Hi Diane--
Don't let agism creep in here, or we will be in even hotter
water! And besides, its grandpa mike.
As a close colleague recently pointed out in connection with
another discussion, email is a diffcult/risky medium for lots of
interactrions when only two people are involved. Get into this mixed
medium and..... well, we see.
The question I asked you, Paul, and really everyone is much
on my mind. We have our theories and our ready-to=hand warrants, and
we trade them here and learn from them, even as we are sometimes
cut by them. But very very very often I can't tell where the crux
of the disagreement is, buried as it is behind a milky way of ipixils.
t To bring it close to home. I love Mary's quote from Bandura,
whose ways of thinking in general do not grab me. Would it make any
difference to my work if I used Bandura's paradigm as a tool rather
than Luria, Vygotsky, Leontieve and their cousins around the world?
What difference? Only to make me feel better/more coherent, or
because I could show that focusing on self=efficacy a la Bandura
and growing children in activity system a la CHAT (what ever I imAG agine
that to nb be) makes a differences in the success of what I am trying
to do.
In the case of the current discussion, there is too much
I not only don't understand in detail, I am not close enough to
make use of it. So, my strategy is to ask: How do the ideas
and the way they are deployed work for you? What do they accomplish?
How? And..... ought we to be trying to accomnplish this?
Thoughts like that.
mike
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 11 2000 - 14:04:07 PST