[Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
mike cole
mcole@ucsd.edu
Fri Dec 2 16:43:01 PST 2016
Turns out that the Medin and Bang book has been reviewed right here in our
very own journal. A "must read" book for all sorts of reasons.
mike
On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 4:15 PM, Edward Wall <ewall@umich.edu> wrote:
> Molly
>
> This does look like an excellent book. I was just looking at her
> article and missed this.
>
> Many thanks!!
>
> Ed
>
> > On Dec 2, 2016, at 6:11 PM, molly shea <mvshea@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Ed,
> >
> > Megan Bang and Doug Medin wrote an excellent book on Science Education:
> > https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/whos-asking
> >
> > *Overview*
> > The answers to scientific questions depend on who’s asking, because the
> > questions asked and the answers sought reflect the cultural values and
> > orientations of the questioner. These values and orientations are most
> > often those of Western science. In Who’s Asking?, Douglas Medin and Megan
> > Bang argue that despite the widely held view that science is objective,
> > value-neutral, and acultural, scientists do not shed their cultures at
> the
> > laboratory or classroom door; their practices reflect their values,
> belief
> > systems, and worldviews. Medin and Bang argue further that scientist
> > diversity—the participation of researchers and educators with different
> > cultural orientations—provides new perspectives and leads to more
> effective
> > science and better science education.
> >
> > Medin and Bang compare Native American and European American orientations
> > toward the natural world and apply these findings to science education.
> The
> > European American model, they find, sees humans as separated from nature;
> > the Native American model sees humans as part of a natural ecosystem.
> Medin
> > and Bang then report on the development of ecologically oriented and
> > community-based science education programs on the Menominee reservation
> in
> > Wisconsin and at the American Indian Center of Chicago. Medin and Bang’s
> > novel argument for scientist diversity also has important implications
> for
> > questions of minority underrepresentation in science.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Molly Shea
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 3:47 PM, Edward Wall <ewall@umich.edu> wrote:
> >
> >> Carrie
> >>
> >> My read of Barton’s publications is that she is using the Maker
> >> movement as a platform as regards issues of equity and science taken
> >> broadly. Is this a fair read or are there other important factors I am
> >> missing??
> >>
> >> My read of a nice paper published by Jessica Thompson and others in
> >> TCR is that she sees what she terms as 'rigor and responsiveness’ as the
> >> key element. In my words - not hers - key is respect for the discipline
> >> (rigor) and key is respect for each other (responsiveness). Is this a
> fair
> >> read or are there other important factors I am missing?
> >>
> >> Megan Bang seems less in the the science/math loop although she just
> >> may not have published much in this area. I did see one paper that, one
> >> might say, addressed what some would term ethnomathematics.
> >>
> >> However, I see nothing in the work of these researchers in the
> discipline
> >> of mathematics per se. Perhaps you could point me in the right
> direction?
> >>
> >> Here is why I’m asking. Just assume that I am a dumb mathematics
> educator
> >> (which I am - smile) and I wish to help those I teach (which I do) -
> i.e.
> >> those who will be elementary and secondary mathematics teachers - in
> >> somehow implementing something like rigor and responsiveness.’ I do
> >> understand that curriculum and teaching are intertwined, but I also know
> >> that teachers enact curriculum and may or may not choose make room for
> >> responsiveness (that was also a point in the Thompson article). Now it
> is
> >> possible that all my students will, on their own and in their own
> >> classrooms, develop substantial notions of rigor and responsiveness,
> but it
> >> is possible that some might struggle. What experiences might I and
> others
> >> design to help those that struggle; for instance, what constitutes rigor
> >> (one can certainly be under or over rigorous). Likewise, what
> constitutes
> >> responsiveness (one certainly doesn’t need to talk to be responsive).
> Often
> >> people such as I do have relations with those, say, in mathematics,
> child
> >> development, and educational philosophy (among others). But, perhaps you
> >> don’t see this as happening in the college classroom, but during
> teaching
> >> itself. This still raises the interesting question as to what should
> occur
> >> in the college classroom (although some would just abolish such
> classrooms,
> >> perhaps understandably). Maybe it is too soon to ask such a question,
> but
> >> until it is answered in some pragmatic fashion, dumb mathematics
> educators
> >> such as myself will continue muddle to the benefit of none and, perhaps,
> >> detriment of all.
> >>
> >> Ed Wall
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Dec 1, 2016, at 3:19 PM, carrie.allen@sri.com wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> Sorry to be joining this strand late, but I wanted to jump in regarding
> >> other possibilities or models of learning in mathematics and science.
> >> First, I want to say that our comments in this paper were not trying to
> >> suggest that students in US schools are all doomed to have hollow ideas
> >> about math and science and fragile identities because of it. There are
> >> certainly many current models - such as in Angie Calabrese Barton’s
> work at
> >> Michigan State University and Jessica Thompson’s and Megan Bang’s work
> at
> >> the University of Washington that disrupt the neoliberal model and
> >> normalized conceptions of math and science, and that engage young
> people in
> >> the practices of the disciplines in meaningful and authentic ways. Math
> and
> >> science in these models are frameworks for engaging in and making sense
> of
> >> the world, and students in these models are positioned as those who
> utilize
> >> the resources and tools within these frameworks to pursue problems,
> >> questions, interests. Youth in these models live into more nuanced ways
> of
> >> being mathematical or scientific, and have more sophisticated means by
> >> which to imagine possible selves (and pathways). And, I’m not entirely
> sure
> >> how to articulate it, but, in these models math and science too are
> >> “living” – being shaped in use and expanded in its possibilities.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>>
> >>> CARRIE D. ALLEN, Ph.D.
> >>> STEM Researcher
> >>> SRI International
> >>> Center for Technology in Learning
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> (650) 859-5262
> >>> Twitter: @CarrieDAllen2
> >>> Skype: carrie.allen_9
> >>>
> >>> On 11/17/16, 7:16 PM, "xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of
> >> lpscholar2@gmail.com" <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu on behalf of
> >> lpscholar2@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> So basically engaging in play may be foundational to learning a
> >> particular disciplinary subject matter including mathematical play.
> >>> This playful approach as counterpoint to formal high stakes
> >> approaches. This places the scope of play (itself) at the center of our
> >> inquiry.
> >>> This feels intuitively to be relevant to exemplary ways of learning.
> >>>
> >>> Like imagination, play is not taken seriously , but may be
> >> foundational or necessary for learning that is exemplary.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Sent from my Windows 10 phone
> >>>
> >>> From: Edward Wall
> >>> Sent: November 17, 2016 4:45 PM
> >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
> >>>
> >>> Larry
> >>>
> >>> There are, at least, four somewhat current possibilities (I’m
> >> not sure if they should be called exemplars) as regards mathematics
> >>>
> >>> 1. Summerhill (and, perhaps, some other English private schools)
> >>> 2. Some private schools in the US (a book was written by a teacher at
> >> one. If there is any interest I’ll see if I can dig up the title).
> >>> 3. The case of Louis P. Benezet in a US public school in1929
> >>> 4. There is some indication that schools in Finland and the
> >> Netherlands are, perhaps, a little less ‘neoliberal' (however, the
> evidence
> >> isn’t clear)
> >>>
> >>> Basically in some of the above formal mathematics instruction is put
> >> off until either children ask or until until fourth or fifth grade;
> >> however, children engage in, you might say, mathematical play (Dewey
> >> recommended something like this). This is, by the way and according to
> >> some, also what a good mathematics preK program looks like. Also, this
> is a
> >> bit as regards mathematics what the ancient Greek version of schooling
> for
> >> the elite looked like (i.e. mathematics was put off).
> >>>
> >>> Ed
> >>>
> >>>> On Nov 17, 2016, at 3:05 PM, lpscholar2@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> The question remains, if this neoliberal context generates
> >> (hollowed-out) educational *spaces* or institutions then is it possible
> we
> >> are able to offer exemplars of other educational places (current or
> >> historical) that manifested different kinds of identity formation that
> were
> >> not hollowed out. I speculate these exemplars would embody or incarnate
> >> deeply historical and ethical orientations and practices.
> >>>> If we have lost our way, are there other models (cultural imaginaries)
> >> that co-generate developmental narratives that will nurture well-being?
> >>>>
> >>>> Exemplary models that point in a certain direction
> >>>>
> >>>> Sent from my Windows 10 phone
> >>>>
> >>>> From: Huw Lloyd
> >>>> Sent: November 17, 2016 11:32 AM
> >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
> >>>>
> >>>> Alfredo,
> >>>>
> >>>> Yes, they're pathological. I am merely saying that the problems
> >> inherent
> >>>> in the pathology can be edifying. No, I don't think the issues can be
> >>>> transcended within conventional practices. Perhaps the best that can
> be
> >>>> achieved is that the students recognise an institutional need for
> "good
> >>>> behaviour" and the teacher recognises an educational need for real
> >> problem
> >>>> solving. For "real" education, we would need something like Davydov's
> >>>> system. But this is merely one view of the purpose of "education".
> There
> >>>> are many who don't seem to recognise these (and other) important
> >>>> implications.
> >>>>
> >>>> Best,
> >>>> Huw
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 17 November 2016 at 18:11, Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no
> >
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Huw,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> great comments. I like what you say, that the (institutional, social)
> >>>>> process always is educational, and I agree: it develops into the
> >> formation
> >>>>> of habit and character. But I still wonder whether all educational
> >>>>> processes lead to growth or development, or whether we rather should
> be
> >>>>> able to identify some processes as, we may call them, *pathological*
> >> (or
> >>>>> perhaps involutive?). There you have Bateson on double bind and
> >>>>> schizophrenia, for example. Here, in the article, we have some young
> >>>>> students that enter a system that generates a double bind (it was
> Mike
> >> who
> >>>>> made me aware of the connection with double bind). The question is,
> >> will
> >>>>> the system develop without some form of awareness *about* the double
> >> bind
> >>>>> that overcomes it by generating a system that does not only include
> the
> >>>>> double bind, but also its own description (thereby becoming a higher
> >> order
> >>>>> system, one in which participants, students and teachers, come to
> grow
> >>>>> rather than come to stall).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Alfredo
> >>>>> ________________________________________
> >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
> edu
> >>>
> >>>>> on behalf of Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
> >>>>> Sent: 17 November 2016 10:54
> >>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Alfredo,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The 'zone' is always present. Whether it is recognised or not is
> >> another
> >>>>> matter.
> >>>>> I do not think this interpretation is quite a zero sum game, because
> >> there
> >>>>> is always the aspect that the institutionalised process is
> educational
> >> --
> >>>>> the laws reveal themselves one way or another. So (from an Illich
> >>>>> perspective) the opportunity to discover what is real remains, it
> just
> >>>>> takes a different course.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Best,
> >>>>> Huw
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 17 November 2016 at 07:37, Alfredo Jornet Gil <
> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> What touches me of the article is something that perhaps relates to
> >> this
> >>>>>> tension that I find between David's (individualistic?) approach to
> >>>>>> prolepsis in his post (David, I thought, and continue thinking, that
> >>>>>> prolepsis refers to something that emerges in the relation between
> >> two,
> >>>>> not
> >>>>>> something that either is present or absent within a person), and
> >>>>> Phillip's
> >>>>>> view of young people figuring out what life is all about just as all
> >> we
> >>>>> do.
> >>>>>> And so here (and in any neoliberal school context) we have
> wonderfully
> >>>>>> beautiful young people more or less interested in science or in
> maths,
> >>>>> but
> >>>>>> all eager to live a life and evolve as best as they can (whatever
> that
> >>>>> best
> >>>>>> may mean for each one). And then you see how the history and context
> >> that
> >>>>>> they come into gives them everything they need to develop motives
> and
> >>>>>> goals; to then make sure that the majority of them won't make it so
> >> that
> >>>>>> only a few privileged (or in the case of Margaret's paper none,
> >> according
> >>>>>> to the authors) succeed. And then what remains is not just a
> >> hollowed-out
> >>>>>> science and math identity, but also a hollowed-out soul that had
> >> illusion
> >>>>>> and now just doesn't. Not only a failure to provide opportunities to
> >>>>>> learners to become anything(one) good about science and math, but
> >> also a
> >>>>>> robbing of other possible paths of development that may had grown in
> >>>>> people
> >>>>>> if they had been hanging out with some other better company. Do we
> >> have a
> >>>>>> term to refer to the opposite of a zone of proximal development? Not
> >> just
> >>>>>> the absence of it, but the strangling of it.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Alfredo
> >>>>>> ________________________________________
> >>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
> >> edu>
> >>>>>> on behalf of White, Phillip <Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu>
> >>>>>> Sent: 17 November 2016 06:29
> >>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> >>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> David, the examples on page 193, students 1, 2 & 3 - aren't these
> >>>>> examples
> >>>>>> of proleptic thought - especially for student 2, who looks at where
> >> she
> >>>>> is
> >>>>>> "I have my own standards", a statement of the present, then a
> looking
> >>>>> back
> >>>>>> at what has happened, "I like to get straight A's". and then
> setting
> >> a
> >>>>>> target for the future, "help for like to get in college and stuff,
> so
> >>>>> yeah,
> >>>>>> I participate in a lot of stuff." ending with a reassertion of
> present
> >>>>>> activities to attain future goals.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> and there is a preponderance of the use of "I", rather than "you".
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> i'd give the young people for credit than a myopia focused merely on
> >>>>> their
> >>>>>> age: the business of young people is figuring out what life is all
> >> about
> >>>>>> and how to participate, just as adults and infants and old people
> >> like me
> >>>>>> do.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> i'm not convinced that your arguments are supported by the data in
> >> this
> >>>>>> Eisenhard / Allen paper.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> phillip
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> ________________________________
> >>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
> >> edu>
> >>>>>> on behalf of David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
> >>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 1:24:35 PM
> >>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> >>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Actually, Henry, I was attacking the idea that tense is an empty
> >> mental
> >>>>>> space. I guess I am a little like Larry: when we discuss articles I
> >> have
> >>>>> a
> >>>>>> strong tendency to try to make them relevant to what I am doing
> rather
> >>>>> than
> >>>>>> to drop what I am doing and go and discuss what everybody else is
> >>>>>> discussing. So what I am doing right now is trying to make sense of
> >> some
> >>>>>> story-telling data where the adults are all over the map on tenses,
> >> and
> >>>>> the
> >>>>>> kids seem to stick to one tense only. The adults are slipping in and
> >> out
> >>>>> of
> >>>>>> mental spaces. The kids are telling stories.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I think the relevance to the article is this: When you look at the
> way
> >>>>> the
> >>>>>> article frames institutional practices and figured worlds, we see
> >>>>>> prolepsis--a preoccupation with the future. But when we look at what
> >> the
> >>>>>> kids are doing and saying it is very much in the moment. Is this
> >> simply
> >>>>>> because mental processes like "like" and "want" tend to take simple
> >>>>> present
> >>>>>> (because they are less defined than material processes)? Or is it
> >> because
> >>>>>> while the institutions have the near future firmly in view and the
> >>>>> figured
> >>>>>> worlds have irrealis in view, the business of young people is youth?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Vygotsky points out that the question the interviewer asks is very
> >> much a
> >>>>>> part of the data. For example, if you ask a question using "you" you
> >>>>> often
> >>>>>> get "you" in reply, even if you design your question to get "I".
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Q: Why do you want to kill yourself?
> >>>>>> A: The same reason everybody wants to kill themselves. You want to
> >> find
> >>>>> out
> >>>>>> if anybody really cares.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> To take another example that is probably more relevant to readers:
> >> both
> >>>>> the
> >>>>>> Brexit vote and the American elections are clear examples of
> >> statistical
> >>>>>> unreliability in that if you tried to repeat the election the
> morning
> >>>>> after
> >>>>>> you would probably get an utterly different result. Take all of
> those
> >>>>> black
> >>>>>> voters and the real working class voters who voted Obama but
> couldn't
> >> be
> >>>>>> bothered for Hillary (not the imaginary "white working class voters"
> >> who
> >>>>>> work in imaginary industries in Iowa, rural Pennsylvania, North
> >> Carolina
> >>>>>> and Florida). They might well have behaved rather differently
> knowing
> >> how
> >>>>>> imminent the neo-Confederacy really was. This is usually presented
> as
> >>>>>> "buyer's remorse," but it's more than that; the event itself would
> be
> >>>>> part
> >>>>>> of its replication. This is something that statistical models that
> use
> >>>>>> standard error of the mean cannot build in (they work on the
> >> impossible
> >>>>>> idea that you can repeat an event ten or twenty thousand times
> without
> >>>>> any
> >>>>>> memory at all).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> In the same way, when you interview a group of students together you
> >>>>> notice
> >>>>>> that they tend to model answers on each other rather than on your
> >>>>> question,
> >>>>>> and when you interview them separately, you notice that YOU tend to
> >>>>> change
> >>>>>> your question according to the previous answer you received. On the
> >> one
> >>>>>> hand, life is not easily distracted by its own future: it is too
> >> wholly
> >>>>>> there in each moment of existence. On the other hand, each of these
> >>>>> moments
> >>>>>> includes the previous one, and therefore all the previous ones, in
> >>>>> itself.
> >>>>>> The past weighs like a nightmare on the brain of the living, and
> >> objects
> >>>>> in
> >>>>>> the rear view mirror are always closer than they appear.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> David Kellogg
> >>>>>> Macquarie University
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 10:23 AM, HENRY SHONERD <hshonerd@gmail.com
> >
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> David,
> >>>>>>> I was puzzled that you found Langacker to be relevant to this
> topic,
> >>>>> but
> >>>>>>> the last paragraph of your post makes an important connection
> between
> >>>>>>> Langacker and Vygotsky: Both see speech acts as staged…interactants
> >>>>> view
> >>>>>>> themselves as “on stage”. I think the book by Vera and Reuben is
> >>>>> largely
> >>>>>>> about how differently math is “staged” by working mathematicians as
> >>>>>>> contrasted with doing math in school. I think it would be
> interesting
> >>>>> to
> >>>>>>> analyze how natural language and the language of math scaffold each
> >>>>> other
> >>>>>>> in both contexts. Word problems have been a well-used way of
> >> connecting
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>>> two languages; stats and graphs are commonly used in the media to
> >>>>> clarify
> >>>>>>> and elaborate text in articles on economics, presidential
> elections,
> >>>>> and
> >>>>>>> what not.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I would love to read your “unpublishable” on Langacker and Halliday
> >> on
> >>>>>>> tense. What I recall from reading Langacker is his interest in
> “basic
> >>>>>>> domains”, starting with the temporal and spatial. Somewhere he has
> >> said
> >>>>>>> that he believes that the temporal domain is the more basic. As
> you’d
> >>>>>>> guess, the spatial domain is especially useful in elucidating what
> he
> >>>>>> calls
> >>>>>>> “things” (nouns are conceptually about things); the temporal domain
> >> is
> >>>>>> more
> >>>>>>> closely connected to what he calls “processes” wherein he analyzes
> >>>>> tense
> >>>>>>> and aspect.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I think Langacker would agree that his work in cognitive grammar
> has
> >> a
> >>>>>>> long way to go in contributing to the idea that grammar is usage
> >> based,
> >>>>>>> rather than some autonomous module, but he is working on it. I
> think
> >>>>>> there
> >>>>>>> is a potential for connecting Halliday and Langacker, though I’m
> not
> >>>>>> smart
> >>>>>>> enough to convince you of that evidently. Somehow the connection
> must
> >>>>> be
> >>>>>>> made by staying close to the data, “thick description”
> ethnographers
> >>>>> are
> >>>>>>> fond of saying. I think the article by Carrie and Margaret is
> raising
> >>>>>> this
> >>>>>>> issue.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The “hollowed out” math curriculum in the article resonates with
> the
> >>>>>>> “potholes” you say teachers must watch out for. Some may say that
> >> the
> >>>>>>> hollowing out is typical even of “elite” K-12 schools. Some may say
> >>>>> that
> >>>>>>> this is deliberate. I would say my own experience of math in school
> >> was
> >>>>>>> often hollowed out, which I sensed, but didn’t discover until I got
> >> to
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>>> “pure math” department in the mid 60s at Univ of Texas at Austin
> >> under
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>>> leadership of Robert Lee Moore. He is a main protagonist in
> Chapter 8
> >>>>> of
> >>>>>>> Vera’s and Reuben’s book.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I’ll end it there.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Henry
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Nov 15, 2016, at 1:38 PM, David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Henry:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I just wrote another unpublishable comparing how Langacker and
> >>>>>>>> Halliday treat tense, and I'm starting to come to grips with the
> >>>>>>> different
> >>>>>>>> theory of experience underlying the two grammars. Langacker
> somehow
> >>>>>> sees
> >>>>>>> it
> >>>>>>>> as creating empty mental space (and aspect as creating space
> within
> >>>>>>> space).
> >>>>>>>> Halliday sees tense as a way of abstracting concrete doings and
> >>>>>>> happenings.
> >>>>>>>> Halliday's tense system is not spatial at all but temporal: it's
> >>>>>>> temporally
> >>>>>>>> deictic and then temporally recursive: a kind of time machine that
> >>>>>>>> simultaneously transports and orients the speaker either
> >>>>> proleptically
> >>>>>> or
> >>>>>>>> retroleptically. So for example if I say to you that this article
> we
> >>>>>> are
> >>>>>>>> discussing is going to have been being discussed for two or three
> >>>>> weeks
> >>>>>>>> now, then "is going" is a kind of time machine that takes you into
> >>>>> the
> >>>>>>>> future, from which "You are Here" vantage point the article has
> been
> >>>>>>> (past)
> >>>>>>>> being discussed (present). Present in the past in the future.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> And that got me thinking about theory and practice. It seems to me
> >>>>> that
> >>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>> they are related, but simultaneously and not sequentially. That
> is,
> >>>>> the
> >>>>>>>> output of one is not the input of the other: they are simply more
> >> and
> >>>>>>> less
> >>>>>>>> abstract ways of looking at one and the same thing. So for example
> >> in
> >>>>>>> this
> >>>>>>>> article the tasks of theory and practice are one and the same: the
> >>>>> task
> >>>>>>> of
> >>>>>>>> theory is really to define as precisely as possible the domain,
> the
> >>>>>>> scope,
> >>>>>>>> the range of the inquiry into authoring math and science
> identities
> >>>>> and
> >>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>> task of practice is to ask what exactly you want to do in this
> >>>>>>>> domain/scope/range--to try to understand how they are hollowed
> out a
> >>>>>>> little
> >>>>>>>> better so that maybe teachers like you and me can help fill the
> damn
> >>>>>>>> potholes in a little. You can't really do the one without doing
> the
> >>>>>>> other:
> >>>>>>>> trying to decide the terrain under study without deciding some
> task
> >>>>>> that
> >>>>>>>> you want to do there is like imagining tense as empty mental space
> >>>>> and
> >>>>>>> not
> >>>>>>>> as some actual, concrete doing or happening. Conversely, the way
> you
> >>>>>> dig
> >>>>>>>> the hole depends very much on how big and where you want it.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> So there are three kinds of mental spaces in the first part of the
> >>>>>>> article:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> a) institutional arrangements (e.g. "priority improvement plans",
> >>>>>>>> career-academy/comprehensive school status STEM tracks, AP
> classes)
> >>>>>>>> b) figured worlds (e.g. 'good students', and 'don't cares', or
> what
> >>>>>>> Eckhart
> >>>>>>>> and McConnell-Ginet called 'jocks', 'nerds', 'burnouts',
> >>>>>> 'gangbangers')
> >>>>>>>> c) authored identities (i.e. what kids say about themselves and
> what
> >>>>>> they
> >>>>>>>> think about themselves)
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Now, I think it's possible to make this distinction--but they are
> >>>>>>> probably
> >>>>>>>> better understood not as mental spaces (in which case they really
> do
> >>>>>>>> overlap) but rather as doings (or, as is my wont, sayings).
> >> Different
> >>>>>>>> people are saying different things: a) is mostly the sayings of
> the
> >>>>>>> school
> >>>>>>>> boards and administrators, b) is mostly the sayings of teachers
> and
> >>>>>>> groups
> >>>>>>>> of kids, and c) is mostly the sayings of individual students. It's
> >>>>>> always
> >>>>>>>> tempting for a theory to focus on c), because that's where all the
> >>>>> data
> >>>>>>> is
> >>>>>>>> and it's tempting for practice too, because if you are against
> what
> >>>>> is
> >>>>>>>> happening in a) and in b), that's where the most likely point of
> >>>>>>>> intervention is.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> "But the data does suggest that the "figured worlds" are figured
> by
> >>>>>>>> authored identities--not by institutional arrangements. Is that
> just
> >>>>> an
> >>>>>>>> artefact of the warm empathy of the authors for the words
> (although
> >>>>>> maybe
> >>>>>>>> not the exact wordings) of their subjects, or is it real grounds
> for
> >>>>>>> hope?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Marx says (beginning of the 18th Brumaire): "*Men make* their own
> >>>>>>> *history*,
> >>>>>>>> *but they* do *not make* it as *they* please; *they* do *not make*
> >> it
> >>>>>>>> under self-selected circumstances, *but* under circumstances
> >> existing
> >>>>>>>> already, given and transmitted from the *past*. The tradition of
> all
> >>>>>> dead
> >>>>>>>> generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living."
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> It's a good theory, i.e. at once a truth and a tragedy. And it's a
> >>>>>>>> theory treats time as time and not as an empty stage.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> David Kellogg
> >>>>>>>> Macquarie University
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 9:39 AM, HENRY SHONERD <
> hshonerd@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> All,
> >>>>>>>>> I have read only part of Margaret’s and Carrie’s article, but I
> >>>>> wanted
> >>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>> jump in with a reference to a book by Vygotskian Vera
> John-Steiner
> >>>>> and
> >>>>>>> her
> >>>>>>>>> mathematician husband Reuben Hersh: Loving and Hating
> Mathematics:
> >>>>>>>>> Challenging the Mathematical Life. Huw’s point (v) which refers
> to
> >>>>>>>>> “identities of independence and finding out sustainable within
> >> these
> >>>>>>>>> settings (school math classes) spent high school. Vera’s and
> >>>>> Reuben’s
> >>>>>>> book
> >>>>>>>>> contrasts what it’s like to work and think like a real (working)
> >>>>>>>>> mathematician (what I think Huw is talking about) and what we
> call
> >>>>>>>>> mathematics in the classroom. Chapter 8 of the book "The Teaching
> >> of
> >>>>>>>>> Mathematics: Fierce or Friendly?” is interesting reading and
> could
> >>>>> be
> >>>>>>>>> relevant to this discussion.
> >>>>>>>>> Henry
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Nov 13, 2016, at 2:47 PM, Huw Lloyd <
> huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Dear Margaret
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> My reading has not been a particularly careful one, so I leave
> it
> >>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>> yourselves to judge the usefulness of these points.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> i) Whether arguments can be made (for or against) a nebulous
> term
> >>>>>>>>>> (neoliberalism) with its political associations, by arguments
> >> about
> >>>>>>>>>> identity that are themselves not deliberately political.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> ii) Whether it is better not to focus essentially on the place
> of
> >>>>>>>>> identity.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> iii) Whether it is worthwhile contrasting the role/identity of
> >>>>> "model
> >>>>>>>>>> student" with "identities" that anyone excelling at STEM
> subjects
> >>>>>> would
> >>>>>>>>>> relate to. On this, I would point to the importance with
> >>>>> identifying
> >>>>>>>>> with
> >>>>>>>>>> appreciations for "awareness of not knowing" and "eagerness to
> >> find
> >>>>>>> out"
> >>>>>>>>>> (which also entails learning about what it means to know).
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> iv) Whether you detect that to the degree that an identity is
> >>>>>>>>> foregrounded
> >>>>>>>>>> in the actual practice of STEM work (rather than as background
> >>>>> social
> >>>>>>>>>> appeasement), it is being faked? That is, someone is playing at
> >> the
> >>>>>>> role
> >>>>>>>>>> rather than actually committing themselves to finding out about
> >>>>>>> unknowns.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> v) Whether, in fact, there is actually a "tiered" or varied set
> of
> >>>>>>>>>> acceptable "identities" within the settings you explored, such
> >> that
> >>>>>>>>>> identities of independence and finding out are sustainable
> within
> >>>>>> these
> >>>>>>>>>> settings, possibly representing a necessary fudge to deal with
> the
> >>>>>>>>>> requirements placed upon the institutions.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Best,
> >>>>>>>>>> Huw
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On 12 November 2016 at 20:30, Margaret A Eisenhart <
> >>>>>>>>>> margaret.eisenhart@colorado.edu> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Hello Everyone,
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Carrie and I are newcomers to this list, and we thank you for
> the
> >>>>>>>>>>> opportunity to engage with you about our article, “Hollowed
> Out.”
> >>>>>> We
> >>>>>>>>> also
> >>>>>>>>>>> hope for your patience as we learn to participate in the stream
> >> of
> >>>>>>>>>>> thinking here!
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Given the comments so far, we are intrigued by others’ ideas
> >> about
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>> link between our theory and our data. On this topic, we would
> >>>>> like
> >>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>>> make clear that we did not intend to suggest that the students
> >>>>> were
> >>>>>>>>> making
> >>>>>>>>>>> sense of their lives in the same way that we interpreted them
> >>>>>> through
> >>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>> lens of our theory. Our claim is that opportunities and figured
> >>>>>> worlds
> >>>>>>>>> are
> >>>>>>>>>>> resources for identity and that the students' words to us
> >>>>> reflected
> >>>>>>>>>>> perspectives consistent with neoliberalism, with some pretty
> >>>>> serious
> >>>>>>>>>>> implications. Like Phillip White, we are interested in what
> >>>>> theories
> >>>>>>>>>>> others would use to explain the data we presented.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Like Mike Cole, we are also intrigued by the prospect of
> >>>>> “exemplars”
> >>>>>>> we
> >>>>>>>>>>> might turn to.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> We look forward to hearing your thoughts.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Margaret Eisenhart
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On 11/11/16, 11:35 AM, "lpscholar2@gmail.com" <
> >>>>> lpscholar2@gmail.com
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> A resumption in exploring the meaning and sense (preferably
> sens
> >>>>> as
> >>>>>>>>> this
> >>>>>>>>>>>> term draws attention to movement and direction within meaning
> >> and
> >>>>>>>>> sense)
> >>>>>>>>>>>> of this month’s article.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> The paper begins with the title and the image of
> (hollowed-out)
> >>>>>>> meaning
> >>>>>>>>>>>> and sense that is impoverished and holds few resources for
> >>>>>>> developing a
> >>>>>>>>>>>> deeper sens of identity.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> The article concludes with the implication that the work of
> >>>>> social
> >>>>>>>>>>>> justice within educational institutions is not about improving
> >>>>>>>>>>>> educational outcome in neoliberal terms; the implications of
> the
> >>>>>>> study
> >>>>>>>>>>>> are about *reorganizing* the identities – particulary
> >>>>>>>>>>>> identities-with-standind that young people are *exposed* to,
> can
> >>>>>>>>>>>> articulate, and can act on (in school and beyond).
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I would say this is taking an ethical stand?.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I will now turn to page 189 and the section
> >> (identity-in-context)
> >>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>>>> amplify the notion of (cultural imaginary) and (figured
> worlds).
> >>>>>>>>>>>> This imaginary being the site or location of
> history-in-person.
> >>>>>> That
> >>>>>>> is
> >>>>>>>>>>>> identity is a form of legacy (or *text*) ABOUT the kind of
> >> person
> >>>>>> one
> >>>>>>>>> is
> >>>>>>>>>>>> or has become in responding to (external) circumstances.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> These external circumstances are EXPERIENCED primarily in the
> >>>>>>>>>>>> organization of local practices and cultural imaginaries
> >> (figured
> >>>>>>>>> worlds)
> >>>>>>>>>>>> that circulate and *give meaning* (and sens) to local
> practices
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Figured worlds are interpreted following Holland as socially
> and
> >>>>>>>>>>>> culturally *realms of interpretation* and certain players are
> >>>>>>>>> recognized
> >>>>>>>>>>>> as (exemplars).
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> As such cultural, social, historical, dialogical psychological
> >>>>>>>>>>>> (imaginaries) are handmaidens of the imaginal *giving meaning*
> >> to
> >>>>>>>>> *what*
> >>>>>>>>>>>> goes on in the directions we take together.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Two key terms i highlight are (exemplars) and (direction) we
> >>>>> take.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> The realm of the ethical turn
> >>>>>>>>>>>> What are the markers and signposts emerging in the deeper
> >> ethical
> >>>>>>> turn
> >>>>>>>>>>>> that offers more than a hollowed-out answer.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Are there any *ghost* stories of exemplars we can turn to as
> >> well
> >>>>>> as
> >>>>>>>>>>>> living exemplars? By ghosts i mean ancestors who continue as
> >>>>>> beacons
> >>>>>>> of
> >>>>>>>>>>>> hope exemplifying *who* we are.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> My way into exploring the impoverished narratives of the
> >>>>> neoliberal
> >>>>>>>>>>>> imaginary and reawakening exemplary ancestors or ghosts from
> >>>>> their
> >>>>>>>>>>>> slumber to help guide us through these multiple imaginaries
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my Windows 10 phone
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> From: mike cole
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: November 9, 2016 3:04 PM
> >>>>>>>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion
> >>>>> Re-started
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Alfredo--
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> for any who missed the initial article sent out, you might
> send
> >>>>>> them
> >>>>>>>>>>>> here:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> http://lchc.ucsd.edu/mca/
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I am meeting shortly with Bruce. A list of improvements to web
> >>>>> site
> >>>>>>>>>>>> welcome, although not clear how long they will take to
> >> implement.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> mike
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 2:38 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil <
> >>>>>>>>> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear all,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> last week I announced MCA's 3rd Issue article for discussion:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> "Hollowed Out: Meaning and Authoring of High School Math and
> >>>>>> Science
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Identities in the Context of Neoliberal Reform," by Margaret
> >>>>>>> Eisenhart
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Carrie Allen.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> The article is open access and will continue to be so during
> >> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> discussion time at this link.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks to everyone who begun the discussion early after I
> >> shared
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> link
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> last week, and sorry that we sort of brought the discussion
> to
> >> a
> >>>>>>> halt
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> until
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> the authors were ready to discuss. I have now sent Margaret
> and
> >>>>>>> Carrie
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> posts that were produced then so that they could catch up,
> but
> >> I
> >>>>>>> also
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> invited them to feel free to move on an introduce themselves
> as
> >>>>>> soon
> >>>>>>>>> as
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> they ??wanted.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> It is not without some doubts that one introduces a
> discussion
> >>>>> of
> >>>>>> an
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> article in a moment that some US media have called as "An
> >>>>> American
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Tragedy"
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> and other international editorials are describing as "a dark
> >> day
> >>>>>> for
> >>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> world." But I believe that the paper may indeed offer some
> >>>>> grounds
> >>>>>>> for
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> discuss important issues that are at stake in everyone's home
> >>>>> now,
> >>>>>>> as
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Mike
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> recently describes in a touching post on the "local state of
> >>>>> mind"
> >>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> that
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> have to do with identity and its connection to a neoliberal
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> organisation of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> the economy. It is not difficult to link neoliberalism to
> >>>>> Trump's
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> phenomenon and how it pervades very intimate aspects of
> >> everyday
> >>>>>>> life.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> If this was not enough, I think the authors' background on
> >>>>> women's
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> scholar
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> and professional careers in science is totally relevant to
> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> discussions
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> on gendered discourse we've been having. Now without halts, I
> >>>>> hope
> >>>>>>>>> this
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> thread gives joys and wisdom to all.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Alfredo
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ________________________________________
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
> >>>>>> <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
> >>>>>>>>> edu>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: 02 November 2016 01:48
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Mike and everyone! I am sure Margaret (and many of
> those
> >>>>>>> still
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> reading) will be happy to be able to catch up when she joins
> us
> >>>>>> next
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> week!
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Alfredo
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ________________________________________
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
> >>>>>> <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
> >>>>>>>>> edu>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: 02 November 2016 01:32
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Gentlemen -- I believe Fernando told us that Margaret would
> be
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> able to join this discussion next week. Just a quick glance
> at
> >>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> discussion so far indicates that there is a lot there to wade
> >>>>> into
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> before she has had a word.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I am only part way through the article, expecting to have
> until
> >>>>>> next
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> week
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> to think about it.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> May I suggest your forbearance while this slow-poke tries to
> >>>>> catch
> >>>>>>> up!
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> mike
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 3:38 PM, White, Phillip
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> David & Larry, everyone else ...
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> by way of introduction, Margaret and Carrie point out that
> the
> >>>>>> data
> >>>>>>>>> in
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> this paper emerged through a three year study - which was
> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> processes
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> how students of color, interested in STEM, responded to the
> >>>>>>>>> externally
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> imposed neoliberal requirements. they framed their study
> using
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> theories
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> social practices on how identity developed in context.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> David, you reject the theories. or so i understand your
> >>>>>> position.
> >>>>>>> as
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> you
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> write: It's that the theory
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> contradicts my own personal theories.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> are you also rejecting the data as well? it seems as if you
> >>>>> are
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> suggesting this when you write: The authors find this point
> >> (in
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> case
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lorena) somewhere between the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> beginning of the tenth and the end of the eleventh grade,
> but
> >> I
> >>>>>>> think
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> that's just because it's where they are looking.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> you reject the narrative of Lorena on the grounds that it
> >> could
> >>>>>> be
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> traced
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> back to infancy.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> do you also reject the identical narrative found in the
> adult
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> practitioners within the context of the high schools? that
> >>>>> this
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> narrative
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> is not one of a contemporary neoliberal practice but rather
> >>>>> could
> >>>>>>> be
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> traced
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> back to, say, the mid 1600's new england colonies, in
> >>>>> particular
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> massachusettes, where the practices of public american
> >>>>> education
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> began?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to explain the data that emerged from the Eisenhart/Allen
> >>>>> study,
> >>>>>>> what
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> theories would you have used?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> phillip
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ________________________________
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 7:03 AM
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: David Kellogg; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Margaret and Carrie,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for this wonderful paper that explains the shallow
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *hollowed-out* way of forming identity as a form of meaning
> >> and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> sense. I
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> will add the French word *sens* which always includes
> >>>>> *direction*
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> within
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> meaning and sense.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> David, your response that what our theory makes sens of
> >> depends
> >>>>>> on
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> where
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> we are looking makes sens to me.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> You put in question the moment when the interpersonal (you
> and
> >>>>>> me)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> way of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> authoring sens *shifts* or turns to cultural and historical
> >>>>> ways
> >>>>>> of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> being
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> immersed in sens. The article refers to the
> >>>>>> *historical-in-person*.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> My further comment, where I am looking) is in the
> description
> >>>>> of
> >>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> sociocultural as a response to *externally changing
> >>>>>> circumstances*
> >>>>>>>>> as
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> process of *learning as becoming* (see page 190).
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The article says:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> This process is what Lave and Wenger (1991) and other
> >>>>>> Sociocultural
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> researchers have referred to as *learning as becoming,* that
> >>>>> is,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> learning
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> that occurs as one becomes a certain kind of person in a
> >>>>>> particular
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> context. Identities conceived in this way are not stable or
> >>>>>> fixed.
> >>>>>>>>> As
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *external circumstances* affecting a person change, so too
> may
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> identities that are produced *in response*. (Holland &
> >> Skinner,
> >>>>>>>>> 1997).
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> In this version of *history-in-person* the identity
> processes
> >>>>>> that
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> start
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the process moving in a neoliberal *direction* are
> *external*
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> circumstances. I am not questioning this version of the
> >>>>>> importance
> >>>>>>> of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> external but do question if looking primarily or
> primordially
> >>>>> to
> >>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> external circumstances as central if we are not leaving a
> gap
> >>>>> in
> >>>>>>> our
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> notions of *sens*.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> If by looking or highlighting or illuminating the *external*
> >>>>> and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> highly
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> visible acts of the actual we are leaving a gap in
> actual*ity.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> A gap in *sens*.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> To be continued by others...
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my Windows 10 phone
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: David Kellogg
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: October 31, 2016 2:15 PM
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I was turning Mike's request--for a short explanation of the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Halliday/Vygotsky interface--over in my mind for a few days,
> >>>>>> unsure
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> where
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to start. I usually decide these difficult "where to start"
> >>>>>>> questions
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> in
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the easiest possible way, with whatever I happen to be
> working
> >>>>>> on.
> >>>>>>> In
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> this
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> case it's the origins of language in a one year old, a
> moment
> >>>>>> which
> >>>>>>>>> is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> almost as mysterious to me as the origins of life or the Big
> >>>>>> Bang.
> >>>>>>>>> But
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> perhaps for that very reason it's not a good place to start
> >>>>> (the
> >>>>>>> Big
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Bang
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> always seemed to me to jump the gun a bit, not to mention
> the
> >>>>>>> origins
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> life).
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let me start with the "Hollowed Out" paper Alfredo just
> >>>>>>> thoughtfully
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> sent
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> around instead. My first impression is that this paper
> leaves
> >> a
> >>>>>>>>> really
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> big
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> gap between the data and the conclusions, and that this gap
> is
> >>>>>>>>> largely
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> filled by theory. Here are some examples of what I mean:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> a) "Whereas 'subject position' is given by society,
> >>>>> 'identity'
> >>>>>>> is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> self-authored, although it must be recognized by others to
> be
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> sustained."
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (p. 189)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> b) "It is notable that this construction of a good student,
> >>>>>> though
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> familiar, does not make any reference to personal interest,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> excitement,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> or
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> engagement in the topics or content-related activities."
> (193)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> c) "When students' statements such as 'I get it', 'I'm
> >>>>>> confident',
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 'I'm
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> good at this', and 'I can pull this off' are interpreted in
> >>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> context
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the figured world of math or science at the two schools,
> their
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> statements
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> index more than a grade. They reference a meaning system for
> >>>>>> being
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> good
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> in
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> math or science that includes the actor identity
> >>>>> characteristics
> >>>>>> of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> being
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> able to grasp the subject matter easily, do the work
> quickly,
> >>>>> do
> >>>>>> it
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> without
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> help from others, do it faster than others, and get an A."
> >>>>> (193)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> In each case, we are told to believe in a theory: "given by
> >>>>>>> society",
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "self-authored", "does not make any reference", "the context
> >> of
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> figured
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> world". It's not just that in each case the theory seems to
> go
> >>>>>>>>> against
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> data (although it certainly does in places, such as Lowena's
> >>>>>> views
> >>>>>>> as
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> a
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> tenth grader). I can always live with a theory that
> >> contradicts
> >>>>>> my
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> data:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> that's what being a rationalist is all about. It's that the
> >>>>>> theory
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> contradicts my own personal theories.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't believe that identity is self authored, and I also
> >>>>> don't
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> believe
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> that subject position is given by society as a whole, I
> think
> >>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>> word
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "good" does include personal interest, excitement, and
> >>>>> engagement
> >>>>>>> as
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> much
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> as it includes being able to grasp the subject matter
> easily,
> >>>>> do
> >>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> work
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> quickly, do it without help from others, do it faster than
> >>>>> others
> >>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> get
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> an A. To me anyway, the key word in the data given in c) is
> >>>>>>> actually
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> "I"
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and not "it" or "this": the students think they are talking
> >>>>>> about,
> >>>>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> therefore probably are actually talking about, a relation
> >>>>> between
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> their
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> inner states and the activity at hand or between the
> activity
> >>>>> at
> >>>>>>>>> hand
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the result they get; they are not invoking the figured world
> >> of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> neoliberal
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> results and prospects.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> But never mind my own theories. Any gap is, after all, a
> good
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> opportunity
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> for theory building. The authors are raising a key issue in
> >>>>> both
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Vygotsky
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Halliday: when does an interpersonal relation become a
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> historico-cultural one? That is, when does that 'me" and
> "you"
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> relationship
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> in which I really do have the power to author my identity (I
> >>>>> can
> >>>>>>> make
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> up
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> any name I want and, within limits, invent my own history,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> particularly
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> if
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am a backpacker) give way to a job, an address, a number
> and
> >>>>> a
> >>>>>>>>> class
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> over
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> which I have very little power at all? When does the
> >>>>>> interpersonal
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> somehow
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> become an alien ideational "identity" that confronts me
> like a
> >>>>>>>>> strange
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ghost when I look in the mirror?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The authors find this point (in the case of Lorena)
> somewhere
> >>>>>>> between
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> beginning of the tenth and the end of the eleventh grade,
> but
> >> I
> >>>>>>> think
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> that's just because it's where they are looking. We can
> >>>>> probably
> >>>>>>> find
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> roots of this distinction (between the interpersonal and the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> historico-cultural) as far back as we like, right back to
> >>>>>>> (Vygotsky)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> moment when the child gives up the "self-authored" language
> at
> >>>>>> one
> >>>>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> takes on the language recognized by others and (Halliday)
> the
> >>>>>>> moment
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> when
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the child distinguishes between Attributive identifying
> >> clauses
> >>>>>>> ("I'm
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> confident", "I'm good at this"), material processes ("I can
> >>>>> pull
> >>>>>>> this
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> off")
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and mental ones ("I get it").
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (To be continued...but not necessarily by me!)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> David Kellogg
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Macquarie University
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear xmca'ers,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am excited to announce the next article for discussion,
> >>>>> which
> >>>>>> is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> now
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> available open access at the T&F MCA pages<
> >>>>>> http://www.tandfonline
> >>>>>>> .
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039.2016.1188962>.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After a really interesting discussion on Zaza's colourful
> >>>>> paper
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> (which
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> still goes on developed into a discussion on micro- and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ontogenesis),
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> we
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will from next week be looking at an article by Margaret
> >>>>>> Eisenhart
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Carrie Allen from the special issue on "Reimagining Science
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Education
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> in
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Neoliberal Global Context". I think the article, as the
> >>>>>> whole
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> issue,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> offers a very neat example of research trying to tie
> together
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cultural/economical? and developmental aspects (of identity
> >> in
> >>>>>>> this
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> case).
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Margaret has kindly accepted to join the discussion ?after
> US
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> elections
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (which will surely keep the attention of many of us busy).
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Meanwhile, I
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> share the link<http://www.tandfonline.
> >>>>>>> com/doi/full/10.1080/10749039
> >>>>>>>>>>> .
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2016.1188962> to the article (see above), and also attach
> it
> >>>>> as
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> PDF.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ??Good read!
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Alfredo
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Confronting the Home Field Disadvantage.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 285774 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20161202/bac1f4ff/attachment.pdf
More information about the xmca-l
mailing list