
> > > > > > > performed
> > > > > > > > to deal with problems (perceived by the researcher, indicated
> > by
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > learners)". On the other, contexts are expanded to include
> > > > > "pedagogical
> > > > > > > > assumptions, power relations, and interracial conflict".
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I think this solution to the problem is the correct one: when
> > we
> > > > > > consider
> > > > > > > > the relationship of the child and the environment, we cannot
> > > treat
> > > > it
> > > > > > > like
> > > > > > > > an unstoppable force meeting an unmoveable object. But for me
> > > that
> > > > > > means
> > > > > > > > that both the child and the environment have to be considered
> > in
> > > > > > > "internal"
> > > > > > > > (that is, abstract, linguistic) terms. We can't think of
> speech
> > > as
> > > > > > > actions;
> > > > > > > > it's more useful to think of actions as speech. We can't
> think
> > of
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > social situation of development as a material setting: it's a
> > > > > > > relationship
> > > > > > > > with others.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Contrariwise, it seems to me that when we consider "racism",
> it
> > > is
> > > > > more
> > > > > > > > helpful to consider it in "external", that is, concrete,
> > > > > nonlinguistic
> > > > > > > > terms. In the 2011 paper, Professor Jang and her co-author
> are
> > > > > willing
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > openly criticize the idea that languages are learned in
> exactly
> > > the
> > > > > > same
> > > > > > > > way whether they are first or second languages. Here, they
> just
> > > > quote
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > teacher's comments on "mommy skills".
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > It's a very revealing quote. One thing it reveals is why it's
> > > > > probably
> > > > > > > not
> > > > > > > > helpful to refer to "racist" as an "insult" (p. 40) or to
> imply
> > > > that
> > > > > > > racism
> > > > > > > > and anti-racism is really just a matter of having the right
> > > > attitude
> > > > > > (as
> > > > > > > > the Republicans did in the Sessions debate or as Bernie
> Sanders
> > > did
> > > > > > when
> > > > > > > he
> > > > > > > > referred to Trump supporters who voted for Obama as "not
> > having a
> > > > > > racist
> > > > > > > > bone in their bodies").
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > You can see that subjectively, the teacher is being
> > > > anti-racist--all
> > > > > > > > students, French, Turkish, Egyptian, Korean, use the same
> > > > strategies,
> > > > > > > just
> > > > > > > > like we all have mommies.She has all the right attitudes, and
> > > > > probably
> > > > > > > > doesn't have a racist bone in her body. But that doesn't
> > diminish
> > > > by
> > > > > > one
> > > > > > > > jot the terrible damage that this kind of indiscriminate
> > > > > discrimination
> > > > > > > > does in the classroom.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > David Kellogg
> > > > > > > > Macquarie University
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ------------------------ On a related thread (Subject: Don't
> do
> > > > it),
> > > > > > > David
> > > > > > > > K. wrote:--------------
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > It seems to me that we need to clearly distinguish between
> > > "racism"
> > > > > and
> > > > > > > > "racist sentiment". One of the interesting problems that
> comes
> > up
> > > > in
> > > > > > > Eunhee
> > > > > > > > Jang's excellent article on second language learning
> strategies
> > > > from
> > > > > a
> > > > > > > > sociocultural point of view--a wonderful piece of "inside"
> > work,
> > > > > > > > introducing racial issues into an area where they have never
> > been
> > > > > > > seriously
> > > > > > > > discussed--is the use of "racist" (by the Korean kids to
> > describe
> > > > > their
> > > > > > > > teacher) as an "insult".
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I like the article. I think it's important work. But for that
> > > very
> > > > > > > reason,
> > > > > > > > I think that it's important to resist any attempt to reduce
> > > > "racist"
> > > > > > to a
> > > > > > > > personal insult. I think we've seen very very clearly, both
> in
> > > the
> > > > > > > Sessions
> > > > > > > > confirmation hearing, and in the discussion of Trump's own
> > > > > anti-semitic
> > > > > > > > behavior--that this kind of reduction of the political to the
> > > > > personal
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > precisely the kind of reducing the sociocultural to the
> > cognitive
> > > > > that
> > > > > > > > Professor Jang is trying to resist.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > David Kellogg
> > > > > > > > Macquarie University
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ------------------------- Idem as
> > above-------------------------
> > > > > > > > ---------------
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > One of the interesting aspects of Professor Jang's paper is
> > that
> > > it
> > > > > is
> > > > > > > > about adolescents who are in the process of forming concepts,
> > but
> > > > who
> > > > > > are
> > > > > > > > not there yet. And one way in which an adolescent forms a
> > concept
> > > > > about
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > difficult concept of a social contract, of citizenship, of
> > > > > nationality
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > pseudoconceptual: it is based on discussing "actual"
> perceptual
> > > > > > > differences
> > > > > > > > between races. This might seem irrelevant to current
> political
> > > > > > discourse.
> > > > > > > > Unfortunately, it isn't.​
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > David Kellogg
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Jang, Eun-Young. Ph.D.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Education
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Seoul National University of Education
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Seoul, S. Korea
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > Jang, Eun-Young. Ph.D.
> > > >
> > > > Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Education
> > > >
> > > > Seoul National University of Education
> > > >
> > > > Seoul, S. Korea
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>