High Armando--
Yes, intervention is a "heavy" word. But gestation may have its problems
too.
After all, what events coincided to initiate gestation? Mutual consent? This
is a good issues to think about.
You are not alone in finding the issue of subject disquieting in Leontiev.
Before
he was killed Brushlinsky (this was at end of/after the USSR) as head of the
institute of psychology placed very heavy emphasis on the need for subject
persepctive in activity theory -- in his case, Rubenshtein's version of
activity
theory.
Also, there is need for greater knowledge of the ways in which Vygotsky
(and....???)
used the concept of social sitatuion of development.
Other important questions to carry to Sevilla in search of answers.
mike
I believe that the work of Galina Zuckerman may provide help in thinking
about
how to theorize/understand the subect of educational activity.
On 9/15/05, Armando Perez <armreyper@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Mike:
> When I analyzed the concept of leading activity in the
> pass, I always feel that this concpet it has to be
> treated in a double link: as a social leading activiy
> and as a personal leading activity. Always when a read
> Leontiev the concepts of Activity, action and
> operation may me feel a lost of the subject as
> subject. Taking as example the problem of
> intervention, the central point is "Who is the subject
> of the intervention" Thah´s why in my Reserch Center
> we are trying to abandon the concept of
> "intervention". We are moving to the methaphor of
> "gestation", to gestate. It is something taht is
> borning in a SOCIAL SITUATION OF DEVELOPMENT. Maybe
> this concept could explain the unity of feeling and
> thinking and actioning, taking into account each
> subject in it singularity and all of the people
> around the activity system, conforming a collective
> leading activity system? Maybe we could speak about
> the integrration of each "singular leading activity"
> into a collective leading activity system????
> I dont know, but I refuse to lost the subject as
> singular subject and the subject as social subject.
> Armando
>
>
> --- Mike Cole <lchcmike@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Here are the questions we have so far plus one from
> > me.
> >
> > 1. Leading activities: transitions from one to
> > another; what categories or
> > methods prove useful for some leading activities but
> > less so for others; how
> > to tell if an analysis works differ depending on the
> > leading activity being
> > studied? What happens to contemporaneous
> > "non-leading" activities?
> >
> > 2. How should we understand the relation between
> > monism, marx, & Spinoza?
> >
> > 3. How can language (Discourse mode?) be a tool for
> > developing critical
> > thinking among urban poor school participants?
> >
> > 4. some question about work activity (I am
> > guessing, Helena), or maybe,
> > what happened to your exciting symposium idea!
> > 5. My question is about intervention studies. What
> > do we know about the
> > influence of relative power between interveners and
> > those
> > who are being "helped" on what transpires? This
> > could be reformulated to as
> > "who is the agent in intervention studies and who
> > profits from them?"
> > Who goes next? The world map is telling us that
> > plenty of us have plenty
> > of questions! And those of us going to Sevilla have
> > several
> > days to seek answers and report back about what we
> > did or did not find.
> > mike
> > _______________________________________________
> > xmca mailing list
> > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> >
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Oct 01 2005 - 01:00:11 PDT