-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Barowy [mailto:wbarowy@attbi.com]
Sent: Wed 11/19/2003 8:19 PM
To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
Cc:
Subject: Carol Lee's article
hey, there, Bill B, and xmca-ers - i found your points pertinent, Bill - and i like you analogy with Pollock.
"snip"
The reason I chose the Pollack analogy in
the previous post was because Pollack put his canvas on the floor. Unlike
previous artists, there was no priviledged perspective to his work, no up or
down. He worked from all sides and when he created he was *inside* the
painting.
"snip"
and then you picked up on elementary school grades and computers, and i think you're right on:
"snip"
In the elementary grades
I don't think the design of computer based tools is really much of an issue,
cultural or otherwise. Computers are not what elementary children spend much
time working on during the day, and there really does not seem to be any
silver software bullets out there for learning maths or reading or writing in
the elementary grades -- great learning moments can happen with ordinary
stuff: pumpkin seeds, pencils, pens, 100's charts, unifix cubes, etc.
Science can be done with a magnifying glass and with things that float (or
not) in the water. What's really essential is dialogue. Dialogue with the
stuff, with peers, and with the teacher.
"snip"
yes, Gordon Wells has for years been emphasizing the importance of the dialogue.
in regards to the use of the computer in the class room, it's important to recognize that all of the state and federal tests at the elementary level have nothing to do with technology - computers - it is all paper and pencil test - and so of course, since that's a larger activity object/goal, to demonstrate knowledge and understanding with the tools of paper and pencil, that's what elementary teachers focus on. if the tests were done with computers, then in the classroom computers would be used differently than from present uses.
then you've got those questions!
"snip"
The question I have is, How can activity theory contribute to the better of
this situation? Can it address the tensions in a system caused by an ensemble
of rapidly changing artifacts (i.e. computer technology), together with rapid
change in rules (e.g. "no child left behind"), steady change in subject (e.g.
Phillip's students are new to him every year and are also most likely
changing in their diversity)? Are there patterns that researchers can detect
on the whole so that teachers can find some islands of stability in this
dynamic complexity?
"snip"
off the top of my head, i don't think that activity theory per se can contribute to the betterment of the situation - it can certainly be used as a tool to explicate what's happening now, and implications.
but that other question, "What are the patterns of stability that teachers build on with the dynamic of complexity in education?" so i've turned it into an ethnographic question - and i think that this is a question about systemic coherence - patterns and relationships that are stable over time ..... it could be that these patterns of stability are exactly what are most resistent to forces of reform/change - and that could actually be the strongest leverage points in achieving reform/change.
points to consider - thanks - also, i think that activity theory can show what is in practice - and certainly when the object/goal is changes, then what needs to be in place to practice the object.
phillip
phillip white
university of colorado at denver
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Dec 01 2003 - 01:00:12 PST