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

[Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started



Thanks, everyone. 

And yes, thanks, Helena, for this suggestion!

 
-- 

CARRIE D. ALLEN, Ph.D. 
STEM Researcher
SRI International
Center for Technology in Learning 
 

 (650) 859-5262
 Twitter: @CarrieDAllen2
  Skype: carrie.allen_9

On 12/1/16, 9:50 PM, "xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil" <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of a.j.gil@iped.uio.no> wrote:

    1 star in netflix makes it even more attractive to me. Will try to watch it!
    Alfredo
    ________________________________________
    From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> on behalf of Helena Worthen <helenaworthen@gmail.com>
    Sent: 02 December 2016 03:39
    To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
    Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
    
    I can understand giving it 1. We might want it ask if it is art. It is not a documentary.
    yes, please take a look.
    
    
    Helena Worthen
    helenaworthen@gmail.com
    Berkeley, CA 94707
    Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com
    
    
    
    > On Dec 1, 2016, at 5:24 PM, mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu> wrote:
    >
    > PS-- the film has a rating of 1, the lowest I have ever seen.
    >
    > Hmmmmmmm, might it have to do with the pain of the message, or is it just
    > bad
    > acting? Gotta take a look.
    > mike
    >
    > On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 5:23 PM, mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu> wrote:
    >
    >> "The measure of a man" is on Netflix, at least, Helena. I think its a
    >> great way to generate more discussion of neoliberalism and education that
    >> Margaret and Carrie's article has stirred up. I have been seeing it as the
    >> intensification/codification/digitalized/nanoized/ of patterns evident in
    >> the period dating from, say, the end of the Johnson administration. But
    >> quantity can convert into quality (so they say), so identifying those
    >> special qualities or configurations of them, would be very useful.
    >>
    >> Carrie --- Thanks for sending the suggestions for successful
    >> counter-examples in the form of locally implemented alternative models. It
    >> seems important to collect such examples in order to understand both how to
    >> put them together and how to sustain/diffuse them in the face of
    >> overwhelming pressure toward commodification
    >> of education.
    >>
    >> And as Alfredo wrote (but in my dialect :-))  ) , "it ain't over 'til its
    >> over."
    >>
    >> Helena's idea of watching a film embodying her understanding of
    >> neoliberalism
    >> seems like a way to get greater understanding of each other when
    >> discussing our polysemic interests.
    >>
    >> The Zuckerman article seems to speak directly into these concerns.
    >>
    >> So thanks for starting such an interesting discussion!!
    >>
    >> mike
    >>
    >> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 2:44 PM, Helena Worthen <helenaworthen@gmail.com>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>> Carrie, and others on xmcc:
    >>>
    >>> I’ve been watching the term “neoliberal” float past in recent weeks. An
    >>> example of the ways that I’ve seen it being used is in Carrie’s most recent
    >>> message:
    >>>
    >>> “…. that disrupt the neoliberal model and normalized conceptions of math
    >>> and science, and that engage young people in the practices of the
    >>> disciplines in meaningful and authentic ways. Math and science in these
    >>> models are frameworks for engaging in and making sense of the world, and
    >>> students in these models are positioned as those who utilize the resources
    >>> and tools within these frameworks to pursue problems, questions, interests.”
    >>>
    >>> It sounds as if these frameworks - the math and science in these models -
    >>> are what is disrupting the neoliberal model. They enable students to make
    >>> sense of the world in a way that is an alternative to the neoliberal model.
    >>>
    >>> Discourse like this makes me want to suggest a film for shared viewing:
    >>> The Measure of a Man, directed by Stephane Brize, 2016. This film works
    >>> carefully and thoroughly through the whole experience of a middle-aged
    >>> white man who is trying to live in a country (France) that has given itself
    >>> away pretty entirely to neoliberalism. Each slow turn of the plot opens up
    >>> another dimension of how the neoliberal model is experienced by someone
    >>> who, under a different model, would have lived quite differently.
    >>> Amazingly, the film doesn’t leave out anything that I can think of. One of
    >>> its messages is how totalized the neoliberal model can be made in its
    >>> operation. There are of course sections that speak to education and
    >>> training.
    >>>
    >>> Has anyone else seen this film?
    >>>
    >>> Helena
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Helena Worthen
    >>> helenaworthen@gmail.com
    >>> Berkeley, CA 94707
    >>> Blog about US and Viet Nam: helenaworthen.wordpress.com
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> On Dec 1, 2016, at 1:19 PM, carrie.allen@sri.com wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>> Hi all,
    >>>>
    >>>> Sorry to be joining this strand late, but I wanted to jump in regarding
    >>> other possibilities or models of learning in mathematics and science.
    >>> First, I want to say that our comments in this paper were not trying to
    >>> suggest that students in US schools are all doomed to have hollow ideas
    >>> about math and science and fragile identities because of it. There are
    >>> certainly many current models - such as in Angie Calabrese Barton’s work at
    >>> Michigan State University and Jessica Thompson’s and Megan Bang’s work at
    >>> the University of Washington that disrupt the neoliberal model and
    >>> normalized conceptions of math and science, and that engage young people in
    >>> the practices of the disciplines in meaningful and authentic ways. Math and
    >>> science in these models are frameworks for engaging in and making sense of
    >>> the world, and students in these models are positioned as those who utilize
    >>> the resources and tools within these frameworks to pursue problems,
    >>> questions, interests. Youth in these models live into more nuanced ways of
    >>> being mathematical or scientific, and have more sophisticated means by
    >>> which to imagine possible selves (and pathways). And, I’m not entirely sure
    >>> how to articulate it, but, in these models math and science too are
    >>> “living” – being shaped in use and expanded in its possibilities.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> --
    >>>>
    >>>> CARRIE D. ALLEN, Ph.D.
    >>>> STEM Researcher
    >>>> SRI International
    >>>> Center for Technology in Learning
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> (650) 859-5262
    >>>> Twitter: @CarrieDAllen2
    >>>> Skype: carrie.allen_9
    >>>>
    >>>> On 11/17/16, 7:16 PM, "xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of
    >>> lpscholar2@gmail.com" <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of
    >>> lpscholar2@gmail.com> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>   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.e
    >>> du>
    >>>>>> 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.e
    >>> du>
    >>>>>>> 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.e
    >>> du>
    >>>>>>> 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
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>
    
    
    
    


Status: O