[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [xmca] Re: Luria - New Vodka Old Bottle PDF

Michael, in response to your multiple questions here, i'm going to hazard a guess based on my experiences teaching children who are learning a second language as well as teaching teachers how to teach second language learners.

for me, the communicative discourse drives our actions.

when working with second language learners, when the learners had language supports, particularly visual and auditory, they were often stronger in mastering an activity.  for example, in science when comparing two objects and finding similarities and differences.  if on the board that statement was posted, "I noticed that _____________ was similar to ________________ because ___________________."

in time, i noticed that when the teachers were learning teaching strategies, and, say, i'd focus on utilizing open questions, when i provided them with a piece of paper with specific open question prompts, they were more easily and more quickly able to change their questioning behaviors.

while the teachers knew the difference between a closed  question and an open question, they didn't have the language structures, say, on the tip of their tongue.  as time passed and they became more fluent with open questions, then they were better able to control their questioning strategies, which also demanded that the students then had to respond with more than "yes", "no" or other monosyllabic discourses.

my two bits.


Phillip White, PhD
Urban Community Teacher Education Program
Site Coordinator
Montview Elementary, Aurora, CO
From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Glassman, Michael [glassman.13@osu.edu]
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 12:16 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: RE: [xmca] Re: Luria - New Vodka Old Bottle PDF

There is, it seems to me, a really big problem, or divide, that has been haunting the issue of communicative discourse and action.

Which is primary?  And I don't think this is a frivolous question - and the idea that it is in a constant cycle has a difficult time working because the question always comes up where do we as researchers enter this cycle?

Does communicative discourse drive our actions?  And do we change our actions by changing communicative discourse?

Or does action drive our communicative discourse?  And we change our communicative discourse through changing our actions.

Do we change racism in America by getting people to change their communicative discourse about Treyvon Martin?

Or do we get people to engage in more just actions and allow this to lead to a change in communicative discourse.

One of the difficulties with Vygotsky, at least from my view, is that he can be interpreted both ways, depending of course on what you are reading and level of confirmation bias.