[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Xmca-l] Re: basic prerequisites for CHAT supervision?
- To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <email@example.com>
- Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: basic prerequisites for CHAT supervision?
- From: mike cole <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2014 11:51:18 -0700
- In-reply-to: <CAG1MBOHnchQ5suM8At5aZf1KAZSMwEu0oLLkSVb3+aChsg+YSw@mail.gmail.com>
- List-archive: <https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l>
- List-help: <mailto:email@example.com?subject=help>
- List-id: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l.mailman.ucsd.edu>
- List-post: <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>
- List-subscribe: <https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca-l>, <mailto:email@example.com?subject=subscribe>
- List-unsubscribe: <https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca-l>, <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org?subject=unsubscribe>
- References: <CAG1MBOHnchQ5suM8At5aZf1KAZSMwEu0oLLkSVb3+aChsg+YSw@mail.gmail.com>
- Reply-to: <email@example.com>, "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Sender: <email@example.com>
Your question is very difficult to answer, Huw, because it takes us to the
question of "education for what," and I strongly suspect that a lot of work
would have to be done to arrive at a coherent, finite, concensus.
I am on board myself with the impulses in 2-4, although their
interpretation, too, is likely to be variable.
I would be interested in the extent to which CRADLE already follows an
approach such as you are proposing. I have not read their documents
recently and do not know their pedagogical credo, but given Yrjo's
proclivity to view development as breaking away and creating the new, I
imagine some such processes are in that approach.
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 10:33 AM, Huw Lloyd <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> In consideration of a simple list of requirements for good supervision in
> CHAT, the following criteria seem important to me. Has anyone else thought
> about this or tried to formulate it? What would people amend? Is there a
> shared sense of what is important?
> 1. Personal commitment to a "pedagogic oath".
> 2. Thoroughgoing appreciation of cultural-historical conceptions and their
> disparity from the norms of induction into social science, such as the more
> profound notion of qualitative research on the basis of dialectical and
> genetic considerations.
> 3. Interpersonal commitments informed by the intellectual knowledge, i.e. a
> practicing awareness of ZPD that informs the vocational commitment (item
> 4. A present social situational disposition to engage in interested
> dialogue with the student that has substantive benefits for the supervisor
> too (i.e not merely administrative ones).