[Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
HENRY SHONERD
hshonerd@gmail.com
Sun Nov 27 13:16:21 PST 2016
Mike,
For Clive’s “Civilization” try:
https://archive.org/stream/civilizationessa00bell#page/152/mode/2up <https://archive.org/stream/civilizationessa00bell#page/152/mode/2up>
I got it by signing up for free on an on-line library and can keep the article for 15 days.
H
> On Nov 27, 2016, at 12:47 PM, mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu> wrote:
> The subsequent trail of message showed that it is rarely too late to pick
> up a thread of the conversation and have sometime interesting and
> informative come of it, Huw.
>
> In reading through the string of messages on this topic including the
> earlier part of thread, I come away reinforced by the idea that the
> problems associated with current STEM-accountability regimes are a
> continuation and intensification of trends in education with a very long
> history.
>
> As Phillip got us to note, JS Mill made similar points regarding education
> (in his case of the British elites/men, but some key ideas seem
> generalizable). Still, something about the past couple of decades, perhaps
> associated with the intensification and globalization of capitalist modes
> of production, seems qualitatively more draconian. And all indications are
> that matters are in the process of worsening, not improving.
>
> I was hoping that participants could come up with counter-examples: schools
> where routinely the teaching of STEM subjects was integrated into a general
> curriculum and where successful, more inclusive participation in STEM
> subjects could result.
> In this I was disappointed.
>
> Ed provided Summerhill and a variety of small, elite, school situations. We
> did not hear from anyone associated with the dialogical education advocates
> who once participated in such discussions. I think I offered up the school
> that is the subject of a book by Barbara Rogoff and colleagues (From
> Wikipedia - *Learning Together: Children and Adults in a School Community
> [Oxford press, 2002]*, co-authored with teachers Carolyn Turkanis and
> Leslee Bartlett, profiled Salt Lake City's "Open Classroom," a
> parent-cooperative education program that is now a K-8 charter school.
>
> Over the US Thanksgiving holiday, reading your various thoughts and
> chatting with my grandchildren, I came across a case which seemed to fit
> Margaret and Carrie's
> notions of expanded goals for stem education, and education in general. My
> two grandchildren are going/went to a very elite school, the Lab School at
> the U of C Chicago. At dinner they started to talk about school and
> favorite teachers. Both identified one teacher who they thought was
> exceptional and for the same reason.
> "He respects kids. He always listens to them and takes them seriously."
>
> I am sure there are other fine teachers at the school, which is a pressure
> cooker of academic achievement and the attainment of yet more privilege.
> But institutionalized universal education, as Mills laments in his elitest
> and individualistic way (he is focused on Oxbridge), does not appear
> organized to make such teachers and such classrooms ubiquitous. Its
> pragmatic social reproduction functions focused on economics and state
> power, associated with its sorting function, appear to mitigate strong
> against any significant re-mediation. So my example serves mostly as an
> exception that proves the rule, perhaps.
>
> I keep thinking about Lorena, who as Margaret and Carrie show us, came* to
> believe that she had become a bad person—disobedient and disrespectful—in
> the eyes of her teacher. *
>
> Very painful stuff. STEM reform as an iatrogenic disease.
>
> Question for those who know: How are reforms based on the sorts of
> principles espoused by Davydov, Elkonin, and other cultural-historical
> pedagogs doing in Russia these days? My impression is that they struggle
> for recognition and acceptance. But I could easily be wrong.
>
> mike
>
> PS- Huw-- I have not read Clive's *Civilization *and it does not appear
> rapidly obtainable so could not appreciate your reference to Mill and
> Clive. Results of an American public school education.
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 6:01 PM, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> The marketable "skill" is "good behaviour in conjunction with some
>> operational knowledge". Even in technology-oriented companies, creativity
>> and new knowledge are often unwelcome intruders into a social-political
>> situation (see for example Allen's 1977 text, Managing the Flow of
>> Technology). There are many vested interests into the status-quo.
>> Creativity in whatever sport, is usually against the grain. And then, of
>> course, we have all these qualifications which repel creativity through
>> strict enforcement of stupid behaviour.
>>
>> Not sure whether I'm waking up a closing thread here, so my thanks to
>> Margaret for discussing the paper.
>>
>> Best,
>> Huw
>>
>> On 20 November 2016 at 03:34, David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Sorry, I've lost the plot. That is, I don't see the connection between
>> the
>>> kind of educational neoliberalism that is being discussed in the article
>>> (that which is based on measurable results, on academic tracking, on
>>> promising goodies in return for grades and grades in return for
>> schoolwork)
>>> and the kind of political and economic neoliberalism that is being
>>> discussed by Cornel. It seems to me that the policies that Margaret and
>>> Carrie are discussing in this paper were not (politically) liberal, nor
>>> were they new: they were taken over by Arne Duncan from the Bush
>>> administration, and the Bush administration got them, via Clinton, from
>>> good old fashioned "Back to Basics" backlash in the UK. So the roots are
>>> Toryism and not liberalism.
>>>
>>> I suppose you can argue that there is some kind of implicit analogy
>> between
>>> education and neoliberal economics: school is supposed to be some kind of
>>> neoliberal "level playing field" where children compete like businessmen,
>>> grades are "cultural capital", classes are investment opportunities,
>>> assessment portfolios are investment portfolios, etc. This analogy is
>>> little more than a way of whipping up interest among principals,
>> teachers,
>>> and even students (and as such I am not sure I am against it, since I
>> don't
>>> see anything wrong with working class kids taking an interest in the
>>> getting of goodies through study). It's certainly not a good description
>> of
>>> what is happening in schools: These businessmen produce no commodities,
>> the
>>> grades are neither exchangeable or consumable; there is no such thing as
>>> credit or interest in this economy, and assets evaporate upon graduation
>>> instead of maturing.
>>>
>>> I think that the word "reform" is actually more important in Margaret and
>>> Carrie's title than "neoliberal": a "reform" is usually, on the lips of
>>> government bureaucracy, a euphemism for backlash, and the policies being
>>> described are part of a more general ideological backlash against
>> Deweyism
>>> and progressive education: an anti-liberal reaction rather than a
>>> neo-liberal reform. "Neoliberalism", taken literally, would imply that
>> the
>>> schools really are in the marketable skills business, and I don't see
>> much
>>> evidence for that in the study. Am I missing something?
>>>
>>> David Kellogg
>>> Macquarie University
>>>
>>> On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 1:24 AM, <lpscholar2@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Margaret, Carrie, Phillip, Henry, Cornell,
>>>>
>>>> A central and key theme of this month’s article is neoliberalism in all
>>>> its guises.
>>>> In my imaginary response i am addressing the authors of the paper and
>>>> Cornell who addresses neoliberalism, and Phillip, who shared Cornell’s
>>>> article and Henry who heard Cornell offer a way to mediate our crises.
>>>> The paper is about teaching STEM and the neoliberal agenda that ignores
>>>> the plight of those who suffer.
>>>> Cornell says the answer is (democratic soulcraft). At the heart of this
>>>> soulcraft is truth telling of the reality of suffering.
>>>>
>>>> In order to constitute or institute a (new) order a more pro/gressive
>>>> order it seems suffering must be the key factor.
>>>>
>>>> The notion of ivory towers and their responses to suffering seems
>>> central.
>>>> I also want to explore the theme of (play) in relation to suffering.
>>>>
>>>> One exemplar:
>>>> There is a Buddhist who organizes gatherings where food is prepared and
>>>> presented at the gatherings (for the homeless). Musical instruments are
>>>> also brought and dancing proceeds.
>>>> Everyone participates and this is key: You cannot tell who are the
>>>> homeless and who are the people who prepared the food. They are
>> sharing a
>>>> common (new) experience that is profoundly moving and creates a sense
>> of
>>>> well-being.
>>>> This Buddhist practise is exemplary as a response to our current
>>>> contemporary historical moment. It is truth telling and democratic
>>>> soulcraft and PLAY. (each in the other).
>>>> It is one way of answering Margaret, Carrie, Cornell, Phillip, and
>> Henry.
>>>> This Buddhist act or practice is (crafting) an answer that speaks to
>>>> suffering.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my Windows 10 phone
>>>>
>>>> From: HENRY SHONERD
>>>> Sent: November 18, 2016 7:15 PM
>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
>>>>
>>>> Thank you, Phillip.
>>>> "For us in these times, to even have hope is too abstract, too
>> detached,
>>>> too spectatorial. Instead we must be a hope, a participant and a force
>>> for
>>>> good as we face this catastrophe.”
>>>> That’s my favorite part.
>>>> Henry
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Nov 18, 2016, at 3:52 PM, White, Phillip <
>>> Phillip.White@ucdenver.edu>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> well, this is what Cornel West has to say:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/
>>>> american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election
>>>>>
>>>>> [https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/aae8946d80dac457aa8b6af3f9a9fd
>>>> 5acc6b4acb/0_662_5150_3090/master/5150.jpg?w=1200&h=140&
>>>> q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=crop&bm=normal&ba=bottom%2Cleft&blend64=
>>>> aHR0cHM6Ly91cGxvYWRzLmd1aW0uY28udWsvMjAxNi8wNS8yNS9vdmVybGF5
>>>> LWxvZ28tMTIwMC05MF9vcHQucG5n&s=4cbd18b4943818f70304ff2cfdc3da2d]<
>>>> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/
>>>> american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election>
>>>>>
>>>>> Goodbye, American neoliberalism. A new era is here | Cornel West<
>>>> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/17/
>>>> american-neoliberalism-cornel-west-2016-election>
>>>>> www.theguardian.com
>>>>> Trump’s election was enabled by the policies that overlooked the
>> plight
>>>> of our most vulnerable citizens. We gird ourselves for a frightening
>>> future
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> phillip
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.
>> edu
>>>>
>>>> on behalf of lpscholar2@gmail.com <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
>>>>> Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 8:16:01 PM
>>>>> To: Edward Wall; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: MCA Issue 3 article for discussion Re-started
>>>>>
>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
More information about the xmca-l
mailing list