Re: [xmca] Ways With Words

[David Kellogg <vaughndogblack@yahoo.com>]

Well, yes and no. That is, David Kirshner's post does clarify a lot of my misunderstandings of his work. But it also produces some new puzzles, at least for me.
 
For example, David says that A, perhaps even THE, main difference between a domain which is well framed for a skills teaching genre and one which is framed for enculturation/acculturation has to do with the way in which the domain is defined in words.
 
An "undefined" domain is conducive to enculturation. He gives the example of politeness. But of course there are far more (and even far better) definitions of politeness (e.g. wedding procedures) then there are of pecan-shelling processes, at least here in China.
 
It's not clear to me what it means to define a domain. You would think that marching together in unison is an almost perfect example of a skill. But when we actually try to "define" it, we don't end up giving recipes (e.g. "First everybody puts there right foot forward at exactly the same time"). That kind of thing might help you get the ball rolling but it in no way helps with the difficult part, which is what you do when you begin to march out of step.
 
In fact, the "definitions" we give are almost always tautological: they are not procedures so much as what Harris calls "constitutive rules"; they are descriptions of what it means to walk in unison. "When you begin to march out of step you have to look at the kid next to you and adjust your gait to his or hers by either slowing down or speeding up." That looks much more like conceptual knowledge, rather than procedural knowledge, so it belongs to the knowledge-as-concepts genre rather than the knowledge-as-skills genre.
 
But of course nobody actually teaches this way. For one thing, it presupposes a kind of descriptive knowledge that usually follows rather than precedes performance. If you gotta ask, you ain't never gonna know. For another, it assumes that the kid next to you is marching in step. Suppose he or she isn't?
 
So iInstead, we "just do it". You get a bunch of kids together and you get them to march more or less in unison, and they create a kind of culture-of-marching-in-step, using something like good old "Watch this" and "Follow me". That, of course, sounds like an acculturation genre followed by an enculturation genre. And of course it begs Salman Rushdie's question: How does newness come into the world?
 
David Kellogg
Seoul National University of Education
 
PS: Did anyone else feel that Fred Newman and Lisa Fulani's article was PIAGETIAN--that is, it separates development and learning, and places the former absolutely and logically prior to the latter? I did, and perhaps for that reason found it really VERY depressing.
 
dk 

--- On Mon, 1/31/11, mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com> wrote:


From: mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [xmca] Ways With Words
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
Date: Monday, January 31, 2011, 7:42 AM


Both of you messages D&D, are helpful.
David Ki, do you have a manuscript on the en-ac-ulturation distinction and
the genre approach?
mike

On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 6:56 PM, David H Kirshner <dkirsh@lsu.edu> wrote:

> David,
>
> Thanks for the lovely wedding anecdote, and also the example of your
> mother-in-law inducting you into practices of pecan cracking through her
> verbal instructions. The model of enculturation that most of us have to go
> by comes from the situated cognition literature grounded in examples of
> craft apprenticeship. In this model, identity development (from peripheral
> to central participation) as well as the production of skills and concepts
> are incorporated into a complex integrative model of learning. This seems to
> be the frame that you are bringing to bear in understanding my enculturation
> genre.
>
> It is precisely this integrative assumption that the genres approach
> resists. The sculpted genres of teaching enable a parsing of the discrete
> elements interacting even within complex settings. For instance, the
> shelling of pecans, though certainly a cultural practice, is precisely
> defined and hence subject to being learned as a skill, outside of cultural
> context. (Contrast this with open-ended cultural practices like politeness
> or approaches to solving of non-routine problems which cannot be precisely
> specified and hence must be learned in cultural context.) Indeed, though
> your pecan-shelling lesson did transpire in an authentic cultural locale, I
> would want to argue that the structure of the learning support for your
> pecan-shelling prowess is from habituation instruction, not from
> enculturation.
>
> The key to habituated learning is unconscious (subcognitive) association of
> perceptual stimuli and motor responses. Your mother-in-law's directions for
> how you should hold and operate the apparatus served to make perceptually
> salient certain aspects of the stimulus and response domains, and your
> practice served to establish the requisite subcognitive linkages between
> them. I think we can probably rule out concept teaching, as presumably your
> mother-in-law was telling you what to do, rather than explaining principles
> to you (not discounting the possibility that you, independently, chose to
> "make sense" of what you were being asked to do). From a genres perspective,
> habituation would be a sufficient explanation to account for your newfound
> skill in pecan shelling. In fact, the requirements for enculturational
> learning of this "practice" probably were not present.
>
> Let me take a moment to unpack the two enculturation-related pedagogies in
> order to be able to continue the genres analysis of your pecan-shelling
> learning episode. One of the difficulties, given the prior model of situated
> cognition theory and craft apprenticeship, is to imagine how enculturational
> learning could be separated from identity development. However, in the
> genres analysis, identity becomes a salient concern in the case of
> alternative identity possibilities. For instance, in entering a craft
> apprenticeship, one makes a decision to "become" a craftsperson (of a
> certain sort). Thus one is actively seeking to acculturate oneself to the
> practices of the culture.
>
> This dynamic helps structure the "acculturation pedagogy" genre that I will
> soon distinguish from the "enculturation pedagogy." In acculturation
> pedagogy, a bona-fide member of the culture models mature cultural practices
> in order that novices seeking to acculturate themselves to the culture can
> emulate those practices. In your case, David, it doesn't seem that you
> considered this to be a Chinese cultural practice, or even that you expected
> your mother-in-law to be proficient in it. If anything, what you most
> admired about her was her ability to transfer from her prior experience with
> cracking peanuts and pumpkin seeds to new nuts and new devices. However, the
> ability to transfer was NOT what you were learning. You were learning to
> shell pecans.
>
> Enculturation is an even worse fit than acculturation to your
> pecan-shelling episode. Enculturation is the process of cultural absorption
> that comes about when one is immersed in a unitary cultural milieu, for
> instance a child within the national culture adopting the characteristic
> practices of the culture. This kind of learning is accomplished without
> conscious intention or awareness. The associated pedagogical genre has the
> teacher work surreptitiously to develop the classroom microculture so that
> it gradually comes to resemble the reference culture with respect to valued
> practices. Students learn not because of an intention to assume a new
> identity, but because they're immersed in a classroom culture that they
> gradually become enculturated to, even as it continues to evolve. For
> instance, a math teacher might seek to shape the culture of argumentation in
> the classroom so that it comes to more closely resemble the kinds of logical
> chains of reasoning that characterize mathematical proof. This is a gradual
> process over a long period of time--not a good fit for your pecan-shelling
> experience.
>
> Thanks for engaging with the genres approach. I hope this helps clarify
> some of the genres, and the way the genres framework is used to analyze
> situations of learning and teaching.
>
> David
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On
> Behalf Of David Kellogg
> Sent: Sunday, January 30, 2011 6:20 PM
> To: Culture ActivityeXtended Mind
> Subject: [xmca] Ways With Words
>
>
>
> David (Kirshner) is of course quite correct to point out that narrative is
> not a necessary or sufficient element in his “enculturation” educational
> genre. But it does seem to me that the “enculturation” educational genre is
> distinguished by greater discursivity; it’s a much talkier model, and I
> think it is for this reason we often find it in traditional, more oral
> cultures. Unfortunately (I think) we also find it in foreign language
> classrooms, where I think it is fundamentally inappropriate.
>
> First of all, it seems to me that enculturation almost necessarily involves
> some kind of legitimate peripheral participation, non-essential but
> nevertheless participatory roles in an activity that can in theory be taken
> by children and outsiders. This clearly suggests a very hierarchical set of
> roles, which, since they are not set by skills or by knowledge must be set
> by some other criterion (e.g. being a so-called “native speaker”)
>
> Secondly, it seems to me that enculturation models place a premium on doing
> fairly simple, general, everyday things with great adroitness, creativity,
> and confidence. An obvious example of this would be cooking, something which
> everybody has to do but which can be done either with routinism, or with
> verve and inspiration, or with the consummate mastery that is born of
> endless routines illuminated by flashes of inspiration.
>
> Thirdly (and as David says, this is where narrative “kicks in”)
> enculturation means learning what Shirley Brice Heath calls “ways with
> words”. If it were simply a matter of “Watch this” “Now you try it”, then
> there would be no difference between the discursive model and the skills
> model. Even if we add “Now, what was the difference?” we only get a skills
> model plus explicit knowledge, and that is not what the enculturation model
> is really about.
>
> That’s really all I have to say here. The rest of this post is just two
> anecdotes to illustrate. and if I had any sense I would just shut up at this
> point. I am sure that many readers will stop reading at this point, if not
> long before. But of course in the enculturation model, ways with words are
> very important, and sometimes anecdotes and illustrations are more important
> than the actual skills and concepts imparted.
>
> The other day I was sitting here at this very table cracking newly imported
> American pecans for my mother-in-law, who has had a stroke and can barely
> speak. She was watching me intently, having never seen either pecans or the
> jar-opening device I was using to crack them, and began to make speaking
> sounds. I leaned over to listen and suddenly realized she was giving very
> precise instructions about how to use the device so that the meat would not
> be shattered.
>
> Her body no longer obeys her brain, and she has reacquired the skills that
> an infant must have in getting others to obey it instead. But in normal
> times this simply involves laughing or crying, not “ways with words”. The
> unusual thing about this was the objectivity, the precision, and efficiency
> of her instructions: as soon as I held the jar-opening device the way she
> told me to, my speed doubled, my efficiency tripled, and not a single
> nut-meat was broken.
>
> I realized that cracking peanuts and pumpkin seeds with immense precision
> is something she has spent a large stretch of her non-working life doing
> (she retired from the textile mill where she worked at forty years of age)
> and she obviously had very developed views, transferable to entirely new
> products and even completely new tools, about how it should be done. In
> normal times (when we were both twenty years younger) she would have simply
> shoved me out of the way and done it herself. But in this situation,
> absolutely no other way of transferring her knowledge than a slurred mixture
> of Shaanxi and Henan dialects, to which I am normally fairly impervious.
>
> This circumstance is probably not unique; over thousands of years of human
> history there were probably many situations where knowledge had to be
> transferred in this highly imperfect way from disabled elders to not yet
> able juniors. And so ways with words turn out to be as important as skilled
> performances.
>
> But unskilled performances also have to be included, first of all, to
> provide the contrast that we have in skills models (“Watch this” “Now you
> try it”) and the explicit knowledge we have in conceptual models (“See the
> difference”), secondly to allow the elders to show the mastery on which
> their authority must ultimately be based (we cannot always live off of the
> capital of social position), and thirdly to allow some means by which
> outsiders can teach insiders, as well as insiders teach outsiders, making
> the enculturation model not entirely a closed system and allowing the whole
> to develop new forms of knowing.
>
> Yesterday my brother-in-law and I went to a wedding in a nearby village
> where he is doing some business with the local village head, whose friend
> had a son getting married. Village weddings in China are what I would call
> loosely scripted: certain things must be done, but they are not done to
> schedule; they happen when all the principals are accounted for and there is
> enough of an audience to make it worthwhile. In order to make sure that the
> audience shows up and stays, a huge tub of “saozi mian” (noodles) is kept on
> the boil all day, and anyone can eat as much as they like, whether they are
> related to the bride and groom or not.
>
> There are lots of roles that call for little skill, but there are also
> roles which can be fulfilled very skillfully. For example, when we first
> arrived at the wedding, they were carrying the bride’s gifts to her new
> inlaws into a room where the inlaws sat before portraits of their ancestors
> to receive them.
>
> My brother-in-law and I, along with some neighborhood children, took some
> of them in (I took a large, purple plastic thermos bottle) and in return the
> male adults were given cigarettes and the children were given milk sweets.
>
> While my brother-in-law was smoking his cigarette (I stuck mind behind my
> ear because I don’t smoke and I didn’t want another pressed upon me), the
> bride herself arrived. The groom’s sister barred and locked the door, and
> then the spy-hole was prized out so that negotiations could begin.
>
> The bride had to knock, of course. The groom’s sister, as per tradition,
> eyeballed the spy hole (she had to stand on tippy-toe) and then, in standard
> Chinese, told the bride’s family that the door was barred, and if the
> bride’s family really wanted to cross the threshold, they had to give a
> “hongbao” (a red envelope, with money).
>
> An envelope was produced, but when it the groom’s sister opened it she
> found it only had a light greenish one yuan note in it (I think that’s about
> twelve cents at current exchange rates). She complained that the bride’s
> family was “xiaochi” (stingy) and began to open the door.
>
> My brother-in-law finished his cigarette and sprang to his feet. He barred
> the door with is wiry frame and let out a torrent of choice insults in the
> local dialect. Egged on by hilarious laughter (from both sides of the door),
> he finished with a rhetorical flourish based on slightly different
> emphases—he wants a BIG red envelope, and big RED one (one hundred yuan
> notes are red).
>
> Another envelope was produced (with a blue five yuan note) and my brother
> in law relented. The bride came in and bowed to the ancestors, and they went
> off to enjoy their new marital status, their sumptuous (by peasant
> standards) new lodgings and the spiffy new plastic purple thermos I had
> carried up the stairs.
>
> As we left, we noticed that another wedding being held nearby. On closer
> inspection, this turned out to be wedding we had really been invited to—we
> had peripherally participated in the wrong wedding, and nobody cared or even
> noticed. And so the concept of party crashers was introduced to a remote
> village in Northwest China.
>
> David Kellogg
> Seoul National University of Education
> --- On Sat, 1/29/11, Rod Parker-Rees <R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>
> From: Rod Parker-Rees <R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk>
> Subject: RE: [xmca] Folk Psychology from a narrative perspective
> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> Date: Saturday, January 29, 2011, 9:38 AM
>
>
> Children with older siblings observe the way they manage indignant parents
> and can quickly work out what works and when (back in the 1980s Judy Dunn
> found plenty of evidence of 2 year olds - who had older siblings - appealing
> to parents for support but not when they 'knew' that they were responsible
> for a conflict). They don't need to know HOW or WHY a particular appeal
> works before they start to use it and they 'join in' well before they
> develop this sort of understanding (a particularly clear example of the
> general genetic law). Only children have a tougher job to work out how to
> manage their parents but they at least have the advantage of plenty of
> practice.
>
> All the best,
>
> Rod
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On
> Behalf Of Robert Lake
> Sent: 29 January 2011 17:23
> To: lchcmike@gmail.com; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> Subject: Re: [xmca] Folk Psychology from a narrative perspective
>
> Yes, I appreciate your comments as well Greg.
>
> I only have one thing to add and LSV might appreciate this.
>
> My grand daughter was saying "It was an accident" when she was 3.  :-)
>
> Robert
>
> On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 11:17 AM, mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > An interesting elaboration of the idea of the retrospective construction
> of
> > meaning, Greg. I had not thought about it in these terms before.
> > mike
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 11:55 PM, Gregory Allan Thompson <
> > gathomps@uchicago.edu> wrote:
> >
> > > Yes, and the insistence on ascribing motive to practice starts early.
> My
> > > favorite is the parent that looks at his two year old who has just torn
> > half
> > > the pages out of a cherished book of his (substitute lipstick all over
> > the
> > > dining room table or paint on the new carpet) and chastises the child
> > "Why
> > > did you do that?" or better "What were you thinking?"
> > >
> > > As if the child has some complex motivation and thought behind what
> they
> > > did. The child can only stare back in shock wondering what is
> happening.
> > >
> > > But there is important work being done in those ridiculous questions.
> Put
> > > together enough of these moments and by the time they are 7 or so, they
> > get
> > > it - "It was an accident" and "I didn't mean to do it" become stock
> > > responses regardless of what happened. And by 12 they have become
> nearly
> > > fully competent at manipulating the situation, intentions and all, e.g.
> > "I
> > > was trying to help my sister... and...". For each event, they are able
> to
> > > reconstruct a philosophy of the act, so to speak.
> > >
> > > -greg
> > >
> > > >
> > > >------------------------------
> > > >
> > > >Message: 2
> > > >Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2011 11:53:27 -0600
> > > >From: "David H Kirshner" <dkirsh@lsu.edu>
> > > >Subject: RE: [xmca] Folk Psychology from a narrative perspective
> > > >To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > > >Message-ID:
> > > >       <731CECC23FB8CA4E9127BD399744D1EC02E0CDFD@email001.lsu.edu>
> > > >Content-Type: text/plain;      charset="us-ascii"
> > > >
> > > >As with Tollefsen, who reviewed Hutto's book, I'm not quite sure what
> > > >kinds of specialized narrative practices are supposed to be needed to
> > > >establish our folk psychology's rational ascriptions. The ascription
> of
> > > >motive to behavior is ubiquitous. Admittedly, it may take one a long
> > > >time to get good at ascribing particular motives to particular
> actions.
> > > >But our social/cultural frame demands such ascription, so presumably
> we
> > > >all are going to get a lot of practice.
> > > >
> > > >It is one thing to look to narrative as a site for development of a
> > > >particular cultural practice--the folk psychology ascription of
> > > >motives--quite another to associate narrative with the fundamental
> > > >process of enculturation, itself. My approach to enculturation does
> not
> > > >take narrativization of one's identity as fundamental. That only kicks
> > > >in in the specialized process of "acculturation"--intentional
> emulation
> > > >of cultural practices to fulfill goals of cultural membership. But
> > > >enculturation functions more fundamentally as a spontaneous adaption
> to
> > > >the culture in which one is enmeshed.
> > > >
> > > >David
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >-----Original Message-----
> > > >From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
> ]
> > > >On Behalf Of Larry Purss
> > > >Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2011 7:21 PM
> > > >To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> > > >Subject: Re: [xmca] Folk Psychology from a narrative perspective
> > > >
> > > >Hi David Ke
> > > >
> > > >David
> > > >Your distinction between history and narrative is interesting.  Do you
> > > >think
> > > >Bruner collapses the distinction. Hutto's framework on narratives is
> > > >that
> > > >they are forms of story-telling that give "reasons for actions" in
> terms
> > > >of
> > > >beliefs and desires which are the folk psychological frameworks that
> are
> > > >culturally grounded frames of reference.  He suggests this form of
> > > >explanation is socioculturally grounded.  My recollection of Bruner's
> > > >work
> > > >is he suggests it is one of the two basic forms of constructing
> meaning.
> > > >Therefore, for Bruner, history would be a particular form of
> narrative.
> > > >
> > > >David, if Hutto's work interests you, I would also google his edited
> > > >book
> > > >"Folk Psychology Reassessed" which gives alternative theoretical
> > > >approaches
> > > >which are challenging the "theory theory" model and "simulation" model
> > > >of
> > > >folk psychology.  The edited volume situates Hutto's work in a larger
> > > >stream
> > > >of thought.
> > > >
> > > >On this topic of folk psycholgy I'm currently reading a book
> "Philosophy
> > > >in
> > > >the Flesh" by Lakoff & Johnson that posits BASIC or PRIMARY forms of
> > > >cognition as fundamentally metaphorical. We imaginally compare a
> source
> > > >concept to a target concept.   The SOURCE concept of these primary
> > > >cognitive
> > > >structures are ALWAYS based in our physical bodies. Lakoff & Johnson
> > > >suggest
> > > >from these primary metaphors more complex metaphorical meanings
> develop.
> > > >If
> > > >this perspective is accurate, then language is not the SOURCE of our
> > > >most
> > > >basic metaphors. The source is in the sensory-motor or somatic
> embodied
> > > >cognition. Language expresses these basic metaphors.  If there is some
> > > >merit
> > > >in this position then education and developmental science should
> engage
> > > >with
> > > >basic primary metaphors as foundational in the emergence of cognitive
> > > >capacity and in how these basic metaphors IMPLICITLY structure our
> folk
> > > >psychology.
> > > >
> > > >>From this perspective of primary metaphor as embodied  it is not too
> > > >big a
> > > >step  to reflect on primary intersubjectivity as a precursor to
> > > >secondary
> > > >intersubjectivity.  I have a hunch these 2 constructs are intimately
> > > >related.
> > > >
> > > >Larry
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 4:14 PM, David Kellogg
> > > ><vaughndogblack@yahoo.com>wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Wow--I have to get that book! Thanks, Larry.
> > > >>
> > > >> The way I understand David Kirshner's work is this: there is really
> > > >only
> > > >> ONE of the three meta-discourses in education that is narrative, at
> > > >least
> > > >> narrative in the sense of oriented towards the action of a hero in a
> > > >problem
> > > >> space who evaluates and achieves some kind of resolution.
> > > >>
> > > >> That's his THIRD meta-discourse, the one which sees education as a
> > > >process
> > > >> of becoming a participant, a member, a practioner and as mastering a
> > > >> particular set of discourses that accompany membership.
> > > >>
> > > >> It seems to me that his first meta-discourse, which sees education
> as
> > > >a
> > > >> process of mastering skills, is not narrativist, because it focuses
> on
> > > >> problem solutions and pretty much ignores the hero and the
> evaluation
> > > >of the
> > > >> problem space.
> > > >>
> > > >> His second meta-discourse, which sees education as a process of
> > > >acquiring
> > > >> conceptual knowledge, is not narrativist either, because it sees
> this
> > > >> knowledge as being not embodied in a particular hero and because it
> > > >sees the
> > > >> knowledge as being quite separable from the solution of problems.
> > > >>
> > > >> I don't think this means that DHK would consider the third
> > > >meta-discourse
> > > >> the most complete. I think it's only the most complete if we view it
> > > >from a
> > > >> narrativist point of view, and that is no coincidence, since it
> > > >co-evolved
> > > >> with a lot of Bruner's work.
> > > >>
> > > >> I have a question about the difference between narrative and history
> > > >(as in
> > > >> "cultural historical"). It seems to me that everything we say about
> > > >> narrative (its structure, it's "I-ness" and even its past-to-present
> > > >> orientation) is radically UNTRUE of history (because history is not
> > > >> structured around heroes in problem spaces, it is not "I" shaped,
> and
> > > >it is
> > > >> oriented present-to-past). Why, then, do people of our peculiar
> > > >historical
> > > >> epoch treat the two as synonymous?
> > > >>
> > > >> David Kellogg
> > > >> Seoul National University of Education
> > > >>
> > > >> --- On Wed, 1/26/11, Larry Purss <lpscholar2@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> From: Larry Purss <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
> > > >> Subject: [xmca] Folk Psychology from a narrative perspective
> > > >> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > > >> Date: Wednesday, January 26, 2011, 2:38 PM
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> I have attached a book review for others interested in a perspective
> > > >on
> > > >> folk
> > > >> psychology that assumes a perspective inspired by Jerome Bruner's
> work
> > > >on
> > > >> narrative practices,  Hutto is positing a 2nd person dialogical
> > > >grounding
> > > >> for understanding "reasons for actions"  He suggests this mode of
> > > >> understanding is most pronounced when actions are unpredictable.
> > > >Hutto
> > > >> suggests there are other more direct embodied forms of recognition
> and
> > > >> engagement that are not narrative based.
> > > >>
> > > >> I see some affinity in this perspective to David Kirschner's
> approach
> > > >to
> > > >> learning theory as narrative based genres.
> > > >>
> > > >> Larry
> > > >>
> > > >> -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> __________________________________________
> > > >> _____
> > > >> 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
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >------------------------------
> > > >
> > > >_______________________________________________
> > > >xmca mailing list
> > > >xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > > >http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >End of xmca Digest, Vol 68, Issue 27
> > > >************************************
> > > __________________________________________
> > > _____
> > > 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
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> *Robert Lake  Ed.D.
> *Assistant Professor
> Social Foundations of Education
> Dept. of Curriculum, Foundations, and Reading
> Georgia Southern University
> P. O. Box 8144
> Phone: (912) 478-5125
> Fax: (912) 478-5382
> Statesboro, GA  30460
>
> *Democracy must be born anew in every generation, and education is its
> midwife.*
> *-*John Dewey.
> __________________________________________
> _____
> 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
>
> __________________________________________
> _____
> 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