RE: [xmca] RE: Interpretation of theory and research and changes in the practice of teaching

[Monica Hansen <monica.hansen@vandals.uidaho.edu>]

Of course it happens, Andy! And I feel like a rebel or dissident!(No one on
this list knows my dad, do they?!) Sometimes I feel like a bad teacher.

Let me clarify on my use of *modeling* here. I don't just *teach* theories
or practices by *modeling* a lesson plan in which it is used, like a series
of menu items (I think having a personal philosophy of practice is really
important!). I am not the model. The model can be me, another class member,
a teacher in our hosting partner school, or a project which we have
attempted to design together with students). We enact models to test them.
So I encourage students to develop a philosophy--one of their own. And
often, that puts me in an uncomfortable position of having to be the
teacher/leader/boss?! and evaluate students who may not agree with me using
rubrics developed by people who also don't agree with me. We all have to
take on roles in our interactions with each other, so I guess it does have
something to do with theater! I try to present at the outset, that
historically, there are a number of theories, or methods for teaching, and
we (I include myself with the students) will attempt to enact the practice
and see how it works. A certain amount of justification is needed by all of
us: what are the values we are enacting and endorsing, what is at stake, why
it might be important, what might be the implications of our actions
(usually on reading and writing with elementary age students). It is
difficult to set up an authentic inquiry in this way-- organized (to meet
students expectation for structure and the institutions expectation of
regular evaluation)without it being really fake. 

I encourage knowing the rules, rule-following, and also rule-questioning. I
try never to say one way is good and the other way is bad because I want the
students (and future teachers) to understand that it is more complex than
that. (Of course they hate that answer in reviewing for tests, because they
still want to know what the right answer is so they can get full points and
keep their scholarships).There are reasonable aspects to most teaching
practices in use (I say this gingerly--there are reasonable aspects to
practices involving knives, as well). The teaching of grammar, for example
is filled with potential daggers.I really want students to consider the
dangers when they are enacting unquestioned practices.

This all sounds really fantastic about me, but honestly, it is very
difficult to do well and I have made many mistakes and stood up in front of
many classrooms and admitted to my students that it might have gone better,
if only....It try to do that only once a semester, though ;). I don't
encourage new teachers to teach like me, because it is hard to do it well
right out of the box. I encourage them to start small, expect and admit
mistakes--and persevere.

-----Original Message-----
From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On
Behalf Of Andy Blunden
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2011 6:58 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: Re: [xmca] RE: Interpretation of theory and research and changes in
the practice of teaching

Sounds like you are also calling on Vygotsky's early participation in 
the study of Theatre, when you *model* the different teaching methods to 
students. HOw do you feel when you are modelling and explaining a mode 
of teaching which you don't really believe in ... or does thatnever 
happen, Monica?

Andy

Monica Hansen wrote:
> I began by teaching literature because as I explained to all of my peers
in
> college, science and math are about right answers but in literature we get
> to talk about all the messy things in life: love, passion, emotion,
values,
> personality, etc. I think I even recall saying something like ?the lettuce
> in your teeth?! I was very enthusiastic and naïve. I mention this because
it
> coincidentally parallels Vygotsky?s start as a literature teacher, and is
> also interesting in regard to Rey?s characterization of Vygotsky?s first
> moment as emphasizing ?the generative character of the psyche, the
emotions
> and fantasy?. 
>
>  
>
> Personally, as a teacher, I changed what I could by conducting  my own
> classes. I worked within the schools trying to change them from within by
> developing networks and professional development communities. I could see
> outside forces exerting pressure, much like Andy describes in his
> illustrations of the transformation of everyday life by institutions. Not
> only did we have a ban on smoking (there was a smoking lounge in the high
> school I started teaching in), but methods were affected by No Child Left
> Behind because of the accountability factor requiring changes in the
> emphasis on high-stakes tests. At the same time, I could see some
> institutional practices, such as the practice of having Early Childhood
> Education programs housed in Family and Consumer Sciences in the College
of
> Agriculture as indicative of how approaches to language learning and
> literacy were still narrowly defined in the curriculum and in the domain
of
> Education (and Psychology in another realm altogether), as one of the
> sources for a modularized way of thinking that blocked teachers and
parents
> from understanding the very important relationship between development and
> learning. So after some consideration, I quit my full-time teaching job to
> become a full-time grad student. Will I affect any kind of change this
way?
> I can only hope to stretch the range of my influence by a bit. I teach
> education classes now at the University level where I try to teach and
model
> different theoretical approaches in practice with my own students, who
will
> hopefully take some of it with them into the classrooms with children. One
> of the biggest things I try to change is the impression my students have
> that there is ?one right answer?, that truth exists and it is just out
there
> for the picking. I see a high number of students who are successful in
> traditional school models who want to ?play teacher? with a more
traditional
> ?factory model? of education, just because it worked for them, without any
> consideration of the fact that the children they will be teaching may not
> come from anywhere near the same background and not have had the same
> cultural and therefore language interaction as they.  I also like to put
my
> students into real-situations with children (that?s my service learning
> bit). A better understanding of the importance of culture in learning
comes
> from interacting at the situated level of experience?something you
> understand. 
>
>  
>
> I am always interested in this topic of the practicalities of teaching.
But
> now how does this relate to Rey?s article on Vygotsky, and how do the
theory
> and research wind together around the development of psychology as a
> science, the methods and instrumentalism,  and its separation from what
Rey
> is calling ?the category of sense?? I started out there as a literature
> teacher and a poet and I feel like we may be able to weave this back into
> our methods and ground it with more contemporary theory.
>
>  
>
> From: mike cole [mailto:lchcmike@gmail.com] 
> Sent: Monday, July 25, 2011 1:17 PM
> To: Monica Hansen
> Subject: Re: Fernando on LSV
>
>  
>
> Nice that you posted on xmca. I will need to pull up the Sinha article.
> A really good question is to inquire how, as a teacher, you would change
> practices
> depending upon which view you espoused. I think there are some real
> differences, but
> wonder what others would say.
>
> Yes, using theory as a tool for life is what I try to do... darn weak
> theories but then life has its complexities!! :-)
> mike
>
> mike
>
> On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 6:16 PM, Monica Hansen
> <monica.hansen@vandals.uidaho.edu> wrote:
>
> Thanks for the reply, Mike. Did you mean to reply offline?
>
>  
>
> I think I am starting to get a handle on it.  Watching and listening to
the
> discussion going back and forth is useful for me in constructing my
> understanding. I can see where Rey is going in his interpretation of
> Vygotsky. I am a Vygotsky enthusiast and have been for a long time (not as
> long as you), but I am not a Vygotsky scholar, I am a teacher and graduate
> student trying to finish my PhD; because of my day job, I am always
looking
> to understand how student?s(and really all) minds work so I can understand
> how better to approach the practical day to day of learning situations in
> school and at home with my own kids. I take a broad view because I don?t
> have the luxury of living in a world where everyone says what they mean
and
> act as though they mean it. Most of the time, I see a lot of hurt feelings
> and rash behavior, and that is just speaking of the grown ups ;). The
> affective-and volitional have always factored into my fascination with
> Vygotsky, so maybe I read his work with that lens?
>
>  
>
> Only I am still left, as you all are, trying to figure out a way to work,
> write and research  between those same poles as Vygotsky and others. You
> posted Chris Sinha a while ago, did anyone take up with that? I have
skimmed
> back through the discussions and didn?t see it mentioned, but I might have
> missed it. I think his work is relevant to this discussion of loss of the
> meaning making with the overly simplistic view of sign and tool. Also,
from
> the same volume that article appeared in, a piece by William Croft, Toward
a
> social cognitive linguistics. At least from my perspective. Both, pay
close
> attention to expression and gesture as conveying meaning, and as you
mention
> allow for the possibility of polysemy. I intend to bring them up in the
> discussion of Rey?s article.  I hope there are more participants in the
> discussion.
>
>  
>
> Monica
>
>  
>
> From: mike cole [mailto:lchcmike@gmail.com]  
> Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2011 4:23 PM
> To: Monica Hansen
> Cc: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> Subject: Re:Fernando on LSV
>
>  
>
> As I understand it, Monica, Rey is claiming (and in this agrees with many
on
> xmca, but not others) that the LSV of Psychology of Art was displaced for
> several years by an instrumentalist Vygotsky. LSV liked to quote Bacon:
> Neither hand nor mind alone, left to themselves,  amounts to much;
> instruments and aids are  the means to perfection. Bruner highlights this
> idea in his 1962 preface to LSV. 
>
> This view was easily assimilatable by American learning theorists in
general
> and those interested in the role of culture in learning in particular. For
> the former, it appeared to be a rephrasing of what was called "mediated
> stimulus-response learning" diagramed in a triangle with an x at the apex.
> For the latter (me, for example) that little x and that kind of
> instrumentalism provided a perfect way to think about culturally mediated
> psychological processes. Similar interpretations can be made of Dewey. 
>
> But such instrumentalism has several (at least) drawbacks. Firstly, it
> under-guestimates the polysemy of tools (and of course, the "tool of
> tools."). In such under-guestimation it over specifies the goal (e.g., it
is
> easily reduced to the kind of functionalism that many argue against).
> Thirdly, when these two pits are fallen into, it makes meaning MAKING, the
> process of constantly imagining the future to be able to act in the
present,
> disappear from view.
>
> Presumably, according to this line of thinking, the late Vygotsky has
thrown
> off instrumentalism and become a semiotic theorist. Then the problem
becomes
> one of not tipping over into idealism in which all is interpretation
> obdurate reality "only" imagined.
>
> I am not being so foolhardy to say that any of this is correct. But it is
> how I interpret Fernando's argument. Anton, David, Van der Veer, Valsiner,
> and others are the one's who can provide a more nuanced view of sequences
> and relationships across the 1924-1934 period.
>
> mike
>
> On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 12:26 PM, Monica Hansen
> <monica.hansen@vandals.uidaho.edu> wrote:
>
> I am still working on the taking in the Rey article. Some of you are so
> fast! I need a couple of nights of sleep at least.
>
> In looking at the last bit of this post, Mike, can you clarify a couple of
> things? You write that the work from Rey's "middle period" of Vygotsky's
> work was more "easily assimilable"? What does that mean? And for who was
it
> more easily assimilable? For the translators and editors of the earlier
> English editions or for the American and English reading audience who
would
> then go on to use it in their work? And then also, what issues of Larry's
> and others do you think the "middle period" fails to orient us on? Is it
the
> issue with "instrumentalism" and "reductionist" methods and the following
> "objectivism"?
>
> Just trying to catch up and discuss. I know I have more to read in
postings
> so you may have already clarified.
>
> Thanks,
> Monica
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On
> Behalf Of mike cole
> Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2011 7:59 AM
> To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> Subject: Re: [xmca] Article for Discussion
>
> The answer to your question, Andy, is that you should ask if we can post
the
> williams article for discussion in papers for discussion. After we discuss
> Fernando's paper, we could turn to it. I agree, its very relevant, taking
up
> the Lave-McDermott Marx-->Learning paper from Outlines (I think) and
arguing
> for use value in education.
>
> As to Fernando's paper, I have a different view.
>
> Roughly, I interpret him as arguing that the focus on the period when LSV
et
> al were doing "instrumental" psychology, the instrumentalism involved
> reductions that had unfortunate consequences but it was this aspect/period
> of the work that English speakers focused on. The ties to Dewey here are
> obvious and behaviorism ditto
> (Skinner was in many ways following the lessons of his interpretation of
> pragmatism).
>
> Fernando, reading the outpouring of materials in English sees what he
thinks
> is a narrow focus and seeks to counter by pointing backward toward Psych
of
> art and forward to the late work. So, rather than focus on periodization,
> wouldn't it be more
> productive to focus on the extent to which the middle period which
> interested us so
> much, perhaps because it was more easily assimilable (for which see passim
> all the criticism you care to read on the topic!) fails to orient us to
the
> issues that Larry and others have been focusing on?
>
> mike
>
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 7:46 AM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:
>
>   
>> Mike, I've been reading this article by Fernando Gonzales Rey, but I
>>     
> really
>   
>> am not interested in discusssing it. His periodisation of Vygotsky does
>> nothing for me. I mean, to describe Vygotsky's view of the development of
>> higher psychological functionse, as "objectivist" and some kind of
>> regression from the period before he wrote "Historical Crisis", which
puts
>> him in the same basket as Behaviourism,  is just so remote from how I
read
>> Vygotsky, I would rather just bow out of the discussion. I admit, I
>>     
> stopped
>   
>> reading before I got through reading Rey on this period in which Vygotsky
>> apparently went backwards.
>>
>> Any chance we could squeeze two articles out of Taylor & Francis for
>> discussion? I would like to see a discussion about Julian Williams'
effort
>> to connect up a critique of formal education and Marx's analysis of
>> capitalism and commodity production. Could we have two going at the same
>> time?
>>
>> Andy
>>
>> mike cole wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> THNX FOR PICKING UP THE MISTAKE< ANDY
>>> M
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 6:35 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net
<mailto:
>>> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote:
>>>
>>>    Mike, you forgot to cc us all, but is the cc above still right for
>>>    Fernando?
>>>    andy
>>>
>>>    mike cole wrote:
>>>
>>>       
>>>>    Fernando Rey on turning points in Vygotsky's thinking was selected
in
>>>> a last
>>>>    minute rush of votes. I am having the article posted for all the
>>>>         
> world
>   
>>>> to read, but meantime, see attached.
>>>>
>>>>    The author, currrently living in Brasilia, is cc'ed.
>>>>    mike
>>>>
------------------------------**------------------------------*
>>>> *------------
>>>>
>>>>    ______________________________**____________
>>>>    _____
>>>>    xmca mailing list
>>>>    xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
>>>>
>>>>         
>
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/list
> <http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/list%0Ainfo/xmca> 
> info/xmca>
>   
>>>>         
>>>    --
------------------------------**------------------------------*
>>> *------------
>>>    *Andy Blunden*
>>>    Joint Editor MCA:
>>>
>>>       
> http://www.informaworld.com/**smpp/title~db=all~content=**g932564744
> <http://www.informaworld.com/**smpp/title%7Edb=all%7Econtent=**g932564744>
> <http://
> www.informaworld.com/smpp/title%7Edb=all%7Econtent=g932564744>
>   
>>>    <http://www.informaworld.com/**smpp/title%7Edb=all%7Econtent=**
>>>
>>>       
>
g932564744<http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title%7Edb=all%7Econtent=g932564
> 744>
>   
>>>    Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/
<http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/>
>>>       
>
>   
>>>    <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/**>
>>>    Book:
>>>       
> http://www.brill.nl/default.**aspx?partid=227
> <http://www.brill.nl/default.**aspx?partid=227&pid=34857>
> &pid=34857<http://www.brill.nl/
> <http://www.brill.nl/%0Adefault.aspx?partid=227&pid=34857> 
> default.aspx?partid=227&pid=34857>
>   
> <http://www.brill.nl/default.**aspx?partid=227
> <http://www.brill.nl/default.**aspx?partid=227&pid=34857>
> &pid=34857<http://www.brill.nl
> /default.aspx?partid=227&pid=34857>
>   
>>>    MIA: http://www.marxists.org
>>>
>>>    ______________________________**____________
>>>    _____
>>>    xmca mailing list
>>>    xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
>>>
>>>       
>
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/**listinfo/xmca<http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/list
> <http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/list%0Ainfo/xmca> 
> info/xmca>
>   
>>>
>>>       
>> --
>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**
>> ------------
>> *Andy Blunden*
>> Joint Editor MCA:
http://www.informaworld.com/**smpp/title~db=all~content=
>>     
> <http://www.informaworld.com/**smpp/title%7Edb=all%7Econtent=> 
>   
>
**g932564744<http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title%7Edb=all%7Econtent=g9325
> 64744>
>   
>> Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/ <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/> 
>> Book:
>>     
> http://www.brill.nl/default.**aspx?partid=227
> <http://www.brill.nl/default.**aspx?partid=227&pid=34857>
> &pid=34857<http://www.brill.nl/
> <http://www.brill.nl/%0Adefault.aspx?partid=227&pid=34857> 
> 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<http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/list
> <http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/list%0Ainfo/xmca> 
> info/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