[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [xmca] Mary Had a Little Lamb: the concept categories
David,
I was referring not the line from 16.2 to 65.5, which is correctly placed, but the line that extends from 81.3 to the upper-right corner. That should run from 79.5, I think. The fault isn't Minick's, for the diagram is the same in the Spanish translation.
I just reread the section (5) where LV is comparing learning scientific concepts with learning a second language. After identifying in detail three-plus considerations for exploring the analogy he warns that it should not be extended too far. He argues that with a new language one doesn't learn a "new system of meanings", but when learning a scientific concept one does. I would expect that you would disagree with this, and it seems to me that as I'm learning Spanish (painfully slowly) a new system of meanings is indeed becoming evident.
I suppose that what he's emphasizing is that with EC there is no *system*, while with SC there is (OK, "AC", i.e. academic concepts if you prefer - but that's precisely because you see it as a way of talking, no?). But one could argue that with one's native language there is really no true "system" of meaning either. But now I'm off into the depths of #6 to see how he defines a system.
Martin
On Apr 5, 2010, at 7:04 PM, David Kellogg wrote:
> If you look carefully at the EC "although" line that connects 16.2 and 65.5, and compare it to the lines in the key you will see that it is a real and not a hypothetical line.
>
> The Minick diagramme is not really WRONG, Martin. It's just confusing. There are just too many different kinds of lines to show (prolongation vs. continuation, real vs. hypothetical, because vs. although, EC vs. AC) and they are too similar.
>
> Meccaci is the only edition I have with a diagramme which is both readable and correct. The 2005 Russian edition (Labirint) and the French edition are correct, but unreadable. E viva il maestro, Luciano Meccaci!
>
> Now, my question is really about what CAUSES the parallelogram of development. Vygotsky argues that it is the pull of the AC on the EC, and I am very ready to believe him. But how can we prove it?
>
> How can we POSSIBLY distinguish the very real parallelogram of development from a simple ceiling effect in the increase of science concepts caused by the inability of the children to get beyond empty verbalism?
>
> One of my grads is working on a (microgenetic rather than ontogenetic) replication study right now, actually. For the current lesson we've got the following:
>
> EVERYDAY CONCEPT:
> Kevin's Father: Excuse me, ma'am. Where is York Street?
> Korean Old Lady: Go straight and turn right.
>
> ACADEMIC CONCEPT:
> Teacher: Now, there is no nice old Korean grandma around, so he calls me on his cell phone. I have only this map (shows a Cartesian grid map of Manhattan) and a GPS which shows that he's here in Times Square. But the York Street Korean restaurant is way over HERE (points to a spot a dozen blocks away). What do I say?
>
> Well, it turns out that the answer to this question involves not only NUMBERS (e.g. "go straight five blocks" instead of just "go straight") but also non-relative direction words (e.g. "north", "south", "east", and "west" instead of "left" and "right").
>
> As a result the distal directions are significantly longer in words per line. We think that precisely this kind of pressure on grammatical processing (particularly with written language) would eventually lead to hypotaxis (i.e. "because" and "although" in preferance to "so" and "but"), a characteristic more typical of academic than of everyday language.
>
> On the other hand, the level of successful completion in the distal condition (arguably, an AC condition) is significantly LOWER than that in EC. Not too surprising, given that we are looking at microgenesis and not ontogenesis, and given the lack of cramming given the kids. But still it's the opposite of what Vygotsky found.
>
> David Kellogg
> Seoul National University of Education
>
>
> --- On Mon, 4/5/10, Martin Packer <packer@duq.edu> wrote:
>
>
> From: Martin Packer <packer@duq.edu>
> Subject: Re: [xmca] Mary Had a Little Lamb: the concept categories
> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> Date: Monday, April 5, 2010, 3:04 PM
>
>
> David,
>
> That helps, thank you. Part of my confusion was due to the fact that the figure in this chapter (it's on page 214 of the Minick translation) is evidently misdrawn. As shown, "hypothetical" extensions are drawn back in time for both SC and EC for "Because" questions (the upper lines), but the hypothetical extensions drawn *forward* in time (the lower lines) are of EC for "Because" and of SC for "Although." What should have been shown are the extensions forward of SC and EC for "Although," because if this were done, we would have a parallelogram for each question.
>
> Martin
> On Apr 4, 2010, at 9:29 PM, David Kellogg wrote:
>
>> Martin:
>>
>> Vygotsky reasons that "although" is a late developing concept compared to "because" in both its EC and SC forms. This makes sense to me; it is much more difficult than "because", since it contains the dialectical idea of two things that are linked but distinct and in some sense opposed and contradictory, not simply the idea that they are linked but distinct and one follows causally from the other. It's hard to get your head around that one.
>>
>> So Vygotsky thinks, we are basically looking at the first part of the parallelogram of development, the part where (Vygotsky estimates) "because" also showed divergent development between the fast rising academic concept and the much slower rising everyday concept.
>>
>> Eventually, Vygotsky reasons, we will see a ceiling effect on the academic concept and the everday concept will join it. The picture he draws to show this includes some purely speculative data which he probably intended to gather but never did. I think he went ahead and published because of nature's deadline.
>>
>> There ARE complete parallelograms of development visible in materials that are gathered by subsequent researchers, including stuff from researchers who are not actually very sympathetic to Vygotsky, such as Karmiloff-Smith (see "Beyond Modularity", p.19, where there is a very clear parallelogram of development in her depiction of "behavioral change" vs. "representational change").
>>
>> So...how does he reconcile the claims with the data? Optimism, as Jay would say!
>>
>> David Kellogg
>> Seoulnational University of Education
>>
>> --- On Sun, 4/4/10, Martin Packer <packer@duq.edu> wrote:
>>
>>
>> From: Martin Packer <packer@duq.edu>
>> Subject: Re: [xmca] Mary Had a Little Lamb: the concept categories
>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
>> Date: Sunday, April 4, 2010, 5:31 PM
>>
>>
>> A question on chapter 6 of R&L. Vygotsky provides some data on the first few pages, which I plotted (attached) and found that I had reproduced his own diagram later in the chapter. This is from the study asking children to complete sentences with 'because' or 'although,' using either everyday concepts (EC) or scientific concepts (SC). LSV interprets the data as showing that responses employing SCs are always at a higher level, but that with time they 'pull up' the ECs. The first figure does seem to show this. It shows results from asking the children "Because..." qustions. At 2nd grade the SC results are higher than the EC results, while at 4th grade although the responses using SC are scored even higher, those using EC have caught up. But in the second diagram, showing data from "Although..." questions, the gap between SC and EC grows over time/age/grade. The difference between SC and EC is greater at 4th grade than at 2nd grade. This seems to run
>> counter to LSV's statements. Any suggestions about how to reconcile the claims with the data?
>>
>> Martin
>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>> -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> xmca mailing list
>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> xmca mailing list
>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
> _______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca