Re: RE: boundary objects versus

Katherine Goff (Katherine_Goff who-is-at ceo.cudenver.edu)
Thu, 21 Jan 1999 11:21:45 -0700

ematusov who-is-at udel.edu writes:
>As to tests, I do not think that tests in school or any other "evidence of
>learning" divorced from the activity flow are inherently required by or
>necessary for teachers. Tests seem to be as tools (aha!) for negotiation
>with people who are not in the classroom. I think that critique of
>testing
>focusing only on low validity of tests often misses this point. In other
>words, I argue that tests mediate not learning but negotiation (probably
>about material resources). In a sense, request for "evidence of learning"
>is not less bizarre than request for "evidence of love" as something
>separate from the flow of events. Both focuses can easily kill the very
>subject, evidence of which they try to find.

i like this comparison.
i think much of learning is difficult to express, involving feelings
and/or emotions and relying on negotiated relationships (can there be any
other kind?) which depend on faith or hope or dispair concerning the
intentions of the others involved in the process.

i also think it's useful to blur the distinction between
subject-tool-object and a fuzzy boundary helps me to do so.

the example i offer is of my kids using an organizer to keep track of
homework. eventually the tool gets internalized and then the material
representation is no longer needed. is the tool now somehow included in
the subject?

also, donna haraway's vision of feminist objectivity calls for the objects
of study (people, rats, ecosystems, molecules, etc.) to play an active,
conversational role in knowledge production while the subject is required
to objectify her/himself and reveal her/his biases, desires, intentions.

this helps me when i begin to wonder what is _not_ a tool?
anything and anyone _can_ be, but not simultaneously from every
perspective.
plus, it exposes the subject's objective of using someone or something
_as_ a tool.

kathie

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
start all over.
start all over.
we need to make new symbols,
make new signs,
make a new language,
with these we'll redefine the world
and start all over.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^tracy chapman:new beginning
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Katherine_Goff who-is-at ceo.cudenver.edu
http://ceo.cudenver.edu/~katherine_goff/index.html