[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [xmca] Educational neuroscience
Hello Huw,
I agree with you in both points, but I think a good professional has
to have at least some understanding of neuroscience, not to apply
directly (as with tests or something like the proposals of main stream
neuroscience), but well it is the most "material" part of our studies
- along with social relations in my poor understanding - and also to
have good arguments against abusive use of testing, medication and
blaming the individual for educational failure. And for most people
(at least from my experience in Brazil) a "Doctor" like a physician
knows "real science" while we are just "from humanities", so he is
always right and many times because of lack of argumentation in
neuroscience we fail the discussion and loose even more ground to the
"wonder world of drugs to children".
Best,
Wagner
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 12:21 AM, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 24 July 2013 16:06, Wagner Luiz Schmit <wagner.schmit@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hello Huw,
>>
>> I like that text pretty much (I always returned to it in our research
>> group in Brazil and I will present it again this week to our research
>> group in Japan). And this text, acording to Leontiev, is from 1930...
>> But at the same time Leontiev, in a letter from this same year (if I
>> am not mistaken again) points to divergent way of thinking between
>> him, Luria and Vygotsky... I unfortunately know very little about
>> Luria (just read some texts) and even less about today Russian
>> neuroscience, does this proposal by Vygotsky continues in Luria?
>
>
> My current reading of these circumstances is there are 3 inter-related
> variants of genetic systems of thought at play.
>
>
>> And
>> returning to the main topic, there is still neuroscience following
>> these guidelines?
>>
>
> Does neuroscience follow these guidelines? I don't think so. I think it
> requires a deep appreciation for both Marxian dialectics and functional
> systems, both of which offer genetic explanations and are complementary.
>
> But Marxian Activity systems are quite practical to studying education, I
> believe. How is one going to study neuroscientific phenomena in an
> educational context?
>
> Best,
> Huw
>
>
>>
>> Wagner
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 11:54 PM, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > On 24 July 2013 15:38, Wagner Luiz Schmit <wagner.schmit@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hello Larry,
>> >>
>> >> Please say more... I think this is so important, and things point out
>> >> that Vygotsky also, otherwise why enter the Medicine course in 1930
>> >> (if my memory is not wrong)
>> >>
>> >> Wagner
>> >>
>> >
>> > "On Psychological Systems", collected works of LSV, v.3, p.105
>> >
>> > "In actual fact, it seems to me that by introducing the concept of
>> > psychological system in the form we discussed, we get a splendid
>> > possibility of conceiving the real connections, the real complex
>> > relationships that exist."
>> >
>> > "To a certain degree this also holds true for one of the most difficult
>> > problems -- the localization of higher psychological systems."
>> >
>> > Huw
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 11:33 PM, Larry Purss <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > Ulvi,
>> >> >
>> >> > You mentioned you are interested in *cognitive CHANGE*.
>> >> >
>> >> > Within the concept *neuroplasticity* is implicit Nero change.
>> >> >
>> >> > There is a scholar in France [Catherine Malabou] whose central
>> conceptual
>> >> > thesis explores *plasticity* as from the Greek *to mold or to model.*
>> >> > She moves the concepts of *dynamic* and *systems* and *theory* and
>> >> *neural*
>> >> > within the orbit of the central thesis of plasticity as change,
>> >> > transformation and metamorphosis.
>> >> >
>> >> > Not sure if this is too far off topic.
>> >> >
>> >> > I also want to mention *neo-Piagetian* theory including Vygotsky and
>> >> > Wittgenstein is being explored at SIMON Fraser University.
>> >> > If interested I could say more.
>> >> > Larry
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 6:39 AM, Ulvi İçil <ulvi.icil@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Dear Andy and all, I found Kurt Fisher, he is at Harvard, Mind, Brain
>> >> and
>> >> >> Education.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> He is described as:
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Piagetian_theories_of_cognitive_development
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Fischer's theory differs from the other neo-Piagetian theories in a
>> >> number
>> >> >> of respects. One of them is in the way it explains cognitive change.
>> >> >> Specifically, although Fischer does not deny the operation of
>> >> information
>> >> >> processing constrains on development, he emphasizes on the
>> environmental
>> >> >> and social rather than individual factors as causes of development.
>> To
>> >> >> explain developmental change he borrowed two classic notions from Lev
>> >> >> Vygotsky,[12]<
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Piagetian_theories_of_cognitive_development#cite_note-12
>> >> >> >that
>> >> >> is, internalization and the zone of proximal development.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I am rather interested in the application of the new findings in the
>> >> field
>> >> >> of educational neuroscience into the theory and practice of
>> education.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Ulvi
>> >> >>
>> >> >> 2013/7/23 Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > Ulvi, best of luck in your search, and maybe someone on this list
>> can
>> >> >> > help. But don't get your hopes up.
>> >> >> > Lawrence Barsalou is a very sophisticated writer on neuroscience,
>> but
>> >> in:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Barsalou, L. W. (1992) “Cognitive Psychology. An Overview for
>> >> Cognitive
>> >> >> > Scientists,” Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > where he has a chapter on education, he characterises education as:
>> >> >> > “teachers provide information that students incorporate into
>> existing
>> >> >> > knowledge” - in other words, not only does he use "folk
>> psychology" in
>> >> >> his
>> >> >> > grasp of the subtlties of education, but he seems to be unaware
>> that
>> >> this
>> >> >> > antiquated "theory" of teaching and learning has been subject to
>> any
>> >> >> > critique over the past 100 years. A classic illustration of the
>> >> problem
>> >> >> > that Greg has been raising.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Andy
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Ulvi İçil wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> Dear all,
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> I would like to know some outstanding scholar names in the field
>> of
>> >> >> >> educational neuroscience, working in the line of sociocultural
>> >> theory.
>> >> >> >> Thanks.
>> >> >> >> Ulvi
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > --
>> >> >> > ------------------------------**------------------------------**
>> >> >> > ------------
>> >> >> > *Andy Blunden*
>> >> >> > Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/
>> >> >> > Book: http://www.brill.nl/concepts
>> >> >> > http://marxists.academia.edu/**AndyBlunden<
>> >> >> http://marxists.academia.edu/AndyBlunden>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>