xmca@weber.ucsd.edu writes:
Nate scrobe:
>The point being I guess is appropriation for me gets more at the
>actual process that is ocurring in these examples than say
>internalization,
>construction or various other terms. For me it keeps activity in clear
>focus
>which usually does not occur when we approach children's unique ways of
>learning from an inner-outer individualistic framework.
>
yes - for me activity theory has been an enormously beneficial tool in
supporting my work as a teacher and understanding the dynamics of our
interactions.
>That may be good or bad - we don't have time to
>reinvent the wheel with every child, but then there are also teachers
>whose
>experience with teacher education and students from the 60's still
>determine
>the type of activity current students engage in.
yes - and this could be to the child's benefit - after all there were
many strengths from the 60's - and many problematic behaviors are being
practiced with standards based instructional strategies from the 90's or
00's.
and actually - we do have to re-invent the wheel with every child -
in fact - as a culture we re-invent the wheel all the time - and thank
goodness, or we'd still be using round stones.
phillip
* * * * * * * *
* *
The English noun "identity" comes, ultimately, from the
Latin adverb "identidem", which means "repeatedly."
The Latin has exactly the same rhythm as the English,
buh-BUM-buh-BUM - a simple iamb, repeated; and
"identidem" is, in fact, nothing more than a
reduplication of the word "idem", "the same":
"idem(et)idem". "Same(and) same". The same,
repeated. It is a word that does exactly what
it means.
from "The Elusive Embrace" by Daniel
Mendelsohn.
phillip white
third grade teacher
doctoral student http://ceo.cudenver.edu/~hacms_lab/index.htm
scrambling a dissertation
denver, colorado
phillip_white@ceo.cudenver.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 01 2000 - 01:01:41 PST