> I am not sure what to think. On the one hand, I greatly admire Dewey and
> know he was read by LSV, and the quotation is thought provoking. On the
> second hand, I really mourn the face that I do not have the capacity to
> follow over long periods of time the kids I work with. Part of the problem
> is technical/ethical (Ashcroft and W may solve that problem-- but not for
> me-- I'll be on the inside of the fence). But part is practical. I spend
> outrageous amounts of time in a combination of environmental desigh and
> documentation (aka re-search). Followup/longitudinal study over decades
> was not something the importance of which I understood when I started (and
> got money) and now is something for which there is a very specifiable and
> fascinating convergence of interests to extinguish ( no money, but feel
free!).
There is a fascinating series on the BBC which started way back in the early
60s following a group of children as they went through their lives returning
to make a new programme every seven years or so. They have managed to keep
most of the group involved until they are now in their 40s (the one
exception went on to become a judge!). They certainly have the resources to
do longitudinal research....
Bruce
> My guess? If some humans could live 10,000 years and be supported to
pursue
> the same objects of inquiry in dialogue with heterorchronous others, we
> might be able to make progress.
>
> Meanwhile, hermit crab-like, I rejoice that I was found crawling out of
> my shell and returned to the sea by sympathetic shell hunters.
> mike
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jan 01 2003 - 01:00:08 PST