[Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started

[mike cole]

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
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>