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

[Xmca-l] Please change my email address



Hej

Please could you change the email of my subscription from the present one to
Sharada.Gade@gmail.com<mailto:Sharada.Gade@gmail.com> to which address this mail is also copy to …

I am in-between jobs, yet wish to continue receiving xmca mails and discussion

Regards
Sharada
------------------------------------------------------------
Sharada Gade
Assistant Professor in Mathematics Education,
Umeå Mathematics Education Research Centre,
Department of Science and Mathematics Education,
Linnaeus Väg 41, Umeå University,
901 87 UMEÅ
Sweden



Email: Sharada.Gade@gmail.com<http://mail.com>
Phone: 07382 26025
http://www.ufm.umu.se/om-ufm/personal/visa-person/.cid68430?uid=shga0004&guise=employee78686
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On 23 Nov 2016, at 17:21, xmca-l-request@mailman.ucsd.edu<mailto:xmca-l-request@mailman.ucsd.edu> wrote:

Send xmca-l mailing list submissions to
xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu<mailto:xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca-l
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
xmca-l-request@mailman.ucsd.edu

You can reach the person managing the list at
xmca-l-owner@mailman.ucsd.edu

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of xmca-l digest..."


Today's Topics:

  1. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (Edward Wall)
  2. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (David Kellogg)
  3. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
     (Margaret A Eisenhart)
  4. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
     (Margaret A Eisenhart)
  5. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
     (Margaret A Eisenhart)
  6. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
     (Margaret A Eisenhart)
  7. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (Huw Lloyd)
  8. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (HENRY SHONERD)
  9. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (Edward Wall)
 10. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (White, Phillip)
 11. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (Edward Wall)
 12. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
     (Margaret A Eisenhart)
 13. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (David Kellogg)
 14.  JoLLE's Fall Issue is LIVE!!! (Peter Smagorinsky)
 15. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (White, Phillip)
 16. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
     (Alfredo Jornet Gil)
 17. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (Huw Lloyd)
 18. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
     (Alfredo Jornet Gil)
 19. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (Huw Lloyd)
 20.  Butterflies of Zagorsk (mike cole)
 21. Re: Butterflies of Zagorsk (Huw Lloyd)
 22. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
     (lpscholar2@gmail.com)
 23. Re: Butterflies of Zagorsk (Wagner Luiz Schmit)
 24. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (Edward Wall)
 25. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
     (lpscholar2@gmail.com)
 26. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (White, Phillip)
 27. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (Huw Lloyd)
 28. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (HENRY SHONERD)
 29. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
     (lpscholar2@gmail.com)
 30. Spiritual blackout in America: Election 2016 - The Boston
     Globe (lpscholar2@gmail.com)
 31. Re: Spiritual blackout in America: Election 2016 - The Boston
     Globe (lpscholar2@gmail.com)
 32. Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started (David Kellogg)
 33. Fwd: [COGDEVSOC] TWO Tenure-track positions in Open Area of
     Psychology, Governors State University (just outside Chicago)
     (mike cole)
 34.  zone of next development (Peter Smagorinsky)
 35. Re: zone of next development (David Kellogg)
 36. Re: zone of next development (Peter Smagorinsky)
 37. Re: zone of next development (Shirin Vossoughi)
 38. Fwd: [COGDEVSOC] Lectureship in 'Culture and Cognition' at
     Durham University (mike cole)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2016 20:37:03 -0600
From: Edward Wall <ewall@umich.edu>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID: <1F325873-EC41-4E1E-82C6-333275137EB9@umich.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

Margaret and Carrie

    Thanks for the article. I hope what I write will be of interest.

     I am presently a mathematics educator (although retired) and have taught mathematics in all the grades into graduate school and well as teachers of preschool, elementary, and secondary mathematics. What you write about authoring math identities resonates !highly! with my experience.

    However, I am unsure what to make of the labeling of neoliberal reform. I see something similar to the young woman you mention at all grade levels including those of graduate school. It seems to have little to do with curricular reform and everything to do with teaching. For example, the Calculus courses you mention are not there to give students a deep understanding of mathematics, but to aid in college acceptance. This, of course, led to parent and student outcry and situation in schools all across the US for high school Calculus (this has been going on for some time) The Calculus AP may have originally been for the purpose of usefully challenging young people, but, in the hands of college admission officers, soon changed into a way to control admission. These courses are usually poorly taught (regardless of where they are taught) because few high school teachers have sufficient training or experience (taking a calculus course does not mean you have the wherewithal to teach it; that takes considerably more knowledge). Math departments do use them for placement, but not because they think students have been well prepared for Calculus.

    Let me give an exemplar (smile).  A number of years ago I was teaching a freshman English course (I know that sounds peculiar) with a significant slant on social justice. One of my students, who seemed (and acted) quite bright, was having problems completing assignments (and seemed a little dismissive of his peers). Finally, I told him that I was going to give him an F. At that point things became interesting. He told me that he had breezed through high school, scored high on the Calculus AP, received a scholarship, and was placed in the second semester of Calculus. The reason work wasn?t done was that he was failing that course in Calculus and was on the verge of losing his scholarship (especially if I failed him). Well, I, of course, extended deadlines, etc. and became a mentor of sorts for the next 4 years.
     All this, as the young woman in your article, pretty much destroyed his confidence/identity and it was not until his junior year that I began to see some slight improvement or, one might say, re-authoring (although the story line had changed considerably; once hoping to be a doctor he is now hoping to be a PA). This is all to the good. However, during his final science course (physics), he decided that he was lacking in geometry and trigonometry and asked for help the summer before and during the relevant semester. I (being retired you have extra time - ha!) did so and found that he was !woefully! lacking relevant skills (this from a student who had scored at the highest level on the Calculus AP).

    My second point is, in a sense, complicated. Maxine Green has a variation of this on page 276 of her book ?Teacher as Stranger.? She tells the story of a teacher who believes in social justice and citizen participation. He is eager for his students to participate in a moratorium in response to the Vietnamese War. However, he has other convictions. ?He does not believe that learning sequences should be whimsically or foolishly interrupted; he thinks classroom activity, because it brings him in contact with his students, contributes measurably to their education. A lost day, as he sees it, might mean a setback for some of his students; missed opportunities for other s? Taking all this in account, he still believes it is more worthwhile to support the peace action than do nothing at all.? This conclusion may seem ?right? and it may seem obvious, but, as Greene continues, it is hardly easy. It is also a little more complicated than she makes out. Say I have a strong commitment to social justice (which I do) and say I have a strong commitment to my discipline (which is mathematics). I could skimp on the mathematics and really focus on social justice, but then I run the risk having students as the above who cannot compete within the present education system. I could skimp on the social justice and really focus on the mathematics, but then I have signaled that social justice really isn?t all that important. So I incorporate social justice into my mathematics class. I could do it two ways: (1) use mathematics as a tool to consider issues of social justice (however, if I do this well, this is not teaching mathematics, but teaching social justice) - this is the usual approach of those who do such things (and I admire their attempts) or (2) use an issue of social justice to illustrate a mathematical principle - this is, quite a bit harder and it is easy to imagine somewhat silly lessons (although not entirely) as integrating the distribution of incomes in the US (there is a nice book that sort of does this called "X in the City?) - this is not, in my opinion, properly attending to issues of social justice. Neither of these approaches, in my opinion, give cognizance to the importance of social justice or mathematics (and, of course, I speak as a person who believes both are important). Ball does not help here (nor Foucault or Butler). The only one who comes close is Kierkegaard. He indicates there may be a way out (although it is not cookie-cutter), but most often one comes to despair.


PS. There is also the whole issue of preparing teachers of mathematics to incorporate social justice in their students' learning especially as more and more Schools of Education eliminate substantial course work in social justice from the required curriculum.

Ed Wall

On Nov 12, 2016, at  2:30 PM, Margaret A Eisenhart <margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu> wrote:

Hello Everyone,

Carrie and I are newcomers to this list, and we thank you for the
opportunity to engage with you about our article, ?Hollowed Out.?  We also
hope for your patience as we learn to participate in the stream of
thinking here!

Given the comments so far, we are intrigued by others? ideas about the
link between our theory and our data.  On this topic, we would like to
make clear that we did not intend to suggest that the students were making
sense of their lives in the same way that we interpreted them through the
lens of our theory. Our claim is that opportunities and figured worlds are
resources for identity and that the students' words to us reflected
perspectives consistent with neoliberalism, with some pretty serious
implications. Like Phillip White, we are interested in what theories
others would use to explain the data we presented.

Like Mike Cole, we are also intrigued by the prospect of ?exemplars? we
might turn to.

We look forward to hearing your thoughts.


Margaret Eisenhart






------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 07:38:12 +1100
From: David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID:
<CACwG6DtManeOs6E0hOCS8WM7obANG7TqGRhG36Nx0WADimaTdA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Henry:

I just wrote another unpublishable comparing how Langacker and
Halliday treat tense, and I'm starting to come to grips with the different
theory of experience underlying the two grammars. Langacker somehow sees it
as creating empty mental space (and aspect as creating space within space).
Halliday sees tense as a way of abstracting concrete doings and happenings.
Halliday's tense system is not spatial at all but temporal: it's temporally
deictic and then temporally recursive: a kind of time machine that
simultaneously transports and orients the speaker either proleptically or
retroleptically. So for example if I say to you that this article we are
discussing is going to have been being discussed for two or three weeks
now, then "is going" is a kind of time machine that takes you into the
future, from which "You are Here" vantage point the article has been (past)
being discussed (present). Present in the past in the future.

And that got me thinking about theory and practice. It seems to me that the
they are related, but simultaneously and not sequentially. That is, the
output of one is not the input of the other: they are simply more and less
abstract ways of looking at one and the same thing. So for example in this
article the tasks of theory and practice are one and the same: the task of
theory is really to define as precisely as possible the domain, the scope,
the range of the inquiry into authoring math and science identities and the
task of practice is to ask what exactly you want to do in this
domain/scope/range--to try to understand how they are hollowed out a little
better so that maybe teachers like you and me can help fill the damn
potholes in a little. You can't really do the one without doing the other:
trying to decide the terrain under study without deciding some task that
you want to do there is like imagining tense as empty mental space and not
as some actual, concrete doing or happening. Conversely, the way you dig
the hole depends very much on how big and where you want it.

So there are three kinds of mental spaces in the first part of the article:

a) institutional arrangements (e.g. "priority improvement plans",
career-academy/comprehensive school status STEM tracks, AP classes)
b) figured worlds (e.g. 'good students', and 'don't cares', or what Eckhart
and McConnell-Ginet called 'jocks', 'nerds',  'burnouts', 'gangbangers')
c) authored identities (i.e. what kids say about themselves and what they
think about themselves)

Now, I think it's possible to make this distinction--but they are probably
better understood not as mental spaces (in which case they really do
overlap) but rather as doings (or, as is my wont, sayings). Different
people are saying different things: a) is mostly the sayings of the school
boards and administrators, b) is mostly the sayings of teachers and groups
of kids, and c) is mostly the sayings of individual students. It's always
tempting for a theory to focus on c), because that's where all the data is
and it's tempting for practice too, because if you are against what is
happening in a) and in b), that's where the most likely point of
intervention is.

"But the data does suggest that the "figured worlds" are figured by
authored identities--not by institutional arrangements. Is that just an
artefact of the warm empathy of the authors for the words (although maybe
not the exact wordings) of their subjects, or is it real grounds for hope?

Marx says (beginning of the 18th Brumaire): "*Men make* their own *history*,
*but they* do *not make* it as *they* please; *they* do *not make* it
under self-selected circumstances, *but* under circumstances existing
already, given and transmitted from the *past*. The tradition of all dead
generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living."

It's a good theory, i.e. at once a truth and a tragedy. And it's a
theory treats time as time and not as an empty stage.

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 9:39 AM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com> wrote:

All,
I have read only part of Margaret?s and Carrie?s article, but I wanted to
jump in with a reference to a book by Vygotskian Vera John-Steiner and her
mathematician husband Reuben Hersh: Loving and Hating Mathematics:
Challenging the Mathematical Life. Huw?s point (v) which refers to
?identities of independence and finding out sustainable within these
settings (school math classes) spent high school. Vera?s and Reuben?s book
contrasts what it?s like to work and think like a real (working)
mathematician (what I think Huw is talking about) and what we call
mathematics in the classroom. Chapter 8 of the book "The Teaching of
Mathematics: Fierce or Friendly?? is interesting reading and could be
relevant to this discussion.
Henry


On Nov 13, 2016, at 2:47 PM, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Margaret

My reading has not been a particularly careful one, so I leave it to
yourselves to judge the usefulness of these points.

i) Whether arguments can be made (for or against) a nebulous term
(neoliberalism) with its political associations, by arguments about
identity that are themselves not deliberately political.

ii) Whether it is better not to focus essentially on the place of
identity.

iii) Whether it is worthwhile contrasting the role/identity of "model
student" with "identities" that anyone excelling at STEM subjects would
relate to.  On this, I would point to the importance with identifying
with
appreciations for "awareness of not knowing" and "eagerness to find out"
(which also entails learning about what it means to know).

iv) Whether you detect that to the degree that an identity is
foregrounded
in the actual practice of STEM work (rather than as background social
appeasement), it is being faked? That is, someone is playing at the role
rather than actually committing themselves to finding out about unknowns.

v) Whether, in fact, there is actually a "tiered" or varied set of
acceptable "identities" within the settings you explored, such that
identities of independence and finding out are sustainable within these
settings, possibly representing a necessary fudge to deal with the
requirements placed upon the institutions.

Best,
Huw

On 12 November 2016 at 20:30, Margaret A Eisenhart <
margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu> wrote:

Hello Everyone,

Carrie and I are newcomers to this list, and we thank you for the
opportunity to engage with you about our article, ?Hollowed Out.?  We
also
hope for your patience as we learn to participate in the stream of
thinking here!

Given the comments so far, we are intrigued by others? ideas about the
link between our theory and our data.  On this topic, we would like to
make clear that we did not intend to suggest that the students were
making
sense of their lives in the same way that we interpreted them through
the
lens of our theory. Our claim is that opportunities and figured worlds
are
resources for identity and that the students' words to us reflected
perspectives consistent with neoliberalism, with some pretty serious
implications. Like Phillip White, we are interested in what theories
others would use to explain the data we presented.

Like Mike Cole, we are also intrigued by the prospect of ?exemplars? we
might turn to.

We look forward to hearing your thoughts.


Margaret Eisenhart



On 11/11/16, 11:35 AM, "lpscholar2@gmail.com" <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
wrote:

A resumption in exploring the meaning and sense (preferably sens as
this
term draws attention to movement and direction within meaning and
sense)
of this month?s article.
The paper begins with the title and the image of (hollowed-out) meaning
and sense that is impoverished and holds few resources for developing a
deeper sens of identity.
The article concludes with the implication that the work of social
justice within educational institutions is not about improving
educational outcome in neoliberal terms; the implications of the study
are about *reorganizing* the identities ? particulary
identities-with-standind that young people are *exposed* to, can
articulate, and can act on (in school and beyond).

I would say this is taking an ethical stand?.

I will now turn to page 189 and the section (identity-in-context) to
amplify the notion of (cultural imaginary) and (figured worlds).
This imaginary being the site or location of history-in-person. That is
identity is a form of legacy (or *text*) ABOUT the kind of person one
is
or has become in responding to (external) circumstances.
These external circumstances are EXPERIENCED primarily in the
organization of local practices and cultural imaginaries (figured
worlds)
that circulate and *give meaning* (and sens) to local practices

Figured worlds are interpreted following Holland as socially and
culturally *realms of interpretation* and certain players are
recognized
as (exemplars).

As such cultural, social, historical, dialogical psychological
(imaginaries) are handmaidens of the imaginal *giving meaning* to
*what*
goes on in the directions we take together.

Two key terms i highlight are (exemplars) and (direction) we take.
The realm of the ethical turn
What are the markers and signposts emerging in the deeper ethical turn
that offers more than a hollowed-out answer.
Are there any *ghost* stories of exemplars we can turn to as well as
living exemplars? By ghosts i mean ancestors who continue as beacons of
hope exemplifying *who* we are.

My way into exploring the impoverished narratives of the neoliberal
imaginary and reawakening exemplary ancestors or ghosts from their
slumber to help guide us through these multiple imaginaries

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: mike cole
Sent: November 9, 2016 3:04 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Alfredo--

for any who missed the initial article sent out, you might send them
here:

http://lchc.ucsd.edu/mca/

I am meeting shortly with Bruce. A list of improvements to web site
welcome, although not clear how long they will take to implement.

mike

On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 2:38 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil <
a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
wrote:

Dear all,

last week I announced MCA's 3rd Issue article for discussion:

"Hollowed Out: Meaning and Authoring of High School Math and Science
Identities in the Context of Neoliberal Reform," by Margaret Eisenhart
and
Carrie Allen.

The article is open access and will continue to be so during the
discussion time at this link.

Thanks to everyone who begun the discussion early after I shared the
link
last week, and sorry that we sort of brought the discussion to a halt
until
the authors were ready to discuss. I have now sent Margaret and Carrie
the
posts that were produced then so that they could catch up, but I also
invited them to feel free to move on an introduce themselves as soon
as
they ??wanted.

It is not without some doubts that one introduces a discussion of an
article in a moment that some US media have called as "An American
Tragedy"
and other international editorials are describing as "a dark day for
the
world." But I believe that the paper may indeed offer some grounds for
discuss important issues that are at stake in everyone's home now, as
Mike
recently describes in a touching post on the "local state of mind" and
that
have to do with identity and its connection to a neoliberal
organisation of
the economy. It is not difficult to link neoliberalism to Trump's
phenomenon and how it pervades very intimate aspects of everyday life.

If this was not enough, I think the authors' background on women's
scholar
and professional careers in science is totally relevant to the
discussions
on gendered discourse we've been having. Now without halts, I hope
this
thread gives joys and wisdom to all.

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
edu>
on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
Sent: 02 November 2016 01:48
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Thanks Mike and everyone! I am sure Margaret (and many of those still
reading) will be happy to be able to catch up when she joins us next
week!
Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
edu>
on behalf of mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu>
Sent: 02 November 2016 01:32
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Gentlemen -- I believe Fernando told us that Margaret would be
able to join this discussion next week. Just a quick glance at the
discussion so far indicates that there is a lot there to wade into
before she has had a word.

I am only part way through the article, expecting to have until next
week
to think about it.

May I suggest your forbearance while this slow-poke tries to catch up!

mike

On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 3:38 PM, White, Phillip
<Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu

wrote:

David & Larry, everyone else ...

by way of introduction, Margaret and Carrie point out that the data
in
this paper emerged through a three year study - which was the
processes
of
how students of color, interested in STEM, responded to the
externally
imposed neoliberal requirements. they framed their study using
theories
of
social practices on how identity developed in context.


David, you reject the theories.  or so i understand your position. as
you
write: It's that the theory

contradicts my own personal theories.

are you also rejecting the data as well?  it seems as if you are
suggesting this when you write: The authors find this point (in the
case
of
Lorena) somewhere between the
beginning of the tenth and the end of the eleventh grade, but I think
that's just because it's where they are looking.

you reject the narrative of Lorena on the grounds that it could be
traced
back to infancy.

do you also reject the identical narrative found in the adult
practitioners within the context of the high schools?  that this
narrative
is not one of a contemporary neoliberal practice but rather could be
traced
back to, say, the mid 1600's new england colonies, in particular
massachusettes, where the practices of public american education
began?

to explain the data that emerged from the Eisenhart/Allen study, what
theories would you have used?

phillip

________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 7:03 AM
To: David Kellogg; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Margaret and Carrie,
Thank you for this wonderful paper that explains the shallow
*hollowed-out* way of forming identity as a form of meaning and
sense. I
will add the French word *sens* which always includes *direction*
within
meaning and sense.

David, your response that what our theory makes sens of depends on
where
we are looking makes sens to me.
You put in question the moment when the interpersonal (you and me)
way of
authoring sens *shifts* or turns to cultural and historical ways of
being
immersed in sens. The article refers to the *historical-in-person*.

My further comment, where I am looking) is in the description of the
sociocultural as a response to *externally changing circumstances*
as
the
process of *learning as becoming* (see page 190).

The article says:

This process is what Lave and Wenger (1991) and other Sociocultural
researchers have referred to as *learning as becoming,* that is,
learning
that occurs as one becomes a certain kind of person in a particular
context.  Identities conceived in this way are not stable or fixed.
As
*external circumstances* affecting a person change, so too may the
identities that are produced *in response*. (Holland & Skinner,
1997).

In this version of *history-in-person* the identity processes that
start
the process moving in a neoliberal *direction* are *external*
circumstances. I am not questioning this version of the importance of
the
external but do question if looking primarily or primordially to the
external circumstances as central if we are not leaving a gap in our
notions of *sens*.

If by looking or highlighting or illuminating the *external* and
highly
visible acts of the actual we are leaving a gap in actual*ity.
A gap in *sens*.

To be continued by others...

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: David Kellogg
Sent: October 31, 2016 2:15 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

I was turning Mike's request--for a short explanation of the
Halliday/Vygotsky interface--over in my mind for a few days, unsure
where
to start. I usually decide these difficult "where to start" questions
in
the easiest possible way, with whatever I happen to be working on. In
this
case it's the origins of language in a one year old, a moment which
is
almost as mysterious to me as the origins of life or the Big Bang.
But
perhaps for that very reason it's not a good place to start (the Big
Bang
always seemed to me to jump the gun a bit, not to mention the origins
of
life).

Let me start with the "Hollowed Out" paper Alfredo just thoughtfully
sent
around instead. My first impression is that this paper leaves a
really
big
gap between the data and the conclusions, and that this gap is
largely
filled by theory. Here are some examples of what I mean:

a)    "Whereas 'subject position' is given by society, 'identity' is
self-authored, although it must be recognized by others to be
sustained."
(p. 189)

b)  "It is notable that this construction of a good student, though
familiar, does not make any reference to personal interest,
excitement,
or
engagement in the topics or content-related activities." (193)

c)  "When students' statements such as 'I get it', 'I'm confident',
'I'm
good at this', and  'I can pull this off' are interpreted in the
context
of
the figured world of math or science at the two schools, their
statements
index more than a grade. They reference a meaning system for being
good
in
math or science that includes the actor identity characteristics of
being
able to grasp the subject matter easily, do the work quickly, do it
without
help from others, do it faster than others, and get an A." (193)

In each case, we are told to believe in a theory: "given by society",
"self-authored", "does not make any reference", "the context of the
figured
world". It's not just that in each case the theory seems to go
against
the
data (although it certainly does in places, such as Lowena's views as
a
tenth grader). I can always live with a theory that contradicts my
data:
that's what being a rationalist is all about. It's that the theory
contradicts my own personal theories.

I don't believe that identity is self authored, and I also don't
believe
that subject position is given by society as a whole, I think the
word
"good" does include personal interest, excitement, and engagement as
much
as it includes being able to grasp the subject matter easily, do the
work
quickly, do it without help from others, do it faster than others and
get
an A. To me anyway, the key word in the data given in c) is actually
"I"
and not "it" or "this": the students think they are talking about,
and
therefore probably are actually talking about, a relation between
their
inner states and the activity at hand  or between the activity at
hand
and
the result they get; they are not invoking the figured world of
neoliberal
results and prospects.

But never mind my own theories. Any gap is, after all, a good
opportunity
for theory building. The authors are raising a key issue in both
Vygotsky
and Halliday: when does an interpersonal relation become a
historico-cultural one? That is, when does that 'me" and "you"
relationship
in which I really do have the power to author my identity (I can make
up
any name I want and, within limits, invent my own history,
particularly
if
I am a backpacker) give way to a job, an address, a number and a
class
over
which I have very little power at all? When does the interpersonal
somehow
become an alien ideational "identity" that confronts me like a
strange
ghost when I look in the mirror?

The authors find this point (in the case of Lorena) somewhere between
the
beginning of the tenth and the end of the eleventh grade, but I think
that's just because it's where they are looking. We can probably find
the
roots of this distinction (between the interpersonal and the
historico-cultural) as far back as we like, right back to (Vygotsky)
the
moment when the child gives up the "self-authored" language at one
and
takes on the language recognized by others and (Halliday) the moment
when
the child distinguishes between Attributive identifying clauses ("I'm
confident", "I'm good at this"), material processes ("I can pull this
off")
and mental ones ("I get it").

(To be continued...but not necessarily by me!)

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil
<a.j.gil@iped.uio.no

wrote:

Dear xmca'ers,


I am excited to announce the next article for discussion, which is
now
available open access at the T&F MCA pages<http://www.tandfonline.
com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1188962>.


After a really interesting discussion on Zaza's colourful paper
(which
still goes on developed into a discussion on micro- and
ontogenesis),
we
will from next week be looking at an article by Margaret Eisenhart
and
Carrie Allen from the special issue on "Reimagining Science
Education
in
the Neoliberal Global Context". I think the article, as the whole
issue,
offers a very neat example of research trying to tie together
cultural/economical? and developmental aspects (of identity in this
case).


Margaret has kindly accepted to join the discussion ?after US
elections
(which will surely keep the attention of many of us busy).
Meanwhile, I
share the link<http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039
.
2016.1188962>  to the article (see above), and also attach it as
PDF.
??Good read!


Alfredo














------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 20:56:12 +0000
From: Margaret A Eisenhart <margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID: <D50D746E-9E8A-45DE-92B8-08B650098288@colorado.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Alfredo, you asked: ?is there not something of the same principle of
privilege that runs through neoliberalism in the "standing" thing? Perhaps
it's just my narrow understanding of the term, and of the theory as a
whole, but it seems to me that privilege has something to do here: the
same principle that pushes some classes down pushes them down when they
begin to raise up in performance. Did other students rise up and begun
performing better or moving to a more privileged position as the initially
high-achieving ones begun failing? Is this notion of identity-as-standing
not also within the same larger scheme of somebodies and nobodies??



We think of identity-with-standing as a concept that draws attention to
identities that bring status and prestige in local social and cultural
context and suggest that such identities need to be examined for what they
confer status and prestige on.  In our case, we do not think that what is
conferred is worthwhile, even though it brings some local prestige.  It
was not the case that other students moved up; it was the case that fewer
and fewer students matched the achievement model of this
identity-with-standing.  We don?t think the concept gets us away from
somebodies and nobodies.

Margaret






------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 21:03:31 +0000
From: Margaret A Eisenhart <margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID: <BDEB02CF-6A60-4DA1-AAD8-18A5F6EDF20C@colorado.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

David, you posted the following:




On 11/13/16, 2:12 PM, "David Kellogg" <dkellogg60@gmail.com> wrote:

Both of these are on p. 193. But they seem quite different to me. The
first
looks like it was taken from an interview, or rather from three different
interviews, because actually Student 2 and 3 don't seem to be answering
the
same question, and even Student 1 doesn't really talk about what it LOOKS
like to be a good student. But the second looks like an interpretation:
not
something students actually said but something that the researchers
assumed
that they were thinking. Is that a fair reading?

The students in the first set of quotes were responding to the same
interview question, although we reproduced only the portions of their
responses that seemed to bear most directly on the question.  The second
set (in quotes) are the students? own words excerpted from longer
responses and our interpretation of them.

Margaret



------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 21:11:32 +0000
From: Margaret A Eisenhart <margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID: <F8398D60-D562-4E47-A843-D1002F1AACB0@colorado.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Thank you for your comments, Huw.  They raise a number of interesting
questions.  Regarding the first one below, we are wondering what you have
in mind as an alternative to identity (in our particular case).  Regarding
the second one below, we don?t think that identities of independence and
finding out are sustainable for most students in this context unless
students have additional resources (outside of classes) for developing
such identities.

Margaret




On 11/13/16, 2:47 PM, "Huw Lloyd" <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com> wrote:

ii) Whether it is better not to focus essentially on the place of
identity.

v) Whether, in fact, there is actually a "tiered" or varied set of
acceptable "identities" within the settings you explored, such that
identities of independence and finding out are sustainable within these
settings, possibly representing a necessary fudge to deal with the
requirements placed upon the institutions.




------------------------------

Message: 6
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 21:29:34 +0000
From: Margaret A Eisenhart <margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID: <2AC29B6F-74D6-4351-A782-84863D9E1DE6@colorado.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Ed, Thank you for your comments. I?m afraid I?m not as sanguine as you are
about separating curriculum and teaching.  Yes, there are some very good
teachers who find ways to go beyond the dictates of curriculum reform,
accountability, and college/university requirements. But the pressures to
conform are many and come from multiple directions.  For students such as
those in our study, such teachers are rare and continually pressured to
take on more and more features of the achievement regime. I do not think
we can depend on good teachers alone to solve this problem.

What is Kierkegaard?s approach?

Margaret




On 11/13/16, 7:37 PM, "Edward Wall" <ewall@umich.edu> wrote:

Margaret and Carrie

   Thanks for the article. I hope what I write will be of interest.

    I am presently a mathematics educator (although retired) and have
taught mathematics in all the grades into graduate school and well as
teachers of preschool, elementary, and secondary mathematics. What you
write about authoring math identities resonates !highly! with my
experience.

   However, I am unsure what to make of the labeling of neoliberal
reform. I see something similar to the young woman you mention at all
grade levels including those of graduate school. It seems to have little
to do with curricular reform and everything to do with teaching. For
example, the Calculus courses you mention are not there to give students
a deep understanding of mathematics, but to aid in college acceptance.
This, of course, led to parent and student outcry and situation in
schools all across the US for high school Calculus (this has been going
on for some time) The Calculus AP may have originally been for the
purpose of usefully challenging young people, but, in the hands of
college admission officers, soon changed into a way to control admission.
These courses are usually poorly taught (regardless of where they are
taught) because few high school teachers have sufficient training or
experience (taking a calculus course does not mean you have the
wherewithal to teach it; that takes considerably more knowledge). Math
departments do use them for placement, but not because they think
students have been well prepared for Calculus.

   Let me give an exemplar (smile).  A number of years ago I was
teaching a freshman English course (I know that sounds peculiar) with a
significant slant on social justice. One of my students, who seemed (and
acted) quite bright, was having problems completing assignments (and
seemed a little dismissive of his peers). Finally, I told him that I was
going to give him an F. At that point things became interesting. He told
me that he had breezed through high school, scored high on the Calculus
AP, received a scholarship, and was placed in the second semester of
Calculus. The reason work wasn?t done was that he was failing that course
in Calculus and was on the verge of losing his scholarship (especially if
I failed him). Well, I, of course, extended deadlines, etc. and became a
mentor of sorts for the next 4 years.
    All this, as the young woman in your article, pretty much destroyed
his confidence/identity and it was not until his junior year that I began
to see some slight improvement or, one might say, re-authoring (although
the story line had changed considerably; once hoping to be a doctor he is
now hoping to be a PA). This is all to the good. However, during his
final science course (physics), he decided that he was lacking in
geometry and trigonometry and asked for help the summer before and during
the relevant semester. I (being retired you have extra time - ha!) did so
and found that he was !woefully! lacking relevant skills (this from a
student who had scored at the highest level on the Calculus AP).

   My second point is, in a sense, complicated. Maxine Green has a
variation of this on page 276 of her book ?Teacher as Stranger.? She
tells the story of a teacher who believes in social justice and citizen
participation. He is eager for his students to participate in a
moratorium in response to the Vietnamese War. However, he has other
convictions. ?He does not believe that learning sequences should be
whimsically or foolishly interrupted; he thinks classroom activity,
because it brings him in contact with his students, contributes
measurably to their education. A lost day, as he sees it, might mean a
setback for some of his students; missed opportunities for other s?
Taking all this in account, he still believes it is more worthwhile to
support the peace action than do nothing at all.? This conclusion may
seem ?right? and it may seem obvious, but, as Greene continues, it is
hardly easy. It is also a little more complicated than she makes out. Say
I have a strong commitment to social justice (which I do) and say I have
a strong commitment to my discipline (which is mathematics). I could
skimp on the mathematics and really focus on social justice, but then I
run the risk having students as the above who cannot compete within the
present education system. I could skimp on the social justice and really
focus on the mathematics, but then I have signaled that social justice
really isn?t all that important. So I incorporate social justice into my
mathematics class. I could do it two ways: (1) use mathematics as a tool
to consider issues of social justice (however, if I do this well, this is
not teaching mathematics, but teaching social justice) - this is the
usual approach of those who do such things (and I admire their attempts)
or (2) use an issue of social justice to illustrate a mathematical
principle - this is, quite a bit harder and it is easy to imagine
somewhat silly lessons (although not entirely) as integrating the
distribution of incomes in the US (there is a nice book that sort of does
this called "X in the City?) - this is not, in my opinion, properly
attending to issues of social justice. Neither of these approaches, in my
opinion, give cognizance to the importance of social justice or
mathematics (and, of course, I speak as a person who believes both are
important). Ball does not help here (nor Foucault or Butler). The only
one who comes close is Kierkegaard. He indicates there may be a way out
(although it is not cookie-cutter), but most often one comes to despair.


PS. There is also the whole issue of preparing teachers of mathematics to
incorporate social justice in their students' learning especially as more
and more Schools of Education eliminate substantial course work in social
justice from the required curriculum.

Ed Wall

On Nov 12, 2016, at  2:30 PM, Margaret A Eisenhart
<margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu> wrote:

Hello Everyone,

Carrie and I are newcomers to this list, and we thank you for the
opportunity to engage with you about our article, ?Hollowed Out.?  We
also
hope for your patience as we learn to participate in the stream of
thinking here!

Given the comments so far, we are intrigued by others? ideas about the
link between our theory and our data.  On this topic, we would like to
make clear that we did not intend to suggest that the students were
making
sense of their lives in the same way that we interpreted them through
the
lens of our theory. Our claim is that opportunities and figured worlds
are
resources for identity and that the students' words to us reflected
perspectives consistent with neoliberalism, with some pretty serious
implications. Like Phillip White, we are interested in what theories
others would use to explain the data we presented.

Like Mike Cole, we are also intrigued by the prospect of ?exemplars? we
might turn to.

We look forward to hearing your thoughts.


Margaret Eisenhart







------------------------------

Message: 7
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 22:24:13 +0000
From: Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID:
<CAG1MBOE07y10piHS=JNaB_U7wM5rPf5pE+XndRSwWCfqSvSVNw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On 15 November 2016 at 21:11, Margaret A Eisenhart <
margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu> wrote:

Thank you for your comments, Huw.  They raise a number of interesting
questions.  Regarding the first one below, we are wondering what you have
in mind as an alternative to identity (in our particular case).  Regarding
the second one below, we don?t think that identities of independence and
finding out are sustainable for most students in this context unless
students have additional resources (outside of classes) for developing
such identities.

Margaret


You're welcome, Margaret.  The "not" in point 2 is an edit error carrying
over from point 1.

For point 5 I had in mind a distinction between ways of being/orienting
that the student already has some habituation for vs those that are
fostered locally and whether authentically finding things out on their own
initiative is sustainable within the settings, i.e. whether it is
obstructed (generally I would say this is often the case including higher
ed.)

Best,
Huw







On 11/13/16, 2:47 PM, "Huw Lloyd" <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com> wrote:

ii) Whether it is better not to focus essentially on the place of
identity.

v) Whether, in fact, there is actually a "tiered" or varied set of
acceptable "identities" within the settings you explored, such that
identities of independence and finding out are sustainable within these
settings, possibly representing a necessary fudge to deal with the
requirements placed upon the institutions.





------------------------------

Message: 8
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 16:23:37 -0700
From: HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID: <5753689B-395F-4239-B435-58A40CAC2526@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

David,
I was puzzled that you found Langacker to be relevant to this topic, but the last paragraph of your post makes an important connection between Langacker and Vygotsky: Both see speech acts as staged?interactants view themselves as ?on stage?. I think the book by Vera and Reuben is largely about how differently math is ?staged? by working mathematicians as contrasted with doing math in school. I think it would be interesting to analyze how natural language and the language of math scaffold each other in both contexts. Word problems have been a well-used way of connecting the two languages; stats and graphs are commonly used in the media to clarify and elaborate text in articles on economics, presidential elections, and what not.

I would love to read your ?unpublishable? on Langacker and Halliday on tense. What I recall from reading Langacker is his interest in ?basic domains?, starting with the temporal and spatial. Somewhere he has said that he believes that the temporal domain is the more basic. As you?d guess, the spatial domain is especially useful in elucidating what he calls ?things? (nouns are conceptually about things); the temporal domain is more closely connected to what he calls ?processes? wherein he analyzes tense and aspect.

I think Langacker would agree that his work in cognitive grammar has a long way to go in contributing to the idea that grammar is usage based, rather than some autonomous module, but he is working on it. I think there is a potential for connecting Halliday and Langacker, though I?m not smart enough to convince you of that evidently. Somehow the connection must be made by staying close to the data, ?thick description? ethnographers are fond of saying. I think the article by Carrie and Margaret is raising this issue.

The ?hollowed out? math curriculum in the article resonates with the ?potholes? you say teachers must watch out for. Some may say that  the hollowing out is typical even of ?elite? K-12 schools. Some may say that this is deliberate. I would say my own experience of math in school was often hollowed out, which I sensed, but didn?t discover until I got to the ?pure math? department in the mid 60s at Univ of Texas at Austin under the leadership of Robert Lee Moore. He is a main protagonist in Chapter 8 of Vera?s and Reuben?s book.

I?ll end it there.

Henry




On Nov 15, 2016, at 1:38 PM, David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com> wrote:

Henry:

I just wrote another unpublishable comparing how Langacker and
Halliday treat tense, and I'm starting to come to grips with the different
theory of experience underlying the two grammars. Langacker somehow sees it
as creating empty mental space (and aspect as creating space within space).
Halliday sees tense as a way of abstracting concrete doings and happenings.
Halliday's tense system is not spatial at all but temporal: it's temporally
deictic and then temporally recursive: a kind of time machine that
simultaneously transports and orients the speaker either proleptically or
retroleptically. So for example if I say to you that this article we are
discussing is going to have been being discussed for two or three weeks
now, then "is going" is a kind of time machine that takes you into the
future, from which "You are Here" vantage point the article has been (past)
being discussed (present). Present in the past in the future.

And that got me thinking about theory and practice. It seems to me that the
they are related, but simultaneously and not sequentially. That is, the
output of one is not the input of the other: they are simply more and less
abstract ways of looking at one and the same thing. So for example in this
article the tasks of theory and practice are one and the same: the task of
theory is really to define as precisely as possible the domain, the scope,
the range of the inquiry into authoring math and science identities and the
task of practice is to ask what exactly you want to do in this
domain/scope/range--to try to understand how they are hollowed out a little
better so that maybe teachers like you and me can help fill the damn
potholes in a little. You can't really do the one without doing the other:
trying to decide the terrain under study without deciding some task that
you want to do there is like imagining tense as empty mental space and not
as some actual, concrete doing or happening. Conversely, the way you dig
the hole depends very much on how big and where you want it.

So there are three kinds of mental spaces in the first part of the article:

a) institutional arrangements (e.g. "priority improvement plans",
career-academy/comprehensive school status STEM tracks, AP classes)
b) figured worlds (e.g. 'good students', and 'don't cares', or what Eckhart
and McConnell-Ginet called 'jocks', 'nerds',  'burnouts', 'gangbangers')
c) authored identities (i.e. what kids say about themselves and what they
think about themselves)

Now, I think it's possible to make this distinction--but they are probably
better understood not as mental spaces (in which case they really do
overlap) but rather as doings (or, as is my wont, sayings). Different
people are saying different things: a) is mostly the sayings of the school
boards and administrators, b) is mostly the sayings of teachers and groups
of kids, and c) is mostly the sayings of individual students. It's always
tempting for a theory to focus on c), because that's where all the data is
and it's tempting for practice too, because if you are against what is
happening in a) and in b), that's where the most likely point of
intervention is.

"But the data does suggest that the "figured worlds" are figured by
authored identities--not by institutional arrangements. Is that just an
artefact of the warm empathy of the authors for the words (although maybe
not the exact wordings) of their subjects, or is it real grounds for hope?

Marx says (beginning of the 18th Brumaire): "*Men make* their own *history*,
*but they* do *not make* it as *they* please; *they* do *not make* it
under self-selected circumstances, *but* under circumstances existing
already, given and transmitted from the *past*. The tradition of all dead
generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living."

It's a good theory, i.e. at once a truth and a tragedy. And it's a
theory treats time as time and not as an empty stage.

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 9:39 AM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com> wrote:

All,
I have read only part of Margaret?s and Carrie?s article, but I wanted to
jump in with a reference to a book by Vygotskian Vera John-Steiner and her
mathematician husband Reuben Hersh: Loving and Hating Mathematics:
Challenging the Mathematical Life. Huw?s point (v) which refers to
?identities of independence and finding out sustainable within these
settings (school math classes) spent high school. Vera?s and Reuben?s book
contrasts what it?s like to work and think like a real (working)
mathematician (what I think Huw is talking about) and what we call
mathematics in the classroom. Chapter 8 of the book "The Teaching of
Mathematics: Fierce or Friendly?? is interesting reading and could be
relevant to this discussion.
Henry


On Nov 13, 2016, at 2:47 PM, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Margaret

My reading has not been a particularly careful one, so I leave it to
yourselves to judge the usefulness of these points.

i) Whether arguments can be made (for or against) a nebulous term
(neoliberalism) with its political associations, by arguments about
identity that are themselves not deliberately political.

ii) Whether it is better not to focus essentially on the place of
identity.

iii) Whether it is worthwhile contrasting the role/identity of "model
student" with "identities" that anyone excelling at STEM subjects would
relate to.  On this, I would point to the importance with identifying
with
appreciations for "awareness of not knowing" and "eagerness to find out"
(which also entails learning about what it means to know).

iv) Whether you detect that to the degree that an identity is
foregrounded
in the actual practice of STEM work (rather than as background social
appeasement), it is being faked? That is, someone is playing at the role
rather than actually committing themselves to finding out about unknowns.

v) Whether, in fact, there is actually a "tiered" or varied set of
acceptable "identities" within the settings you explored, such that
identities of independence and finding out are sustainable within these
settings, possibly representing a necessary fudge to deal with the
requirements placed upon the institutions.

Best,
Huw

On 12 November 2016 at 20:30, Margaret A Eisenhart <
margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu> wrote:

Hello Everyone,

Carrie and I are newcomers to this list, and we thank you for the
opportunity to engage with you about our article, ?Hollowed Out.?  We
also
hope for your patience as we learn to participate in the stream of
thinking here!

Given the comments so far, we are intrigued by others? ideas about the
link between our theory and our data.  On this topic, we would like to
make clear that we did not intend to suggest that the students were
making
sense of their lives in the same way that we interpreted them through
the
lens of our theory. Our claim is that opportunities and figured worlds
are
resources for identity and that the students' words to us reflected
perspectives consistent with neoliberalism, with some pretty serious
implications. Like Phillip White, we are interested in what theories
others would use to explain the data we presented.

Like Mike Cole, we are also intrigued by the prospect of ?exemplars? we
might turn to.

We look forward to hearing your thoughts.


Margaret Eisenhart



On 11/11/16, 11:35 AM, "lpscholar2@gmail.com" <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
wrote:

A resumption in exploring the meaning and sense (preferably sens as
this
term draws attention to movement and direction within meaning and
sense)
of this month?s article.
The paper begins with the title and the image of (hollowed-out) meaning
and sense that is impoverished and holds few resources for developing a
deeper sens of identity.
The article concludes with the implication that the work of social
justice within educational institutions is not about improving
educational outcome in neoliberal terms; the implications of the study
are about *reorganizing* the identities ? particulary
identities-with-standind that young people are *exposed* to, can
articulate, and can act on (in school and beyond).

I would say this is taking an ethical stand?.

I will now turn to page 189 and the section (identity-in-context) to
amplify the notion of (cultural imaginary) and (figured worlds).
This imaginary being the site or location of history-in-person. That is
identity is a form of legacy (or *text*) ABOUT the kind of person one
is
or has become in responding to (external) circumstances.
These external circumstances are EXPERIENCED primarily in the
organization of local practices and cultural imaginaries (figured
worlds)
that circulate and *give meaning* (and sens) to local practices

Figured worlds are interpreted following Holland as socially and
culturally *realms of interpretation* and certain players are
recognized
as (exemplars).

As such cultural, social, historical, dialogical psychological
(imaginaries) are handmaidens of the imaginal *giving meaning* to
*what*
goes on in the directions we take together.

Two key terms i highlight are (exemplars) and (direction) we take.
The realm of the ethical turn
What are the markers and signposts emerging in the deeper ethical turn
that offers more than a hollowed-out answer.
Are there any *ghost* stories of exemplars we can turn to as well as
living exemplars? By ghosts i mean ancestors who continue as beacons of
hope exemplifying *who* we are.

My way into exploring the impoverished narratives of the neoliberal
imaginary and reawakening exemplary ancestors or ghosts from their
slumber to help guide us through these multiple imaginaries

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: mike cole
Sent: November 9, 2016 3:04 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Alfredo--

for any who missed the initial article sent out, you might send them
here:

http://lchc.ucsd.edu/mca/

I am meeting shortly with Bruce. A list of improvements to web site
welcome, although not clear how long they will take to implement.

mike

On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 2:38 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil <
a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
wrote:

Dear all,

last week I announced MCA's 3rd Issue article for discussion:

"Hollowed Out: Meaning and Authoring of High School Math and Science
Identities in the Context of Neoliberal Reform," by Margaret Eisenhart
and
Carrie Allen.

The article is open access and will continue to be so during the
discussion time at this link.

Thanks to everyone who begun the discussion early after I shared the
link
last week, and sorry that we sort of brought the discussion to a halt
until
the authors were ready to discuss. I have now sent Margaret and Carrie
the
posts that were produced then so that they could catch up, but I also
invited them to feel free to move on an introduce themselves as soon
as
they ??wanted.

It is not without some doubts that one introduces a discussion of an
article in a moment that some US media have called as "An American
Tragedy"
and other international editorials are describing as "a dark day for
the
world." But I believe that the paper may indeed offer some grounds for
discuss important issues that are at stake in everyone's home now, as
Mike
recently describes in a touching post on the "local state of mind" and
that
have to do with identity and its connection to a neoliberal
organisation of
the economy. It is not difficult to link neoliberalism to Trump's
phenomenon and how it pervades very intimate aspects of everyday life.

If this was not enough, I think the authors' background on women's
scholar
and professional careers in science is totally relevant to the
discussions
on gendered discourse we've been having. Now without halts, I hope
this
thread gives joys and wisdom to all.

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
edu>
on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
Sent: 02 November 2016 01:48
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Thanks Mike and everyone! I am sure Margaret (and many of those still
reading) will be happy to be able to catch up when she joins us next
week!
Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
edu>
on behalf of mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu>
Sent: 02 November 2016 01:32
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Gentlemen -- I believe Fernando told us that Margaret would be
able to join this discussion next week. Just a quick glance at the
discussion so far indicates that there is a lot there to wade into
before she has had a word.

I am only part way through the article, expecting to have until next
week
to think about it.

May I suggest your forbearance while this slow-poke tries to catch up!

mike

On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 3:38 PM, White, Phillip
<Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu

wrote:

David & Larry, everyone else ...

by way of introduction, Margaret and Carrie point out that the data
in
this paper emerged through a three year study - which was the
processes
of
how students of color, interested in STEM, responded to the
externally
imposed neoliberal requirements. they framed their study using
theories
of
social practices on how identity developed in context.


David, you reject the theories.  or so i understand your position. as
you
write: It's that the theory

contradicts my own personal theories.

are you also rejecting the data as well?  it seems as if you are
suggesting this when you write: The authors find this point (in the
case
of
Lorena) somewhere between the
beginning of the tenth and the end of the eleventh grade, but I think
that's just because it's where they are looking.

you reject the narrative of Lorena on the grounds that it could be
traced
back to infancy.

do you also reject the identical narrative found in the adult
practitioners within the context of the high schools?  that this
narrative
is not one of a contemporary neoliberal practice but rather could be
traced
back to, say, the mid 1600's new england colonies, in particular
massachusettes, where the practices of public american education
began?

to explain the data that emerged from the Eisenhart/Allen study, what
theories would you have used?

phillip

________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 7:03 AM
To: David Kellogg; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Margaret and Carrie,
Thank you for this wonderful paper that explains the shallow
*hollowed-out* way of forming identity as a form of meaning and
sense. I
will add the French word *sens* which always includes *direction*
within
meaning and sense.

David, your response that what our theory makes sens of depends on
where
we are looking makes sens to me.
You put in question the moment when the interpersonal (you and me)
way of
authoring sens *shifts* or turns to cultural and historical ways of
being
immersed in sens. The article refers to the *historical-in-person*.

My further comment, where I am looking) is in the description of the
sociocultural as a response to *externally changing circumstances*
as
the
process of *learning as becoming* (see page 190).

The article says:

This process is what Lave and Wenger (1991) and other Sociocultural
researchers have referred to as *learning as becoming,* that is,
learning
that occurs as one becomes a certain kind of person in a particular
context.  Identities conceived in this way are not stable or fixed.
As
*external circumstances* affecting a person change, so too may the
identities that are produced *in response*. (Holland & Skinner,
1997).

In this version of *history-in-person* the identity processes that
start
the process moving in a neoliberal *direction* are *external*
circumstances. I am not questioning this version of the importance of
the
external but do question if looking primarily or primordially to the
external circumstances as central if we are not leaving a gap in our
notions of *sens*.

If by looking or highlighting or illuminating the *external* and
highly
visible acts of the actual we are leaving a gap in actual*ity.
A gap in *sens*.

To be continued by others...

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: David Kellogg
Sent: October 31, 2016 2:15 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

I was turning Mike's request--for a short explanation of the
Halliday/Vygotsky interface--over in my mind for a few days, unsure
where
to start. I usually decide these difficult "where to start" questions
in
the easiest possible way, with whatever I happen to be working on. In
this
case it's the origins of language in a one year old, a moment which
is
almost as mysterious to me as the origins of life or the Big Bang.
But
perhaps for that very reason it's not a good place to start (the Big
Bang
always seemed to me to jump the gun a bit, not to mention the origins
of
life).

Let me start with the "Hollowed Out" paper Alfredo just thoughtfully
sent
around instead. My first impression is that this paper leaves a
really
big
gap between the data and the conclusions, and that this gap is
largely
filled by theory. Here are some examples of what I mean:

a)    "Whereas 'subject position' is given by society, 'identity' is
self-authored, although it must be recognized by others to be
sustained."
(p. 189)

b)  "It is notable that this construction of a good student, though
familiar, does not make any reference to personal interest,
excitement,
or
engagement in the topics or content-related activities." (193)

c)  "When students' statements such as 'I get it', 'I'm confident',
'I'm
good at this', and  'I can pull this off' are interpreted in the
context
of
the figured world of math or science at the two schools, their
statements
index more than a grade. They reference a meaning system for being
good
in
math or science that includes the actor identity characteristics of
being
able to grasp the subject matter easily, do the work quickly, do it
without
help from others, do it faster than others, and get an A." (193)

In each case, we are told to believe in a theory: "given by society",
"self-authored", "does not make any reference", "the context of the
figured
world". It's not just that in each case the theory seems to go
against
the
data (although it certainly does in places, such as Lowena's views as
a
tenth grader). I can always live with a theory that contradicts my
data:
that's what being a rationalist is all about. It's that the theory
contradicts my own personal theories.

I don't believe that identity is self authored, and I also don't
believe
that subject position is given by society as a whole, I think the
word
"good" does include personal interest, excitement, and engagement as
much
as it includes being able to grasp the subject matter easily, do the
work
quickly, do it without help from others, do it faster than others and
get
an A. To me anyway, the key word in the data given in c) is actually
"I"
and not "it" or "this": the students think they are talking about,
and
therefore probably are actually talking about, a relation between
their
inner states and the activity at hand  or between the activity at
hand
and
the result they get; they are not invoking the figured world of
neoliberal
results and prospects.

But never mind my own theories. Any gap is, after all, a good
opportunity
for theory building. The authors are raising a key issue in both
Vygotsky
and Halliday: when does an interpersonal relation become a
historico-cultural one? That is, when does that 'me" and "you"
relationship
in which I really do have the power to author my identity (I can make
up
any name I want and, within limits, invent my own history,
particularly
if
I am a backpacker) give way to a job, an address, a number and a
class
over
which I have very little power at all? When does the interpersonal
somehow
become an alien ideational "identity" that confronts me like a
strange
ghost when I look in the mirror?

The authors find this point (in the case of Lorena) somewhere between
the
beginning of the tenth and the end of the eleventh grade, but I think
that's just because it's where they are looking. We can probably find
the
roots of this distinction (between the interpersonal and the
historico-cultural) as far back as we like, right back to (Vygotsky)
the
moment when the child gives up the "self-authored" language at one
and
takes on the language recognized by others and (Halliday) the moment
when
the child distinguishes between Attributive identifying clauses ("I'm
confident", "I'm good at this"), material processes ("I can pull this
off")
and mental ones ("I get it").

(To be continued...but not necessarily by me!)

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil
<a.j.gil@iped.uio.no

wrote:

Dear xmca'ers,


I am excited to announce the next article for discussion, which is
now
available open access at the T&F MCA pages<http://www.tandfonline.
com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1188962>.


After a really interesting discussion on Zaza's colourful paper
(which
still goes on developed into a discussion on micro- and
ontogenesis),
we
will from next week be looking at an article by Margaret Eisenhart
and
Carrie Allen from the special issue on "Reimagining Science
Education
in
the Neoliberal Global Context". I think the article, as the whole
issue,
offers a very neat example of research trying to tie together
cultural/economical? and developmental aspects (of identity in this
case).


Margaret has kindly accepted to join the discussion ?after US
elections
(which will surely keep the attention of many of us busy).
Meanwhile, I
share the link<http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039
.
2016.1188962>  to the article (see above), and also attach it as
PDF.
??Good read!


Alfredo
















------------------------------

Message: 9
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 18:43:42 -0600
From: Edward  Wall <ewall@umich.edu>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID: <28AD1876-BDC2-4325-8C27-7C30CA400572@umich.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

Margaret

    My fault for trying to keep things short as I am not sanguine, at all, about separating ?good' teaching and the curriculum either. Asking for a teaching of calculus, etc. by most high school teachers will result in courses where students come away with little intellectual curiosity,  serious deliberation  or deep knowledge and understanding qua mathematics and no classroom time for citizen participation or social critique, [Encouraging those qualities, by the way, seems to me (and some would quibble) as reasonable as any definition of ?good? teaching]  But even more importantly, at the present time, there is a sense in which it is not expected that these courses be taught ?well.' They are there to sort students in the college track and these students will again be intentionally sorted at the university level by similar courses which are again not taught ?well' (tenured faculty tend not to teach these courses and, in general, have little interest in the ?whole? student).
    Part of the problem is, as you say, curriculum, etc. However, part of the problem is many university faculty in the STEM fields although accepting the above definition of ?good? teaching by nodding agreement, would have difficulty modeling and teaching such (and this isn?t because they don?t care; they just don?t know how). Schools of Education, who supposedly intervene on these sorts of things are, most usually, ineffectual for all sorts of reasons (especially as regard the STEM curriculum for high school) and so high school teachers are as they are. Again, this goes all the way down to preK and may be more damaging in pre high school. My point - not well made - is that calling all this neoliberal reform seems to miss the point that nothing really has been reformed for, at least, the last 50 years. What you are calling neoliberal reform has just made what was already problematic all the more obvious.

    That said, you can teach mathematics in such a way that, in a manner of speaking, you can subvert the downside of the curriculum. I am speaking from the inside as a mathematics teacher and as a mathematics teacher educator. That is, despite the curriculum, you can teach for intellectual curiosity,  serious deliberation and deep knowledge and understanding qua mathematics and you can - and I admit to not doing this as well as I would wish - make room for social critique (all this is possibly easier in an inner city school that a suburban school). I was able to do a little with citizen participation as a teacher educator, but nothing, I think, significant. I?m not saying it is easy and I, as a classroom teacher, loudly disagreed with principals and superintendents when they engaged, one might say, in neoliberal reform.  All this neoliberal reform, by the way, was an ongoing discussion in my mathematics eduction classroom as my students were headed for classrooms similar to the ones you write about. So, no you can't separate teaching and the curriculum, but that shouldn?t be (and this is my thinking and many of my students) an excuse to forego attempts at ?good? teaching. Briefly, key is respect for the discipline and respect for one another and I am reasonably unconvinced such respect is, locally, irrevocably curtailed by the curriculum (although I would agree neoliberal reform globally respects neither).

    Kierkegaard?s solution? I wrote an essay awhile back which was published in Journal of Educational Controversy (Winter 2010) titled Aesthetic Education in the Mathematics Classroom. I don?t really like the ending - too positive - and when I sent it in they didn?t send it back for revision so I couldn?t change it. Far too briefly, rationally it is not possible to do such teaching, but that doesn?t mean, pragmatically speaking, that you can?t. However, the decision to do so is in, one might say, every moment.

 Ed

On Nov 15, 2016, at  3:29 PM, Margaret A Eisenhart <margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu> wrote:

Ed, Thank you for your comments. I?m afraid I?m not as sanguine as you are
about separating curriculum and teaching.  Yes, there are some very good
teachers who find ways to go beyond the dictates of curriculum reform,
accountability, and college/university requirements. But the pressures to
conform are many and come from multiple directions.  For students such as
those in our study, such teachers are rare and continually pressured to
take on more and more features of the achievement regime. I do not think
we can depend on good teachers alone to solve this problem.

What is Kierkegaard?s approach?

Margaret




On 11/13/16, 7:37 PM, "Edward Wall" <ewall@umich.edu> wrote:

Margaret and Carrie

  Thanks for the article. I hope what I write will be of interest.

   I am presently a mathematics educator (although retired) and have
taught mathematics in all the grades into graduate school and well as
teachers of preschool, elementary, and secondary mathematics. What you
write about authoring math identities resonates !highly! with my
experience.

  However, I am unsure what to make of the labeling of neoliberal
reform. I see something similar to the young woman you mention at all
grade levels including those of graduate school. It seems to have little
to do with curricular reform and everything to do with teaching. For
example, the Calculus courses you mention are not there to give students
a deep understanding of mathematics, but to aid in college acceptance.
This, of course, led to parent and student outcry and situation in
schools all across the US for high school Calculus (this has been going
on for some time) The Calculus AP may have originally been for the
purpose of usefully challenging young people, but, in the hands of
college admission officers, soon changed into a way to control admission.
These courses are usually poorly taught (regardless of where they are
taught) because few high school teachers have sufficient training or
experience (taking a calculus course does not mean you have the
wherewithal to teach it; that takes considerably more knowledge). Math
departments do use them for placement, but not because they think
students have been well prepared for Calculus.

  Let me give an exemplar (smile).  A number of years ago I was
teaching a freshman English course (I know that sounds peculiar) with a
significant slant on social justice. One of my students, who seemed (and
acted) quite bright, was having problems completing assignments (and
seemed a little dismissive of his peers). Finally, I told him that I was
going to give him an F. At that point things became interesting. He told
me that he had breezed through high school, scored high on the Calculus
AP, received a scholarship, and was placed in the second semester of
Calculus. The reason work wasn?t done was that he was failing that course
in Calculus and was on the verge of losing his scholarship (especially if
I failed him). Well, I, of course, extended deadlines, etc. and became a
mentor of sorts for the next 4 years.
   All this, as the young woman in your article, pretty much destroyed
his confidence/identity and it was not until his junior year that I began
to see some slight improvement or, one might say, re-authoring (although
the story line had changed considerably; once hoping to be a doctor he is
now hoping to be a PA). This is all to the good. However, during his
final science course (physics), he decided that he was lacking in
geometry and trigonometry and asked for help the summer before and during
the relevant semester. I (being retired you have extra time - ha!) did so
and found that he was !woefully! lacking relevant skills (this from a
student who had scored at the highest level on the Calculus AP).

  My second point is, in a sense, complicated. Maxine Green has a
variation of this on page 276 of her book ?Teacher as Stranger.? She
tells the story of a teacher who believes in social justice and citizen
participation. He is eager for his students to participate in a
moratorium in response to the Vietnamese War. However, he has other
convictions. ?He does not believe that learning sequences should be
whimsically or foolishly interrupted; he thinks classroom activity,
because it brings him in contact with his students, contributes
measurably to their education. A lost day, as he sees it, might mean a
setback for some of his students; missed opportunities for other s?
Taking all this in account, he still believes it is more worthwhile to
support the peace action than do nothing at all.? This conclusion may
seem ?right? and it may seem obvious, but, as Greene continues, it is
hardly easy. It is also a little more complicated than she makes out. Say
I have a strong commitment to social justice (which I do) and say I have
a strong commitment to my discipline (which is mathematics). I could
skimp on the mathematics and really focus on social justice, but then I
run the risk having students as the above who cannot compete within the
present education system. I could skimp on the social justice and really
focus on the mathematics, but then I have signaled that social justice
really isn?t all that important. So I incorporate social justice into my
mathematics class. I could do it two ways: (1) use mathematics as a tool
to consider issues of social justice (however, if I do this well, this is
not teaching mathematics, but teaching social justice) - this is the
usual approach of those who do such things (and I admire their attempts)
or (2) use an issue of social justice to illustrate a mathematical
principle - this is, quite a bit harder and it is easy to imagine
somewhat silly lessons (although not entirely) as integrating the
distribution of incomes in the US (there is a nice book that sort of does
this called "X in the City?) - this is not, in my opinion, properly
attending to issues of social justice. Neither of these approaches, in my
opinion, give cognizance to the importance of social justice or
mathematics (and, of course, I speak as a person who believes both are
important). Ball does not help here (nor Foucault or Butler). The only
one who comes close is Kierkegaard. He indicates there may be a way out
(although it is not cookie-cutter), but most often one comes to despair.


PS. There is also the whole issue of preparing teachers of mathematics to
incorporate social justice in their students' learning especially as more
and more Schools of Education eliminate substantial course work in social
justice from the required curriculum.

Ed Wall

On Nov 12, 2016, at  2:30 PM, Margaret A Eisenhart
<margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu> wrote:

Hello Everyone,

Carrie and I are newcomers to this list, and we thank you for the
opportunity to engage with you about our article, ?Hollowed Out.?  We
also
hope for your patience as we learn to participate in the stream of
thinking here!

Given the comments so far, we are intrigued by others? ideas about the
link between our theory and our data.  On this topic, we would like to
make clear that we did not intend to suggest that the students were
making
sense of their lives in the same way that we interpreted them through
the
lens of our theory. Our claim is that opportunities and figured worlds
are
resources for identity and that the students' words to us reflected
perspectives consistent with neoliberalism, with some pretty serious
implications. Like Phillip White, we are interested in what theories
others would use to explain the data we presented.

Like Mike Cole, we are also intrigued by the prospect of ?exemplars? we
might turn to.

We look forward to hearing your thoughts.


Margaret Eisenhart









------------------------------

Message: 10
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 17:23:41 +0000
From: "White, Phillip" <Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID:
<DM5PR05MB318074D7853CCD445AE8FC2999BE0@DM5PR05MB3180.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"

Margaret and Ed, I think that one of the great difficulties of reducing the effects of neoliberal ideology within public education is that it is a default theory of education since the days of liberal laissez faire economics of the 19th century.  It was during that century that public education was socially and politically constructed and the accompanying belief in Spencerian social-darwinism.  The work of Dewey notwithstanding, the values placed on individual merit and self-sufficiency has proved to be an irreducible tension (James Wertsch's phrase) within the efforts to effect greater education equity for those previously marginalised within public education.  So that the data explored in the Eisenhart / Allen paper does, I think, further demonstrate that not only are student identities hollowed out within implementation of STEM education, but is further evidence of an historical process that has been in place for generations of American education systems.  I'm really interested in the final paragraph of the paper, "articulating new ways of making selves intelligible in the contest of our lives".  After all, if we can't do that, what's the use?  Certainly that was what Spinoza was struggling with in his work on ethics.


Phillip

________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> on behalf of Edward Wall <ewall@umich.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 5:43:42 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Margaret

    My fault for trying to keep things short as I am not sanguine, at all, about separating ?good' teaching and the curriculum either. Asking for a teaching of calculus, etc. by most high school teachers will result in courses where students come away with little intellectual curiosity,  serious deliberation  or deep knowledge and understanding qua mathematics and no classroom time for citizen participation or social critique, [Encouraging those qualities, by the way, seems to me (and some would quibble) as reasonable as any definition of ?good? teaching]  But even more importantly, at the present time, there is a sense in which it is not expected that these courses be taught ?well.' They are there to sort students in the college track and these students will again be intentionally sorted at the university level by similar courses which are again not taught ?well' (tenured faculty tend not to teach these courses and, in general, have little interest in the ?whole? student).
    Part of the problem is, as you say, curriculum, etc. However, part of the problem is many university faculty in the STEM fields although accepting the above definition of ?good? teaching by nodding agreement, would have difficulty modeling and teaching such (and this isn?t because they don?t care; they just don?t know how). Schools of Education, who supposedly intervene on these sorts of things are, most usually, ineffectual for all sorts of reasons (especially as regard the STEM curriculum for high school) and so high school teachers are as they are. Again, this goes all the way down to preK and may be more damaging in pre high school. My point - not well made - is that calling all this neoliberal reform seems to miss the point that nothing really has been reformed for, at least, the last 50 years. What you are calling neoliberal reform has just made what was already problematic all the more obvious.

    That said, you can teach mathematics in such a way that, in a manner of speaking, you can subvert the downside of the curriculum. I am speaking from the inside as a mathematics teacher and as a mathematics teacher educator. That is, despite the curriculum, you can teach for intellectual curiosity,  serious deliberation and deep knowledge and understanding qua mathematics and you can - and I admit to not doing this as well as I would wish - make room for social critique (all this is possibly easier in an inner city school that a suburban school). I was able to do a little with citizen participation as a teacher educator, but nothing, I think, significant. I?m not saying it is easy and I, as a classroom teacher, loudly disagreed with principals and superintendents when they engaged, one might say, in neoliberal reform.  All this neoliberal reform, by the way, was an ongoing discussion in my mathematics eduction classroom as my students were headed for classrooms similar to the ones you write about. So, no you can't separate teaching and the curriculum, but that shouldn?t be (and this is my thinking and many of my students) an excuse to forego attempts at ?good? teaching. Briefly, key is respect for the discipline and respect for one another and I am reasonably unconvinced such respect is, locally, irrevocably curtailed by the curriculum (although I would agree neoliberal reform globally respects neither).

    Kierkegaard?s solution? I wrote an essay awhile back which was published in Journal of Educational Controversy (Winter 2010) titled Aesthetic Education in the Mathematics Classroom. I don?t really like the ending - too positive - and when I sent it in they didn?t send it back for revision so I couldn?t change it. Far too briefly, rationally it is not possible to do such teaching, but that doesn?t mean, pragmatically speaking, that you can?t. However, the decision to do so is in, one might say, every moment.

 Ed

On Nov 15, 2016, at  3:29 PM, Margaret A Eisenhart <margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu> wrote:

Ed, Thank you for your comments. I?m afraid I?m not as sanguine as you are
about separating curriculum and teaching.  Yes, there are some very good
teachers who find ways to go beyond the dictates of curriculum reform,
accountability, and college/university requirements. But the pressures to
conform are many and come from multiple directions.  For students such as
those in our study, such teachers are rare and continually pressured to
take on more and more features of the achievement regime. I do not think
we can depend on good teachers alone to solve this problem.

What is Kierkegaard?s approach?

Margaret




On 11/13/16, 7:37 PM, "Edward Wall" <ewall@umich.edu> wrote:

Margaret and Carrie

  Thanks for the article. I hope what I write will be of interest.

   I am presently a mathematics educator (although retired) and have
taught mathematics in all the grades into graduate school and well as
teachers of preschool, elementary, and secondary mathematics. What you
write about authoring math identities resonates !highly! with my
experience.

  However, I am unsure what to make of the labeling of neoliberal
reform. I see something similar to the young woman you mention at all
grade levels including those of graduate school. It seems to have little
to do with curricular reform and everything to do with teaching. For
example, the Calculus courses you mention are not there to give students
a deep understanding of mathematics, but to aid in college acceptance.
This, of course, led to parent and student outcry and situation in
schools all across the US for high school Calculus (this has been going
on for some time) The Calculus AP may have originally been for the
purpose of usefully challenging young people, but, in the hands of
college admission officers, soon changed into a way to control admission.
These courses are usually poorly taught (regardless of where they are
taught) because few high school teachers have sufficient training or
experience (taking a calculus course does not mean you have the
wherewithal to teach it; that takes considerably more knowledge). Math
departments do use them for placement, but not because they think
students have been well prepared for Calculus.

  Let me give an exemplar (smile).  A number of years ago I was
teaching a freshman English course (I know that sounds peculiar) with a
significant slant on social justice. One of my students, who seemed (and
acted) quite bright, was having problems completing assignments (and
seemed a little dismissive of his peers). Finally, I told him that I was
going to give him an F. At that point things became interesting. He told
me that he had breezed through high school, scored high on the Calculus
AP, received a scholarship, and was placed in the second semester of
Calculus. The reason work wasn?t done was that he was failing that course
in Calculus and was on the verge of losing his scholarship (especially if
I failed him). Well, I, of course, extended deadlines, etc. and became a
mentor of sorts for the next 4 years.
   All this, as the young woman in your article, pretty much destroyed
his confidence/identity and it was not until his junior year that I began
to see some slight improvement or, one might say, re-authoring (although
the story line had changed considerably; once hoping to be a doctor he is
now hoping to be a PA). This is all to the good. However, during his
final science course (physics), he decided that he was lacking in
geometry and trigonometry and asked for help the summer before and during
the relevant semester. I (being retired you have extra time - ha!) did so
and found that he was !woefully! lacking relevant skills (this from a
student who had scored at the highest level on the Calculus AP).

  My second point is, in a sense, complicated. Maxine Green has a
variation of this on page 276 of her book ?Teacher as Stranger.? She
tells the story of a teacher who believes in social justice and citizen
participation. He is eager for his students to participate in a
moratorium in response to the Vietnamese War. However, he has other
convictions. ?He does not believe that learning sequences should be
whimsically or foolishly interrupted; he thinks classroom activity,
because it brings him in contact with his students, contributes
measurably to their education. A lost day, as he sees it, might mean a
setback for some of his students; missed opportunities for other s?
Taking all this in account, he still believes it is more worthwhile to
support the peace action than do nothing at all.? This conclusion may
seem ?right? and it may seem obvious, but, as Greene continues, it is
hardly easy. It is also a little more complicated than she makes out. Say
I have a strong commitment to social justice (which I do) and say I have
a strong commitment to my discipline (which is mathematics). I could
skimp on the mathematics and really focus on social justice, but then I
run the risk having students as the above who cannot compete within the
present education system. I could skimp on the social justice and really
focus on the mathematics, but then I have signaled that social justice
really isn?t all that important. So I incorporate social justice into my
mathematics class. I could do it two ways: (1) use mathematics as a tool
to consider issues of social justice (however, if I do this well, this is
not teaching mathematics, but teaching social justice) - this is the
usual approach of those who do such things (and I admire their attempts)
or (2) use an issue of social justice to illustrate a mathematical
principle - this is, quite a bit harder and it is easy to imagine
somewhat silly lessons (although not entirely) as integrating the
distribution of incomes in the US (there is a nice book that sort of does
this called "X in the City?) - this is not, in my opinion, properly
attending to issues of social justice. Neither of these approaches, in my
opinion, give cognizance to the importance of social justice or
mathematics (and, of course, I speak as a person who believes both are
important). Ball does not help here (nor Foucault or Butler). The only
one who comes close is Kierkegaard. He indicates there may be a way out
(although it is not cookie-cutter), but most often one comes to despair.


PS. There is also the whole issue of preparing teachers of mathematics to
incorporate social justice in their students' learning especially as more
and more Schools of Education eliminate substantial course work in social
justice from the required curriculum.

Ed Wall

On Nov 12, 2016, at  2:30 PM, Margaret A Eisenhart
<margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu> wrote:

Hello Everyone,

Carrie and I are newcomers to this list, and we thank you for the
opportunity to engage with you about our article, ?Hollowed Out.?  We
also
hope for your patience as we learn to participate in the stream of
thinking here!

Given the comments so far, we are intrigued by others? ideas about the
link between our theory and our data.  On this topic, we would like to
make clear that we did not intend to suggest that the students were
making
sense of their lives in the same way that we interpreted them through
the
lens of our theory. Our claim is that opportunities and figured worlds
are
resources for identity and that the students' words to us reflected
perspectives consistent with neoliberalism, with some pretty serious
implications. Like Phillip White, we are interested in what theories
others would use to explain the data we presented.

Like Mike Cole, we are also intrigued by the prospect of ?exemplars? we
might turn to.

We look forward to hearing your thoughts.


Margaret Eisenhart









------------------------------

Message: 11
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 13:26:13 -0600
From: Edward  Wall <ewall@umich.edu>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID: <3449352E-E037-4C3A-8030-9F47DA245892@umich.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252

Phillip

      I agree.  Within the so-called STEM disciplines it may go further back than that; however a bit more than 50 years ago, it took on some real teeth as regards mathematics (I schooled in the before and after of those years).

      Perhaps my interest in all this reflects, in a fashion, your interest in the final paragraph of the paper. I think that content area teachers have a role in helping children articulate new ways of making themselves intelligible in the context of their lives regardless of the curriculum. I have seen a lot of mathematics classrooms over time and and have been privileged to observed a lot of outstanding mathematics teachers. I have yet to see a classroom where teachers and students have respect for one another and for the discipline that children fail to develop many of those critical qualities that the paper lists. That does not mean, interesting enough, that some students do not develop those qualities in spite of experiencing classrooms where there little respect for the discipline or each other. Sadly, as one wouldn?t think this need be the case, ?respect' may be a ?new way.?

Ed

On Nov 16, 2016, at  11:23 AM, White, Phillip <Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu> wrote:

Margaret and Ed, I think that one of the great difficulties of reducing the effects of neoliberal ideology within public education is that it is a default theory of education since the days of liberal laissez faire economics of the 19th century.  It was during that century that public education was socially and politically constructed and the accompanying belief in Spencerian social-darwinism.  The work of Dewey notwithstanding, the values placed on individual merit and self-sufficiency has proved to be an irreducible tension (James Wertsch's phrase) within the efforts to effect greater education equity for those previously marginalised within public education.  So that the data explored in the Eisenhart / Allen paper does, I think, further demonstrate that not only are student identities hollowed out within implementation of STEM education, but is further evidence of an historical process that has been in place for generations of American education systems.  I'm really interested in the final paragraph of the paper, "articulating new ways of making selves intelligible in the contest of our lives".  After all, if we can't do that, what's the use?  Certainly that was what Spinoza was struggling with in his work on ethics.


Phillip

________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> on behalf of Edward Wall <ewall@umich.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 5:43:42 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Margaret

   My fault for trying to keep things short as I am not sanguine, at all, about separating ?good' teaching and the curriculum either. Asking for a teaching of calculus, etc. by most high school teachers will result in courses where students come away with little intellectual curiosity,  serious deliberation  or deep knowledge and understanding qua mathematics and no classroom time for citizen participation or social critique, [Encouraging those qualities, by the way, seems to me (and some would quibble) as reasonable as any definition of ?good? teaching]  But even more importantly, at the present time, there is a sense in which it is not expected that these courses be taught ?well.' They are there to sort students in the college track and these students will again be intentionally sorted at the university level by similar courses which are again not taught ?well' (tenured faculty tend not to teach these courses and, in general, have little interest in the ?whole? student).
   Part of the problem is, as you say, curriculum, etc. However, part of the problem is many university faculty in the STEM fields although accepting the above definition of ?good? teaching by nodding agreement, would have difficulty modeling and teaching such (and this isn?t because they don?t care; they just don?t know how). Schools of Education, who supposedly intervene on these sorts of things are, most usually, ineffectual for all sorts of reasons (especially as regard the STEM curriculum for high school) and so high school teachers are as they are. Again, this goes all the way down to preK and may be more damaging in pre high school. My point - not well made - is that calling all this neoliberal reform seems to miss the point that nothing really has been reformed for, at least, the last 50 years. What you are calling neoliberal reform has just made what was already problematic all the more obvious.

   That said, you can teach mathematics in such a way that, in a manner of speaking, you can subvert the downside of the curriculum. I am speaking from the inside as a mathematics teacher and as a mathematics teacher educator. That is, despite the curriculum, you can teach for intellectual curiosity,  serious deliberation and deep knowledge and understanding qua mathematics and you can - and I admit to not doing this as well as I would wish - make room for social critique (all this is possibly easier in an inner city school that a suburban school). I was able to do a little with citizen participation as a teacher educator, but nothing, I think, significant. I?m not saying it is easy and I, as a classroom teacher, loudly disagreed with principals and superintendents when they engaged, one might say, in neoliberal reform.  All this neoliberal reform, by the way, was an ongoing discussion in my mathematics eduction classroom as my students were headed for classrooms similar to the ones you write about. So, no you can't separate teaching and the curriculum, but that shouldn?t be (and this is my thinking and many of my students) an excuse to forego attempts at ?good? teaching. Briefly, key is respect for the discipline and respect for one another and I am reasonably unconvinced such respect is, locally, irrevocably curtailed by the curriculum (although I would agree neoliberal reform globally respects neither).

   Kierkegaard?s solution? I wrote an essay awhile back which was published in Journal of Educational Controversy (Winter 2010) titled Aesthetic Education in the Mathematics Classroom. I don?t really like the ending - too positive - and when I sent it in they didn?t send it back for revision so I couldn?t change it. Far too briefly, rationally it is not possible to do such teaching, but that doesn?t mean, pragmatically speaking, that you can?t. However, the decision to do so is in, one might say, every moment.

Ed

On Nov 15, 2016, at  3:29 PM, Margaret A Eisenhart <margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu> wrote:

Ed, Thank you for your comments. I?m afraid I?m not as sanguine as you are
about separating curriculum and teaching.  Yes, there are some very good
teachers who find ways to go beyond the dictates of curriculum reform,
accountability, and college/university requirements. But the pressures to
conform are many and come from multiple directions.  For students such as
those in our study, such teachers are rare and continually pressured to
take on more and more features of the achievement regime. I do not think
we can depend on good teachers alone to solve this problem.

What is Kierkegaard?s approach?

Margaret




On 11/13/16, 7:37 PM, "Edward Wall" <ewall@umich.edu> wrote:

Margaret and Carrie

 Thanks for the article. I hope what I write will be of interest.

  I am presently a mathematics educator (although retired) and have
taught mathematics in all the grades into graduate school and well as
teachers of preschool, elementary, and secondary mathematics. What you
write about authoring math identities resonates !highly! with my
experience.

 However, I am unsure what to make of the labeling of neoliberal
reform. I see something similar to the young woman you mention at all
grade levels including those of graduate school. It seems to have little
to do with curricular reform and everything to do with teaching. For
example, the Calculus courses you mention are not there to give students
a deep understanding of mathematics, but to aid in college acceptance.
This, of course, led to parent and student outcry and situation in
schools all across the US for high school Calculus (this has been going
on for some time) The Calculus AP may have originally been for the
purpose of usefully challenging young people, but, in the hands of
college admission officers, soon changed into a way to control admission.
These courses are usually poorly taught (regardless of where they are
taught) because few high school teachers have sufficient training or
experience (taking a calculus course does not mean you have the
wherewithal to teach it; that takes considerably more knowledge). Math
departments do use them for placement, but not because they think
students have been well prepared for Calculus.

 Let me give an exemplar (smile).  A number of years ago I was
teaching a freshman English course (I know that sounds peculiar) with a
significant slant on social justice. One of my students, who seemed (and
acted) quite bright, was having problems completing assignments (and
seemed a little dismissive of his peers). Finally, I told him that I was
going to give him an F. At that point things became interesting. He told
me that he had breezed through high school, scored high on the Calculus
AP, received a scholarship, and was placed in the second semester of
Calculus. The reason work wasn?t done was that he was failing that course
in Calculus and was on the verge of losing his scholarship (especially if
I failed him). Well, I, of course, extended deadlines, etc. and became a
mentor of sorts for the next 4 years.
  All this, as the young woman in your article, pretty much destroyed
his confidence/identity and it was not until his junior year that I began
to see some slight improvement or, one might say, re-authoring (although
the story line had changed considerably; once hoping to be a doctor he is
now hoping to be a PA). This is all to the good. However, during his
final science course (physics), he decided that he was lacking in
geometry and trigonometry and asked for help the summer before and during
the relevant semester. I (being retired you have extra time - ha!) did so
and found that he was !woefully! lacking relevant skills (this from a
student who had scored at the highest level on the Calculus AP).

 My second point is, in a sense, complicated. Maxine Green has a
variation of this on page 276 of her book ?Teacher as Stranger.? She
tells the story of a teacher who believes in social justice and citizen
participation. He is eager for his students to participate in a
moratorium in response to the Vietnamese War. However, he has other
convictions. ?He does not believe that learning sequences should be
whimsically or foolishly interrupted; he thinks classroom activity,
because it brings him in contact with his students, contributes
measurably to their education. A lost day, as he sees it, might mean a
setback for some of his students; missed opportunities for other s?
Taking all this in account, he still believes it is more worthwhile to
support the peace action than do nothing at all.? This conclusion may
seem ?right? and it may seem obvious, but, as Greene continues, it is
hardly easy. It is also a little more complicated than she makes out. Say
I have a strong commitment to social justice (which I do) and say I have
a strong commitment to my discipline (which is mathematics). I could
skimp on the mathematics and really focus on social justice, but then I
run the risk having students as the above who cannot compete within the
present education system. I could skimp on the social justice and really
focus on the mathematics, but then I have signaled that social justice
really isn?t all that important. So I incorporate social justice into my
mathematics class. I could do it two ways: (1) use mathematics as a tool
to consider issues of social justice (however, if I do this well, this is
not teaching mathematics, but teaching social justice) - this is the
usual approach of those who do such things (and I admire their attempts)
or (2) use an issue of social justice to illustrate a mathematical
principle - this is, quite a bit harder and it is easy to imagine
somewhat silly lessons (although not entirely) as integrating the
distribution of incomes in the US (there is a nice book that sort of does
this called "X in the City?) - this is not, in my opinion, properly
attending to issues of social justice. Neither of these approaches, in my
opinion, give cognizance to the importance of social justice or
mathematics (and, of course, I speak as a person who believes both are
important). Ball does not help here (nor Foucault or Butler). The only
one who comes close is Kierkegaard. He indicates there may be a way out
(although it is not cookie-cutter), but most often one comes to despair.


PS. There is also the whole issue of preparing teachers of mathematics to
incorporate social justice in their students' learning especially as more
and more Schools of Education eliminate substantial course work in social
justice from the required curriculum.

Ed Wall

On Nov 12, 2016, at  2:30 PM, Margaret A Eisenhart
<margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu> wrote:

Hello Everyone,

Carrie and I are newcomers to this list, and we thank you for the
opportunity to engage with you about our article, ?Hollowed Out.?  We
also
hope for your patience as we learn to participate in the stream of
thinking here!

Given the comments so far, we are intrigued by others? ideas about the
link between our theory and our data.  On this topic, we would like to
make clear that we did not intend to suggest that the students were
making
sense of their lives in the same way that we interpreted them through
the
lens of our theory. Our claim is that opportunities and figured worlds
are
resources for identity and that the students' words to us reflected
perspectives consistent with neoliberalism, with some pretty serious
implications. Like Phillip White, we are interested in what theories
others would use to explain the data we presented.

Like Mike Cole, we are also intrigued by the prospect of ?exemplars? we
might turn to.

We look forward to hearing your thoughts.


Margaret Eisenhart











------------------------------

Message: 12
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 19:29:15 +0000
From: Margaret A Eisenhart <margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID:
<MWHPR03MB2783D957C4784B9191BBE270F9BE0@MWHPR03MB2783.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Yes, I agree.  Thank you, Phillip.

-----Original Message-----
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of White, Phillip
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 10:24 AM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Margaret and Ed, I think that one of the great difficulties of reducing the effects of neoliberal ideology within public education is that it is a default theory of education since the days of liberal laissez faire economics of the 19th century.  It was during that century that public education was socially and politically constructed and the accompanying belief in Spencerian social-darwinism.  The work of Dewey notwithstanding, the values placed on individual merit and self-sufficiency has proved to be an irreducible tension (James Wertsch's phrase) within the efforts to effect greater education equity for those previously marginalised within public education.  So that the data explored in the Eisenhart / Allen paper does, I think, further demonstrate that not only are student identities hollowed out within implementation of STEM education, but is further evidence of an historical process that has been in place for generations of American education systems.  I'm really interested in the final paragraph of the paper, "articulating new ways of making selves intelligible in the contest of our lives".  After all, if we can't do that, what's the use?  Certainly that was what Spinoza was struggling with in his work on ethics.


Phillip

________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> on behalf of Edward Wall <ewall@umich.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 5:43:42 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Margaret

    My fault for trying to keep things short as I am not sanguine, at all, about separating 'good' teaching and the curriculum either. Asking for a teaching of calculus, etc. by most high school teachers will result in courses where students come away with little intellectual curiosity,  serious deliberation  or deep knowledge and understanding qua mathematics and no classroom time for citizen participation or social critique, [Encouraging those qualities, by the way, seems to me (and some would quibble) as reasonable as any definition of 'good' teaching]  But even more importantly, at the present time, there is a sense in which it is not expected that these courses be taught 'well.' They are there to sort students in the college track and these students will again be intentionally sorted at the university level by similar courses which are again not taught 'well' (tenured faculty tend not to teach these courses and, in general, have little interest in the 'whole' student).
    Part of the problem is, as you say, curriculum, etc. However, part of the problem is many university faculty in the STEM fields although accepting the above definition of 'good' teaching by nodding agreement, would have difficulty modeling and teaching such (and this isn't because they don't care; they just don't know how). Schools of Education, who supposedly intervene on these sorts of things are, most usually, ineffectual for all sorts of reasons (especially as regard the STEM curriculum for high school) and so high school teachers are as they are. Again, this goes all the way down to preK and may be more damaging in pre high school. My point - not well made - is that calling all this neoliberal reform seems to miss the point that nothing really has been reformed for, at least, the last 50 years. What you are calling neoliberal reform has just made what was already problematic all the more obvious.

    That said, you can teach mathematics in such a way that, in a manner of speaking, you can subvert the downside of the curriculum. I am speaking from the inside as a mathematics teacher and as a mathematics teacher educator. That is, despite the curriculum, you can teach for intellectual curiosity,  serious deliberation and deep knowledge and understanding qua mathematics and you can - and I admit to not doing this as well as I would wish - make room for social critique (all this is possibly easier in an inner city school that a suburban school). I was able to do a little with citizen participation as a teacher educator, but nothing, I think, significant. I'm not saying it is easy and I, as a classroom teacher, loudly disagreed with principals and superintendents when they engaged, one might say, in neoliberal reform.  All this neoliberal reform, by the way, was an ongoing discussion in my mathematics eduction classroom as my students were headed for classrooms similar to the ones you write about. So, no you can't separate teaching and the curriculum, but that shouldn't be (and this is my thinking and many of my students) an excuse to forego attempts at 'good' teaching. Briefly, key is respect for the discipline and respect for one another and I am reasonably unconvinced such respect is, locally, irrevocably curtailed by the curriculum (although I would agree neoliberal reform globally respects neither).

    Kierkegaard's solution? I wrote an essay awhile back which was published in Journal of Educational Controversy (Winter 2010) titled Aesthetic Education in the Mathematics Classroom. I don't really like the ending - too positive - and when I sent it in they didn't send it back for revision so I couldn't change it. Far too briefly, rationally it is not possible to do such teaching, but that doesn't mean, pragmatically speaking, that you can't. However, the decision to do so is in, one might say, every moment.

 Ed

On Nov 15, 2016, at  3:29 PM, Margaret A Eisenhart <margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu> wrote:

Ed, Thank you for your comments. I'm afraid I'm not as sanguine as you
are about separating curriculum and teaching.  Yes, there are some
very good teachers who find ways to go beyond the dictates of
curriculum reform, accountability, and college/university
requirements. But the pressures to conform are many and come from
multiple directions.  For students such as those in our study, such
teachers are rare and continually pressured to take on more and more
features of the achievement regime. I do not think we can depend on good teachers alone to solve this problem.

What is Kierkegaard's approach?

Margaret




On 11/13/16, 7:37 PM, "Edward Wall" <ewall@umich.edu> wrote:

Margaret and Carrie

  Thanks for the article. I hope what I write will be of interest.

   I am presently a mathematics educator (although retired) and have
taught mathematics in all the grades into graduate school and well as
teachers of preschool, elementary, and secondary mathematics. What
you write about authoring math identities resonates !highly! with my
experience.

  However, I am unsure what to make of the labeling of neoliberal
reform. I see something similar to the young woman you mention at all
grade levels including those of graduate school. It seems to have
little to do with curricular reform and everything to do with
teaching. For example, the Calculus courses you mention are not there
to give students a deep understanding of mathematics, but to aid in college acceptance.
This, of course, led to parent and student outcry and situation in
schools all across the US for high school Calculus (this has been
going on for some time) The Calculus AP may have originally been for
the purpose of usefully challenging young people, but, in the hands
of college admission officers, soon changed into a way to control admission.
These courses are usually poorly taught (regardless of where they are
taught) because few high school teachers have sufficient training or
experience (taking a calculus course does not mean you have the
wherewithal to teach it; that takes considerably more knowledge).
Math departments do use them for placement, but not because they
think students have been well prepared for Calculus.

  Let me give an exemplar (smile).  A number of years ago I was
teaching a freshman English course (I know that sounds peculiar) with
a significant slant on social justice. One of my students, who seemed
(and
acted) quite bright, was having problems completing assignments (and
seemed a little dismissive of his peers). Finally, I told him that I
was going to give him an F. At that point things became interesting.
He told me that he had breezed through high school, scored high on
the Calculus AP, received a scholarship, and was placed in the second
semester of Calculus. The reason work wasn't done was that he was
failing that course in Calculus and was on the verge of losing his
scholarship (especially if I failed him). Well, I, of course,
extended deadlines, etc. and became a mentor of sorts for the next 4 years.
   All this, as the young woman in your article, pretty much
destroyed his confidence/identity and it was not until his junior
year that I began to see some slight improvement or, one might say,
re-authoring (although the story line had changed considerably; once
hoping to be a doctor he is now hoping to be a PA). This is all to
the good. However, during his final science course (physics), he
decided that he was lacking in geometry and trigonometry and asked
for help the summer before and during the relevant semester. I (being
retired you have extra time - ha!) did so and found that he was
!woefully! lacking relevant skills (this from a student who had scored at the highest level on the Calculus AP).

  My second point is, in a sense, complicated. Maxine Green has a
variation of this on page 276 of her book "Teacher as Stranger." She
tells the story of a teacher who believes in social justice and
citizen participation. He is eager for his students to participate in
a moratorium in response to the Vietnamese War. However, he has other
convictions. "He does not believe that learning sequences should be
whimsically or foolishly interrupted; he thinks classroom activity,
because it brings him in contact with his students, contributes
measurably to their education. A lost day, as he sees it, might mean
a setback for some of his students; missed opportunities for other s...
Taking all this in account, he still believes it is more worthwhile
to support the peace action than do nothing at all." This conclusion
may seem 'right' and it may seem obvious, but, as Greene continues,
it is hardly easy. It is also a little more complicated than she
makes out. Say I have a strong commitment to social justice (which I
do) and say I have a strong commitment to my discipline (which is
mathematics). I could skimp on the mathematics and really focus on
social justice, but then I run the risk having students as the above
who cannot compete within the present education system. I could skimp
on the social justice and really focus on the mathematics, but then I
have signaled that social justice really isn't all that important. So
I incorporate social justice into my mathematics class. I could do it
two ways: (1) use mathematics as a tool to consider issues of social
justice (however, if I do this well, this is not teaching
mathematics, but teaching social justice) - this is the usual
approach of those who do such things (and I admire their attempts) or
(2) use an issue of social justice to illustrate a mathematical
principle - this is, quite a bit harder and it is easy to imagine
somewhat silly lessons (although not entirely) as integrating the
distribution of incomes in the US (there is a nice book that sort of
does this called "X in the City") - this is not, in my opinion,
properly attending to issues of social justice. Neither of these
approaches, in my opinion, give cognizance to the importance of
social justice or mathematics (and, of course, I speak as a person
who believes both are important). Ball does not help here (nor
Foucault or Butler). The only one who comes close is Kierkegaard. He indicates there may be a way out (although it is not cookie-cutter), but most often one comes to despair.


PS. There is also the whole issue of preparing teachers of
mathematics to incorporate social justice in their students' learning
especially as more and more Schools of Education eliminate
substantial course work in social justice from the required curriculum.

Ed Wall

On Nov 12, 2016, at  2:30 PM, Margaret A Eisenhart
<margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu> wrote:

Hello Everyone,

Carrie and I are newcomers to this list, and we thank you for the
opportunity to engage with you about our article, "Hollowed Out."
We also hope for your patience as we learn to participate in the
stream of thinking here!

Given the comments so far, we are intrigued by others' ideas about
the link between our theory and our data.  On this topic, we would
like to make clear that we did not intend to suggest that the
students were making sense of their lives in the same way that we
interpreted them through the lens of our theory. Our claim is that
opportunities and figured worlds are resources for identity and that
the students' words to us reflected perspectives consistent with
neoliberalism, with some pretty serious implications. Like Phillip
White, we are interested in what theories others would use to
explain the data we presented.

Like Mike Cole, we are also intrigued by the prospect of "exemplars"
we might turn to.

We look forward to hearing your thoughts.


Margaret Eisenhart










------------------------------

Message: 13
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 07:24:35 +1100
From: David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID:
<CACwG6DuuGghg1GH1UeK6LnoQ8OpiG-znOUCUV61udjBmK-Arug@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Actually, Henry, I was attacking the idea that tense is an empty mental
space. I guess I am a little like Larry: when we discuss articles I have a
strong tendency to try to make them relevant to what I am doing rather than
to drop what I am doing and go and discuss what everybody else is
discussing. So what I am doing right now is trying to make sense of some
story-telling data where the adults are all over the map on tenses, and the
kids seem to stick to one tense only. The adults are slipping in and out of
mental spaces. The kids are telling stories.

I think the relevance to the article is this: When you look at the way the
article frames institutional practices and figured worlds, we see
prolepsis--a preoccupation with the future. But when we look at what the
kids are doing and saying it is very much in the moment. Is this simply
because mental processes like "like" and "want" tend to take simple present
(because they are less defined than material processes)? Or is it because
while the institutions have the near future firmly in view and the figured
worlds have irrealis in view, the business of young people is youth?

Vygotsky points out that the question the interviewer asks is very much a
part of the data. For example, if you ask a question using "you" you often
get "you" in reply, even if you design your question to get "I".

Q: Why do you want to kill yourself?
A: The same reason everybody wants to kill themselves. You want to find out
if anybody really cares.

To take another example that is probably more relevant to readers: both the
Brexit vote and the American elections are clear examples of statistical
unreliability in that if you tried to repeat the election the morning after
you would probably get an utterly different result. Take all of those black
voters and the real working class voters who voted Obama but couldn't be
bothered for Hillary (not the imaginary "white working class voters" who
work in imaginary industries in Iowa, rural Pennsylvania, North Carolina
and Florida). They might well have behaved rather differently knowing how
imminent the neo-Confederacy really was. This is usually presented as
"buyer's remorse," but it's more than that; the event itself would be part
of its replication. This is something that statistical models that use
standard error of the mean cannot build in (they work on the impossible
idea that you can repeat an event ten or twenty thousand times without any
memory at all).

In the same way, when you interview a group of students together you notice
that they tend to model answers on each other rather than on your question,
and when you interview them separately, you notice that YOU tend to change
your question according to the previous answer you received. On the one
hand, life is not easily distracted by its own future: it is too wholly
there in each moment of existence. On the other hand, each of these moments
includes the previous one, and therefore all the previous ones, in itself.
The past weighs like a nightmare on the brain of the living, and objects in
the rear view mirror are always closer than they appear.

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 10:23 AM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com> wrote:

David,
I was puzzled that you found Langacker to be relevant to this topic, but
the last paragraph of your post makes an important connection between
Langacker and Vygotsky: Both see speech acts as staged?interactants view
themselves as ?on stage?. I think the book by Vera and Reuben is largely
about how differently math is ?staged? by working mathematicians as
contrasted with doing math in school. I think it would be interesting to
analyze how natural language and the language of math scaffold each other
in both contexts. Word problems have been a well-used way of connecting the
two languages; stats and graphs are commonly used in the media to clarify
and elaborate text in articles on economics, presidential elections, and
what not.

I would love to read your ?unpublishable? on Langacker and Halliday on
tense. What I recall from reading Langacker is his interest in ?basic
domains?, starting with the temporal and spatial. Somewhere he has said
that he believes that the temporal domain is the more basic. As you?d
guess, the spatial domain is especially useful in elucidating what he calls
?things? (nouns are conceptually about things); the temporal domain is more
closely connected to what he calls ?processes? wherein he analyzes tense
and aspect.

I think Langacker would agree that his work in cognitive grammar has a
long way to go in contributing to the idea that grammar is usage based,
rather than some autonomous module, but he is working on it. I think there
is a potential for connecting Halliday and Langacker, though I?m not smart
enough to convince you of that evidently. Somehow the connection must be
made by staying close to the data, ?thick description? ethnographers are
fond of saying. I think the article by Carrie and Margaret is raising this
issue.

The ?hollowed out? math curriculum in the article resonates with the
?potholes? you say teachers must watch out for. Some may say that  the
hollowing out is typical even of ?elite? K-12 schools. Some may say that
this is deliberate. I would say my own experience of math in school was
often hollowed out, which I sensed, but didn?t discover until I got to the
?pure math? department in the mid 60s at Univ of Texas at Austin under the
leadership of Robert Lee Moore. He is a main protagonist in Chapter 8 of
Vera?s and Reuben?s book.

I?ll end it there.

Henry




On Nov 15, 2016, at 1:38 PM, David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com> wrote:

Henry:

I just wrote another unpublishable comparing how Langacker and
Halliday treat tense, and I'm starting to come to grips with the
different
theory of experience underlying the two grammars. Langacker somehow sees
it
as creating empty mental space (and aspect as creating space within
space).
Halliday sees tense as a way of abstracting concrete doings and
happenings.
Halliday's tense system is not spatial at all but temporal: it's
temporally
deictic and then temporally recursive: a kind of time machine that
simultaneously transports and orients the speaker either proleptically or
retroleptically. So for example if I say to you that this article we are
discussing is going to have been being discussed for two or three weeks
now, then "is going" is a kind of time machine that takes you into the
future, from which "You are Here" vantage point the article has been
(past)
being discussed (present). Present in the past in the future.

And that got me thinking about theory and practice. It seems to me that
the
they are related, but simultaneously and not sequentially. That is, the
output of one is not the input of the other: they are simply more and
less
abstract ways of looking at one and the same thing. So for example in
this
article the tasks of theory and practice are one and the same: the task
of
theory is really to define as precisely as possible the domain, the
scope,
the range of the inquiry into authoring math and science identities and
the
task of practice is to ask what exactly you want to do in this
domain/scope/range--to try to understand how they are hollowed out a
little
better so that maybe teachers like you and me can help fill the damn
potholes in a little. You can't really do the one without doing the
other:
trying to decide the terrain under study without deciding some task that
you want to do there is like imagining tense as empty mental space and
not
as some actual, concrete doing or happening. Conversely, the way you dig
the hole depends very much on how big and where you want it.

So there are three kinds of mental spaces in the first part of the
article:

a) institutional arrangements (e.g. "priority improvement plans",
career-academy/comprehensive school status STEM tracks, AP classes)
b) figured worlds (e.g. 'good students', and 'don't cares', or what
Eckhart
and McConnell-Ginet called 'jocks', 'nerds',  'burnouts', 'gangbangers')
c) authored identities (i.e. what kids say about themselves and what they
think about themselves)

Now, I think it's possible to make this distinction--but they are
probably
better understood not as mental spaces (in which case they really do
overlap) but rather as doings (or, as is my wont, sayings). Different
people are saying different things: a) is mostly the sayings of the
school
boards and administrators, b) is mostly the sayings of teachers and
groups
of kids, and c) is mostly the sayings of individual students. It's always
tempting for a theory to focus on c), because that's where all the data
is
and it's tempting for practice too, because if you are against what is
happening in a) and in b), that's where the most likely point of
intervention is.

"But the data does suggest that the "figured worlds" are figured by
authored identities--not by institutional arrangements. Is that just an
artefact of the warm empathy of the authors for the words (although maybe
not the exact wordings) of their subjects, or is it real grounds for
hope?

Marx says (beginning of the 18th Brumaire): "*Men make* their own
*history*,
*but they* do *not make* it as *they* please; *they* do *not make* it
under self-selected circumstances, *but* under circumstances existing
already, given and transmitted from the *past*. The tradition of all dead
generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living."

It's a good theory, i.e. at once a truth and a tragedy. And it's a
theory treats time as time and not as an empty stage.

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 9:39 AM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com>
wrote:

All,
I have read only part of Margaret?s and Carrie?s article, but I wanted
to
jump in with a reference to a book by Vygotskian Vera John-Steiner and
her
mathematician husband Reuben Hersh: Loving and Hating Mathematics:
Challenging the Mathematical Life. Huw?s point (v) which refers to
?identities of independence and finding out sustainable within these
settings (school math classes) spent high school. Vera?s and Reuben?s
book
contrasts what it?s like to work and think like a real (working)
mathematician (what I think Huw is talking about) and what we call
mathematics in the classroom. Chapter 8 of the book "The Teaching of
Mathematics: Fierce or Friendly?? is interesting reading and could be
relevant to this discussion.
Henry


On Nov 13, 2016, at 2:47 PM, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
wrote:

Dear Margaret

My reading has not been a particularly careful one, so I leave it to
yourselves to judge the usefulness of these points.

i) Whether arguments can be made (for or against) a nebulous term
(neoliberalism) with its political associations, by arguments about
identity that are themselves not deliberately political.

ii) Whether it is better not to focus essentially on the place of
identity.

iii) Whether it is worthwhile contrasting the role/identity of "model
student" with "identities" that anyone excelling at STEM subjects would
relate to.  On this, I would point to the importance with identifying
with
appreciations for "awareness of not knowing" and "eagerness to find
out"
(which also entails learning about what it means to know).

iv) Whether you detect that to the degree that an identity is
foregrounded
in the actual practice of STEM work (rather than as background social
appeasement), it is being faked? That is, someone is playing at the
role
rather than actually committing themselves to finding out about
unknowns.

v) Whether, in fact, there is actually a "tiered" or varied set of
acceptable "identities" within the settings you explored, such that
identities of independence and finding out are sustainable within these
settings, possibly representing a necessary fudge to deal with the
requirements placed upon the institutions.

Best,
Huw

On 12 November 2016 at 20:30, Margaret A Eisenhart <
margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu> wrote:

Hello Everyone,

Carrie and I are newcomers to this list, and we thank you for the
opportunity to engage with you about our article, ?Hollowed Out.?  We
also
hope for your patience as we learn to participate in the stream of
thinking here!

Given the comments so far, we are intrigued by others? ideas about the
link between our theory and our data.  On this topic, we would like to
make clear that we did not intend to suggest that the students were
making
sense of their lives in the same way that we interpreted them through
the
lens of our theory. Our claim is that opportunities and figured worlds
are
resources for identity and that the students' words to us reflected
perspectives consistent with neoliberalism, with some pretty serious
implications. Like Phillip White, we are interested in what theories
others would use to explain the data we presented.

Like Mike Cole, we are also intrigued by the prospect of ?exemplars?
we
might turn to.

We look forward to hearing your thoughts.


Margaret Eisenhart



On 11/11/16, 11:35 AM, "lpscholar2@gmail.com" <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
wrote:

A resumption in exploring the meaning and sense (preferably sens as
this
term draws attention to movement and direction within meaning and
sense)
of this month?s article.
The paper begins with the title and the image of (hollowed-out)
meaning
and sense that is impoverished and holds few resources for
developing a
deeper sens of identity.
The article concludes with the implication that the work of social
justice within educational institutions is not about improving
educational outcome in neoliberal terms; the implications of the
study
are about *reorganizing* the identities ? particulary
identities-with-standind that young people are *exposed* to, can
articulate, and can act on (in school and beyond).

I would say this is taking an ethical stand?.

I will now turn to page 189 and the section (identity-in-context) to
amplify the notion of (cultural imaginary) and (figured worlds).
This imaginary being the site or location of history-in-person. That
is
identity is a form of legacy (or *text*) ABOUT the kind of person one
is
or has become in responding to (external) circumstances.
These external circumstances are EXPERIENCED primarily in the
organization of local practices and cultural imaginaries (figured
worlds)
that circulate and *give meaning* (and sens) to local practices

Figured worlds are interpreted following Holland as socially and
culturally *realms of interpretation* and certain players are
recognized
as (exemplars).

As such cultural, social, historical, dialogical psychological
(imaginaries) are handmaidens of the imaginal *giving meaning* to
*what*
goes on in the directions we take together.

Two key terms i highlight are (exemplars) and (direction) we take.
The realm of the ethical turn
What are the markers and signposts emerging in the deeper ethical
turn
that offers more than a hollowed-out answer.
Are there any *ghost* stories of exemplars we can turn to as well as
living exemplars? By ghosts i mean ancestors who continue as beacons
of
hope exemplifying *who* we are.

My way into exploring the impoverished narratives of the neoliberal
imaginary and reawakening exemplary ancestors or ghosts from their
slumber to help guide us through these multiple imaginaries

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: mike cole
Sent: November 9, 2016 3:04 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Alfredo--

for any who missed the initial article sent out, you might send them
here:

http://lchc.ucsd.edu/mca/

I am meeting shortly with Bruce. A list of improvements to web site
welcome, although not clear how long they will take to implement.

mike

On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 2:38 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil <
a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
wrote:

Dear all,

last week I announced MCA's 3rd Issue article for discussion:

"Hollowed Out: Meaning and Authoring of High School Math and Science
Identities in the Context of Neoliberal Reform," by Margaret
Eisenhart
and
Carrie Allen.

The article is open access and will continue to be so during the
discussion time at this link.

Thanks to everyone who begun the discussion early after I shared the
link
last week, and sorry that we sort of brought the discussion to a
halt
until
the authors were ready to discuss. I have now sent Margaret and
Carrie
the
posts that were produced then so that they could catch up, but I
also
invited them to feel free to move on an introduce themselves as soon
as
they ??wanted.

It is not without some doubts that one introduces a discussion of an
article in a moment that some US media have called as "An American
Tragedy"
and other international editorials are describing as "a dark day for
the
world." But I believe that the paper may indeed offer some grounds
for
discuss important issues that are at stake in everyone's home now,
as
Mike
recently describes in a touching post on the "local state of mind"
and
that
have to do with identity and its connection to a neoliberal
organisation of
the economy. It is not difficult to link neoliberalism to Trump's
phenomenon and how it pervades very intimate aspects of everyday
life.

If this was not enough, I think the authors' background on women's
scholar
and professional careers in science is totally relevant to the
discussions
on gendered discourse we've been having. Now without halts, I hope
this
thread gives joys and wisdom to all.

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
edu>
on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
Sent: 02 November 2016 01:48
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Thanks Mike and everyone! I am sure Margaret (and many of those
still
reading) will be happy to be able to catch up when she joins us next
week!
Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
edu>
on behalf of mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu>
Sent: 02 November 2016 01:32
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Gentlemen -- I believe Fernando told us that Margaret would be
able to join this discussion next week. Just a quick glance at the
discussion so far indicates that there is a lot there to wade into
before she has had a word.

I am only part way through the article, expecting to have until next
week
to think about it.

May I suggest your forbearance while this slow-poke tries to catch
up!

mike

On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 3:38 PM, White, Phillip
<Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu

wrote:

David & Larry, everyone else ...

by way of introduction, Margaret and Carrie point out that the data
in
this paper emerged through a three year study - which was the
processes
of
how students of color, interested in STEM, responded to the
externally
imposed neoliberal requirements. they framed their study using
theories
of
social practices on how identity developed in context.


David, you reject the theories.  or so i understand your position.
as
you
write: It's that the theory

contradicts my own personal theories.

are you also rejecting the data as well?  it seems as if you are
suggesting this when you write: The authors find this point (in the
case
of
Lorena) somewhere between the
beginning of the tenth and the end of the eleventh grade, but I
think
that's just because it's where they are looking.

you reject the narrative of Lorena on the grounds that it could be
traced
back to infancy.

do you also reject the identical narrative found in the adult
practitioners within the context of the high schools?  that this
narrative
is not one of a contemporary neoliberal practice but rather could
be
traced
back to, say, the mid 1600's new england colonies, in particular
massachusettes, where the practices of public american education
began?

to explain the data that emerged from the Eisenhart/Allen study,
what
theories would you have used?

phillip

________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 7:03 AM
To: David Kellogg; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Margaret and Carrie,
Thank you for this wonderful paper that explains the shallow
*hollowed-out* way of forming identity as a form of meaning and
sense. I
will add the French word *sens* which always includes *direction*
within
meaning and sense.

David, your response that what our theory makes sens of depends on
where
we are looking makes sens to me.
You put in question the moment when the interpersonal (you and me)
way of
authoring sens *shifts* or turns to cultural and historical ways of
being
immersed in sens. The article refers to the *historical-in-person*.

My further comment, where I am looking) is in the description of
the
sociocultural as a response to *externally changing circumstances*
as
the
process of *learning as becoming* (see page 190).

The article says:

This process is what Lave and Wenger (1991) and other Sociocultural
researchers have referred to as *learning as becoming,* that is,
learning
that occurs as one becomes a certain kind of person in a particular
context.  Identities conceived in this way are not stable or fixed.
As
*external circumstances* affecting a person change, so too may the
identities that are produced *in response*. (Holland & Skinner,
1997).

In this version of *history-in-person* the identity processes that
start
the process moving in a neoliberal *direction* are *external*
circumstances. I am not questioning this version of the importance
of
the
external but do question if looking primarily or primordially to
the
external circumstances as central if we are not leaving a gap in
our
notions of *sens*.

If by looking or highlighting or illuminating the *external* and
highly
visible acts of the actual we are leaving a gap in actual*ity.
A gap in *sens*.

To be continued by others...

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: David Kellogg
Sent: October 31, 2016 2:15 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

I was turning Mike's request--for a short explanation of the
Halliday/Vygotsky interface--over in my mind for a few days, unsure
where
to start. I usually decide these difficult "where to start"
questions
in
the easiest possible way, with whatever I happen to be working on.
In
this
case it's the origins of language in a one year old, a moment which
is
almost as mysterious to me as the origins of life or the Big Bang.
But
perhaps for that very reason it's not a good place to start (the
Big
Bang
always seemed to me to jump the gun a bit, not to mention the
origins
of
life).

Let me start with the "Hollowed Out" paper Alfredo just
thoughtfully
sent
around instead. My first impression is that this paper leaves a
really
big
gap between the data and the conclusions, and that this gap is
largely
filled by theory. Here are some examples of what I mean:

a)    "Whereas 'subject position' is given by society, 'identity'
is
self-authored, although it must be recognized by others to be
sustained."
(p. 189)

b)  "It is notable that this construction of a good student, though
familiar, does not make any reference to personal interest,
excitement,
or
engagement in the topics or content-related activities." (193)

c)  "When students' statements such as 'I get it', 'I'm confident',
'I'm
good at this', and  'I can pull this off' are interpreted in the
context
of
the figured world of math or science at the two schools, their
statements
index more than a grade. They reference a meaning system for being
good
in
math or science that includes the actor identity characteristics of
being
able to grasp the subject matter easily, do the work quickly, do it
without
help from others, do it faster than others, and get an A." (193)

In each case, we are told to believe in a theory: "given by
society",
"self-authored", "does not make any reference", "the context of the
figured
world". It's not just that in each case the theory seems to go
against
the
data (although it certainly does in places, such as Lowena's views
as
a
tenth grader). I can always live with a theory that contradicts my
data:
that's what being a rationalist is all about. It's that the theory
contradicts my own personal theories.

I don't believe that identity is self authored, and I also don't
believe
that subject position is given by society as a whole, I think the
word
"good" does include personal interest, excitement, and engagement
as
much
as it includes being able to grasp the subject matter easily, do
the
work
quickly, do it without help from others, do it faster than others
and
get
an A. To me anyway, the key word in the data given in c) is
actually
"I"
and not "it" or "this": the students think they are talking about,
and
therefore probably are actually talking about, a relation between
their
inner states and the activity at hand  or between the activity at
hand
and
the result they get; they are not invoking the figured world of
neoliberal
results and prospects.

But never mind my own theories. Any gap is, after all, a good
opportunity
for theory building. The authors are raising a key issue in both
Vygotsky
and Halliday: when does an interpersonal relation become a
historico-cultural one? That is, when does that 'me" and "you"
relationship
in which I really do have the power to author my identity (I can
make
up
any name I want and, within limits, invent my own history,
particularly
if
I am a backpacker) give way to a job, an address, a number and a
class
over
which I have very little power at all? When does the interpersonal
somehow
become an alien ideational "identity" that confronts me like a
strange
ghost when I look in the mirror?

The authors find this point (in the case of Lorena) somewhere
between
the
beginning of the tenth and the end of the eleventh grade, but I
think
that's just because it's where they are looking. We can probably
find
the
roots of this distinction (between the interpersonal and the
historico-cultural) as far back as we like, right back to
(Vygotsky)
the
moment when the child gives up the "self-authored" language at one
and
takes on the language recognized by others and (Halliday) the
moment
when
the child distinguishes between Attributive identifying clauses
("I'm
confident", "I'm good at this"), material processes ("I can pull
this
off")
and mental ones ("I get it").

(To be continued...but not necessarily by me!)

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil
<a.j.gil@iped.uio.no

wrote:

Dear xmca'ers,


I am excited to announce the next article for discussion, which is
now
available open access at the T&F MCA pages<http://www.tandfonline
.
com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1188962>.


After a really interesting discussion on Zaza's colourful paper
(which
still goes on developed into a discussion on micro- and
ontogenesis),
we
will from next week be looking at an article by Margaret Eisenhart
and
Carrie Allen from the special issue on "Reimagining Science
Education
in
the Neoliberal Global Context". I think the article, as the whole
issue,
offers a very neat example of research trying to tie together
cultural/economical? and developmental aspects (of identity in
this
case).


Margaret has kindly accepted to join the discussion ?after US
elections
(which will surely keep the attention of many of us busy).
Meanwhile, I
share the link<http://www.tandfonline.
com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039
.
2016.1188962>  to the article (see above), and also attach it as
PDF.
??Good read!


Alfredo

















------------------------------

Message: 14
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 18:39:54 +0000
From: Peter Smagorinsky <smago@uga.edu>
Subject: [Xmca-l]  JoLLE's Fall Issue is LIVE!!!
To: "(cdaiute@gc.cuny.edu)" <cdaiute@gc.cuny.edu>, "AERA_
SIG030-ANNOUNCE@LISTSERV. AERA. NET
(AERA_SIG030-ANNOUNCE@LISTSERV.AERA.NET)"
<AERA_SIG030-ANNOUNCE@LISTSERV.AERA.NET>, Allan S Cohen
<acohen@uga.edu>, Bertis Downs <bed@chronictown.com>, Craig Kennedy
<chk@uga.edu>, "Denise A. Spangler" <dspangle@uga.edu>,
"docs@listserv.uga.edu" <docs@listserv.uga.edu>, "eXtended Mind,
Culture, Activity" <xmca@potpourri.ucsd.edu>,
"Hillocks@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU" <Hillocks@listserv.uga.edu>, Jack Parish
<jparish@uga.edu>, Jere W Morehead <morehead@uga.edu>, "JoLLE Editors
(JOLLE-EDITORS@listserv.cc.uga.edu)" <JOLLE-EDITORS@listserv.uga.edu>,
Karl Newell <kmn1@uga.edu>, Noel Gregg <ngregg@uga.edu>, Laura Bierema
<bierema@uga.edu>, "LEGO-L@listserv.uga.edu"
<LEGO-L@listserv.uga.edu>, Libby V Morris <lvmorris@uga.edu>,
"LLEDFACSTAFF-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU" <LLEDFACSTAFF-L@listserv.uga.edu>,
"Maureen.Downey@ajc.com" <Maureen.Downey@ajc.com>,
"NCRLL@lists.service.ohio-state.edu"
<NCRLL@lists.service.ohio-state.edu>, "OP-ED@listserv. uga. edu
(OP-ED@listserv.uga.edu)" <OP-ED@listserv.uga.edu>, Ronald M Cervero
<rcervero@uga.edu>, "'UGADOCS@listserv.uga.edu'"
<UGADOCS@listserv.uga.edu>, "Valerie Strauss
(Valerie.Strauss@washpost.com)" <Valerie.Strauss@washpost.com>, Danny
Martinez <dannycm@me.com>, "Elizabeth Durand" <Sybil.Durand@asu.edu>,
"freedman@berkeley.edu" <freedman@berkeley.edu>, Jerome Morris
<jemorris@uga.edu>, "Juan C. Guerra" <jguerra@u.washington.edu>,
Kimberly Parker <kimpossible97@gmail.com>, Latrice Johnson
<Ljohnson2@bamaed.ua.edu>, "limaryscaraballo@gmail.com"
<limaryscaraballo@gmail.com>, "Maisha T Winn (mtwinn@wisc.edu)"
<mtwinn@wisc.edu>, Maneka Brooks <manekadeanna@gmail.com>, Marc Hill
<mlh@marclamonthill.com>, "Margarita Zisselsberger
(margarita.zisselsberger@gmail.com)"
<margarita.zisselsberger@gmail.com>, Maria Franquiz
<mfranquiz@mail.utexas.edu>, "Mariana Souto-Manning
(Soutomanning@gmail.com)" <Soutomanning@gmail.com>, Melody Zoch
<mpzoch@gmail.com>, "Michele Myers (knowingaka@yahoo.com)"
<knowingaka@yahoo.com>, Sandra Quinones <Quinoness@duq.edu>,
"'sealeyruiz@tc.edu'" <sealeyruiz@tc.edu>, Stuart Greene
<sgreene1@nd.edu>, Sybil Durand <sybildurand@gmail.com>, Theresa
Perry <theresa.perry@simmons.edu>, Tim San Pedro
<timsanpedro@gmail.com>, "Violet Harris" <vjharris@illinois.edu>,
"Willis, Arlette I" <aiwillis@illinois.edu>
Message-ID:
<BN1PR02MB0220A20D4C8DE348C6FE32DA4BE0@BN1PR02MB022.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

We are proud to announce the Fall 2016 issue of the Journal of Language and Literacy Education (Volume 12, Issue 2)! You can find it by clicking on this link: http://jolle.coe.uga.edu/current-issue.



From elementary school-aged readers to university faculty writers, the work presented in this issue seeks to help educators grow a hope for a "viable pluralism backed by a willingness to negotiate differences in world-view" (Bruner, 1990, p. 30). There is work to be done towards this end, and we are proud in this Fall 2016 issue of JoLLE to bring readers examples of the efforts being put forth by educators from many walks of life, in multitudinous settings, and through diverse mediums.



It is our hope that this issue calls to question the stories around us, inviting dialogue, raising questions, and challenging the dominant discourses that construct-and potentially change-our worlds.



PLEASE share this news widely. We look forward to the dialogues this issue will bring.



Thank you,



Nick and Jenn


Nick Thompson & Jenn Whitley, Co-Principal Editors
Heidi Lyn Hadley, Managing Editor
Journal of Language and Literacy Education<http://jolle.coe.uga.edu/>
The University of Georgia
Aderhold 315
Athens, GA 30602
jolle@uga.edu<mailto:jolle@uga.edu>

Follow JoLLE on Twitter: @Jolle_uga
Follow JoLLE on Facebook: Journal of Language & Literacy Education<https://www.facebook.com/JoLLE.UGA?fref=ts>


------------------------------

Message: 15
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 05:29:46 +0000
From: "White, Phillip" <Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID:
<MWHPR05MB3182C4C4AADC09776D2CE83F99B10@MWHPR05MB3182.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"

David, the examples on page 193, students 1, 2 & 3 - aren't these examples of proleptic thought - especially for student 2, who looks at where she is "I have my own standards", a statement of the present, then a looking back at  what has happened, "I like to get straight A's". and then setting a target for the future, "help for like to get in college and stuff, so yeah, I participate in a lot of stuff." ending with a reassertion of present activities to attain future goals.


and there is a preponderance of the use of "I", rather than "you".


i'd give the young people for credit than a myopia focused merely on their age: the business of young people is figuring out what life is all about and how to participate, just as adults and infants and old people like me do.


i'm not convinced that your arguments are supported by the data in this Eisenhard / Allen paper.


phillip

________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> on behalf of David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 1:24:35 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Actually, Henry, I was attacking the idea that tense is an empty mental
space. I guess I am a little like Larry: when we discuss articles I have a
strong tendency to try to make them relevant to what I am doing rather than
to drop what I am doing and go and discuss what everybody else is
discussing. So what I am doing right now is trying to make sense of some
story-telling data where the adults are all over the map on tenses, and the
kids seem to stick to one tense only. The adults are slipping in and out of
mental spaces. The kids are telling stories.

I think the relevance to the article is this: When you look at the way the
article frames institutional practices and figured worlds, we see
prolepsis--a preoccupation with the future. But when we look at what the
kids are doing and saying it is very much in the moment. Is this simply
because mental processes like "like" and "want" tend to take simple present
(because they are less defined than material processes)? Or is it because
while the institutions have the near future firmly in view and the figured
worlds have irrealis in view, the business of young people is youth?

Vygotsky points out that the question the interviewer asks is very much a
part of the data. For example, if you ask a question using "you" you often
get "you" in reply, even if you design your question to get "I".

Q: Why do you want to kill yourself?
A: The same reason everybody wants to kill themselves. You want to find out
if anybody really cares.

To take another example that is probably more relevant to readers: both the
Brexit vote and the American elections are clear examples of statistical
unreliability in that if you tried to repeat the election the morning after
you would probably get an utterly different result. Take all of those black
voters and the real working class voters who voted Obama but couldn't be
bothered for Hillary (not the imaginary "white working class voters" who
work in imaginary industries in Iowa, rural Pennsylvania, North Carolina
and Florida). They might well have behaved rather differently knowing how
imminent the neo-Confederacy really was. This is usually presented as
"buyer's remorse," but it's more than that; the event itself would be part
of its replication. This is something that statistical models that use
standard error of the mean cannot build in (they work on the impossible
idea that you can repeat an event ten or twenty thousand times without any
memory at all).

In the same way, when you interview a group of students together you notice
that they tend to model answers on each other rather than on your question,
and when you interview them separately, you notice that YOU tend to change
your question according to the previous answer you received. On the one
hand, life is not easily distracted by its own future: it is too wholly
there in each moment of existence. On the other hand, each of these moments
includes the previous one, and therefore all the previous ones, in itself.
The past weighs like a nightmare on the brain of the living, and objects in
the rear view mirror are always closer than they appear.

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 10:23 AM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com> wrote:

David,
I was puzzled that you found Langacker to be relevant to this topic, but
the last paragraph of your post makes an important connection between
Langacker and Vygotsky: Both see speech acts as staged?interactants view
themselves as ?on stage?. I think the book by Vera and Reuben is largely
about how differently math is ?staged? by working mathematicians as
contrasted with doing math in school. I think it would be interesting to
analyze how natural language and the language of math scaffold each other
in both contexts. Word problems have been a well-used way of connecting the
two languages; stats and graphs are commonly used in the media to clarify
and elaborate text in articles on economics, presidential elections, and
what not.

I would love to read your ?unpublishable? on Langacker and Halliday on
tense. What I recall from reading Langacker is his interest in ?basic
domains?, starting with the temporal and spatial. Somewhere he has said
that he believes that the temporal domain is the more basic. As you?d
guess, the spatial domain is especially useful in elucidating what he calls
?things? (nouns are conceptually about things); the temporal domain is more
closely connected to what he calls ?processes? wherein he analyzes tense
and aspect.

I think Langacker would agree that his work in cognitive grammar has a
long way to go in contributing to the idea that grammar is usage based,
rather than some autonomous module, but he is working on it. I think there
is a potential for connecting Halliday and Langacker, though I?m not smart
enough to convince you of that evidently. Somehow the connection must be
made by staying close to the data, ?thick description? ethnographers are
fond of saying. I think the article by Carrie and Margaret is raising this
issue.

The ?hollowed out? math curriculum in the article resonates with the
?potholes? you say teachers must watch out for. Some may say that  the
hollowing out is typical even of ?elite? K-12 schools. Some may say that
this is deliberate. I would say my own experience of math in school was
often hollowed out, which I sensed, but didn?t discover until I got to the
?pure math? department in the mid 60s at Univ of Texas at Austin under the
leadership of Robert Lee Moore. He is a main protagonist in Chapter 8 of
Vera?s and Reuben?s book.

I?ll end it there.

Henry




On Nov 15, 2016, at 1:38 PM, David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com> wrote:

Henry:

I just wrote another unpublishable comparing how Langacker and
Halliday treat tense, and I'm starting to come to grips with the
different
theory of experience underlying the two grammars. Langacker somehow sees
it
as creating empty mental space (and aspect as creating space within
space).
Halliday sees tense as a way of abstracting concrete doings and
happenings.
Halliday's tense system is not spatial at all but temporal: it's
temporally
deictic and then temporally recursive: a kind of time machine that
simultaneously transports and orients the speaker either proleptically or
retroleptically. So for example if I say to you that this article we are
discussing is going to have been being discussed for two or three weeks
now, then "is going" is a kind of time machine that takes you into the
future, from which "You are Here" vantage point the article has been
(past)
being discussed (present). Present in the past in the future.

And that got me thinking about theory and practice. It seems to me that
the
they are related, but simultaneously and not sequentially. That is, the
output of one is not the input of the other: they are simply more and
less
abstract ways of looking at one and the same thing. So for example in
this
article the tasks of theory and practice are one and the same: the task
of
theory is really to define as precisely as possible the domain, the
scope,
the range of the inquiry into authoring math and science identities and
the
task of practice is to ask what exactly you want to do in this
domain/scope/range--to try to understand how they are hollowed out a
little
better so that maybe teachers like you and me can help fill the damn
potholes in a little. You can't really do the one without doing the
other:
trying to decide the terrain under study without deciding some task that
you want to do there is like imagining tense as empty mental space and
not
as some actual, concrete doing or happening. Conversely, the way you dig
the hole depends very much on how big and where you want it.

So there are three kinds of mental spaces in the first part of the
article:

a) institutional arrangements (e.g. "priority improvement plans",
career-academy/comprehensive school status STEM tracks, AP classes)
b) figured worlds (e.g. 'good students', and 'don't cares', or what
Eckhart
and McConnell-Ginet called 'jocks', 'nerds',  'burnouts', 'gangbangers')
c) authored identities (i.e. what kids say about themselves and what they
think about themselves)

Now, I think it's possible to make this distinction--but they are
probably
better understood not as mental spaces (in which case they really do
overlap) but rather as doings (or, as is my wont, sayings). Different
people are saying different things: a) is mostly the sayings of the
school
boards and administrators, b) is mostly the sayings of teachers and
groups
of kids, and c) is mostly the sayings of individual students. It's always
tempting for a theory to focus on c), because that's where all the data
is
and it's tempting for practice too, because if you are against what is
happening in a) and in b), that's where the most likely point of
intervention is.

"But the data does suggest that the "figured worlds" are figured by
authored identities--not by institutional arrangements. Is that just an
artefact of the warm empathy of the authors for the words (although maybe
not the exact wordings) of their subjects, or is it real grounds for
hope?

Marx says (beginning of the 18th Brumaire): "*Men make* their own
*history*,
*but they* do *not make* it as *they* please; *they* do *not make* it
under self-selected circumstances, *but* under circumstances existing
already, given and transmitted from the *past*. The tradition of all dead
generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living."

It's a good theory, i.e. at once a truth and a tragedy. And it's a
theory treats time as time and not as an empty stage.

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 9:39 AM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com>
wrote:

All,
I have read only part of Margaret?s and Carrie?s article, but I wanted
to
jump in with a reference to a book by Vygotskian Vera John-Steiner and
her
mathematician husband Reuben Hersh: Loving and Hating Mathematics:
Challenging the Mathematical Life. Huw?s point (v) which refers to
?identities of independence and finding out sustainable within these
settings (school math classes) spent high school. Vera?s and Reuben?s
book
contrasts what it?s like to work and think like a real (working)
mathematician (what I think Huw is talking about) and what we call
mathematics in the classroom. Chapter 8 of the book "The Teaching of
Mathematics: Fierce or Friendly?? is interesting reading and could be
relevant to this discussion.
Henry


On Nov 13, 2016, at 2:47 PM, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
wrote:

Dear Margaret

My reading has not been a particularly careful one, so I leave it to
yourselves to judge the usefulness of these points.

i) Whether arguments can be made (for or against) a nebulous term
(neoliberalism) with its political associations, by arguments about
identity that are themselves not deliberately political.

ii) Whether it is better not to focus essentially on the place of
identity.

iii) Whether it is worthwhile contrasting the role/identity of "model
student" with "identities" that anyone excelling at STEM subjects would
relate to.  On this, I would point to the importance with identifying
with
appreciations for "awareness of not knowing" and "eagerness to find
out"
(which also entails learning about what it means to know).

iv) Whether you detect that to the degree that an identity is
foregrounded
in the actual practice of STEM work (rather than as background social
appeasement), it is being faked? That is, someone is playing at the
role
rather than actually committing themselves to finding out about
unknowns.

v) Whether, in fact, there is actually a "tiered" or varied set of
acceptable "identities" within the settings you explored, such that
identities of independence and finding out are sustainable within these
settings, possibly representing a necessary fudge to deal with the
requirements placed upon the institutions.

Best,
Huw

On 12 November 2016 at 20:30, Margaret A Eisenhart <
margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu> wrote:

Hello Everyone,

Carrie and I are newcomers to this list, and we thank you for the
opportunity to engage with you about our article, ?Hollowed Out.?  We
also
hope for your patience as we learn to participate in the stream of
thinking here!

Given the comments so far, we are intrigued by others? ideas about the
link between our theory and our data.  On this topic, we would like to
make clear that we did not intend to suggest that the students were
making
sense of their lives in the same way that we interpreted them through
the
lens of our theory. Our claim is that opportunities and figured worlds
are
resources for identity and that the students' words to us reflected
perspectives consistent with neoliberalism, with some pretty serious
implications. Like Phillip White, we are interested in what theories
others would use to explain the data we presented.

Like Mike Cole, we are also intrigued by the prospect of ?exemplars?
we
might turn to.

We look forward to hearing your thoughts.


Margaret Eisenhart



On 11/11/16, 11:35 AM, "lpscholar2@gmail.com" <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
wrote:

A resumption in exploring the meaning and sense (preferably sens as
this
term draws attention to movement and direction within meaning and
sense)
of this month?s article.
The paper begins with the title and the image of (hollowed-out)
meaning
and sense that is impoverished and holds few resources for
developing a
deeper sens of identity.
The article concludes with the implication that the work of social
justice within educational institutions is not about improving
educational outcome in neoliberal terms; the implications of the
study
are about *reorganizing* the identities ? particulary
identities-with-standind that young people are *exposed* to, can
articulate, and can act on (in school and beyond).

I would say this is taking an ethical stand?.

I will now turn to page 189 and the section (identity-in-context) to
amplify the notion of (cultural imaginary) and (figured worlds).
This imaginary being the site or location of history-in-person. That
is
identity is a form of legacy (or *text*) ABOUT the kind of person one
is
or has become in responding to (external) circumstances.
These external circumstances are EXPERIENCED primarily in the
organization of local practices and cultural imaginaries (figured
worlds)
that circulate and *give meaning* (and sens) to local practices

Figured worlds are interpreted following Holland as socially and
culturally *realms of interpretation* and certain players are
recognized
as (exemplars).

As such cultural, social, historical, dialogical psychological
(imaginaries) are handmaidens of the imaginal *giving meaning* to
*what*
goes on in the directions we take together.

Two key terms i highlight are (exemplars) and (direction) we take.
The realm of the ethical turn
What are the markers and signposts emerging in the deeper ethical
turn
that offers more than a hollowed-out answer.
Are there any *ghost* stories of exemplars we can turn to as well as
living exemplars? By ghosts i mean ancestors who continue as beacons
of
hope exemplifying *who* we are.

My way into exploring the impoverished narratives of the neoliberal
imaginary and reawakening exemplary ancestors or ghosts from their
slumber to help guide us through these multiple imaginaries

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: mike cole
Sent: November 9, 2016 3:04 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Alfredo--

for any who missed the initial article sent out, you might send them
here:

http://lchc.ucsd.edu/mca/

I am meeting shortly with Bruce. A list of improvements to web site
welcome, although not clear how long they will take to implement.

mike

On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 2:38 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil <
a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
wrote:

Dear all,

last week I announced MCA's 3rd Issue article for discussion:

"Hollowed Out: Meaning and Authoring of High School Math and Science
Identities in the Context of Neoliberal Reform," by Margaret
Eisenhart
and
Carrie Allen.

The article is open access and will continue to be so during the
discussion time at this link.

Thanks to everyone who begun the discussion early after I shared the
link
last week, and sorry that we sort of brought the discussion to a
halt
until
the authors were ready to discuss. I have now sent Margaret and
Carrie
the
posts that were produced then so that they could catch up, but I
also
invited them to feel free to move on an introduce themselves as soon
as
they ??wanted.

It is not without some doubts that one introduces a discussion of an
article in a moment that some US media have called as "An American
Tragedy"
and other international editorials are describing as "a dark day for
the
world." But I believe that the paper may indeed offer some grounds
for
discuss important issues that are at stake in everyone's home now,
as
Mike
recently describes in a touching post on the "local state of mind"
and
that
have to do with identity and its connection to a neoliberal
organisation of
the economy. It is not difficult to link neoliberalism to Trump's
phenomenon and how it pervades very intimate aspects of everyday
life.

If this was not enough, I think the authors' background on women's
scholar
and professional careers in science is totally relevant to the
discussions
on gendered discourse we've been having. Now without halts, I hope
this
thread gives joys and wisdom to all.

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
edu>
on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
Sent: 02 November 2016 01:48
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Thanks Mike and everyone! I am sure Margaret (and many of those
still
reading) will be happy to be able to catch up when she joins us next
week!
Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
edu>
on behalf of mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu>
Sent: 02 November 2016 01:32
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Gentlemen -- I believe Fernando told us that Margaret would be
able to join this discussion next week. Just a quick glance at the
discussion so far indicates that there is a lot there to wade into
before she has had a word.

I am only part way through the article, expecting to have until next
week
to think about it.

May I suggest your forbearance while this slow-poke tries to catch
up!

mike

On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 3:38 PM, White, Phillip
<Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu

wrote:

David & Larry, everyone else ...

by way of introduction, Margaret and Carrie point out that the data
in
this paper emerged through a three year study - which was the
processes
of
how students of color, interested in STEM, responded to the
externally
imposed neoliberal requirements. they framed their study using
theories
of
social practices on how identity developed in context.


David, you reject the theories.  or so i understand your position.
as
you
write: It's that the theory

contradicts my own personal theories.

are you also rejecting the data as well?  it seems as if you are
suggesting this when you write: The authors find this point (in the
case
of
Lorena) somewhere between the
beginning of the tenth and the end of the eleventh grade, but I
think
that's just because it's where they are looking.

you reject the narrative of Lorena on the grounds that it could be
traced
back to infancy.

do you also reject the identical narrative found in the adult
practitioners within the context of the high schools?  that this
narrative
is not one of a contemporary neoliberal practice but rather could
be
traced
back to, say, the mid 1600's new england colonies, in particular
massachusettes, where the practices of public american education
began?

to explain the data that emerged from the Eisenhart/Allen study,
what
theories would you have used?

phillip

________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 7:03 AM
To: David Kellogg; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Margaret and Carrie,
Thank you for this wonderful paper that explains the shallow
*hollowed-out* way of forming identity as a form of meaning and
sense. I
will add the French word *sens* which always includes *direction*
within
meaning and sense.

David, your response that what our theory makes sens of depends on
where
we are looking makes sens to me.
You put in question the moment when the interpersonal (you and me)
way of
authoring sens *shifts* or turns to cultural and historical ways of
being
immersed in sens. The article refers to the *historical-in-person*.

My further comment, where I am looking) is in the description of
the
sociocultural as a response to *externally changing circumstances*
as
the
process of *learning as becoming* (see page 190).

The article says:

This process is what Lave and Wenger (1991) and other Sociocultural
researchers have referred to as *learning as becoming,* that is,
learning
that occurs as one becomes a certain kind of person in a particular
context.  Identities conceived in this way are not stable or fixed.
As
*external circumstances* affecting a person change, so too may the
identities that are produced *in response*. (Holland & Skinner,
1997).

In this version of *history-in-person* the identity processes that
start
the process moving in a neoliberal *direction* are *external*
circumstances. I am not questioning this version of the importance
of
the
external but do question if looking primarily or primordially to
the
external circumstances as central if we are not leaving a gap in
our
notions of *sens*.

If by looking or highlighting or illuminating the *external* and
highly
visible acts of the actual we are leaving a gap in actual*ity.
A gap in *sens*.

To be continued by others...

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: David Kellogg
Sent: October 31, 2016 2:15 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

I was turning Mike's request--for a short explanation of the
Halliday/Vygotsky interface--over in my mind for a few days, unsure
where
to start. I usually decide these difficult "where to start"
questions
in
the easiest possible way, with whatever I happen to be working on.
In
this
case it's the origins of language in a one year old, a moment which
is
almost as mysterious to me as the origins of life or the Big Bang.
But
perhaps for that very reason it's not a good place to start (the
Big
Bang
always seemed to me to jump the gun a bit, not to mention the
origins
of
life).

Let me start with the "Hollowed Out" paper Alfredo just
thoughtfully
sent
around instead. My first impression is that this paper leaves a
really
big
gap between the data and the conclusions, and that this gap is
largely
filled by theory. Here are some examples of what I mean:

a)    "Whereas 'subject position' is given by society, 'identity'
is
self-authored, although it must be recognized by others to be
sustained."
(p. 189)

b)  "It is notable that this construction of a good student, though
familiar, does not make any reference to personal interest,
excitement,
or
engagement in the topics or content-related activities." (193)

c)  "When students' statements such as 'I get it', 'I'm confident',
'I'm
good at this', and  'I can pull this off' are interpreted in the
context
of
the figured world of math or science at the two schools, their
statements
index more than a grade. They reference a meaning system for being
good
in
math or science that includes the actor identity characteristics of
being
able to grasp the subject matter easily, do the work quickly, do it
without
help from others, do it faster than others, and get an A." (193)

In each case, we are told to believe in a theory: "given by
society",
"self-authored", "does not make any reference", "the context of the
figured
world". It's not just that in each case the theory seems to go
against
the
data (although it certainly does in places, such as Lowena's views
as
a
tenth grader). I can always live with a theory that contradicts my
data:
that's what being a rationalist is all about. It's that the theory
contradicts my own personal theories.

I don't believe that identity is self authored, and I also don't
believe
that subject position is given by society as a whole, I think the
word
"good" does include personal interest, excitement, and engagement
as
much
as it includes being able to grasp the subject matter easily, do
the
work
quickly, do it without help from others, do it faster than others
and
get
an A. To me anyway, the key word in the data given in c) is
actually
"I"
and not "it" or "this": the students think they are talking about,
and
therefore probably are actually talking about, a relation between
their
inner states and the activity at hand  or between the activity at
hand
and
the result they get; they are not invoking the figured world of
neoliberal
results and prospects.

But never mind my own theories. Any gap is, after all, a good
opportunity
for theory building. The authors are raising a key issue in both
Vygotsky
and Halliday: when does an interpersonal relation become a
historico-cultural one? That is, when does that 'me" and "you"
relationship
in which I really do have the power to author my identity (I can
make
up
any name I want and, within limits, invent my own history,
particularly
if
I am a backpacker) give way to a job, an address, a number and a
class
over
which I have very little power at all? When does the interpersonal
somehow
become an alien ideational "identity" that confronts me like a
strange
ghost when I look in the mirror?

The authors find this point (in the case of Lorena) somewhere
between
the
beginning of the tenth and the end of the eleventh grade, but I
think
that's just because it's where they are looking. We can probably
find
the
roots of this distinction (between the interpersonal and the
historico-cultural) as far back as we like, right back to
(Vygotsky)
the
moment when the child gives up the "self-authored" language at one
and
takes on the language recognized by others and (Halliday) the
moment
when
the child distinguishes between Attributive identifying clauses
("I'm
confident", "I'm good at this"), material processes ("I can pull
this
off")
and mental ones ("I get it").

(To be continued...but not necessarily by me!)

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil
<a.j.gil@iped.uio.no

wrote:

Dear xmca'ers,


I am excited to announce the next article for discussion, which is
now
available open access at the T&F MCA pages<http://www.tandfonline
.
com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1188962>.


After a really interesting discussion on Zaza's colourful paper
(which
still goes on developed into a discussion on micro- and
ontogenesis),
we
will from next week be looking at an article by Margaret Eisenhart
and
Carrie Allen from the special issue on "Reimagining Science
Education
in
the Neoliberal Global Context". I think the article, as the whole
issue,
offers a very neat example of research trying to tie together
cultural/economical? and developmental aspects (of identity in
this
case).


Margaret has kindly accepted to join the discussion ?after US
elections
(which will surely keep the attention of many of us busy).
Meanwhile, I
share the link<http://www.tandfonline.
com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039
.
2016.1188962>  to the article (see above), and also attach it as
PDF.
??Good read!


Alfredo

















------------------------------

Message: 16
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 07:37:54 +0000
From: Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID: <1479368272828.93794@iped.uio.no>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"

What touches me of the article is something that perhaps relates to this tension that I find between David's (individualistic?) approach to prolepsis in his post (David, I thought, and continue thinking, that prolepsis refers to something that emerges in the relation between two, not something that either is present or absent within a person), and Phillip's view of young people figuring out what life is all about just as all we do. And so here (and in any neoliberal school context) we have wonderfully beautiful young people more or less interested in science or in maths, but all eager to live a life and evolve as best as they can (whatever that best may mean for each one). And then you see how the history and context that they come into gives them everything they need to develop motives and goals; to then make sure that the majority of them won't make it so that only a few privileged (or in the case of Margaret's paper none, according to the authors) succeed. And then what remains is not just a hollowed-out science and math identity, but also a hollowed-out soul that had illusion and now just doesn't. Not only a failure to provide opportunities to learners to become anything(one) good about science and math, but also a robbing of other possible paths of development that may had grown in people if they had been hanging out with some other better company. Do we have a term to refer to the opposite of a zone of proximal development? Not just the absence of it, but the strangling of it.

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> on behalf of White, Phillip <Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu>
Sent: 17 November 2016 06:29
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

David, the examples on page 193, students 1, 2 & 3 - aren't these examples of proleptic thought - especially for student 2, who looks at where she is "I have my own standards", a statement of the present, then a looking back at  what has happened, "I like to get straight A's". and then setting a target for the future, "help for like to get in college and stuff, so yeah, I participate in a lot of stuff." ending with a reassertion of present activities to attain future goals.


and there is a preponderance of the use of "I", rather than "you".


i'd give the young people for credit than a myopia focused merely on their age: the business of young people is figuring out what life is all about and how to participate, just as adults and infants and old people like me do.


i'm not convinced that your arguments are supported by the data in this Eisenhard / Allen paper.


phillip

________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> on behalf of David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 1:24:35 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Actually, Henry, I was attacking the idea that tense is an empty mental
space. I guess I am a little like Larry: when we discuss articles I have a
strong tendency to try to make them relevant to what I am doing rather than
to drop what I am doing and go and discuss what everybody else is
discussing. So what I am doing right now is trying to make sense of some
story-telling data where the adults are all over the map on tenses, and the
kids seem to stick to one tense only. The adults are slipping in and out of
mental spaces. The kids are telling stories.

I think the relevance to the article is this: When you look at the way the
article frames institutional practices and figured worlds, we see
prolepsis--a preoccupation with the future. But when we look at what the
kids are doing and saying it is very much in the moment. Is this simply
because mental processes like "like" and "want" tend to take simple present
(because they are less defined than material processes)? Or is it because
while the institutions have the near future firmly in view and the figured
worlds have irrealis in view, the business of young people is youth?

Vygotsky points out that the question the interviewer asks is very much a
part of the data. For example, if you ask a question using "you" you often
get "you" in reply, even if you design your question to get "I".

Q: Why do you want to kill yourself?
A: The same reason everybody wants to kill themselves. You want to find out
if anybody really cares.

To take another example that is probably more relevant to readers: both the
Brexit vote and the American elections are clear examples of statistical
unreliability in that if you tried to repeat the election the morning after
you would probably get an utterly different result. Take all of those black
voters and the real working class voters who voted Obama but couldn't be
bothered for Hillary (not the imaginary "white working class voters" who
work in imaginary industries in Iowa, rural Pennsylvania, North Carolina
and Florida). They might well have behaved rather differently knowing how
imminent the neo-Confederacy really was. This is usually presented as
"buyer's remorse," but it's more than that; the event itself would be part
of its replication. This is something that statistical models that use
standard error of the mean cannot build in (they work on the impossible
idea that you can repeat an event ten or twenty thousand times without any
memory at all).

In the same way, when you interview a group of students together you notice
that they tend to model answers on each other rather than on your question,
and when you interview them separately, you notice that YOU tend to change
your question according to the previous answer you received. On the one
hand, life is not easily distracted by its own future: it is too wholly
there in each moment of existence. On the other hand, each of these moments
includes the previous one, and therefore all the previous ones, in itself.
The past weighs like a nightmare on the brain of the living, and objects in
the rear view mirror are always closer than they appear.

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 10:23 AM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com> wrote:

David,
I was puzzled that you found Langacker to be relevant to this topic, but
the last paragraph of your post makes an important connection between
Langacker and Vygotsky: Both see speech acts as staged?interactants view
themselves as ?on stage?. I think the book by Vera and Reuben is largely
about how differently math is ?staged? by working mathematicians as
contrasted with doing math in school. I think it would be interesting to
analyze how natural language and the language of math scaffold each other
in both contexts. Word problems have been a well-used way of connecting the
two languages; stats and graphs are commonly used in the media to clarify
and elaborate text in articles on economics, presidential elections, and
what not.

I would love to read your ?unpublishable? on Langacker and Halliday on
tense. What I recall from reading Langacker is his interest in ?basic
domains?, starting with the temporal and spatial. Somewhere he has said
that he believes that the temporal domain is the more basic. As you?d
guess, the spatial domain is especially useful in elucidating what he calls
?things? (nouns are conceptually about things); the temporal domain is more
closely connected to what he calls ?processes? wherein he analyzes tense
and aspect.

I think Langacker would agree that his work in cognitive grammar has a
long way to go in contributing to the idea that grammar is usage based,
rather than some autonomous module, but he is working on it. I think there
is a potential for connecting Halliday and Langacker, though I?m not smart
enough to convince you of that evidently. Somehow the connection must be
made by staying close to the data, ?thick description? ethnographers are
fond of saying. I think the article by Carrie and Margaret is raising this
issue.

The ?hollowed out? math curriculum in the article resonates with the
?potholes? you say teachers must watch out for. Some may say that  the
hollowing out is typical even of ?elite? K-12 schools. Some may say that
this is deliberate. I would say my own experience of math in school was
often hollowed out, which I sensed, but didn?t discover until I got to the
?pure math? department in the mid 60s at Univ of Texas at Austin under the
leadership of Robert Lee Moore. He is a main protagonist in Chapter 8 of
Vera?s and Reuben?s book.

I?ll end it there.

Henry




On Nov 15, 2016, at 1:38 PM, David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com> wrote:

Henry:

I just wrote another unpublishable comparing how Langacker and
Halliday treat tense, and I'm starting to come to grips with the
different
theory of experience underlying the two grammars. Langacker somehow sees
it
as creating empty mental space (and aspect as creating space within
space).
Halliday sees tense as a way of abstracting concrete doings and
happenings.
Halliday's tense system is not spatial at all but temporal: it's
temporally
deictic and then temporally recursive: a kind of time machine that
simultaneously transports and orients the speaker either proleptically or
retroleptically. So for example if I say to you that this article we are
discussing is going to have been being discussed for two or three weeks
now, then "is going" is a kind of time machine that takes you into the
future, from which "You are Here" vantage point the article has been
(past)
being discussed (present). Present in the past in the future.

And that got me thinking about theory and practice. It seems to me that
the
they are related, but simultaneously and not sequentially. That is, the
output of one is not the input of the other: they are simply more and
less
abstract ways of looking at one and the same thing. So for example in
this
article the tasks of theory and practice are one and the same: the task
of
theory is really to define as precisely as possible the domain, the
scope,
the range of the inquiry into authoring math and science identities and
the
task of practice is to ask what exactly you want to do in this
domain/scope/range--to try to understand how they are hollowed out a
little
better so that maybe teachers like you and me can help fill the damn
potholes in a little. You can't really do the one without doing the
other:
trying to decide the terrain under study without deciding some task that
you want to do there is like imagining tense as empty mental space and
not
as some actual, concrete doing or happening. Conversely, the way you dig
the hole depends very much on how big and where you want it.

So there are three kinds of mental spaces in the first part of the
article:

a) institutional arrangements (e.g. "priority improvement plans",
career-academy/comprehensive school status STEM tracks, AP classes)
b) figured worlds (e.g. 'good students', and 'don't cares', or what
Eckhart
and McConnell-Ginet called 'jocks', 'nerds',  'burnouts', 'gangbangers')
c) authored identities (i.e. what kids say about themselves and what they
think about themselves)

Now, I think it's possible to make this distinction--but they are
probably
better understood not as mental spaces (in which case they really do
overlap) but rather as doings (or, as is my wont, sayings). Different
people are saying different things: a) is mostly the sayings of the
school
boards and administrators, b) is mostly the sayings of teachers and
groups
of kids, and c) is mostly the sayings of individual students. It's always
tempting for a theory to focus on c), because that's where all the data
is
and it's tempting for practice too, because if you are against what is
happening in a) and in b), that's where the most likely point of
intervention is.

"But the data does suggest that the "figured worlds" are figured by
authored identities--not by institutional arrangements. Is that just an
artefact of the warm empathy of the authors for the words (although maybe
not the exact wordings) of their subjects, or is it real grounds for
hope?

Marx says (beginning of the 18th Brumaire): "*Men make* their own
*history*,
*but they* do *not make* it as *they* please; *they* do *not make* it
under self-selected circumstances, *but* under circumstances existing
already, given and transmitted from the *past*. The tradition of all dead
generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living."

It's a good theory, i.e. at once a truth and a tragedy. And it's a
theory treats time as time and not as an empty stage.

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 9:39 AM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com>
wrote:

All,
I have read only part of Margaret?s and Carrie?s article, but I wanted
to
jump in with a reference to a book by Vygotskian Vera John-Steiner and
her
mathematician husband Reuben Hersh: Loving and Hating Mathematics:
Challenging the Mathematical Life. Huw?s point (v) which refers to
?identities of independence and finding out sustainable within these
settings (school math classes) spent high school. Vera?s and Reuben?s
book
contrasts what it?s like to work and think like a real (working)
mathematician (what I think Huw is talking about) and what we call
mathematics in the classroom. Chapter 8 of the book "The Teaching of
Mathematics: Fierce or Friendly?? is interesting reading and could be
relevant to this discussion.
Henry


On Nov 13, 2016, at 2:47 PM, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
wrote:

Dear Margaret

My reading has not been a particularly careful one, so I leave it to
yourselves to judge the usefulness of these points.

i) Whether arguments can be made (for or against) a nebulous term
(neoliberalism) with its political associations, by arguments about
identity that are themselves not deliberately political.

ii) Whether it is better not to focus essentially on the place of
identity.

iii) Whether it is worthwhile contrasting the role/identity of "model
student" with "identities" that anyone excelling at STEM subjects would
relate to.  On this, I would point to the importance with identifying
with
appreciations for "awareness of not knowing" and "eagerness to find
out"
(which also entails learning about what it means to know).

iv) Whether you detect that to the degree that an identity is
foregrounded
in the actual practice of STEM work (rather than as background social
appeasement), it is being faked? That is, someone is playing at the
role
rather than actually committing themselves to finding out about
unknowns.

v) Whether, in fact, there is actually a "tiered" or varied set of
acceptable "identities" within the settings you explored, such that
identities of independence and finding out are sustainable within these
settings, possibly representing a necessary fudge to deal with the
requirements placed upon the institutions.

Best,
Huw

On 12 November 2016 at 20:30, Margaret A Eisenhart <
margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu> wrote:

Hello Everyone,

Carrie and I are newcomers to this list, and we thank you for the
opportunity to engage with you about our article, ?Hollowed Out.?  We
also
hope for your patience as we learn to participate in the stream of
thinking here!

Given the comments so far, we are intrigued by others? ideas about the
link between our theory and our data.  On this topic, we would like to
make clear that we did not intend to suggest that the students were
making
sense of their lives in the same way that we interpreted them through
the
lens of our theory. Our claim is that opportunities and figured worlds
are
resources for identity and that the students' words to us reflected
perspectives consistent with neoliberalism, with some pretty serious
implications. Like Phillip White, we are interested in what theories
others would use to explain the data we presented.

Like Mike Cole, we are also intrigued by the prospect of ?exemplars?
we
might turn to.

We look forward to hearing your thoughts.


Margaret Eisenhart



On 11/11/16, 11:35 AM, "lpscholar2@gmail.com" <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
wrote:

A resumption in exploring the meaning and sense (preferably sens as
this
term draws attention to movement and direction within meaning and
sense)
of this month?s article.
The paper begins with the title and the image of (hollowed-out)
meaning
and sense that is impoverished and holds few resources for
developing a
deeper sens of identity.
The article concludes with the implication that the work of social
justice within educational institutions is not about improving
educational outcome in neoliberal terms; the implications of the
study
are about *reorganizing* the identities ? particulary
identities-with-standind that young people are *exposed* to, can
articulate, and can act on (in school and beyond).

I would say this is taking an ethical stand?.

I will now turn to page 189 and the section (identity-in-context) to
amplify the notion of (cultural imaginary) and (figured worlds).
This imaginary being the site or location of history-in-person. That
is
identity is a form of legacy (or *text*) ABOUT the kind of person one
is
or has become in responding to (external) circumstances.
These external circumstances are EXPERIENCED primarily in the
organization of local practices and cultural imaginaries (figured
worlds)
that circulate and *give meaning* (and sens) to local practices

Figured worlds are interpreted following Holland as socially and
culturally *realms of interpretation* and certain players are
recognized
as (exemplars).

As such cultural, social, historical, dialogical psychological
(imaginaries) are handmaidens of the imaginal *giving meaning* to
*what*
goes on in the directions we take together.

Two key terms i highlight are (exemplars) and (direction) we take.
The realm of the ethical turn
What are the markers and signposts emerging in the deeper ethical
turn
that offers more than a hollowed-out answer.
Are there any *ghost* stories of exemplars we can turn to as well as
living exemplars? By ghosts i mean ancestors who continue as beacons
of
hope exemplifying *who* we are.

My way into exploring the impoverished narratives of the neoliberal
imaginary and reawakening exemplary ancestors or ghosts from their
slumber to help guide us through these multiple imaginaries

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: mike cole
Sent: November 9, 2016 3:04 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Alfredo--

for any who missed the initial article sent out, you might send them
here:

http://lchc.ucsd.edu/mca/

I am meeting shortly with Bruce. A list of improvements to web site
welcome, although not clear how long they will take to implement.

mike

On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 2:38 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil <
a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
wrote:

Dear all,

last week I announced MCA's 3rd Issue article for discussion:

"Hollowed Out: Meaning and Authoring of High School Math and Science
Identities in the Context of Neoliberal Reform," by Margaret
Eisenhart
and
Carrie Allen.

The article is open access and will continue to be so during the
discussion time at this link.

Thanks to everyone who begun the discussion early after I shared the
link
last week, and sorry that we sort of brought the discussion to a
halt
until
the authors were ready to discuss. I have now sent Margaret and
Carrie
the
posts that were produced then so that they could catch up, but I
also
invited them to feel free to move on an introduce themselves as soon
as
they ??wanted.

It is not without some doubts that one introduces a discussion of an
article in a moment that some US media have called as "An American
Tragedy"
and other international editorials are describing as "a dark day for
the
world." But I believe that the paper may indeed offer some grounds
for
discuss important issues that are at stake in everyone's home now,
as
Mike
recently describes in a touching post on the "local state of mind"
and
that
have to do with identity and its connection to a neoliberal
organisation of
the economy. It is not difficult to link neoliberalism to Trump's
phenomenon and how it pervades very intimate aspects of everyday
life.

If this was not enough, I think the authors' background on women's
scholar
and professional careers in science is totally relevant to the
discussions
on gendered discourse we've been having. Now without halts, I hope
this
thread gives joys and wisdom to all.

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
edu>
on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
Sent: 02 November 2016 01:48
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Thanks Mike and everyone! I am sure Margaret (and many of those
still
reading) will be happy to be able to catch up when she joins us next
week!
Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
edu>
on behalf of mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu>
Sent: 02 November 2016 01:32
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Gentlemen -- I believe Fernando told us that Margaret would be
able to join this discussion next week. Just a quick glance at the
discussion so far indicates that there is a lot there to wade into
before she has had a word.

I am only part way through the article, expecting to have until next
week
to think about it.

May I suggest your forbearance while this slow-poke tries to catch
up!

mike

On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 3:38 PM, White, Phillip
<Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu

wrote:

David & Larry, everyone else ...

by way of introduction, Margaret and Carrie point out that the data
in
this paper emerged through a three year study - which was the
processes
of
how students of color, interested in STEM, responded to the
externally
imposed neoliberal requirements. they framed their study using
theories
of
social practices on how identity developed in context.


David, you reject the theories.  or so i understand your position.
as
you
write: It's that the theory

contradicts my own personal theories.

are you also rejecting the data as well?  it seems as if you are
suggesting this when you write: The authors find this point (in the
case
of
Lorena) somewhere between the
beginning of the tenth and the end of the eleventh grade, but I
think
that's just because it's where they are looking.

you reject the narrative of Lorena on the grounds that it could be
traced
back to infancy.

do you also reject the identical narrative found in the adult
practitioners within the context of the high schools?  that this
narrative
is not one of a contemporary neoliberal practice but rather could
be
traced
back to, say, the mid 1600's new england colonies, in particular
massachusettes, where the practices of public american education
began?

to explain the data that emerged from the Eisenhart/Allen study,
what
theories would you have used?

phillip

________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 7:03 AM
To: David Kellogg; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Margaret and Carrie,
Thank you for this wonderful paper that explains the shallow
*hollowed-out* way of forming identity as a form of meaning and
sense. I
will add the French word *sens* which always includes *direction*
within
meaning and sense.

David, your response that what our theory makes sens of depends on
where
we are looking makes sens to me.
You put in question the moment when the interpersonal (you and me)
way of
authoring sens *shifts* or turns to cultural and historical ways of
being
immersed in sens. The article refers to the *historical-in-person*.

My further comment, where I am looking) is in the description of
the
sociocultural as a response to *externally changing circumstances*
as
the
process of *learning as becoming* (see page 190).

The article says:

This process is what Lave and Wenger (1991) and other Sociocultural
researchers have referred to as *learning as becoming,* that is,
learning
that occurs as one becomes a certain kind of person in a particular
context.  Identities conceived in this way are not stable or fixed.
As
*external circumstances* affecting a person change, so too may the
identities that are produced *in response*. (Holland & Skinner,
1997).

In this version of *history-in-person* the identity processes that
start
the process moving in a neoliberal *direction* are *external*
circumstances. I am not questioning this version of the importance
of
the
external but do question if looking primarily or primordially to
the
external circumstances as central if we are not leaving a gap in
our
notions of *sens*.

If by looking or highlighting or illuminating the *external* and
highly
visible acts of the actual we are leaving a gap in actual*ity.
A gap in *sens*.

To be continued by others...

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: David Kellogg
Sent: October 31, 2016 2:15 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

I was turning Mike's request--for a short explanation of the
Halliday/Vygotsky interface--over in my mind for a few days, unsure
where
to start. I usually decide these difficult "where to start"
questions
in
the easiest possible way, with whatever I happen to be working on.
In
this
case it's the origins of language in a one year old, a moment which
is
almost as mysterious to me as the origins of life or the Big Bang.
But
perhaps for that very reason it's not a good place to start (the
Big
Bang
always seemed to me to jump the gun a bit, not to mention the
origins
of
life).

Let me start with the "Hollowed Out" paper Alfredo just
thoughtfully
sent
around instead. My first impression is that this paper leaves a
really
big
gap between the data and the conclusions, and that this gap is
largely
filled by theory. Here are some examples of what I mean:

a)    "Whereas 'subject position' is given by society, 'identity'
is
self-authored, although it must be recognized by others to be
sustained."
(p. 189)

b)  "It is notable that this construction of a good student, though
familiar, does not make any reference to personal interest,
excitement,
or
engagement in the topics or content-related activities." (193)

c)  "When students' statements such as 'I get it', 'I'm confident',
'I'm
good at this', and  'I can pull this off' are interpreted in the
context
of
the figured world of math or science at the two schools, their
statements
index more than a grade. They reference a meaning system for being
good
in
math or science that includes the actor identity characteristics of
being
able to grasp the subject matter easily, do the work quickly, do it
without
help from others, do it faster than others, and get an A." (193)

In each case, we are told to believe in a theory: "given by
society",
"self-authored", "does not make any reference", "the context of the
figured
world". It's not just that in each case the theory seems to go
against
the
data (although it certainly does in places, such as Lowena's views
as
a
tenth grader). I can always live with a theory that contradicts my
data:
that's what being a rationalist is all about. It's that the theory
contradicts my own personal theories.

I don't believe that identity is self authored, and I also don't
believe
that subject position is given by society as a whole, I think the
word
"good" does include personal interest, excitement, and engagement
as
much
as it includes being able to grasp the subject matter easily, do
the
work
quickly, do it without help from others, do it faster than others
and
get
an A. To me anyway, the key word in the data given in c) is
actually
"I"
and not "it" or "this": the students think they are talking about,
and
therefore probably are actually talking about, a relation between
their
inner states and the activity at hand  or between the activity at
hand
and
the result they get; they are not invoking the figured world of
neoliberal
results and prospects.

But never mind my own theories. Any gap is, after all, a good
opportunity
for theory building. The authors are raising a key issue in both
Vygotsky
and Halliday: when does an interpersonal relation become a
historico-cultural one? That is, when does that 'me" and "you"
relationship
in which I really do have the power to author my identity (I can
make
up
any name I want and, within limits, invent my own history,
particularly
if
I am a backpacker) give way to a job, an address, a number and a
class
over
which I have very little power at all? When does the interpersonal
somehow
become an alien ideational "identity" that confronts me like a
strange
ghost when I look in the mirror?

The authors find this point (in the case of Lorena) somewhere
between
the
beginning of the tenth and the end of the eleventh grade, but I
think
that's just because it's where they are looking. We can probably
find
the
roots of this distinction (between the interpersonal and the
historico-cultural) as far back as we like, right back to
(Vygotsky)
the
moment when the child gives up the "self-authored" language at one
and
takes on the language recognized by others and (Halliday) the
moment
when
the child distinguishes between Attributive identifying clauses
("I'm
confident", "I'm good at this"), material processes ("I can pull
this
off")
and mental ones ("I get it").

(To be continued...but not necessarily by me!)

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil
<a.j.gil@iped.uio.no

wrote:

Dear xmca'ers,


I am excited to announce the next article for discussion, which is
now
available open access at the T&F MCA pages<http://www.tandfonline
.
com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1188962>.


After a really interesting discussion on Zaza's colourful paper
(which
still goes on developed into a discussion on micro- and
ontogenesis),
we
will from next week be looking at an article by Margaret Eisenhart
and
Carrie Allen from the special issue on "Reimagining Science
Education
in
the Neoliberal Global Context". I think the article, as the whole
issue,
offers a very neat example of research trying to tie together
cultural/economical? and developmental aspects (of identity in
this
case).


Margaret has kindly accepted to join the discussion ?after US
elections
(which will surely keep the attention of many of us busy).
Meanwhile, I
share the link<http://www.tandfonline.
com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039
.
2016.1188962>  to the article (see above), and also attach it as
PDF.
??Good read!


Alfredo

















------------------------------

Message: 17
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 09:54:44 +0000
From: Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID:
<CAG1MBOHG+KK3QHoP72jqeaP87+ivJwzxYtB1YRxuvekwwPxQBQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Alfredo,

The 'zone' is always present.  Whether it is recognised or not is another
matter.
I do not think this interpretation is quite a zero sum game, because there
is always the aspect that the institutionalised process is educational --
the laws reveal themselves one way or another.  So (from an Illich
perspective) the opportunity to discover what is real remains, it just
takes a different course.

Best,
Huw

On 17 November 2016 at 07:37, Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
wrote:

What touches me of the article is something that perhaps relates to this
tension that I find between David's (individualistic?) approach to
prolepsis in his post (David, I thought, and continue thinking, that
prolepsis refers to something that emerges in the relation between two, not
something that either is present or absent within a person), and Phillip's
view of young people figuring out what life is all about just as all we do.
And so here (and in any neoliberal school context) we have wonderfully
beautiful young people more or less interested in science or in maths, but
all eager to live a life and evolve as best as they can (whatever that best
may mean for each one). And then you see how the history and context that
they come into gives them everything they need to develop motives and
goals; to then make sure that the majority of them won't make it so that
only a few privileged (or in the case of Margaret's paper none, according
to the authors) succeed. And then what remains is not just a hollowed-out
science and math identity, but also a hollowed-out soul that had illusion
and now just doesn't. Not only a failure to provide opportunities to
learners to become anything(one) good about science and math, but also a
robbing of other possible paths of development that may had grown in people
if they had been hanging out with some other better company. Do we have a
term to refer to the opposite of a zone of proximal development? Not just
the absence of it, but the strangling of it.

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of White, Phillip <Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu>
Sent: 17 November 2016 06:29
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

David, the examples on page 193, students 1, 2 & 3 - aren't these examples
of proleptic thought - especially for student 2, who looks at where she is
"I have my own standards", a statement of the present, then a looking back
at  what has happened, "I like to get straight A's". and then setting a
target for the future, "help for like to get in college and stuff, so yeah,
I participate in a lot of stuff." ending with a reassertion of present
activities to attain future goals.


and there is a preponderance of the use of "I", rather than "you".


i'd give the young people for credit than a myopia focused merely on their
age: the business of young people is figuring out what life is all about
and how to participate, just as adults and infants and old people like me
do.


i'm not convinced that your arguments are supported by the data in this
Eisenhard / Allen paper.


phillip

________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 1:24:35 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Actually, Henry, I was attacking the idea that tense is an empty mental
space. I guess I am a little like Larry: when we discuss articles I have a
strong tendency to try to make them relevant to what I am doing rather than
to drop what I am doing and go and discuss what everybody else is
discussing. So what I am doing right now is trying to make sense of some
story-telling data where the adults are all over the map on tenses, and the
kids seem to stick to one tense only. The adults are slipping in and out of
mental spaces. The kids are telling stories.

I think the relevance to the article is this: When you look at the way the
article frames institutional practices and figured worlds, we see
prolepsis--a preoccupation with the future. But when we look at what the
kids are doing and saying it is very much in the moment. Is this simply
because mental processes like "like" and "want" tend to take simple present
(because they are less defined than material processes)? Or is it because
while the institutions have the near future firmly in view and the figured
worlds have irrealis in view, the business of young people is youth?

Vygotsky points out that the question the interviewer asks is very much a
part of the data. For example, if you ask a question using "you" you often
get "you" in reply, even if you design your question to get "I".

Q: Why do you want to kill yourself?
A: The same reason everybody wants to kill themselves. You want to find out
if anybody really cares.

To take another example that is probably more relevant to readers: both the
Brexit vote and the American elections are clear examples of statistical
unreliability in that if you tried to repeat the election the morning after
you would probably get an utterly different result. Take all of those black
voters and the real working class voters who voted Obama but couldn't be
bothered for Hillary (not the imaginary "white working class voters" who
work in imaginary industries in Iowa, rural Pennsylvania, North Carolina
and Florida). They might well have behaved rather differently knowing how
imminent the neo-Confederacy really was. This is usually presented as
"buyer's remorse," but it's more than that; the event itself would be part
of its replication. This is something that statistical models that use
standard error of the mean cannot build in (they work on the impossible
idea that you can repeat an event ten or twenty thousand times without any
memory at all).

In the same way, when you interview a group of students together you notice
that they tend to model answers on each other rather than on your question,
and when you interview them separately, you notice that YOU tend to change
your question according to the previous answer you received. On the one
hand, life is not easily distracted by its own future: it is too wholly
there in each moment of existence. On the other hand, each of these moments
includes the previous one, and therefore all the previous ones, in itself.
The past weighs like a nightmare on the brain of the living, and objects in
the rear view mirror are always closer than they appear.

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 10:23 AM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com>
wrote:

David,
I was puzzled that you found Langacker to be relevant to this topic, but
the last paragraph of your post makes an important connection between
Langacker and Vygotsky: Both see speech acts as staged?interactants view
themselves as ?on stage?. I think the book by Vera and Reuben is largely
about how differently math is ?staged? by working mathematicians as
contrasted with doing math in school. I think it would be interesting to
analyze how natural language and the language of math scaffold each other
in both contexts. Word problems have been a well-used way of connecting
the
two languages; stats and graphs are commonly used in the media to clarify
and elaborate text in articles on economics, presidential elections, and
what not.

I would love to read your ?unpublishable? on Langacker and Halliday on
tense. What I recall from reading Langacker is his interest in ?basic
domains?, starting with the temporal and spatial. Somewhere he has said
that he believes that the temporal domain is the more basic. As you?d
guess, the spatial domain is especially useful in elucidating what he
calls
?things? (nouns are conceptually about things); the temporal domain is
more
closely connected to what he calls ?processes? wherein he analyzes tense
and aspect.

I think Langacker would agree that his work in cognitive grammar has a
long way to go in contributing to the idea that grammar is usage based,
rather than some autonomous module, but he is working on it. I think
there
is a potential for connecting Halliday and Langacker, though I?m not
smart
enough to convince you of that evidently. Somehow the connection must be
made by staying close to the data, ?thick description? ethnographers are
fond of saying. I think the article by Carrie and Margaret is raising
this
issue.

The ?hollowed out? math curriculum in the article resonates with the
?potholes? you say teachers must watch out for. Some may say that  the
hollowing out is typical even of ?elite? K-12 schools. Some may say that
this is deliberate. I would say my own experience of math in school was
often hollowed out, which I sensed, but didn?t discover until I got to
the
?pure math? department in the mid 60s at Univ of Texas at Austin under
the
leadership of Robert Lee Moore. He is a main protagonist in Chapter 8 of
Vera?s and Reuben?s book.

I?ll end it there.

Henry




On Nov 15, 2016, at 1:38 PM, David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
wrote:

Henry:

I just wrote another unpublishable comparing how Langacker and
Halliday treat tense, and I'm starting to come to grips with the
different
theory of experience underlying the two grammars. Langacker somehow
sees
it
as creating empty mental space (and aspect as creating space within
space).
Halliday sees tense as a way of abstracting concrete doings and
happenings.
Halliday's tense system is not spatial at all but temporal: it's
temporally
deictic and then temporally recursive: a kind of time machine that
simultaneously transports and orients the speaker either proleptically
or
retroleptically. So for example if I say to you that this article we
are
discussing is going to have been being discussed for two or three weeks
now, then "is going" is a kind of time machine that takes you into the
future, from which "You are Here" vantage point the article has been
(past)
being discussed (present). Present in the past in the future.

And that got me thinking about theory and practice. It seems to me that
the
they are related, but simultaneously and not sequentially. That is, the
output of one is not the input of the other: they are simply more and
less
abstract ways of looking at one and the same thing. So for example in
this
article the tasks of theory and practice are one and the same: the task
of
theory is really to define as precisely as possible the domain, the
scope,
the range of the inquiry into authoring math and science identities and
the
task of practice is to ask what exactly you want to do in this
domain/scope/range--to try to understand how they are hollowed out a
little
better so that maybe teachers like you and me can help fill the damn
potholes in a little. You can't really do the one without doing the
other:
trying to decide the terrain under study without deciding some task
that
you want to do there is like imagining tense as empty mental space and
not
as some actual, concrete doing or happening. Conversely, the way you
dig
the hole depends very much on how big and where you want it.

So there are three kinds of mental spaces in the first part of the
article:

a) institutional arrangements (e.g. "priority improvement plans",
career-academy/comprehensive school status STEM tracks, AP classes)
b) figured worlds (e.g. 'good students', and 'don't cares', or what
Eckhart
and McConnell-Ginet called 'jocks', 'nerds',  'burnouts',
'gangbangers')
c) authored identities (i.e. what kids say about themselves and what
they
think about themselves)

Now, I think it's possible to make this distinction--but they are
probably
better understood not as mental spaces (in which case they really do
overlap) but rather as doings (or, as is my wont, sayings). Different
people are saying different things: a) is mostly the sayings of the
school
boards and administrators, b) is mostly the sayings of teachers and
groups
of kids, and c) is mostly the sayings of individual students. It's
always
tempting for a theory to focus on c), because that's where all the data
is
and it's tempting for practice too, because if you are against what is
happening in a) and in b), that's where the most likely point of
intervention is.

"But the data does suggest that the "figured worlds" are figured by
authored identities--not by institutional arrangements. Is that just an
artefact of the warm empathy of the authors for the words (although
maybe
not the exact wordings) of their subjects, or is it real grounds for
hope?

Marx says (beginning of the 18th Brumaire): "*Men make* their own
*history*,
*but they* do *not make* it as *they* please; *they* do *not make* it
under self-selected circumstances, *but* under circumstances existing
already, given and transmitted from the *past*. The tradition of all
dead
generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living."

It's a good theory, i.e. at once a truth and a tragedy. And it's a
theory treats time as time and not as an empty stage.

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 9:39 AM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com>
wrote:

All,
I have read only part of Margaret?s and Carrie?s article, but I wanted
to
jump in with a reference to a book by Vygotskian Vera John-Steiner and
her
mathematician husband Reuben Hersh: Loving and Hating Mathematics:
Challenging the Mathematical Life. Huw?s point (v) which refers to
?identities of independence and finding out sustainable within these
settings (school math classes) spent high school. Vera?s and Reuben?s
book
contrasts what it?s like to work and think like a real (working)
mathematician (what I think Huw is talking about) and what we call
mathematics in the classroom. Chapter 8 of the book "The Teaching of
Mathematics: Fierce or Friendly?? is interesting reading and could be
relevant to this discussion.
Henry


On Nov 13, 2016, at 2:47 PM, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
wrote:

Dear Margaret

My reading has not been a particularly careful one, so I leave it to
yourselves to judge the usefulness of these points.

i) Whether arguments can be made (for or against) a nebulous term
(neoliberalism) with its political associations, by arguments about
identity that are themselves not deliberately political.

ii) Whether it is better not to focus essentially on the place of
identity.

iii) Whether it is worthwhile contrasting the role/identity of "model
student" with "identities" that anyone excelling at STEM subjects
would
relate to.  On this, I would point to the importance with identifying
with
appreciations for "awareness of not knowing" and "eagerness to find
out"
(which also entails learning about what it means to know).

iv) Whether you detect that to the degree that an identity is
foregrounded
in the actual practice of STEM work (rather than as background social
appeasement), it is being faked? That is, someone is playing at the
role
rather than actually committing themselves to finding out about
unknowns.

v) Whether, in fact, there is actually a "tiered" or varied set of
acceptable "identities" within the settings you explored, such that
identities of independence and finding out are sustainable within
these
settings, possibly representing a necessary fudge to deal with the
requirements placed upon the institutions.

Best,
Huw

On 12 November 2016 at 20:30, Margaret A Eisenhart <
margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu> wrote:

Hello Everyone,

Carrie and I are newcomers to this list, and we thank you for the
opportunity to engage with you about our article, ?Hollowed Out.?
We
also
hope for your patience as we learn to participate in the stream of
thinking here!

Given the comments so far, we are intrigued by others? ideas about
the
link between our theory and our data.  On this topic, we would like
to
make clear that we did not intend to suggest that the students were
making
sense of their lives in the same way that we interpreted them
through
the
lens of our theory. Our claim is that opportunities and figured
worlds
are
resources for identity and that the students' words to us reflected
perspectives consistent with neoliberalism, with some pretty serious
implications. Like Phillip White, we are interested in what theories
others would use to explain the data we presented.

Like Mike Cole, we are also intrigued by the prospect of ?exemplars?
we
might turn to.

We look forward to hearing your thoughts.


Margaret Eisenhart



On 11/11/16, 11:35 AM, "lpscholar2@gmail.com" <lpscholar2@gmail.com

wrote:

A resumption in exploring the meaning and sense (preferably sens as
this
term draws attention to movement and direction within meaning and
sense)
of this month?s article.
The paper begins with the title and the image of (hollowed-out)
meaning
and sense that is impoverished and holds few resources for
developing a
deeper sens of identity.
The article concludes with the implication that the work of social
justice within educational institutions is not about improving
educational outcome in neoliberal terms; the implications of the
study
are about *reorganizing* the identities ? particulary
identities-with-standind that young people are *exposed* to, can
articulate, and can act on (in school and beyond).

I would say this is taking an ethical stand?.

I will now turn to page 189 and the section (identity-in-context)
to
amplify the notion of (cultural imaginary) and (figured worlds).
This imaginary being the site or location of history-in-person.
That
is
identity is a form of legacy (or *text*) ABOUT the kind of person
one
is
or has become in responding to (external) circumstances.
These external circumstances are EXPERIENCED primarily in the
organization of local practices and cultural imaginaries (figured
worlds)
that circulate and *give meaning* (and sens) to local practices

Figured worlds are interpreted following Holland as socially and
culturally *realms of interpretation* and certain players are
recognized
as (exemplars).

As such cultural, social, historical, dialogical psychological
(imaginaries) are handmaidens of the imaginal *giving meaning* to
*what*
goes on in the directions we take together.

Two key terms i highlight are (exemplars) and (direction) we take.
The realm of the ethical turn
What are the markers and signposts emerging in the deeper ethical
turn
that offers more than a hollowed-out answer.
Are there any *ghost* stories of exemplars we can turn to as well
as
living exemplars? By ghosts i mean ancestors who continue as
beacons
of
hope exemplifying *who* we are.

My way into exploring the impoverished narratives of the neoliberal
imaginary and reawakening exemplary ancestors or ghosts from their
slumber to help guide us through these multiple imaginaries

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: mike cole
Sent: November 9, 2016 3:04 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Alfredo--

for any who missed the initial article sent out, you might send
them
here:

http://lchc.ucsd.edu/mca/

I am meeting shortly with Bruce. A list of improvements to web site
welcome, although not clear how long they will take to implement.

mike

On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 2:38 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil <
a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
wrote:

Dear all,

last week I announced MCA's 3rd Issue article for discussion:

"Hollowed Out: Meaning and Authoring of High School Math and
Science
Identities in the Context of Neoliberal Reform," by Margaret
Eisenhart
and
Carrie Allen.

The article is open access and will continue to be so during the
discussion time at this link.

Thanks to everyone who begun the discussion early after I shared
the
link
last week, and sorry that we sort of brought the discussion to a
halt
until
the authors were ready to discuss. I have now sent Margaret and
Carrie
the
posts that were produced then so that they could catch up, but I
also
invited them to feel free to move on an introduce themselves as
soon
as
they ??wanted.

It is not without some doubts that one introduces a discussion of
an
article in a moment that some US media have called as "An American
Tragedy"
and other international editorials are describing as "a dark day
for
the
world." But I believe that the paper may indeed offer some grounds
for
discuss important issues that are at stake in everyone's home now,
as
Mike
recently describes in a touching post on the "local state of mind"
and
that
have to do with identity and its connection to a neoliberal
organisation of
the economy. It is not difficult to link neoliberalism to Trump's
phenomenon and how it pervades very intimate aspects of everyday
life.

If this was not enough, I think the authors' background on women's
scholar
and professional careers in science is totally relevant to the
discussions
on gendered discourse we've been having. Now without halts, I hope
this
thread gives joys and wisdom to all.

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
edu>
on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
Sent: 02 November 2016 01:48
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Thanks Mike and everyone! I am sure Margaret (and many of those
still
reading) will be happy to be able to catch up when she joins us
next
week!
Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
edu>
on behalf of mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu>
Sent: 02 November 2016 01:32
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Gentlemen -- I believe Fernando told us that Margaret would be
able to join this discussion next week. Just a quick glance at the
discussion so far indicates that there is a lot there to wade into
before she has had a word.

I am only part way through the article, expecting to have until
next
week
to think about it.

May I suggest your forbearance while this slow-poke tries to catch
up!

mike

On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 3:38 PM, White, Phillip
<Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu

wrote:

David & Larry, everyone else ...

by way of introduction, Margaret and Carrie point out that the
data
in
this paper emerged through a three year study - which was the
processes
of
how students of color, interested in STEM, responded to the
externally
imposed neoliberal requirements. they framed their study using
theories
of
social practices on how identity developed in context.


David, you reject the theories.  or so i understand your
position.
as
you
write: It's that the theory

contradicts my own personal theories.

are you also rejecting the data as well?  it seems as if you are
suggesting this when you write: The authors find this point (in
the
case
of
Lorena) somewhere between the
beginning of the tenth and the end of the eleventh grade, but I
think
that's just because it's where they are looking.

you reject the narrative of Lorena on the grounds that it could
be
traced
back to infancy.

do you also reject the identical narrative found in the adult
practitioners within the context of the high schools?  that this
narrative
is not one of a contemporary neoliberal practice but rather could
be
traced
back to, say, the mid 1600's new england colonies, in particular
massachusettes, where the practices of public american education
began?

to explain the data that emerged from the Eisenhart/Allen study,
what
theories would you have used?

phillip

________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 7:03 AM
To: David Kellogg; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Margaret and Carrie,
Thank you for this wonderful paper that explains the shallow
*hollowed-out* way of forming identity as a form of meaning and
sense. I
will add the French word *sens* which always includes *direction*
within
meaning and sense.

David, your response that what our theory makes sens of depends
on
where
we are looking makes sens to me.
You put in question the moment when the interpersonal (you and
me)
way of
authoring sens *shifts* or turns to cultural and historical ways
of
being
immersed in sens. The article refers to the
*historical-in-person*.

My further comment, where I am looking) is in the description of
the
sociocultural as a response to *externally changing
circumstances*
as
the
process of *learning as becoming* (see page 190).

The article says:

This process is what Lave and Wenger (1991) and other
Sociocultural
researchers have referred to as *learning as becoming,* that is,
learning
that occurs as one becomes a certain kind of person in a
particular
context.  Identities conceived in this way are not stable or
fixed.
As
*external circumstances* affecting a person change, so too may
the
identities that are produced *in response*. (Holland & Skinner,
1997).

In this version of *history-in-person* the identity processes
that
start
the process moving in a neoliberal *direction* are *external*
circumstances. I am not questioning this version of the
importance
of
the
external but do question if looking primarily or primordially to
the
external circumstances as central if we are not leaving a gap in
our
notions of *sens*.

If by looking or highlighting or illuminating the *external* and
highly
visible acts of the actual we are leaving a gap in actual*ity.
A gap in *sens*.

To be continued by others...

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: David Kellogg
Sent: October 31, 2016 2:15 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

I was turning Mike's request--for a short explanation of the
Halliday/Vygotsky interface--over in my mind for a few days,
unsure
where
to start. I usually decide these difficult "where to start"
questions
in
the easiest possible way, with whatever I happen to be working
on.
In
this
case it's the origins of language in a one year old, a moment
which
is
almost as mysterious to me as the origins of life or the Big
Bang.
But
perhaps for that very reason it's not a good place to start (the
Big
Bang
always seemed to me to jump the gun a bit, not to mention the
origins
of
life).

Let me start with the "Hollowed Out" paper Alfredo just
thoughtfully
sent
around instead. My first impression is that this paper leaves a
really
big
gap between the data and the conclusions, and that this gap is
largely
filled by theory. Here are some examples of what I mean:

a)    "Whereas 'subject position' is given by society, 'identity'
is
self-authored, although it must be recognized by others to be
sustained."
(p. 189)

b)  "It is notable that this construction of a good student,
though
familiar, does not make any reference to personal interest,
excitement,
or
engagement in the topics or content-related activities." (193)

c)  "When students' statements such as 'I get it', 'I'm
confident',
'I'm
good at this', and  'I can pull this off' are interpreted in the
context
of
the figured world of math or science at the two schools, their
statements
index more than a grade. They reference a meaning system for
being
good
in
math or science that includes the actor identity characteristics
of
being
able to grasp the subject matter easily, do the work quickly, do
it
without
help from others, do it faster than others, and get an A." (193)

In each case, we are told to believe in a theory: "given by
society",
"self-authored", "does not make any reference", "the context of
the
figured
world". It's not just that in each case the theory seems to go
against
the
data (although it certainly does in places, such as Lowena's
views
as
a
tenth grader). I can always live with a theory that contradicts
my
data:
that's what being a rationalist is all about. It's that the
theory
contradicts my own personal theories.

I don't believe that identity is self authored, and I also don't
believe
that subject position is given by society as a whole, I think the
word
"good" does include personal interest, excitement, and engagement
as
much
as it includes being able to grasp the subject matter easily, do
the
work
quickly, do it without help from others, do it faster than others
and
get
an A. To me anyway, the key word in the data given in c) is
actually
"I"
and not "it" or "this": the students think they are talking
about,
and
therefore probably are actually talking about, a relation between
their
inner states and the activity at hand  or between the activity at
hand
and
the result they get; they are not invoking the figured world of
neoliberal
results and prospects.

But never mind my own theories. Any gap is, after all, a good
opportunity
for theory building. The authors are raising a key issue in both
Vygotsky
and Halliday: when does an interpersonal relation become a
historico-cultural one? That is, when does that 'me" and "you"
relationship
in which I really do have the power to author my identity (I can
make
up
any name I want and, within limits, invent my own history,
particularly
if
I am a backpacker) give way to a job, an address, a number and a
class
over
which I have very little power at all? When does the
interpersonal
somehow
become an alien ideational "identity" that confronts me like a
strange
ghost when I look in the mirror?

The authors find this point (in the case of Lorena) somewhere
between
the
beginning of the tenth and the end of the eleventh grade, but I
think
that's just because it's where they are looking. We can probably
find
the
roots of this distinction (between the interpersonal and the
historico-cultural) as far back as we like, right back to
(Vygotsky)
the
moment when the child gives up the "self-authored" language at
one
and
takes on the language recognized by others and (Halliday) the
moment
when
the child distinguishes between Attributive identifying clauses
("I'm
confident", "I'm good at this"), material processes ("I can pull
this
off")
and mental ones ("I get it").

(To be continued...but not necessarily by me!)

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil
<a.j.gil@iped.uio.no

wrote:

Dear xmca'ers,


I am excited to announce the next article for discussion, which
is
now
available open access at the T&F MCA pages<
http://www.tandfonline
.
com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1188962>.


After a really interesting discussion on Zaza's colourful paper
(which
still goes on developed into a discussion on micro- and
ontogenesis),
we
will from next week be looking at an article by Margaret
Eisenhart
and
Carrie Allen from the special issue on "Reimagining Science
Education
in
the Neoliberal Global Context". I think the article, as the
whole
issue,
offers a very neat example of research trying to tie together
cultural/economical? and developmental aspects (of identity in
this
case).


Margaret has kindly accepted to join the discussion ?after US
elections
(which will surely keep the attention of many of us busy).
Meanwhile, I
share the link<http://www.tandfonline.
com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039
.
2016.1188962>  to the article (see above), and also attach it as
PDF.
??Good read!


Alfredo


















------------------------------

Message: 18
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 18:11:05 +0000
From: Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID: <1479406265608.19906@iped.uio.no>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"

Huw,

great comments. I like what you say, that the (institutional, social) process always is educational, and I agree: it develops into the formation of habit and character. But I still wonder whether all educational processes lead to growth or development, or whether we rather should be able to identify some processes as, we may call them, *pathological* (or perhaps involutive?). There you have Bateson on double bind and schizophrenia, for example. Here, in the article, we have some young students that enter a system that generates a double bind (it was Mike who made me aware of the connection with double bind). The question is, will the system develop without some form of awareness *about* the double bind that overcomes it by generating a system that does not only include the double bind, but also its own description (thereby becoming a higher order system, one in which participants, students and teachers, come to grow rather than come to stall).

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> on behalf of Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
Sent: 17 November 2016 10:54
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Alfredo,

The 'zone' is always present.  Whether it is recognised or not is another
matter.
I do not think this interpretation is quite a zero sum game, because there
is always the aspect that the institutionalised process is educational --
the laws reveal themselves one way or another.  So (from an Illich
perspective) the opportunity to discover what is real remains, it just
takes a different course.

Best,
Huw

On 17 November 2016 at 07:37, Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
wrote:

What touches me of the article is something that perhaps relates to this
tension that I find between David's (individualistic?) approach to
prolepsis in his post (David, I thought, and continue thinking, that
prolepsis refers to something that emerges in the relation between two, not
something that either is present or absent within a person), and Phillip's
view of young people figuring out what life is all about just as all we do.
And so here (and in any neoliberal school context) we have wonderfully
beautiful young people more or less interested in science or in maths, but
all eager to live a life and evolve as best as they can (whatever that best
may mean for each one). And then you see how the history and context that
they come into gives them everything they need to develop motives and
goals; to then make sure that the majority of them won't make it so that
only a few privileged (or in the case of Margaret's paper none, according
to the authors) succeed. And then what remains is not just a hollowed-out
science and math identity, but also a hollowed-out soul that had illusion
and now just doesn't. Not only a failure to provide opportunities to
learners to become anything(one) good about science and math, but also a
robbing of other possible paths of development that may had grown in people
if they had been hanging out with some other better company. Do we have a
term to refer to the opposite of a zone of proximal development? Not just
the absence of it, but the strangling of it.

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of White, Phillip <Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu>
Sent: 17 November 2016 06:29
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

David, the examples on page 193, students 1, 2 & 3 - aren't these examples
of proleptic thought - especially for student 2, who looks at where she is
"I have my own standards", a statement of the present, then a looking back
at  what has happened, "I like to get straight A's". and then setting a
target for the future, "help for like to get in college and stuff, so yeah,
I participate in a lot of stuff." ending with a reassertion of present
activities to attain future goals.


and there is a preponderance of the use of "I", rather than "you".


i'd give the young people for credit than a myopia focused merely on their
age: the business of young people is figuring out what life is all about
and how to participate, just as adults and infants and old people like me
do.


i'm not convinced that your arguments are supported by the data in this
Eisenhard / Allen paper.


phillip

________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 1:24:35 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Actually, Henry, I was attacking the idea that tense is an empty mental
space. I guess I am a little like Larry: when we discuss articles I have a
strong tendency to try to make them relevant to what I am doing rather than
to drop what I am doing and go and discuss what everybody else is
discussing. So what I am doing right now is trying to make sense of some
story-telling data where the adults are all over the map on tenses, and the
kids seem to stick to one tense only. The adults are slipping in and out of
mental spaces. The kids are telling stories.

I think the relevance to the article is this: When you look at the way the
article frames institutional practices and figured worlds, we see
prolepsis--a preoccupation with the future. But when we look at what the
kids are doing and saying it is very much in the moment. Is this simply
because mental processes like "like" and "want" tend to take simple present
(because they are less defined than material processes)? Or is it because
while the institutions have the near future firmly in view and the figured
worlds have irrealis in view, the business of young people is youth?

Vygotsky points out that the question the interviewer asks is very much a
part of the data. For example, if you ask a question using "you" you often
get "you" in reply, even if you design your question to get "I".

Q: Why do you want to kill yourself?
A: The same reason everybody wants to kill themselves. You want to find out
if anybody really cares.

To take another example that is probably more relevant to readers: both the
Brexit vote and the American elections are clear examples of statistical
unreliability in that if you tried to repeat the election the morning after
you would probably get an utterly different result. Take all of those black
voters and the real working class voters who voted Obama but couldn't be
bothered for Hillary (not the imaginary "white working class voters" who
work in imaginary industries in Iowa, rural Pennsylvania, North Carolina
and Florida). They might well have behaved rather differently knowing how
imminent the neo-Confederacy really was. This is usually presented as
"buyer's remorse," but it's more than that; the event itself would be part
of its replication. This is something that statistical models that use
standard error of the mean cannot build in (they work on the impossible
idea that you can repeat an event ten or twenty thousand times without any
memory at all).

In the same way, when you interview a group of students together you notice
that they tend to model answers on each other rather than on your question,
and when you interview them separately, you notice that YOU tend to change
your question according to the previous answer you received. On the one
hand, life is not easily distracted by its own future: it is too wholly
there in each moment of existence. On the other hand, each of these moments
includes the previous one, and therefore all the previous ones, in itself.
The past weighs like a nightmare on the brain of the living, and objects in
the rear view mirror are always closer than they appear.

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 10:23 AM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com>
wrote:

David,
I was puzzled that you found Langacker to be relevant to this topic, but
the last paragraph of your post makes an important connection between
Langacker and Vygotsky: Both see speech acts as staged?interactants view
themselves as ?on stage?. I think the book by Vera and Reuben is largely
about how differently math is ?staged? by working mathematicians as
contrasted with doing math in school. I think it would be interesting to
analyze how natural language and the language of math scaffold each other
in both contexts. Word problems have been a well-used way of connecting
the
two languages; stats and graphs are commonly used in the media to clarify
and elaborate text in articles on economics, presidential elections, and
what not.

I would love to read your ?unpublishable? on Langacker and Halliday on
tense. What I recall from reading Langacker is his interest in ?basic
domains?, starting with the temporal and spatial. Somewhere he has said
that he believes that the temporal domain is the more basic. As you?d
guess, the spatial domain is especially useful in elucidating what he
calls
?things? (nouns are conceptually about things); the temporal domain is
more
closely connected to what he calls ?processes? wherein he analyzes tense
and aspect.

I think Langacker would agree that his work in cognitive grammar has a
long way to go in contributing to the idea that grammar is usage based,
rather than some autonomous module, but he is working on it. I think
there
is a potential for connecting Halliday and Langacker, though I?m not
smart
enough to convince you of that evidently. Somehow the connection must be
made by staying close to the data, ?thick description? ethnographers are
fond of saying. I think the article by Carrie and Margaret is raising
this
issue.

The ?hollowed out? math curriculum in the article resonates with the
?potholes? you say teachers must watch out for. Some may say that  the
hollowing out is typical even of ?elite? K-12 schools. Some may say that
this is deliberate. I would say my own experience of math in school was
often hollowed out, which I sensed, but didn?t discover until I got to
the
?pure math? department in the mid 60s at Univ of Texas at Austin under
the
leadership of Robert Lee Moore. He is a main protagonist in Chapter 8 of
Vera?s and Reuben?s book.

I?ll end it there.

Henry




On Nov 15, 2016, at 1:38 PM, David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
wrote:

Henry:

I just wrote another unpublishable comparing how Langacker and
Halliday treat tense, and I'm starting to come to grips with the
different
theory of experience underlying the two grammars. Langacker somehow
sees
it
as creating empty mental space (and aspect as creating space within
space).
Halliday sees tense as a way of abstracting concrete doings and
happenings.
Halliday's tense system is not spatial at all but temporal: it's
temporally
deictic and then temporally recursive: a kind of time machine that
simultaneously transports and orients the speaker either proleptically
or
retroleptically. So for example if I say to you that this article we
are
discussing is going to have been being discussed for two or three weeks
now, then "is going" is a kind of time machine that takes you into the
future, from which "You are Here" vantage point the article has been
(past)
being discussed (present). Present in the past in the future.

And that got me thinking about theory and practice. It seems to me that
the
they are related, but simultaneously and not sequentially. That is, the
output of one is not the input of the other: they are simply more and
less
abstract ways of looking at one and the same thing. So for example in
this
article the tasks of theory and practice are one and the same: the task
of
theory is really to define as precisely as possible the domain, the
scope,
the range of the inquiry into authoring math and science identities and
the
task of practice is to ask what exactly you want to do in this
domain/scope/range--to try to understand how they are hollowed out a
little
better so that maybe teachers like you and me can help fill the damn
potholes in a little. You can't really do the one without doing the
other:
trying to decide the terrain under study without deciding some task
that
you want to do there is like imagining tense as empty mental space and
not
as some actual, concrete doing or happening. Conversely, the way you
dig
the hole depends very much on how big and where you want it.

So there are three kinds of mental spaces in the first part of the
article:

a) institutional arrangements (e.g. "priority improvement plans",
career-academy/comprehensive school status STEM tracks, AP classes)
b) figured worlds (e.g. 'good students', and 'don't cares', or what
Eckhart
and McConnell-Ginet called 'jocks', 'nerds',  'burnouts',
'gangbangers')
c) authored identities (i.e. what kids say about themselves and what
they
think about themselves)

Now, I think it's possible to make this distinction--but they are
probably
better understood not as mental spaces (in which case they really do
overlap) but rather as doings (or, as is my wont, sayings). Different
people are saying different things: a) is mostly the sayings of the
school
boards and administrators, b) is mostly the sayings of teachers and
groups
of kids, and c) is mostly the sayings of individual students. It's
always
tempting for a theory to focus on c), because that's where all the data
is
and it's tempting for practice too, because if you are against what is
happening in a) and in b), that's where the most likely point of
intervention is.

"But the data does suggest that the "figured worlds" are figured by
authored identities--not by institutional arrangements. Is that just an
artefact of the warm empathy of the authors for the words (although
maybe
not the exact wordings) of their subjects, or is it real grounds for
hope?

Marx says (beginning of the 18th Brumaire): "*Men make* their own
*history*,
*but they* do *not make* it as *they* please; *they* do *not make* it
under self-selected circumstances, *but* under circumstances existing
already, given and transmitted from the *past*. The tradition of all
dead
generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living."

It's a good theory, i.e. at once a truth and a tragedy. And it's a
theory treats time as time and not as an empty stage.

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 9:39 AM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com>
wrote:

All,
I have read only part of Margaret?s and Carrie?s article, but I wanted
to
jump in with a reference to a book by Vygotskian Vera John-Steiner and
her
mathematician husband Reuben Hersh: Loving and Hating Mathematics:
Challenging the Mathematical Life. Huw?s point (v) which refers to
?identities of independence and finding out sustainable within these
settings (school math classes) spent high school. Vera?s and Reuben?s
book
contrasts what it?s like to work and think like a real (working)
mathematician (what I think Huw is talking about) and what we call
mathematics in the classroom. Chapter 8 of the book "The Teaching of
Mathematics: Fierce or Friendly?? is interesting reading and could be
relevant to this discussion.
Henry


On Nov 13, 2016, at 2:47 PM, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
wrote:

Dear Margaret

My reading has not been a particularly careful one, so I leave it to
yourselves to judge the usefulness of these points.

i) Whether arguments can be made (for or against) a nebulous term
(neoliberalism) with its political associations, by arguments about
identity that are themselves not deliberately political.

ii) Whether it is better not to focus essentially on the place of
identity.

iii) Whether it is worthwhile contrasting the role/identity of "model
student" with "identities" that anyone excelling at STEM subjects
would
relate to.  On this, I would point to the importance with identifying
with
appreciations for "awareness of not knowing" and "eagerness to find
out"
(which also entails learning about what it means to know).

iv) Whether you detect that to the degree that an identity is
foregrounded
in the actual practice of STEM work (rather than as background social
appeasement), it is being faked? That is, someone is playing at the
role
rather than actually committing themselves to finding out about
unknowns.

v) Whether, in fact, there is actually a "tiered" or varied set of
acceptable "identities" within the settings you explored, such that
identities of independence and finding out are sustainable within
these
settings, possibly representing a necessary fudge to deal with the
requirements placed upon the institutions.

Best,
Huw

On 12 November 2016 at 20:30, Margaret A Eisenhart <
margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu> wrote:

Hello Everyone,

Carrie and I are newcomers to this list, and we thank you for the
opportunity to engage with you about our article, ?Hollowed Out.?
We
also
hope for your patience as we learn to participate in the stream of
thinking here!

Given the comments so far, we are intrigued by others? ideas about
the
link between our theory and our data.  On this topic, we would like
to
make clear that we did not intend to suggest that the students were
making
sense of their lives in the same way that we interpreted them
through
the
lens of our theory. Our claim is that opportunities and figured
worlds
are
resources for identity and that the students' words to us reflected
perspectives consistent with neoliberalism, with some pretty serious
implications. Like Phillip White, we are interested in what theories
others would use to explain the data we presented.

Like Mike Cole, we are also intrigued by the prospect of ?exemplars?
we
might turn to.

We look forward to hearing your thoughts.


Margaret Eisenhart



On 11/11/16, 11:35 AM, "lpscholar2@gmail.com" <lpscholar2@gmail.com

wrote:

A resumption in exploring the meaning and sense (preferably sens as
this
term draws attention to movement and direction within meaning and
sense)
of this month?s article.
The paper begins with the title and the image of (hollowed-out)
meaning
and sense that is impoverished and holds few resources for
developing a
deeper sens of identity.
The article concludes with the implication that the work of social
justice within educational institutions is not about improving
educational outcome in neoliberal terms; the implications of the
study
are about *reorganizing* the identities ? particulary
identities-with-standind that young people are *exposed* to, can
articulate, and can act on (in school and beyond).

I would say this is taking an ethical stand?.

I will now turn to page 189 and the section (identity-in-context)
to
amplify the notion of (cultural imaginary) and (figured worlds).
This imaginary being the site or location of history-in-person.
That
is
identity is a form of legacy (or *text*) ABOUT the kind of person
one
is
or has become in responding to (external) circumstances.
These external circumstances are EXPERIENCED primarily in the
organization of local practices and cultural imaginaries (figured
worlds)
that circulate and *give meaning* (and sens) to local practices

Figured worlds are interpreted following Holland as socially and
culturally *realms of interpretation* and certain players are
recognized
as (exemplars).

As such cultural, social, historical, dialogical psychological
(imaginaries) are handmaidens of the imaginal *giving meaning* to
*what*
goes on in the directions we take together.

Two key terms i highlight are (exemplars) and (direction) we take.
The realm of the ethical turn
What are the markers and signposts emerging in the deeper ethical
turn
that offers more than a hollowed-out answer.
Are there any *ghost* stories of exemplars we can turn to as well
as
living exemplars? By ghosts i mean ancestors who continue as
beacons
of
hope exemplifying *who* we are.

My way into exploring the impoverished narratives of the neoliberal
imaginary and reawakening exemplary ancestors or ghosts from their
slumber to help guide us through these multiple imaginaries

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: mike cole
Sent: November 9, 2016 3:04 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Alfredo--

for any who missed the initial article sent out, you might send
them
here:

http://lchc.ucsd.edu/mca/

I am meeting shortly with Bruce. A list of improvements to web site
welcome, although not clear how long they will take to implement.

mike

On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 2:38 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil <
a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
wrote:

Dear all,

last week I announced MCA's 3rd Issue article for discussion:

"Hollowed Out: Meaning and Authoring of High School Math and
Science
Identities in the Context of Neoliberal Reform," by Margaret
Eisenhart
and
Carrie Allen.

The article is open access and will continue to be so during the
discussion time at this link.

Thanks to everyone who begun the discussion early after I shared
the
link
last week, and sorry that we sort of brought the discussion to a
halt
until
the authors were ready to discuss. I have now sent Margaret and
Carrie
the
posts that were produced then so that they could catch up, but I
also
invited them to feel free to move on an introduce themselves as
soon
as
they ??wanted.

It is not without some doubts that one introduces a discussion of
an
article in a moment that some US media have called as "An American
Tragedy"
and other international editorials are describing as "a dark day
for
the
world." But I believe that the paper may indeed offer some grounds
for
discuss important issues that are at stake in everyone's home now,
as
Mike
recently describes in a touching post on the "local state of mind"
and
that
have to do with identity and its connection to a neoliberal
organisation of
the economy. It is not difficult to link neoliberalism to Trump's
phenomenon and how it pervades very intimate aspects of everyday
life.

If this was not enough, I think the authors' background on women's
scholar
and professional careers in science is totally relevant to the
discussions
on gendered discourse we've been having. Now without halts, I hope
this
thread gives joys and wisdom to all.

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
edu>
on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
Sent: 02 November 2016 01:48
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Thanks Mike and everyone! I am sure Margaret (and many of those
still
reading) will be happy to be able to catch up when she joins us
next
week!
Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
edu>
on behalf of mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu>
Sent: 02 November 2016 01:32
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Gentlemen -- I believe Fernando told us that Margaret would be
able to join this discussion next week. Just a quick glance at the
discussion so far indicates that there is a lot there to wade into
before she has had a word.

I am only part way through the article, expecting to have until
next
week
to think about it.

May I suggest your forbearance while this slow-poke tries to catch
up!

mike

On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 3:38 PM, White, Phillip
<Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu

wrote:

David & Larry, everyone else ...

by way of introduction, Margaret and Carrie point out that the
data
in
this paper emerged through a three year study - which was the
processes
of
how students of color, interested in STEM, responded to the
externally
imposed neoliberal requirements. they framed their study using
theories
of
social practices on how identity developed in context.


David, you reject the theories.  or so i understand your
position.
as
you
write: It's that the theory

contradicts my own personal theories.

are you also rejecting the data as well?  it seems as if you are
suggesting this when you write: The authors find this point (in
the
case
of
Lorena) somewhere between the
beginning of the tenth and the end of the eleventh grade, but I
think
that's just because it's where they are looking.

you reject the narrative of Lorena on the grounds that it could
be
traced
back to infancy.

do you also reject the identical narrative found in the adult
practitioners within the context of the high schools?  that this
narrative
is not one of a contemporary neoliberal practice but rather could
be
traced
back to, say, the mid 1600's new england colonies, in particular
massachusettes, where the practices of public american education
began?

to explain the data that emerged from the Eisenhart/Allen study,
what
theories would you have used?

phillip

________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 7:03 AM
To: David Kellogg; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Margaret and Carrie,
Thank you for this wonderful paper that explains the shallow
*hollowed-out* way of forming identity as a form of meaning and
sense. I
will add the French word *sens* which always includes *direction*
within
meaning and sense.

David, your response that what our theory makes sens of depends
on
where
we are looking makes sens to me.
You put in question the moment when the interpersonal (you and
me)
way of
authoring sens *shifts* or turns to cultural and historical ways
of
being
immersed in sens. The article refers to the
*historical-in-person*.

My further comment, where I am looking) is in the description of
the
sociocultural as a response to *externally changing
circumstances*
as
the
process of *learning as becoming* (see page 190).

The article says:

This process is what Lave and Wenger (1991) and other
Sociocultural
researchers have referred to as *learning as becoming,* that is,
learning
that occurs as one becomes a certain kind of person in a
particular
context.  Identities conceived in this way are not stable or
fixed.
As
*external circumstances* affecting a person change, so too may
the
identities that are produced *in response*. (Holland & Skinner,
1997).

In this version of *history-in-person* the identity processes
that
start
the process moving in a neoliberal *direction* are *external*
circumstances. I am not questioning this version of the
importance
of
the
external but do question if looking primarily or primordially to
the
external circumstances as central if we are not leaving a gap in
our
notions of *sens*.

If by looking or highlighting or illuminating the *external* and
highly
visible acts of the actual we are leaving a gap in actual*ity.
A gap in *sens*.

To be continued by others...

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: David Kellogg
Sent: October 31, 2016 2:15 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

I was turning Mike's request--for a short explanation of the
Halliday/Vygotsky interface--over in my mind for a few days,
unsure
where
to start. I usually decide these difficult "where to start"
questions
in
the easiest possible way, with whatever I happen to be working
on.
In
this
case it's the origins of language in a one year old, a moment
which
is
almost as mysterious to me as the origins of life or the Big
Bang.
But
perhaps for that very reason it's not a good place to start (the
Big
Bang
always seemed to me to jump the gun a bit, not to mention the
origins
of
life).

Let me start with the "Hollowed Out" paper Alfredo just
thoughtfully
sent
around instead. My first impression is that this paper leaves a
really
big
gap between the data and the conclusions, and that this gap is
largely
filled by theory. Here are some examples of what I mean:

a)    "Whereas 'subject position' is given by society, 'identity'
is
self-authored, although it must be recognized by others to be
sustained."
(p. 189)

b)  "It is notable that this construction of a good student,
though
familiar, does not make any reference to personal interest,
excitement,
or
engagement in the topics or content-related activities." (193)

c)  "When students' statements such as 'I get it', 'I'm
confident',
'I'm
good at this', and  'I can pull this off' are interpreted in the
context
of
the figured world of math or science at the two schools, their
statements
index more than a grade. They reference a meaning system for
being
good
in
math or science that includes the actor identity characteristics
of
being
able to grasp the subject matter easily, do the work quickly, do
it
without
help from others, do it faster than others, and get an A." (193)

In each case, we are told to believe in a theory: "given by
society",
"self-authored", "does not make any reference", "the context of
the
figured
world". It's not just that in each case the theory seems to go
against
the
data (although it certainly does in places, such as Lowena's
views
as
a
tenth grader). I can always live with a theory that contradicts
my
data:
that's what being a rationalist is all about. It's that the
theory
contradicts my own personal theories.

I don't believe that identity is self authored, and I also don't
believe
that subject position is given by society as a whole, I think the
word
"good" does include personal interest, excitement, and engagement
as
much
as it includes being able to grasp the subject matter easily, do
the
work
quickly, do it without help from others, do it faster than others
and
get
an A. To me anyway, the key word in the data given in c) is
actually
"I"
and not "it" or "this": the students think they are talking
about,
and
therefore probably are actually talking about, a relation between
their
inner states and the activity at hand  or between the activity at
hand
and
the result they get; they are not invoking the figured world of
neoliberal
results and prospects.

But never mind my own theories. Any gap is, after all, a good
opportunity
for theory building. The authors are raising a key issue in both
Vygotsky
and Halliday: when does an interpersonal relation become a
historico-cultural one? That is, when does that 'me" and "you"
relationship
in which I really do have the power to author my identity (I can
make
up
any name I want and, within limits, invent my own history,
particularly
if
I am a backpacker) give way to a job, an address, a number and a
class
over
which I have very little power at all? When does the
interpersonal
somehow
become an alien ideational "identity" that confronts me like a
strange
ghost when I look in the mirror?

The authors find this point (in the case of Lorena) somewhere
between
the
beginning of the tenth and the end of the eleventh grade, but I
think
that's just because it's where they are looking. We can probably
find
the
roots of this distinction (between the interpersonal and the
historico-cultural) as far back as we like, right back to
(Vygotsky)
the
moment when the child gives up the "self-authored" language at
one
and
takes on the language recognized by others and (Halliday) the
moment
when
the child distinguishes between Attributive identifying clauses
("I'm
confident", "I'm good at this"), material processes ("I can pull
this
off")
and mental ones ("I get it").

(To be continued...but not necessarily by me!)

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil
<a.j.gil@iped.uio.no

wrote:

Dear xmca'ers,


I am excited to announce the next article for discussion, which
is
now
available open access at the T&F MCA pages<
http://www.tandfonline
.
com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1188962>.


After a really interesting discussion on Zaza's colourful paper
(which
still goes on developed into a discussion on micro- and
ontogenesis),
we
will from next week be looking at an article by Margaret
Eisenhart
and
Carrie Allen from the special issue on "Reimagining Science
Education
in
the Neoliberal Global Context". I think the article, as the
whole
issue,
offers a very neat example of research trying to tie together
cultural/economical? and developmental aspects (of identity in
this
case).


Margaret has kindly accepted to join the discussion ?after US
elections
(which will surely keep the attention of many of us busy).
Meanwhile, I
share the link<http://www.tandfonline.
com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039
.
2016.1188962>  to the article (see above), and also attach it as
PDF.
??Good read!


Alfredo


















------------------------------

Message: 19
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 19:29:47 +0000
From: Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID:
<CAG1MBOE9a_=-7kPQNm+aEfH9CkZqRZfR6wrqGPG2Y-4BaAiwdw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Alfredo,

Yes, they're pathological.  I am merely saying that the problems inherent
in the pathology can be edifying.  No, I don't think the issues can be
transcended within conventional practices. Perhaps the best that can be
achieved is that the students recognise an institutional need for "good
behaviour" and the teacher recognises an educational need for real problem
solving. For "real" education, we would need something like Davydov's
system. But this is merely one view of the purpose of "education". There
are many who don't seem to recognise these (and other) important
implications.

Best,
Huw



On 17 November 2016 at 18:11, Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
wrote:

Huw,

great comments. I like what you say, that the (institutional, social)
process always is educational, and I agree: it develops into the formation
of habit and character. But I still wonder whether all educational
processes lead to growth or development, or whether we rather should be
able to identify some processes as, we may call them, *pathological* (or
perhaps involutive?). There you have Bateson on double bind and
schizophrenia, for example. Here, in the article, we have some young
students that enter a system that generates a double bind (it was Mike who
made me aware of the connection with double bind). The question is, will
the system develop without some form of awareness *about* the double bind
that overcomes it by generating a system that does not only include the
double bind, but also its own description (thereby becoming a higher order
system, one in which participants, students and teachers, come to grow
rather than come to stall).

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
Sent: 17 November 2016 10:54
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Alfredo,

The 'zone' is always present.  Whether it is recognised or not is another
matter.
I do not think this interpretation is quite a zero sum game, because there
is always the aspect that the institutionalised process is educational --
the laws reveal themselves one way or another.  So (from an Illich
perspective) the opportunity to discover what is real remains, it just
takes a different course.

Best,
Huw

On 17 November 2016 at 07:37, Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
wrote:

What touches me of the article is something that perhaps relates to this
tension that I find between David's (individualistic?) approach to
prolepsis in his post (David, I thought, and continue thinking, that
prolepsis refers to something that emerges in the relation between two,
not
something that either is present or absent within a person), and
Phillip's
view of young people figuring out what life is all about just as all we
do.
And so here (and in any neoliberal school context) we have wonderfully
beautiful young people more or less interested in science or in maths,
but
all eager to live a life and evolve as best as they can (whatever that
best
may mean for each one). And then you see how the history and context that
they come into gives them everything they need to develop motives and
goals; to then make sure that the majority of them won't make it so that
only a few privileged (or in the case of Margaret's paper none, according
to the authors) succeed. And then what remains is not just a hollowed-out
science and math identity, but also a hollowed-out soul that had illusion
and now just doesn't. Not only a failure to provide opportunities to
learners to become anything(one) good about science and math, but also a
robbing of other possible paths of development that may had grown in
people
if they had been hanging out with some other better company. Do we have a
term to refer to the opposite of a zone of proximal development? Not just
the absence of it, but the strangling of it.

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of White, Phillip <Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu>
Sent: 17 November 2016 06:29
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

David, the examples on page 193, students 1, 2 & 3 - aren't these
examples
of proleptic thought - especially for student 2, who looks at where she
is
"I have my own standards", a statement of the present, then a looking
back
at  what has happened, "I like to get straight A's". and then setting a
target for the future, "help for like to get in college and stuff, so
yeah,
I participate in a lot of stuff." ending with a reassertion of present
activities to attain future goals.


and there is a preponderance of the use of "I", rather than "you".


i'd give the young people for credit than a myopia focused merely on
their
age: the business of young people is figuring out what life is all about
and how to participate, just as adults and infants and old people like me
do.


i'm not convinced that your arguments are supported by the data in this
Eisenhard / Allen paper.


phillip

________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 1:24:35 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Actually, Henry, I was attacking the idea that tense is an empty mental
space. I guess I am a little like Larry: when we discuss articles I have
a
strong tendency to try to make them relevant to what I am doing rather
than
to drop what I am doing and go and discuss what everybody else is
discussing. So what I am doing right now is trying to make sense of some
story-telling data where the adults are all over the map on tenses, and
the
kids seem to stick to one tense only. The adults are slipping in and out
of
mental spaces. The kids are telling stories.

I think the relevance to the article is this: When you look at the way
the
article frames institutional practices and figured worlds, we see
prolepsis--a preoccupation with the future. But when we look at what the
kids are doing and saying it is very much in the moment. Is this simply
because mental processes like "like" and "want" tend to take simple
present
(because they are less defined than material processes)? Or is it because
while the institutions have the near future firmly in view and the
figured
worlds have irrealis in view, the business of young people is youth?

Vygotsky points out that the question the interviewer asks is very much a
part of the data. For example, if you ask a question using "you" you
often
get "you" in reply, even if you design your question to get "I".

Q: Why do you want to kill yourself?
A: The same reason everybody wants to kill themselves. You want to find
out
if anybody really cares.

To take another example that is probably more relevant to readers: both
the
Brexit vote and the American elections are clear examples of statistical
unreliability in that if you tried to repeat the election the morning
after
you would probably get an utterly different result. Take all of those
black
voters and the real working class voters who voted Obama but couldn't be
bothered for Hillary (not the imaginary "white working class voters" who
work in imaginary industries in Iowa, rural Pennsylvania, North Carolina
and Florida). They might well have behaved rather differently knowing how
imminent the neo-Confederacy really was. This is usually presented as
"buyer's remorse," but it's more than that; the event itself would be
part
of its replication. This is something that statistical models that use
standard error of the mean cannot build in (they work on the impossible
idea that you can repeat an event ten or twenty thousand times without
any
memory at all).

In the same way, when you interview a group of students together you
notice
that they tend to model answers on each other rather than on your
question,
and when you interview them separately, you notice that YOU tend to
change
your question according to the previous answer you received. On the one
hand, life is not easily distracted by its own future: it is too wholly
there in each moment of existence. On the other hand, each of these
moments
includes the previous one, and therefore all the previous ones, in
itself.
The past weighs like a nightmare on the brain of the living, and objects
in
the rear view mirror are always closer than they appear.

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 10:23 AM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com>
wrote:

David,
I was puzzled that you found Langacker to be relevant to this topic,
but
the last paragraph of your post makes an important connection between
Langacker and Vygotsky: Both see speech acts as staged?interactants
view
themselves as ?on stage?. I think the book by Vera and Reuben is
largely
about how differently math is ?staged? by working mathematicians as
contrasted with doing math in school. I think it would be interesting
to
analyze how natural language and the language of math scaffold each
other
in both contexts. Word problems have been a well-used way of connecting
the
two languages; stats and graphs are commonly used in the media to
clarify
and elaborate text in articles on economics, presidential elections,
and
what not.

I would love to read your ?unpublishable? on Langacker and Halliday on
tense. What I recall from reading Langacker is his interest in ?basic
domains?, starting with the temporal and spatial. Somewhere he has said
that he believes that the temporal domain is the more basic. As you?d
guess, the spatial domain is especially useful in elucidating what he
calls
?things? (nouns are conceptually about things); the temporal domain is
more
closely connected to what he calls ?processes? wherein he analyzes
tense
and aspect.

I think Langacker would agree that his work in cognitive grammar has a
long way to go in contributing to the idea that grammar is usage based,
rather than some autonomous module, but he is working on it. I think
there
is a potential for connecting Halliday and Langacker, though I?m not
smart
enough to convince you of that evidently. Somehow the connection must
be
made by staying close to the data, ?thick description? ethnographers
are
fond of saying. I think the article by Carrie and Margaret is raising
this
issue.

The ?hollowed out? math curriculum in the article resonates with the
?potholes? you say teachers must watch out for. Some may say that  the
hollowing out is typical even of ?elite? K-12 schools. Some may say
that
this is deliberate. I would say my own experience of math in school was
often hollowed out, which I sensed, but didn?t discover until I got to
the
?pure math? department in the mid 60s at Univ of Texas at Austin under
the
leadership of Robert Lee Moore. He is a main protagonist in Chapter 8
of
Vera?s and Reuben?s book.

I?ll end it there.

Henry




On Nov 15, 2016, at 1:38 PM, David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
wrote:

Henry:

I just wrote another unpublishable comparing how Langacker and
Halliday treat tense, and I'm starting to come to grips with the
different
theory of experience underlying the two grammars. Langacker somehow
sees
it
as creating empty mental space (and aspect as creating space within
space).
Halliday sees tense as a way of abstracting concrete doings and
happenings.
Halliday's tense system is not spatial at all but temporal: it's
temporally
deictic and then temporally recursive: a kind of time machine that
simultaneously transports and orients the speaker either
proleptically
or
retroleptically. So for example if I say to you that this article we
are
discussing is going to have been being discussed for two or three
weeks
now, then "is going" is a kind of time machine that takes you into
the
future, from which "You are Here" vantage point the article has been
(past)
being discussed (present). Present in the past in the future.

And that got me thinking about theory and practice. It seems to me
that
the
they are related, but simultaneously and not sequentially. That is,
the
output of one is not the input of the other: they are simply more and
less
abstract ways of looking at one and the same thing. So for example in
this
article the tasks of theory and practice are one and the same: the
task
of
theory is really to define as precisely as possible the domain, the
scope,
the range of the inquiry into authoring math and science identities
and
the
task of practice is to ask what exactly you want to do in this
domain/scope/range--to try to understand how they are hollowed out a
little
better so that maybe teachers like you and me can help fill the damn
potholes in a little. You can't really do the one without doing the
other:
trying to decide the terrain under study without deciding some task
that
you want to do there is like imagining tense as empty mental space
and
not
as some actual, concrete doing or happening. Conversely, the way you
dig
the hole depends very much on how big and where you want it.

So there are three kinds of mental spaces in the first part of the
article:

a) institutional arrangements (e.g. "priority improvement plans",
career-academy/comprehensive school status STEM tracks, AP classes)
b) figured worlds (e.g. 'good students', and 'don't cares', or what
Eckhart
and McConnell-Ginet called 'jocks', 'nerds',  'burnouts',
'gangbangers')
c) authored identities (i.e. what kids say about themselves and what
they
think about themselves)

Now, I think it's possible to make this distinction--but they are
probably
better understood not as mental spaces (in which case they really do
overlap) but rather as doings (or, as is my wont, sayings). Different
people are saying different things: a) is mostly the sayings of the
school
boards and administrators, b) is mostly the sayings of teachers and
groups
of kids, and c) is mostly the sayings of individual students. It's
always
tempting for a theory to focus on c), because that's where all the
data
is
and it's tempting for practice too, because if you are against what
is
happening in a) and in b), that's where the most likely point of
intervention is.

"But the data does suggest that the "figured worlds" are figured by
authored identities--not by institutional arrangements. Is that just
an
artefact of the warm empathy of the authors for the words (although
maybe
not the exact wordings) of their subjects, or is it real grounds for
hope?

Marx says (beginning of the 18th Brumaire): "*Men make* their own
*history*,
*but they* do *not make* it as *they* please; *they* do *not make* it
under self-selected circumstances, *but* under circumstances existing
already, given and transmitted from the *past*. The tradition of all
dead
generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living."

It's a good theory, i.e. at once a truth and a tragedy. And it's a
theory treats time as time and not as an empty stage.

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 9:39 AM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com>
wrote:

All,
I have read only part of Margaret?s and Carrie?s article, but I
wanted
to
jump in with a reference to a book by Vygotskian Vera John-Steiner
and
her
mathematician husband Reuben Hersh: Loving and Hating Mathematics:
Challenging the Mathematical Life. Huw?s point (v) which refers to
?identities of independence and finding out sustainable within these
settings (school math classes) spent high school. Vera?s and
Reuben?s
book
contrasts what it?s like to work and think like a real (working)
mathematician (what I think Huw is talking about) and what we call
mathematics in the classroom. Chapter 8 of the book "The Teaching of
Mathematics: Fierce or Friendly?? is interesting reading and could
be
relevant to this discussion.
Henry


On Nov 13, 2016, at 2:47 PM, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
wrote:

Dear Margaret

My reading has not been a particularly careful one, so I leave it
to
yourselves to judge the usefulness of these points.

i) Whether arguments can be made (for or against) a nebulous term
(neoliberalism) with its political associations, by arguments about
identity that are themselves not deliberately political.

ii) Whether it is better not to focus essentially on the place of
identity.

iii) Whether it is worthwhile contrasting the role/identity of
"model
student" with "identities" that anyone excelling at STEM subjects
would
relate to.  On this, I would point to the importance with
identifying
with
appreciations for "awareness of not knowing" and "eagerness to find
out"
(which also entails learning about what it means to know).

iv) Whether you detect that to the degree that an identity is
foregrounded
in the actual practice of STEM work (rather than as background
social
appeasement), it is being faked? That is, someone is playing at the
role
rather than actually committing themselves to finding out about
unknowns.

v) Whether, in fact, there is actually a "tiered" or varied set of
acceptable "identities" within the settings you explored, such that
identities of independence and finding out are sustainable within
these
settings, possibly representing a necessary fudge to deal with the
requirements placed upon the institutions.

Best,
Huw

On 12 November 2016 at 20:30, Margaret A Eisenhart <
margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu> wrote:

Hello Everyone,

Carrie and I are newcomers to this list, and we thank you for the
opportunity to engage with you about our article, ?Hollowed Out.?
We
also
hope for your patience as we learn to participate in the stream of
thinking here!

Given the comments so far, we are intrigued by others? ideas about
the
link between our theory and our data.  On this topic, we would
like
to
make clear that we did not intend to suggest that the students
were
making
sense of their lives in the same way that we interpreted them
through
the
lens of our theory. Our claim is that opportunities and figured
worlds
are
resources for identity and that the students' words to us
reflected
perspectives consistent with neoliberalism, with some pretty
serious
implications. Like Phillip White, we are interested in what
theories
others would use to explain the data we presented.

Like Mike Cole, we are also intrigued by the prospect of
?exemplars?
we
might turn to.

We look forward to hearing your thoughts.


Margaret Eisenhart



On 11/11/16, 11:35 AM, "lpscholar2@gmail.com" <
lpscholar2@gmail.com

wrote:

A resumption in exploring the meaning and sense (preferably sens
as
this
term draws attention to movement and direction within meaning and
sense)
of this month?s article.
The paper begins with the title and the image of (hollowed-out)
meaning
and sense that is impoverished and holds few resources for
developing a
deeper sens of identity.
The article concludes with the implication that the work of
social
justice within educational institutions is not about improving
educational outcome in neoliberal terms; the implications of the
study
are about *reorganizing* the identities ? particulary
identities-with-standind that young people are *exposed* to, can
articulate, and can act on (in school and beyond).

I would say this is taking an ethical stand?.

I will now turn to page 189 and the section (identity-in-context)
to
amplify the notion of (cultural imaginary) and (figured worlds).
This imaginary being the site or location of history-in-person.
That
is
identity is a form of legacy (or *text*) ABOUT the kind of person
one
is
or has become in responding to (external) circumstances.
These external circumstances are EXPERIENCED primarily in the
organization of local practices and cultural imaginaries (figured
worlds)
that circulate and *give meaning* (and sens) to local practices

Figured worlds are interpreted following Holland as socially and
culturally *realms of interpretation* and certain players are
recognized
as (exemplars).

As such cultural, social, historical, dialogical psychological
(imaginaries) are handmaidens of the imaginal *giving meaning* to
*what*
goes on in the directions we take together.

Two key terms i highlight are (exemplars) and (direction) we
take.
The realm of the ethical turn
What are the markers and signposts emerging in the deeper ethical
turn
that offers more than a hollowed-out answer.
Are there any *ghost* stories of exemplars we can turn to as well
as
living exemplars? By ghosts i mean ancestors who continue as
beacons
of
hope exemplifying *who* we are.

My way into exploring the impoverished narratives of the
neoliberal
imaginary and reawakening exemplary ancestors or ghosts from
their
slumber to help guide us through these multiple imaginaries

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: mike cole
Sent: November 9, 2016 3:04 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion
Re-started

Alfredo--

for any who missed the initial article sent out, you might send
them
here:

http://lchc.ucsd.edu/mca/

I am meeting shortly with Bruce. A list of improvements to web
site
welcome, although not clear how long they will take to implement.

mike

On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 2:38 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil <
a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
wrote:

Dear all,

last week I announced MCA's 3rd Issue article for discussion:

"Hollowed Out: Meaning and Authoring of High School Math and
Science
Identities in the Context of Neoliberal Reform," by Margaret
Eisenhart
and
Carrie Allen.

The article is open access and will continue to be so during the
discussion time at this link.

Thanks to everyone who begun the discussion early after I shared
the
link
last week, and sorry that we sort of brought the discussion to a
halt
until
the authors were ready to discuss. I have now sent Margaret and
Carrie
the
posts that were produced then so that they could catch up, but I
also
invited them to feel free to move on an introduce themselves as
soon
as
they ??wanted.

It is not without some doubts that one introduces a discussion
of
an
article in a moment that some US media have called as "An
American
Tragedy"
and other international editorials are describing as "a dark day
for
the
world." But I believe that the paper may indeed offer some
grounds
for
discuss important issues that are at stake in everyone's home
now,
as
Mike
recently describes in a touching post on the "local state of
mind"
and
that
have to do with identity and its connection to a neoliberal
organisation of
the economy. It is not difficult to link neoliberalism to
Trump's
phenomenon and how it pervades very intimate aspects of everyday
life.

If this was not enough, I think the authors' background on
women's
scholar
and professional careers in science is totally relevant to the
discussions
on gendered discourse we've been having. Now without halts, I
hope
this
thread gives joys and wisdom to all.

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
edu>
on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
Sent: 02 November 2016 01:48
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Thanks Mike and everyone! I am sure Margaret (and many of those
still
reading) will be happy to be able to catch up when she joins us
next
week!
Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
edu>
on behalf of mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu>
Sent: 02 November 2016 01:32
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Gentlemen -- I believe Fernando told us that Margaret would be
able to join this discussion next week. Just a quick glance at
the
discussion so far indicates that there is a lot there to wade
into
before she has had a word.

I am only part way through the article, expecting to have until
next
week
to think about it.

May I suggest your forbearance while this slow-poke tries to
catch
up!

mike

On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 3:38 PM, White, Phillip
<Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu

wrote:

David & Larry, everyone else ...

by way of introduction, Margaret and Carrie point out that the
data
in
this paper emerged through a three year study - which was the
processes
of
how students of color, interested in STEM, responded to the
externally
imposed neoliberal requirements. they framed their study using
theories
of
social practices on how identity developed in context.


David, you reject the theories.  or so i understand your
position.
as
you
write: It's that the theory

contradicts my own personal theories.

are you also rejecting the data as well?  it seems as if you
are
suggesting this when you write: The authors find this point (in
the
case
of
Lorena) somewhere between the
beginning of the tenth and the end of the eleventh grade, but I
think
that's just because it's where they are looking.

you reject the narrative of Lorena on the grounds that it could
be
traced
back to infancy.

do you also reject the identical narrative found in the adult
practitioners within the context of the high schools?  that
this
narrative
is not one of a contemporary neoliberal practice but rather
could
be
traced
back to, say, the mid 1600's new england colonies, in
particular
massachusettes, where the practices of public american
education
began?

to explain the data that emerged from the Eisenhart/Allen
study,
what
theories would you have used?

phillip

________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 7:03 AM
To: David Kellogg; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Margaret and Carrie,
Thank you for this wonderful paper that explains the shallow
*hollowed-out* way of forming identity as a form of meaning and
sense. I
will add the French word *sens* which always includes
*direction*
within
meaning and sense.

David, your response that what our theory makes sens of depends
on
where
we are looking makes sens to me.
You put in question the moment when the interpersonal (you and
me)
way of
authoring sens *shifts* or turns to cultural and historical
ways
of
being
immersed in sens. The article refers to the
*historical-in-person*.

My further comment, where I am looking) is in the description
of
the
sociocultural as a response to *externally changing
circumstances*
as
the
process of *learning as becoming* (see page 190).

The article says:

This process is what Lave and Wenger (1991) and other
Sociocultural
researchers have referred to as *learning as becoming,* that
is,
learning
that occurs as one becomes a certain kind of person in a
particular
context.  Identities conceived in this way are not stable or
fixed.
As
*external circumstances* affecting a person change, so too may
the
identities that are produced *in response*. (Holland & Skinner,
1997).

In this version of *history-in-person* the identity processes
that
start
the process moving in a neoliberal *direction* are *external*
circumstances. I am not questioning this version of the
importance
of
the
external but do question if looking primarily or primordially
to
the
external circumstances as central if we are not leaving a gap
in
our
notions of *sens*.

If by looking or highlighting or illuminating the *external*
and
highly
visible acts of the actual we are leaving a gap in actual*ity.
A gap in *sens*.

To be continued by others...

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: David Kellogg
Sent: October 31, 2016 2:15 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

I was turning Mike's request--for a short explanation of the
Halliday/Vygotsky interface--over in my mind for a few days,
unsure
where
to start. I usually decide these difficult "where to start"
questions
in
the easiest possible way, with whatever I happen to be working
on.
In
this
case it's the origins of language in a one year old, a moment
which
is
almost as mysterious to me as the origins of life or the Big
Bang.
But
perhaps for that very reason it's not a good place to start
(the
Big
Bang
always seemed to me to jump the gun a bit, not to mention the
origins
of
life).

Let me start with the "Hollowed Out" paper Alfredo just
thoughtfully
sent
around instead. My first impression is that this paper leaves a
really
big
gap between the data and the conclusions, and that this gap is
largely
filled by theory. Here are some examples of what I mean:

a)    "Whereas 'subject position' is given by society,
'identity'
is
self-authored, although it must be recognized by others to be
sustained."
(p. 189)

b)  "It is notable that this construction of a good student,
though
familiar, does not make any reference to personal interest,
excitement,
or
engagement in the topics or content-related activities." (193)

c)  "When students' statements such as 'I get it', 'I'm
confident',
'I'm
good at this', and  'I can pull this off' are interpreted in
the
context
of
the figured world of math or science at the two schools, their
statements
index more than a grade. They reference a meaning system for
being
good
in
math or science that includes the actor identity
characteristics
of
being
able to grasp the subject matter easily, do the work quickly,
do
it
without
help from others, do it faster than others, and get an A."
(193)

In each case, we are told to believe in a theory: "given by
society",
"self-authored", "does not make any reference", "the context of
the
figured
world". It's not just that in each case the theory seems to go
against
the
data (although it certainly does in places, such as Lowena's
views
as
a
tenth grader). I can always live with a theory that contradicts
my
data:
that's what being a rationalist is all about. It's that the
theory
contradicts my own personal theories.

I don't believe that identity is self authored, and I also
don't
believe
that subject position is given by society as a whole, I think
the
word
"good" does include personal interest, excitement, and
engagement
as
much
as it includes being able to grasp the subject matter easily,
do
the
work
quickly, do it without help from others, do it faster than
others
and
get
an A. To me anyway, the key word in the data given in c) is
actually
"I"
and not "it" or "this": the students think they are talking
about,
and
therefore probably are actually talking about, a relation
between
their
inner states and the activity at hand  or between the activity
at
hand
and
the result they get; they are not invoking the figured world of
neoliberal
results and prospects.

But never mind my own theories. Any gap is, after all, a good
opportunity
for theory building. The authors are raising a key issue in
both
Vygotsky
and Halliday: when does an interpersonal relation become a
historico-cultural one? That is, when does that 'me" and "you"
relationship
in which I really do have the power to author my identity (I
can
make
up
any name I want and, within limits, invent my own history,
particularly
if
I am a backpacker) give way to a job, an address, a number and
a
class
over
which I have very little power at all? When does the
interpersonal
somehow
become an alien ideational "identity" that confronts me like a
strange
ghost when I look in the mirror?

The authors find this point (in the case of Lorena) somewhere
between
the
beginning of the tenth and the end of the eleventh grade, but I
think
that's just because it's where they are looking. We can
probably
find
the
roots of this distinction (between the interpersonal and the
historico-cultural) as far back as we like, right back to
(Vygotsky)
the
moment when the child gives up the "self-authored" language at
one
and
takes on the language recognized by others and (Halliday) the
moment
when
the child distinguishes between Attributive identifying clauses
("I'm
confident", "I'm good at this"), material processes ("I can
pull
this
off")
and mental ones ("I get it").

(To be continued...but not necessarily by me!)

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil
<a.j.gil@iped.uio.no

wrote:

Dear xmca'ers,


I am excited to announce the next article for discussion,
which
is
now
available open access at the T&F MCA pages<
http://www.tandfonline
.
com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1188962>.


After a really interesting discussion on Zaza's colourful
paper
(which
still goes on developed into a discussion on micro- and
ontogenesis),
we
will from next week be looking at an article by Margaret
Eisenhart
and
Carrie Allen from the special issue on "Reimagining Science
Education
in
the Neoliberal Global Context". I think the article, as the
whole
issue,
offers a very neat example of research trying to tie together
cultural/economical? and developmental aspects (of identity in
this
case).


Margaret has kindly accepted to join the discussion ?after US
elections
(which will surely keep the attention of many of us busy).
Meanwhile, I
share the link<http://www.tandfonline.
com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039
.
2016.1188962>  to the article (see above), and also attach it
as
PDF.
??Good read!


Alfredo



















------------------------------

Message: 20
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 11:45:31 -0800
From: mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu>
Subject: [Xmca-l]  Butterflies of Zagorsk
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID:
<CAHCnM0Bk+FWP9ksresmQaaZORD9KJ_+hK5Y245pE5RWNnU3=rA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

In rummaging through old files, I found a copy of Butterflies of Zagorsk,
which has been asked about for some time on XMCA. It is posted here:
http://lchc.ucsd.edu/Movies/Butterflies_of_Zagorsk.mp4

Note that in making this film available to the xmca community, I am doing
so in my function as an educator, and in light of the pedagogical functions
of xmca as a source of important materials for concerning the cultural
nature of human development. I trust you will use it in the same fashion.

Meantime, lets hear it for rummaging and Bruce Jones' help in getting it
online for us. Perhaps for later discussion.


mike


------------------------------

Message: 21
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 20:51:56 +0000
From: Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Butterflies of Zagorsk
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID:
<CAG1MBOHiA=wxfQL=hrEY+KSL79_Q9Xw=Xyt1h4Ffo+xXf5UinA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Great find.  You might want to watch server consumption as the file is
1.1Gb.

Best,
Huw

On 17 November 2016 at 19:45, mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu> wrote:

In rummaging through old files, I found a copy of Butterflies of Zagorsk,
which has been asked about for some time on XMCA. It is posted here:
http://lchc.ucsd.edu/Movies/Butterflies_of_Zagorsk.mp4

Note that in making this film available to the xmca community, I am doing
so in my function as an educator, and in light of the pedagogical functions
of xmca as a source of important materials for concerning the cultural
nature of human development. I trust you will use it in the same fashion.

Meantime, lets hear it for rummaging and Bruce Jones' help in getting it
online for us. Perhaps for later discussion.


mike



------------------------------

Message: 22
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 13:05:23 -0800
From: <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
To: Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>, "eXtended Mind, Culture,
Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID: <582e1ba4.c7cc620a.3c64e.b199@mx.google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

The question remains, if this neoliberal context generates (hollowed-out) educational *spaces* or institutions then is it possible we are able to offer exemplars of other educational places (current or historical) that manifested different kinds of identity formation that were not hollowed out. I speculate these exemplars would embody or incarnate deeply historical and  ethical orientations and practices.
If we have lost our way, are there other models (cultural imaginaries) that co-generate developmental narratives that will nurture well-being?

Exemplary models that point in a certain direction

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: Huw Lloyd
Sent: November 17, 2016 11:32 AM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Alfredo,

Yes, they're pathological.  I am merely saying that the problems inherent
in the pathology can be edifying.  No, I don't think the issues can be
transcended within conventional practices. Perhaps the best that can be
achieved is that the students recognise an institutional need for "good
behaviour" and the teacher recognises an educational need for real problem
solving. For "real" education, we would need something like Davydov's
system. But this is merely one view of the purpose of "education". There
are many who don't seem to recognise these (and other) important
implications.

Best,
Huw



On 17 November 2016 at 18:11, Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
wrote:

Huw,

great comments. I like what you say, that the (institutional, social)
process always is educational, and I agree: it develops into the formation
of habit and character. But I still wonder whether all educational
processes lead to growth or development, or whether we rather should be
able to identify some processes as, we may call them, *pathological* (or
perhaps involutive?). There you have Bateson on double bind and
schizophrenia, for example. Here, in the article, we have some young
students that enter a system that generates a double bind (it was Mike who
made me aware of the connection with double bind). The question is, will
the system develop without some form of awareness *about* the double bind
that overcomes it by generating a system that does not only include the
double bind, but also its own description (thereby becoming a higher order
system, one in which participants, students and teachers, come to grow
rather than come to stall).

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
Sent: 17 November 2016 10:54
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Alfredo,

The 'zone' is always present.  Whether it is recognised or not is another
matter.
I do not think this interpretation is quite a zero sum game, because there
is always the aspect that the institutionalised process is educational --
the laws reveal themselves one way or another.  So (from an Illich
perspective) the opportunity to discover what is real remains, it just
takes a different course.

Best,
Huw

On 17 November 2016 at 07:37, Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
wrote:

What touches me of the article is something that perhaps relates to this
tension that I find between David's (individualistic?) approach to
prolepsis in his post (David, I thought, and continue thinking, that
prolepsis refers to something that emerges in the relation between two,
not
something that either is present or absent within a person), and
Phillip's
view of young people figuring out what life is all about just as all we
do.
And so here (and in any neoliberal school context) we have wonderfully
beautiful young people more or less interested in science or in maths,
but
all eager to live a life and evolve as best as they can (whatever that
best
may mean for each one). And then you see how the history and context that
they come into gives them everything they need to develop motives and
goals; to then make sure that the majority of them won't make it so that
only a few privileged (or in the case of Margaret's paper none, according
to the authors) succeed. And then what remains is not just a hollowed-out
science and math identity, but also a hollowed-out soul that had illusion
and now just doesn't. Not only a failure to provide opportunities to
learners to become anything(one) good about science and math, but also a
robbing of other possible paths of development that may had grown in
people
if they had been hanging out with some other better company. Do we have a
term to refer to the opposite of a zone of proximal development? Not just
the absence of it, but the strangling of it.

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of White, Phillip <Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu>
Sent: 17 November 2016 06:29
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

David, the examples on page 193, students 1, 2 & 3 - aren't these
examples
of proleptic thought - especially for student 2, who looks at where she
is
"I have my own standards", a statement of the present, then a looking
back
at  what has happened, "I like to get straight A's". and then setting a
target for the future, "help for like to get in college and stuff, so
yeah,
I participate in a lot of stuff." ending with a reassertion of present
activities to attain future goals.


and there is a preponderance of the use of "I", rather than "you".


i'd give the young people for credit than a myopia focused merely on
their
age: the business of young people is figuring out what life is all about
and how to participate, just as adults and infants and old people like me
do.


i'm not convinced that your arguments are supported by the data in this
Eisenhard / Allen paper.


phillip

________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 1:24:35 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Actually, Henry, I was attacking the idea that tense is an empty mental
space. I guess I am a little like Larry: when we discuss articles I have
a
strong tendency to try to make them relevant to what I am doing rather
than
to drop what I am doing and go and discuss what everybody else is
discussing. So what I am doing right now is trying to make sense of some
story-telling data where the adults are all over the map on tenses, and
the
kids seem to stick to one tense only. The adults are slipping in and out
of
mental spaces. The kids are telling stories.

I think the relevance to the article is this: When you look at the way
the
article frames institutional practices and figured worlds, we see
prolepsis--a preoccupation with the future. But when we look at what the
kids are doing and saying it is very much in the moment. Is this simply
because mental processes like "like" and "want" tend to take simple
present
(because they are less defined than material processes)? Or is it because
while the institutions have the near future firmly in view and the
figured
worlds have irrealis in view, the business of young people is youth?

Vygotsky points out that the question the interviewer asks is very much a
part of the data. For example, if you ask a question using "you" you
often
get "you" in reply, even if you design your question to get "I".

Q: Why do you want to kill yourself?
A: The same reason everybody wants to kill themselves. You want to find
out
if anybody really cares.

To take another example that is probably more relevant to readers: both
the
Brexit vote and the American elections are clear examples of statistical
unreliability in that if you tried to repeat the election the morning
after
you would probably get an utterly different result. Take all of those
black
voters and the real working class voters who voted Obama but couldn't be
bothered for Hillary (not the imaginary "white working class voters" who
work in imaginary industries in Iowa, rural Pennsylvania, North Carolina
and Florida). They might well have behaved rather differently knowing how
imminent the neo-Confederacy really was. This is usually presented as
"buyer's remorse," but it's more than that; the event itself would be
part
of its replication. This is something that statistical models that use
standard error of the mean cannot build in (they work on the impossible
idea that you can repeat an event ten or twenty thousand times without
any
memory at all).

In the same way, when you interview a group of students together you
notice
that they tend to model answers on each other rather than on your
question,
and when you interview them separately, you notice that YOU tend to
change
your question according to the previous answer you received. On the one
hand, life is not easily distracted by its own future: it is too wholly
there in each moment of existence. On the other hand, each of these
moments
includes the previous one, and therefore all the previous ones, in
itself.
The past weighs like a nightmare on the brain of the living, and objects
in
the rear view mirror are always closer than they appear.

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 10:23 AM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com>
wrote:

David,
I was puzzled that you found Langacker to be relevant to this topic,
but
the last paragraph of your post makes an important connection between
Langacker and Vygotsky: Both see speech acts as staged?interactants
view
themselves as ?on stage?. I think the book by Vera and Reuben is
largely
about how differently math is ?staged? by working mathematicians as
contrasted with doing math in school. I think it would be interesting
to
analyze how natural language and the language of math scaffold each
other
in both contexts. Word problems have been a well-used way of connecting
the
two languages; stats and graphs are commonly used in the media to
clarify
and elaborate text in articles on economics, presidential elections,
and
what not.

I would love to read your ?unpublishable? on Langacker and Halliday on
tense. What I recall from reading Langacker is his interest in ?basic
domains?, starting with the temporal and spatial. Somewhere he has said
that he believes that the temporal domain is the more basic. As you?d
guess, the spatial domain is especially useful in elucidating what he
calls
?things? (nouns are conceptually about things); the temporal domain is
more
closely connected to what he calls ?processes? wherein he analyzes
tense
and aspect.

I think Langacker would agree that his work in cognitive grammar has a
long way to go in contributing to the idea that grammar is usage based,
rather than some autonomous module, but he is working on it. I think
there
is a potential for connecting Halliday and Langacker, though I?m not
smart
enough to convince you of that evidently. Somehow the connection must
be
made by staying close to the data, ?thick description? ethnographers
are
fond of saying. I think the article by Carrie and Margaret is raising
this
issue.

The ?hollowed out? math curriculum in the article resonates with the
?potholes? you say teachers must watch out for. Some may say that  the
hollowing out is typical even of ?elite? K-12 schools. Some may say
that
this is deliberate. I would say my own experience of math in school was
often hollowed out, which I sensed, but didn?t discover until I got to
the
?pure math? department in the mid 60s at Univ of Texas at Austin under
the
leadership of Robert Lee Moore. He is a main protagonist in Chapter 8
of
Vera?s and Reuben?s book.

I?ll end it there.

Henry




On Nov 15, 2016, at 1:38 PM, David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
wrote:

Henry:

I just wrote another unpublishable comparing how Langacker and
Halliday treat tense, and I'm starting to come to grips with the
different
theory of experience underlying the two grammars. Langacker somehow
sees
it
as creating empty mental space (and aspect as creating space within
space).
Halliday sees tense as a way of abstracting concrete doings and
happenings.
Halliday's tense system is not spatial at all but temporal: it's
temporally
deictic and then temporally recursive: a kind of time machine that
simultaneously transports and orients the speaker either
proleptically
or
retroleptically. So for example if I say to you that this article we
are
discussing is going to have been being discussed for two or three
weeks
now, then "is going" is a kind of time machine that takes you into
the
future, from which "You are Here" vantage point the article has been
(past)
being discussed (present). Present in the past in the future.

And that got me thinking about theory and practice. It seems to me
that
the
they are related, but simultaneously and not sequentially. That is,
the
output of one is not the input of the other: they are simply more and
less
abstract ways of looking at one and the same thing. So for example in
this
article the tasks of theory and practice are one and the same: the
task
of
theory is really to define as precisely as possible the domain, the
scope,
the range of the inquiry into authoring math and science identities
and
the
task of practice is to ask what exactly you want to do in this
domain/scope/range--to try to understand how they are hollowed out a
little
better so that maybe teachers like you and me can help fill the damn
potholes in a little. You can't really do the one without doing the
other:
trying to decide the terrain under study without deciding some task
that
you want to do there is like imagining tense as empty mental space
and
not
as some actual, concrete doing or happening. Conversely, the way you
dig
the hole depends very much on how big and where you want it.

So there are three kinds of mental spaces in the first part of the
article:

a) institutional arrangements (e.g. "priority improvement plans",
career-academy/comprehensive school status STEM tracks, AP classes)
b) figured worlds (e.g. 'good students', and 'don't cares', or what
Eckhart
and McConnell-Ginet called 'jocks', 'nerds',  'burnouts',
'gangbangers')
c) authored identities (i.e. what kids say about themselves and what
they
think about themselves)

Now, I think it's possible to make this distinction--but they are
probably
better understood not as mental spaces (in which case they really do
overlap) but rather as doings (or, as is my wont, sayings). Different
people are saying different things: a) is mostly the sayings of the
school
boards and administrators, b) is mostly the sayings of teachers and
groups
of kids, and c) is mostly the sayings of individual students. It's
always
tempting for a theory to focus on c), because that's where all the
data
is
and it's tempting for practice too, because if you are against what
is
happening in a) and in b), that's where the most likely point of
intervention is.

"But the data does suggest that the "figured worlds" are figured by
authored identities--not by institutional arrangements. Is that just
an
artefact of the warm empathy of the authors for the words (although
maybe
not the exact wordings) of their subjects, or is it real grounds for
hope?

Marx says (beginning of the 18th Brumaire): "*Men make* their own
*history*,
*but they* do *not make* it as *they* please; *they* do *not make* it
under self-selected circumstances, *but* under circumstances existing
already, given and transmitted from the *past*. The tradition of all
dead
generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living."

It's a good theory, i.e. at once a truth and a tragedy. And it's a
theory treats time as time and not as an empty stage.

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 9:39 AM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com>
wrote:

All,
I have read only part of Margaret?s and Carrie?s article, but I
wanted
to
jump in with a reference to a book by Vygotskian Vera John-Steiner
and
her
mathematician husband Reuben Hersh: Loving and Hating Mathematics:
Challenging the Mathematical Life. Huw?s point (v) which refers to
?identities of independence and finding out sustainable within these
settings (school math classes) spent high school. Vera?s and
Reuben?s
book
contrasts what it?s like to work and think like a real (working)
mathematician (what I think Huw is talking about) and what we call
mathematics in the classroom. Chapter 8 of the book "The Teaching of
Mathematics: Fierce or Friendly?? is interesting reading and could
be
relevant to this discussion.
Henry


On Nov 13, 2016, at 2:47 PM, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
wrote:

Dear Margaret

My reading has not been a particularly careful one, so I leave it
to
yourselves to judge the usefulness of these points.

i) Whether arguments can be made (for or against) a nebulous term
(neoliberalism) with its political associations, by arguments about
identity that are themselves not deliberately political.

ii) Whether it is better not to focus essentially on the place of
identity.

iii) Whether it is worthwhile contrasting the role/identity of
"model
student" with "identities" that anyone excelling at STEM subjects
would
relate to.  On this, I would point to the importance with
identifying
with
appreciations for "awareness of not knowing" and "eagerness to find
out"
(which also entails learning about what it means to know).

iv) Whether you detect that to the degree that an identity is
foregrounded
in the actual practice of STEM work (rather than as background
social
appeasement), it is being faked? That is, someone is playing at the
role
rather than actually committing themselves to finding out about
unknowns.

v) Whether, in fact, there is actually a "tiered" or varied set of
acceptable "identities" within the settings you explored, such that
identities of independence and finding out are sustainable within
these
settings, possibly representing a necessary fudge to deal with the
requirements placed upon the institutions.

Best,
Huw

On 12 November 2016 at 20:30, Margaret A Eisenhart <
margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu> wrote:

Hello Everyone,

Carrie and I are newcomers to this list, and we thank you for the
opportunity to engage with you about our article, ?Hollowed Out.?
We
also
hope for your patience as we learn to participate in the stream of
thinking here!

Given the comments so far, we are intrigued by others? ideas about
the
link between our theory and our data.  On this topic, we would
like
to
make clear that we did not intend to suggest that the students
were
making
sense of their lives in the same way that we interpreted them
through
the
lens of our theory. Our claim is that opportunities and figured
worlds
are
resources for identity and that the students' words to us
reflected
perspectives consistent with neoliberalism, with some pretty
serious
implications. Like Phillip White, we are interested in what
theories
others would use to explain the data we presented.

Like Mike Cole, we are also intrigued by the prospect of
?exemplars?
we
might turn to.

We look forward to hearing your thoughts.


Margaret Eisenhart



On 11/11/16, 11:35 AM, "lpscholar2@gmail.com" <
lpscholar2@gmail.com

wrote:

A resumption in exploring the meaning and sense (preferably sens
as
this
term draws attention to movement and direction within meaning and
sense)
of this month?s article.
The paper begins with the title and the image of (hollowed-out)
meaning
and sense that is impoverished and holds few resources for
developing a
deeper sens of identity.
The article concludes with the implication that the work of
social
justice within educational institutions is not about improving
educational outcome in neoliberal terms; the implications of the
study
are about *reorganizing* the identities ? particulary
identities-with-standind that young people are *exposed* to, can
articulate, and can act on (in school and beyond).

I would say this is taking an ethical stand?.

I will now turn to page 189 and the section (identity-in-context)
to
amplify the notion of (cultural imaginary) and (figured worlds).
This imaginary being the site or location of history-in-person.
That
is
identity is a form of legacy (or *text*) ABOUT the kind of person
one
is
or has become in responding to (external) circumstances.
These external circumstances are EXPERIENCED primarily in the
organization of local practices and cultural imaginaries (figured
worlds)
that circulate and *give meaning* (and sens) to local practices

Figured worlds are interpreted following Holland as socially and
culturally *realms of interpretation* and certain players are
recognized
as (exemplars).

As such cultural, social, historical, dialogical psychological
(imaginaries) are handmaidens of the imaginal *giving meaning* to
*what*
goes on in the directions we take together.

Two key terms i highlight are (exemplars) and (direction) we
take.
The realm of the ethical turn
What are the markers and signposts emerging in the deeper ethical
turn
that offers more than a hollowed-out answer.
Are there any *ghost* stories of exemplars we can turn to as well
as
living exemplars? By ghosts i mean ancestors who continue as
beacons
of
hope exemplifying *who* we are.

My way into exploring the impoverished narratives of the
neoliberal
imaginary and reawakening exemplary ancestors or ghosts from
their
slumber to help guide us through these multiple imaginaries

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: mike cole
Sent: November 9, 2016 3:04 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion
Re-started

Alfredo--

for any who missed the initial article sent out, you might send
them
here:

http://lchc.ucsd.edu/mca/

I am meeting shortly with Bruce. A list of improvements to web
site
welcome, although not clear how long they will take to implement.

mike

On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 2:38 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil <
a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
wrote:

Dear all,

last week I announced MCA's 3rd Issue article for discussion:

"Hollowed Out: Meaning and Authoring of High School Math and
Science
Identities in the Context of Neoliberal Reform," by Margaret
Eisenhart
and
Carrie Allen.

The article is open access and will continue to be so during the
discussion time at this link.

Thanks to everyone who begun the discussion early after I shared
the
link
last week, and sorry that we sort of brought the discussion to a
halt
until
the authors were ready to discuss. I have now sent Margaret and
Carrie
the
posts that were produced then so that they could catch up, but I
also
invited them to feel free to move on an introduce themselves as
soon
as
they ??wanted.

It is not without some doubts that one introduces a discussion
of
an
article in a moment that some US media have called as "An
American
Tragedy"
and other international editorials are describing as "a dark day
for
the
world." But I believe that the paper may indeed offer some
grounds
for
discuss important issues that are at stake in everyone's home
now,
as
Mike
recently describes in a touching post on the "local state of
mind"
and
that
have to do with identity and its connection to a neoliberal
organisation of
the economy. It is not difficult to link neoliberalism to
Trump's
phenomenon and how it pervades very intimate aspects of everyday
life.

If this was not enough, I think the authors' background on
women's
scholar
and professional careers in science is totally relevant to the
discussions
on gendered discourse we've been having. Now without halts, I
hope
this
thread gives joys and wisdom to all.

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
edu>
on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
Sent: 02 November 2016 01:48
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Thanks Mike and everyone! I am sure Margaret (and many of those
still
reading) will be happy to be able to catch up when she joins us
next
week!
Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
edu>
on behalf of mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu>
Sent: 02 November 2016 01:32
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Gentlemen -- I believe Fernando told us that Margaret would be
able to join this discussion next week. Just a quick glance at
the
discussion so far indicates that there is a lot there to wade
into
before she has had a word.

I am only part way through the article, expecting to have until
next
week
to think about it.

May I suggest your forbearance while this slow-poke tries to
catch
up!

mike

On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 3:38 PM, White, Phillip
<Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu

wrote:

David & Larry, everyone else ...

by way of introduction, Margaret and Carrie point out that the
data
in
this paper emerged through a three year study - which was the
processes
of
how students of color, interested in STEM, responded to the
externally
imposed neoliberal requirements. they framed their study using
theories
of
social practices on how identity developed in context.


David, you reject the theories.  or so i understand your
position.
as
you
write: It's that the theory

contradicts my own personal theories.

are you also rejecting the data as well?  it seems as if you
are
suggesting this when you write: The authors find this point (in
the
case
of
Lorena) somewhere between the
beginning of the tenth and the end of the eleventh grade, but I
think
that's just because it's where they are looking.

you reject the narrative of Lorena on the grounds that it could
be
traced
back to infancy.

do you also reject the identical narrative found in the adult
practitioners within the context of the high schools?  that
this
narrative
is not one of a contemporary neoliberal practice but rather
could
be
traced
back to, say, the mid 1600's new england colonies, in
particular
massachusettes, where the practices of public american
education
began?

to explain the data that emerged from the Eisenhart/Allen
study,
what
theories would you have used?

phillip

________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 7:03 AM
To: David Kellogg; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Margaret and Carrie,
Thank you for this wonderful paper that explains the shallow
*hollowed-out* way of forming identity as a form of meaning and
sense. I
will add the French word *sens* which always includes
*direction*
within
meaning and sense.

David, your response that what our theory makes sens of depends
on
where
we are looking makes sens to me.
You put in question the moment when the interpersonal (you and
me)
way of
authoring sens *shifts* or turns to cultural and historical
ways
of
being
immersed in sens. The article refers to the
*historical-in-person*.

My further comment, where I am looking) is in the description
of
the
sociocultural as a response to *externally changing
circumstances*
as
the
process of *learning as becoming* (see page 190).

The article says:

This process is what Lave and Wenger (1991) and other
Sociocultural
researchers have referred to as *learning as becoming,* that
is,
learning
that occurs as one becomes a certain kind of person in a
particular
context.  Identities conceived in this way are not stable or
fixed.
As
*external circumstances* affecting a person change, so too may
the
identities that are produced *in response*. (Holland & Skinner,
1997).

In this version of *history-in-person* the identity processes
that
start
the process moving in a neoliberal *direction* are *external*
circumstances. I am not questioning this version of the
importance
of
the
external but do question if looking primarily or primordially
to
the
external circumstances as central if we are not leaving a gap
in
our
notions of *sens*.

If by looking or highlighting or illuminating the *external*
and
highly
visible acts of the actual we are leaving a gap in actual*ity.
A gap in *sens*.

To be continued by others...

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: David Kellogg
Sent: October 31, 2016 2:15 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

I was turning Mike's request--for a short explanation of the
Halliday/Vygotsky interface--over in my mind for a few days,
unsure
where
to start. I usually decide these difficult "where to start"
questions
in
the easiest possible way, with whatever I happen to be working
on.
In
this
case it's the origins of language in a one year old, a moment
which
is
almost as mysterious to me as the origins of life or the Big
Bang.
But
perhaps for that very reason it's not a good place to start
(the
Big
Bang
always seemed to me to jump the gun a bit, not to mention the
origins
of
life).

Let me start with the "Hollowed Out" paper Alfredo just
thoughtfully
sent
around instead. My first impression is that this paper leaves a
really
big
gap between the data and the conclusions, and that this gap is
largely
filled by theory. Here are some examples of what I mean:

a)    "Whereas 'subject position' is given by society,
'identity'
is
self-authored, although it must be recognized by others to be
sustained."
(p. 189)

b)  "It is notable that this construction of a good student,
though
familiar, does not make any reference to personal interest,
excitement,
or
engagement in the topics or content-related activities." (193)

c)  "When students' statements such as 'I get it', 'I'm
confident',
'I'm
good at this', and  'I can pull this off' are interpreted in
the
context
of
the figured world of math or science at the two schools, their
statements
index more than a grade. They reference a meaning system for
being
good
in
math or science that includes the actor identity
characteristics
of
being
able to grasp the subject matter easily, do the work quickly,
do
it
without
help from others, do it faster than others, and get an A."
(193)

In each case, we are told to believe in a theory: "given by
society",
"self-authored", "does not make any reference", "the context of
the
figured
world". It's not just that in each case the theory seems to go
against
the
data (although it certainly does in places, such as Lowena's
views
as
a
tenth grader). I can always live with a theory that contradicts
my
data:
that's what being a rationalist is all about. It's that the
theory
contradicts my own personal theories.

I don't believe that identity is self authored, and I also
don't
believe
that subject position is given by society as a whole, I think
the
word
"good" does include personal interest, excitement, and
engagement
as
much
as it includes being able to grasp the subject matter easily,
do
the
work
quickly, do it without help from others, do it faster than
others
and
get
an A. To me anyway, the key word in the data given in c) is
actually
"I"
and not "it" or "this": the students think they are talking
about,
and
therefore probably are actually talking about, a relation
between
their
inner states and the activity at hand  or between the activity
at
hand
and
the result they get; they are not invoking the figured world of
neoliberal
results and prospects.

But never mind my own theories. Any gap is, after all, a good
opportunity
for theory building. The authors are raising a key issue in
both
Vygotsky
and Halliday: when does an interpersonal relation become a
historico-cultural one? That is, when does that 'me" and "you"
relationship
in which I really do have the power to author my identity (I
can
make
up
any name I want and, within limits, invent my own history,
particularly
if
I am a backpacker) give way to a job, an address, a number and
a
class
over
which I have very little power at all? When does the
interpersonal
somehow
become an alien ideational "identity" that confronts me like a
strange
ghost when I look in the mirror?

The authors find this point (in the case of Lorena) somewhere
between
the
beginning of the tenth and the end of the eleventh grade, but I
think
that's just because it's where they are looking. We can
probably
find
the
roots of this distinction (between the interpersonal and the
historico-cultural) as far back as we like, right back to
(Vygotsky)
the
moment when the child gives up the "self-authored" language at
one
and
takes on the language recognized by others and (Halliday) the
moment
when
the child distinguishes between Attributive identifying clauses
("I'm
confident", "I'm good at this"), material processes ("I can
pull
this
off")
and mental ones ("I get it").

(To be continued...but not necessarily by me!)

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil
<a.j.gil@iped.uio.no

wrote:

Dear xmca'ers,


I am excited to announce the next article for discussion,
which
is
now
available open access at the T&F MCA pages<
http://www.tandfonline
.
com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1188962>.


After a really interesting discussion on Zaza's colourful
paper
(which
still goes on developed into a discussion on micro- and
ontogenesis),
we
will from next week be looking at an article by Margaret
Eisenhart
and
Carrie Allen from the special issue on "Reimagining Science
Education
in
the Neoliberal Global Context". I think the article, as the
whole
issue,
offers a very neat example of research trying to tie together
cultural/economical? and developmental aspects (of identity in
this
case).


Margaret has kindly accepted to join the discussion ?after US
elections
(which will surely keep the attention of many of us busy).
Meanwhile, I
share the link<http://www.tandfonline.
com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039
.
2016.1188962>  to the article (see above), and also attach it
as
PDF.
??Good read!


Alfredo




















------------------------------

Message: 23
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2016 07:39:56 +0900
From: Wagner Luiz Schmit <wagner.schmit@gmail.com>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Butterflies of Zagorsk
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID:
<CAMS1o3FuQTKNsXd=txqh17jp=eHCnmeWUkbyRgBHr2TqFN6CPg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Dear Professor Cole,

Thank you very much for this file! I am downloading it now and it will be
very useful in classes about special education.

All the best for you.

Wagner

On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 4:45 AM, mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu> wrote:

In rummaging through old files, I found a copy of Butterflies of Zagorsk,
which has been asked about for some time on XMCA. It is posted here:
http://lchc.ucsd.edu/Movies/Butterflies_of_Zagorsk.mp4

Note that in making this film available to the xmca community, I am doing
so in my function as an educator, and in light of the pedagogical functions
of xmca as a source of important materials for concerning the cultural
nature of human development. I trust you will use it in the same fashion.

Meantime, lets hear it for rummaging and Bruce Jones' help in getting it
online for us. Perhaps for later discussion.


mike



------------------------------

Message: 24
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 18:42:36 -0600
From: Edward  Wall <ewall@umich.edu>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID: <E6844A14-7ED6-466A-8C76-C45883D6F5E7@umich.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

Larry

    There are, at least, four somewhat current possibilities (I?m not sure if they should be called exemplars) as regards mathematics

1. Summerhill (and, perhaps, some other English private schools)
2. Some private schools in the US (a book was written by a teacher at one. If there is any interest I?ll see if I can dig up the title).
3. The case of Louis P. Benezet in a US public school in1929
4. There is some indication that schools in Finland and the Netherlands are, perhaps, a little less ?neoliberal' (however, the evidence isn?t clear)

Basically in some of the above formal mathematics instruction is put off until either children ask or until until fourth or fifth grade; however, children engage in, you might say, mathematical play (Dewey recommended something like this). This is, by the way and according to some, also what a good mathematics preK program looks like. Also, this is a bit as regards mathematics what the ancient Greek version of schooling for the elite looked like (i.e. mathematics was put off).

Ed

On Nov 17, 2016, at  3:05 PM, lpscholar2@gmail.com wrote:

The question remains, if this neoliberal context generates (hollowed-out) educational *spaces* or institutions then is it possible we are able to offer exemplars of other educational places (current or historical) that manifested different kinds of identity formation that were not hollowed out. I speculate these exemplars would embody or incarnate deeply historical and  ethical orientations and practices.
If we have lost our way, are there other models (cultural imaginaries) that co-generate developmental narratives that will nurture well-being?

Exemplary models that point in a certain direction

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: Huw Lloyd
Sent: November 17, 2016 11:32 AM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Alfredo,

Yes, they're pathological.  I am merely saying that the problems inherent
in the pathology can be edifying.  No, I don't think the issues can be
transcended within conventional practices. Perhaps the best that can be
achieved is that the students recognise an institutional need for "good
behaviour" and the teacher recognises an educational need for real problem
solving. For "real" education, we would need something like Davydov's
system. But this is merely one view of the purpose of "education". There
are many who don't seem to recognise these (and other) important
implications.

Best,
Huw



On 17 November 2016 at 18:11, Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
wrote:

Huw,

great comments. I like what you say, that the (institutional, social)
process always is educational, and I agree: it develops into the formation
of habit and character. But I still wonder whether all educational
processes lead to growth or development, or whether we rather should be
able to identify some processes as, we may call them, *pathological* (or
perhaps involutive?). There you have Bateson on double bind and
schizophrenia, for example. Here, in the article, we have some young
students that enter a system that generates a double bind (it was Mike who
made me aware of the connection with double bind). The question is, will
the system develop without some form of awareness *about* the double bind
that overcomes it by generating a system that does not only include the
double bind, but also its own description (thereby becoming a higher order
system, one in which participants, students and teachers, come to grow
rather than come to stall).

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
Sent: 17 November 2016 10:54
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Alfredo,

The 'zone' is always present.  Whether it is recognised or not is another
matter.
I do not think this interpretation is quite a zero sum game, because there
is always the aspect that the institutionalised process is educational --
the laws reveal themselves one way or another.  So (from an Illich
perspective) the opportunity to discover what is real remains, it just
takes a different course.

Best,
Huw

On 17 November 2016 at 07:37, Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
wrote:

What touches me of the article is something that perhaps relates to this
tension that I find between David's (individualistic?) approach to
prolepsis in his post (David, I thought, and continue thinking, that
prolepsis refers to something that emerges in the relation between two,
not
something that either is present or absent within a person), and
Phillip's
view of young people figuring out what life is all about just as all we
do.
And so here (and in any neoliberal school context) we have wonderfully
beautiful young people more or less interested in science or in maths,
but
all eager to live a life and evolve as best as they can (whatever that
best
may mean for each one). And then you see how the history and context that
they come into gives them everything they need to develop motives and
goals; to then make sure that the majority of them won't make it so that
only a few privileged (or in the case of Margaret's paper none, according
to the authors) succeed. And then what remains is not just a hollowed-out
science and math identity, but also a hollowed-out soul that had illusion
and now just doesn't. Not only a failure to provide opportunities to
learners to become anything(one) good about science and math, but also a
robbing of other possible paths of development that may had grown in
people
if they had been hanging out with some other better company. Do we have a
term to refer to the opposite of a zone of proximal development? Not just
the absence of it, but the strangling of it.

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of White, Phillip <Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu>
Sent: 17 November 2016 06:29
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

David, the examples on page 193, students 1, 2 & 3 - aren't these
examples
of proleptic thought - especially for student 2, who looks at where she
is
"I have my own standards", a statement of the present, then a looking
back
at  what has happened, "I like to get straight A's". and then setting a
target for the future, "help for like to get in college and stuff, so
yeah,
I participate in a lot of stuff." ending with a reassertion of present
activities to attain future goals.


and there is a preponderance of the use of "I", rather than "you".


i'd give the young people for credit than a myopia focused merely on
their
age: the business of young people is figuring out what life is all about
and how to participate, just as adults and infants and old people like me
do.


i'm not convinced that your arguments are supported by the data in this
Eisenhard / Allen paper.


phillip

________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 1:24:35 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Actually, Henry, I was attacking the idea that tense is an empty mental
space. I guess I am a little like Larry: when we discuss articles I have
a
strong tendency to try to make them relevant to what I am doing rather
than
to drop what I am doing and go and discuss what everybody else is
discussing. So what I am doing right now is trying to make sense of some
story-telling data where the adults are all over the map on tenses, and
the
kids seem to stick to one tense only. The adults are slipping in and out
of
mental spaces. The kids are telling stories.

I think the relevance to the article is this: When you look at the way
the
article frames institutional practices and figured worlds, we see
prolepsis--a preoccupation with the future. But when we look at what the
kids are doing and saying it is very much in the moment. Is this simply
because mental processes like "like" and "want" tend to take simple
present
(because they are less defined than material processes)? Or is it because
while the institutions have the near future firmly in view and the
figured
worlds have irrealis in view, the business of young people is youth?

Vygotsky points out that the question the interviewer asks is very much a
part of the data. For example, if you ask a question using "you" you
often
get "you" in reply, even if you design your question to get "I".

Q: Why do you want to kill yourself?
A: The same reason everybody wants to kill themselves. You want to find
out
if anybody really cares.

To take another example that is probably more relevant to readers: both
the
Brexit vote and the American elections are clear examples of statistical
unreliability in that if you tried to repeat the election the morning
after
you would probably get an utterly different result. Take all of those
black
voters and the real working class voters who voted Obama but couldn't be
bothered for Hillary (not the imaginary "white working class voters" who
work in imaginary industries in Iowa, rural Pennsylvania, North Carolina
and Florida). They might well have behaved rather differently knowing how
imminent the neo-Confederacy really was. This is usually presented as
"buyer's remorse," but it's more than that; the event itself would be
part
of its replication. This is something that statistical models that use
standard error of the mean cannot build in (they work on the impossible
idea that you can repeat an event ten or twenty thousand times without
any
memory at all).

In the same way, when you interview a group of students together you
notice
that they tend to model answers on each other rather than on your
question,
and when you interview them separately, you notice that YOU tend to
change
your question according to the previous answer you received. On the one
hand, life is not easily distracted by its own future: it is too wholly
there in each moment of existence. On the other hand, each of these
moments
includes the previous one, and therefore all the previous ones, in
itself.
The past weighs like a nightmare on the brain of the living, and objects
in
the rear view mirror are always closer than they appear.

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 10:23 AM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com>
wrote:

David,
I was puzzled that you found Langacker to be relevant to this topic,
but
the last paragraph of your post makes an important connection between
Langacker and Vygotsky: Both see speech acts as staged?interactants
view
themselves as ?on stage?. I think the book by Vera and Reuben is
largely
about how differently math is ?staged? by working mathematicians as
contrasted with doing math in school. I think it would be interesting
to
analyze how natural language and the language of math scaffold each
other
in both contexts. Word problems have been a well-used way of connecting
the
two languages; stats and graphs are commonly used in the media to
clarify
and elaborate text in articles on economics, presidential elections,
and
what not.

I would love to read your ?unpublishable? on Langacker and Halliday on
tense. What I recall from reading Langacker is his interest in ?basic
domains?, starting with the temporal and spatial. Somewhere he has said
that he believes that the temporal domain is the more basic. As you?d
guess, the spatial domain is especially useful in elucidating what he
calls
?things? (nouns are conceptually about things); the temporal domain is
more
closely connected to what he calls ?processes? wherein he analyzes
tense
and aspect.

I think Langacker would agree that his work in cognitive grammar has a
long way to go in contributing to the idea that grammar is usage based,
rather than some autonomous module, but he is working on it. I think
there
is a potential for connecting Halliday and Langacker, though I?m not
smart
enough to convince you of that evidently. Somehow the connection must
be
made by staying close to the data, ?thick description? ethnographers
are
fond of saying. I think the article by Carrie and Margaret is raising
this
issue.

The ?hollowed out? math curriculum in the article resonates with the
?potholes? you say teachers must watch out for. Some may say that  the
hollowing out is typical even of ?elite? K-12 schools. Some may say
that
this is deliberate. I would say my own experience of math in school was
often hollowed out, which I sensed, but didn?t discover until I got to
the
?pure math? department in the mid 60s at Univ of Texas at Austin under
the
leadership of Robert Lee Moore. He is a main protagonist in Chapter 8
of
Vera?s and Reuben?s book.

I?ll end it there.

Henry




On Nov 15, 2016, at 1:38 PM, David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
wrote:

Henry:

I just wrote another unpublishable comparing how Langacker and
Halliday treat tense, and I'm starting to come to grips with the
different
theory of experience underlying the two grammars. Langacker somehow
sees
it
as creating empty mental space (and aspect as creating space within
space).
Halliday sees tense as a way of abstracting concrete doings and
happenings.
Halliday's tense system is not spatial at all but temporal: it's
temporally
deictic and then temporally recursive: a kind of time machine that
simultaneously transports and orients the speaker either
proleptically
or
retroleptically. So for example if I say to you that this article we
are
discussing is going to have been being discussed for two or three
weeks
now, then "is going" is a kind of time machine that takes you into
the
future, from which "You are Here" vantage point the article has been
(past)
being discussed (present). Present in the past in the future.

And that got me thinking about theory and practice. It seems to me
that
the
they are related, but simultaneously and not sequentially. That is,
the
output of one is not the input of the other: they are simply more and
less
abstract ways of looking at one and the same thing. So for example in
this
article the tasks of theory and practice are one and the same: the
task
of
theory is really to define as precisely as possible the domain, the
scope,
the range of the inquiry into authoring math and science identities
and
the
task of practice is to ask what exactly you want to do in this
domain/scope/range--to try to understand how they are hollowed out a
little
better so that maybe teachers like you and me can help fill the damn
potholes in a little. You can't really do the one without doing the
other:
trying to decide the terrain under study without deciding some task
that
you want to do there is like imagining tense as empty mental space
and
not
as some actual, concrete doing or happening. Conversely, the way you
dig
the hole depends very much on how big and where you want it.

So there are three kinds of mental spaces in the first part of the
article:

a) institutional arrangements (e.g. "priority improvement plans",
career-academy/comprehensive school status STEM tracks, AP classes)
b) figured worlds (e.g. 'good students', and 'don't cares', or what
Eckhart
and McConnell-Ginet called 'jocks', 'nerds',  'burnouts',
'gangbangers')
c) authored identities (i.e. what kids say about themselves and what
they
think about themselves)

Now, I think it's possible to make this distinction--but they are
probably
better understood not as mental spaces (in which case they really do
overlap) but rather as doings (or, as is my wont, sayings). Different
people are saying different things: a) is mostly the sayings of the
school
boards and administrators, b) is mostly the sayings of teachers and
groups
of kids, and c) is mostly the sayings of individual students. It's
always
tempting for a theory to focus on c), because that's where all the
data
is
and it's tempting for practice too, because if you are against what
is
happening in a) and in b), that's where the most likely point of
intervention is.

"But the data does suggest that the "figured worlds" are figured by
authored identities--not by institutional arrangements. Is that just
an
artefact of the warm empathy of the authors for the words (although
maybe
not the exact wordings) of their subjects, or is it real grounds for
hope?

Marx says (beginning of the 18th Brumaire): "*Men make* their own
*history*,
*but they* do *not make* it as *they* please; *they* do *not make* it
under self-selected circumstances, *but* under circumstances existing
already, given and transmitted from the *past*. The tradition of all
dead
generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living."

It's a good theory, i.e. at once a truth and a tragedy. And it's a
theory treats time as time and not as an empty stage.

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 9:39 AM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com>
wrote:

All,
I have read only part of Margaret?s and Carrie?s article, but I
wanted
to
jump in with a reference to a book by Vygotskian Vera John-Steiner
and
her
mathematician husband Reuben Hersh: Loving and Hating Mathematics:
Challenging the Mathematical Life. Huw?s point (v) which refers to
?identities of independence and finding out sustainable within these
settings (school math classes) spent high school. Vera?s and
Reuben?s
book
contrasts what it?s like to work and think like a real (working)
mathematician (what I think Huw is talking about) and what we call
mathematics in the classroom. Chapter 8 of the book "The Teaching of
Mathematics: Fierce or Friendly?? is interesting reading and could
be
relevant to this discussion.
Henry


On Nov 13, 2016, at 2:47 PM, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
wrote:

Dear Margaret

My reading has not been a particularly careful one, so I leave it
to
yourselves to judge the usefulness of these points.

i) Whether arguments can be made (for or against) a nebulous term
(neoliberalism) with its political associations, by arguments about
identity that are themselves not deliberately political.

ii) Whether it is better not to focus essentially on the place of
identity.

iii) Whether it is worthwhile contrasting the role/identity of
"model
student" with "identities" that anyone excelling at STEM subjects
would
relate to.  On this, I would point to the importance with
identifying
with
appreciations for "awareness of not knowing" and "eagerness to find
out"
(which also entails learning about what it means to know).

iv) Whether you detect that to the degree that an identity is
foregrounded
in the actual practice of STEM work (rather than as background
social
appeasement), it is being faked? That is, someone is playing at the
role
rather than actually committing themselves to finding out about
unknowns.

v) Whether, in fact, there is actually a "tiered" or varied set of
acceptable "identities" within the settings you explored, such that
identities of independence and finding out are sustainable within
these
settings, possibly representing a necessary fudge to deal with the
requirements placed upon the institutions.

Best,
Huw

On 12 November 2016 at 20:30, Margaret A Eisenhart <
margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu> wrote:

Hello Everyone,

Carrie and I are newcomers to this list, and we thank you for the
opportunity to engage with you about our article, ?Hollowed Out.?
We
also
hope for your patience as we learn to participate in the stream of
thinking here!

Given the comments so far, we are intrigued by others? ideas about
the
link between our theory and our data.  On this topic, we would
like
to
make clear that we did not intend to suggest that the students
were
making
sense of their lives in the same way that we interpreted them
through
the
lens of our theory. Our claim is that opportunities and figured
worlds
are
resources for identity and that the students' words to us
reflected
perspectives consistent with neoliberalism, with some pretty
serious
implications. Like Phillip White, we are interested in what
theories
others would use to explain the data we presented.

Like Mike Cole, we are also intrigued by the prospect of
?exemplars?
we
might turn to.

We look forward to hearing your thoughts.


Margaret Eisenhart



On 11/11/16, 11:35 AM, "lpscholar2@gmail.com" <
lpscholar2@gmail.com

wrote:

A resumption in exploring the meaning and sense (preferably sens
as
this
term draws attention to movement and direction within meaning and
sense)
of this month?s article.
The paper begins with the title and the image of (hollowed-out)
meaning
and sense that is impoverished and holds few resources for
developing a
deeper sens of identity.
The article concludes with the implication that the work of
social
justice within educational institutions is not about improving
educational outcome in neoliberal terms; the implications of the
study
are about *reorganizing* the identities ? particulary
identities-with-standind that young people are *exposed* to, can
articulate, and can act on (in school and beyond).

I would say this is taking an ethical stand?.

I will now turn to page 189 and the section (identity-in-context)
to
amplify the notion of (cultural imaginary) and (figured worlds).
This imaginary being the site or location of history-in-person.
That
is
identity is a form of legacy (or *text*) ABOUT the kind of person
one
is
or has become in responding to (external) circumstances.
These external circumstances are EXPERIENCED primarily in the
organization of local practices and cultural imaginaries (figured
worlds)
that circulate and *give meaning* (and sens) to local practices

Figured worlds are interpreted following Holland as socially and
culturally *realms of interpretation* and certain players are
recognized
as (exemplars).

As such cultural, social, historical, dialogical psychological
(imaginaries) are handmaidens of the imaginal *giving meaning* to
*what*
goes on in the directions we take together.

Two key terms i highlight are (exemplars) and (direction) we
take.
The realm of the ethical turn
What are the markers and signposts emerging in the deeper ethical
turn
that offers more than a hollowed-out answer.
Are there any *ghost* stories of exemplars we can turn to as well
as
living exemplars? By ghosts i mean ancestors who continue as
beacons
of
hope exemplifying *who* we are.

My way into exploring the impoverished narratives of the
neoliberal
imaginary and reawakening exemplary ancestors or ghosts from
their
slumber to help guide us through these multiple imaginaries

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: mike cole
Sent: November 9, 2016 3:04 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion
Re-started

Alfredo--

for any who missed the initial article sent out, you might send
them
here:

http://lchc.ucsd.edu/mca/

I am meeting shortly with Bruce. A list of improvements to web
site
welcome, although not clear how long they will take to implement.

mike

On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 2:38 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil <
a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
wrote:

Dear all,

last week I announced MCA's 3rd Issue article for discussion:

"Hollowed Out: Meaning and Authoring of High School Math and
Science
Identities in the Context of Neoliberal Reform," by Margaret
Eisenhart
and
Carrie Allen.

The article is open access and will continue to be so during the
discussion time at this link.

Thanks to everyone who begun the discussion early after I shared
the
link
last week, and sorry that we sort of brought the discussion to a
halt
until
the authors were ready to discuss. I have now sent Margaret and
Carrie
the
posts that were produced then so that they could catch up, but I
also
invited them to feel free to move on an introduce themselves as
soon
as
they ??wanted.

It is not without some doubts that one introduces a discussion
of
an
article in a moment that some US media have called as "An
American
Tragedy"
and other international editorials are describing as "a dark day
for
the
world." But I believe that the paper may indeed offer some
grounds
for
discuss important issues that are at stake in everyone's home
now,
as
Mike
recently describes in a touching post on the "local state of
mind"
and
that
have to do with identity and its connection to a neoliberal
organisation of
the economy. It is not difficult to link neoliberalism to
Trump's
phenomenon and how it pervades very intimate aspects of everyday
life.

If this was not enough, I think the authors' background on
women's
scholar
and professional careers in science is totally relevant to the
discussions
on gendered discourse we've been having. Now without halts, I
hope
this
thread gives joys and wisdom to all.

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
edu>
on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
Sent: 02 November 2016 01:48
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Thanks Mike and everyone! I am sure Margaret (and many of those
still
reading) will be happy to be able to catch up when she joins us
next
week!
Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
edu>
on behalf of mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu>
Sent: 02 November 2016 01:32
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Gentlemen -- I believe Fernando told us that Margaret would be
able to join this discussion next week. Just a quick glance at
the
discussion so far indicates that there is a lot there to wade
into
before she has had a word.

I am only part way through the article, expecting to have until
next
week
to think about it.

May I suggest your forbearance while this slow-poke tries to
catch
up!

mike

On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 3:38 PM, White, Phillip
<Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu

wrote:

David & Larry, everyone else ...

by way of introduction, Margaret and Carrie point out that the
data
in
this paper emerged through a three year study - which was the
processes
of
how students of color, interested in STEM, responded to the
externally
imposed neoliberal requirements. they framed their study using
theories
of
social practices on how identity developed in context.


David, you reject the theories.  or so i understand your
position.
as
you
write: It's that the theory

contradicts my own personal theories.

are you also rejecting the data as well?  it seems as if you
are
suggesting this when you write: The authors find this point (in
the
case
of
Lorena) somewhere between the
beginning of the tenth and the end of the eleventh grade, but I
think
that's just because it's where they are looking.

you reject the narrative of Lorena on the grounds that it could
be
traced
back to infancy.

do you also reject the identical narrative found in the adult
practitioners within the context of the high schools?  that
this
narrative
is not one of a contemporary neoliberal practice but rather
could
be
traced
back to, say, the mid 1600's new england colonies, in
particular
massachusettes, where the practices of public american
education
began?

to explain the data that emerged from the Eisenhart/Allen
study,
what
theories would you have used?

phillip

________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 7:03 AM
To: David Kellogg; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Margaret and Carrie,
Thank you for this wonderful paper that explains the shallow
*hollowed-out* way of forming identity as a form of meaning and
sense. I
will add the French word *sens* which always includes
*direction*
within
meaning and sense.

David, your response that what our theory makes sens of depends
on
where
we are looking makes sens to me.
You put in question the moment when the interpersonal (you and
me)
way of
authoring sens *shifts* or turns to cultural and historical
ways
of
being
immersed in sens. The article refers to the
*historical-in-person*.

My further comment, where I am looking) is in the description
of
the
sociocultural as a response to *externally changing
circumstances*
as
the
process of *learning as becoming* (see page 190).

The article says:

This process is what Lave and Wenger (1991) and other
Sociocultural
researchers have referred to as *learning as becoming,* that
is,
learning
that occurs as one becomes a certain kind of person in a
particular
context.  Identities conceived in this way are not stable or
fixed.
As
*external circumstances* affecting a person change, so too may
the
identities that are produced *in response*. (Holland & Skinner,
1997).

In this version of *history-in-person* the identity processes
that
start
the process moving in a neoliberal *direction* are *external*
circumstances. I am not questioning this version of the
importance
of
the
external but do question if looking primarily or primordially
to
the
external circumstances as central if we are not leaving a gap
in
our
notions of *sens*.

If by looking or highlighting or illuminating the *external*
and
highly
visible acts of the actual we are leaving a gap in actual*ity.
A gap in *sens*.

To be continued by others...

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: David Kellogg
Sent: October 31, 2016 2:15 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

I was turning Mike's request--for a short explanation of the
Halliday/Vygotsky interface--over in my mind for a few days,
unsure
where
to start. I usually decide these difficult "where to start"
questions
in
the easiest possible way, with whatever I happen to be working
on.
In
this
case it's the origins of language in a one year old, a moment
which
is
almost as mysterious to me as the origins of life or the Big
Bang.
But
perhaps for that very reason it's not a good place to start
(the
Big
Bang
always seemed to me to jump the gun a bit, not to mention the
origins
of
life).

Let me start with the "Hollowed Out" paper Alfredo just
thoughtfully
sent
around instead. My first impression is that this paper leaves a
really
big
gap between the data and the conclusions, and that this gap is
largely
filled by theory. Here are some examples of what I mean:

a)    "Whereas 'subject position' is given by society,
'identity'
is
self-authored, although it must be recognized by others to be
sustained."
(p. 189)

b)  "It is notable that this construction of a good student,
though
familiar, does not make any reference to personal interest,
excitement,
or
engagement in the topics or content-related activities." (193)

c)  "When students' statements such as 'I get it', 'I'm
confident',
'I'm
good at this', and  'I can pull this off' are interpreted in
the
context
of
the figured world of math or science at the two schools, their
statements
index more than a grade. They reference a meaning system for
being
good
in
math or science that includes the actor identity
characteristics
of
being
able to grasp the subject matter easily, do the work quickly,
do
it
without
help from others, do it faster than others, and get an A."
(193)

In each case, we are told to believe in a theory: "given by
society",
"self-authored", "does not make any reference", "the context of
the
figured
world". It's not just that in each case the theory seems to go
against
the
data (although it certainly does in places, such as Lowena's
views
as
a
tenth grader). I can always live with a theory that contradicts
my
data:
that's what being a rationalist is all about. It's that the
theory
contradicts my own personal theories.

I don't believe that identity is self authored, and I also
don't
believe
that subject position is given by society as a whole, I think
the
word
"good" does include personal interest, excitement, and
engagement
as
much
as it includes being able to grasp the subject matter easily,
do
the
work
quickly, do it without help from others, do it faster than
others
and
get
an A. To me anyway, the key word in the data given in c) is
actually
"I"
and not "it" or "this": the students think they are talking
about,
and
therefore probably are actually talking about, a relation
between
their
inner states and the activity at hand  or between the activity
at
hand
and
the result they get; they are not invoking the figured world of
neoliberal
results and prospects.

But never mind my own theories. Any gap is, after all, a good
opportunity
for theory building. The authors are raising a key issue in
both
Vygotsky
and Halliday: when does an interpersonal relation become a
historico-cultural one? That is, when does that 'me" and "you"
relationship
in which I really do have the power to author my identity (I
can
make
up
any name I want and, within limits, invent my own history,
particularly
if
I am a backpacker) give way to a job, an address, a number and
a
class
over
which I have very little power at all? When does the
interpersonal
somehow
become an alien ideational "identity" that confronts me like a
strange
ghost when I look in the mirror?

The authors find this point (in the case of Lorena) somewhere
between
the
beginning of the tenth and the end of the eleventh grade, but I
think
that's just because it's where they are looking. We can
probably
find
the
roots of this distinction (between the interpersonal and the
historico-cultural) as far back as we like, right back to
(Vygotsky)
the
moment when the child gives up the "self-authored" language at
one
and
takes on the language recognized by others and (Halliday) the
moment
when
the child distinguishes between Attributive identifying clauses
("I'm
confident", "I'm good at this"), material processes ("I can
pull
this
off")
and mental ones ("I get it").

(To be continued...but not necessarily by me!)

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil
<a.j.gil@iped.uio.no

wrote:

Dear xmca'ers,


I am excited to announce the next article for discussion,
which
is
now
available open access at the T&F MCA pages<
http://www.tandfonline
.
com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1188962>.


After a really interesting discussion on Zaza's colourful
paper
(which
still goes on developed into a discussion on micro- and
ontogenesis),
we
will from next week be looking at an article by Margaret
Eisenhart
and
Carrie Allen from the special issue on "Reimagining Science
Education
in
the Neoliberal Global Context". I think the article, as the
whole
issue,
offers a very neat example of research trying to tie together
cultural/economical? and developmental aspects (of identity in
this
case).


Margaret has kindly accepted to join the discussion ?after US
elections
(which will surely keep the attention of many of us busy).
Meanwhile, I
share the link<http://www.tandfonline.
com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039
.
2016.1188962>  to the article (see above), and also attach it
as
PDF.
??Good read!


Alfredo






















------------------------------

Message: 25
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 19:16:01 -0800
From: <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
To: Edward Wall <ewall@umich.edu>, "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"
<xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID: <582e7283.84cf620a.c9f5a.302f@mx.google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

So basically engaging in play may be foundational to learning a particular disciplinary subject matter including mathematical play.
This playful approach as counterpoint to formal high stakes approaches.  This places the scope of play (itself) at the center of our inquiry.
This feels intuitively to be relevant to exemplary ways of learning.

Like imagination, play is not taken seriously , but may be foundational or necessary for learning that is exemplary.


Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: Edward Wall
Sent: November 17, 2016 4:45 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Larry

    There are, at least, four somewhat current possibilities (I?m not sure if they should be called exemplars) as regards mathematics

1. Summerhill (and, perhaps, some other English private schools)
2. Some private schools in the US (a book was written by a teacher at one. If there is any interest I?ll see if I can dig up the title).
3. The case of Louis P. Benezet in a US public school in1929
4. There is some indication that schools in Finland and the Netherlands are, perhaps, a little less ?neoliberal' (however, the evidence isn?t clear)

Basically in some of the above formal mathematics instruction is put off until either children ask or until until fourth or fifth grade; however, children engage in, you might say, mathematical play (Dewey recommended something like this). This is, by the way and according to some, also what a good mathematics preK program looks like. Also, this is a bit as regards mathematics what the ancient Greek version of schooling for the elite looked like (i.e. mathematics was put off).

Ed

On Nov 17, 2016, at  3:05 PM, lpscholar2@gmail.com wrote:

The question remains, if this neoliberal context generates (hollowed-out) educational *spaces* or institutions then is it possible we are able to offer exemplars of other educational places (current or historical) that manifested different kinds of identity formation that were not hollowed out. I speculate these exemplars would embody or incarnate deeply historical and  ethical orientations and practices.
If we have lost our way, are there other models (cultural imaginaries) that co-generate developmental narratives that will nurture well-being?

Exemplary models that point in a certain direction

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: Huw Lloyd
Sent: November 17, 2016 11:32 AM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Alfredo,

Yes, they're pathological.  I am merely saying that the problems inherent
in the pathology can be edifying.  No, I don't think the issues can be
transcended within conventional practices. Perhaps the best that can be
achieved is that the students recognise an institutional need for "good
behaviour" and the teacher recognises an educational need for real problem
solving. For "real" education, we would need something like Davydov's
system. But this is merely one view of the purpose of "education". There
are many who don't seem to recognise these (and other) important
implications.

Best,
Huw



On 17 November 2016 at 18:11, Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
wrote:

Huw,

great comments. I like what you say, that the (institutional, social)
process always is educational, and I agree: it develops into the formation
of habit and character. But I still wonder whether all educational
processes lead to growth or development, or whether we rather should be
able to identify some processes as, we may call them, *pathological* (or
perhaps involutive?). There you have Bateson on double bind and
schizophrenia, for example. Here, in the article, we have some young
students that enter a system that generates a double bind (it was Mike who
made me aware of the connection with double bind). The question is, will
the system develop without some form of awareness *about* the double bind
that overcomes it by generating a system that does not only include the
double bind, but also its own description (thereby becoming a higher order
system, one in which participants, students and teachers, come to grow
rather than come to stall).

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
Sent: 17 November 2016 10:54
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Alfredo,

The 'zone' is always present.  Whether it is recognised or not is another
matter.
I do not think this interpretation is quite a zero sum game, because there
is always the aspect that the institutionalised process is educational --
the laws reveal themselves one way or another.  So (from an Illich
perspective) the opportunity to discover what is real remains, it just
takes a different course.

Best,
Huw

On 17 November 2016 at 07:37, Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
wrote:

What touches me of the article is something that perhaps relates to this
tension that I find between David's (individualistic?) approach to
prolepsis in his post (David, I thought, and continue thinking, that
prolepsis refers to something that emerges in the relation between two,
not
something that either is present or absent within a person), and
Phillip's
view of young people figuring out what life is all about just as all we
do.
And so here (and in any neoliberal school context) we have wonderfully
beautiful young people more or less interested in science or in maths,
but
all eager to live a life and evolve as best as they can (whatever that
best
may mean for each one). And then you see how the history and context that
they come into gives them everything they need to develop motives and
goals; to then make sure that the majority of them won't make it so that
only a few privileged (or in the case of Margaret's paper none, according
to the authors) succeed. And then what remains is not just a hollowed-out
science and math identity, but also a hollowed-out soul that had illusion
and now just doesn't. Not only a failure to provide opportunities to
learners to become anything(one) good about science and math, but also a
robbing of other possible paths of development that may had grown in
people
if they had been hanging out with some other better company. Do we have a
term to refer to the opposite of a zone of proximal development? Not just
the absence of it, but the strangling of it.

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of White, Phillip <Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu>
Sent: 17 November 2016 06:29
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

David, the examples on page 193, students 1, 2 & 3 - aren't these
examples
of proleptic thought - especially for student 2, who looks at where she
is
"I have my own standards", a statement of the present, then a looking
back
at  what has happened, "I like to get straight A's". and then setting a
target for the future, "help for like to get in college and stuff, so
yeah,
I participate in a lot of stuff." ending with a reassertion of present
activities to attain future goals.


and there is a preponderance of the use of "I", rather than "you".


i'd give the young people for credit than a myopia focused merely on
their
age: the business of young people is figuring out what life is all about
and how to participate, just as adults and infants and old people like me
do.


i'm not convinced that your arguments are supported by the data in this
Eisenhard / Allen paper.


phillip

________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 1:24:35 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Actually, Henry, I was attacking the idea that tense is an empty mental
space. I guess I am a little like Larry: when we discuss articles I have
a
strong tendency to try to make them relevant to what I am doing rather
than
to drop what I am doing and go and discuss what everybody else is
discussing. So what I am doing right now is trying to make sense of some
story-telling data where the adults are all over the map on tenses, and
the
kids seem to stick to one tense only. The adults are slipping in and out
of
mental spaces. The kids are telling stories.

I think the relevance to the article is this: When you look at the way
the
article frames institutional practices and figured worlds, we see
prolepsis--a preoccupation with the future. But when we look at what the
kids are doing and saying it is very much in the moment. Is this simply
because mental processes like "like" and "want" tend to take simple
present
(because they are less defined than material processes)? Or is it because
while the institutions have the near future firmly in view and the
figured
worlds have irrealis in view, the business of young people is youth?

Vygotsky points out that the question the interviewer asks is very much a
part of the data. For example, if you ask a question using "you" you
often
get "you" in reply, even if you design your question to get "I".

Q: Why do you want to kill yourself?
A: The same reason everybody wants to kill themselves. You want to find
out
if anybody really cares.

To take another example that is probably more relevant to readers: both
the
Brexit vote and the American elections are clear examples of statistical
unreliability in that if you tried to repeat the election the morning
after
you would probably get an utterly different result. Take all of those
black
voters and the real working class voters who voted Obama but couldn't be
bothered for Hillary (not the imaginary "white working class voters" who
work in imaginary industries in Iowa, rural Pennsylvania, North Carolina
and Florida). They might well have behaved rather differently knowing how
imminent the neo-Confederacy really was. This is usually presented as
"buyer's remorse," but it's more than that; the event itself would be
part
of its replication. This is something that statistical models that use
standard error of the mean cannot build in (they work on the impossible
idea that you can repeat an event ten or twenty thousand times without
any
memory at all).

In the same way, when you interview a group of students together you
notice
that they tend to model answers on each other rather than on your
question,
and when you interview them separately, you notice that YOU tend to
change
your question according to the previous answer you received. On the one
hand, life is not easily distracted by its own future: it is too wholly
there in each moment of existence. On the other hand, each of these
moments
includes the previous one, and therefore all the previous ones, in
itself.
The past weighs like a nightmare on the brain of the living, and objects
in
the rear view mirror are always closer than they appear.

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 10:23 AM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com>
wrote:

David,
I was puzzled that you found Langacker to be relevant to this topic,
but
the last paragraph of your post makes an important connection between
Langacker and Vygotsky: Both see speech acts as staged?interactants
view
themselves as ?on stage?. I think the book by Vera and Reuben is
largely
about how differently math is ?staged? by working mathematicians as
contrasted with doing math in school. I think it would be interesting
to
analyze how natural language and the language of math scaffold each
other
in both contexts. Word problems have been a well-used way of connecting
the
two languages; stats and graphs are commonly used in the media to
clarify
and elaborate text in articles on economics, presidential elections,
and
what not.

I would love to read your ?unpublishable? on Langacker and Halliday on
tense. What I recall from reading Langacker is his interest in ?basic
domains?, starting with the temporal and spatial. Somewhere he has said
that he believes that the temporal domain is the more basic. As you?d
guess, the spatial domain is especially useful in elucidating what he
calls
?things? (nouns are conceptually about things); the temporal domain is
more
closely connected to what he calls ?processes? wherein he analyzes
tense
and aspect.

I think Langacker would agree that his work in cognitive grammar has a
long way to go in contributing to the idea that grammar is usage based,
rather than some autonomous module, but he is working on it. I think
there
is a potential for connecting Halliday and Langacker, though I?m not
smart
enough to convince you of that evidently. Somehow the connection must
be
made by staying close to the data, ?thick description? ethnographers
are
fond of saying. I think the article by Carrie and Margaret is raising
this
issue.

The ?hollowed out? math curriculum in the article resonates with the
?potholes? you say teachers must watch out for. Some may say that  the
hollowing out is typical even of ?elite? K-12 schools. Some may say
that
this is deliberate. I would say my own experience of math in school was
often hollowed out, which I sensed, but didn?t discover until I got to
the
?pure math? department in the mid 60s at Univ of Texas at Austin under
the
leadership of Robert Lee Moore. He is a main protagonist in Chapter 8
of
Vera?s and Reuben?s book.

I?ll end it there.

Henry




On Nov 15, 2016, at 1:38 PM, David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
wrote:

Henry:

I just wrote another unpublishable comparing how Langacker and
Halliday treat tense, and I'm starting to come to grips with the
different
theory of experience underlying the two grammars. Langacker somehow
sees
it
as creating empty mental space (and aspect as creating space within
space).
Halliday sees tense as a way of abstracting concrete doings and
happenings.
Halliday's tense system is not spatial at all but temporal: it's
temporally
deictic and then temporally recursive: a kind of time machine that
simultaneously transports and orients the speaker either
proleptically
or
retroleptically. So for example if I say to you that this article we
are
discussing is going to have been being discussed for two or three
weeks
now, then "is going" is a kind of time machine that takes you into
the
future, from which "You are Here" vantage point the article has been
(past)
being discussed (present). Present in the past in the future.

And that got me thinking about theory and practice. It seems to me
that
the
they are related, but simultaneously and not sequentially. That is,
the
output of one is not the input of the other: they are simply more and
less
abstract ways of looking at one and the same thing. So for example in
this
article the tasks of theory and practice are one and the same: the
task
of
theory is really to define as precisely as possible the domain, the
scope,
the range of the inquiry into authoring math and science identities
and
the
task of practice is to ask what exactly you want to do in this
domain/scope/range--to try to understand how they are hollowed out a
little
better so that maybe teachers like you and me can help fill the damn
potholes in a little. You can't really do the one without doing the
other:
trying to decide the terrain under study without deciding some task
that
you want to do there is like imagining tense as empty mental space
and
not
as some actual, concrete doing or happening. Conversely, the way you
dig
the hole depends very much on how big and where you want it.

So there are three kinds of mental spaces in the first part of the
article:

a) institutional arrangements (e.g. "priority improvement plans",
career-academy/comprehensive school status STEM tracks, AP classes)
b) figured worlds (e.g. 'good students', and 'don't cares', or what
Eckhart
and McConnell-Ginet called 'jocks', 'nerds',  'burnouts',
'gangbangers')
c) authored identities (i.e. what kids say about themselves and what
they
think about themselves)

Now, I think it's possible to make this distinction--but they are
probably
better understood not as mental spaces (in which case they really do
overlap) but rather as doings (or, as is my wont, sayings). Different
people are saying different things: a) is mostly the sayings of the
school
boards and administrators, b) is mostly the sayings of teachers and
groups
of kids, and c) is mostly the sayings of individual students. It's
always
tempting for a theory to focus on c), because that's where all the
data
is
and it's tempting for practice too, because if you are against what
is
happening in a) and in b), that's where the most likely point of
intervention is.

"But the data does suggest that the "figured worlds" are figured by
authored identities--not by institutional arrangements. Is that just
an
artefact of the warm empathy of the authors for the words (although
maybe
not the exact wordings) of their subjects, or is it real grounds for
hope?

Marx says (beginning of the 18th Brumaire): "*Men make* their own
*history*,
*but they* do *not make* it as *they* please; *they* do *not make* it
under self-selected circumstances, *but* under circumstances existing
already, given and transmitted from the *past*. The tradition of all
dead
generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living."

It's a good theory, i.e. at once a truth and a tragedy. And it's a
theory treats time as time and not as an empty stage.

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 9:39 AM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com>
wrote:

All,
I have read only part of Margaret?s and Carrie?s article, but I
wanted
to
jump in with a reference to a book by Vygotskian Vera John-Steiner
and
her
mathematician husband Reuben Hersh: Loving and Hating Mathematics:
Challenging the Mathematical Life. Huw?s point (v) which refers to
?identities of independence and finding out sustainable within these
settings (school math classes) spent high school. Vera?s and
Reuben?s
book
contrasts what it?s like to work and think like a real (working)
mathematician (what I think Huw is talking about) and what we call
mathematics in the classroom. Chapter 8 of the book "The Teaching of
Mathematics: Fierce or Friendly?? is interesting reading and could
be
relevant to this discussion.
Henry


On Nov 13, 2016, at 2:47 PM, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
wrote:

Dear Margaret

My reading has not been a particularly careful one, so I leave it
to
yourselves to judge the usefulness of these points.

i) Whether arguments can be made (for or against) a nebulous term
(neoliberalism) with its political associations, by arguments about
identity that are themselves not deliberately political.

ii) Whether it is better not to focus essentially on the place of
identity.

iii) Whether it is worthwhile contrasting the role/identity of
"model
student" with "identities" that anyone excelling at STEM subjects
would
relate to.  On this, I would point to the importance with
identifying
with
appreciations for "awareness of not knowing" and "eagerness to find
out"
(which also entails learning about what it means to know).

iv) Whether you detect that to the degree that an identity is
foregrounded
in the actual practice of STEM work (rather than as background
social
appeasement), it is being faked? That is, someone is playing at the
role
rather than actually committing themselves to finding out about
unknowns.

v) Whether, in fact, there is actually a "tiered" or varied set of
acceptable "identities" within the settings you explored, such that
identities of independence and finding out are sustainable within
these
settings, possibly representing a necessary fudge to deal with the
requirements placed upon the institutions.

Best,
Huw

On 12 November 2016 at 20:30, Margaret A Eisenhart <
margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu> wrote:

Hello Everyone,

Carrie and I are newcomers to this list, and we thank you for the
opportunity to engage with you about our article, ?Hollowed Out.?
We
also
hope for your patience as we learn to participate in the stream of
thinking here!

Given the comments so far, we are intrigued by others? ideas about
the
link between our theory and our data.  On this topic, we would
like
to
make clear that we did not intend to suggest that the students
were
making
sense of their lives in the same way that we interpreted them
through
the
lens of our theory. Our claim is that opportunities and figured
worlds
are
resources for identity and that the students' words to us
reflected
perspectives consistent with neoliberalism, with some pretty
serious
implications. Like Phillip White, we are interested in what
theories
others would use to explain the data we presented.

Like Mike Cole, we are also intrigued by the prospect of
?exemplars?
we
might turn to.

We look forward to hearing your thoughts.


Margaret Eisenhart



On 11/11/16, 11:35 AM, "lpscholar2@gmail.com" <
lpscholar2@gmail.com

wrote:

A resumption in exploring the meaning and sense (preferably sens
as
this
term draws attention to movement and direction within meaning and
sense)
of this month?s article.
The paper begins with the title and the image of (hollowed-out)
meaning
and sense that is impoverished and holds few resources for
developing a
deeper sens of identity.
The article concludes with the implication that the work of
social
justice within educational institutions is not about improving
educational outcome in neoliberal terms; the implications of the
study
are about *reorganizing* the identities ? particulary
identities-with-standind that young people are *exposed* to, can
articulate, and can act on (in school and beyond).

I would say this is taking an ethical stand?.

I will now turn to page 189 and the section (identity-in-context)
to
amplify the notion of (cultural imaginary) and (figured worlds).
This imaginary being the site or location of history-in-person.
That
is
identity is a form of legacy (or *text*) ABOUT the kind of person
one
is
or has become in responding to (external) circumstances.
These external circumstances are EXPERIENCED primarily in the
organization of local practices and cultural imaginaries (figured
worlds)
that circulate and *give meaning* (and sens) to local practices

Figured worlds are interpreted following Holland as socially and
culturally *realms of interpretation* and certain players are
recognized
as (exemplars).

As such cultural, social, historical, dialogical psychological
(imaginaries) are handmaidens of the imaginal *giving meaning* to
*what*
goes on in the directions we take together.

Two key terms i highlight are (exemplars) and (direction) we
take.
The realm of the ethical turn
What are the markers and signposts emerging in the deeper ethical
turn
that offers more than a hollowed-out answer.
Are there any *ghost* stories of exemplars we can turn to as well
as
living exemplars? By ghosts i mean ancestors who continue as
beacons
of
hope exemplifying *who* we are.

My way into exploring the impoverished narratives of the
neoliberal
imaginary and reawakening exemplary ancestors or ghosts from
their
slumber to help guide us through these multiple imaginaries

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: mike cole
Sent: November 9, 2016 3:04 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion
Re-started

Alfredo--

for any who missed the initial article sent out, you might send
them
here:

http://lchc.ucsd.edu/mca/

I am meeting shortly with Bruce. A list of improvements to web
site
welcome, although not clear how long they will take to implement.

mike

On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 2:38 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil <
a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
wrote:

Dear all,

last week I announced MCA's 3rd Issue article for discussion:

"Hollowed Out: Meaning and Authoring of High School Math and
Science
Identities in the Context of Neoliberal Reform," by Margaret
Eisenhart
and
Carrie Allen.

The article is open access and will continue to be so during the
discussion time at this link.

Thanks to everyone who begun the discussion early after I shared
the
link
last week, and sorry that we sort of brought the discussion to a
halt
until
the authors were ready to discuss. I have now sent Margaret and
Carrie
the
posts that were produced then so that they could catch up, but I
also
invited them to feel free to move on an introduce themselves as
soon
as
they ??wanted.

It is not without some doubts that one introduces a discussion
of
an
article in a moment that some US media have called as "An
American
Tragedy"
and other international editorials are describing as "a dark day
for
the
world." But I believe that the paper may indeed offer some
grounds
for
discuss important issues that are at stake in everyone's home
now,
as
Mike
recently describes in a touching post on the "local state of
mind"
and
that
have to do with identity and its connection to a neoliberal
organisation of
the economy. It is not difficult to link neoliberalism to
Trump's
phenomenon and how it pervades very intimate aspects of everyday
life.

If this was not enough, I think the authors' background on
women's
scholar
and professional careers in science is totally relevant to the
discussions
on gendered discourse we've been having. Now without halts, I
hope
this
thread gives joys and wisdom to all.

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
edu>
on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
Sent: 02 November 2016 01:48
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Thanks Mike and everyone! I am sure Margaret (and many of those
still
reading) will be happy to be able to catch up when she joins us
next
week!
Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
edu>
on behalf of mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu>
Sent: 02 November 2016 01:32
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Gentlemen -- I believe Fernando told us that Margaret would be
able to join this discussion next week. Just a quick glance at
the
discussion so far indicates that there is a lot there to wade
into
before she has had a word.

I am only part way through the article, expecting to have until
next
week
to think about it.

May I suggest your forbearance while this slow-poke tries to
catch
up!

mike

On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 3:38 PM, White, Phillip
<Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu

wrote:

David & Larry, everyone else ...

by way of introduction, Margaret and Carrie point out that the
data
in
this paper emerged through a three year study - which was the
processes
of
how students of color, interested in STEM, responded to the
externally
imposed neoliberal requirements. they framed their study using
theories
of
social practices on how identity developed in context.


David, you reject the theories.  or so i understand your
position.
as
you
write: It's that the theory

contradicts my own personal theories.

are you also rejecting the data as well?  it seems as if you
are
suggesting this when you write: The authors find this point (in
the
case
of
Lorena) somewhere between the
beginning of the tenth and the end of the eleventh grade, but I
think
that's just because it's where they are looking.

you reject the narrative of Lorena on the grounds that it could
be
traced
back to infancy.

do you also reject the identical narrative found in the adult
practitioners within the context of the high schools?  that
this
narrative
is not one of a contemporary neoliberal practice but rather
could
be
traced
back to, say, the mid 1600's new england colonies, in
particular
massachusettes, where the practices of public american
education
began?

to explain the data that emerged from the Eisenhart/Allen
study,
what
theories would you have used?

phillip

________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 7:03 AM
To: David Kellogg; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Margaret and Carrie,
Thank you for this wonderful paper that explains the shallow
*hollowed-out* way of forming identity as a form of meaning and
sense. I
will add the French word *sens* which always includes
*direction*
within
meaning and sense.

David, your response that what our theory makes sens of depends
on
where
we are looking makes sens to me.
You put in question the moment when the interpersonal (you and
me)
way of
authoring sens *shifts* or turns to cultural and historical
ways
of
being
immersed in sens. The article refers to the
*historical-in-person*.

My further comment, where I am looking) is in the description
of
the
sociocultural as a response to *externally changing
circumstances*
as
the
process of *learning as becoming* (see page 190).

The article says:

This process is what Lave and Wenger (1991) and other
Sociocultural
researchers have referred to as *learning as becoming,* that
is,
learning
that occurs as one becomes a certain kind of person in a
particular
context.  Identities conceived in this way are not stable or
fixed.
As
*external circumstances* affecting a person change, so too may
the
identities that are produced *in response*. (Holland & Skinner,
1997).

In this version of *history-in-person* the identity processes
that
start
the process moving in a neoliberal *direction* are *external*
circumstances. I am not questioning this version of the
importance
of
the
external but do question if looking primarily or primordially
to
the
external circumstances as central if we are not leaving a gap
in
our
notions of *sens*.

If by looking or highlighting or illuminating the *external*
and
highly
visible acts of the actual we are leaving a gap in actual*ity.
A gap in *sens*.

To be continued by others...

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: David Kellogg
Sent: October 31, 2016 2:15 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

I was turning Mike's request--for a short explanation of the
Halliday/Vygotsky interface--over in my mind for a few days,
unsure
where
to start. I usually decide these difficult "where to start"
questions
in
the easiest possible way, with whatever I happen to be working
on.
In
this
case it's the origins of language in a one year old, a moment
which
is
almost as mysterious to me as the origins of life or the Big
Bang.
But
perhaps for that very reason it's not a good place to start
(the
Big
Bang
always seemed to me to jump the gun a bit, not to mention the
origins
of
life).

Let me start with the "Hollowed Out" paper Alfredo just
thoughtfully
sent
around instead. My first impression is that this paper leaves a
really
big
gap between the data and the conclusions, and that this gap is
largely
filled by theory. Here are some examples of what I mean:

a)    "Whereas 'subject position' is given by society,
'identity'
is
self-authored, although it must be recognized by others to be
sustained."
(p. 189)

b)  "It is notable that this construction of a good student,
though
familiar, does not make any reference to personal interest,
excitement,
or
engagement in the topics or content-related activities." (193)

c)  "When students' statements such as 'I get it', 'I'm
confident',
'I'm
good at this', and  'I can pull this off' are interpreted in
the
context
of
the figured world of math or science at the two schools, their
statements
index more than a grade. They reference a meaning system for
being
good
in
math or science that includes the actor identity
characteristics
of
being
able to grasp the subject matter easily, do the work quickly,
do
it
without
help from others, do it faster than others, and get an A."
(193)

In each case, we are told to believe in a theory: "given by
society",
"self-authored", "does not make any reference", "the context of
the
figured
world". It's not just that in each case the theory seems to go
against
the
data (although it certainly does in places, such as Lowena's
views
as
a
tenth grader). I can always live with a theory that contradicts
my
data:
that's what being a rationalist is all about. It's that the
theory
contradicts my own personal theories.

I don't believe that identity is self authored, and I also
don't
believe
that subject position is given by society as a whole, I think
the
word
"good" does include personal interest, excitement, and
engagement
as
much
as it includes being able to grasp the subject matter easily,
do
the
work
quickly, do it without help from others, do it faster than
others
and
get
an A. To me anyway, the key word in the data given in c) is
actually
"I"
and not "it" or "this": the students think they are talking
about,
and
therefore probably are actually talking about, a relation
between
their
inner states and the activity at hand  or between the activity
at
hand
and
the result they get; they are not invoking the figured world of
neoliberal
results and prospects.

But never mind my own theories. Any gap is, after all, a good
opportunity
for theory building. The authors are raising a key issue in
both
Vygotsky
and Halliday: when does an interpersonal relation become a
historico-cultural one? That is, when does that 'me" and "you"
relationship
in which I really do have the power to author my identity (I
can
make
up
any name I want and, within limits, invent my own history,
particularly
if
I am a backpacker) give way to a job, an address, a number and
a
class
over
which I have very little power at all? When does the
interpersonal
somehow
become an alien ideational "identity" that confronts me like a
strange
ghost when I look in the mirror?

The authors find this point (in the case of Lorena) somewhere
between
the
beginning of the tenth and the end of the eleventh grade, but I
think
that's just because it's where they are looking. We can
probably
find
the
roots of this distinction (between the interpersonal and the
historico-cultural) as far back as we like, right back to
(Vygotsky)
the
moment when the child gives up the "self-authored" language at
one
and
takes on the language recognized by others and (Halliday) the
moment
when
the child distinguishes between Attributive identifying clauses
("I'm
confident", "I'm good at this"), material processes ("I can
pull
this
off")
and mental ones ("I get it").

(To be continued...but not necessarily by me!)

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil
<a.j.gil@iped.uio.no

wrote:

Dear xmca'ers,


I am excited to announce the next article for discussion,
which
is
now
available open access at the T&F MCA pages<
http://www.tandfonline
.
com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1188962>.


After a really interesting discussion on Zaza's colourful
paper
(which
still goes on developed into a discussion on micro- and
ontogenesis),
we
will from next week be looking at an article by Margaret
Eisenhart
and
Carrie Allen from the special issue on "Reimagining Science
Education
in
the Neoliberal Global Context". I think the article, as the
whole
issue,
offers a very neat example of research trying to tie together
cultural/economical? and developmental aspects (of identity in
this
case).


Margaret has kindly accepted to join the discussion ?after US
elections
(which will surely keep the attention of many of us busy).
Meanwhile, I
share the link<http://www.tandfonline.
com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039
.
2016.1188962>  to the article (see above), and also attach it
as
PDF.
??Good read!


Alfredo























------------------------------

Message: 26
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2016 22:52:01 +0000
From: "White, Phillip" <Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
To: Edward Wall <ewall@umich.edu>, "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"
<xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID:
<DM5PR05MB318004C8BC4E9E2ECC6C205899B00@DM5PR05MB3180.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"

well, this is what Cornel West has to say:


https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election

[https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/aae8946d80dac457aa8b6af3f9a9fd5acc6b4acb/0_662_5150_3090/master/5150.jpg?w=1200&h=140&q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=crop&bm=normal&ba=bottom%2Cleft&blend64=aHR0cHM6Ly91cGxvYWRzLmd1aW0uY28udWsvMjAxNi8wNS8yNS9vdmVybGF5LWxvZ28tMTIwMC05MF9vcHQucG5n&s=4cbd18b4943818f70304ff2cfdc3da2d]<https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election>

Goodbye, American neoliberalism. A new era is here | Cornel West<https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election>
www.theguardian.com
Trump?s election was enabled by the policies that overlooked the plight of our most vulnerable citizens. We gird ourselves for a frightening future




phillip


________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 8:16:01 PM
To: Edward Wall; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

So basically engaging in play may be foundational to learning a particular disciplinary subject matter including mathematical play.
This playful approach as counterpoint to formal high stakes approaches.  This places the scope of play (itself) at the center of our inquiry.
This feels intuitively to be relevant to exemplary ways of learning.

Like imagination, play is not taken seriously , but may be foundational or necessary for learning that is exemplary.


Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: Edward Wall
Sent: November 17, 2016 4:45 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Larry

    There are, at least, four somewhat current possibilities (I?m not sure if they should be called exemplars) as regards mathematics

1. Summerhill (and, perhaps, some other English private schools)
2. Some private schools in the US (a book was written by a teacher at one. If there is any interest I?ll see if I can dig up the title).
3. The case of Louis P. Benezet in a US public school in1929
4. There is some indication that schools in Finland and the Netherlands are, perhaps, a little less ?neoliberal' (however, the evidence isn?t clear)

Basically in some of the above formal mathematics instruction is put off until either children ask or until until fourth or fifth grade; however, children engage in, you might say, mathematical play (Dewey recommended something like this). This is, by the way and according to some, also what a good mathematics preK program looks like. Also, this is a bit as regards mathematics what the ancient Greek version of schooling for the elite looked like (i.e. mathematics was put off).

Ed

On Nov 17, 2016, at  3:05 PM, lpscholar2@gmail.com wrote:

The question remains, if this neoliberal context generates (hollowed-out) educational *spaces* or institutions then is it possible we are able to offer exemplars of other educational places (current or historical) that manifested different kinds of identity formation that were not hollowed out. I speculate these exemplars would embody or incarnate deeply historical and  ethical orientations and practices.
If we have lost our way, are there other models (cultural imaginaries) that co-generate developmental narratives that will nurture well-being?

Exemplary models that point in a certain direction

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: Huw Lloyd
Sent: November 17, 2016 11:32 AM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Alfredo,

Yes, they're pathological.  I am merely saying that the problems inherent
in the pathology can be edifying.  No, I don't think the issues can be
transcended within conventional practices. Perhaps the best that can be
achieved is that the students recognise an institutional need for "good
behaviour" and the teacher recognises an educational need for real problem
solving. For "real" education, we would need something like Davydov's
system. But this is merely one view of the purpose of "education". There
are many who don't seem to recognise these (and other) important
implications.

Best,
Huw



On 17 November 2016 at 18:11, Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
wrote:

Huw,

great comments. I like what you say, that the (institutional, social)
process always is educational, and I agree: it develops into the formation
of habit and character. But I still wonder whether all educational
processes lead to growth or development, or whether we rather should be
able to identify some processes as, we may call them, *pathological* (or
perhaps involutive?). There you have Bateson on double bind and
schizophrenia, for example. Here, in the article, we have some young
students that enter a system that generates a double bind (it was Mike who
made me aware of the connection with double bind). The question is, will
the system develop without some form of awareness *about* the double bind
that overcomes it by generating a system that does not only include the
double bind, but also its own description (thereby becoming a higher order
system, one in which participants, students and teachers, come to grow
rather than come to stall).

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
Sent: 17 November 2016 10:54
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Alfredo,

The 'zone' is always present.  Whether it is recognised or not is another
matter.
I do not think this interpretation is quite a zero sum game, because there
is always the aspect that the institutionalised process is educational --
the laws reveal themselves one way or another.  So (from an Illich
perspective) the opportunity to discover what is real remains, it just
takes a different course.

Best,
Huw

On 17 November 2016 at 07:37, Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
wrote:

What touches me of the article is something that perhaps relates to this
tension that I find between David's (individualistic?) approach to
prolepsis in his post (David, I thought, and continue thinking, that
prolepsis refers to something that emerges in the relation between two,
not
something that either is present or absent within a person), and
Phillip's
view of young people figuring out what life is all about just as all we
do.
And so here (and in any neoliberal school context) we have wonderfully
beautiful young people more or less interested in science or in maths,
but
all eager to live a life and evolve as best as they can (whatever that
best
may mean for each one). And then you see how the history and context that
they come into gives them everything they need to develop motives and
goals; to then make sure that the majority of them won't make it so that
only a few privileged (or in the case of Margaret's paper none, according
to the authors) succeed. And then what remains is not just a hollowed-out
science and math identity, but also a hollowed-out soul that had illusion
and now just doesn't. Not only a failure to provide opportunities to
learners to become anything(one) good about science and math, but also a
robbing of other possible paths of development that may had grown in
people
if they had been hanging out with some other better company. Do we have a
term to refer to the opposite of a zone of proximal development? Not just
the absence of it, but the strangling of it.

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of White, Phillip <Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu>
Sent: 17 November 2016 06:29
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

David, the examples on page 193, students 1, 2 & 3 - aren't these
examples
of proleptic thought - especially for student 2, who looks at where she
is
"I have my own standards", a statement of the present, then a looking
back
at  what has happened, "I like to get straight A's". and then setting a
target for the future, "help for like to get in college and stuff, so
yeah,
I participate in a lot of stuff." ending with a reassertion of present
activities to attain future goals.


and there is a preponderance of the use of "I", rather than "you".


i'd give the young people for credit than a myopia focused merely on
their
age: the business of young people is figuring out what life is all about
and how to participate, just as adults and infants and old people like me
do.


i'm not convinced that your arguments are supported by the data in this
Eisenhard / Allen paper.


phillip

________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 1:24:35 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Actually, Henry, I was attacking the idea that tense is an empty mental
space. I guess I am a little like Larry: when we discuss articles I have
a
strong tendency to try to make them relevant to what I am doing rather
than
to drop what I am doing and go and discuss what everybody else is
discussing. So what I am doing right now is trying to make sense of some
story-telling data where the adults are all over the map on tenses, and
the
kids seem to stick to one tense only. The adults are slipping in and out
of
mental spaces. The kids are telling stories.

I think the relevance to the article is this: When you look at the way
the
article frames institutional practices and figured worlds, we see
prolepsis--a preoccupation with the future. But when we look at what the
kids are doing and saying it is very much in the moment. Is this simply
because mental processes like "like" and "want" tend to take simple
present
(because they are less defined than material processes)? Or is it because
while the institutions have the near future firmly in view and the
figured
worlds have irrealis in view, the business of young people is youth?

Vygotsky points out that the question the interviewer asks is very much a
part of the data. For example, if you ask a question using "you" you
often
get "you" in reply, even if you design your question to get "I".

Q: Why do you want to kill yourself?
A: The same reason everybody wants to kill themselves. You want to find
out
if anybody really cares.

To take another example that is probably more relevant to readers: both
the
Brexit vote and the American elections are clear examples of statistical
unreliability in that if you tried to repeat the election the morning
after
you would probably get an utterly different result. Take all of those
black
voters and the real working class voters who voted Obama but couldn't be
bothered for Hillary (not the imaginary "white working class voters" who
work in imaginary industries in Iowa, rural Pennsylvania, North Carolina
and Florida). They might well have behaved rather differently knowing how
imminent the neo-Confederacy really was. This is usually presented as
"buyer's remorse," but it's more than that; the event itself would be
part
of its replication. This is something that statistical models that use
standard error of the mean cannot build in (they work on the impossible
idea that you can repeat an event ten or twenty thousand times without
any
memory at all).

In the same way, when you interview a group of students together you
notice
that they tend to model answers on each other rather than on your
question,
and when you interview them separately, you notice that YOU tend to
change
your question according to the previous answer you received. On the one
hand, life is not easily distracted by its own future: it is too wholly
there in each moment of existence. On the other hand, each of these
moments
includes the previous one, and therefore all the previous ones, in
itself.
The past weighs like a nightmare on the brain of the living, and objects
in
the rear view mirror are always closer than they appear.

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 10:23 AM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com>
wrote:

David,
I was puzzled that you found Langacker to be relevant to this topic,
but
the last paragraph of your post makes an important connection between
Langacker and Vygotsky: Both see speech acts as staged?interactants
view
themselves as ?on stage?. I think the book by Vera and Reuben is
largely
about how differently math is ?staged? by working mathematicians as
contrasted with doing math in school. I think it would be interesting
to
analyze how natural language and the language of math scaffold each
other
in both contexts. Word problems have been a well-used way of connecting
the
two languages; stats and graphs are commonly used in the media to
clarify
and elaborate text in articles on economics, presidential elections,
and
what not.

I would love to read your ?unpublishable? on Langacker and Halliday on
tense. What I recall from reading Langacker is his interest in ?basic
domains?, starting with the temporal and spatial. Somewhere he has said
that he believes that the temporal domain is the more basic. As you?d
guess, the spatial domain is especially useful in elucidating what he
calls
?things? (nouns are conceptually about things); the temporal domain is
more
closely connected to what he calls ?processes? wherein he analyzes
tense
and aspect.

I think Langacker would agree that his work in cognitive grammar has a
long way to go in contributing to the idea that grammar is usage based,
rather than some autonomous module, but he is working on it. I think
there
is a potential for connecting Halliday and Langacker, though I?m not
smart
enough to convince you of that evidently. Somehow the connection must
be
made by staying close to the data, ?thick description? ethnographers
are
fond of saying. I think the article by Carrie and Margaret is raising
this
issue.

The ?hollowed out? math curriculum in the article resonates with the
?potholes? you say teachers must watch out for. Some may say that  the
hollowing out is typical even of ?elite? K-12 schools. Some may say
that
this is deliberate. I would say my own experience of math in school was
often hollowed out, which I sensed, but didn?t discover until I got to
the
?pure math? department in the mid 60s at Univ of Texas at Austin under
the
leadership of Robert Lee Moore. He is a main protagonist in Chapter 8
of
Vera?s and Reuben?s book.

I?ll end it there.

Henry




On Nov 15, 2016, at 1:38 PM, David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
wrote:

Henry:

I just wrote another unpublishable comparing how Langacker and
Halliday treat tense, and I'm starting to come to grips with the
different
theory of experience underlying the two grammars. Langacker somehow
sees
it
as creating empty mental space (and aspect as creating space within
space).
Halliday sees tense as a way of abstracting concrete doings and
happenings.
Halliday's tense system is not spatial at all but temporal: it's
temporally
deictic and then temporally recursive: a kind of time machine that
simultaneously transports and orients the speaker either
proleptically
or
retroleptically. So for example if I say to you that this article we
are
discussing is going to have been being discussed for two or three
weeks
now, then "is going" is a kind of time machine that takes you into
the
future, from which "You are Here" vantage point the article has been
(past)
being discussed (present). Present in the past in the future.

And that got me thinking about theory and practice. It seems to me
that
the
they are related, but simultaneously and not sequentially. That is,
the
output of one is not the input of the other: they are simply more and
less
abstract ways of looking at one and the same thing. So for example in
this
article the tasks of theory and practice are one and the same: the
task
of
theory is really to define as precisely as possible the domain, the
scope,
the range of the inquiry into authoring math and science identities
and
the
task of practice is to ask what exactly you want to do in this
domain/scope/range--to try to understand how they are hollowed out a
little
better so that maybe teachers like you and me can help fill the damn
potholes in a little. You can't really do the one without doing the
other:
trying to decide the terrain under study without deciding some task
that
you want to do there is like imagining tense as empty mental space
and
not
as some actual, concrete doing or happening. Conversely, the way you
dig
the hole depends very much on how big and where you want it.

So there are three kinds of mental spaces in the first part of the
article:

a) institutional arrangements (e.g. "priority improvement plans",
career-academy/comprehensive school status STEM tracks, AP classes)
b) figured worlds (e.g. 'good students', and 'don't cares', or what
Eckhart
and McConnell-Ginet called 'jocks', 'nerds',  'burnouts',
'gangbangers')
c) authored identities (i.e. what kids say about themselves and what
they
think about themselves)

Now, I think it's possible to make this distinction--but they are
probably
better understood not as mental spaces (in which case they really do
overlap) but rather as doings (or, as is my wont, sayings). Different
people are saying different things: a) is mostly the sayings of the
school
boards and administrators, b) is mostly the sayings of teachers and
groups
of kids, and c) is mostly the sayings of individual students. It's
always
tempting for a theory to focus on c), because that's where all the
data
is
and it's tempting for practice too, because if you are against what
is
happening in a) and in b), that's where the most likely point of
intervention is.

"But the data does suggest that the "figured worlds" are figured by
authored identities--not by institutional arrangements. Is that just
an
artefact of the warm empathy of the authors for the words (although
maybe
not the exact wordings) of their subjects, or is it real grounds for
hope?

Marx says (beginning of the 18th Brumaire): "*Men make* their own
*history*,
*but they* do *not make* it as *they* please; *they* do *not make* it
under self-selected circumstances, *but* under circumstances existing
already, given and transmitted from the *past*. The tradition of all
dead
generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living."

It's a good theory, i.e. at once a truth and a tragedy. And it's a
theory treats time as time and not as an empty stage.

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 9:39 AM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com>
wrote:

All,
I have read only part of Margaret?s and Carrie?s article, but I
wanted
to
jump in with a reference to a book by Vygotskian Vera John-Steiner
and
her
mathematician husband Reuben Hersh: Loving and Hating Mathematics:
Challenging the Mathematical Life. Huw?s point (v) which refers to
?identities of independence and finding out sustainable within these
settings (school math classes) spent high school. Vera?s and
Reuben?s
book
contrasts what it?s like to work and think like a real (working)
mathematician (what I think Huw is talking about) and what we call
mathematics in the classroom. Chapter 8 of the book "The Teaching of
Mathematics: Fierce or Friendly?? is interesting reading and could
be
relevant to this discussion.
Henry


On Nov 13, 2016, at 2:47 PM, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
wrote:

Dear Margaret

My reading has not been a particularly careful one, so I leave it
to
yourselves to judge the usefulness of these points.

i) Whether arguments can be made (for or against) a nebulous term
(neoliberalism) with its political associations, by arguments about
identity that are themselves not deliberately political.

ii) Whether it is better not to focus essentially on the place of
identity.

iii) Whether it is worthwhile contrasting the role/identity of
"model
student" with "identities" that anyone excelling at STEM subjects
would
relate to.  On this, I would point to the importance with
identifying
with
appreciations for "awareness of not knowing" and "eagerness to find
out"
(which also entails learning about what it means to know).

iv) Whether you detect that to the degree that an identity is
foregrounded
in the actual practice of STEM work (rather than as background
social
appeasement), it is being faked? That is, someone is playing at the
role
rather than actually committing themselves to finding out about
unknowns.

v) Whether, in fact, there is actually a "tiered" or varied set of
acceptable "identities" within the settings you explored, such that
identities of independence and finding out are sustainable within
these
settings, possibly representing a necessary fudge to deal with the
requirements placed upon the institutions.

Best,
Huw

On 12 November 2016 at 20:30, Margaret A Eisenhart <
margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu> wrote:

Hello Everyone,

Carrie and I are newcomers to this list, and we thank you for the
opportunity to engage with you about our article, ?Hollowed Out.?
We
also
hope for your patience as we learn to participate in the stream of
thinking here!

Given the comments so far, we are intrigued by others? ideas about
the
link between our theory and our data.  On this topic, we would
like
to
make clear that we did not intend to suggest that the students
were
making
sense of their lives in the same way that we interpreted them
through
the
lens of our theory. Our claim is that opportunities and figured
worlds
are
resources for identity and that the students' words to us
reflected
perspectives consistent with neoliberalism, with some pretty
serious
implications. Like Phillip White, we are interested in what
theories
others would use to explain the data we presented.

Like Mike Cole, we are also intrigued by the prospect of
?exemplars?
we
might turn to.

We look forward to hearing your thoughts.


Margaret Eisenhart



On 11/11/16, 11:35 AM, "lpscholar2@gmail.com" <
lpscholar2@gmail.com

wrote:

A resumption in exploring the meaning and sense (preferably sens
as
this
term draws attention to movement and direction within meaning and
sense)
of this month?s article.
The paper begins with the title and the image of (hollowed-out)
meaning
and sense that is impoverished and holds few resources for
developing a
deeper sens of identity.
The article concludes with the implication that the work of
social
justice within educational institutions is not about improving
educational outcome in neoliberal terms; the implications of the
study
are about *reorganizing* the identities ? particulary
identities-with-standind that young people are *exposed* to, can
articulate, and can act on (in school and beyond).

I would say this is taking an ethical stand?.

I will now turn to page 189 and the section (identity-in-context)
to
amplify the notion of (cultural imaginary) and (figured worlds).
This imaginary being the site or location of history-in-person.
That
is
identity is a form of legacy (or *text*) ABOUT the kind of person
one
is
or has become in responding to (external) circumstances.
These external circumstances are EXPERIENCED primarily in the
organization of local practices and cultural imaginaries (figured
worlds)
that circulate and *give meaning* (and sens) to local practices

Figured worlds are interpreted following Holland as socially and
culturally *realms of interpretation* and certain players are
recognized
as (exemplars).

As such cultural, social, historical, dialogical psychological
(imaginaries) are handmaidens of the imaginal *giving meaning* to
*what*
goes on in the directions we take together.

Two key terms i highlight are (exemplars) and (direction) we
take.
The realm of the ethical turn
What are the markers and signposts emerging in the deeper ethical
turn
that offers more than a hollowed-out answer.
Are there any *ghost* stories of exemplars we can turn to as well
as
living exemplars? By ghosts i mean ancestors who continue as
beacons
of
hope exemplifying *who* we are.

My way into exploring the impoverished narratives of the
neoliberal
imaginary and reawakening exemplary ancestors or ghosts from
their
slumber to help guide us through these multiple imaginaries

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: mike cole
Sent: November 9, 2016 3:04 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion
Re-started

Alfredo--

for any who missed the initial article sent out, you might send
them
here:

http://lchc.ucsd.edu/mca/

I am meeting shortly with Bruce. A list of improvements to web
site
welcome, although not clear how long they will take to implement.

mike

On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 2:38 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil <
a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
wrote:

Dear all,

last week I announced MCA's 3rd Issue article for discussion:

"Hollowed Out: Meaning and Authoring of High School Math and
Science
Identities in the Context of Neoliberal Reform," by Margaret
Eisenhart
and
Carrie Allen.

The article is open access and will continue to be so during the
discussion time at this link.

Thanks to everyone who begun the discussion early after I shared
the
link
last week, and sorry that we sort of brought the discussion to a
halt
until
the authors were ready to discuss. I have now sent Margaret and
Carrie
the
posts that were produced then so that they could catch up, but I
also
invited them to feel free to move on an introduce themselves as
soon
as
they ??wanted.

It is not without some doubts that one introduces a discussion
of
an
article in a moment that some US media have called as "An
American
Tragedy"
and other international editorials are describing as "a dark day
for
the
world." But I believe that the paper may indeed offer some
grounds
for
discuss important issues that are at stake in everyone's home
now,
as
Mike
recently describes in a touching post on the "local state of
mind"
and
that
have to do with identity and its connection to a neoliberal
organisation of
the economy. It is not difficult to link neoliberalism to
Trump's
phenomenon and how it pervades very intimate aspects of everyday
life.

If this was not enough, I think the authors' background on
women's
scholar
and professional careers in science is totally relevant to the
discussions
on gendered discourse we've been having. Now without halts, I
hope
this
thread gives joys and wisdom to all.

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
edu>
on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
Sent: 02 November 2016 01:48
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Thanks Mike and everyone! I am sure Margaret (and many of those
still
reading) will be happy to be able to catch up when she joins us
next
week!
Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
edu>
on behalf of mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu>
Sent: 02 November 2016 01:32
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Gentlemen -- I believe Fernando told us that Margaret would be
able to join this discussion next week. Just a quick glance at
the
discussion so far indicates that there is a lot there to wade
into
before she has had a word.

I am only part way through the article, expecting to have until
next
week
to think about it.

May I suggest your forbearance while this slow-poke tries to
catch
up!

mike

On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 3:38 PM, White, Phillip
<Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu

wrote:

David & Larry, everyone else ...

by way of introduction, Margaret and Carrie point out that the
data
in
this paper emerged through a three year study - which was the
processes
of
how students of color, interested in STEM, responded to the
externally
imposed neoliberal requirements. they framed their study using
theories
of
social practices on how identity developed in context.


David, you reject the theories.  or so i understand your
position.
as
you
write: It's that the theory

contradicts my own personal theories.

are you also rejecting the data as well?  it seems as if you
are
suggesting this when you write: The authors find this point (in
the
case
of
Lorena) somewhere between the
beginning of the tenth and the end of the eleventh grade, but I
think
that's just because it's where they are looking.

you reject the narrative of Lorena on the grounds that it could
be
traced
back to infancy.

do you also reject the identical narrative found in the adult
practitioners within the context of the high schools?  that
this
narrative
is not one of a contemporary neoliberal practice but rather
could
be
traced
back to, say, the mid 1600's new england colonies, in
particular
massachusettes, where the practices of public american
education
began?

to explain the data that emerged from the Eisenhart/Allen
study,
what
theories would you have used?

phillip

________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 7:03 AM
To: David Kellogg; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Margaret and Carrie,
Thank you for this wonderful paper that explains the shallow
*hollowed-out* way of forming identity as a form of meaning and
sense. I
will add the French word *sens* which always includes
*direction*
within
meaning and sense.

David, your response that what our theory makes sens of depends
on
where
we are looking makes sens to me.
You put in question the moment when the interpersonal (you and
me)
way of
authoring sens *shifts* or turns to cultural and historical
ways
of
being
immersed in sens. The article refers to the
*historical-in-person*.

My further comment, where I am looking) is in the description
of
the
sociocultural as a response to *externally changing
circumstances*
as
the
process of *learning as becoming* (see page 190).

The article says:

This process is what Lave and Wenger (1991) and other
Sociocultural
researchers have referred to as *learning as becoming,* that
is,
learning
that occurs as one becomes a certain kind of person in a
particular
context.  Identities conceived in this way are not stable or
fixed.
As
*external circumstances* affecting a person change, so too may
the
identities that are produced *in response*. (Holland & Skinner,
1997).

In this version of *history-in-person* the identity processes
that
start
the process moving in a neoliberal *direction* are *external*
circumstances. I am not questioning this version of the
importance
of
the
external but do question if looking primarily or primordially
to
the
external circumstances as central if we are not leaving a gap
in
our
notions of *sens*.

If by looking or highlighting or illuminating the *external*
and
highly
visible acts of the actual we are leaving a gap in actual*ity.
A gap in *sens*.

To be continued by others...

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: David Kellogg
Sent: October 31, 2016 2:15 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

I was turning Mike's request--for a short explanation of the
Halliday/Vygotsky interface--over in my mind for a few days,
unsure
where
to start. I usually decide these difficult "where to start"
questions
in
the easiest possible way, with whatever I happen to be working
on.
In
this
case it's the origins of language in a one year old, a moment
which
is
almost as mysterious to me as the origins of life or the Big
Bang.
But
perhaps for that very reason it's not a good place to start
(the
Big
Bang
always seemed to me to jump the gun a bit, not to mention the
origins
of
life).

Let me start with the "Hollowed Out" paper Alfredo just
thoughtfully
sent
around instead. My first impression is that this paper leaves a
really
big
gap between the data and the conclusions, and that this gap is
largely
filled by theory. Here are some examples of what I mean:

a)    "Whereas 'subject position' is given by society,
'identity'
is
self-authored, although it must be recognized by others to be
sustained."
(p. 189)

b)  "It is notable that this construction of a good student,
though
familiar, does not make any reference to personal interest,
excitement,
or
engagement in the topics or content-related activities." (193)

c)  "When students' statements such as 'I get it', 'I'm
confident',
'I'm
good at this', and  'I can pull this off' are interpreted in
the
context
of
the figured world of math or science at the two schools, their
statements
index more than a grade. They reference a meaning system for
being
good
in
math or science that includes the actor identity
characteristics
of
being
able to grasp the subject matter easily, do the work quickly,
do
it
without
help from others, do it faster than others, and get an A."
(193)

In each case, we are told to believe in a theory: "given by
society",
"self-authored", "does not make any reference", "the context of
the
figured
world". It's not just that in each case the theory seems to go
against
the
data (although it certainly does in places, such as Lowena's
views
as
a
tenth grader). I can always live with a theory that contradicts
my
data:
that's what being a rationalist is all about. It's that the
theory
contradicts my own personal theories.

I don't believe that identity is self authored, and I also
don't
believe
that subject position is given by society as a whole, I think
the
word
"good" does include personal interest, excitement, and
engagement
as
much
as it includes being able to grasp the subject matter easily,
do
the
work
quickly, do it without help from others, do it faster than
others
and
get
an A. To me anyway, the key word in the data given in c) is
actually
"I"
and not "it" or "this": the students think they are talking
about,
and
therefore probably are actually talking about, a relation
between
their
inner states and the activity at hand  or between the activity
at
hand
and
the result they get; they are not invoking the figured world of
neoliberal
results and prospects.

But never mind my own theories. Any gap is, after all, a good
opportunity
for theory building. The authors are raising a key issue in
both
Vygotsky
and Halliday: when does an interpersonal relation become a
historico-cultural one? That is, when does that 'me" and "you"
relationship
in which I really do have the power to author my identity (I
can
make
up
any name I want and, within limits, invent my own history,
particularly
if
I am a backpacker) give way to a job, an address, a number and
a
class
over
which I have very little power at all? When does the
interpersonal
somehow
become an alien ideational "identity" that confronts me like a
strange
ghost when I look in the mirror?

The authors find this point (in the case of Lorena) somewhere
between
the
beginning of the tenth and the end of the eleventh grade, but I
think
that's just because it's where they are looking. We can
probably
find
the
roots of this distinction (between the interpersonal and the
historico-cultural) as far back as we like, right back to
(Vygotsky)
the
moment when the child gives up the "self-authored" language at
one
and
takes on the language recognized by others and (Halliday) the
moment
when
the child distinguishes between Attributive identifying clauses
("I'm
confident", "I'm good at this"), material processes ("I can
pull
this
off")
and mental ones ("I get it").

(To be continued...but not necessarily by me!)

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil
<a.j.gil@iped.uio.no

wrote:

Dear xmca'ers,


I am excited to announce the next article for discussion,
which
is
now
available open access at the T&F MCA pages<
http://www.tandfonline
.
com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1188962>.


After a really interesting discussion on Zaza's colourful
paper
(which
still goes on developed into a discussion on micro- and
ontogenesis),
we
will from next week be looking at an article by Margaret
Eisenhart
and
Carrie Allen from the special issue on "Reimagining Science
Education
in
the Neoliberal Global Context". I think the article, as the
whole
issue,
offers a very neat example of research trying to tie together
cultural/economical? and developmental aspects (of identity in
this
case).


Margaret has kindly accepted to join the discussion ?after US
elections
(which will surely keep the attention of many of us busy).
Meanwhile, I
share the link<http://www.tandfonline.
com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039
.
2016.1188962>  to the article (see above), and also attach it
as
PDF.
??Good read!


Alfredo























------------------------------

Message: 27
Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2016 00:26:37 +0000
From: Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID:
<CAG1MBOEBWTyBD6E1oJjQEEPRwbaCHPbxNi63hwGDQdEAKtZkrw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Margaret,

With respect to the application of other theories, an alternative focus on
the problems of "hitting a mathematical wall", is to attend to the
structure of activity that the students engage with, specifically the kinds
of (psychological) objects they are focused upon. The expected distinction
between "being a good student" and "finding out" might have their
respective foci upon diligence in manipulating notation and attendance to
mathematical problems (which are then subsequently referred to through the
use of notation).

Ed presented some exemplars that "put off" (delay) mathematics in
teaching.  An alternative to this is to look to specialised forms of
education in which essential aspects of the subject matter are made
tangible and manifest to young minds (or older minds for that matter) on
the basis of the historical origins of the ideas. Davydov's school of
developmental education is the most remarkable exemplar I am aware of in
this regard.  However, the central English text for this (Problems of
Developmental Instruction) is by no means easy to read.  Its possible you
may get a sense for what it is about from my comparisons paper.  The
consideration of identity is a concern with this line of thought, but it
was not developed at the time. The principles are rather similar to those
of Meshcheryakov (the Butterfies film Mike recently posted), but applied to
the history of ideas rather than common cultural artefacts. In the film,
the stress is on language, but most of the protracted work -- not presented
in the film -- entails familiarity with basic cultural tasks.

Another area of interest for me has been the work of Kay/Papert, but this
has been in a more limited capacity with a focus on technological use.
Still, used correctly it can be a powerful means of bringing mathematical
considerations within the playful sphere of interests of primary school
aged children.

With respect to neoliberal politics and education, I have my doubts about
any direct links unless the stress upon qualifications is considered to be
a central part of it.  Still, I agree with Cornel's analysis.

Best,
Huw

On 12 November 2016 at 20:30, Margaret A Eisenhart <
margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu> wrote:

Hello Everyone,

Carrie and I are newcomers to this list, and we thank you for the
opportunity to engage with you about our article, ?Hollowed Out.?  We also
hope for your patience as we learn to participate in the stream of
thinking here!

Given the comments so far, we are intrigued by others? ideas about the
link between our theory and our data.  On this topic, we would like to
make clear that we did not intend to suggest that the students were making
sense of their lives in the same way that we interpreted them through the
lens of our theory. Our claim is that opportunities and figured worlds are
resources for identity and that the students' words to us reflected
perspectives consistent with neoliberalism, with some pretty serious
implications. Like Phillip White, we are interested in what theories
others would use to explain the data we presented.

Like Mike Cole, we are also intrigued by the prospect of ?exemplars? we
might turn to.

We look forward to hearing your thoughts.


Margaret Eisenhart



On 11/11/16, 11:35 AM, "lpscholar2@gmail.com" <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
wrote:

A resumption in exploring the meaning and sense (preferably sens as this
term draws attention to movement and direction within meaning and sense)
of this month?s article.
The paper begins with the title and the image of (hollowed-out) meaning
and sense that is impoverished and holds few resources for developing a
deeper sens of identity.
The article concludes with the implication that the work of social
justice within educational institutions is not about improving
educational outcome in neoliberal terms; the implications of the study
are about *reorganizing* the identities ? particulary
identities-with-standind that young people are *exposed* to, can
articulate, and can act on (in school and beyond).

I would say this is taking an ethical stand?.

I will now turn to page 189 and the section (identity-in-context) to
amplify the notion of (cultural imaginary) and (figured worlds).
This imaginary being the site or location of history-in-person. That is
identity is a form of legacy (or *text*) ABOUT the kind of person one is
or has become in responding to (external) circumstances.
These external circumstances are EXPERIENCED primarily in the
organization of local practices and cultural imaginaries (figured worlds)
that circulate and *give meaning* (and sens) to local practices

Figured worlds are interpreted following Holland as socially and
culturally *realms of interpretation* and certain players are recognized
as (exemplars).

As such cultural, social, historical, dialogical psychological
(imaginaries) are handmaidens of the imaginal *giving meaning* to *what*
goes on in the directions we take together.

Two key terms i highlight are (exemplars) and (direction) we take.
The realm of the ethical turn
What are the markers and signposts emerging in the deeper ethical turn
that offers more than a hollowed-out answer.
Are there any *ghost* stories of exemplars we can turn to as well as
living exemplars? By ghosts i mean ancestors who continue as beacons of
hope exemplifying *who* we are.

My way into exploring the impoverished narratives of the neoliberal
imaginary and reawakening exemplary ancestors or ghosts from their
slumber to help guide us through these multiple imaginaries

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: mike cole
Sent: November 9, 2016 3:04 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Alfredo--

for any who missed the initial article sent out, you might send them
here:

http://lchc.ucsd.edu/mca/

I am meeting shortly with Bruce. A list of improvements to web site
welcome, although not clear how long they will take to implement.

mike

On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 2:38 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
wrote:

Dear all,

last week I announced MCA's 3rd Issue article for discussion:

"Hollowed Out: Meaning and Authoring of High School Math and Science
Identities in the Context of Neoliberal Reform," by Margaret Eisenhart
and
Carrie Allen.

The article is open access and will continue to be so during the
discussion time at this link.

Thanks to everyone who begun the discussion early after I shared the
link
last week, and sorry that we sort of brought the discussion to a halt
until
the authors were ready to discuss. I have now sent Margaret and Carrie
the
posts that were produced then so that they could catch up, but I also
invited them to feel free to move on an introduce themselves as soon as
they ??wanted.

It is not without some doubts that one introduces a discussion of an
article in a moment that some US media have called as "An American
Tragedy"
and other international editorials are describing as "a dark day for the
world." But I believe that the paper may indeed offer some grounds for
discuss important issues that are at stake in everyone's home now, as
Mike
recently describes in a touching post on the "local state of mind" and
that
have to do with identity and its connection to a neoliberal
organisation of
the economy. It is not difficult to link neoliberalism to Trump's
phenomenon and how it pervades very intimate aspects of everyday life.

If this was not enough, I think the authors' background on women's
scholar
and professional careers in science is totally relevant to the
discussions
on gendered discourse we've been having. Now without halts, I hope this
thread gives joys and wisdom to all.

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
Sent: 02 November 2016 01:48
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Thanks Mike and everyone! I am sure Margaret (and many of those still
reading) will be happy to be able to catch up when she joins us next
week!
Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu>
Sent: 02 November 2016 01:32
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Gentlemen -- I believe Fernando told us that Margaret would be
able to join this discussion next week. Just a quick glance at the
discussion so far indicates that there is a lot there to wade into
before she has had a word.

I am only part way through the article, expecting to have until next
week
to think about it.

May I suggest your forbearance while this slow-poke tries to catch up!

mike

On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 3:38 PM, White, Phillip
<Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu

wrote:

David & Larry, everyone else ...

by way of introduction, Margaret and Carrie point out that the data in
this paper emerged through a three year study - which was the
processes
of
how students of color, interested in STEM, responded to the externally
imposed neoliberal requirements. they framed their study using
theories
of
social practices on how identity developed in context.


David, you reject the theories.  or so i understand your position. as
you
write: It's that the theory

contradicts my own personal theories.

are you also rejecting the data as well?  it seems as if you are
suggesting this when you write: The authors find this point (in the
case
of
Lorena) somewhere between the
beginning of the tenth and the end of the eleventh grade, but I think
that's just because it's where they are looking.

you reject the narrative of Lorena on the grounds that it could be
traced
back to infancy.

do you also reject the identical narrative found in the adult
practitioners within the context of the high schools?  that this
narrative
is not one of a contemporary neoliberal practice but rather could be
traced
back to, say, the mid 1600's new england colonies, in particular
massachusettes, where the practices of public american education
began?

to explain the data that emerged from the Eisenhart/Allen study, what
theories would you have used?

phillip

________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 7:03 AM
To: David Kellogg; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Margaret and Carrie,
Thank you for this wonderful paper that explains the shallow
*hollowed-out* way of forming identity as a form of meaning and
sense. I
will add the French word *sens* which always includes *direction*
within
meaning and sense.

David, your response that what our theory makes sens of depends on
where
we are looking makes sens to me.
You put in question the moment when the interpersonal (you and me)
way of
authoring sens *shifts* or turns to cultural and historical ways of
being
immersed in sens. The article refers to the *historical-in-person*.

My further comment, where I am looking) is in the description of the
sociocultural as a response to *externally changing circumstances*  as
the
process of *learning as becoming* (see page 190).

The article says:

This process is what Lave and Wenger (1991) and other Sociocultural
researchers have referred to as *learning as becoming,* that is,
learning
that occurs as one becomes a certain kind of person in a particular
context.  Identities conceived in this way are not stable or fixed. As
*external circumstances* affecting a person change, so too may the
identities that are produced *in response*. (Holland & Skinner, 1997).

In this version of *history-in-person* the identity processes that
start
the process moving in a neoliberal *direction* are *external*
circumstances. I am not questioning this version of the importance of
the
external but do question if looking primarily or primordially to the
external circumstances as central if we are not leaving a gap in our
notions of *sens*.

If by looking or highlighting or illuminating the *external* and
highly
visible acts of the actual we are leaving a gap in actual*ity.
A gap in *sens*.

To be continued by others...

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: David Kellogg
Sent: October 31, 2016 2:15 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

I was turning Mike's request--for a short explanation of the
Halliday/Vygotsky interface--over in my mind for a few days, unsure
where
to start. I usually decide these difficult "where to start" questions
in
the easiest possible way, with whatever I happen to be working on. In
this
case it's the origins of language in a one year old, a moment which is
almost as mysterious to me as the origins of life or the Big Bang. But
perhaps for that very reason it's not a good place to start (the Big
Bang
always seemed to me to jump the gun a bit, not to mention the origins
of
life).

Let me start with the "Hollowed Out" paper Alfredo just thoughtfully
sent
around instead. My first impression is that this paper leaves a really
big
gap between the data and the conclusions, and that this gap is largely
filled by theory. Here are some examples of what I mean:

a)    "Whereas 'subject position' is given by society, 'identity' is
self-authored, although it must be recognized by others to be
sustained."
(p. 189)

b)  "It is notable that this construction of a good student, though
familiar, does not make any reference to personal interest,
excitement,
or
engagement in the topics or content-related activities." (193)

c)  "When students' statements such as 'I get it', 'I'm confident',
'I'm
good at this', and  'I can pull this off' are interpreted in the
context
of
the figured world of math or science at the two schools, their
statements
index more than a grade. They reference a meaning system for being
good
in
math or science that includes the actor identity characteristics of
being
able to grasp the subject matter easily, do the work quickly, do it
without
help from others, do it faster than others, and get an A." (193)

In each case, we are told to believe in a theory: "given by society",
"self-authored", "does not make any reference", "the context of the
figured
world". It's not just that in each case the theory seems to go against
the
data (although it certainly does in places, such as Lowena's views as
a
tenth grader). I can always live with a theory that contradicts my
data:
that's what being a rationalist is all about. It's that the theory
contradicts my own personal theories.

I don't believe that identity is self authored, and I also don't
believe
that subject position is given by society as a whole, I think the word
"good" does include personal interest, excitement, and engagement as
much
as it includes being able to grasp the subject matter easily, do the
work
quickly, do it without help from others, do it faster than others and
get
an A. To me anyway, the key word in the data given in c) is actually
"I"
and not "it" or "this": the students think they are talking about, and
therefore probably are actually talking about, a relation between
their
inner states and the activity at hand  or between the activity at hand
and
the result they get; they are not invoking the figured world of
neoliberal
results and prospects.

But never mind my own theories. Any gap is, after all, a good
opportunity
for theory building. The authors are raising a key issue in both
Vygotsky
and Halliday: when does an interpersonal relation become a
historico-cultural one? That is, when does that 'me" and "you"
relationship
in which I really do have the power to author my identity (I can make
up
any name I want and, within limits, invent my own history,
particularly
if
I am a backpacker) give way to a job, an address, a number and a class
over
which I have very little power at all? When does the interpersonal
somehow
become an alien ideational "identity" that confronts me like a strange
ghost when I look in the mirror?

The authors find this point (in the case of Lorena) somewhere between
the
beginning of the tenth and the end of the eleventh grade, but I think
that's just because it's where they are looking. We can probably find
the
roots of this distinction (between the interpersonal and the
historico-cultural) as far back as we like, right back to (Vygotsky)
the
moment when the child gives up the "self-authored" language at one and
takes on the language recognized by others and (Halliday) the moment
when
the child distinguishes between Attributive identifying clauses ("I'm
confident", "I'm good at this"), material processes ("I can pull this
off")
and mental ones ("I get it").

(To be continued...but not necessarily by me!)

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil
<a.j.gil@iped.uio.no

wrote:

Dear xmca'ers,


I am excited to announce the next article for discussion, which is
now
available open access at the T&F MCA pages<http://www.tandfonline.
com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1188962>.


After a really interesting discussion on Zaza's colourful paper
(which
still goes on developed into a discussion on micro- and
ontogenesis),
we
will from next week be looking at an article by Margaret Eisenhart
and
Carrie Allen from the special issue on "Reimagining Science
Education
in
the Neoliberal Global Context". I think the article, as the whole
issue,
offers a very neat example of research trying to tie together
cultural/economical? and developmental aspects (of identity in this
case).


Margaret has kindly accepted to join the discussion ?after US
elections
(which will surely keep the attention of many of us busy).
Meanwhile, I
share the link<http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039
.
2016.1188962>  to the article (see above), and also attach it as
PDF.
??Good read!


Alfredo











------------------------------

Message: 28
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2016 20:12:33 -0700
From: HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID: <56BA469E-D1C3-4924-8C7F-F976876DEE9E@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252

Thank you, Phillip.
"For us in these times, to even have hope is too abstract, too detached, too spectatorial. Instead we must be a hope, a participant and a force for good as we face this catastrophe.?
That?s my favorite part.
Henry




On Nov 18, 2016, at 3:52 PM, White, Phillip <Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu> wrote:

well, this is what Cornel West has to say:


https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election

[https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/aae8946d80dac457aa8b6af3f9a9fd5acc6b4acb/0_662_5150_3090/master/5150.jpg?w=1200&h=140&q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=crop&bm=normal&ba=bottom%2Cleft&blend64=aHR0cHM6Ly91cGxvYWRzLmd1aW0uY28udWsvMjAxNi8wNS8yNS9vdmVybGF5LWxvZ28tMTIwMC05MF9vcHQucG5n&s=4cbd18b4943818f70304ff2cfdc3da2d]<https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election>

Goodbye, American neoliberalism. A new era is here | Cornel West<https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election>
www.theguardian.com
Trump?s election was enabled by the policies that overlooked the plight of our most vulnerable citizens. We gird ourselves for a frightening future




phillip


________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 8:16:01 PM
To: Edward Wall; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

So basically engaging in play may be foundational to learning a particular disciplinary subject matter including mathematical play.
This playful approach as counterpoint to formal high stakes approaches.  This places the scope of play (itself) at the center of our inquiry.
This feels intuitively to be relevant to exemplary ways of learning.

Like imagination, play is not taken seriously , but may be foundational or necessary for learning that is exemplary.


Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: Edward Wall
Sent: November 17, 2016 4:45 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Larry

   There are, at least, four somewhat current possibilities (I?m not sure if they should be called exemplars) as regards mathematics

1. Summerhill (and, perhaps, some other English private schools)
2. Some private schools in the US (a book was written by a teacher at one. If there is any interest I?ll see if I can dig up the title).
3. The case of Louis P. Benezet in a US public school in1929
4. There is some indication that schools in Finland and the Netherlands are, perhaps, a little less ?neoliberal' (however, the evidence isn?t clear)

Basically in some of the above formal mathematics instruction is put off until either children ask or until until fourth or fifth grade; however, children engage in, you might say, mathematical play (Dewey recommended something like this). This is, by the way and according to some, also what a good mathematics preK program looks like. Also, this is a bit as regards mathematics what the ancient Greek version of schooling for the elite looked like (i.e. mathematics was put off).

Ed

On Nov 17, 2016, at  3:05 PM, lpscholar2@gmail.com wrote:

The question remains, if this neoliberal context generates (hollowed-out) educational *spaces* or institutions then is it possible we are able to offer exemplars of other educational places (current or historical) that manifested different kinds of identity formation that were not hollowed out. I speculate these exemplars would embody or incarnate deeply historical and  ethical orientations and practices.
If we have lost our way, are there other models (cultural imaginaries) that co-generate developmental narratives that will nurture well-being?

Exemplary models that point in a certain direction

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: Huw Lloyd
Sent: November 17, 2016 11:32 AM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Alfredo,

Yes, they're pathological.  I am merely saying that the problems inherent
in the pathology can be edifying.  No, I don't think the issues can be
transcended within conventional practices. Perhaps the best that can be
achieved is that the students recognise an institutional need for "good
behaviour" and the teacher recognises an educational need for real problem
solving. For "real" education, we would need something like Davydov's
system. But this is merely one view of the purpose of "education". There
are many who don't seem to recognise these (and other) important
implications.

Best,
Huw



On 17 November 2016 at 18:11, Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
wrote:

Huw,

great comments. I like what you say, that the (institutional, social)
process always is educational, and I agree: it develops into the formation
of habit and character. But I still wonder whether all educational
processes lead to growth or development, or whether we rather should be
able to identify some processes as, we may call them, *pathological* (or
perhaps involutive?). There you have Bateson on double bind and
schizophrenia, for example. Here, in the article, we have some young
students that enter a system that generates a double bind (it was Mike who
made me aware of the connection with double bind). The question is, will
the system develop without some form of awareness *about* the double bind
that overcomes it by generating a system that does not only include the
double bind, but also its own description (thereby becoming a higher order
system, one in which participants, students and teachers, come to grow
rather than come to stall).

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
Sent: 17 November 2016 10:54
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Alfredo,

The 'zone' is always present.  Whether it is recognised or not is another
matter.
I do not think this interpretation is quite a zero sum game, because there
is always the aspect that the institutionalised process is educational --
the laws reveal themselves one way or another.  So (from an Illich
perspective) the opportunity to discover what is real remains, it just
takes a different course.

Best,
Huw

On 17 November 2016 at 07:37, Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
wrote:

What touches me of the article is something that perhaps relates to this
tension that I find between David's (individualistic?) approach to
prolepsis in his post (David, I thought, and continue thinking, that
prolepsis refers to something that emerges in the relation between two,
not
something that either is present or absent within a person), and
Phillip's
view of young people figuring out what life is all about just as all we
do.
And so here (and in any neoliberal school context) we have wonderfully
beautiful young people more or less interested in science or in maths,
but
all eager to live a life and evolve as best as they can (whatever that
best
may mean for each one). And then you see how the history and context that
they come into gives them everything they need to develop motives and
goals; to then make sure that the majority of them won't make it so that
only a few privileged (or in the case of Margaret's paper none, according
to the authors) succeed. And then what remains is not just a hollowed-out
science and math identity, but also a hollowed-out soul that had illusion
and now just doesn't. Not only a failure to provide opportunities to
learners to become anything(one) good about science and math, but also a
robbing of other possible paths of development that may had grown in
people
if they had been hanging out with some other better company. Do we have a
term to refer to the opposite of a zone of proximal development? Not just
the absence of it, but the strangling of it.

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of White, Phillip <Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu>
Sent: 17 November 2016 06:29
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

David, the examples on page 193, students 1, 2 & 3 - aren't these
examples
of proleptic thought - especially for student 2, who looks at where she
is
"I have my own standards", a statement of the present, then a looking
back
at  what has happened, "I like to get straight A's". and then setting a
target for the future, "help for like to get in college and stuff, so
yeah,
I participate in a lot of stuff." ending with a reassertion of present
activities to attain future goals.


and there is a preponderance of the use of "I", rather than "you".


i'd give the young people for credit than a myopia focused merely on
their
age: the business of young people is figuring out what life is all about
and how to participate, just as adults and infants and old people like me
do.


i'm not convinced that your arguments are supported by the data in this
Eisenhard / Allen paper.


phillip

________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 1:24:35 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Actually, Henry, I was attacking the idea that tense is an empty mental
space. I guess I am a little like Larry: when we discuss articles I have
a
strong tendency to try to make them relevant to what I am doing rather
than
to drop what I am doing and go and discuss what everybody else is
discussing. So what I am doing right now is trying to make sense of some
story-telling data where the adults are all over the map on tenses, and
the
kids seem to stick to one tense only. The adults are slipping in and out
of
mental spaces. The kids are telling stories.

I think the relevance to the article is this: When you look at the way
the
article frames institutional practices and figured worlds, we see
prolepsis--a preoccupation with the future. But when we look at what the
kids are doing and saying it is very much in the moment. Is this simply
because mental processes like "like" and "want" tend to take simple
present
(because they are less defined than material processes)? Or is it because
while the institutions have the near future firmly in view and the
figured
worlds have irrealis in view, the business of young people is youth?

Vygotsky points out that the question the interviewer asks is very much a
part of the data. For example, if you ask a question using "you" you
often
get "you" in reply, even if you design your question to get "I".

Q: Why do you want to kill yourself?
A: The same reason everybody wants to kill themselves. You want to find
out
if anybody really cares.

To take another example that is probably more relevant to readers: both
the
Brexit vote and the American elections are clear examples of statistical
unreliability in that if you tried to repeat the election the morning
after
you would probably get an utterly different result. Take all of those
black
voters and the real working class voters who voted Obama but couldn't be
bothered for Hillary (not the imaginary "white working class voters" who
work in imaginary industries in Iowa, rural Pennsylvania, North Carolina
and Florida). They might well have behaved rather differently knowing how
imminent the neo-Confederacy really was. This is usually presented as
"buyer's remorse," but it's more than that; the event itself would be
part
of its replication. This is something that statistical models that use
standard error of the mean cannot build in (they work on the impossible
idea that you can repeat an event ten or twenty thousand times without
any
memory at all).

In the same way, when you interview a group of students together you
notice
that they tend to model answers on each other rather than on your
question,
and when you interview them separately, you notice that YOU tend to
change
your question according to the previous answer you received. On the one
hand, life is not easily distracted by its own future: it is too wholly
there in each moment of existence. On the other hand, each of these
moments
includes the previous one, and therefore all the previous ones, in
itself.
The past weighs like a nightmare on the brain of the living, and objects
in
the rear view mirror are always closer than they appear.

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 10:23 AM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com>
wrote:

David,
I was puzzled that you found Langacker to be relevant to this topic,
but
the last paragraph of your post makes an important connection between
Langacker and Vygotsky: Both see speech acts as staged?interactants
view
themselves as ?on stage?. I think the book by Vera and Reuben is
largely
about how differently math is ?staged? by working mathematicians as
contrasted with doing math in school. I think it would be interesting
to
analyze how natural language and the language of math scaffold each
other
in both contexts. Word problems have been a well-used way of connecting
the
two languages; stats and graphs are commonly used in the media to
clarify
and elaborate text in articles on economics, presidential elections,
and
what not.

I would love to read your ?unpublishable? on Langacker and Halliday on
tense. What I recall from reading Langacker is his interest in ?basic
domains?, starting with the temporal and spatial. Somewhere he has said
that he believes that the temporal domain is the more basic. As you?d
guess, the spatial domain is especially useful in elucidating what he
calls
?things? (nouns are conceptually about things); the temporal domain is
more
closely connected to what he calls ?processes? wherein he analyzes
tense
and aspect.

I think Langacker would agree that his work in cognitive grammar has a
long way to go in contributing to the idea that grammar is usage based,
rather than some autonomous module, but he is working on it. I think
there
is a potential for connecting Halliday and Langacker, though I?m not
smart
enough to convince you of that evidently. Somehow the connection must
be
made by staying close to the data, ?thick description? ethnographers
are
fond of saying. I think the article by Carrie and Margaret is raising
this
issue.

The ?hollowed out? math curriculum in the article resonates with the
?potholes? you say teachers must watch out for. Some may say that  the
hollowing out is typical even of ?elite? K-12 schools. Some may say
that
this is deliberate. I would say my own experience of math in school was
often hollowed out, which I sensed, but didn?t discover until I got to
the
?pure math? department in the mid 60s at Univ of Texas at Austin under
the
leadership of Robert Lee Moore. He is a main protagonist in Chapter 8
of
Vera?s and Reuben?s book.

I?ll end it there.

Henry




On Nov 15, 2016, at 1:38 PM, David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
wrote:

Henry:

I just wrote another unpublishable comparing how Langacker and
Halliday treat tense, and I'm starting to come to grips with the
different
theory of experience underlying the two grammars. Langacker somehow
sees
it
as creating empty mental space (and aspect as creating space within
space).
Halliday sees tense as a way of abstracting concrete doings and
happenings.
Halliday's tense system is not spatial at all but temporal: it's
temporally
deictic and then temporally recursive: a kind of time machine that
simultaneously transports and orients the speaker either
proleptically
or
retroleptically. So for example if I say to you that this article we
are
discussing is going to have been being discussed for two or three
weeks
now, then "is going" is a kind of time machine that takes you into
the
future, from which "You are Here" vantage point the article has been
(past)
being discussed (present). Present in the past in the future.

And that got me thinking about theory and practice. It seems to me
that
the
they are related, but simultaneously and not sequentially. That is,
the
output of one is not the input of the other: they are simply more and
less
abstract ways of looking at one and the same thing. So for example in
this
article the tasks of theory and practice are one and the same: the
task
of
theory is really to define as precisely as possible the domain, the
scope,
the range of the inquiry into authoring math and science identities
and
the
task of practice is to ask what exactly you want to do in this
domain/scope/range--to try to understand how they are hollowed out a
little
better so that maybe teachers like you and me can help fill the damn
potholes in a little. You can't really do the one without doing the
other:
trying to decide the terrain under study without deciding some task
that
you want to do there is like imagining tense as empty mental space
and
not
as some actual, concrete doing or happening. Conversely, the way you
dig
the hole depends very much on how big and where you want it.

So there are three kinds of mental spaces in the first part of the
article:

a) institutional arrangements (e.g. "priority improvement plans",
career-academy/comprehensive school status STEM tracks, AP classes)
b) figured worlds (e.g. 'good students', and 'don't cares', or what
Eckhart
and McConnell-Ginet called 'jocks', 'nerds',  'burnouts',
'gangbangers')
c) authored identities (i.e. what kids say about themselves and what
they
think about themselves)

Now, I think it's possible to make this distinction--but they are
probably
better understood not as mental spaces (in which case they really do
overlap) but rather as doings (or, as is my wont, sayings). Different
people are saying different things: a) is mostly the sayings of the
school
boards and administrators, b) is mostly the sayings of teachers and
groups
of kids, and c) is mostly the sayings of individual students. It's
always
tempting for a theory to focus on c), because that's where all the
data
is
and it's tempting for practice too, because if you are against what
is
happening in a) and in b), that's where the most likely point of
intervention is.

"But the data does suggest that the "figured worlds" are figured by
authored identities--not by institutional arrangements. Is that just
an
artefact of the warm empathy of the authors for the words (although
maybe
not the exact wordings) of their subjects, or is it real grounds for
hope?

Marx says (beginning of the 18th Brumaire): "*Men make* their own
*history*,
*but they* do *not make* it as *they* please; *they* do *not make* it
under self-selected circumstances, *but* under circumstances existing
already, given and transmitted from the *past*. The tradition of all
dead
generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living."

It's a good theory, i.e. at once a truth and a tragedy. And it's a
theory treats time as time and not as an empty stage.

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 9:39 AM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com>
wrote:

All,
I have read only part of Margaret?s and Carrie?s article, but I
wanted
to
jump in with a reference to a book by Vygotskian Vera John-Steiner
and
her
mathematician husband Reuben Hersh: Loving and Hating Mathematics:
Challenging the Mathematical Life. Huw?s point (v) which refers to
?identities of independence and finding out sustainable within these
settings (school math classes) spent high school. Vera?s and
Reuben?s
book
contrasts what it?s like to work and think like a real (working)
mathematician (what I think Huw is talking about) and what we call
mathematics in the classroom. Chapter 8 of the book "The Teaching of
Mathematics: Fierce or Friendly?? is interesting reading and could
be
relevant to this discussion.
Henry


On Nov 13, 2016, at 2:47 PM, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
wrote:

Dear Margaret

My reading has not been a particularly careful one, so I leave it
to
yourselves to judge the usefulness of these points.

i) Whether arguments can be made (for or against) a nebulous term
(neoliberalism) with its political associations, by arguments about
identity that are themselves not deliberately political.

ii) Whether it is better not to focus essentially on the place of
identity.

iii) Whether it is worthwhile contrasting the role/identity of
"model
student" with "identities" that anyone excelling at STEM subjects
would
relate to.  On this, I would point to the importance with
identifying
with
appreciations for "awareness of not knowing" and "eagerness to find
out"
(which also entails learning about what it means to know).

iv) Whether you detect that to the degree that an identity is
foregrounded
in the actual practice of STEM work (rather than as background
social
appeasement), it is being faked? That is, someone is playing at the
role
rather than actually committing themselves to finding out about
unknowns.

v) Whether, in fact, there is actually a "tiered" or varied set of
acceptable "identities" within the settings you explored, such that
identities of independence and finding out are sustainable within
these
settings, possibly representing a necessary fudge to deal with the
requirements placed upon the institutions.

Best,
Huw

On 12 November 2016 at 20:30, Margaret A Eisenhart <
margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu> wrote:

Hello Everyone,

Carrie and I are newcomers to this list, and we thank you for the
opportunity to engage with you about our article, ?Hollowed Out.?
We
also
hope for your patience as we learn to participate in the stream of
thinking here!

Given the comments so far, we are intrigued by others? ideas about
the
link between our theory and our data.  On this topic, we would
like
to
make clear that we did not intend to suggest that the students
were
making
sense of their lives in the same way that we interpreted them
through
the
lens of our theory. Our claim is that opportunities and figured
worlds
are
resources for identity and that the students' words to us
reflected
perspectives consistent with neoliberalism, with some pretty
serious
implications. Like Phillip White, we are interested in what
theories
others would use to explain the data we presented.

Like Mike Cole, we are also intrigued by the prospect of
?exemplars?
we
might turn to.

We look forward to hearing your thoughts.


Margaret Eisenhart



On 11/11/16, 11:35 AM, "lpscholar2@gmail.com" <
lpscholar2@gmail.com

wrote:

A resumption in exploring the meaning and sense (preferably sens
as
this
term draws attention to movement and direction within meaning and
sense)
of this month?s article.
The paper begins with the title and the image of (hollowed-out)
meaning
and sense that is impoverished and holds few resources for
developing a
deeper sens of identity.
The article concludes with the implication that the work of
social
justice within educational institutions is not about improving
educational outcome in neoliberal terms; the implications of the
study
are about *reorganizing* the identities ? particulary
identities-with-standind that young people are *exposed* to, can
articulate, and can act on (in school and beyond).

I would say this is taking an ethical stand?.

I will now turn to page 189 and the section (identity-in-context)
to
amplify the notion of (cultural imaginary) and (figured worlds).
This imaginary being the site or location of history-in-person.
That
is
identity is a form of legacy (or *text*) ABOUT the kind of person
one
is
or has become in responding to (external) circumstances.
These external circumstances are EXPERIENCED primarily in the
organization of local practices and cultural imaginaries (figured
worlds)
that circulate and *give meaning* (and sens) to local practices

Figured worlds are interpreted following Holland as socially and
culturally *realms of interpretation* and certain players are
recognized
as (exemplars).

As such cultural, social, historical, dialogical psychological
(imaginaries) are handmaidens of the imaginal *giving meaning* to
*what*
goes on in the directions we take together.

Two key terms i highlight are (exemplars) and (direction) we
take.
The realm of the ethical turn
What are the markers and signposts emerging in the deeper ethical
turn
that offers more than a hollowed-out answer.
Are there any *ghost* stories of exemplars we can turn to as well
as
living exemplars? By ghosts i mean ancestors who continue as
beacons
of
hope exemplifying *who* we are.

My way into exploring the impoverished narratives of the
neoliberal
imaginary and reawakening exemplary ancestors or ghosts from
their
slumber to help guide us through these multiple imaginaries

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: mike cole
Sent: November 9, 2016 3:04 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion
Re-started

Alfredo--

for any who missed the initial article sent out, you might send
them
here:

http://lchc.ucsd.edu/mca/

I am meeting shortly with Bruce. A list of improvements to web
site
welcome, although not clear how long they will take to implement.

mike

On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 2:38 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil <
a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
wrote:

Dear all,

last week I announced MCA's 3rd Issue article for discussion:

"Hollowed Out: Meaning and Authoring of High School Math and
Science
Identities in the Context of Neoliberal Reform," by Margaret
Eisenhart
and
Carrie Allen.

The article is open access and will continue to be so during the
discussion time at this link.

Thanks to everyone who begun the discussion early after I shared
the
link
last week, and sorry that we sort of brought the discussion to a
halt
until
the authors were ready to discuss. I have now sent Margaret and
Carrie
the
posts that were produced then so that they could catch up, but I
also
invited them to feel free to move on an introduce themselves as
soon
as
they ??wanted.

It is not without some doubts that one introduces a discussion
of
an
article in a moment that some US media have called as "An
American
Tragedy"
and other international editorials are describing as "a dark day
for
the
world." But I believe that the paper may indeed offer some
grounds
for
discuss important issues that are at stake in everyone's home
now,
as
Mike
recently describes in a touching post on the "local state of
mind"
and
that
have to do with identity and its connection to a neoliberal
organisation of
the economy. It is not difficult to link neoliberalism to
Trump's
phenomenon and how it pervades very intimate aspects of everyday
life.

If this was not enough, I think the authors' background on
women's
scholar
and professional careers in science is totally relevant to the
discussions
on gendered discourse we've been having. Now without halts, I
hope
this
thread gives joys and wisdom to all.

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
edu>
on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
Sent: 02 November 2016 01:48
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Thanks Mike and everyone! I am sure Margaret (and many of those
still
reading) will be happy to be able to catch up when she joins us
next
week!
Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
edu>
on behalf of mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu>
Sent: 02 November 2016 01:32
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Gentlemen -- I believe Fernando told us that Margaret would be
able to join this discussion next week. Just a quick glance at
the
discussion so far indicates that there is a lot there to wade
into
before she has had a word.

I am only part way through the article, expecting to have until
next
week
to think about it.

May I suggest your forbearance while this slow-poke tries to
catch
up!

mike

On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 3:38 PM, White, Phillip
<Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu

wrote:

David & Larry, everyone else ...

by way of introduction, Margaret and Carrie point out that the
data
in
this paper emerged through a three year study - which was the
processes
of
how students of color, interested in STEM, responded to the
externally
imposed neoliberal requirements. they framed their study using
theories
of
social practices on how identity developed in context.


David, you reject the theories.  or so i understand your
position.
as
you
write: It's that the theory

contradicts my own personal theories.

are you also rejecting the data as well?  it seems as if you
are
suggesting this when you write: The authors find this point (in
the
case
of
Lorena) somewhere between the
beginning of the tenth and the end of the eleventh grade, but I
think
that's just because it's where they are looking.

you reject the narrative of Lorena on the grounds that it could
be
traced
back to infancy.

do you also reject the identical narrative found in the adult
practitioners within the context of the high schools?  that
this
narrative
is not one of a contemporary neoliberal practice but rather
could
be
traced
back to, say, the mid 1600's new england colonies, in
particular
massachusettes, where the practices of public american
education
began?

to explain the data that emerged from the Eisenhart/Allen
study,
what
theories would you have used?

phillip

________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 7:03 AM
To: David Kellogg; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Margaret and Carrie,
Thank you for this wonderful paper that explains the shallow
*hollowed-out* way of forming identity as a form of meaning and
sense. I
will add the French word *sens* which always includes
*direction*
within
meaning and sense.

David, your response that what our theory makes sens of depends
on
where
we are looking makes sens to me.
You put in question the moment when the interpersonal (you and
me)
way of
authoring sens *shifts* or turns to cultural and historical
ways
of
being
immersed in sens. The article refers to the
*historical-in-person*.

My further comment, where I am looking) is in the description
of
the
sociocultural as a response to *externally changing
circumstances*
as
the
process of *learning as becoming* (see page 190).

The article says:

This process is what Lave and Wenger (1991) and other
Sociocultural
researchers have referred to as *learning as becoming,* that
is,
learning
that occurs as one becomes a certain kind of person in a
particular
context.  Identities conceived in this way are not stable or
fixed.
As
*external circumstances* affecting a person change, so too may
the
identities that are produced *in response*. (Holland & Skinner,
1997).

In this version of *history-in-person* the identity processes
that
start
the process moving in a neoliberal *direction* are *external*
circumstances. I am not questioning this version of the
importance
of
the
external but do question if looking primarily or primordially
to
the
external circumstances as central if we are not leaving a gap
in
our
notions of *sens*.

If by looking or highlighting or illuminating the *external*
and
highly
visible acts of the actual we are leaving a gap in actual*ity.
A gap in *sens*.

To be continued by others...

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: David Kellogg
Sent: October 31, 2016 2:15 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

I was turning Mike's request--for a short explanation of the
Halliday/Vygotsky interface--over in my mind for a few days,
unsure
where
to start. I usually decide these difficult "where to start"
questions
in
the easiest possible way, with whatever I happen to be working
on.
In
this
case it's the origins of language in a one year old, a moment
which
is
almost as mysterious to me as the origins of life or the Big
Bang.
But
perhaps for that very reason it's not a good place to start
(the
Big
Bang
always seemed to me to jump the gun a bit, not to mention the
origins
of
life).

Let me start with the "Hollowed Out" paper Alfredo just
thoughtfully
sent
around instead. My first impression is that this paper leaves a
really
big
gap between the data and the conclusions, and that this gap is
largely
filled by theory. Here are some examples of what I mean:

a)    "Whereas 'subject position' is given by society,
'identity'
is
self-authored, although it must be recognized by others to be
sustained."
(p. 189)

b)  "It is notable that this construction of a good student,
though
familiar, does not make any reference to personal interest,
excitement,
or
engagement in the topics or content-related activities." (193)

c)  "When students' statements such as 'I get it', 'I'm
confident',
'I'm
good at this', and  'I can pull this off' are interpreted in
the
context
of
the figured world of math or science at the two schools, their
statements
index more than a grade. They reference a meaning system for
being
good
in
math or science that includes the actor identity
characteristics
of
being
able to grasp the subject matter easily, do the work quickly,
do
it
without
help from others, do it faster than others, and get an A."
(193)

In each case, we are told to believe in a theory: "given by
society",
"self-authored", "does not make any reference", "the context of
the
figured
world". It's not just that in each case the theory seems to go
against
the
data (although it certainly does in places, such as Lowena's
views
as
a
tenth grader). I can always live with a theory that contradicts
my
data:
that's what being a rationalist is all about. It's that the
theory
contradicts my own personal theories.

I don't believe that identity is self authored, and I also
don't
believe
that subject position is given by society as a whole, I think
the
word
"good" does include personal interest, excitement, and
engagement
as
much
as it includes being able to grasp the subject matter easily,
do
the
work
quickly, do it without help from others, do it faster than
others
and
get
an A. To me anyway, the key word in the data given in c) is
actually
"I"
and not "it" or "this": the students think they are talking
about,
and
therefore probably are actually talking about, a relation
between
their
inner states and the activity at hand  or between the activity
at
hand
and
the result they get; they are not invoking the figured world of
neoliberal
results and prospects.

But never mind my own theories. Any gap is, after all, a good
opportunity
for theory building. The authors are raising a key issue in
both
Vygotsky
and Halliday: when does an interpersonal relation become a
historico-cultural one? That is, when does that 'me" and "you"
relationship
in which I really do have the power to author my identity (I
can
make
up
any name I want and, within limits, invent my own history,
particularly
if
I am a backpacker) give way to a job, an address, a number and
a
class
over
which I have very little power at all? When does the
interpersonal
somehow
become an alien ideational "identity" that confronts me like a
strange
ghost when I look in the mirror?

The authors find this point (in the case of Lorena) somewhere
between
the
beginning of the tenth and the end of the eleventh grade, but I
think
that's just because it's where they are looking. We can
probably
find
the
roots of this distinction (between the interpersonal and the
historico-cultural) as far back as we like, right back to
(Vygotsky)
the
moment when the child gives up the "self-authored" language at
one
and
takes on the language recognized by others and (Halliday) the
moment
when
the child distinguishes between Attributive identifying clauses
("I'm
confident", "I'm good at this"), material processes ("I can
pull
this
off")
and mental ones ("I get it").

(To be continued...but not necessarily by me!)

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil
<a.j.gil@iped.uio.no

wrote:

Dear xmca'ers,


I am excited to announce the next article for discussion,
which
is
now
available open access at the T&F MCA pages<
http://www.tandfonline
.
com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1188962>.


After a really interesting discussion on Zaza's colourful
paper
(which
still goes on developed into a discussion on micro- and
ontogenesis),
we
will from next week be looking at an article by Margaret
Eisenhart
and
Carrie Allen from the special issue on "Reimagining Science
Education
in
the Neoliberal Global Context". I think the article, as the
whole
issue,
offers a very neat example of research trying to tie together
cultural/economical? and developmental aspects (of identity in
this
case).


Margaret has kindly accepted to join the discussion ?after US
elections
(which will surely keep the attention of many of us busy).
Meanwhile, I
share the link<http://www.tandfonline.
com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039
.
2016.1188962>  to the article (see above), and also attach it
as
PDF.
??Good read!


Alfredo
























------------------------------

Message: 29
Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2016 06:24:47 -0800
From: <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
To: HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com>, "eXtended Mind, Culture,
Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID: <583060c1.098d620a.b4db8.5e32@mx.google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Margaret, Carrie, Phillip, Henry, Cornell,

A central and key theme of this month?s article is neoliberalism in all its guises.
In my imaginary response i am addressing the authors of the paper and Cornell who addresses neoliberalism, and Phillip, who shared Cornell?s article and Henry who heard Cornell offer a way to mediate our crises.
The paper is about teaching STEM and the neoliberal agenda that ignores the plight of those who suffer.
Cornell says the answer is (democratic soulcraft). At the heart of this soulcraft is truth telling of the reality of suffering.

In order to constitute or institute a (new) order a more pro/gressive order it seems suffering must be the key factor.

The notion of ivory towers and their responses to suffering seems central.
I also want to explore the theme of (play) in relation to suffering.

One exemplar:
There is a Buddhist who organizes gatherings where food is prepared and presented at the gatherings (for the homeless). Musical instruments are also brought and dancing proceeds.
Everyone participates and this is key: You cannot tell who are the homeless and who are the people who prepared the food. They are sharing a common (new) experience that is profoundly moving and creates a sense of well-being.
This Buddhist practise is exemplary as a response to our current contemporary historical moment. It is truth telling and democratic soulcraft and PLAY. (each in the other).
It is one way of answering Margaret, Carrie, Cornell, Phillip, and Henry.
This Buddhist act or practice  is (crafting) an answer that speaks to suffering.


Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: HENRY SHONERD
Sent: November 18, 2016 7:15 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Thank you, Phillip.
"For us in these times, to even have hope is too abstract, too detached, too spectatorial. Instead we must be a hope, a participant and a force for good as we face this catastrophe.?
That?s my favorite part.
Henry




On Nov 18, 2016, at 3:52 PM, White, Phillip <Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu> wrote:

well, this is what Cornel West has to say:


https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election

[https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/aae8946d80dac457aa8b6af3f9a9fd5acc6b4acb/0_662_5150_3090/master/5150.jpg?w=1200&h=140&q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=crop&bm=normal&ba=bottom%2Cleft&blend64=aHR0cHM6Ly91cGxvYWRzLmd1aW0uY28udWsvMjAxNi8wNS8yNS9vdmVybGF5LWxvZ28tMTIwMC05MF9vcHQucG5n&s=4cbd18b4943818f70304ff2cfdc3da2d]<https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election>

Goodbye, American neoliberalism. A new era is here | Cornel West<https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election>
www.theguardian.com
Trump?s election was enabled by the policies that overlooked the plight of our most vulnerable citizens. We gird ourselves for a frightening future




phillip


________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 8:16:01 PM
To: Edward Wall; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

So basically engaging in play may be foundational to learning a particular disciplinary subject matter including mathematical play.
This playful approach as counterpoint to formal high stakes approaches.  This places the scope of play (itself) at the center of our inquiry.
This feels intuitively to be relevant to exemplary ways of learning.

Like imagination, play is not taken seriously , but may be foundational or necessary for learning that is exemplary.


Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: Edward Wall
Sent: November 17, 2016 4:45 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Larry

   There are, at least, four somewhat current possibilities (I?m not sure if they should be called exemplars) as regards mathematics

1. Summerhill (and, perhaps, some other English private schools)
2. Some private schools in the US (a book was written by a teacher at one. If there is any interest I?ll see if I can dig up the title).
3. The case of Louis P. Benezet in a US public school in1929
4. There is some indication that schools in Finland and the Netherlands are, perhaps, a little less ?neoliberal' (however, the evidence isn?t clear)

Basically in some of the above formal mathematics instruction is put off until either children ask or until until fourth or fifth grade; however, children engage in, you might say, mathematical play (Dewey recommended something like this). This is, by the way and according to some, also what a good mathematics preK program looks like. Also, this is a bit as regards mathematics what the ancient Greek version of schooling for the elite looked like (i.e. mathematics was put off).

Ed

On Nov 17, 2016, at  3:05 PM, lpscholar2@gmail.com wrote:

The question remains, if this neoliberal context generates (hollowed-out) educational *spaces* or institutions then is it possible we are able to offer exemplars of other educational places (current or historical) that manifested different kinds of identity formation that were not hollowed out. I speculate these exemplars would embody or incarnate deeply historical and  ethical orientations and practices.
If we have lost our way, are there other models (cultural imaginaries) that co-generate developmental narratives that will nurture well-being?

Exemplary models that point in a certain direction

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: Huw Lloyd
Sent: November 17, 2016 11:32 AM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Alfredo,

Yes, they're pathological.  I am merely saying that the problems inherent
in the pathology can be edifying.  No, I don't think the issues can be
transcended within conventional practices. Perhaps the best that can be
achieved is that the students recognise an institutional need for "good
behaviour" and the teacher recognises an educational need for real problem
solving. For "real" education, we would need something like Davydov's
system. But this is merely one view of the purpose of "education". There
are many who don't seem to recognise these (and other) important
implications.

Best,
Huw



On 17 November 2016 at 18:11, Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
wrote:

Huw,

great comments. I like what you say, that the (institutional, social)
process always is educational, and I agree: it develops into the formation
of habit and character. But I still wonder whether all educational
processes lead to growth or development, or whether we rather should be
able to identify some processes as, we may call them, *pathological* (or
perhaps involutive?). There you have Bateson on double bind and
schizophrenia, for example. Here, in the article, we have some young
students that enter a system that generates a double bind (it was Mike who
made me aware of the connection with double bind). The question is, will
the system develop without some form of awareness *about* the double bind
that overcomes it by generating a system that does not only include the
double bind, but also its own description (thereby becoming a higher order
system, one in which participants, students and teachers, come to grow
rather than come to stall).

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
Sent: 17 November 2016 10:54
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Alfredo,

The 'zone' is always present.  Whether it is recognised or not is another
matter.
I do not think this interpretation is quite a zero sum game, because there
is always the aspect that the institutionalised process is educational --
the laws reveal themselves one way or another.  So (from an Illich
perspective) the opportunity to discover what is real remains, it just
takes a different course.

Best,
Huw

On 17 November 2016 at 07:37, Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
wrote:

What touches me of the article is something that perhaps relates to this
tension that I find between David's (individualistic?) approach to
prolepsis in his post (David, I thought, and continue thinking, that
prolepsis refers to something that emerges in the relation between two,
not
something that either is present or absent within a person), and
Phillip's
view of young people figuring out what life is all about just as all we
do.
And so here (and in any neoliberal school context) we have wonderfully
beautiful young people more or less interested in science or in maths,
but
all eager to live a life and evolve as best as they can (whatever that
best
may mean for each one). And then you see how the history and context that
they come into gives them everything they need to develop motives and
goals; to then make sure that the majority of them won't make it so that
only a few privileged (or in the case of Margaret's paper none, according
to the authors) succeed. And then what remains is not just a hollowed-out
science and math identity, but also a hollowed-out soul that had illusion
and now just doesn't. Not only a failure to provide opportunities to
learners to become anything(one) good about science and math, but also a
robbing of other possible paths of development that may had grown in
people
if they had been hanging out with some other better company. Do we have a
term to refer to the opposite of a zone of proximal development? Not just
the absence of it, but the strangling of it.

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of White, Phillip <Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu>
Sent: 17 November 2016 06:29
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

David, the examples on page 193, students 1, 2 & 3 - aren't these
examples
of proleptic thought - especially for student 2, who looks at where she
is
"I have my own standards", a statement of the present, then a looking
back
at  what has happened, "I like to get straight A's". and then setting a
target for the future, "help for like to get in college and stuff, so
yeah,
I participate in a lot of stuff." ending with a reassertion of present
activities to attain future goals.


and there is a preponderance of the use of "I", rather than "you".


i'd give the young people for credit than a myopia focused merely on
their
age: the business of young people is figuring out what life is all about
and how to participate, just as adults and infants and old people like me
do.


i'm not convinced that your arguments are supported by the data in this
Eisenhard / Allen paper.


phillip

________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 1:24:35 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Actually, Henry, I was attacking the idea that tense is an empty mental
space. I guess I am a little like Larry: when we discuss articles I have
a
strong tendency to try to make them relevant to what I am doing rather
than
to drop what I am doing and go and discuss what everybody else is
discussing. So what I am doing right now is trying to make sense of some
story-telling data where the adults are all over the map on tenses, and
the
kids seem to stick to one tense only. The adults are slipping in and out
of
mental spaces. The kids are telling stories.

I think the relevance to the article is this: When you look at the way
the
article frames institutional practices and figured worlds, we see
prolepsis--a preoccupation with the future. But when we look at what the
kids are doing and saying it is very much in the moment. Is this simply
because mental processes like "like" and "want" tend to take simple
present
(because they are less defined than material processes)? Or is it because
while the institutions have the near future firmly in view and the
figured
worlds have irrealis in view, the business of young people is youth?

Vygotsky points out that the question the interviewer asks is very much a
part of the data. For example, if you ask a question using "you" you
often
get "you" in reply, even if you design your question to get "I".

Q: Why do you want to kill yourself?
A: The same reason everybody wants to kill themselves. You want to find
out
if anybody really cares.

To take another example that is probably more relevant to readers: both
the
Brexit vote and the American elections are clear examples of statistical
unreliability in that if you tried to repeat the election the morning
after
you would probably get an utterly different result. Take all of those
black
voters and the real working class voters who voted Obama but couldn't be
bothered for Hillary (not the imaginary "white working class voters" who
work in imaginary industries in Iowa, rural Pennsylvania, North Carolina
and Florida). They might well have behaved rather differently knowing how
imminent the neo-Confederacy really was. This is usually presented as
"buyer's remorse," but it's more than that; the event itself would be
part
of its replication. This is something that statistical models that use
standard error of the mean cannot build in (they work on the impossible
idea that you can repeat an event ten or twenty thousand times without
any
memory at all).

In the same way, when you interview a group of students together you
notice
that they tend to model answers on each other rather than on your
question,
and when you interview them separately, you notice that YOU tend to
change
your question according to the previous answer you received. On the one
hand, life is not easily distracted by its own future: it is too wholly
there in each moment of existence. On the other hand, each of these
moments
includes the previous one, and therefore all the previous ones, in
itself.
The past weighs like a nightmare on the brain of the living, and objects
in
the rear view mirror are always closer than they appear.

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 10:23 AM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com>
wrote:

David,
I was puzzled that you found Langacker to be relevant to this topic,
but
the last paragraph of your post makes an important connection between
Langacker and Vygotsky: Both see speech acts as staged?interactants
view
themselves as ?on stage?. I think the book by Vera and Reuben is
largely
about how differently math is ?staged? by working mathematicians as
contrasted with doing math in school. I think it would be interesting
to
analyze how natural language and the language of math scaffold each
other
in both contexts. Word problems have been a well-used way of connecting
the
two languages; stats and graphs are commonly used in the media to
clarify
and elaborate text in articles on economics, presidential elections,
and
what not.

I would love to read your ?unpublishable? on Langacker and Halliday on
tense. What I recall from reading Langacker is his interest in ?basic
domains?, starting with the temporal and spatial. Somewhere he has said
that he believes that the temporal domain is the more basic. As you?d
guess, the spatial domain is especially useful in elucidating what he
calls
?things? (nouns are conceptually about things); the temporal domain is
more
closely connected to what he calls ?processes? wherein he analyzes
tense
and aspect.

I think Langacker would agree that his work in cognitive grammar has a
long way to go in contributing to the idea that grammar is usage based,
rather than some autonomous module, but he is working on it. I think
there
is a potential for connecting Halliday and Langacker, though I?m not
smart
enough to convince you of that evidently. Somehow the connection must
be
made by staying close to the data, ?thick description? ethnographers
are
fond of saying. I think the article by Carrie and Margaret is raising
this
issue.

The ?hollowed out? math curriculum in the article resonates with the
?potholes? you say teachers must watch out for. Some may say that  the
hollowing out is typical even of ?elite? K-12 schools. Some may say
that
this is deliberate. I would say my own experience of math in school was
often hollowed out, which I sensed, but didn?t discover until I got to
the
?pure math? department in the mid 60s at Univ of Texas at Austin under
the
leadership of Robert Lee Moore. He is a main protagonist in Chapter 8
of
Vera?s and Reuben?s book.

I?ll end it there.

Henry




On Nov 15, 2016, at 1:38 PM, David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
wrote:

Henry:

I just wrote another unpublishable comparing how Langacker and
Halliday treat tense, and I'm starting to come to grips with the
different
theory of experience underlying the two grammars. Langacker somehow
sees
it
as creating empty mental space (and aspect as creating space within
space).
Halliday sees tense as a way of abstracting concrete doings and
happenings.
Halliday's tense system is not spatial at all but temporal: it's
temporally
deictic and then temporally recursive: a kind of time machine that
simultaneously transports and orients the speaker either
proleptically
or
retroleptically. So for example if I say to you that this article we
are
discussing is going to have been being discussed for two or three
weeks
now, then "is going" is a kind of time machine that takes you into
the
future, from which "You are Here" vantage point the article has been
(past)
being discussed (present). Present in the past in the future.

And that got me thinking about theory and practice. It seems to me
that
the
they are related, but simultaneously and not sequentially. That is,
the
output of one is not the input of the other: they are simply more and
less
abstract ways of looking at one and the same thing. So for example in
this
article the tasks of theory and practice are one and the same: the
task
of
theory is really to define as precisely as possible the domain, the
scope,
the range of the inquiry into authoring math and science identities
and
the
task of practice is to ask what exactly you want to do in this
domain/scope/range--to try to understand how they are hollowed out a
little
better so that maybe teachers like you and me can help fill the damn
potholes in a little. You can't really do the one without doing the
other:
trying to decide the terrain under study without deciding some task
that
you want to do there is like imagining tense as empty mental space
and
not
as some actual, concrete doing or happening. Conversely, the way you
dig
the hole depends very much on how big and where you want it.

So there are three kinds of mental spaces in the first part of the
article:

a) institutional arrangements (e.g. "priority improvement plans",
career-academy/comprehensive school status STEM tracks, AP classes)
b) figured worlds (e.g. 'good students', and 'don't cares', or what
Eckhart
and McConnell-Ginet called 'jocks', 'nerds',  'burnouts',
'gangbangers')
c) authored identities (i.e. what kids say about themselves and what
they
think about themselves)

Now, I think it's possible to make this distinction--but they are
probably
better understood not as mental spaces (in which case they really do
overlap) but rather as doings (or, as is my wont, sayings). Different
people are saying different things: a) is mostly the sayings of the
school
boards and administrators, b) is mostly the sayings of teachers and
groups
of kids, and c) is mostly the sayings of individual students. It's
always
tempting for a theory to focus on c), because that's where all the
data
is
and it's tempting for practice too, because if you are against what
is
happening in a) and in b), that's where the most likely point of
intervention is.

"But the data does suggest that the "figured worlds" are figured by
authored identities--not by institutional arrangements. Is that just
an
artefact of the warm empathy of the authors for the words (although
maybe
not the exact wordings) of their subjects, or is it real grounds for
hope?

Marx says (beginning of the 18th Brumaire): "*Men make* their own
*history*,
*but they* do *not make* it as *they* please; *they* do *not make* it
under self-selected circumstances, *but* under circumstances existing
already, given and transmitted from the *past*. The tradition of all
dead
generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living."

It's a good theory, i.e. at once a truth and a tragedy. And it's a
theory treats time as time and not as an empty stage.

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 9:39 AM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com>
wrote:

All,
I have read only part of Margaret?s and Carrie?s article, but I
wanted
to
jump in with a reference to a book by Vygotskian Vera John-Steiner
and
her
mathematician husband Reuben Hersh: Loving and Hating Mathematics:
Challenging the Mathematical Life. Huw?s point (v) which refers to
?identities of independence and finding out sustainable within these
settings (school math classes) spent high school. Vera?s and
Reuben?s
book
contrasts what it?s like to work and think like a real (working)
mathematician (what I think Huw is talking about) and what we call
mathematics in the classroom. Chapter 8 of the book "The Teaching of
Mathematics: Fierce or Friendly?? is interesting reading and could
be
relevant to this discussion.
Henry


On Nov 13, 2016, at 2:47 PM, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
wrote:

Dear Margaret

My reading has not been a particularly careful one, so I leave it
to
yourselves to judge the usefulness of these points.

i) Whether arguments can be made (for or against) a nebulous term
(neoliberalism) with its political associations, by arguments about
identity that are themselves not deliberately political.

ii) Whether it is better not to focus essentially on the place of
identity.

iii) Whether it is worthwhile contrasting the role/identity of
"model
student" with "identities" that anyone excelling at STEM subjects
would
relate to.  On this, I would point to the importance with
identifying
with
appreciations for "awareness of not knowing" and "eagerness to find
out"
(which also entails learning about what it means to know).

iv) Whether you detect that to the degree that an identity is
foregrounded
in the actual practice of STEM work (rather than as background
social
appeasement), it is being faked? That is, someone is playing at the
role
rather than actually committing themselves to finding out about
unknowns.

v) Whether, in fact, there is actually a "tiered" or varied set of
acceptable "identities" within the settings you explored, such that
identities of independence and finding out are sustainable within
these
settings, possibly representing a necessary fudge to deal with the
requirements placed upon the institutions.

Best,
Huw

On 12 November 2016 at 20:30, Margaret A Eisenhart <
margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu> wrote:

Hello Everyone,

Carrie and I are newcomers to this list, and we thank you for the
opportunity to engage with you about our article, ?Hollowed Out.?
We
also
hope for your patience as we learn to participate in the stream of
thinking here!

Given the comments so far, we are intrigued by others? ideas about
the
link between our theory and our data.  On this topic, we would
like
to
make clear that we did not intend to suggest that the students
were
making
sense of their lives in the same way that we interpreted them
through
the
lens of our theory. Our claim is that opportunities and figured
worlds
are
resources for identity and that the students' words to us
reflected
perspectives consistent with neoliberalism, with some pretty
serious
implications. Like Phillip White, we are interested in what
theories
others would use to explain the data we presented.

Like Mike Cole, we are also intrigued by the prospect of
?exemplars?
we
might turn to.

We look forward to hearing your thoughts.


Margaret Eisenhart



On 11/11/16, 11:35 AM, "lpscholar2@gmail.com" <
lpscholar2@gmail.com

wrote:

A resumption in exploring the meaning and sense (preferably sens
as
this
term draws attention to movement and direction within meaning and
sense)
of this month?s article.
The paper begins with the title and the image of (hollowed-out)
meaning
and sense that is impoverished and holds few resources for
developing a
deeper sens of identity.
The article concludes with the implication that the work of
social
justice within educational institutions is not about improving
educational outcome in neoliberal terms; the implications of the
study
are about *reorganizing* the identities ? particulary
identities-with-standind that young people are *exposed* to, can
articulate, and can act on (in school and beyond).

I would say this is taking an ethical stand?.

I will now turn to page 189 and the section (identity-in-context)
to
amplify the notion of (cultural imaginary) and (figured worlds).
This imaginary being the site or location of history-in-person.
That
is
identity is a form of legacy (or *text*) ABOUT the kind of person
one
is
or has become in responding to (external) circumstances.
These external circumstances are EXPERIENCED primarily in the
organization of local practices and cultural imaginaries (figured
worlds)
that circulate and *give meaning* (and sens) to local practices

Figured worlds are interpreted following Holland as socially and
culturally *realms of interpretation* and certain players are
recognized
as (exemplars).

As such cultural, social, historical, dialogical psychological
(imaginaries) are handmaidens of the imaginal *giving meaning* to
*what*
goes on in the directions we take together.

Two key terms i highlight are (exemplars) and (direction) we
take.
The realm of the ethical turn
What are the markers and signposts emerging in the deeper ethical
turn
that offers more than a hollowed-out answer.
Are there any *ghost* stories of exemplars we can turn to as well
as
living exemplars? By ghosts i mean ancestors who continue as
beacons
of
hope exemplifying *who* we are.

My way into exploring the impoverished narratives of the
neoliberal
imaginary and reawakening exemplary ancestors or ghosts from
their
slumber to help guide us through these multiple imaginaries

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: mike cole
Sent: November 9, 2016 3:04 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion
Re-started

Alfredo--

for any who missed the initial article sent out, you might send
them
here:

http://lchc.ucsd.edu/mca/

I am meeting shortly with Bruce. A list of improvements to web
site
welcome, although not clear how long they will take to implement.

mike

On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 2:38 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil <
a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
wrote:

Dear all,

last week I announced MCA's 3rd Issue article for discussion:

"Hollowed Out: Meaning and Authoring of High School Math and
Science
Identities in the Context of Neoliberal Reform," by Margaret
Eisenhart
and
Carrie Allen.

The article is open access and will continue to be so during the
discussion time at this link.

Thanks to everyone who begun the discussion early after I shared
the
link
last week, and sorry that we sort of brought the discussion to a
halt
until
the authors were ready to discuss. I have now sent Margaret and
Carrie
the
posts that were produced then so that they could catch up, but I
also
invited them to feel free to move on an introduce themselves as
soon
as
they ??wanted.

It is not without some doubts that one introduces a discussion
of
an
article in a moment that some US media have called as "An
American
Tragedy"
and other international editorials are describing as "a dark day
for
the
world." But I believe that the paper may indeed offer some
grounds
for
discuss important issues that are at stake in everyone's home
now,
as
Mike
recently describes in a touching post on the "local state of
mind"
and
that
have to do with identity and its connection to a neoliberal
organisation of
the economy. It is not difficult to link neoliberalism to
Trump's
phenomenon and how it pervades very intimate aspects of everyday
life.

If this was not enough, I think the authors' background on
women's
scholar
and professional careers in science is totally relevant to the
discussions
on gendered discourse we've been having. Now without halts, I
hope
this
thread gives joys and wisdom to all.

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
edu>
on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
Sent: 02 November 2016 01:48
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Thanks Mike and everyone! I am sure Margaret (and many of those
still
reading) will be happy to be able to catch up when she joins us
next
week!
Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
edu>
on behalf of mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu>
Sent: 02 November 2016 01:32
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Gentlemen -- I believe Fernando told us that Margaret would be
able to join this discussion next week. Just a quick glance at
the
discussion so far indicates that there is a lot there to wade
into
before she has had a word.

I am only part way through the article, expecting to have until
next
week
to think about it.

May I suggest your forbearance while this slow-poke tries to
catch
up!

mike

On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 3:38 PM, White, Phillip
<Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu

wrote:

David & Larry, everyone else ...

by way of introduction, Margaret and Carrie point out that the
data
in
this paper emerged through a three year study - which was the
processes
of
how students of color, interested in STEM, responded to the
externally
imposed neoliberal requirements. they framed their study using
theories
of
social practices on how identity developed in context.


David, you reject the theories.  or so i understand your
position.
as
you
write: It's that the theory

contradicts my own personal theories.

are you also rejecting the data as well?  it seems as if you
are
suggesting this when you write: The authors find this point (in
the
case
of
Lorena) somewhere between the
beginning of the tenth and the end of the eleventh grade, but I
think
that's just because it's where they are looking.

you reject the narrative of Lorena on the grounds that it could
be
traced
back to infancy.

do you also reject the identical narrative found in the adult
practitioners within the context of the high schools?  that
this
narrative
is not one of a contemporary neoliberal practice but rather
could
be
traced
back to, say, the mid 1600's new england colonies, in
particular
massachusettes, where the practices of public american
education
began?

to explain the data that emerged from the Eisenhart/Allen
study,
what
theories would you have used?

phillip

________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 7:03 AM
To: David Kellogg; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Margaret and Carrie,
Thank you for this wonderful paper that explains the shallow
*hollowed-out* way of forming identity as a form of meaning and
sense. I
will add the French word *sens* which always includes
*direction*
within
meaning and sense.

David, your response that what our theory makes sens of depends
on
where
we are looking makes sens to me.
You put in question the moment when the interpersonal (you and
me)
way of
authoring sens *shifts* or turns to cultural and historical
ways
of
being
immersed in sens. The article refers to the
*historical-in-person*.

My further comment, where I am looking) is in the description
of
the
sociocultural as a response to *externally changing
circumstances*
as
the
process of *learning as becoming* (see page 190).

The article says:

This process is what Lave and Wenger (1991) and other
Sociocultural
researchers have referred to as *learning as becoming,* that
is,
learning
that occurs as one becomes a certain kind of person in a
particular
context.  Identities conceived in this way are not stable or
fixed.
As
*external circumstances* affecting a person change, so too may
the
identities that are produced *in response*. (Holland & Skinner,
1997).

In this version of *history-in-person* the identity processes
that
start
the process moving in a neoliberal *direction* are *external*
circumstances. I am not questioning this version of the
importance
of
the
external but do question if looking primarily or primordially
to
the
external circumstances as central if we are not leaving a gap
in
our
notions of *sens*.

If by looking or highlighting or illuminating the *external*
and
highly
visible acts of the actual we are leaving a gap in actual*ity.
A gap in *sens*.

To be continued by others...

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: David Kellogg
Sent: October 31, 2016 2:15 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

I was turning Mike's request--for a short explanation of the
Halliday/Vygotsky interface--over in my mind for a few days,
unsure
where
to start. I usually decide these difficult "where to start"
questions
in
the easiest possible way, with whatever I happen to be working
on.
In
this
case it's the origins of language in a one year old, a moment
which
is
almost as mysterious to me as the origins of life or the Big
Bang.
But
perhaps for that very reason it's not a good place to start
(the
Big
Bang
always seemed to me to jump the gun a bit, not to mention the
origins
of
life).

Let me start with the "Hollowed Out" paper Alfredo just
thoughtfully
sent
around instead. My first impression is that this paper leaves a
really
big
gap between the data and the conclusions, and that this gap is
largely
filled by theory. Here are some examples of what I mean:

a)    "Whereas 'subject position' is given by society,
'identity'
is
self-authored, although it must be recognized by others to be
sustained."
(p. 189)

b)  "It is notable that this construction of a good student,
though
familiar, does not make any reference to personal interest,
excitement,
or
engagement in the topics or content-related activities." (193)

c)  "When students' statements such as 'I get it', 'I'm
confident',
'I'm
good at this', and  'I can pull this off' are interpreted in
the
context
of
the figured world of math or science at the two schools, their
statements
index more than a grade. They reference a meaning system for
being
good
in
math or science that includes the actor identity
characteristics
of
being
able to grasp the subject matter easily, do the work quickly,
do
it
without
help from others, do it faster than others, and get an A."
(193)

In each case, we are told to believe in a theory: "given by
society",
"self-authored", "does not make any reference", "the context of
the
figured
world". It's not just that in each case the theory seems to go
against
the
data (although it certainly does in places, such as Lowena's
views
as
a
tenth grader). I can always live with a theory that contradicts
my
data:
that's what being a rationalist is all about. It's that the
theory
contradicts my own personal theories.

I don't believe that identity is self authored, and I also
don't
believe
that subject position is given by society as a whole, I think
the
word
"good" does include personal interest, excitement, and
engagement
as
much
as it includes being able to grasp the subject matter easily,
do
the
work
quickly, do it without help from others, do it faster than
others
and
get
an A. To me anyway, the key word in the data given in c) is
actually
"I"
and not "it" or "this": the students think they are talking
about,
and
therefore probably are actually talking about, a relation
between
their
inner states and the activity at hand  or between the activity
at
hand
and
the result they get; they are not invoking the figured world of
neoliberal
results and prospects.

But never mind my own theories. Any gap is, after all, a good
opportunity
for theory building. The authors are raising a key issue in
both
Vygotsky
and Halliday: when does an interpersonal relation become a
historico-cultural one? That is, when does that 'me" and "you"
relationship
in which I really do have the power to author my identity (I
can
make
up
any name I want and, within limits, invent my own history,
particularly
if
I am a backpacker) give way to a job, an address, a number and
a
class
over
which I have very little power at all? When does the
interpersonal
somehow
become an alien ideational "identity" that confronts me like a
strange
ghost when I look in the mirror?

The authors find this point (in the case of Lorena) somewhere
between
the
beginning of the tenth and the end of the eleventh grade, but I
think
that's just because it's where they are looking. We can
probably
find
the
roots of this distinction (between the interpersonal and the
historico-cultural) as far back as we like, right back to
(Vygotsky)
the
moment when the child gives up the "self-authored" language at
one
and
takes on the language recognized by others and (Halliday) the
moment
when
the child distinguishes between Attributive identifying clauses
("I'm
confident", "I'm good at this"), material processes ("I can
pull
this
off")
and mental ones ("I get it").

(To be continued...but not necessarily by me!)

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil
<a.j.gil@iped.uio.no

wrote:

Dear xmca'ers,


I am excited to announce the next article for discussion,
which
is
now
available open access at the T&F MCA pages<
http://www.tandfonline
.
com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1188962>.


After a really interesting discussion on Zaza's colourful
paper
(which
still goes on developed into a discussion on micro- and
ontogenesis),
we
will from next week be looking at an article by Margaret
Eisenhart
and
Carrie Allen from the special issue on "Reimagining Science
Education
in
the Neoliberal Global Context". I think the article, as the
whole
issue,
offers a very neat example of research trying to tie together
cultural/economical? and developmental aspects (of identity in
this
case).


Margaret has kindly accepted to join the discussion ?after US
elections
(which will surely keep the attention of many of us busy).
Meanwhile, I
share the link<http://www.tandfonline.
com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039
.
2016.1188962>  to the article (see above), and also attach it
as
PDF.
??Good read!


Alfredo

























------------------------------

Message: 30
Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2016 08:30:59 -0800
From: <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Spiritual blackout in America: Election 2016 - The
Boston Globe
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID: <58307e54.943e620a.da1ed.7938@mx.google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"


Spiritual blackout in America: Election 2016 - The Boston Globe
The neofascist catastrophe called Donald Trump and the neoliberal disaster named Hillary Clinton are predictable symbols of our spiritual blackout.


https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/11/03/spiritual-blackout-america-election/v7lWSybxux1OPoBg56dgsL/story.html

MOVING DEEPER INTO THE NOTION OF DEMOCRATIC SOULCRAFT. NOTICE WHO ARE THE EXEMPLARY PERSONS TO INSPIRE THIS SOULCRAFT.
LARRY PURSS
Sent from my Windows 10 phone



------------------------------

Message: 31
Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2016 08:39:33 -0800
From: <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Spiritual blackout in America: Election 2016 -
The Boston Globe
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID: <58308056.d222620a.4b2ad.7e43@mx.google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

The article situates Bernie Saunders within the Judaic Phophetic tradition that inspires Bernie?s (democratic soulcraft). This needs highlighting to bring to the forefront multiple sources of democratic soulcraft


Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: lpscholar2@gmail.com
Sent: November 19, 2016 8:31 AM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: Spiritual blackout in America: Election 2016 - The Boston Globe


Spiritual blackout in America: Election 2016 - The Boston Globe
The neofascist catastrophe called Donald Trump and the neoliberal disaster named Hillary Clinton are predictable symbols of our spiritual blackout.


https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/11/03/spiritual-blackout-america-election/v7lWSybxux1OPoBg56dgsL/story.html

MOVING DEEPER INTO THE NOTION OF DEMOCRATIC SOULCRAFT. NOTICE WHO ARE THE EXEMPLARY PERSONS TO INSPIRE THIS SOULCRAFT.
LARRY PURSS
Sent from my Windows 10 phone




------------------------------

Message: 32
Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2016 14:34:48 +1100
From: David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID:
<CACwG6DtKx4QqPV_q0GT2MJgQBU6gkgJJRYHdTH_PpY_6P45gbQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Sorry, I've lost the plot. That is, I don't see the connection between the
kind of educational neoliberalism that is being discussed in the article
(that which is based on measurable results, on academic tracking, on
promising goodies in return for grades and grades in return for schoolwork)
and the kind of political and economic neoliberalism that is being
discussed by Cornel. It seems to me that the policies that Margaret and
Carrie are discussing in this paper were not (politically) liberal, nor
were they new: they were taken over by Arne Duncan from the Bush
administration, and the Bush administration got them, via Clinton, from
good old fashioned "Back to Basics" backlash in the UK. So the roots are
Toryism and not liberalism.

I suppose you can argue that there is some kind of implicit analogy between
education and neoliberal economics: school is supposed to be some kind of
neoliberal "level playing field" where children compete like businessmen,
grades are "cultural capital", classes are investment opportunities,
assessment portfolios are investment portfolios, etc. This analogy is
little more than a way of whipping up interest among principals, teachers,
and even students (and as such I am not sure I am against it, since I don't
see anything wrong with working class kids taking an interest in the
getting of goodies through study). It's certainly not a good description of
what is happening in schools: These businessmen produce no commodities, the
grades are neither exchangeable or consumable; there is no such thing as
credit or interest in this economy, and assets evaporate upon graduation
instead of maturing.

I think that the word "reform" is actually more important in Margaret and
Carrie's title than "neoliberal": a "reform" is usually, on the lips of
government bureaucracy, a euphemism for backlash, and the policies being
described are part of a more general ideological backlash against Deweyism
and progressive education: an anti-liberal reaction rather than a
neo-liberal reform. "Neoliberalism", taken literally, would imply that the
schools really are in the marketable skills business, and I don't see much
evidence for that in the study. Am I missing something?

David Kellogg
Macquarie University

On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 1:24 AM, <lpscholar2@gmail.com> wrote:

Margaret, Carrie, Phillip, Henry, Cornell,

A central and key theme of this month?s article is neoliberalism in all
its guises.
In my imaginary response i am addressing the authors of the paper and
Cornell who addresses neoliberalism, and Phillip, who shared Cornell?s
article and Henry who heard Cornell offer a way to mediate our crises.
The paper is about teaching STEM and the neoliberal agenda that ignores
the plight of those who suffer.
Cornell says the answer is (democratic soulcraft). At the heart of this
soulcraft is truth telling of the reality of suffering.

In order to constitute or institute a (new) order a more pro/gressive
order it seems suffering must be the key factor.

The notion of ivory towers and their responses to suffering seems central.
I also want to explore the theme of (play) in relation to suffering.

One exemplar:
There is a Buddhist who organizes gatherings where food is prepared and
presented at the gatherings (for the homeless). Musical instruments are
also brought and dancing proceeds.
Everyone participates and this is key: You cannot tell who are the
homeless and who are the people who prepared the food. They are sharing a
common (new) experience that is profoundly moving and creates a sense of
well-being.
This Buddhist practise is exemplary as a response to our current
contemporary historical moment. It is truth telling and democratic
soulcraft and PLAY. (each in the other).
It is one way of answering Margaret, Carrie, Cornell, Phillip, and Henry.
This Buddhist act or practice  is (crafting) an answer that speaks to
suffering.


Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: HENRY SHONERD
Sent: November 18, 2016 7:15 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Thank you, Phillip.
"For us in these times, to even have hope is too abstract, too detached,
too spectatorial. Instead we must be a hope, a participant and a force for
good as we face this catastrophe.?
That?s my favorite part.
Henry




On Nov 18, 2016, at 3:52 PM, White, Phillip <Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu>
wrote:

well, this is what Cornel West has to say:


https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/
american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election

[https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/aae8946d80dac457aa8b6af3f9a9fd
5acc6b4acb/0_662_5150_3090/master/5150.jpg?w=1200&h=140&
q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=crop&bm=normal&ba=bottom%2Cleft&blend64=
aHR0cHM6Ly91cGxvYWRzLmd1aW0uY28udWsvMjAxNi8wNS8yNS9vdmVybGF5
LWxvZ28tMTIwMC05MF9vcHQucG5n&s=4cbd18b4943818f70304ff2cfdc3da2d]<
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/
american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election>

Goodbye, American neoliberalism. A new era is here | Cornel West<
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/
american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election>
www.theguardian.com
Trump?s election was enabled by the policies that overlooked the plight
of our most vulnerable citizens. We gird ourselves for a frightening future




phillip


________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 8:16:01 PM
To: Edward Wall; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

So basically engaging in play may be foundational to learning a
particular disciplinary subject matter including mathematical play.
This playful approach as counterpoint to formal high stakes approaches.
This places the scope of play (itself) at the center of our inquiry.
This feels intuitively to be relevant to exemplary ways of learning.

Like imagination, play is not taken seriously , but may be foundational
or necessary for learning that is exemplary.


Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: Edward Wall
Sent: November 17, 2016 4:45 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Larry

   There are, at least, four somewhat current possibilities (I?m not
sure if they should be called exemplars) as regards mathematics

1. Summerhill (and, perhaps, some other English private schools)
2. Some private schools in the US (a book was written by a teacher at
one. If there is any interest I?ll see if I can dig up the title).
3. The case of Louis P. Benezet in a US public school in1929
4. There is some indication that schools in Finland and the Netherlands
are, perhaps, a little less ?neoliberal' (however, the evidence isn?t clear)

Basically in some of the above formal mathematics instruction is put off
until either children ask or until until fourth or fifth grade; however,
children engage in, you might say, mathematical play (Dewey recommended
something like this). This is, by the way and according to some, also what
a good mathematics preK program looks like. Also, this is a bit as regards
mathematics what the ancient Greek version of schooling for the elite
looked like (i.e. mathematics was put off).

Ed

On Nov 17, 2016, at  3:05 PM, lpscholar2@gmail.com wrote:

The question remains, if this neoliberal context generates
(hollowed-out) educational *spaces* or institutions then is it possible we
are able to offer exemplars of other educational places (current or
historical) that manifested different kinds of identity formation that were
not hollowed out. I speculate these exemplars would embody or incarnate
deeply historical and  ethical orientations and practices.
If we have lost our way, are there other models (cultural imaginaries)
that co-generate developmental narratives that will nurture well-being?

Exemplary models that point in a certain direction

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: Huw Lloyd
Sent: November 17, 2016 11:32 AM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Alfredo,

Yes, they're pathological.  I am merely saying that the problems
inherent
in the pathology can be edifying.  No, I don't think the issues can be
transcended within conventional practices. Perhaps the best that can be
achieved is that the students recognise an institutional need for "good
behaviour" and the teacher recognises an educational need for real
problem
solving. For "real" education, we would need something like Davydov's
system. But this is merely one view of the purpose of "education". There
are many who don't seem to recognise these (and other) important
implications.

Best,
Huw



On 17 November 2016 at 18:11, Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
wrote:

Huw,

great comments. I like what you say, that the (institutional, social)
process always is educational, and I agree: it develops into the
formation
of habit and character. But I still wonder whether all educational
processes lead to growth or development, or whether we rather should be
able to identify some processes as, we may call them, *pathological*
(or
perhaps involutive?). There you have Bateson on double bind and
schizophrenia, for example. Here, in the article, we have some young
students that enter a system that generates a double bind (it was Mike
who
made me aware of the connection with double bind). The question is,
will
the system develop without some form of awareness *about* the double
bind
that overcomes it by generating a system that does not only include the
double bind, but also its own description (thereby becoming a higher
order
system, one in which participants, students and teachers, come to grow
rather than come to stall).

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu

on behalf of Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
Sent: 17 November 2016 10:54
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Alfredo,

The 'zone' is always present.  Whether it is recognised or not is
another
matter.
I do not think this interpretation is quite a zero sum game, because
there
is always the aspect that the institutionalised process is educational
--
the laws reveal themselves one way or another.  So (from an Illich
perspective) the opportunity to discover what is real remains, it just
takes a different course.

Best,
Huw

On 17 November 2016 at 07:37, Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
wrote:

What touches me of the article is something that perhaps relates to
this
tension that I find between David's (individualistic?) approach to
prolepsis in his post (David, I thought, and continue thinking, that
prolepsis refers to something that emerges in the relation between
two,
not
something that either is present or absent within a person), and
Phillip's
view of young people figuring out what life is all about just as all
we
do.
And so here (and in any neoliberal school context) we have wonderfully
beautiful young people more or less interested in science or in maths,
but
all eager to live a life and evolve as best as they can (whatever that
best
may mean for each one). And then you see how the history and context
that
they come into gives them everything they need to develop motives and
goals; to then make sure that the majority of them won't make it so
that
only a few privileged (or in the case of Margaret's paper none,
according
to the authors) succeed. And then what remains is not just a
hollowed-out
science and math identity, but also a hollowed-out soul that had
illusion
and now just doesn't. Not only a failure to provide opportunities to
learners to become anything(one) good about science and math, but
also a
robbing of other possible paths of development that may had grown in
people
if they had been hanging out with some other better company. Do we
have a
term to refer to the opposite of a zone of proximal development? Not
just
the absence of it, but the strangling of it.

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
edu>
on behalf of White, Phillip <Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu>
Sent: 17 November 2016 06:29
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

David, the examples on page 193, students 1, 2 & 3 - aren't these
examples
of proleptic thought - especially for student 2, who looks at where
she
is
"I have my own standards", a statement of the present, then a looking
back
at  what has happened, "I like to get straight A's". and then setting
a
target for the future, "help for like to get in college and stuff, so
yeah,
I participate in a lot of stuff." ending with a reassertion of present
activities to attain future goals.


and there is a preponderance of the use of "I", rather than "you".


i'd give the young people for credit than a myopia focused merely on
their
age: the business of young people is figuring out what life is all
about
and how to participate, just as adults and infants and old people
like me
do.


i'm not convinced that your arguments are supported by the data in
this
Eisenhard / Allen paper.


phillip

________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
edu>
on behalf of David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 1:24:35 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

Actually, Henry, I was attacking the idea that tense is an empty
mental
space. I guess I am a little like Larry: when we discuss articles I
have
a
strong tendency to try to make them relevant to what I am doing rather
than
to drop what I am doing and go and discuss what everybody else is
discussing. So what I am doing right now is trying to make sense of
some
story-telling data where the adults are all over the map on tenses,
and
the
kids seem to stick to one tense only. The adults are slipping in and
out
of
mental spaces. The kids are telling stories.

I think the relevance to the article is this: When you look at the way
the
article frames institutional practices and figured worlds, we see
prolepsis--a preoccupation with the future. But when we look at what
the
kids are doing and saying it is very much in the moment. Is this
simply
because mental processes like "like" and "want" tend to take simple
present
(because they are less defined than material processes)? Or is it
because
while the institutions have the near future firmly in view and the
figured
worlds have irrealis in view, the business of young people is youth?

Vygotsky points out that the question the interviewer asks is very
much a
part of the data. For example, if you ask a question using "you" you
often
get "you" in reply, even if you design your question to get "I".

Q: Why do you want to kill yourself?
A: The same reason everybody wants to kill themselves. You want to
find
out
if anybody really cares.

To take another example that is probably more relevant to readers:
both
the
Brexit vote and the American elections are clear examples of
statistical
unreliability in that if you tried to repeat the election the morning
after
you would probably get an utterly different result. Take all of those
black
voters and the real working class voters who voted Obama but couldn't
be
bothered for Hillary (not the imaginary "white working class voters"
who
work in imaginary industries in Iowa, rural Pennsylvania, North
Carolina
and Florida). They might well have behaved rather differently knowing
how
imminent the neo-Confederacy really was. This is usually presented as
"buyer's remorse," but it's more than that; the event itself would be
part
of its replication. This is something that statistical models that use
standard error of the mean cannot build in (they work on the
impossible
idea that you can repeat an event ten or twenty thousand times without
any
memory at all).

In the same way, when you interview a group of students together you
notice
that they tend to model answers on each other rather than on your
question,
and when you interview them separately, you notice that YOU tend to
change
your question according to the previous answer you received. On the
one
hand, life is not easily distracted by its own future: it is too
wholly
there in each moment of existence. On the other hand, each of these
moments
includes the previous one, and therefore all the previous ones, in
itself.
The past weighs like a nightmare on the brain of the living, and
objects
in
the rear view mirror are always closer than they appear.

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 10:23 AM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com>
wrote:

David,
I was puzzled that you found Langacker to be relevant to this topic,
but
the last paragraph of your post makes an important connection between
Langacker and Vygotsky: Both see speech acts as staged?interactants
view
themselves as ?on stage?. I think the book by Vera and Reuben is
largely
about how differently math is ?staged? by working mathematicians as
contrasted with doing math in school. I think it would be interesting
to
analyze how natural language and the language of math scaffold each
other
in both contexts. Word problems have been a well-used way of
connecting
the
two languages; stats and graphs are commonly used in the media to
clarify
and elaborate text in articles on economics, presidential elections,
and
what not.

I would love to read your ?unpublishable? on Langacker and Halliday
on
tense. What I recall from reading Langacker is his interest in ?basic
domains?, starting with the temporal and spatial. Somewhere he has
said
that he believes that the temporal domain is the more basic. As you?d
guess, the spatial domain is especially useful in elucidating what he
calls
?things? (nouns are conceptually about things); the temporal domain
is
more
closely connected to what he calls ?processes? wherein he analyzes
tense
and aspect.

I think Langacker would agree that his work in cognitive grammar has
a
long way to go in contributing to the idea that grammar is usage
based,
rather than some autonomous module, but he is working on it. I think
there
is a potential for connecting Halliday and Langacker, though I?m not
smart
enough to convince you of that evidently. Somehow the connection must
be
made by staying close to the data, ?thick description? ethnographers
are
fond of saying. I think the article by Carrie and Margaret is raising
this
issue.

The ?hollowed out? math curriculum in the article resonates with the
?potholes? you say teachers must watch out for. Some may say that
the
hollowing out is typical even of ?elite? K-12 schools. Some may say
that
this is deliberate. I would say my own experience of math in school
was
often hollowed out, which I sensed, but didn?t discover until I got
to
the
?pure math? department in the mid 60s at Univ of Texas at Austin
under
the
leadership of Robert Lee Moore. He is a main protagonist in Chapter 8
of
Vera?s and Reuben?s book.

I?ll end it there.

Henry




On Nov 15, 2016, at 1:38 PM, David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
wrote:

Henry:

I just wrote another unpublishable comparing how Langacker and
Halliday treat tense, and I'm starting to come to grips with the
different
theory of experience underlying the two grammars. Langacker somehow
sees
it
as creating empty mental space (and aspect as creating space within
space).
Halliday sees tense as a way of abstracting concrete doings and
happenings.
Halliday's tense system is not spatial at all but temporal: it's
temporally
deictic and then temporally recursive: a kind of time machine that
simultaneously transports and orients the speaker either
proleptically
or
retroleptically. So for example if I say to you that this article we
are
discussing is going to have been being discussed for two or three
weeks
now, then "is going" is a kind of time machine that takes you into
the
future, from which "You are Here" vantage point the article has been
(past)
being discussed (present). Present in the past in the future.

And that got me thinking about theory and practice. It seems to me
that
the
they are related, but simultaneously and not sequentially. That is,
the
output of one is not the input of the other: they are simply more
and
less
abstract ways of looking at one and the same thing. So for example
in
this
article the tasks of theory and practice are one and the same: the
task
of
theory is really to define as precisely as possible the domain, the
scope,
the range of the inquiry into authoring math and science identities
and
the
task of practice is to ask what exactly you want to do in this
domain/scope/range--to try to understand how they are hollowed out a
little
better so that maybe teachers like you and me can help fill the damn
potholes in a little. You can't really do the one without doing the
other:
trying to decide the terrain under study without deciding some task
that
you want to do there is like imagining tense as empty mental space
and
not
as some actual, concrete doing or happening. Conversely, the way you
dig
the hole depends very much on how big and where you want it.

So there are three kinds of mental spaces in the first part of the
article:

a) institutional arrangements (e.g. "priority improvement plans",
career-academy/comprehensive school status STEM tracks, AP classes)
b) figured worlds (e.g. 'good students', and 'don't cares', or what
Eckhart
and McConnell-Ginet called 'jocks', 'nerds',  'burnouts',
'gangbangers')
c) authored identities (i.e. what kids say about themselves and what
they
think about themselves)

Now, I think it's possible to make this distinction--but they are
probably
better understood not as mental spaces (in which case they really do
overlap) but rather as doings (or, as is my wont, sayings).
Different
people are saying different things: a) is mostly the sayings of the
school
boards and administrators, b) is mostly the sayings of teachers and
groups
of kids, and c) is mostly the sayings of individual students. It's
always
tempting for a theory to focus on c), because that's where all the
data
is
and it's tempting for practice too, because if you are against what
is
happening in a) and in b), that's where the most likely point of
intervention is.

"But the data does suggest that the "figured worlds" are figured by
authored identities--not by institutional arrangements. Is that just
an
artefact of the warm empathy of the authors for the words (although
maybe
not the exact wordings) of their subjects, or is it real grounds for
hope?

Marx says (beginning of the 18th Brumaire): "*Men make* their own
*history*,
*but they* do *not make* it as *they* please; *they* do *not make*
it
under self-selected circumstances, *but* under circumstances
existing
already, given and transmitted from the *past*. The tradition of all
dead
generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living."

It's a good theory, i.e. at once a truth and a tragedy. And it's a
theory treats time as time and not as an empty stage.

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 9:39 AM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com>
wrote:

All,
I have read only part of Margaret?s and Carrie?s article, but I
wanted
to
jump in with a reference to a book by Vygotskian Vera John-Steiner
and
her
mathematician husband Reuben Hersh: Loving and Hating Mathematics:
Challenging the Mathematical Life. Huw?s point (v) which refers to
?identities of independence and finding out sustainable within
these
settings (school math classes) spent high school. Vera?s and
Reuben?s
book
contrasts what it?s like to work and think like a real (working)
mathematician (what I think Huw is talking about) and what we call
mathematics in the classroom. Chapter 8 of the book "The Teaching
of
Mathematics: Fierce or Friendly?? is interesting reading and could
be
relevant to this discussion.
Henry


On Nov 13, 2016, at 2:47 PM, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
wrote:

Dear Margaret

My reading has not been a particularly careful one, so I leave it
to
yourselves to judge the usefulness of these points.

i) Whether arguments can be made (for or against) a nebulous term
(neoliberalism) with its political associations, by arguments
about
identity that are themselves not deliberately political.

ii) Whether it is better not to focus essentially on the place of
identity.

iii) Whether it is worthwhile contrasting the role/identity of
"model
student" with "identities" that anyone excelling at STEM subjects
would
relate to.  On this, I would point to the importance with
identifying
with
appreciations for "awareness of not knowing" and "eagerness to
find
out"
(which also entails learning about what it means to know).

iv) Whether you detect that to the degree that an identity is
foregrounded
in the actual practice of STEM work (rather than as background
social
appeasement), it is being faked? That is, someone is playing at
the
role
rather than actually committing themselves to finding out about
unknowns.

v) Whether, in fact, there is actually a "tiered" or varied set of
acceptable "identities" within the settings you explored, such
that
identities of independence and finding out are sustainable within
these
settings, possibly representing a necessary fudge to deal with the
requirements placed upon the institutions.

Best,
Huw

On 12 November 2016 at 20:30, Margaret A Eisenhart <
margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu> wrote:

Hello Everyone,

Carrie and I are newcomers to this list, and we thank you for the
opportunity to engage with you about our article, ?Hollowed Out.?
We
also
hope for your patience as we learn to participate in the stream
of
thinking here!

Given the comments so far, we are intrigued by others? ideas
about
the
link between our theory and our data.  On this topic, we would
like
to
make clear that we did not intend to suggest that the students
were
making
sense of their lives in the same way that we interpreted them
through
the
lens of our theory. Our claim is that opportunities and figured
worlds
are
resources for identity and that the students' words to us
reflected
perspectives consistent with neoliberalism, with some pretty
serious
implications. Like Phillip White, we are interested in what
theories
others would use to explain the data we presented.

Like Mike Cole, we are also intrigued by the prospect of
?exemplars?
we
might turn to.

We look forward to hearing your thoughts.


Margaret Eisenhart



On 11/11/16, 11:35 AM, "lpscholar2@gmail.com" <
lpscholar2@gmail.com

wrote:

A resumption in exploring the meaning and sense (preferably sens
as
this
term draws attention to movement and direction within meaning
and
sense)
of this month?s article.
The paper begins with the title and the image of (hollowed-out)
meaning
and sense that is impoverished and holds few resources for
developing a
deeper sens of identity.
The article concludes with the implication that the work of
social
justice within educational institutions is not about improving
educational outcome in neoliberal terms; the implications of the
study
are about *reorganizing* the identities ? particulary
identities-with-standind that young people are *exposed* to, can
articulate, and can act on (in school and beyond).

I would say this is taking an ethical stand?.

I will now turn to page 189 and the section
(identity-in-context)
to
amplify the notion of (cultural imaginary) and (figured worlds).
This imaginary being the site or location of history-in-person.
That
is
identity is a form of legacy (or *text*) ABOUT the kind of
person
one
is
or has become in responding to (external) circumstances.
These external circumstances are EXPERIENCED primarily in the
organization of local practices and cultural imaginaries
(figured
worlds)
that circulate and *give meaning* (and sens) to local practices

Figured worlds are interpreted following Holland as socially and
culturally *realms of interpretation* and certain players are
recognized
as (exemplars).

As such cultural, social, historical, dialogical psychological
(imaginaries) are handmaidens of the imaginal *giving meaning*
to
*what*
goes on in the directions we take together.

Two key terms i highlight are (exemplars) and (direction) we
take.
The realm of the ethical turn
What are the markers and signposts emerging in the deeper
ethical
turn
that offers more than a hollowed-out answer.
Are there any *ghost* stories of exemplars we can turn to as
well
as
living exemplars? By ghosts i mean ancestors who continue as
beacons
of
hope exemplifying *who* we are.

My way into exploring the impoverished narratives of the
neoliberal
imaginary and reawakening exemplary ancestors or ghosts from
their
slumber to help guide us through these multiple imaginaries

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: mike cole
Sent: November 9, 2016 3:04 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion
Re-started

Alfredo--

for any who missed the initial article sent out, you might send
them
here:

http://lchc.ucsd.edu/mca/

I am meeting shortly with Bruce. A list of improvements to web
site
welcome, although not clear how long they will take to
implement.

mike

On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 2:38 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil <
a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
wrote:

Dear all,

last week I announced MCA's 3rd Issue article for discussion:

"Hollowed Out: Meaning and Authoring of High School Math and
Science
Identities in the Context of Neoliberal Reform," by Margaret
Eisenhart
and
Carrie Allen.

The article is open access and will continue to be so during
the
discussion time at this link.

Thanks to everyone who begun the discussion early after I
shared
the
link
last week, and sorry that we sort of brought the discussion to
a
halt
until
the authors were ready to discuss. I have now sent Margaret and
Carrie
the
posts that were produced then so that they could catch up, but
I
also
invited them to feel free to move on an introduce themselves as
soon
as
they ??wanted.

It is not without some doubts that one introduces a discussion
of
an
article in a moment that some US media have called as "An
American
Tragedy"
and other international editorials are describing as "a dark
day
for
the
world." But I believe that the paper may indeed offer some
grounds
for
discuss important issues that are at stake in everyone's home
now,
as
Mike
recently describes in a touching post on the "local state of
mind"
and
that
have to do with identity and its connection to a neoliberal
organisation of
the economy. It is not difficult to link neoliberalism to
Trump's
phenomenon and how it pervades very intimate aspects of
everyday
life.

If this was not enough, I think the authors' background on
women's
scholar
and professional careers in science is totally relevant to the
discussions
on gendered discourse we've been having. Now without halts, I
hope
this
thread gives joys and wisdom to all.

Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
edu>
on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
Sent: 02 November 2016 01:48
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Thanks Mike and everyone! I am sure Margaret (and many of those
still
reading) will be happy to be able to catch up when she joins us
next
week!
Alfredo
________________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
edu>
on behalf of mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu>
Sent: 02 November 2016 01:32
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Gentlemen -- I believe Fernando told us that Margaret would be
able to join this discussion next week. Just a quick glance at
the
discussion so far indicates that there is a lot there to wade
into
before she has had a word.

I am only part way through the article, expecting to have until
next
week
to think about it.

May I suggest your forbearance while this slow-poke tries to
catch
up!

mike

On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 3:38 PM, White, Phillip
<Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu

wrote:

David & Larry, everyone else ...

by way of introduction, Margaret and Carrie point out that the
data
in
this paper emerged through a three year study - which was the
processes
of
how students of color, interested in STEM, responded to the
externally
imposed neoliberal requirements. they framed their study using
theories
of
social practices on how identity developed in context.


David, you reject the theories.  or so i understand your
position.
as
you
write: It's that the theory

contradicts my own personal theories.

are you also rejecting the data as well?  it seems as if you
are
suggesting this when you write: The authors find this point
(in
the
case
of
Lorena) somewhere between the
beginning of the tenth and the end of the eleventh grade, but
I
think
that's just because it's where they are looking.

you reject the narrative of Lorena on the grounds that it
could
be
traced
back to infancy.

do you also reject the identical narrative found in the adult
practitioners within the context of the high schools?  that
this
narrative
is not one of a contemporary neoliberal practice but rather
could
be
traced
back to, say, the mid 1600's new england colonies, in
particular
massachusettes, where the practices of public american
education
began?

to explain the data that emerged from the Eisenhart/Allen
study,
what
theories would you have used?

phillip

________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 7:03 AM
To: David Kellogg; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

Margaret and Carrie,
Thank you for this wonderful paper that explains the shallow
*hollowed-out* way of forming identity as a form of meaning
and
sense. I
will add the French word *sens* which always includes
*direction*
within
meaning and sense.

David, your response that what our theory makes sens of
depends
on
where
we are looking makes sens to me.
You put in question the moment when the interpersonal (you and
me)
way of
authoring sens *shifts* or turns to cultural and historical
ways
of
being
immersed in sens. The article refers to the
*historical-in-person*.

My further comment, where I am looking) is in the description
of
the
sociocultural as a response to *externally changing
circumstances*
as
the
process of *learning as becoming* (see page 190).

The article says:

This process is what Lave and Wenger (1991) and other
Sociocultural
researchers have referred to as *learning as becoming,* that
is,
learning
that occurs as one becomes a certain kind of person in a
particular
context.  Identities conceived in this way are not stable or
fixed.
As
*external circumstances* affecting a person change, so too may
the
identities that are produced *in response*. (Holland &
Skinner,
1997).

In this version of *history-in-person* the identity processes
that
start
the process moving in a neoliberal *direction* are *external*
circumstances. I am not questioning this version of the
importance
of
the
external but do question if looking primarily or primordially
to
the
external circumstances as central if we are not leaving a gap
in
our
notions of *sens*.

If by looking or highlighting or illuminating the *external*
and
highly
visible acts of the actual we are leaving a gap in actual*ity.
A gap in *sens*.

To be continued by others...

Sent from my Windows 10 phone

From: David Kellogg
Sent: October 31, 2016 2:15 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion

I was turning Mike's request--for a short explanation of the
Halliday/Vygotsky interface--over in my mind for a few days,
unsure
where
to start. I usually decide these difficult "where to start"
questions
in
the easiest possible way, with whatever I happen to be working
on.
In
this
case it's the origins of language in a one year old, a moment
which
is
almost as mysterious to me as the origins of life or the Big
Bang.
But
perhaps for that very reason it's not a good place to start
(the
Big
Bang
always seemed to me to jump the gun a bit, not to mention the
origins
of
life).

Let me start with the "Hollowed Out" paper Alfredo just
thoughtfully
sent
around instead. My first impression is that this paper leaves
a
really
big
gap between the data and the conclusions, and that this gap is
largely
filled by theory. Here are some examples of what I mean:

a)    "Whereas 'subject position' is given by society,
'identity'
is
self-authored, although it must be recognized by others to be
sustained."
(p. 189)

b)  "It is notable that this construction of a good student,
though
familiar, does not make any reference to personal interest,
excitement,
or
engagement in the topics or content-related activities." (193)

c)  "When students' statements such as 'I get it', 'I'm
confident',
'I'm
good at this', and  'I can pull this off' are interpreted in
the
context
of
the figured world of math or science at the two schools, their
statements
index more than a grade. They reference a meaning system for
being
good
in
math or science that includes the actor identity
characteristics
of
being
able to grasp the subject matter easily, do the work quickly,
do
it
without
help from others, do it faster than others, and get an A."
(193)

In each case, we are told to believe in a theory: "given by
society",
"self-authored", "does not make any reference", "the context
of
the
figured
world". It's not just that in each case the theory seems to go
against
the
data (although it certainly does in places, such as Lowena's
views
as
a
tenth grader). I can always live with a theory that
contradicts
my
data:
that's what being a rationalist is all about. It's that the
theory
contradicts my own personal theories.

I don't believe that identity is self authored, and I also
don't
believe
that subject position is given by society as a whole, I think
the
word
"good" does include personal interest, excitement, and
engagement
as
much
as it includes being able to grasp the subject matter easily,
do
the
work
quickly, do it without help from others, do it faster than
others
and
get
an A. To me anyway, the key word in the data given in c) is
actually
"I"
and not "it" or "this": the students think they are talking
about,
and
therefore probably are actually talking about, a relation
between
their
inner states and the activity at hand  or between the activity
at
hand
and
the result they get; they are not invoking the figured world
of
neoliberal
results and prospects.

But never mind my own theories. Any gap is, after all, a good
opportunity
for theory building. The authors are raising a key issue in
both
Vygotsky
and Halliday: when does an interpersonal relation become a
historico-cultural one? That is, when does that 'me" and "you"
relationship
in which I really do have the power to author my identity (I
can
make
up
any name I want and, within limits, invent my own history,
particularly
if
I am a backpacker) give way to a job, an address, a number and
a
class
over
which I have very little power at all? When does the
interpersonal
somehow
become an alien ideational "identity" that confronts me like a
strange
ghost when I look in the mirror?

The authors find this point (in the case of Lorena) somewhere
between
the
beginning of the tenth and the end of the eleventh grade, but
I
think
that's just because it's where they are looking. We can
probably
find
the
roots of this distinction (between the interpersonal and the
historico-cultural) as far back as we like, right back to
(Vygotsky)
the
moment when the child gives up the "self-authored" language at
one
and
takes on the language recognized by others and (Halliday) the
moment
when
the child distinguishes between Attributive identifying
clauses
("I'm
confident", "I'm good at this"), material processes ("I can
pull
this
off")
and mental ones ("I get it").

(To be continued...but not necessarily by me!)

David Kellogg
Macquarie University



On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil
<a.j.gil@iped.uio.no

wrote:

Dear xmca'ers,


I am excited to announce the next article for discussion,
which
is
now
available open access at the T&F MCA pages<
http://www.tandfonline
.
com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1188962>.


After a really interesting discussion on Zaza's colourful
paper
(which
still goes on developed into a discussion on micro- and
ontogenesis),
we
will from next week be looking at an article by Margaret
Eisenhart
and
Carrie Allen from the special issue on "Reimagining Science
Education
in
the Neoliberal Global Context". I think the article, as the
whole
issue,
offers a very neat example of research trying to tie together
cultural/economical? and developmental aspects (of identity
in
this
case).


Margaret has kindly accepted to join the discussion ?after US
elections
(which will surely keep the attention of many of us busy).
Meanwhile, I
share the link<http://www.tandfonline.
com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039
.
2016.1188962>  to the article (see above), and also attach it
as
PDF.
??Good read!


Alfredo


























------------------------------

Message: 33
Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2016 12:25:23 -0800
From: mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Fwd: [COGDEVSOC] TWO Tenure-track positions in Open
Area of Psychology, Governors State University (just outside Chicago)
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID:
<CAHCnM0Cx4yqx1usgXXYKL2t+fZmXqCh_ExS-FQoZ_75t1WFVqg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Sasha N. Cervantes <cervantes@uchicago.edu>
Date: Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 12:00 PM
Subject: [COGDEVSOC] TWO Tenure-track positions in Open Area of Psychology,
Governors State University (just outside Chicago)
To: cogdevsoc@lists.cogdevsoc.org


Governors State University is seeking applicants in any area of
psychology for our Division of Psychology and Counseling; *separate
*listings also exist for TT position as a Coordinator and Assistant
Professor in School Psychology, and for an Assistant Professor of
Counseling. If interested in these other positions, see website:
https://employment.govst.edu/. Below is a slightly abridged
description for the *two TT open area positions in Psychology*.

*Position Title: Assistant Professor of Psychology (Open Area)*
Start Fall 2017
*Listing currently on HigherEdJobs.com (posting number: FA0084P)*
Description

Governors State University's College of Education invites applications
for two tenure-track, Assistant Professors in psychology and one
tenure-track, Assistant Professor in School Psychology to begin August
2017. The psychology programs are housed in the College of Education
and in the Division of Psychology and Counseling. Psychology faculty
support an undergraduate program (500 majors and minors), an MA
program with two sequences (Clinical and Theoretical), and an EdS in
School Psychology. The GSU psychology program is seeking applicants
who demonstrates a commitment to: effective, multicultural approaches
to teaching and mentoring, serving underserved student populations,
integrating peer and student feedback, and to working collaboratively
and harmoniously with a diverse team of faculty.

Responsibilities for the general psychology positions will include:
      ? Teaching undergraduate courses in psychology and possibly
graduate courses in the College of Education
      ? Maintain an active scholarship agenda
      ? Service to the university, community, and the profession of psychology

GENERAL PSYCHOLOGY POSITIONS
http://employment.govst.edu/postings/2191

Requirements


Minimum Qualifications:
Earned doctorate in any field in psychology

Preferred Qualifications:
      ? Experience in any of our undergraduate concentrations, especially:
                ? Forensic, Industrial/Organizational
      ? Experience teaching or the ability to teach research methods
and/or statistics
      ? Teaching experience in a diverse setting
      ? Experience with underserved student populations
      ? Ability to work independently and work collaboratively with groups
      ? Ability to integrate feedback
      ? Scholarship in the field of psychology


--
____________________________________________________________
"Develop a desire for goodness, an eagerness for knowledge, a capacity for
friendship, an appreciation of beauty, and a concern for others." From The
Art of Education

Sasha N. Cervantes, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
Division of Psychology and Counseling
Governors State University
1 University Parkway
University Park, IL 60484

_______________________________________________
To post to the CDS listserv, send your message to:
cogdevsoc@lists.cogdevsoc.org
(If you belong to the listserv and have not included any large attachments,
your message
will be posted without moderation--so be careful!)

To subscribe or unsubscribe from the listserv, visit:
http://lists.cogdevsoc.org/listinfo.cgi/cogdevsoc-cogdevsoc.org


------------------------------

Message: 34
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2016 23:22:33 +0000
From: Peter Smagorinsky <smago@uga.edu>
Subject: [Xmca-l]  zone of next development
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity (xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu)"
<xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID:
<BN1PR02MB022B20136A992BEB63CF42EA4B40@BN1PR02MB022.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

I'm watching the version of The Butterflies of Zagorsk that Mike generously shared from the UCSD archives. I give it 4 stars. It would be 5, but the copy is pretty bad.

The narrator consistently refers to the "zone of next development" illustrated by periodic diagnostic sessions that also involved assistance with deaf and blind kids learning how to speak with their hands on another's hands.

Zone of Next Development seems such a better term than ZPD. Proximal is too ambiguous, and so allows for just about any learning of anything anyhow to be illustrative of the ZPD. "Next" instead really emphasizes the more long-term growth that Vygotsky had in mind, as I understand his writing.

But it's proximal in all the translations. Any help in understanding why? Thx,p


------------------------------

Message: 35
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2016 12:29:20 +1100
From: David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: zone of next development
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID:
<CACwG6DuDAhZLiP_K2=hkxvYb_a4WLowt4sixUq4zocs6dck5kA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Peter:

The French translation is "zone prochaine de developpement", i.e. the next
zone of development. Francoise Seve explains why--it is because the "next
zone of development" does not refer to any particular skill or knowledge or
even metalinguistic reflection that the child is going to have in the
course of development; it refers very precisely to the functions which will
be the most rapidly developing functions in the next age level, according
to the schema that Vygotsky was working out in "The Problem of Age" (Vol. 5
in English, p. 196). This is completely confirmed by a remark that Vygotsky
makes at the beginning of the lecture on the Crisis at Three (p. 283 in the
English Collected Works):

""...(W)e must assume that all changes and all events that happen during
the period of this crisis are grouped around some neoformation of a
transitional type. Consequently, when we analyse the symptoms of the
crisis, we msut answer, albeit conditionally, the question as to what it is
that is new that appears during the indicated time and what is the fate of
the neoformation that disappears after it. Then we must consider what
change is occurring in the central and peripheral lines of development.
Finally, we must evaluate the critical age from the point of view of the
zone of its proximal development, that is, the relation to subsequent
growth".

This is why the ZPD is ALWAYS measured in years, something that very few
Western people who invoke the concept have ever noted, even though it is
quite explicit in every place that the ZPD is invoked. Even when the ZPD is
spoken of somewhat loosely, (e.g. "What the child can do with assistance
today he will be able to do without assistance tomorrow", or "in play the
child is a head taller than himself") it is very clear that years are
meant. Tomorrow does not and cannot mean 24 hours later, and the child will
not be a head taller than himself in a week or two.

David Kellogg
Macquarie University

On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 10:22 AM, Peter Smagorinsky <smago@uga.edu> wrote:

I'm watching the version of The Butterflies of Zagorsk that Mike
generously shared from the UCSD archives. I give it 4 stars. It would be 5,
but the copy is pretty bad.

The narrator consistently refers to the "zone of next development"
illustrated by periodic diagnostic sessions that also involved assistance
with deaf and blind kids learning how to speak with their hands on
another's hands.

Zone of Next Development seems such a better term than ZPD. Proximal is
too ambiguous, and so allows for just about any learning of anything anyhow
to be illustrative of the ZPD. "Next" instead really emphasizes the more
long-term growth that Vygotsky had in mind, as I understand his writing.

But it's proximal in all the translations. Any help in understanding why?
Thx,p



------------------------------

Message: 36
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2016 11:06:32 +0000
From: Peter Smagorinsky <smago@uga.edu>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: zone of next development
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID:
<BN1PR02MB022DF8CD9FA0184A13128D2A4B70@BN1PR02MB022.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Thanks David. In US educational circles in which people only read selected chapters from Mind in Society, it's always "tomorrow" and not "next year" that is invoked. Do you know if that's a translation problem, or was he being metaphorical?

-----Original Message-----
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of David Kellogg
Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2016 8:29 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: zone of next development

Peter:

The French translation is "zone prochaine de developpement", i.e. the next zone of development. Francoise Seve explains why--it is because the "next zone of development" does not refer to any particular skill or knowledge or even metalinguistic reflection that the child is going to have in the course of development; it refers very precisely to the functions which will be the most rapidly developing functions in the next age level, according to the schema that Vygotsky was working out in "The Problem of Age" (Vol. 5 in English, p. 196). This is completely confirmed by a remark that Vygotsky makes at the beginning of the lecture on the Crisis at Three (p. 283 in the English Collected Works):

""...(W)e must assume that all changes and all events that happen during the period of this crisis are grouped around some neoformation of a transitional type. Consequently, when we analyse the symptoms of the crisis, we msut answer, albeit conditionally, the question as to what it is that is new that appears during the indicated time and what is the fate of the neoformation that disappears after it. Then we must consider what change is occurring in the central and peripheral lines of development.
Finally, we must evaluate the critical age from the point of view of the zone of its proximal development, that is, the relation to subsequent growth".

This is why the ZPD is ALWAYS measured in years, something that very few Western people who invoke the concept have ever noted, even though it is quite explicit in every place that the ZPD is invoked. Even when the ZPD is spoken of somewhat loosely, (e.g. "What the child can do with assistance today he will be able to do without assistance tomorrow", or "in play the child is a head taller than himself") it is very clear that years are meant. Tomorrow does not and cannot mean 24 hours later, and the child will not be a head taller than himself in a week or two.

David Kellogg
Macquarie University

On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 10:22 AM, Peter Smagorinsky <smago@uga.edu> wrote:

I'm watching the version of The Butterflies of Zagorsk that Mike
generously shared from the UCSD archives. I give it 4 stars. It would
be 5, but the copy is pretty bad.

The narrator consistently refers to the "zone of next development"
illustrated by periodic diagnostic sessions that also involved
assistance with deaf and blind kids learning how to speak with their
hands on another's hands.

Zone of Next Development seems such a better term than ZPD. Proximal
is too ambiguous, and so allows for just about any learning of
anything anyhow to be illustrative of the ZPD. "Next" instead really
emphasizes the more long-term growth that Vygotsky had in mind, as I understand his writing.

But it's proximal in all the translations. Any help in understanding why?
Thx,p




------------------------------

Message: 37
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2016 09:41:26 -0600
From: Shirin Vossoughi <shirinvossoughi@gmail.com>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: zone of next development
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID:
<CAGXv3+gd36Omf2gK-6Mq9Q+_+Xcw9JtNcZHL=1uH8K0bK6T0zA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Hi David,
Thank you for this. How do you think about the ways that "acting a head
taller" is a concrete experience of one's emergent capabilities / potential
in the moment? (in the context of play, or through generative forms of
mediation/assistance)

Does this align in your view with the idea that "the child will not be a
head taller than himself in a week or two" or does it complicate the ways
we view this phenomenon as an experience?

Shirin

On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 7:29 PM, David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com> wrote:

Peter:

The French translation is "zone prochaine de developpement", i.e. the next
zone of development. Francoise Seve explains why--it is because the "next
zone of development" does not refer to any particular skill or knowledge or
even metalinguistic reflection that the child is going to have in the
course of development; it refers very precisely to the functions which will
be the most rapidly developing functions in the next age level, according
to the schema that Vygotsky was working out in "The Problem of Age" (Vol. 5
in English, p. 196). This is completely confirmed by a remark that Vygotsky
makes at the beginning of the lecture on the Crisis at Three (p. 283 in the
English Collected Works):

""...(W)e must assume that all changes and all events that happen during
the period of this crisis are grouped around some neoformation of a
transitional type. Consequently, when we analyse the symptoms of the
crisis, we msut answer, albeit conditionally, the question as to what it is
that is new that appears during the indicated time and what is the fate of
the neoformation that disappears after it. Then we must consider what
change is occurring in the central and peripheral lines of development.
Finally, we must evaluate the critical age from the point of view of the
zone of its proximal development, that is, the relation to subsequent
growth".

This is why the ZPD is ALWAYS measured in years, something that very few
Western people who invoke the concept have ever noted, even though it is
quite explicit in every place that the ZPD is invoked. Even when the ZPD is
spoken of somewhat loosely, (e.g. "What the child can do with assistance
today he will be able to do without assistance tomorrow", or "in play the
child is a head taller than himself") it is very clear that years are
meant. Tomorrow does not and cannot mean 24 hours later, and the child will
not be a head taller than himself in a week or two.

David Kellogg
Macquarie University

On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 10:22 AM, Peter Smagorinsky <smago@uga.edu> wrote:

I'm watching the version of The Butterflies of Zagorsk that Mike
generously shared from the UCSD archives. I give it 4 stars. It would be
5,
but the copy is pretty bad.

The narrator consistently refers to the "zone of next development"
illustrated by periodic diagnostic sessions that also involved assistance
with deaf and blind kids learning how to speak with their hands on
another's hands.

Zone of Next Development seems such a better term than ZPD. Proximal is
too ambiguous, and so allows for just about any learning of anything
anyhow
to be illustrative of the ZPD. "Next" instead really emphasizes the more
long-term growth that Vygotsky had in mind, as I understand his writing.

But it's proximal in all the translations. Any help in understanding why?
Thx,p




------------------------------

Message: 38
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2016 16:14:19 +0000
From: mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Fwd: [COGDEVSOC] Lectureship in 'Culture and
Cognition' at Durham University
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID:
<CAHCnM0DoB=5SSa2PYwiuT_K9wCUToP5gYbGakyn6_O+pbWuQ1w@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: FLYNN, EMMA G. <e.g.flynn@durham.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 9:50 AM
Subject: [COGDEVSOC] Lectureship in 'Culture and Cognition' at Durham
University
To: cogdevsoc@lists.cogdevsoc.org <cogdevsoc@lists.cogdevsoc.org>,
dev-europe@lboro.ac.uk <dev-europe@lboro.ac.uk>


Dear All,



There is a lecturer position in ?Culture and Cognition? at Durham
University?s Anthropology department. Requirements state a PhD in
Anthropology or *related discipline*, so it may be of interest to some
people on this mailing list.  Details are attached.

It is a lovely place to live and work.



Best wishes,



Emma

------------------------------------------

Prof Emma Flynn



*Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Themed Issue: Innovation
in animals and humans: understanding the origins and development of novel
and creative behaviour *

Compiled and edited by Simon M. Reader, Emma Flynn, Julie Morand-Ferron and
Kevin N. Laland

Including: Flynn E, Turner C, Giraldeau L-A. 2016 Selectivity in social and
asocial learning: investigating the prevalence, effect and development of
young children?s learning preferences. *Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B* 371:
20150189.

Reader SM, Morand-Ferron J, Flynn E. 2016 Animal and human innovation:
novel problems and novel solutions. *Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B* 371: 20150182.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2015.0182



Deputy Head of Faculty (Research), Faculty of Social Sciences and Health,
Durham University, Tel: +44 (0)191 3342096 (ext 42096)



Developmental and Comparative Psychologist, School of Education, Durham
University, Durham, DH1 1TA, +44 (0)191 334 8412 (ext 48412)

https://www.dur.ac.uk/education/staff/profile/?id=5391


_______________________________________________
To post to the CDS listserv, send your message to:
cogdevsoc@lists.cogdevsoc.org
(If you belong to the listserv and have not included any large attachments,
your message
will be posted without moderation--so be careful!)

To subscribe or unsubscribe from the listserv, visit:
http://lists.cogdevsoc.org/listinfo.cgi/cogdevsoc-cogdevsoc.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: EvoCogCulture@Durham.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 179209 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20161123/78b64712/attachment.pdf

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
xmca-l mailing list
xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu
https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca-l


End of xmca-l Digest, Vol 40, Issue 6
*************************************