SIG theme

From: Peter Smagorinsky (psmagorinsky@home.com)
Date: Mon Jun 25 2001 - 02:25:51 PDT


 From the current edition of Organic Gardening (p. 15)
(http://www.organicgardening.com, for anyone who gardens):
The world's cultural, linguistic, and biological diversity lies in peril as
a result of growing globalization, studies carried out on behalf of the
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) warn. The studies--chronicled
in the UNEP-sponsored book Cultural and Spiritual Values of
Biodiversity--estimate that more than half the world's 5-7,000 languages
are in danger of extinction. With them, researchers say, could go the oral
traditions that for generations have helped sustain diverse agricultural
practices and a wide variety of animal and plant species. Find this and
other UNEP publications at www.earthprint.com.

That's something I'd never considered about the effects of globalization,
and it dovetails with ideas about a sig theme, something about the tension
between globalization and diversity. (I don't know of any chat researchers
who extend their studies of culture to biodiversity, though.) David K has a
good point that a them can end up excluding some people's work, but I
wonder if people working within a CHAT perspective (itself a theme) might
inevitably deal with this topic. Peter

At 05:45 PM 6/24/01 -0700, you wrote:
>A different option for SIG theming might be to adopt an admixture of themes
>weighted by the proportion each received of the popular vote, with learning,
>globalization, boundaries, and play each getting their proportion. After all,
>why should we, if anyone, be single-minded? It could be vexing if there was a
>non-zero vote for "no theme" but that has not happened yet. But I'm looking
>forward to it!
>
>Still a quantum mechanic in spirit, and a playful one,
>
>bb
>
>--- Eugene Matusov <ematusov@udel.edu> wrote:
> > Hi David--
> >
> > Sounds like that you may not want to have any theme at all. It is
> > understandable. Your reasoning makes sense for me. Having no year theme is
> > an option for the sig. There is an option on the sig voting booth that fits
> > your idea. I encourage you to vote in order your opinion to be counted and
> > heard.
> >
> > Thanks for sharing your views,
> >
> > Eugene
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: David H Kirshner [mailto:dkirsh@lsu.edu]
> > > Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2001 3:03 PM
> > > To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > > Subject: Re: re-sending
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Hello Eugene, et al.,
> > > I appreciate the CH-sig and all of the work you are doing on its (our)
> > > behalf. I've been to the site and looked over the ballot choices for an
> > > AERA focus. Of course some of them appeal to me more than others, yet I
> > > haven't voted. The reason is because I'm not quite sure what it means to
> > > have a SIG focus for the AERA meeting. Perhaps it means different
> > > things to
> > > different people? One possible meaning is that scholars are presumed to
> > > have general interests which they can direct toward different themes. In
> > > this interpretation, a theme doesn't serve to delimit the participants at
> > > the conference, only the nature of the presentations -- rather like
> a pot
> > > luck dinner in which, say, Chinese is identified as the theme for
> > > contributions. In this case, there is not exclusionary cost
> offsetting the
> > > advantages of thematically related presentations. But if the
> > > presumption is
> > > that scholars have definite foci to their work, and that a theme in one
> > > person's favor excludes another, then it seems to me there is a cost to
> > > achieving thematic harmony. It's entirely possible that I missed the note
> > > in which these trade-offs were discussed--I'm not that thorough a
> > > reader of
> > > the list mail. But without a sense of consensus around the
> trade-offs, I'm
> > > reluctant to do something that might result in someone's work not
> > > achieving
> > > the audience it otherwise might achieve. As I think about it, of course
> > > there are other levels of organization (e.g., Divisions) to which
> > > one might
> > > submit if the SIG focus doesn't mesh with one's interests, so maybe I
> need
> > > to rethink my cautiousness here. In any case, I wanted to let you
> > > know that
> > > at least some of the people "out here" in cyberspace who haven't
> voted are
> > > nevertheless involved with the SIG and appreciative of those who maintain
> > > and develop it.
> > > Regards.
> > > David Kirshner
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Mike Cole <mcole@weber.ucsd.edu> on 06/24/2001 10:47:29 AM
> > >
> > > Please respond to xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > >
> > > To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > > cc: (bcc: David H Kirshner/dkirsh/LSU)
> > >
> > > Subject: re-sending
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I tried sending a note to xmca from a jury-rigged account and it
> > > bounced, so I am re-trying.
> > >
> > > I went to the CHAT-sig AERA polling booth and found several interestng
> > > themes proposed. Also noted that relatively few people had voted. I
> > > wrote my note in the context of voicing and exiting and resistence,
> > > since here was a fine chance for people to shape the next general
> > > occasion for face to face discussion but few were voting on what to talk
> > > about and there is even an explicit choice for resisting!
> > >
> > > In light of the turn toward discussion of learning and development today,
> > > the fact that a discussion of learning is the lead candidate struck me
> > > as relevant I am reminded to support Eugene's efforts to give people
> > > a voice and agency. Go to the sig site and vote! Or you may be elected
> > > sig president in your absence and then think of all the work you will
> have
> > > to do!
> > > :-)
> > > mike
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
>http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jul 01 2001 - 01:01:40 PDT