Shouldn't it be 'times' rather than time? David Harvey, Daniel Bensaid, Roy
Bhaskar and others have all recently taken up the idea that different scales
of time are superimposed on one another in a multi-level ontology? And our
own Jay Lemke, of course. (For Harvey and Bensaid this is a necessary and
important feature of the way capitalism operates that gives rise to a number
of contradictions.)
Does an activity system operate at just one of these levels or across more
than one? If the latter (as I think must be the case), how can they ben
integrated into the analysis?
Bruce Robinson (like bb hoping I can half brew or even half bake..)
----- Original Message -----
From: "bb" <xmca-whoever@comcast.net>
To: <mcole@weber.ucsd.edu>; "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"
<xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>; "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"
<xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 6:06 PM
Subject: [xmca] time and triangulation
> MC wrote:
>
> Most
>> famously,
>> it [extended triangle] does not represent time.
>
> I played around several years ago with creating ways that a diagram could
> show time and thought "why not just use time itself?". So I came up with
> this animation for someone moving from one institution to another and
> back, embodying and enacting change in both places. When I pushed the
> thinking, it became plausible for the person also to be mapped as an
> extended expanding and retracting triangle, at least in the case study i
> was doing.
>
> http://www.lesley.edu/faculty/wbarowy/Crossing.gif
>
> It's not so far fetched, really. There are precedents. Feynman invented
> some diagrams to show quantum mechanical interactions in which time is
> implicit in following pathways. In the situation described above, the
> path loops as the person moves in back and forth from one workplace to the
> other.
>
> The problem with diagrams is that a shared semantics must exist for the
> diagram to be communicative, as is the case with written and spoken
> language. The advantage of a diagram is that it can break from the
> spatial directionality of print. In Yrjo's extended triangle, I take it
> to mean, at one level of description, that activity can be meaningfully
> parsed into 6 interrelated, and somewhat distinct, elements. To do so for
> a person means the same thing, and gives rise to thoughts of wartofsky's
> artifacts, multi-tasking (division of labor?) and "community" being the
> relations to other people. At the next level one uses the spatial
> relationship of the six elements to investigate contradictions, and by
> extension, so it does for a person.
>
> I do hope this is the place where one can (de)still half brew?
>
> bb
>
>
>
>> The "famous triangle" is an abstractoin, Martin. It does not, qua
>> abstraction,
>> represent different kinds of objects, social rules, commnities, etc.
>> Rather, I assme that in any instance of its use,
>> the analyst
>> must carry out an historically grounded analysis of specific forms of
>> activity and the way
>> in which the constituent analytic categories are embodied and undergo
>> change
>> over time.
>> Something about rising to concrete may be involved.
>>
>> Soviet scholars could write all they want to about kinds of division of
>> labor and alenation so long
>> as they were writing about capitalism. They could not do so about their
>> own
>> country which was,
>> as you know, on its way to becoming a worker's paradise, or perhaps
>> already
>> was one, so that
>> any claims about alienation were slurs upon the state.
>>
>> mike
>>
>> On 10/8/05, Martin Packer <packer@duq.edu> wrote:
>> >
>> > I'm not sure that the collective hunt really illustrates a division of
>> > labor
>> > as Marx viewed it. It certainly is very different from the division of
>> > labor
>> > in an industrial society, in which workers paradoxically are brought
>> > together in a social process of production, yet experience themselves
>> > as
>> > isolated individuals (working on an assembly line is a typical
>> > example).
>> > That being so, if Leont'ev bases his concept of activity on the
>> > primeval
>> > collective hunt - but perhaps I'm mistaken here? - one wonders how well
>> > the
>> > concept can grasp alienated labor. For one thing, appeal to the
>> > consciousness of the industrial worker is tricky, since alienated labor
>> > requires/gives rise to false consciousness.
>> >
>> > I'd welcome some instruction on how activity theory deals with this: I
>> > recall a fragment of conversation in Seville where the claim was made
>> > that
>> > the famous triangle doesn't distinguish between labor as the honest
>> > toil
>> > to
>> > produce food and clothing, and as modern alienated wage labor. Is that
>> > indeed the case?
>> >
>> > bb doesn't recall Vygotsky writing about the division of labor, and
>> > coincidently I've been searching for this myself. There's a passing
>> > reference to "the class organization of production" in 'Educational
>> > Psychology.' But in the 1930 'The Socialist Alteration of Man' Vygotsky
>> > writes about the division of labor quite extensively, citing Marx
>> > frequently. For example:
>> >
>> > "In his classic descriptions of the early period of capitalism, Marx
>> > frequently dwells on the subject of the corruption of the human
>> > personality
>> > which is brought about by the growth of capitalist industrial society.
>> > On
>> > one extreme end of society, the division between intellectual and
>> > physical
>> > labour, the separation between town and country, the ruthless
>> > exploitation
>> > of child and female labour, poverty and the impossibility of a free and
>> > full
>> > development of full human potential, and on the other extreme, idleness
>> > and
>> > luxury; not only does all this result in the single human type becoming
>> > differentiated and fragmented into several separate social class types
>> > which
>> > stand in sharp contrast to one another, but also in the corruption and
>> > distortion of the human personality and its subjection to unsuitable,
>> > one-sided development within all these different variants of the human
>> > type."
>> >
>> > But Vygotsky argues here that even Marx saw a positive side to labor in
>> > large scale industry: that, removed from a capitalist economy, such
>> > labor
>> > can expand human capabilities. One presumes that he believed that the
>> > socialist Soviet state was heading in that direction.
>> >
>> > Martin
>> >
>> >
>> > On 10/8/05 8:37 PM, "bb" <xmca-whoever@comcast.net> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Ana, Steve, hopefully i understand the division of labor (dl) as yrjo
>> > > intended, and i think i do, because it's in the manner of the
>> > > collective
>> > hunt,
>> > > and, in his change lab workshop in goteborg, I had the distinct
>> > impression
>> > > that his formulation of chat with extended triangles, historical
>> > analysis,
>> > > expansive learning, was around systems with these well formed
>> > > elements.
>> > This
>> > > makes a great deal of sense considering his approaches to
>> > > developmental
>> > work
>> > > research.
>> > >
>> > > Conciousness as an ingredient comes from early on in marx's relation
>> > > of
>> > > conciousness and life, i tihnk, and later, but more productivley for
>> > > me,
>> > > Leont'ev wrote about as conciousness and activity. There is an
>> > > article
>> > with
>> > > this title, but i recall reading between the words of having read and
>> > reread
>> > > as much of Leont'ev as i could.
>> > >
>> > > If I couple the above with my recollection that nowhere have i seen
>> > vygotsky
>> > > writing about division of labor, then it doesn't make sense to talk
>> > > in
>> > an
>> > > orthodox manner about the zoped of a toddler and an adult involving a
>> > division
>> > > of labor -- although your notion, Ana, DOES make a lot of sense to me
>> > when I
>> > > open up to new possibilities. I think it's just not explicitly in
>> > > yrjo's
>> > > formulation. But so, having explicitly made that demarcation, this is
>> > where
>> > > we can be clear that you Ana, make your contributions in the
>> > > evolution
>> > of the
>> > > study of human activity.
>> > >
>> > > Aside, what I recall having as one insight reading LBE is that Yjro
>> > describes
>> > > a zoped between two systems of activity -- a very different and
>> > > amazing
>> > thing.
>> > >
>> > > There are other possible parallels that I see Ana -- such as the
>> > separation of
>> > > motive and object that happens in the collective hunt, arising
>> > > withthe
>> > > division of labor, and the suspension of immediate need that vygotsky
>> > > describes in social play, where there is in some sense a fluid,
>> > > dynamic
>> > > division of labor. Perhaps I'm just conjecturing here, or I'm
>> > > thinking
>> > of
>> > > what bodrova and leong have described.
>> > >
>> > > Anyway, I think the points Steve made are where I wanted to go, as
>> > > Mike
>> > said,
>> > > the map's not the territory, and steve and I could be observing the
>> > > very
>> > same
>> > > situations, coming up with different analyses because of the tools we
>> > employed
>> > > and our differences in intent. One of us could have a street map and
>> > > the
>> > > other a topo.
>> > >
>> > > bb
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >> Bill,
>> > >> a very interesting point! Showed me how different I understood the
>> > >> "division of labor" concept than the one developed by Yrjö. I
>> > >> started
>> > >> from Vygotsky's notion of joint activity in which the more
>> > >> experienced
>> > >> (often an adult) partner caries out more and often almost every
>> > >> operation of the activity, while the less experienced (child in
>> > >> development) carries out small parts of the activity. With
>> > >> development
>> > >> this proportion changes, so that the child is able to take over more
>> > and
>> > >> more complex aspects of an activity, until, one day, the child is
>> > >> able
>> > >> to carry out the whole activity (if possible) or at least to perform
>> > any
>> > >> part of the activity as her/his more experienced partner. It is not
>> > >> necessary to "know" what role you are playing, nor to have a
>> > "knowledge"
>> > >> of the fulls scope of an activity, to participate in it.
>> > >> If you think of language development as a joint activity, then, in
>> > >> the
>> > >> beginning, the child uses various sounds to express various dialogic
>> > >> tasks (ask for something, call, laugh, demand, protest etc) but they
>> > are
>> > >> not "words". The adult (or more developed participant in the
>> > >> dialogue)
>> > >> often "translates" these sounds into the possible utterances as they
>> > >> should have sounded in a more developed form. It is like the adult
>> > >> is
>> > >> doing all the work in the dialogue, or most of the linguistic work.
>> > >> And
>> > >> then the child starts using some "words" for some dialogic
>> > >> functions,
>> > >> taking over some of the "work" of speaking. etc.
>> > >> So, to bring this back to your example with the day care. There are
>> > many
>> > >> things going on in a day care, not just solitary play. On the
>> > >> contrary,
>> > >> the life of a three year old child is full of relationships and full
>> > >> of
>> > >> discoveries related to the world of people and the material world.
>> > There
>> > >> are joint activities in which everyone has their role, both in play
>> > >> and
>> > >> in other activities: lunch, nap time, story telling, going out, etc.
>> > >> There are rules about what is to be done at what time, in which
>> > >> space,
>> > >> with which toy, with which people. There are disputes about what
>> > belongs
>> > >> to whom, and who took what and what does it mean to share and
>> > >> how....
>> > >> Activity Systems Theory is absolutely necessary to analyze such a
>> > >> complex setting as every day life and development in a day care. In
>> > many
>> > >> ways, a day care center is as complex as a factory in which people
>> > >> use
>> > >> wrenches and pipes to make machines. In fact, I think that it is
>> > >> easier
>> > >> to learn to work in a plant like Steve's, than to learn to work with
>> > >> children in a day care. (Although that is relative to what is easier
>> > >> to
>> > >> each one of us).
>> > >> This is a fascinating point: division of labor (roles) in and its
>> > >> significance and meaning in development.
>> > >> Ana
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> bb wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >>> I appreciate Steve's practical follow up and the chance to clarify.
>> > >>> I
>> > too
>> > >>> have
>> > >> used an extension to put more muscle into my pipe wrench when
>> > >> working
>> > on my
>> > >> home
>> > >> steam heating system, having watched my father apply this strategy
>> > >> to
>> > the
>> > >> track
>> > >> gear on his bulldozer when I was much younger.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> But let me work with specifics; by example. I greatly appreciate
>> > Engestrom's
>> > >> activity systems theory and its application to institutional and
>> > >> inter-institutional transformation or resistance thereof. It's six
>> > >> main
>> > >> elements parse activity into interrelated elements where those
>> > >> elements
>> > are
>> > >> well
>> > >> formed, e.g. a division of labor, as in the collective hunt wrtitten
>> > >> by
>> > >> Leont'ev, that being one of the paradigm cases in Learning by
>> > >> Expanding
>> > >> (LBE).
>> > >>>
>> > >>> But what if one is interested in the day to day development of 3
>> > >>> year
>> > old
>> > >> children in nursery schools? There, one sees children in solitary
>> > >> play
>> > -- no
>> > >> division of labor to speak of among the children, no understanding
>> > >> by
>> > the
>> > >> children of their roles, if they had any, no conscious engaging in a
>> > >> collective
>> > >> object by the chlidren. Activity Systems Theory does not purchase
>> > >> much
>> > here,
>> > >> microgenetically. Ahh... but if one is interested in the development
>> > >> of
>> > >> nursery schools, and how that historical development shapes the
>> > >> context
>> > of
>> > >> the
>> > >> children's play -- what rules the adults obey and enforce, what toys
>> > exist,
>> > >> what
>> > >> the caregivers must do to be licensed? Or if one is interested in
>> > changing
>> > >> the
>> > >> nature of nursery schools? Then AST methods described in LBE could
>> > yield
>> > >> large
>> > >> gains.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> It's more like cutting diamonds (
>> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diamond_cut):
>> > >>>
>> > >>> The rule (following cleavage planes)
>> > >>> The tool (the cutting steel wedge)
>> > >>> The jewel (the outcome)
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> bb
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>> I appreciate Bill's (bb's) comments on using the appropriate tool
>> > >>>> for
>> > >>>> the job. Bill seems to imply that Marxism is appropriate for
>> > >>>> certain
>> > >>>> kinds of heavy lifting, but other tools are more suited for more
>> > >>>> delicate and intricate work. I happen to run into the kind of
>> > >>>> situation that Bill uses as an analogy fairly frequently in my
>> > >>>> line
>> > >>>> of work. We use impact wrenches to bolt down and unbolt large
>> > >>>> steel
>> > >>>> plates that hold our clamping fixtures (I work in a large machine
>> > >>>> shop that mills the parts (spars) that become the long
>> > >>>> infrastructures of jetliner wings). Sometimes a bolt is on too
>> > >>>> tight
>> > >>>> for even an impact wrench to loosen, so we get a breaker bar, just
>> > >>>> as
>> > >>>> Bill suggests to use when needed, to muscle it off. In rare cases
>> > >>>> where that amount of force is still not sufficient, we go find a
>> > >>>> long
>> > >>>> pipe that fits over the breaker bar, and apply that extra
>> > >>>> leverage. If I follow Bill's reasoning, perhaps Bill would compare
>> > >>>> such mechanical extensions of the breaker bar to politically
>> > >>>> employing Leninist and Trotskyist extensions of Marxism ... in
>> > >>>> cases
>> > >>>> where the old rulers ... are particularly intransigent ... :-))
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> ~ Steve
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> At 09:12 PM 10/5/2005 +0000, you wrote:
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>> Interesting comments, Julian, may it be the case that never the
>> > >>>>> twain shall meet?
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> To indulge for a brief email, for which I may be soundly
>> > >>>>> criticized, my interest is in understanding learning and
>> > >>>>> development in particular circumstances, and activity theory,
>> > >>>>> dialectics, marxist critique, etc, are tools toward furthering
>> > >>>>> that
>> > >>>>> understanding. Perhaps this is my own ontogeny brought about by
>> > >>>>> mostly american influences and resources. So then, on the one
>> > >>>>> hand, in this perspective, not being dialectical enough, or
>> > >>>>> marxist enough, or being faithful to the originators, doesn't
>> > >>>>> really seem a reasonable measure of the quality of someone's
>> > >>>>> research. In analogy to a mechanic, who finds he is working on a
>> > >>>>> car with hand tightened wheel lugs, it would make no sense for
>> > >>>>> someone to say the mechanic is not using the "breaker bar"
>> > >>>>> enough,
>> > >>>>> since that tool is not appropriate in this circumstance.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> On the other hand, I do really think it's important to well
>> > >>>>> understand the original works, and to critically mark where and
>> > >>>>> when
>> > >>>>> departures are made from them. And it would seem departures must
>> > >>>>> be
>> > >>>>> made for there to be a continuing (r)evolution. This might be the
>> > >>>>> razor that slices superficial from contributing studies, e.g.
>> > >>>>> those
>> > >>>>> that illuminate the human condition and further activity
>> > >>>>> theory. Granted, I've seen papers submitted for publication that
>> > >>>>> have used AT superficially, apparently (I'm guessing) to leverage
>> > >>>>> AT
>> > >>>>> for a publication (AT becoming the research buzz). I'd further
>> > >>>>> guess that a cultural-historical critique of higher education and
>> > >>>>> its promotion incentives would reveal contradictions between the
>> > >>>>> object of furthering activity theory and
>> > >>>>> professors/researchers/educators/etc. personal motives. Perhaps
>> > >>>>> to
>> > >>>>> continue the analogy, we are sometimes seeing mechanics trying to
>> > >>>>> use "breaker bars" where breaker bars are not the appropriate
>> > >>>>> tool.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> bb
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>> Date sent: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 15:19:15 -0400
>> > >>>>>> From: Ana Marjanovic-Shane <ana@zmajcenter.org>
>> > >>>>>> To: Xmca <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
>> > >>>>>> Subject: [xmca] ISCAR - Sevilla 2005 -- Theoretical
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>> Concepts in
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>> CHAT and
>> > >>>>>> their connestion to physical concepts and knowledge
>> > >>>>>> Send reply to: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>> <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca-request@weber.ucsd.edu?subject=unsubscribe>
>> > >>>>>> <mailto:xmca-request@weber.ucsd.edu?subject=subscribe>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> Ana
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> I will try two concepts: each seems to mark a conceptual
>> > >>>>>> dichotomy
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> 1. One concept that seems to divide the ISCAR/socio-cultural
>> > >>>>>> community is its relation to Marxism.
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> For some of the Marxists (or maybe for some eg michael Roth? -
>> > >>>>>> the dialectics is the crucial 'line') , the version of AT known
>> > >>>>>> to
>> > the
>> > >>>>>> West through Yrjo Engestrom's account is regarded as not Marxist
>> > >>>>>> (or maybe not Marxist enough).
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> I felt myself drawn towards this critique of Yrjo's
>> > >>>>>> site/approach
>> > >>>>>> when I saw it being 'applied' in fairly routine
>> > >>>>>> (non-dialectical)
>> > way to
>> > >>>>>> an 'analysis' of the directors of sports-and-drug centres. There
>> > was
>> > >>>>>> no critical analysis of why sports-people use drugs, the
>> > >>>>>> commodification involved in the Olympic industry etc.
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> The theme was there also in David Bakhurst's (and others) talks
>> > >>>>>> in
>> > >>>>>> a different way: he and others suggested that many of the users
>> > >>>>>> of
>> > >>>>>> the (CH-) AT literature (Yrjo got criticised again) are not
>> > faithful to
>> > >>>>>> the originators: eg Hegel, Ilyenkov, Bakhtin, Leont'ev ...
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> (But then I was not impressed by his example of a meaningless
>> > >>>>>> 'object' of activity: I believe he worried about the sense in
>> > >>>>>> which
>> > >>>>>> there was an 'object' of the Russian Revolution. I found this
>> > >>>>>> extraordinary for a philosopher who has read all this Marxism.)
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> On the other hand I was struck by the readiness of Yrjo in his
>> > >>>>>> own
>> > >>>>>> paper/symposium to abandon the familiar model of the AS
>> > >>>>>> (triangles) when the need arises (I hope I understood that
>> > >>>>>> right- I
>> > >>>>>> mean when he talks of wildfire activity).
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> 2. There seems to be a division between those concerned mainly
>> > >>>>>> with identity (and discourse/positioning/subjectivity) and those
>> > >>>>>> concerned more with practice (and activity/system). Some of us
>> > >>>>>> are focussing on working out the dialectics/relations between
>> > >>>>>> the
>> > >>>>>> two (see also Harry Daniels' and other papers).
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> We (some of my colleagues here in Manchester and I) are working
>> > >>>>>> on the theme of discourse-and-practice (you can find our papers
>> > >>>>>> to
>> > >>>>>> sevilla at
>> > >>>>>> http://www.education.man.ac.uk/lta/ISCAR2005/symposium/index.h
>> > >>>>>> tm
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> and would like to hear from others similarly interested in this.
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> Julian
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> Also BTW some more papers from the Sept Manchester
>> > >>>>>> conference on the themes of community, identity and transition
>> > >>>>>> are
>> > >>>>>> at:
>> > >>>>>> http://orgs.man.ac.uk/projects/include/experiment/sctigcon.htm
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>> > >>>>>>> --------------050203030509000100050703
>> > >>>>>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>> > >>>>>>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> ISCAR in Sevilla, September 2005:
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> In a conference of this scope, where one cannot hope to have
>> > attended=20
>> > >>>>>>> even one 10th of all the presentations, it is hard to give any
>> > >>>>>>> overall=20
>> > >>>>>>> evaluations or even impressions. But, XMCA members who did not
>> > come
>> > >>>>>>> to=20
>> > >>>>>>> Sevilla, ought to have some notion of what went on there for 5
>> > days
>> > >>>>>>> in=20
>> > >>>>>>> September 2005. So those of us who were there really need to
>> > >>>>>>> put
>> > our=20
>> > >>>>>>> thoughts together and give some descriptions of what went on.
>> > >>>>>>> That
>> > is=20
>> > >>>>>>> not easy. There are different aspects one can write about,
>> > different=20
>> > >>>>>>> themes that ran through presentations, different aspects of=20
>> > >>>>>>> organization. I will be working from my notes -- taken in haste
>> > >>>>>>> during=20
>> > >>>>>>> the workshops, from the abstracts we received and from some
>> > other=20
>> > >>>>>>> sources people gave us (handouts, web pages). It would be very
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>> useful if=20
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> someone at the XMCA headquarters could put the abstracts in pdf
>> > >>>>>>> format=20
>> > >>>>>>> on the server so that everyone could have an access to them.
>> > (Mike,
>> > >>>>>>> is=20
>> > >>>>>>> it possible to organize it?).
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> The conference was held in 3 buildings of the Department of
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>> Psychology,=20
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> Sociology and Philosophy, at the University of Sevilla. Those
>> > >>>>>>> are
>> > new=20
>> > >>>>>>> buildings (not part of the University main venue in the old
>> > Tobacco=20
>> > >>>>>>> Factory), built with inner balconies and great visibility, so
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>> they were=20
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> easy to navigate. The workshops were held in auditoriums, most
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>> of which=20
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> had a classic layout: a podium with a blackboard and projection
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>> screen,=20
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> and then rows of seats and desks. Everything fixed --
>> > >>>>>>> unmovable.
>> > >>>>>>> There=20
>> > >>>>>>> were just a few rooms without fixed benches -- with panels and
>> > >>>>>>> chairs.=20
>> > >>>>>>> They were used for Poster sessions. My first fear was that the
>> > first=20
>> > >>>>>>> part of our session was assigned a room with fixed benches. We
>> > would=20
>> > >>>>>>> have to move it -- since it was an interactive drama workshop
>> > where=20
>> > >>>>>>> people have to have space to move, group and regroups and
>> > play!!=20
>> > >>>>>>> Fortunately, it was not: we were given one of the poster
>> > >>>>>>> rooms!!
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> We usually don't consciously think of the space and its
>> > >>>>>>> qualities
>> > >>>>>>> when=20
>> > >>>>>>> we participate in activities with intellectual content. But it
>> > is=20
>> > >>>>>>> important. If our beliefs about the mediated quality of
>> > intellectual=20
>> > >>>>>>> growth and functioning are true, then we have to think about
>> > >>>>>>> the
>> > >>>>>>> space=20
>> > >>>>>>> as mediated and mediating. European universities (at least
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>> three of them=20
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> I know, and now Sevilla) are still mediated by another paradigm
>> > about=20
>> > >>>>>>> intellectual processing and education. A paradigm that Vygotsky
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>> started=20
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> to question 100 years ago. It takes much more to have this
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>> understanding=20
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> of ourselves trickle down to those who plan and build schools
>> > and=20
>> > >>>>>>> universities.
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> Participants came from many parts of the world. But not from
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>> everywhere.=20
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> I was happy to see people from Africa -- some of them from
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>> Rwanda! There=20
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> were not many Africans in the previous ISCRAT
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>> conferences. Participants=20
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> came from all continents. There were many people known to us on
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>> the XMCA=20
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> discussion list in the conference: N. Ares, D. Bakhurst, S.
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>> Chaiklin, M.=20
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> Cole, M. de Haan, J. Derry, Y. Engestr=F6m, S. Gaskin, A.
>> > >>>>>>> Goncu,
>> > P.=20
>> > >>>>>>> Hakkarainen, L. Holzman, V. John-Stainer, E. Lampert-Shepel, C.
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>> Lee, E.=20
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> Matusov, D. Robbins, W-M. Roth, A. Stetsenko, A. Surmava, J.
>> > >>>>>>> Valsiner,=20
>> > >>>>>>> B. van Oers, N. Veresov, G. Wells, J. Wertsch..., There were
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>> many more=20
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> we have to learn about.
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> The conference program listed two main themes with lots of sub
>> > themes:
>> > >>>>>>> THEME A.- Theoretical and Methodological Issues
>> > >>>>>>> THEME B.- Acting in changing worlds
>> > >>>>>>> Each workshop was classified within one of the two themes and
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>> within one=20
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> of its subtopics. What was hard on the conference organizers
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>> and on the=20
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> conference attendees was to separate workshops that tackled
>> > similar=20
>> > >>>>>>> problems in time: there were many workshops I wanted to go to,
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>> but they=20
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> were held at the same time. I always had to choose between, at
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>> least two=20
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> competing workshops and more often between three or four. That
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>> was very=20
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> hard to juggle. I ended up running from one to another, missing
>> > >>>>>>> chunks=20
>> > >>>>>>> from each workshop that I wanted to hear, or just worrying that
>> > >>>>>>> I
>> > was=20
>> > >>>>>>> missing something else.
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> Before the conference, I made my own selection of workshops
>> > >>>>>>> which
>> > >>>>>>> have=20
>> > >>>>>>> something to do with play and imagination. That was my personal
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>> program=20
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> guide, I am attaching here. However, I ended up changing it
>> > >>>>>>> to=20
>> > >>>>>>> accommodate other talks which were also important to me.
>> > >>>>>>> [Other=20
>> > >>>>>>> participants in Sevilla: Please send your own selection of
>> > >>>>>>> the=20
>> > >>>>>>> workshops!"]. In my next postings, I will discuss some of
>> > >>>>>>> the=20
>> > >>>>>>> presentations I attended. I invite you who went to Sevilla to
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>> discuss at=20
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> least one of the presentations: one paper, one concept you
>> > heard=20
>> > >>>>>>> discussed, one thought you found important in Sevilla. Each one
>> > >>>>>>> of
>> > us=20
>> > >>>>>>> has a special "pet" interest, and sometimes, special ways to
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>> understand=20
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> or to "objectify" this interest through different selection of
>> > topics=20
>> > >>>>>>> and different people. Maybe you want to connect the questions
>> > >>>>>>> we
>> > >>>>>>> asked=20
>> > >>>>>>> before the Conference with your experience in the conference?
>> > >>>>>>> Or
>> > >>>>>>> maybe=20
>> > >>>>>>> you would want to mention just something unexpected, something
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>> that made=20
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> you think?
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> Until later.
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> Ana
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> _______________________________________________
>> > >>>>>> 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
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>
>> > >> --
>> > >>
>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > >> Ana Marjanovic-Shane
>> > >>
>> > >> 151 W. Tulpehocken St.
>> > >>
>> > >> Philadelphia, PA 19144
>> > >>
>> > >> Home office: (215) 843-2909
>> > >>
>> > >> Mobile: (267) 334-2905
>> > >>
>> > >> _______________________________________________
>> > >> 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
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.10/119 - Release Date:
> 04/10/2005
>
>
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Nov 01 2005 - 01:00:21 PST
