Kevin-- We have a paper-for-discussion section on xmca webpage. We can post
it there.
And, if you can fuzz the video and send on DVD we can post it as well.
mike
On 4/25/06, O'Connor, Kevin <kevin.oconnor@rochester.edu> wrote:
>
> Hi Mike, Bill, and others-
> I'd welcome the opportunity for discussion of this paper on xmca. I agree
> with Mike that viewing the video in conjunction with reading the paper could
> add to the discussion to some extent - this would also complicate things, as
> I would need to electronically mask participants before the video could be
> posted online. Today I will look into what resources I might have available
> to me for doing so.
>
> Mike, would you suggest attaching the paper to a message to the list, or
> some other way of making it available?
>
> I'm looking forward to it!
> Thanks,
> Kevin
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu on behalf of Mike Cole
> Sent: Mon 4/24/2006 5:25 PM
> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> Subject: Re: [xmca] legitimacy
>
> Hi bb, Keven, et al.
>
> I was thinking that if we could perhaps read the paper and see a video
> segment of the interactions (we could post, or kevin, or.....) It would
> make
> a for a productive discussion.
>
> mike
>
> On 4/24/06, bb <xmca-whoever@comcast.net> wrote:
> >
> > The title of Kevin's paper looks very interesting. Mike, maybe the x
> can
> > discuss this?
> > bb
> > On Monday 24 April 2006 2:37 pm, O'Connor, Kevin wrote:
> > > On 4/17/06 3:03 PM, "bb" <xmca-whoever@comcast.net> wrote:
> > > > CoP certainly seems useful for the lads study in that it addresses
> > > > identity development -- in the lads view they have become outsiders
> --
> > > > but the socio-economic/cultural-historical dimensions that lead this
> > > > development of conciousness are not well laid out in the CoP
> > framework,
> > > > last I checked. What are boundaries of the community in other ways
> > seem
> > > > to need more definition. Still, as you point out Nancy, there is a
> lot
> > of
> > > > purchase in the notion of LPP. Is there anything recent about who
> > > > determines what is "legitimate"?
> > >
> > > Bill asks if there's anything recent about who determines what is
> > > "legitimate." I have a couple of papers that address some of the
> > > interesting issues regarding legitimacy, boundary crossing, etc., that
> > are
> > > raised in this thread.
> > >
> > > One of the arguments of these papers is that some CoP research (e.g.,
> > much
> > > of the work that uses the concept of CoP for designing learning
> > contexts)
> > > has taken L&Wšs focus on (mostly) bounded, stable, and benign CoPšs as
> a
> > > model for studying all CoPšs. This has backgrounded crucial issues
> like
> > > those that Bill and others raise on the sources of legitimacy,
> etc. But
> > if
> > > we look at L&Wšs focus on these sorts of CoPšs as acknowledged
> > > simplifications made for strategic analytic purposes rather than as a
> > > description of all CoPšs, it leads us to suspend these simplified
> > > assumptions and open us up to taking on different kinds of analyses
> that
> > > foreground different aspects of CoP's.
> > >
> > > The direction Išve taken with this has been to make a different
> > strategic
> > > choice, i.e. to study a setting in which boundedness, stability, and
> > > benignness are clearly not reasonable assumptions to make, in that key
> > > disciplinary and institutional values and practices are overtly
> > undergoing
> > > transformation (e.g., bringing historically separated institutions
> into
> > > contact through videoconferencing technology). I closely examined the
> > > communicative processes by means of which participants in interaction
> > > construct and, more importantly, contest the identity of various
> > > communities and their roles in them e.g., as legitimate participants
> > or
> > > not. Some of the socio/cultural/historical dimensions that Bill and
> > Nancy
> > > want to see are available in the interactional details, and these are
> > what
> > > my analyses try to show.
> > >
> > > For those who might be interested, the most relevant reference is
> below.
> > > I'd be happy to send a copy if you don't have easy access to the book.
> > >
> > > Kevin
> > >
> > >
> > > OšConnor, K. (2003). Communicative practice, cultural production, and
> > > situated learning: Constructing and contesting identities of expertise
> > in a
> > > heterogeneous learning context. In S. Wortham and B. Rymes (Eds.),
> > > Linguistic anthropology of education. Westport, CT: Praeger.
> >
>
> ********************
> Kevin O'Connor
> Assistant Professor
> University of Rochester
> Warner School of Education and Human Development
> 1-320 Dewey Hall
> Rochester NY 14627
>
> 585-273-3430
> kevin.oconnor@rochester.edu
>
> ********************
>
>
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon May 01 2006 - 01:00:12 PDT