RE: [xmca] spontaneous concepts indeed

["David H Kirshner" <dkirsh@lsu.edu>]

Jay,

Credit, where credit is due, I filched "conceptual splatter" from a 1990 Arithmetic Teacher paper by George Stanic, Jack Easley et al. title "Dialogue and conceptual splatter in mathematics classes."

I'm acquainted with your notion of "thematic nexus" owing to my having accepted for publication yesterday (as guest editor) a JRME paper that documents a thematic nexus in a mathematics class. Quite a provocative notion of what can make classroom discourse powerful for students' conceptual development.

So what makes a thematic nexus potentially effective as a support for learning? 

>From your response, I think we parse the cognitive realm a bit differently, as reflected in your example of first language learning of grammar as analogous to learning science concepts through the "conceptual splatter" of classroom dialogue. Admittedly, they're both inductive processes. But for me, the kind of ground-up subcognitive connectivity underlying grammar in particular, and skills in general, is different from conceptual learning that has to include some kind of fit or tie-in with existing conceptual structures. I see skills as building up incrementally from a kind of over-exposure to the data of usage. Now admittedly, conceptual frames can facilitate the learning of skills by influencing our perceptual schemes with respect to the data of usage. However, for me conceptual development involves a transformation of conceptual structures--a different kind of event. 

Educationally, the learning of concepts through conceptual splatter can occur through the unmediated conceptual splatter of classroom dialogue. But I see this as requiring a high degree of metacognitive awareness on the part of the student. In contrast everyone learns grammar (and skills in general), though perhaps at different rates.

David

-----Original Message-----
From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Jay Lemke
Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2011 3:03 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: Re: [xmca] spontaneous concepts indeed

David,

I like your term "conceptual splatter"! That's just what a lot of classroom dialogue looks like, and peer project-oriented dialogue, too, when examined for its "conceptual" content.

One of my basic research questions for many years was: How can students process all this "splatter" into coherent systems of scientific concepts and their meaning relations?

I think this remains unanswered at the level of information processing, and I don't think anyone has taught a computer to do it. However brains and people-in-interaction do it, it's quite an achievement. 

One of the things I noticed was that periodically in reasonably expert teaching, the discussion manages to create what I called a "nexus": a short passage or period of dialogue/talk, where all the different "concepts" (or in my terms, thematic items and relations) get expressed verbally, together and in relation to one another. The rest of the time, one you get are bits and pieces, with partial connections, rather like a jigsaw puzzle. It's not clear whether student recognize the "nexus" moments as the keys to assembling the information that is otherwise distributed somewhat opportunistically across time and circumstances. Some good teachers do highlight these moments, and even write "summaries" or draw diagrams to give them salience and durability. 

I think the nexus helps, but it's not the whole story. We do keep juggling the pieces looking for a good fit. But of course there are non-canonical ways of fitting pieces together as well, that work partially or temporarily, or by ignoring a few mis-fits. Just as we do when we happen to be on the right track for the canonical assemblage. There are some recent developments in algorithmic intelligence research that focus on our judgments of probability of hypotheses relative to continuously incoming evidence (Bayesian algorithms). And some work on inferring the brain's own wetware "algorithms" for doing this. 

This is the sort of complexity that led Chomsky to conclude that acquiring a first language (not such a different kind of task) could only be possible if the basic structural template for the "right answer" were built-in by evolution. I think we now know that he underestimated the useful information in "input" because he did not take contextual cues and dialogue-specific kinds of information into account, in a model that integrates input over time (using something maybe like Bayesian algorithms). But, still, it would make sense if languages evolved to make the task of learning them easier for brains that work in a certain way (and maybe brains evolved a bit too, though harder to say). And anything we can do to piggyback on what evolution already uses to guide learning ought to help kids cope with turning conceptual splatter into usable, and canonical, conceptual systems.

I think that includes using emotional engagement more than we do, using rhythmic and song-like patterns, using multimedia, using hands-on activities and social-interpersonal activities, harnessing the power of play and playfulness, humor, effective markers of salience and connection (e.g. with voice, with diagrams, etc.), etc. etc. Insofar as we can figure out what these are.

JAY.

PS. For the computational work, google Hierarchical Bayesian Models and Tenenbaum (recent article in Science), and Hawkins and Numenta on brain-based algorithms (watch the Beckman Institute lecture video).

Jay Lemke
Senior Research Scientist
Laboratory for Comparative Human Cognition
University of California - San Diego
9500 Gilman Drive
La Jolla, California 92093-0506

Professor (Adjunct status 2009-11)
School of Education
University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
www.umich.edu/~jaylemke 

Professor Emeritus
City University of New York







On Apr 27, 2011, at 10:01 AM, David H Kirshner wrote:

> Thanks for your reply, Huw.
> I've replied in CAPS, below.
> David
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Huw Lloyd
> Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2011 9:25 AM
> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> Subject: Re: [xmca] spontaneous concepts indeed
> 
> On 26 April 2011 23:14, David H Kirshner <dkirsh@lsu.edu> wrote:
> 
>> Okay, I'm going to throw my 2 cents into the concepts ring.
>> 
>> I'm sympathetic to those who've expressed skepticism about the utility of
>> concept as an analytic construct.
>> Nevertheless, I teach entire courses devoted to development of math
>> concepts; I find the notion of concept indispensable to preparing effective
>> mathematics educators. Instrumentally, what's relevant is concept
>> development. We're always talking about how intuitive concepts can be
>> transformed into more sophisticated concepts through certain kinds of
>> experiences (either occurring spontaneously, or as orchestrated
>> instructionally).
> 
> 
> In the context of self-directed/spontaneous learning intuition is a key
> concern.  Although coming to a scientific conceptual appre of intuition
> entails quite a journey.
> 
> ALTHOUGH INTUITIONS ARISE SPONTANEOUSLY AS AN ADAPTATION OF AN INDIVIDUAL TO THEIR WORLD, THESE INTUITIVE UNDERSTANDINGS TURN OUT TO BE THE BASIC RESOURCES UPON WHICH ANY FURTHER CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT MUST BE BASED. THE ALMOST UNIVERSAL INEFFECTIVENESS OF ANY INSTRUCTION THAT ATTEMPTS TO GRAFT NEW CONCEPTS ON TOP OF EXISTING INTUITIONS IS A FIRMLY ESTABLISHED CONCLUSION FOR RESEARCH IN MATHEMATICS EDUCATION AND ESPECIALLY SCIENCE EDUCATION. FOR THE VAST MAJORITY OF KIDS THAT "JOURNEY" TO MORE SOPHISTICATED UNDERSTANDINGS NEEDS TO BE ORCHESTRATED BY A TEACHER OPERATING WITH LOTS OF SPECIALIZED INSIGHT INTO TYPICAL DEVELOPMENTAL PATHS, AS WELL AS A DELICATE ABILITY TO USE THAT INSIGHT TO ENGAGE STUDENTS PRODUCTIVELY WITH THE LIMITATIONS OF THEIR CURRENT CONSTRUAL. 
> 
> 
>> Importantly, these experiences are theorized intramentally as involving
>> feedback loops between expectations and results of actions. Piagetian
>> notions of accommodation and assimilation come into play.
>> 
>> My point isn't that sociocultural notions of concept as indexed to the
>> culture are incorrect or unreasonable.
> 
> 
> How about scientific concepts emerging in a scientific culture?
> 
> WHAT EMERGES IN A SCIENTIFIC CULTURE ARE SCIENTIFIC PRACTICES. NURTURING THE DEVELOPMENT OF SUCH PRACTICES REQUIRES A DIFFERENT KIND OF PEDAGOGICAL EXPERTISE, WORTHY OF ITS OWN THEORIZATION AND ITS OWN SPACE IN TEACHER EDUCATION. IN GENERAL, THE KINDS OF SCIENTIFIC PRACTICES IN WHICH WE ENGAGE STUDENTS DO INVOLVE PROJECTS AND CONVERSATIONS ORIENTED AROUND VALUED CONCEPTUAL CONTENT. A TYPICAL MISTAKE OF REFORM INSTRUCTION AIMING AT BOTH CULTURAL PRACTICES AND CONCEPTS IS TO ASSUME THAT THE EMBEDDING OF THIS CONCEPTUAL MATERIAL IN PRACTICES IS SUFFICIENT TO FACILITATE CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT. OF COURSE, FOR SOME STUDENTS IT IS. BUT FOR MANY STUDENTS THE RELATIVELY HAPHAZARD "CONCEPTUAL SPLATTER" WITHIN THESE CONVERSATIONS AND PROJECTS IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO LEAD TO CONCEPTUAL RESTRUCTURING. IT REQUIRES A MORE DIRECT PEDAGOGICAL INTERVENTION OF THE SORT DESCRIBED ABOVE. SO THE EFFECTIVE REFORM-ORIENTED TEACHER NEEDS TO COORDINATE WHAT ARE IN FACT SEPARATE (AND SOMETIMES COMPETING) PEDAGOGICAL PROGRAMS WITHIN THE INQUIRY CLASSROOM.
> 
> 
>> Indeed, a comprehensive sociocultural psychology has to come to grips with
>> concepts, eventually reconciling the divergent ontogenetic and sociogenetic
>> perspectives. But after so many dozens of emails devoted to articulating
>> this program, I thought it would be refreshing to offer an escape into
>> paradigmatic divergence. "Concept," narrowly defined in intramental terms,
>> is a really useful construct to inform the genre of teaching involving
>> concept development. Reciprocally, a narrow sociocultural theorization of
>> enculturation into the practices of a cultural community is invaluable for
>> informing the pedagogical project of acquiring valued dispositions through
>> cultural participation. It's the ever-roiling program of theoretical
>> synthesis that's so darn problematic for purposes of informing educational
>> practice.
>> 
>> As baseball legend Yogi Berra put it, "In theory there is no difference
>> between theory and practice, but in practice there is." :)
>> 
> 
> I'm guessing he didn't use maps very often, or was subject to "teachers"
> that didn't distinguish between the map and the territory.  That's doesn't
> sound like a very good theory, or model, which I guess was his point.
> 
> Huw
> 
> 
>> 
>> David
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On
>> Behalf Of Andy Blunden
>> Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2011 8:29 AM
>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>> Subject: Re: [xmca] spontaneous concepts indeed
>> 
>> Temple, there is a little ambiguity in your question. When you talk
>> about "concepts developing" can I presume you mean "can a person
>> learn/master a scientific concept ...". I presume you are not actually
>> asking about the formation of concepts, i.e., their creation, as opposed
>> to their transmission.
>> 
>> I think Vygotsky took a scientific concept as an archetype (or paragon)
>> of the true concept, and in the context of the early Soviet Union, most
>> people would have taken the two as synonymous. But in general, *true
>> concepts* arise in *institutions* of some kind. As I said to Anna Sfard,
>> in my opinion a trrue concept is nearly synonymous to a discourse. (Not
>> quite, because in my opinion, concept also includes the forms of social
>> practice other than discourse.)
>> 
>> So for example, "the Holy Trinity" is a true concept and obviously
>> neither scientific nor spontaneous, and it arises through instruction in
>> a Church institution.
>> 
>> I think *adults *can acquire concepts in all sorts of activity, whether
>> playing computer game or reading books, so long as their acquisition of
>> the word is connected to participation in the relevant social practices.
>> After all, I learnt everything I know about CHAT participating in xmca
>> and reading.
>> 
>> that's how I see it.
>> Andy
>> 
>> Martin Packer wrote:
>>> Anthony, and Temple,
>>> 
>>> Mind, Culture and Activity has a special issue in preparation, guest
>> edited by Yrjö Engestrom and Annalisa Sannino, titled 'Concept formation in
>> the wild.' I know that some of the people who have sent in abstracts for
>> manuscripts to be considered for that issue are xmca members. Perhaps they
>> would like to take a shot at answering your question.
>>> 
>>> Martin
>>> 
>>> On Apr 26, 2011, at 6:24 AM, Temple wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> I realize some time's gone by, but the question Jody's (Joanne's) post
>> from last week raises for me is this:
>>>> 
>>>> Can scientific concepts develop in non-structured learning settings?  I
>> mean those other than schooling, team play, church, work, etc.  How about
>> from being online a lot - just surfing, playing games, or reading blogs - or
>> from spending one's time at the library or bookstore alone?
>>>> 
>>>> It seems to me that such scenarios blur the lines between spontaneous
>> and scientific situations, so to speak.  That is, they are natural, everyday
>> activities that lend themselves to repetition and reflective thinking and
>> naming, where the structure of the activity itself (as opposed to a more
>> experienced mentor) spurs on one's reflection, generalization, and
>> "scientification" of knowledge.
>>>> 
>>>> The following statement from Jody's (post sent my thoughts in this
>> direction:
>>>> 
>>>>> In home schooling described by Holt, certain scientific concepts could
>> be learned by a child at home, driven by their loves and needs.
>>>>> 
>>>> Could someone point me specifically towards a richer discussion of the
>> development of scientific concepts during one's everyday "alone time"?
>>>> 
>>>> Thx,
>>>> 
>>>> Anthony
>>>> 
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>> 
>>>> On Apr 22, 2011, at 7:32 AM, Joanne Hyatt <jody.hyatt@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> I'm only a grad student, but I'll risk a spontaneous response.
>>>>> 
>>>>> In 1991 I had no background in education other than my own experiences.
>>>>> However, compelled by circumstance, I home schooled my fourth grader.
>> My
>>>>> main thought at the time was, "Even if he only reads at home for a
>> year,
>>>>> he'll be better off than attending the school he is destined to be
>> bussed
>>>>> to." My pedagogy was inspired by John Holt's magazine "Unschooling", a
>>>>> publication edited by Holt and filled with inspiring stories from
>> families
>>>>> following Holt's theories.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I loved overseeing school at home, and my son and later my daughter
>> thrived
>>>>> there. However, try as I might, it was exceptionally hard to shift or
>> impact
>>>>> the approach my children took to schooling. They were already
>> hopelessly
>>>>> brainwashed by their few years of traditional schooling. While I hoped
>>>>> they'd want to build a ham radio and communicate with 10-year-olds in
>>>>> Australia, they'd see a workbook in the supermarket and ask me to buy
>> it for
>>>>> them. Also, years later, when I became a 4th grade teacher, I found it
>>>>> impossible to create at school the environment I strove to create in my
>>>>> home.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Clark Aldrich, in the link Peter supplied, is a breath of fresh air, a
>> more
>>>>> modern and insightful 'Holt'. He is spot on in his diagnosis of
>> traditional
>>>>> schooling's failings and offers compelling reasons try a new approach
>> at
>>>>> home. However, to unschool properly, in my opinion, required a
>> tremendous
>>>>> amount of work on the part of parents. Today, in my community, more and
>> more
>>>>> parents are choosing to home school, mostly out of desperation and
>>>>> frustration with the school systems, but they lack the time and energy
>> to
>>>>> follow up on Aldrich's compelling implications of what might compromise
>>>>> unschooling.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I just finished reading Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech. Admittedly a
>> novice,
>>>>> as I read, I kept looking for more references to a child's learning
>> from
>>>>> their own experiences. Vygotsky's notion of scientific and everyday
>> concepts
>>>>> seemed defined more by an instructional pedagogy than by content. He
>> seemed
>>>>> to discount the idea that a child could develop an interest and pursue
>> it
>>>>> successfully on their own.  He refers to formal schooling, as he knows
>> it,
>>>>> as a given, an unchanging institution, and the trick is to figure out
>> how
>>>>> children are developing there. The concept that many children might
>> learn
>>>>> outside of such an institution in different ways was absent.  "Schools
>> are
>>>>> teaching too many children too many things that don't excite them and
>> have
>>>>> no relevance to what they need or love... says Aldrich." In home
>> schooling
>>>>> described by Holt, certain scientific concepts could be learned by a
>> child
>>>>> at home, driven by their loves and needs.
>>>>> 
>>>>> It seems that today we are trying to reinvent the institution of formal
>>>>> schooling; how would that affect both Vygotsky's teacher or expert in
>> the
>>>>> ZPD as well as his distinction between scientific and everyday
>> concepts?
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 6:04 AM, Peter Smagorinsky <smago@uga.edu>
>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>> http://blogs.ajc.com/get-schooled-blog/2011/04/22/unschooling-homeschooling-
>>>>>> without-the-school/?cxntfid=blogs_get_schooled_blog
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> __________________________________________
>>>>>> _____
>>>>>> 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
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> --
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> *Andy Blunden*
>> Joint Editor MCA:
>> http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~db=all~content=g932564744
>> Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/
>> Book: http://www.brill.nl/default.aspx?partid=227&pid=34857
>> MIA: http://www.marxists.org
>> 
>> __________________________________________
>> _____
>> 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
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca