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

[Xmca-l] KrisRRQ



Luisa Aires has responded to Kris's note just as I sent my last message on
organization of threads. This note pair can be considered the first note on
the Kris thread, suggested by Dana. The first is Kris's original note. The
second is Luisa's note.
mike

your turn
:-)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From Kris*

Re: Mike/Miguel,  (Mike, XMCA has a weird email address for me and I am
unable to post; would you post if it doesn’t come through?)

         Miguel, who has deep knowledge of an important time in the Migrant
Program (MSLI), rightly points out that the development of sociocritical

literacies/  syncretic approaches to learning must be understood in the
context of the larger designed ecology and its history.  And I can’t begin
to do it

justice here.  But here are some reflections.

 Building on a decade of earlier designs that brought together Freire and
cultural historical theoretical perspectives, and Chicano/a and ethnic
studies

to create new forms of teaching  and learning, and theorizations of the
Third Space that preceded the development of the month long migrant
program,

MSLI was designed as a hybrid space organized around an historicizing
pedagogy, informed, deepened, and augmented by

Tejeda’s robust decolonizing framework  and pedagogies, and Manuel
Espinoza’s notions of social dreaming and the importance of students
becoming

historical actors who could "who invoke the past in order to re-mediate it
so that it becomes a resource for current and future action.”  Their work
is key

to understanding the MSLI ecology. Our long-term 5th Dimension work (UC
Links), its theoretical underpinnings, and the pedagogical approaches to

undergraduate education and learning in informal contexts were also a part
of the mix, as most of the MSLI instructional team also was involved in 5th

D work. Of significance, all MSLI staff had extensive knowledge of CHAT,
critical pedagogies, social theories, disciplinary learning, as well as
direct

experience with and in immigrant, migrant, and non dominant communities,
their histories, repertoires, lived experiences, and possibilities.

There are many other important contributions of others I could elaborate
here that contributed to the iterative design, re-mediation, and

implementation and sustainability of this program, including Miguel's.
 Consider Shirin Vossoughi’s recent MCA article, Social Analytic  Artifacts
Made

Concrete,”  in  which she  beautifully elaborates the ways  social analytic
artifacts served as  tools “that deepened and propelled the collective
analysis

of  social problems”  for migrant students and the instructional teams.

Our collective efforts and design were oriented toward transformation and
change and had multiple aims: sociopolitical, cultural, educational,

including reframing education and learning in ways that brought the
everyday and scientific (school-based) concepts into conversation with one

another (a different kind of conversation to be sure).  The goal in this
regard was to put  scientific and everyday concepts on a more level playing
field

such that scientific concepts were not placed in an hierarchical
relationship with the everyday.  Disciplinary learning and critical forms
of literacy were

placed in conversation, their tensions made the object of analysis —all
toward the production of more meaningful and expansive forms of learning.

Mike and Yrjo have written important work on this, and, Carol Lee’s work is
another robust example.

And, of course, there is a history of work among researchers in the
sociocultural tradition who have attended to the consequential nature of
everyday

knowledge and practices in expansive ways (e.g., Scribner & Cole, 1973;
Lave, 1988; 2012; Lave  & Rogoff, 1984; Rogoff, 2003, as key examples of

work that informs this thinking, including ongoing conversations and
collaborations with and weekly meetings at LCHC with Mike, Yrjo,
Olga,Vasquez

and others ).


Our approach to consequential learning involved the development of
syncretic approaches to literacy and social scientific thinking. The design

involved  intentional moves that 1) brought together and reorganized
different discourses, cultural practices, histories, and genres that
were generally
considered incompatible or in tension with one another; 2) preserved and
foregrounded their tension; and 3) sought to maintain the value, history,
and integrity of the everyday  vis-à-vis the dominant form, especially in
light of historical power relations.  The syncretic testimonio is such an
example. A nod here to Cindy Cruz’s powerful and informing work on
testimonio.
(I have a new piece in press which you read, Mike, that attempts to
elaborate the syncretic approach).

A footnote on the sociocritical article.  The RRQ Sociocritical
Literacy article
was the publication of my AERA Scribner Lecture (2005 for the 2004 Scribner
Award for my work on the Third Space; the lecture and its published piece
were my attempt to further theorize the Third Space, using MSLI as a robust
example.

 Hope this provides more context and food for thought.  excuse typos and
lapses, it’s late.  Kris


Kris D. Gutiérrez
Professor
Graduate School of Education
5629 Tolman Hall #1670
University of California, Berkeley
Berkeley CA 94720-1670

Distinguished Professor
Learning Sciences and Literacy
School of Education
University of Colorado, Boulder
\
*From Luisa*

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Luisa Aires <laires11@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 11:25 AM
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Sociocritical Literacies and more context
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>,
gutierkd@gmail.com

Dear Professor Kris Gutierrez

It is delightful to see you here in XMCA :-)


I must confess that after reading your post, I am going to read your text
again because you added so much interesting information about MSLI program
(for example, I didn´t know that MSLI had strong links with 5th dimension).

I would like to learn about Chicano/a and ethnic studies, Tejeda’s
decolonizing framework and pedagogies, and Manuel Espinoza’s notions of
social dreaming. How can we access the most important references of those
theories?

One more question (we need to take advantage of your presence here ;-):
when and how can we access your new piece about syncretic approach?


Best wishes,

Luísa A.



--
Department of Education and Distance Learning, Universidade Aberta
Centre of Studies on Migrations and Intercultural Relations (CEMRI)
R. Amial, nº 752, 4200-055 Porto, Portugal
laires@uab.pt

-- 
It is the dilemma of psychology to deal with a natural science with an
object that creates history. Ernst Boesch.