Re: [xmca] Emotion at Work (and Theses on Feuerbach)

Emily--- If you have it to hand, we could put a biblio on XMCA somewhere
prominent (I think concrete psych is there now) and put links where such
exist..
mike

On 8/6/07, E Duvall <duvalleg@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> That sounded like an invitation. Perhaps everyone ought to make a top ten
> Vygotsky related list each year, we could merge them, and then produce an
> annual top ten plus other must reads..... :-)..... xmca top ten for 2007. It
> would be interesting to create and trace the development of the canon...
> what we return to over and over again.
>
> A perennial favorite for me is M. Cole & I. Maltzman (editors), A Handbook
> of Contemporary Soviet Psychology. New York, NY: Basic Books, Inc.
> A current favorite is Vygotsky, L.S. (1929/1986). Concrete human
> psychology: An unpublished manuscript by Vygotsky. Translated by A.A.
> Puzyrei. Psikhologiya,14(1), pp. 51-64. I love the raw notes by Vygotsky and
> the interpretive work by Puzyrei.
> And of course Wolff-Michael's piece in RER! (Wolff-Michael Roth and
> Yew-Jin Lee, "Vygotsky's Neglected Legacy": Cultural-Historical Activity
> Theory, Review of Educational Research 2007 77: 186-232.)
> Gredler's work is a good read as well (Margaret E. Gredler, Of Cabbages
> and Kings: Concepts and Inferences Curiously Attributed to Lev Vygotsky
> (Commentary on McVee, Dunsmore, and Gavelek, 2005) Review of Educational
> Research 2007 77: 233-238.
>
> -Em
>
> -------------- Original message ----------------------
> From: "Mike Cole" <lchcmike@gmail.com>
> > I somehow missed your great bibliographic note, Emily. Glad that Andy
> > brought it back on screen.
> > Chock a block full of even more things that are "must" reading. But oh
> the
> > mammoth proportions of the tangled webs of
> > reference, language slippage, conceptual confusions, not to say the
> absence
> > of anything
> > approach original texts that could be considered (however illusiorally!)
> > authoritative!!
> > mike
> >
> > On 8/5/07, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > Funny you should mention "Theses on Feuerbach" in that respect, Emily.
> > > Because of arguments about translation, etc., I had "Theses"
> translated
> > > especially for marxists.org, and the contentious words in the original
> > > German included to help resolve arguments. And of course, not
> "however"
> > > inserted into Thesis 11.
> > > Andy
> > > At 09:58 PM 5/08/2007 -0400, you wrote:
> > > >In finishing up my dissertation, I ended up back at the Helsinki site
> and
> > > >then moving forward from there. Back to marxists.org in fact... :-)
> > > Theses
> > > >on Feuerbach gets richer in light of new readings... excuse the
> pun....
> > > >and trying to work through material. One of my advisor's always
> cautioned
> > > >that one be aware of versions of versions of versions. Worth going to
> the
> > > >sources. Gillen (2000) does a nice piece on "Versions of Vygotsky",
> > > >British Journal of Educational Studies, 48(2), pp.183-198, discussing
> > > >issues of translation and true authorship of works printed in the
> name of
> > > >Vygotsky, but I digress.
> > > >In terms of activity theory, there was also a nice series in the
> Journal
> > > >of Russian and East European Psychology, May-June, 2004 volume, which
> > > >includes, among others : Mikhailov, "Object-Oriented Activity ­
> Whose?",
> > > >pp.6-34; Lazarev, "The Crisis of "the Activity Approach" in
> Psychology
> > > and
> > > >Possible Ways to Overcome It", 35-58; Gromyko, "The Activity
> Approach:
> > > New
> > > >Lines of Research", pp. 59-71; Rozin, "Value Foundations of
> Conceptions
> > > of
> > > >Activity in Psychology and Contemporary Methodology", pp72-89.
> > > >Dot Robbins' work has been another great source for me
> > > >(http://faculty.cmsu.edu/drobbins/index.html). She had done some nice
> > > work
> > > >differentiating between Vygotsky's cultural and historical approach,
> > > >activity theory/ies, and sociocultural theory/ies. I like her view
> that
> > > >Vygotsky's work is more a metatheory.
> > > >Yeah...everything is filtered through my dissertation these days.
> Hope
> > > >this wasn't too far off.
> > > >
> > > >Andy Blunden wrote:
> > > >>Wow! That's a classic article, Mike. Somehow I've gone all these
> years
> > > >>without reading it. I don't think I was aware of how deeply Engstrom
> > > >>embedded conflict in his idea of "system of activity";
> "contradiction
> > > >>between use-value and exchange value" can sound a little dry until
> you
> > > >>realise that this is just the conflict that Helena was referring to,
> > > >>viz., class interests!
> > > >>This still leaves open a few questions for me:
> > > >>
> > > >>1. Why does this seem "cold" especially when we see how
> conflict-ridden
> > > >>is Leontyev and Engstrom's original idea?
> > > >>2. I can see how "systems of activity" arise objectively out of
> > > >>contradictions or relations in an existing system of activity, by a
> > > >>process of differentiation, but what is the criterion for claiming
> > > >>something to be a "system" of activity, rather than just an
> activity?
> > > >>3. If we can trace the source of negative emotions connected to
> > > learning,
> > > >>in conflict, what is the place of positive emotions, or are emotions
> > > >>simply epiphenomena from the standpoint of learning?
> > > >>
> > > >>Andy
> > > >>At 11:01 AM 5/08/2007 -0700, you wrote:
> > > >>>As I think is true for everyone who has been following this thread,
> I
> > > found
> > > >>>helena's summaries and commentaries
> > > >>>extremely thought provoking. Whenever we dig deep into a topic, as
> in
> > > this
> > > >>>case, my overwhelming impulse is
> > > >>>to feel as if I have to go back to the beginning and rethink
> > > everything, and
> > > >>>then I panic because I will not have time
> > > >>>to do so, and then I start plotting to teach a class "from the
> > > beginning"
> > > >>>and then THAT becomes too complicated
> > > >>>to arrange, and then I start looking for shortcuts.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>In what follows I am not following the emotion line of discussion
> > > although I
> > > >>>believe, along with others here as I interpreted
> > > >>>them, that we all believe emotion to be deeply implicated in
> > > >>>learning/work/earning a living/....... My only thought is that
> > > >>>I want to remember moments of positive emotion, as illustrated in
> the
> > > >>>article and many places, and not restrict emotion
> > > >>>to the consequences of conflict. I don't thinks michael r does
> this,
> > > but in
> > > >>>a couple of the posts, the times of intense
> > > >>>positive emotion experienced might get submerged.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>Rather, I think as I read through some dozen+ messages that the
> terms
> > > >>>"activity" and "activity system" are floating around
> > > >>>in ways that leave me confused, at times, to whether and when
> people
> > > are
> > > >>>agreeomg, elaborating, or talking about different
> > > >>>things.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>I started stumbling over the "making a living" "vs" "commercial
> fishery
> > > >>>production" as different activity systems. There seems
> > > >>>to me to be something incommensurate, in time scale, in what we
> could
> > > mean
> > > >>>by "motive", "need" or "object" these vastly
> > > >>>different enterprises. The relations can't, it seems to me, be seen
> as
> > > >>>activity 1<-->activity2 etc, but perhaps, I was thinking
> > > >>>in terms of embedding, where "fish farming" is one of many
> historically
> > > >>>accumulated ensemble of activities that, as an ensemble,
> > > >>>constitute "making a living" for the social group or the socium in
> > > general.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>Following this line of thought, I was led backward in my thinking
> to
> > > Yrjo's
> > > >>>philosophical anthropology of the evolution from animal
> > > >>>to human activity, where human activity is vastly more
> differentiated
> > > (in
> > > >>>his representation of it) than animal activity.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>I have no great insights to offer here. For those who have never
> done
> > > so, it
> > > >>>might be worthwhile looking at
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> http://www.edu.helsinki.fi/activity/pages/chatanddwr/activitysystem/
> > > >>>
> > > >>>where this story is told in synoptic form and the issue of division
> of
> > > labor
> > > >>>and class come up as well.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>Thanks a lot for the stimulus to re-education, all.
> > > >>>mike
> > > >>>
> > > >>>On 8/5/07, Steve Gabosch <sgabosch@comcast.net> wrote:
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > Many aspects of the situation Wolff-Michael
> > > >>> > describes in the fish hatchery with Erin and Jack
> > > >>> > - layoffs, new management, new policies,
> > > >>> > initiative from workers ignored, solidarity among
> > > >>> > workers, negative attitudes, arguments with
> > > >>> > management, budget cuts, threats of job cuts -
> > > >>> > remind me of hundreds of similar situations I
> > > >>> > have experienced in the aircraft manufacturing
> > > >>> > plants I worked at for many years, and just
> > > >>> > retired from (yea!!). A complex work
> > > >>> > environment like a fish hatchery or a mega
> > > >>> > manufacturing company tends to exaggerate the
> > > >>> > dynamics and contradictions of everyday activity
> > > >>> > - the class conflicts in particular between
> > > >>> > people are more pronounced and expressed in more
> > > >>> > specific ways in a larger production oriented
> > > >>> > workplace than is typically found in a shopping
> > > >>> > mall, neighborhood, or even a school, where
> > > >>> > conflicting needs and motives between and within
> > > >>> > people are always there but tend to be more
> > > >>> > smoothed over and less obvious. As Helena
> > > >>> > indicates, in workplaces, especially if there is
> > > >>> > open activity supporting workers (organizing a
> > > >>> > union, getting a better contract, fighting for
> > > >>> > better working conditions, opposing
> > > >>> > discrimination), deeper social questions rise to
> > > >>> > the surface and can become explicit. And it most
> > > >>> > certainly is a world of many emotions, emotional
> > > >>> > payoffs, varying emotional payoffs, which is
> > > >>> > Wolff-Michael's most important point - emotions are very much at
> > > work at
> > > >>> > work.
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > A way I try to make sense of the zillion
> > > >>> > conflicts between people that can be observed in
> > > >>> > a large factory or any work environment is to try
> > > >>> > to get a handle on what a person's concrete needs
> > > >>> > and motives are. There is usually much more
> > > >>> > going on than meets the eye. Sometimes, even the
> > > >>> > persons involved are not fully aware of (able to
> > > >>> > fully articulate verbally) the multiple needs and
> > > >>> > motives that are driving them and the people
> > > >>> > around them. Helena points to a very common
> > > >>> > conflict, between participating in production and
> > > >>> > earning a living - layoff situations. During a
> > > >>> > layoff, as with Erin, the relationship between
> > > >>> > these two activities becomes problematic. I have
> > > >>> > sure seen that many times! I have been through
> > > >>> > several waves of massive layoffs at Boeing, which
> > > >>> > tends to have a cyclical production cycle, and
> > > >>> > emotions certainly do run high on the job during
> > > >>> > these very difficult situations.
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > Safety issues are another arena where
> > > >>> > "participating in production" can conflict with
> > > >>> > worker's self-interests. Although people are not
> > > >>> > necessarily fully conscious of it, these issues
> > > >>> > get resolved almost minute to minute in dynamic
> > > >>> > ways, sometimes resolved by choosing to get
> > > >>> > something fixed or changed, generating potential
> > > >>> > conflicts with supervision, sometimes resolved by
> > > >>> > working around or through the safety or health
> > > >>> > issue, perhaps just accepting the wear and tear
> > > >>> > on one's body and taking other little
> > > >>> > risks. These issues can hide beneath the surface
> > > >>> > for a while and then break out more dramatically
> > > >>> > when someone gets hurt or something otherwise
> > > >>> > goes wrong (and then the fingerpointing begins,
> > > >>> > where needs and motives may get openly
> > > >>> > debated). Helena alludes to this when she
> > > >>> > points out how safety questions, especially
> > > >>> > incidents and near misses, are really good ways
> > > >>> > to get people to talk about their jobs. Part of
> > > >>> > what makes these stories so interesting is the
> > > >>> > way they reveal conflicting needs and motives,
> > > >>> > between labor and management, between different
> > > >>> > workers with different tasks, between a worker and herself or
> > > himself.
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > Another area of conflicting motives and needs I
> > > >>> > have seen over the years: during union activity
> > > >>> > that could result in a strike, solidarity can
> > > >>> > come into conflict with earning a living. Some
> > > >>> > contemplate crossing a picket line, a
> > > >>> > particularly dramatic example of dealing with
> > > >>> > conflicting motives in a work situation - and one
> > > >>> > with consequences that are likely to generate
> > > >>> > very tense emotional valences, sometimes for a long time after.
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > - Steve
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > At 07:17 PM 8/4/2007 -0500, you wrote:
> > > >>> > >Andy --
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > >Almost. It's not the *key* fact about emotion.
> > > >>> > >However, when there is conflict between the
> > > >>> > >bottom line and the attempt to earn a living,
> > > >>> > >that conflict shapes the knowledge that people
> > > >>> > >bring to bear on resolving the conflict.
> > > >>> > >Sometimes there is no conflict. Either way, the
> > > >>> > >kind of knowledge that people develop in order
> > > >>> > >to survive and protect or improve their jobs is
> > > >>> > >emotionally charged, and that emotion can be
> > > >>> > >seen to have been shaped by the social relations of their work.
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > >Take symphony orchestra players -- for example,
> > > >>> > >the Milwaukee symphony. They organized a union
> > > >>> > >(based on the example of the Chicago symphony)
> > > >>> > >back in the 1970's or earlier. When they started
> > > >>> > >bargaining, the job of a symphony musician was a
> > > >>> > >terrible job. (To check out what a "bad" job for
> > > >>> > >performers is, take a look at the Washington DC
> > > >>> > >ballet.) Over the course of 30 years, the
> > > >>> > >Milwaukee job has become better and better. The
> > > >>> > >musicians have a considerable amount of power --
> > > >>> > >over the choice of program, the hiring of a
> > > >>> > >conductor, the hiring of new musicians, loans
> > > >>> > >for instruments, conditions while touring, etc.
> > > >>> > >Whether the city can afford the good working
> > > >>> > >conditions is another question. Negotiating an
> > > >>> > >incrementally better contract year after year
> > > >>> > >takes knowledge. That knowledge has an emotional
> > > >>> > >valence, positive valence -- to use Wolff-Michael's terms.
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > >At the other extreme, remember the Sago mine
> > > >>> > >tragedy? There was one survivor. While he was in
> > > >>> > >a coma, his wife was interviewed on television.
> > > >>> > >She described how she and her husband had talked
> > > >>> > >about how dangerous the mine was. The problem
> > > >>> > >was that if he left the mine, she'd have to go
> > > >>> > >to work, and there was no job she could get that
> > > >>> > >would pay enough to support them and cover
> > > >>> > >childcare. The actual level of danger, the
> > > >>> > >immediacy of the danger, was unknown to them,
> > > >>> > >although that information existed. This was a
> > > >>> > >mine that had been closed but reopened when the
> > > >>> > >price of gas rose and coal became economically
> > > >>> > >viable. It was a non-union mine. The calculation
> > > >>> > >that she and her husband made about his
> > > >>> > >likelihood of surviving his job was deeply
> > > >>> > >fatalistic. This is a case where someone knew he
> > > >>> > >was engaging in very dangerous work but just
> > > >>> > >went ahead and did it because he felt he had no other choice.
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > >People do work all the time that exposes them to
> > > >>> > >risks, and they know it, and sometimes they know
> > > >>> > >how to do something about it and sometimes they
> > > >>> > >just shrug their shoulders and say, "I can't do anything about
> it."
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > >This body of knowledge about how to survive a
> > > >>> > >job, and how to protect or improve it, is common
> > > >>> > >across all kinds of work. Symphony musicians can
> > > >>> > >talk to grocery clerks can talk to social
> > > >>> > >workers can talk to prison guards can talk to
> > > >>> > >teachers about what they know about it. The
> > > >>> > >emotions are all over the map, depending on
> > > >>> > >their job, but the knowledge is something they have in common.
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > >Helena Worthen
> > > >>> > >NEW EMAIL: hworthen@uiuc.edu
> > > >>> > >Chicago Labor Education Program
> > > >>> > >Suite 110 The Rice Building
> > > >>> > >815 West Van Buren Street
> > > >>> > >Chicago, IL 60607
> > > >>> > >312-996-8733
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > >-----Original Message-----
> > > >>> > >From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
> > > >>> > >[mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden
> > > >>> > >Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2007 1:39 AM
> > > >>> > >To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> > > >>> > >Subject: RE: [xmca] Emotion at Work
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > >That's fascinating Helena. I feel I've got to know you for the
> > > first
> > > >>> > time.
> > > >>> > >Thank you.
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > >Just to clarify: you are saying that conflict (interpreted as
> > > conflict
> > > >>> > >between activity systems, endowing actions with conflicted
> > > motivations,
> > > >>> > >significance, etc.) is *the key* fact about emotion. yes? Would
> you
> > > go
> > > >>> > any
> > > >>> > >further than this? Or is this too narrow?
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > >Andy
> > > >>> > >At 07:04 PM 3/08/2007 -0500, you wrote:
> > > >>> > > >Hello -- I'll try to respond to Wolff-Michael, Andy and Paul
> all
> > > >>> > together,
> > > >>> > > >since all three are picking up on my claim that two, not one
> > > activity
> > > >>> > > >systems are taking place in the fish hatchery where the
> employees
> > > that
> > > >>> > > >Wolf-Michael observed are working. I especially want to reply
> to
> > > >>> Andy's
> > > >>> > > >question, "If someone were to deny that, say, earning and
> living
> > > and
> > > >>> > > >producing a product, were two different activity systems, how
> > > >>> would you
> > > >>> > go
> > > >>> > > >about justifying that?"
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >It has to do with what you're trying to do, what you need the
> > > >>> theory to
> > > >>> > be
> > > >>> > > >able to show or explain.
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >Wolff-Michael's discussion article is an effort to enrich and
> > > expand
> > > >>> > the
> > > >>> > > >theory itself, and I thank him for doing that. He is writing
> "as
> > > part
> > > >>> > of
> > > >>> > > >an effort to develop third-generation-historical activity
> > > theory," and
> > > >>> > to
> > > >>> > > >incorporate emotion, motivation and identity into that
> theory. If
> > > you
> > > >>> > > >picture his audience, he's speaking to other researchers and
> the
> > > >>> > academic
> > > >>> > > >community generally. His data contributes to this effort.
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >I'm dealing with a different problem. I'm trying to explain
> > > something
> > > >>> > that
> > > >>> > > >is going on in my classes. However, I can't do it without
> ALSO
> > > >>> > speaking
> > > >>> > > >to the same audience as Wolff-Michael and engaging with
> theory.
> > > >>> This is
> > > >>> > > >because theory is an indispensable tool for successful
> practice.
> > > But
> > > >>> > I'm
> > > >>> > > >trying to answer the question, "How do we explain the intense
> > > emotion
> > > >>> > with
> > > >>> > > >which the learning produced at work is charged?"
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >In my job as a labor educator for the University of Illinois,
> I
> > > teach
> > > >>> > > >people about work from the point of view of workers. This
> means
> > > >>> > everything
> > > >>> > > >from labor history, labor law, basics of representation and
> > > bargaining
> > > >>> > to
> > > >>> > > >job design, including safety. Just as in any teaching, I have
> to
> > > find
> > > >>> > out
> > > >>> > > >what my students, most of whom are working adults, already
> know
> > > in
> > > >>> > order
> > > >>> > > >to figure out how and what to teach them. This is axiomatic
> in
> > > >>> teaching
> > > >>> > > >kids and undergraduates -- you build on prior knowledge,
> right?
> > > But
> > > >>> > when I
> > > >>> > > >start to investigate what my adult students know, I find it
> > > charged
> > > >>> > with
> > > >>> > > >strong -- sometimes extreme -- emotion. It has other
> > > >>> characteristics as
> > > >>> > > >well, but the one that surfaces immediately in the classroom
> is
> > > this
> > > >>> > > >emotion. It can run the gamut from despair to pride to
> gratitude
> > > to
> > > >>> > > >bitterness. Whatever it is, that's what a teacher has to
> build
> > > on. For
> > > >>> > my
> > > >>> > > >practice as a teacher, I need theory that can account for
> this.
> > > As
> > > >>> > > >Wolff-Michael shows, this emotion is integral to the
> cognitive
> > > >>> activity
> > > >>> > > >going on. The cognitive activity is not "cool," it's hot.
> Where
> > > does
> > > >>> > this
> > > >>> > > >emotion come from? Thus my investment in seeing CHAT
> developed to
> > > >>> > account
> > > >>> > > >for emotion.
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >Sociocultural learning theory generally assumes that social
> > > >>> context has
> > > >>> > a
> > > >>> > > >powerful, if not fully determinative impact on learning. The
> > > Engestrom
> > > >>> > > >model -- the famous triangle -- gives us a representation of
> what
> > > we
> > > >>> > mean
> > > >>> > > >by "social context." Andy, since you ask about "unit of
> > > analysis,"
> > > >>> I'll
> > > >>> > > >respond by saying that I'm happy with the concept of "unit of
> > > >>> analysis"
> > > >>> > > >and furthermore, I like Engestrom's model as an image of the
> unit
> > > of
> > > >>> > > >analysis of an activity system. It's a concise way to
> visualize
> > > >>> all the
> > > >>> > > >things you have to think about when you ask, of a situation,
> > > "What's
> > > >>> > going
> > > >>> > > >on here?" or of a person or group of people, "What are they
> doing
> > > >>> > here?"
> > > >>> > > >The Engestrom model leads me to ask, "What's the nature of
> the
> > > >>> division
> > > >>> > of
> > > >>> > > >labor that I'm looking at?" "Who is the community out of
> which
> > > these
> > > >>> > > >people have been selected?" "What are the history, the
> > > traditions, the
> > > >>> > > >customs, the rules of this activity?" "What are they using --
> > > what
> > > >>> > > >material or cultural tools, what resources or equipment?" and
> > > most
> > > >>> > > >important, "Why are they doing what they're doing?"
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >One of the things you can do with that model is talk about
> how it
> > > >>> > > >transforms and expands, moves via contradictions from one
> > > activity to
> > > >>> > > >another, is part of a network of activity systems or is
> nested in
> > > >>> other
> > > >>> > > >activity systems (I'm looking at Engestrom 1987 Figure 2.11and
> > > 2.12,
> > > >>> > > >here). All I've done is place one activity system opposite
> > > another
> > > >>> > > >activity system to represent that there is a conflict between
> the
> > > two
> > > >>> > > >activity systems. One is the activity system of production,
> the
> > > other
> > > >>> > is
> > > >>> > > >the activity system of earning a living.
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >This is the image I propose to represent the difference
> between
> > > the
> > > >>> > kind
> > > >>> > > >of learning activity that workers engage in when learning how
> to
> > > >>> do the
> > > >>> > > >work they are hired to do, as opposed to the kind of learning
> > > activity
> > > >>> > > >that workers engage in when they are learning how to survive
> at
> > > their
> > > >>> > job
> > > >>> > > >or how to protect or improve their working conditions. These
> two
> > > >>> > activity
> > > >>> > > >systems are driven by different motives. Sometimes there is
> no
> > > >>> conflict
> > > >>> > > >between them but sometimes the conflict is extreme. Either
> way,
> > > we
> > > >>> need
> > > >>> > to
> > > >>> > > >be able to theorize what's going on. Either way, the social
> > > >>> > relationships
> > > >>> > > >of those activity systems impact the learning activity and
> leave
> > > their
> > > >>> > > >mark on it. It seems reasonable to me that that is where the
> > > emotion
> > > >>> > comes
> > > >>> > > >from.
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >Other major theories of learning do not have the potential to
> be
> > > >>> > developed
> > > >>> > > >in this direction. Some theories of learning are individual
> > > >>> (Kolb). But
> > > >>> > > >even among theories that treat learning as a collective
> activity
> > > >>> > > >-- distributed cognition, legitimate peripheral
> participation,
> > > >>> > > >communities of practice, human capital theory -- we don't
> hear
> > > about
> > > >>> > > >conflict. Sometimes this doesn't matter. When we're talking
> about
> > > >>> > school
> > > >>> > > >learning or informal learning such as second language
> acquisition
> > > >>> > outside
> > > >>> > > >school, we may not need to be able to talk about the
> conflicting
> > > >>> > purposes
> > > >>> > > >of the site where the learning is being produced. But if
> we're
> > > talking
> > > >>> > > >about working adults (of whom there are a lot), we do need to
> be
> > > able
> > > >>> > to
> > > >>> > > >surface the reality that what people learn in order to meet
> the
> > > >>> demands
> > > >>> > of
> > > >>> > > >production is sometimes in conflict with what people learn in
> > > order to
> > > >>> > > >survive their jobs, and that this conflict generates emotions
> > > >>> which, as
> > > >>> > > >Wolff-Michael puts it, "are integral to the cognitive
> activity."
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >The easiest stories to elicit from students that illustrate
> this
> > > >>> > conflict
> > > >>> > > >are stories about safety incidents -- accidents, near misses,
> > > etc.
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >Helena
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >Helena Worthen
> > > >>> > > >NEW EMAIL: hworthen@uiuc.edu
> > > >>> > > >Chicago Labor Education Program
> > > >>> > > >Suite 110 The Rice Building
> > > >>> > > >815 West Van Buren Street
> > > >>> > > >Chicago, IL 60607
> > > >>> > > >312-996-8733
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >-----Original Message-----
> > > >>> > > >From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:
> > > xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu]
> > > >>> > On
> > > >>> > > >Behalf Of Paul Dillon
> > > >>> > > >Sent: Friday, August 03, 2007 5:56 AM
> > > >>> > > >To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> > > >>> > > >Subject: Re: [xmca] Emotion at Work
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >Helena,
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > > As I read your comments I found the first activity system
> > > >>> > > > described/named but not the second except insofar as you
> > > identified
> > > >>> > it's
> > > >>> > > > object: making a living, which you contrasted to the object
> of
> > > the
> > > >>> > first
> > > >>> > > > activity system: being a fish culturist. But the first
> activity
> > > >>> > system,
> > > >>> > > > the focus of the discussion paper, was also clearly
> identified
> > > in
> > > >>> > other
> > > >>> > > > activity theoretic categories in your comments. Perhaps
> > > Wollf-Michael
> > > >>> > is
> > > >>> > > > right in saying there is only one activity system. But if
> we,
> > > >>> > adopting
> > > >>> > > > Marx's categories as Engestrom applied them, consider that
> the
> > > >>> > use-value
> > > >>> > > > of being a fish-culturist is doing the best job and getting
> the
> > > >>> > biggest
> > > >>> > > > and healthiest fish as a member of the entire team, while
> the
> > > >>> > > > exchange-value of that job is for each member of the system
> > > "making a
> > > >>> > > > living", the fundamental condition of wage labor, is the
> problem
> > > >>> > > > resolved? I don't remember any analysis of the
> contradictions
> > > >>> > > > between use value and exchange value of the fish culturist's
> > > labor
> > > >>> > in
> > > >>> > > > the paper.
> > > >>> > > > Not too sure about this expanding power stuff either.
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > > I don't know if Engestrom has changed his position about the
> > > >>> > > > contradictions between use and exchange value in activity
> > > systems but
> > > >>> > > > perhaps that would account for your concern which seems to
> be
> > > >>> > addressing
> > > >>> > > > the class character of all labor in capitalist economies.
> Our
> > > ability
> > > >>> > to
> > > >>> > > > participate in "this or that activity" is a function of the
> > > >>> market for
> > > >>> > > > the labor commodity, no matter how skilled. Certainly,when
> one
> > > does
> > > >>> > the
> > > >>> > > > best job they can but still gets laid off, frustration and
> > > resentment
> > > >>> > > > arise. I'm not sure whether the term "wage-laborer", someone
> who
> > > haas
> > > >>> > to
> > > >>> > > > "make a living", as opposed to someone who inherited a lot
> of
> > > money
> > > >>> > for
> > > >>> > > > example, is a category of a specific activity system or one
> of
> > > the
> > > >>> > > > principles of all activity systems in capitalist economies.
> The
> > > >>> > latter
> > > >>> > > > is how I understand Engestrom when he evaluates how ithis
> > > >>> > contradiction
> > > >>> > > > works itself out in the different vertices.
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > > As far as production, distribution, exchange, consumption in
> the
> > > >>> > > > Grundrisse, Marx's analysis in that work showed how
> production
> > > was
> > > >>> > > > determinant of the of the others despite their ability to be
> > > analyzed
> > > >>> > in
> > > >>> > > > terms of each other. Hence commodity production as
> determines
> > > the
> > > >>> > > > specific characteristics of the other elements of the
> economic
> > > system
> > > >>> > as
> > > >>> > > > a whole.
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > > Paul Dillon
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >Wolff-Michael Roth <mroth@uvic.ca> wrote:
> > > >>> > > > Hi Helena,
> > > >>> > > >I am sure all appreciate your extensive comments as much as I
> do.
> > > The
> > > >>> > > >one question I have is about the two activity systems and how
> you
> > > see
> > > >>> > > >them as operating in the hatchery.
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >I think if you took Marx's Capital, or perhaps rather Klaus
> > > >>> > > >Holzkamp's extension of Leont'ev, you would think of one
> rather
> > > than
> > > >>> > > >of two systems. As individuals, we expand our own room to
> > > maneuver---
> > > >>> > > >control over our life situation---if we contribute to the
> > > collective
> > > >>> > > >control over life conditions. By participating in this or
> that
> > > >>> > > >activity (Tätigkeit, deyatel'nost'), we expand our person
> > > control---
> > > >>> > > >we buy food, clothing, a roof over our head, etc.
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >Now you COULD see it as two systems, but the second would be
> an
> > > >>> > > >integral and constitutive part of the first, just as Yrjö
> (1987)
> > > >>> > > >cites the GRUNDRISSE, where Marx writes how production can be
> > > >>> > > >analyzed in terms of consumption, exchange, distribution, and
> > > >>> > > >production; and each of these terms in turn can be analyzed
> in
> > > terms
> > > >>> > > >of production, consumption, distribution, and exchange. Thus
> > > >>> > > >productive activity, such as working in a fish hatchery,
> involves
> > > >>> > > >exchange processes---but whether these constitute activity
> > > >>> > > >(Tätigkeit, deyatel'nost') is another question, which is
> answered
> > > >>> > > >when you ask, so what is societal about this?
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >Thanks again for your careful reading,
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >Cheers,
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >Michael
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >On 1-Aug-07, at 9:20 AM, Helena Harlow Worthen wrote:
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >Hello, xmca --
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >I hope this response is not too late to re-engage in the
> > > discussion
> > > >>> > > >of Wolf-Michael's paper "Emotion at Work." It always seems to
> > > take me
> > > >>> > > >a while to work my way through a paper. By the time I get
> through
> > > it,
> > > >>> > > >and then read through the discussion, the discussion has
> started
> > > to
> > > >>> > > >fade. In addition, I tend to write pretty long responses
> because
> > > I
> > > >>> > > >come to these discussions as a labor educator and therefore
> > > imagine,
> > > >>> > > >rightly or wrongly, that I have to load up my contribution
> with
> > > some
> > > >>> > > >explicit explanations. So apologies for the long post and the
> > > late
> > > >>> > > >contribution, but I'm very interested in hearing anyone's
> reply.
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >Helena Worthen
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >Comments on Wolf-Michael Roth's paper, Emotion at Work
> (MCA14,
> > > 1-2)
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >Wolf-Michael follows the work experience of two employees at
> a
> > > >>> > > >federal fish hatchery in Canada over a period of five years,
> with
> > > a
> > > >>> > > >return visit one year after the five-year period. In this
> > > article, he
> > > >>> > > >is concerned with investigating the relationship between
> emotions
> > > and
> > > >>> > > >motivation and identity for the purpose of incorporating
> these
> > > into
> > > >>> > > >activity theory, which he says has tended toward being a
> theory
> > > of
> > > >>> > > >"cold cognition." He compares the emotions, motivation and
> work
> > > >>> > > >identities of two employees, Erin and Jack, to show how their
> > > >>> > > >feelings about their work relate to their motivation and
> identity
> > > -
> > > >>> > > >or more specifically, how their emotions about their
> expertise at
> > > >>> > > >work and the degree to which it is valued in the workplace
> affect
> > > >>> > > >their motivation to do their work and consequently, their
> > > identity as
> > > >>> > > >workers.
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >Bringing emotion into the discussion of the production of
> > > knowledge
> > > >>> > > >at work is very important, and this ethnographic study
> provides
> > > >>> > > >plenty of material. As someone whose job (labor education)
> > > consists
> > > >>> > > >of teaching employees about the social relations of
> employment
> > > from
> > > >>> > > >the perspective of workers, I appreciate attempts to approach
> the
> > > >>> > > >profoundly important question of how people feel about what
> they
> > > know
> > > >>> > > >and how this affects what they learn on the one hand and what
> > > they do
> > > >>> > > >with what they know on the other hand. Since learning goes on
> all
> > > the
> > > >>> > > >time at work, and since the success or failure of both
> workers
> > > and
> > > >>> > > >workplaces is tightly related to what is learned and what is
> done
> > > >>> > > >with that knowledge, this is a question of general interest
> to
> > > both
> > > >>> > > >employees and management.
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >However, I would argue that Wolf-Michael's study would
> benefit
> > > from a
> > > >>> > > >step which would have to be taken early in the analysis. I
> would
> > > like
> > > >>> > > >to see the comparison of the emotional valence of Erin and
> Jack's
> > > >>> > > >deployment of their expertise framed in terms of not one
> activity
> > > >>> > > >system but two. First is the activity system of production
> and
> > > second
> > > >>> > > >is the activity system of earning a living. Through the
> division
> > > of
> > > >>> > > >labor of the first system, Jack and Erin are fish culturists,
> > > engaged
> > > >>> > > >in fish feeding, ordering feed, cleaning the fishpond and
> other
> > > >>> > > >actions that contribute to the overall activity of fish
> hatching
> > > (p.
> > > >>> > > >45). In this first system, their goal-directed actions are
> > > consistent
> > > >>> > > >with the collective motive of the hatchery: hatching fish.
> But
> > > >>> > > >through the division of labor of the second, they are
> employees
> > > who
> > > >>> > > >are trying to earn a living. Not always, but sometimes, these
> two
> > > >>> > > >activity systems conflict, with resulting tensions between
> the
> > > >>> > > >emotions, motivations and identities associated with them.
> Wolf-
> > > >>> > > >Michael notes that Jack and Erin could be doing the same
> actions
> > > in a
> > > >>> > > >backyard fish pond, where they would also be engaged in a
> > > different
> > > >>> > > >activity system (motivated by recreation, not production or
> > > earning a
> > > >>> > > >living), but he doesn't distinguish between the two activity
> > > systems
> > > >>> > > >that are taking place at the workplace - fish hatching and
> > > earning a
> > > >>> > > >living.
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >For example: Wolf-Michael's description of Erin's voice pitch
> as
> > > she
> > > >>> > > >analyses the computer generated plot of fish length and
> weight
> > > >>> > > >(rising pitch, positive valence of emotion) is taken from a
> > > moment
> > > >>> > > >when she is talking about her work in the activity system of
> fish
> > > >>> > > >hatching. He does not provide a description of her voice
> pitch
> > > when
> > > >>> > > >she is talking about the changes undertaken by the new
> management
> > > or
> > > >>> > > >the impending layoffs, although he does report that at the
> time
> > > when
> > > >>> > > >she is being laid off, the emotions expressed through voice
> pitch
> > > (p.
> > > >>> > > >50) are wider in range and there are "many more emotional
> > > outbursts
> > > >>> > > >with large differences" (p 52). I would have said here that
> we're
> > > >>> > > >looking at the emotional tension between Erin's pride in her
> > > >>> > > >expertise as a fish culturist and her anger as an employee at
> > > being
> > > >>> > > >laid off - one activity system (fish culturing) is going well
> and
> > > the
> > > >>> > > >other (earning a living) is going badly. If we are looking at
> two
> > > >>> > > >systems, we can understand why Erin, for example, might feel
> > > proud
> > > >>> > > >and committed with regard to her work as a fish culturist but
> > > anxious
> > > >>> > > >and even bitter with regard to her job, and that these two
> > > emotions
> > > >>> > > >would be in tension with each other.
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >Similarly, Wolf-Michael's description of Jack's emotional
> state
> > > could
> > > >>> > > >also benefit from being understood as the tension between
> being
> > > >>> > > >engaged in two conflicting activity systems at once.
> Wolf-Michael
> > > >>> > > >gives us more information about Jack. Although he is a gifted
> and
> > > >>> > > >conscientious fish culturist who developed some original
> > > experiments
> > > >>> > > >and did research that at first got some recognition, the
> hatchery
> > > is
> > > >>> > > >now under the new management and support for his professional
> > > >>> > > >development has evaporated. He is seeing doors of opportunity
> > > >>> > > >closing. He's understandably angry and cuts back on his
> > > investment in
> > > >>> > > >the fish hatchery beyond what he has to do to earn a living:
> he
> > > re-
> > > >>> > > >calibrates his commitment to being just an employee.
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >Separating out these two activity systems early in the
> analysis
> > > >>> > > >allows us to see how the knowledge or expertise produced
> within
> > > each
> > > >>> > > >of them becomes charged with emotional valence. Wolf-Michael
> > > proposes
> > > >>> > > >"positive" and "negative" labels for this valence, which we
> might
> > > >>> > > >expand by proposing pride, enthusiasm, elation, curiosity,
> > > anxiety,
> > > >>> > > >disappointment, fear, anger, bitterness, etc - some of these
> are
> > > Wolf-
> > > >>> > > >Michael's. This separation would open the door in two
> directions.
> > > >>> > > >In one direction we would look outward to the pressures on
> that
> > > >>> > > >workplace from society which are typically transmitted
> through
> > > >>> > > >management into a workplace. In the other direction we would
> look
> > > to
> > > >>> > > >see the relationship between individual workers and the
> > > collective of
> > > >>> > > >workers. Activity theory helps us hold these two perspectives
> > > steady
> > > >>> > > >while we investigate what is going on in each of them.
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >Looking outward, in order to really understand the social
> > > >>> > > >relationships of a workplace and thereby to interpret how
> people
> > > are
> > > >>> > > >behaving and feeling, we need to be explicit about the
> industrial
> > > >>> > > >relations system within which that workplace is operating. We
> > > need to
> > > >>> > > >look closely at the concrete reality of the division of labor
> > > that
> > > >>> > > >has sorted some people into management, others into employees
> (or
> > > in
> > > >>> > > >this case, two people into management, five into fish
> > > culturalists,
> > > >>> > > >two into maintenance/administrative assistant staff workers,
> and
> > > >>> > > >perhaps thirty into seasonal employees). Looking inward, we
> need
> > > to
> > > >>> > > >understand what kind of solidarity (Michael's word in page
> 59,
> > > >>> > > >although he notes it as something that "fuels invidiaul
> short-and
> > > >>> > > >long-term emotional states") is available to the employees.
> These
> > > two
> > > >>> > > >dimensions, both easily approached through activity theory,
> will
> > > give
> > > >>> > > >us the concrete reality of the kind of control that the
> managers
> > > have
> > > >>> > > >(or don't have) over the work done by Jack, Erin and the
> other
> > > >>> > > >employees. How was this division of labor established and how
> is
> > > it
> > > >>> > > >maintained? What are its edges and limits? What are the
> resources
> > > of
> > > >>> > > >the employees? The answers to these questions would provide
> the
> > > >>> > > >framework, or matrix, within which the emotions that
> Wolf-Michael
> > > is
> > > >>> > > >writing about are generated.
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >Wolf-Michael tells us a few things about the concrete social
> > > >>> > > >relationships of the hatchery, so that we can extrapolate
> what is
> > > >>> > > >probably going on. There are 18 federal fish hatcheries in
> this
> > > >>> > > >province and this one employs 2 managers, 5 culturists, a
> > > maintenance
> > > >>> > > >person and an administrative assistant, and up to 30 seasonal
> > > temps.
> > > >>> > > >This means that there are not a lot of alternative jobs for
> fish
> > > >>> > > >culturists (especially for one like Jack who has only a high
> > > school
> > > >>> > > >education) so that keeping one's job is very important. There
> is
> > > new
> > > >>> > > >management and thus probably new employment practices on the
> > > agenda.
> > > >>> > > >Costs are closely watched to the point of choosing what kind
> of
> > > feed
> > > >>> > > >to give the fish and whether to drive 50 kilometers to
> exchange a
> > > set
> > > >>> > > >of keys, and the survival of hatchery is always in question
> (p.
> > > 53).
> > > >>> > > >We can't tell much more than this, except that "collectively,
> > > then,
> > > >>> > > >there was a sense that things were going from bad to worse"
> (p.
> > > 56).
> > > >>> > > >It would help if we knew what the overall agenda of the new
> > > >>> > > >management was with regard to budget and target number of
> > > employees;
> > > >>> > > >that, after all, is the overarching framework of the social
> > > >>> > > >relationships of the workplace which are being experienced by
> the
> > > >>> > > >employees. If we were looking at this material as an activity
> > > system
> > > >>> > > >in which managers were trying to manage a workplace during a
> > > period
> > > >>> > > >of budget cuts and downsizing, and employees were trying to
> earn
> > > a
> > > >>> > > >living and protect or improve working conditions (including
> job
> > > >>> > > >security and earnings) at that same workplace, we could
> > > understand
> > > >>> > > >the emotional valence in which the knowledge of how to do
> these
> > > >>> > > >complementary and conflicting activities becomes charged.
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >It's within the workforce, obviously, not between the two
> > > managers,
> > > >>> > > >that the "sense that things were going from bad to worse" is
> > > >>> > > >generated. Wolf-Michael notes this: "Interactions with the
> new
> > > >>> > > >managers were laden with conflict" (p. 57). We are now
> looking at
> > > >>> > > >Jack as a member of the workforce, and Erin as a member of
> the
> > > >>> > > >workforce - them as employees, not as fish culturists. Not
> > > >>> > > >surprisingly, Jack - who as an older employee (he was in fact
> > > once
> > > >>> > > >Erin's mentor) has fewer options in case he is laid off -
> resorts
> > > to
> > > >>> > > >his knowledge of how to behave as just an employee - not
> someone
> > > who,
> > > >>> > > >as a fish culturist, gives 300%, but someone who as an
> employee
> > > >>> > > >calculates how to invest the least effort for the highest
> return.
> > > He
> > > >>> > > >works to rule and minimizes contact with the new management.
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >Finally, in the absence of making the distinction between the
> two
> > > >>> > > >activity systems that are going among the workers at the fish
> > > >>> > > >hatchery at the same time (hatching fish and earning a
> living),
> > > we
> > > >>> > > >have a hard time making sense of what we're reading on
> several
> > > >>> > > >accounts. The fish hatchery is referred to as a "collective."
> > > >>> > > >Although we are not told much about the collective solidarity
> of
> > > the
> > > >>> > > >workforce, it sounds as if Jack is pretty isolated in his
> > > withdrawal
> > > >>> > > >into work to rule. When we get to the final section on page
> 59
> > > where
> > > >>> > > >Wolf-Michael is talking about the phenomenon of collective
> > > emotion
> > > >>> > > >and its connection to individual emotion,it sounds as if he's
> > > saying
> > > >>> > > >that everyone who works at the fish hatchery, the new
> management
> > > >>> > > >included, is part of the collective. I would argue that the
> > > >>> > > >collective is not the whole hatchery including the new
> > > management,
> > > >>> > > >but that it's the employees for whom the hatchery is a way to
> > > earn a
> > > >>> > > >living. This essence, which can be left in the background
> when
> > > >>> > > >budgets are generous and jobs are secure, jumps into the
> > > foregrand
> > > >>> > > >during a period of layoffs and budget cuts, which is what is
> > > >>> > > >happening in this fish hatchery.
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >Helena Worthen
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >University of Illinois Labor Education Program
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >Institute of Labor and Industrial Relations
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >hworthen@uiuc.edu
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >_______________________________________________
> > > >>> > > >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
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >---------------------------------
> > > >>> > > >Need a vacation? Get great deals to amazing places on Yahoo!
> > > Travel.
> > > >>> > > >_______________________________________________
> > > >>> > > >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 : http://home.mira.net/~andy/ tel (H) +61 3 9380
> > > 9435,
> > > >>> > AIM
> > > >>> > >identity: AndyMarxists mobile 0409 358 651
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > >_______________________________________________
> > > >>> > >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
> > > >>
> > > >>Andy Blunden : http://home.mira.net/~andy/ tel (H) +61 3 9380 9435,
> AIM
> > > >>identity: AndyMarxists mobile 0409 358 651
> > > >>
> > > >>_______________________________________________
> > > >>xmca mailing list
> > > >>xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > > >>http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >--
> > > >He only earns his freedom and his life, who takes them every day by
> > > storm.
> > > >-- Johann Wolfgang Goethe
> > > >
> > > >Emily Duvall
> > > >Doctoral Candidate (ABD) / Graduate Assistant-Instructor
> > > >Language and Literacy Education (LLED)
> > > >Department of Curriculum and Instruction
> > > >College of Education
> > > >Penn State University
> > > >256 Chambers Bldg.
> > > >University Park , PA 16802
> > > >814-861-3315 (home)
> > > >814-404-6175 (cell)
> > > >814-863-4511 (office)
> > > >FAX: 814-863-7602
> > > >email: edd130@psu.edu
> > > >
> > > >_______________________________________________
> > > >xmca mailing list
> > > >xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > > >http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> > >
> > > Andy Blunden : http://home.mira.net/~andy/ tel (H) +61 3 9380 9435,
> AIM
> > > identity: AndyMarxists mobile 0409 358 651
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
Received on Mon Aug 6 12:50 PDT 2007