Re: [xmca] Learning Sciences / Science of Education

[Mike Cole <lchcmike@gmail.com>]

Wow!
Match meets gasoline puddle.
Thanks for additional refs David Ki
Is it some other Keith Sawyer who is editor of the Handbook of Learning
Sciences? The guy i am thinking about writes about creativity,
improvisation, emergence....

share martin's questions, although I think I get the spirit of the
distinction being made.

Luria being cited as central to the neuro side of things is encouraging,
Emily. But then we have the interpenetration and co-constructive actions of
phylogeny and ontogeny from the get-go. What I have seen in the brain-ed
literature mostly goes from brain-->education, and not from
culturally organized experience (read enculturation, of which education is a
subset) to the brain.
mike

On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Martin Packer <packer@duq.edu> wrote:

> Fascinating discussion - but could someone provide me with some
> clarification of the 'production' model (of schooling? of cognition?) and
> the formation model (of knowledge? of the learner? Bildung)?
>
> And is the claim that learning science is hegemonic with respect to other
> perspectives (such as Piaget or LSV), or wrt schooling (curriculum)?
>
> And 'dissipation' of situative perspectives... In the sense of being
> dispersed and lost? Seems to me everyone in cog sci is jumping on the
> situated bandwagon. More co-opted than dissipated?
>
> hanging on to this thread for dear life...
>
> Martin
>
>
>
> On Sep 15, 2009, at 7:29 PM, Tony Whitson wrote:
>
>  David,
>>
>> Your message is powerfully corrobarative.
>>
>> It arrived as I was preparing documents for inclusion in the web page I'll
>> be posting in response to this thread. One of those documents is a very
>> slightly expanded version of a proposal for AERA this year on Learning
>> Sciences / Science of Education as a hegemonic project.
>>
>> In terms of HOW PEOPLE LEARN, Piaget, Vygotsky -- and how Dewey, Lave,
>> etc. get contortedly forced into that framework, see my "Curriculum & the
>> post-(cognitivist) synthesis,"
>> at http://wp.me/p1V0H-1O . (If you vaguely remember having seen this
>> before, it's because I skipped ahead to this page when you appeared in my
>> classroom a couple years ago.)
>>
>> I find this article very helpful for understanding what's happening here:
>>
>> Lave, J. (1991). Situating learning in communities of practice. In L. B.
>> Resnick, J. M. Levine & S. D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially
>> shared cognition (1st ed., pp. 63-82). Washington, DC: American
>> Psychological Association.
>>
>> I will include that in the page for tonight.
>>
>> Emily, my own answer (obviously not speaking for David) is that David
>> nails the problem with his reference to the production model. The difference
>> between production and formation is absolutely crucial. I think Cognitive
>> Science is generally oblivious to that difference. Some Cog Sci is clearly
>> productionist. There's nothing to preclude Cog Sci from recognizing
>> formation as distinct from production, but often in its obliviousness it
>> remains equivocal and ambiguous at best. Given that in U.S. English
>> discourse education as formation has pretty much disappeared from the
>> language, writing must be done deliberately to preclude texts from being
>> read as productionist texts, and I don't see that happening in the Cog Sci
>> literature, even where the author(s) might be themselves thinking that
>> they're writing about formative activity.
>>
>> On Tue, 15 Sep 2009, Duvall, Emily wrote:
>>
>>  David,
>>> When you stated:
>>> " So the text is largely a promissory note for how a cognitive science
>>> approach encompasses all of these rich traditions, whereas inspecting
>>> the actual contribution of cognitive science research leads to little
>>> more than an unpacking of how
>>> skills develop through repetitive practice."
>>>
>>> Is the latter part of the sentence (from 'whereas' on) your comment on
>>> the text or on cognitive science in general?
>>> In either case, it seems to be a very narrow view on 'all' cognitive
>>> science research. I assume it is based on some works in particular?
>>> ~em
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu]
>>> On Behalf Of David H Kirshner
>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009 3:45 PM
>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>>> Subject: RE: [xmca] Learning Sciences / Science of Education
>>>
>>> Tony,
>>>
>>> I'm co-PI on a grant to replicate the University of Texas secondary
>>> teacher education program, which is largely focused on the learning
>>> sciences literature. This semester, I'm teaching an intro course,
>>> Knowing and Learning, that uses How People Learn as its main text, and
>>> presents the orthodoxy of production systems as the organizing framework
>>> for thinking about learning and teaching--at the same time extolling the
>>> need for group work, project based instruction, and the like. What
>>> becomes increasingly clear as I go through the literature is the
>>> hegemonic character of the learning sciences, at least in relation to
>>> educational matters. The insights into learning extolled in the
>>> literature derive in large part from Piagetian constructivist research
>>> and from Vygotskyan sociocultural research. So the text is largely a
>>> promissory note for how a cognitive science approach encompasses all of
>>> these rich traditions, whereas inspecting the actual contribution of
>>> cognitive science research leads to little more than an unpacking of how
>>> skills develop through repetitive practice.
>>>
>>> The sociological process of hegemonic discourse is itself an interest of
>>> mine at this time. I'm recalling our discussion of a couple of years ago
>>> about the possibility of a new edition of our situated cognition reader
>>> organized as a response to the dissipation of situative perspectives
>>> within the learning sciences. I'm increasingly interested in
>>> understanding that process.
>>>
>>> David
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu]
>>> On Behalf Of Tony Whitson
>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009 3:07 PM
>>> To: mcole@ucsd.edu; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>>> Subject: [xmca] Learning Sciences / Science of Education
>>>
>>> This is something that I'm very interested in. I'm planning a paper for
>>> a
>>> narrow audience this winter, and a more ambitious paper for a wide
>>> audience in Winter 2011. If others would be interested in a 2011 AERA
>>> symposium, let's talk.
>>>
>>> I'll see if I can put together a post tonight with some fragments &
>>> bibliography that people might be interested in.
>>>
>>> Meanwhile, I think there is a short answer, which of course is not the
>>> complete answer:
>>>
>>> I think a good deal of the impetus behind "Learning Sciences" comes from
>>>
>>> the political hostility to Education faculty in favor of positive(istic)
>>>
>>> psychology, as in Reid Lyons' statement that "If there was any piece of
>>> legislation that I could pass, it would be to blow up colleges of
>>> education".
>>>
>>> This has created an environment in which an Educational Psychologist
>>> (like
>>> John Bransford, for example) would lose out in the funding for
>>> competition
>>> to a Learning Scientist (like John Bransford, for example).
>>>
>>> Folks in Seattle, Nashville, etc. see little cost in a name change that
>>> keeps the dollars flowing. I'm not concerned about the name change, so
>>> much, but I have continuing concerns about the enterprise in general.
>>>
>>> On Tue, 15 Sep 2009, Mike Cole wrote:
>>>
>>>  Thanks Em-- And I googled Goswami neuromyths. Also very enlightening.
>>>> Goswami did early work with Ann Brown, former collaborator with us at
>>>>
>>> LCHC.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Now if we go back a step and look at the people who created the label
>>>>
>>> of
>>>
>>>> learning sciences, and their backgrounds, the shift from
>>>>
>>> "developmental
>>>
>>>> psychology" to developmental sciences, the appearance recently of the
>>>> handbook of cultural developmental science, ......... what a tempest!
>>>>
>>> Must
>>>
>>>> be a teapot in there somewhere. Simultaneous, fractilated paradigm
>>>>
>>> shifts?
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Does anyone have the luxury of being able to organize a science
>>>>
>>> studies
>>>
>>>> interrogation of these movements? Seems really worthwhile.
>>>> mike
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 12:16 PM, Duvall, Emily <emily@uidaho.edu>
>>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>  Thanks Mike... :-)
>>>>>      In general I like Goswami's work; I find her discussion of
>>>>> neuromyths compelling and have had my grad students do additional
>>>>> research on some of them. I am also particularly interested in ways
>>>>>
>>>> to
>>>
>>>> try to negotiate across different fields. I've attached my favorite
>>>>> Goswami and a nice intro to neuroeducation.
>>>>>      As a side note: Monica (Hansen, who frequently shows up on the
>>>>> list serve and is one of my doc students) and I took a neuroscience
>>>>> journal club/ seminar last spring and found ourselves trying to make
>>>>> sense of the work that is done with regard to education. We are
>>>>>
>>>> taking
>>>
>>>> another seminar right now and some of the folks who were in last
>>>>>
>>>> year's
>>>
>>>> class are presenting journal articles in their field, but are trying
>>>>>
>>>> to
>>>
>>>> make the links to human experience, particularly education. It's been
>>>>> interesting to discover how open minded the students and faculty
>>>>>
>>>> are...
>>>
>>>> one of the computational neuroscience faculty has taken up some
>>>>>
>>>> Vygotsky
>>>
>>>> reading as well as neuroeducation... of course Luria's work is a door
>>>>> opener and a point of mutual interest.
>>>>>      ~em
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>>>
>>>> [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu]
>>>
>>>> On Behalf Of Mike Cole
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009 9:41 AM
>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>>>>> Subject: Re: [xmca] Neuroscience connections to learning and
>>>>>
>>>> relearning
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> No one picked up on your interest in neuroeducation, Emily. A lot of
>>>>> what I
>>>>> read in this area strikes me as almost entirely without any
>>>>>
>>>> appreciation
>>>
>>>> of
>>>>> education, or human experience, as a culturally mediated,
>>>>>
>>>> co-constructed
>>>
>>>> process. Do you have a favorite general ref you could point us to
>>>>>
>>>> that
>>>
>>>> you
>>>>> resonate to??
>>>>> mike
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 8:50 AM, Duvall, Emily <emily@uidaho.edu>
>>>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>  I thought some of you might one or both of these article summaries
>>>>>> interesting. The first really speaks to the new field of
>>>>>>
>>>>> neuroeducation
>>>>>
>>>>>> with regard to cellular learning... the nice thing about the summary
>>>>>>
>>>>> is
>>>>>
>>>>>> it gives you an overview of learning at the cellular basis... very
>>>>>>
>>>>> clear
>>>>>
>>>>>> and easy to understand. Plus an introduction to astrocytes... :-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The second piece actually discusses re-learning, which has been a
>>>>>>
>>>>> topic
>>>>>
>>>>>> lately.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What I personally find so interesting is the role of experience in
>>>>>> learning and relearning... I found myself thinking back to Shirley
>>>>>>
>>>>> Brice
>>>>>
>>>>>> Heath's work... it would be fun to go back to her work and look at
>>>>>>
>>>>> her
>>>
>>>> study through a neuroeducation lens.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. Star-shaped Cells In Brain Help With Learning
>>>>>> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/09/090911132907.htm
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Every movement and every thought requires the passing of specific
>>>>>> information between networks of nerve cells. To improve a skill or
>>>>>>
>>>>> to
>>>
>>>> learn something new entails more efficient or a greater number of
>>>>>>
>>>>> cell
>>>
>>>> contacts. Scientists can now show that certain cells in the brain --
>>>>>>
>>>>> the
>>>>>
>>>>>> astrocytes -- actively influence this information exchange.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2. Forgotten But Not Gone: How The Brain Re-learns
>>>>>> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/11/081117110834.htm
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks to our ability to learn and to remember, we can perform tasks
>>>>>> that other living things can not even dream of. However, we are only
>>>>>> just beginning to get the gist of what really goes on in the brain
>>>>>>
>>>>> when
>>>>>
>>>>>> it learns or forgets something. What we do know is that changes in
>>>>>>
>>>>> the
>>>
>>>> contacts between nerve cells play an important role. But can these
>>>>>> structural changes account for that well-known phenomenon that it is
>>>>>> much easier to re-learn something that was forgotten than to learn
>>>>>> something completely new?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ~em
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Emily Duvall, PhD
>>>>>> Assistant Professor Curriculum & Instruction
>>>>>> University of Idaho, Coeur d'Alene
>>>>>> 1000 W. Hubbard Suite 242 | Coeur d'Alene, ID 83814
>>>>>> T 208 292 2512 | F 208 667 5275 emily@uidaho.edu |
>>>>>>
>>>>> www.cda.uidaho.edu
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> He only earns his freedom and his life, who takes them every day by
>>>>>> storm.
>>>>>> -- Johann Wolfgang Goethe
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  _______________________________________________
>>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>>>
>>>>>  _______________________________________________
>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Tony Whitson
>>> UD School of Education
>>> NEWARK  DE  19716
>>>
>>> twhitson@udel.edu
>>> _______________________________
>>>
>>> "those who fail to reread
>>> are obliged to read the same story everywhere"
>>>                 -- Roland Barthes, S/Z (1970)
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> xmca mailing list
>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> xmca mailing list
>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> xmca mailing list
>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>
>>>
>> Tony Whitson
>> UD School of Education
>> NEWARK  DE  19716
>>
>> twhitson@udel.edu
>> _______________________________
>>
>> "those who fail to reread
>> are obliged to read the same story everywhere"
>>                 -- Roland Barthes, S/Z (1970)
>> _______________________________________________
>> xmca mailing list
>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca