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

[Xmca-l] Re: units of analysis?


I like your analysis, it makes perezhivanje more accessible in this framework,


-----Original Message-----
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Julian Williams
Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2014 3:56 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: units of analysis?


I think the model of 'unit'  for LSV after KM is the commodity, which captures the essential contradiction within capitalism, ... between use and exchange, producer and consumer (mediated by capital)... Marx thought that this unit could provide the source of the whole system, and it's demise. The demise/sublation of the contradiction inherent in the commodity is the disappearance of capital/money. Which we all await... But don't hold your breath...

Anyway the point is the unit holds the essential contradiction, without which nothing transpires...

So .. perezhivanije captures in a unit the contradiction between the (objectivity of the) environment (the abusive mother) and the child's subjectivity of this experience (emotional experience, crisis) mediating and mediated by the child's development, 'among other things' ... The child's development has to be understood as moving, the contradiction between their understanding and their emotional experience is the dialectic of development.

 The objective content of the abuse is as relevant to perezhivanije as the child's development (they are in contradiction?) in explaining/understanding  the dynamics of 'experience' and development. The sublation/resolution of the contradiction - if it occurs- perhaps involves a development in which the emotional crisis becomes understood by the abused child in a new way that relieves the guilt, stress etc.

Is that the connection?


Sent from my iPad

On 12 Oct 2014, at 22:14, "Tonyan, Holli A" <Holli.Tonyan@csun.edu> wrote:

> Juan,
> Can you say more of what you mean?  Part if the issue of late has been that the discussion veers very quickly deep into the framework and then many get lost.  Part of what we are trying to do is to keep the discussion grounded in specifics of some sort.  
> For me, the goal is to use a method directed at a unit of analysis the allows me to understand the unity, the point past which it becomes deceptive to break down into further parts beyond thought experiments.  I like Rogoff's example of the heart as part of the body: we can imagine the heart functioning on its own, but the heart cannot function without the circulatory system.
> The LSV paper uses a child's emotional experience (perezhevanie) because each child understands an experience differently, but not just understands.  Isn't that ANL's big critique that "experience" is still too individual and not social enough?  Sorry, simple but the best I can do on my phone.
> I am fascinated by this thread and discussion, but can't contribute as I would like when I am on the go.
> Sent from my iPhone
>> On Oct 12, 2014, at 1:18 PM, "Juan Duarte" <juanma.duarte@gmail.com> wrote:
>> <html>
>> I wonder if it is possible to refer to the vigotskyan "units of análisis"
>> without say a word of the marxist framework in which he developed 
>> that concept. For me, in going so, we lost great part of the richness 
>> of his
>> psychology: his method.
>> Thanks a lot for the interchange.
>> Juan Duarte
>> 2014-10-12 15:31 GMT-03:00 Helena Worthen <helenaworthen@gmail.com>:
>>> As someone who uses the concept of "unit of analysis" in a very 
>>> down-to-earth, quick and dirty, applied way to shape collective 
>>> responses to a crisis in a labor and employment relationships (like, 
>>> when a rule changes creates difficulties for workers), I would agree with Andy:
>>>> The other thing is that discovering a unit of analysis is an *insight*.
>>> It
>>>> is not something that can be achieved by following a template, it 
>>>> is the breakthrough in your research into some problem, the leap. 
>>>> It usually
>>> comes
>>>> *after* you've collected all the data for your research using some 
>>>> other unit of analysis.
>>> First comes the story, the details, the experiences. The question 
>>> lying behind the telling of the stories is, "What are we going to 
>>> do?" The unit of analysis gets defined by the purpose we are trying 
>>> to accomplish. Are we trying to get the employer to back off 
>>> temporarily? Are we trying get the rule changed? Example:  In a big 
>>> hospital system in Chicago, clerical workers were no longer allowed 
>>> to leave an "I'm going to be late to work today" or "I have to stay home with my sick kid today and will miss work"
>>> message on the answering machines of their supervisors. We're 
>>> talking about a workforce with hundreds of employees, most of them 
>>> middle aged minority women -- with grandchildren and extended families to be responsible for.
>>> Not being allowed to leave a message on a machine, but being 
>>> required to actually speak to a supervisor in person who would then 
>>> keep a record of the call, was a problem because supervisors were 
>>> often away from their desks and the whole phone system was 
>>> unreliable. Also, a lot of workers didn't have cell phones at the 
>>> time this was happening (2004) and pay phones are few and far 
>>> between, so if someone it out buying more asthma inhalers for a grandkid, making a phone call is not easy.
>>> So, exactly what is the purpose that we're trying to accomplish, here?
>>> To repeal the rule? To fix the phone system?  To educate members of 
>>> the union and other others about how to respond collectively to 
>>> something that only affects some of them? To make a profound change 
>>> in society so that middle-aged women are not the primary caretakers of an extended family?
>>> Pick one. Once you've picked one (hopefully, one that you can carry 
>>> out) you can define the unit of analysis and then reviewing the 
>>> whole Engestrom triangle and evaluating your strategy becomes, as 
>>> Andy says,  a matter of solving puzzles.
>>>> From the employer point of view, asking workers to actually speak 
>>>> to a
>>> live supervisor makes a certain sense. That's why we talk about 
>>> activity system(s), not just one activity system. But they are often 
>>> in conflict with each other, which adds to the drama.
>>> Is the data in your study being gathered with some purpose in mind? 
>>> Is the purpose the purpose of the children, the purpose of the 
>>> class, or the purpose of the PhdD program?  To me, what would be 
>>> most interesting would be a comparison between the unit of analysis 
>>> (purposes of children) and unit of analysis (purpose of classroom). I'll bet they're not identical.
>>> Helena
>>> Helena Worthen
>>> helenaworthen@gmail.com
>>>> On Oct 12, 2014, at 10:20 AM, Katerina Plakitsi wrote:
>>>> This problem of the ' unit of analysis' is my concern too. I 
>>>> supervise three PHD students on Science Education in a CHAT 
>>>> context. Two of them on early childhood science education and one 
>>>> on primary science. They have collected log files, children 
>>>> discourses consisted of scientific justifications, accepted rules, 
>>>> and forms of division of
>>> labor.
>>>> They have collected children narratives, and drawings. When they 
>>>> decided
>>> to
>>>> analyze their data they follow different paths into CHAT context 
>>>> mainly modeling them using Engestrom's triangle. They still doubt about the "
>>> unit
>>>> of analysis".
>>>> Στις Κυριακή, 12 Οκτωβρίου 2014, ο χρήστης Andy Blunden <
>>> ablunden@mira.net>
>>>> έγραψε:
>>>>> Katie, picking up on your concern about units of analysis, it was 
>>>>> one of the points I mentioned in my "report" from ISCAR, that this 
>>>>> concept was almost lost to us. A phrase I heard a lot, and which 
>>>>> was new for me, was "unit to be analysed." If anyone knows the 
>>>>> origin of this expression,
>>> I'd
>>>>> be interested in hearing. It seemed to me that what it referred to 
>>>>> was a "closed system" for analysis, that is, abandoning CHAT 
>>>>> methodology
>>> whilst
>>>>> keeping the word. If I am mistaken about this, please let me know.
>>>>> The other thing is that discovering a unit of analysis is an *insight*.
>>> It
>>>>> is not something that can be achieved by following a template, it 
>>>>> is the breakthrough in your research into some problem, the leap. 
>>>>> It usually
>>> comes
>>>>> *after* you've collected all the data for your research using some 
>>>>> other unit of analysis. In Kuhn's terms, discovery of the unit is 
>>>>> the new paradigm, after which it is just a matter of solving 
>>>>> puzzles. So for graduate students to use the concept of unit in 
>>>>> their research, often depends on the wisdom of teh direction they 
>>>>> get from their supervisor. I don't know how many PhD students I've 
>>>>> met who have got to this point in their thesis and discover that 
>>>>> the data they have is not the data they
>>> now
>>>>> know they need.
>>>>> Andy
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> ------
>>>>> *Andy Blunden*
>>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__home.pacific.n
>>>>> et.au_-7Eandy_&d=AAIFaQ&c=Oo8bPJf7k7r_cPTz1JF7vEiFxvFRfQtp-j14fFwh
>>>>> 71U&r=nc0IzcQ7AJuG1zNoaB3azX4jLwOThkgntuk4nvTAto4&m=16FfApl1f5E7VY
>>>>> PyK5I0gy-pAWG8266Fy1MMjz86JnA&s=uDlMvMB3Fzu1MSZ0FcG3QyfXFkfKMgGD_T
>>>>> raR68Xoh4&e=
>>>>> Katherine Wester Neal wrote:
>>>>>> I like Holli's plan to commit some time to reading the two articles.
>>> But,
>>>>>> as usual, I don't know that I'll have much to contribute in 
>>>>>> posts. I usually get deep in thinking about the posts and don't 
>>>>>> follow that
>>> through
>>>>>> to write something. The writing is much harder, and I am usually 
>>>>>> just trying to keep up with reading!
>>>>>> For me, the thread has been fascinating, probably because I'm
>>> interested
>>>>>> in different units of analysis, what they might be used for, and 
>>>>>> how
>>> they
>>>>>> fit together with theory and conducting research. What are people 
>>>>>> doing with units of analysis and why? Or why aren't units of 
>>>>>> analysis being
>>> used?
>>>>>> If anyone wants to write more in that direction, I'd be very
>>> interested to
>>>>>> read, and I'll try to respond, although the questions might be as
>>> basic as
>>>>>> these.
>>>>>> Lastly, Andy has basically been articulating my thoughts (in a 
>>>>>> much
>>> more
>>>>>> eloquent way than I would) about action as a unit of analysis. In
>>> Mike's
>>>>>> example about driving and thinking and writing, I'd add that the
>>> action is
>>>>>> mediated. Together with sociocultural and historical factors that 
>>>>>> influenced those actions (and which, as has been said here 
>>>>>> before, are often difficult to get a look at), the actions create 
>>>>>> a picture of much more than just Mike's behavior.
>>>>>> Katie
>>>>>> Katie Wester-Neal
>>>>>> University of Georgia
>>>> --
>>>> ............................................................
>>>> Katerina Plakitsi
>>>> Associate Professor of Science Education School of Education 
>>>> University of Ioannina University Campus Dourouti 45110 Ioannina 
>>>> Greece tel. +302651005771 fax. +302651005842 mobile.phone 
>>>> +306972898463
>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__users.uoi.gr_kp
>>>> lakits&d=AAIFaQ&c=Oo8bPJf7k7r_cPTz1JF7vEiFxvFRfQtp-j14fFwh71U&r=nc0
>>>> IzcQ7AJuG1zNoaB3azX4jLwOThkgntuk4nvTAto4&m=16FfApl1f5E7VYPyK5I0gy-p
>>>> AWG8266Fy1MMjz86JnA&s=hWaKcSHx4FXJI724_Gda4_nBcPgoSsmpb8jTtxCwCoI&e
>>>> = 
>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__erasmus-2Dip.uo
>>>> i.gr_&d=AAIFaQ&c=Oo8bPJf7k7r_cPTz1JF7vEiFxvFRfQtp-j14fFwh71U&r=nc0I
>>>> zcQ7AJuG1zNoaB3azX4jLwOThkgntuk4nvTAto4&m=16FfApl1f5E7VYPyK5I0gy-pA
>>>> WG8266Fy1MMjz86JnA&s=2juSbVE8U8pWsD5dUN0kXTi2SpE8KxXAJWfpXs3BmAs&e=
>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.lib.uoi.gr_
>>>> serp&d=AAIFaQ&c=Oo8bPJf7k7r_cPTz1JF7vEiFxvFRfQtp-j14fFwh71U&r=nc0Iz
>>>> cQ7AJuG1zNoaB3azX4jLwOThkgntuk4nvTAto4&m=16FfApl1f5E7VYPyK5I0gy-pAW
>>>> G8266Fy1MMjz86JnA&s=NNtgPFaVNetiZFsDR3tzVat_lmLuDx5fUW5OeO-YmZc&e=
>> --
>> Juan