Hi Carol,
Certainly when we are asked about culture - when we are interviewed by an ethnographer or if, trained in ethnography, we reflect on our own cultural memberships -- we become conscious of our goals. But otherwise we often are not. As you point out, intercultural conflict can make participants aware that not everyone shares their goals, but up to that point participants may not have been aware of their goals as such.
I also think that trust CAN be a part of culture. Other participants in the list have offered examples and given reasons for the dangers inherent in cultures of mistrust. In my earlier message I only meant that I did not see it as part of an essential definition.
As for your comment about goals, in which you wrote "However, on a practically level, we have
been asking students to set goals for about 40-50 years now, and this
practice might have simply become a superficial routine, and a blunt tool
for thinking." Here you are suggesting that when goals become routine they may drop from our conscious awareness. I'm not sure that's true. We know the value of classroom behavioral routines, which can free up cognitive space for higher-order thinking when they become automatic (or non-conscious) but I'm not sure a thinking routine works the same way. Unless we are talking about a teacher who has been teaching the same lesson with the same goal for years.
My original comments about goals and my elaboration on those comments here were influenced by my recent reading of David Olson's 2003 book, Psychological Theory and Educational Reform, in which he discusses goals as a characteristic of schooling, and schools as *institutions* as opposed to cultures. The significance of this characterization is that in institutions the rules and procedures are explicitly spelled out in written regulations whereas in cultures, rules and procedures are left implicit. I'm oversimplifying his argument a bit to make a point, but in general I think it reinforces what Wertsch wrote about the consciousness of goals in the context of an activity.
--Sarah
----- Original Message -----
From: Carol Macdonald <macdonaldc@educ.wits.ac.za>
Date: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 2:01 am
Subject: RE: RE: cr&c
> Hi Sarah -
>
> "We are often not conscious of our participation in a
> culture as culture."
>
> I am absolutely sure that this is true-in all situations except
> situationsof dense literacy practice, and those looking at culture
> as culture.
> Certainly, I have found in monocultural situations that this
> consciousnessis just about absent; or else when it discovered that
> others do it
> differently, indignant outrage (=ethnocentricity) sets in. I have
> beenlocated in about 5 cultures and my experience is that the
> Scottish folk are
> the most striking example. I really thinks it help to be a cultural
> psychologist who has been brought up in a multicultural
> situations, because
> then nothing has ever been taken for granted.
>
> But can't things like trust-which CAN be brought to awareness, be
> part of
> culture? Does it have to remain in the non-conscious? (Possibly
> an ignorant
> question.)
>
> Carol
>
>
>
>
> Hi Sarah,
>
> Why do shared goals imply consciousness? I think some shared goals can
> be quite unconscious, specially in complex (ideological) societies.
>
> David
>
> Quoting Sarah Woodward Beck <sarah.beck@nyu.edu>:
>
> > I agree with Judy - I would remove trust and shared goals. Trust,
> > because it has strong moral connotations that don't seem to
> belong in
> > a basic definition of culture, and Shared Goals because this implies
> > a consciousness (of goals) that participants in a culture may not
> > possess. We are often not conscious of our participation in a
> > culture as culture.
> > --Sarah Beck
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Judy Diamondstone <jdiamondstone@clarku.edu>
> > Date: Saturday, March 20, 2004 1:57 pm
> > Subject: RE: cr&c
> >
> > > > Establshing shared goals/visions?
> > > > trust?
> > > > division of labor?
> > > > complementarity?
> > > >
> > > > Which of these things would remove from your own conception of
> > > culture?
> > > SHAREDness of goals
> > > Trust.
> > >
> > > What do you think?
> > >
> > > Judy
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Mike Cole [mcole@weber.ucsd.edu]
> > > > Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2004 1:38 PM
> > > > To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > > > Subject: re: cr&c
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I can see that those working to create activities where
> > > > reflective practice
> > > > is valued and implemented have good reason not to want to
> > substitute
> > > > culture into Bill's paragraph. I am, of course, speaking of
> > > culture as
> > > > (better, from) a particular perspective and it is polysemic.
> > > Reflective> practice is also polysemic. Even the word
> polysemic is
> >
> > > polysemic.>
> > > > However, which of the following things is not characteristic of
> >
> > > culture> as understood in chat discourse:
> > > >
> > > > I am also uncomfortable about the substtution as I think
> > > collaborative> reflection is a highly specific practice and there
> >
> > > are some important
> > > > principles that givern it including the establishment of a
> > shared
> > > > vision or
> > > > goal, the establishment of trust, division of labor,
> > > complementarity, etc.
> > > >
> > > > Establshing shared goals/visions?
> > > > trust?
> > > > division of labor?
> > > > complementarity?
> > > >
> > > > Which of these things would remove from your own conception of
> > > culture?> mike
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Nov 09 2004 - 11:42:24 PST