[Xmca-l] Re: units of analysis?

[mike cole]

Juan--

David Kellogg's earlier message in which he discussed the ways in which the
russian word for meaning, znachenie, can also mean value (and maybe, behind
our backs, always means both?) and brought this insight from a Marxist
colleague to bear on the possibility that the distinction between meaning
and sense could usefully thought of in terms of the exchange value of
meaning and the use value of sense. (If i remember correctly!).

Marxism is infused in the disagreements between LSV and ANL in the two
articles under consideration, at this moment playing out with respect to
the concept of activity and how
perezhivanie is or is not a unit of analysis for understanding the relation
between cognition and emotion as core constituents of experience.
mike

On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 1:15 PM, Juan Duarte <juanma.duarte@gmail.com>
wrote:

> I wonder if it is possible to refer to the vigotskyan "units of análisis"
> without say a word of the marxist framework in which he developed that
> concept. For me, in going so, we lost great part of the richness of his
> psychology: his method.
>
> Thanks a lot for the interchange.
> Juan Duarte
>
> 2014-10-12 15:31 GMT-03:00 Helena Worthen <helenaworthen@gmail.com>:
>
> > As someone who uses the concept of "unit of analysis" in a very
> > down-to-earth, quick and dirty, applied way to shape collective responses
> > to a crisis in a labor and employment relationships (like, when a rule
> > changes creates difficulties for workers), I would agree with Andy:
> >
> > > The other thing is that discovering a unit of analysis is an *insight*.
> > It
> > > is not something that can be achieved by following a template, it is
> the
> > > breakthrough in your research into some problem, the leap. It usually
> > comes
> > > *after* you've collected all the data for your research using some
> other
> > > unit of analysis.
> >
> > First comes the story, the details, the experiences. The question lying
> > behind the telling of the stories is, "What are we going to do?" The unit
> > of analysis gets defined by the purpose we are trying to accomplish. Are
> we
> > trying to get the employer to back off temporarily? Are we trying get the
> > rule changed? Example:  In a big hospital system in Chicago, clerical
> > workers were no longer allowed to leave an "I'm going to be late to work
> > today" or "I have to stay home with my sick kid today and will miss work"
> > message on the answering machines of their supervisors. We're talking
> about
> > a workforce with hundreds of employees, most of them middle aged minority
> > women -- with grandchildren and extended families to be responsible for.
> > Not being allowed to leave a message on a machine, but being required to
> > actually speak to a supervisor in person who would then keep a record of
> > the call, was a problem because supervisors were often away from their
> > desks and the whole phone system was unreliable. Also, a lot of workers
> > didn't have cell phones at the time this was happening (2004) and pay
> > phones are few and far between, so if someone it out buying more asthma
> > inhalers for a grandkid, making a phone call is not easy.
> >
> >  So, exactly what is the purpose that we're trying to accomplish, here?
> > To repeal the rule? To fix the phone system?  To educate members of the
> > union and other others about how to respond collectively to something
> that
> > only affects some of them? To make a profound change in society so that
> > middle-aged women are not the primary caretakers of an extended family?
> > Pick one. Once you've picked one (hopefully, one that you can carry out)
> > you can define the unit of analysis and then reviewing the whole
> Engestrom
> > triangle and evaluating your strategy becomes, as Andy says,  a matter of
> > solving puzzles.
> >
> > >From the employer point of view, asking workers to actually speak to a
> > live supervisor makes a certain sense. That's why we talk about activity
> > system(s), not just one activity system. But they are often in conflict
> > with each other, which adds to the drama.
> >
> > Is the data in your study being gathered with some purpose in mind? Is
> the
> > purpose the purpose of the children, the purpose of the class, or the
> > purpose of the PhdD program?  To me, what would be most interesting would
> > be a comparison between the unit of analysis (purposes of children) and
> > unit of analysis (purpose of classroom). I'll bet they're not identical.
> >
> >
> > Helena
> >
> >
> > Helena Worthen
> > helenaworthen@gmail.com
> >
> > On Oct 12, 2014, at 10:20 AM, Katerina Plakitsi wrote:
> >
> > > This problem of the ' unit of analysis' is my concern too. I supervise
> > > three PHD students on Science Education in a CHAT context. Two of them
> on
> > > early childhood science education and one on primary science. They have
> > > collected log files, children discourses consisted of
> > > scientific justifications, accepted rules, and forms of division of
> > labor.
> > > They have collected children narratives, and drawings. When they
> decided
> > to
> > > analyze their data they follow different paths into CHAT context mainly
> > > modeling them using Engestrom's triangle. They still doubt about the "
> > unit
> > > of analysis".
> > >
> > > Στις Κυριακή, 12 Οκτωβρίου 2014, ο χρήστης Andy Blunden <
> > ablunden@mira.net>
> > > έγραψε:
> > >
> > >> Katie, picking up on your concern about units of analysis, it was one
> of
> > >> the points I mentioned in my "report" from ISCAR, that this concept
> was
> > >> almost lost to us. A phrase I heard a lot, and which was new for me,
> was
> > >> "unit to be analysed." If anyone knows the origin of this expression,
> > I'd
> > >> be interested in hearing. It seemed to me that what it referred to
> was a
> > >> "closed system" for analysis, that is, abandoning CHAT methodology
> > whilst
> > >> keeping the word. If I am mistaken about this, please let me know.
> > >>
> > >> The other thing is that discovering a unit of analysis is an
> *insight*.
> > It
> > >> is not something that can be achieved by following a template, it is
> the
> > >> breakthrough in your research into some problem, the leap. It usually
> > comes
> > >> *after* you've collected all the data for your research using some
> other
> > >> unit of analysis. In Kuhn's terms, discovery of the unit is the new
> > >> paradigm, after which it is just a matter of solving puzzles. So for
> > >> graduate students to use the concept of unit in their research, often
> > >> depends on the wisdom of teh direction they get from their
> supervisor. I
> > >> don't know how many PhD students I've met who have got to this point
> in
> > >> their thesis and discover that the data they have is not the data they
> > now
> > >> know they need.
> > >>
> > >> Andy
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> *Andy Blunden*
> > >> http://home.pacific.net.au/~andy/
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Katherine Wester Neal wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> I like Holli's plan to commit some time to reading the two articles.
> > But,
> > >>> as usual, I don't know that I'll have much to contribute in posts. I
> > >>> usually get deep in thinking about the posts and don't follow that
> > through
> > >>> to write something. The writing is much harder, and I am usually just
> > >>> trying to keep up with reading!
> > >>>
> > >>> For me, the thread has been fascinating, probably because I'm
> > interested
> > >>> in different units of analysis, what they might be used for, and how
> > they
> > >>> fit together with theory and conducting research. What are people
> doing
> > >>> with units of analysis and why? Or why aren't units of analysis being
> > used?
> > >>> If anyone wants to write more in that direction, I'd be very
> > interested to
> > >>> read, and I'll try to respond, although the questions might be as
> > basic as
> > >>> these.
> > >>>
> > >>> Lastly, Andy has basically been articulating my thoughts (in a much
> > more
> > >>> eloquent way than I would) about action as a unit of analysis. In
> > Mike's
> > >>> example about driving and thinking and writing, I'd add that the
> > action is
> > >>> mediated. Together with sociocultural and historical factors that
> > >>> influenced those actions (and which, as has been said here before,
> are
> > >>> often difficult to get a look at), the actions create a picture of
> much
> > >>> more than just Mike's behavior.
> > >>> Katie
> > >>>
> > >>> Katie Wester-Neal
> > >>> University of Georgia
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > > --
> > > ............................................................
> > > Katerina Plakitsi
> > > Associate Professor of Science Education
> > > School of Education
> > > University of Ioannina
> > > University Campus Dourouti 45110
> > > Ioannina
> > > Greece
> > > tel. +302651005771
> > > fax. +302651005842
> > > mobile.phone +306972898463
> > >
> > > http://users.uoi.gr/kplakits
> > > http://erasmus-ip.uoi.gr
> > > http://www.lib.uoi.gr/serp
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Juan
>



-- 
It is the dilemma of psychology to deal with a natural science with an
object that creates history. Ernst Boesch.