Hi, Ana, Pedro, and other friends of the CH-SIG,
I like the idea of setting guidelines. Tension is good for development.
What makes CHAT-work significant? Do you think we should not limit the award
to graduate students?
Do you have any ideas for a theme for 2003?
Judy for BPJC
>>>>>>>>>
Anyway, the idea of an award sounds good and I quite agree with Pedro:
recognize a novel research, an extension of the activity theory, something
seminal and significant. But since a lot of people qualify - we should
really have to set some guidelines, some criteria for evaluation. This will
not be easy AND it potentially may create tension among the members of the
SIG.
What do you think? (such a useful small question)
Ana
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 08 2002 - 12:53:46 PDT