Re: [xmca] The Evolution of CHAT

It would be interesting and very useful if each bibliographic reference
could get a very short annotation which could be expandable by
individual contributions (of limited size). We could also develop a
network of tags (key words and phrases) that could be attached to each
reference and form a non-linear web -- instead of developing strict
categories?
Ana

Mike Cole wrote:
> Yep--
>
> My suggestion is that we follow multiple paths and coordinate results and
> inform each other of progress.
> A few things are in motion.
> 1. Cathrene is collecting sources sent to her that purport to provide
> relevant historical accounts.
> 2. Cathrene and I are conspiring with a local librarian to get a
> bibliogrpahic program that represents time and
> connections together and we have hopes of a local history grad student and
> history professor interested in
> multi-media representations of history (so that non-linear elements, such as
> andy tossing 2000 into 2007 so we can
> see from two sides at once) are represented.
> 3. Michael Roth has offered a source of quotes and there must be a way to
> feed those data into a structure data base with temporal parameters in it.
> Not sure who will follow up on that.
> 4. The issue is apparently going on the agenda for ISCAR.
>
> What else??
> mike
> On 9/16/07, Emily Duvall <emily@uidaho.edu> wrote:
>
>> I agree Paul, to a point. I don't think citations are as impartial as we
>> might like to think.
>> Citations are important for academic work, but for various reasons that
>> are not necessarily connected to the content. In some schools (maybe all?)
>> how many times ones work has been cited can have an impact on
>> tenure/promotion in which case (I have heard) encouraging folks to cite
>> one's work has become part of the process. This has become a little more
>> interesting given that the current directions for citations are to cite only
>> those that you quote or refer to directly.
>> It doesn't take into consideration what we may recommend to others to read
>> or, for that matter, what we may read ourselves.
>> I think that some form of weighting is important, but should take into
>> consideration what we all believe to be foundational, or perhaps what we may
>> have actually read.
>> That said, I have no solution other than to add in a survey of top ten and
>> check off of items read that could easily load into a data base. More bean
>> counting, for sure, but balancing the weight of jobs and pubs with other
>> criteria.
>> My suggestion re organizing material categorically was more my own bias re
>> how I think about material historically.
>> On the other hand, my meanderings needn't make the process more
>> problematic that it may seem to appear. Perhaps your approach is a better
>> beginning... :-)
>> Any other suggestions out there?
>> ~ Em
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On
>> Behalf Of Paul Dillon
>> Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 10:31 AM
>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>> Subject: RE: [xmca] The Evolution of CHAT
>>
>> Emily,
>>
>> The use of citations needn't claim to be anything more than that. But I
>> really can't think of anything else that could provide an impartial index of
>> the relative importance of the contributions of the people or the specific
>> works themselves. Such an index would also reveal the sub-groups, branches,
>> etc., more consistently than an attempt to evaluate those structures on the
>> basis of an evaluation of the content - e.g., evaluating the different
>> approaches to "internalization". Moreover, it would be faster to produce
>> (using SSRI or other citation indexes) A "before, during, and after"
>> approach wouldn't reveal much of the structure of the discourse or the
>> interconnections between those who have contributed in some lasting way.
>>
>> Paul
>>
>>
>> Emily Duvall <emily@uidaho.edu> wrote:
>> Perhaps we generally sort pre-Vygoskian matter, during Vygotsky,
>> post-Vygotsky....literally using dates as an initial sort and then tree out
>> the former and the latter?
>> I worry about weight.
>> ~ Em
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On
>> Behalf Of Paul Dillon
>> Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 11:40 PM
>> To: mcole@weber.ucsd.edu; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>> Subject: Re: [xmca] The Evolution of CHAT
>>
>> Might it be as easy as counting the references and establishing weighted
>> links that way?
>>
>> Paul
>>
>> Mike Cole wrote:
>> Hi H&P ( nice pairing of initials to print by)--
>>
>> I was kind of thinking of Steve Gould-ish pictures too, but worrying about
>> the issues that Paul raises.
>> I love the idea of plastering whatever the representation is with
>> xmca/xlchc
>> notes, but also figured we
>> would have references to printed article and where possible, links to
>> those
>> sources.
>>
>> We have a librarian who is being very helpful in thinking about this, but
>> I
>> think Cathrene should be controlling the pace
>> while the rest of us feed materials into some kind of retrievable-from
>> structure.
>>
>> Can't think beyond that. Something not too big, not too little, not to
>> structured master narrative not too disjointed to make sense of, something
>> kind of
>> half baked but potentially nourishing with the input of a little energy.
>>
>> You know, something easy.
>> :-)
>> mike
>> On 9/13/07, Paul Dillon
>> wrote:
>>
>>> It occurred to me that this process of producing a history of CHAT
>>> could be approached as a tree shaped history beginning in LSV of which
>>>
>> CHAT
>>
>>> would be one branch, or as a tree beginning with CHAT, a current point
>>>
>> on
>>
>>> the river with many tributaries of which LSV would be one of the most
>>> important. In either event it does seem to risk reification and future
>>>
>> use
>>
>>> as dogma. Perhaps a cross-referenced web of connections (a hyper-text),
>>>
>> a
>>
>>> multi-dimensional web of connections of different intensities and
>>>
>> strengths
>>
>>> between ideas and scholars (including their institutional connections)
>>>
>> might
>>
>>> make a better representation. Like a wiki it wouldn't risk dogmatic
>>> authority or the creation of reifying categories.
>>>
>>> Paul Dillon
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Worthen, Helena Harlow" wrote:
>>> Mike, these NOT yes or no answer questions! :)
>>>
>>> What I was picturing was more like the construction of a tree-shaped
>>> history, with its roots in the 1920's with LSV and its branches reaching
>>> into the present, and its surface made of a jigsaw of people's memories
>>>
>> of
>>
>>> what happened when. Not readings, but contributions to xmca. Some are in
>>>
>> the
>>
>>> archives already.
>>>
>>> For example, the kind of things Dot Robbins was actually present for.
>>>
>>> Your own experience in the 1960's.
>>>
>>> The fact that, in the 1990's, Mohamed felt it was important to pull
>>> together this bibliography that demonstrated that there were Vygotsky
>>> studies taking place in countries and languages that had very little
>>> cross-communication.
>>>
>>> My little note about Bauer and Bruner which was meant to show that in
>>>
>> the
>>
>>> 1940's and 1950's, Vygotsky in the US was a shadow figure who belonged
>>>
>> to
>>
>>> the enemy, which still lingers in questions about whether he was a
>>>
>> Marxist
>>
>>> or not.
>>>
>>> The questions you list open the door to discussions that could go back
>>>
>> and
>>
>>> forth for a long time. I'm trying to stick with Cathrene's request, from
>>> down at the bottom of this message. She wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi everyone:
>>> Tony's eloquent characterization of "behaviorist hegemony giving way to
>>> cognitivist hegemony, which in turn is being challenged by a turn to the
>>> broader perspective of social ontology" is well put. How CHAT is being
>>> presented to the rugged individualists (albeit mythological entities) in
>>> our teacher ed programs is of interest to me as well. It would further
>>>
>> be
>>
>>> helpful for CHAT neophytes like myself to hear how those of you who have
>>> shaped CHAT view how the domain has genetically evolved and, in some
>>>
>> cases,
>>
>>> splintered (i.e. the differences between sociocultural theory vs.
>>>
>> activity
>>
>>> theory).
>>>
>>> We could find out "how the domain has genetically evolved" if the wise
>>> ones on this list would tell us what they saw happening, and when. Or,
>>>
>> if
>>
>>> the wise ones are to busy, someone (?) could select out from the
>>>
>> archives
>>
>>> some of the more remarkable "I was there when..." stories.
>>>
>>> Does anyone know where Eva Ekblad is?
>>>
>>> Helena
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Helena Worthen, Clinical Associate Professor
>>> Labor Education Program, Institute of Labor & Industrial Relations
>>> University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign
>>> 504 E. Armory, Room 227
>>> Champaign, IL 61821
>>> Phone: 217-244-4095
>>> hworthen@uiuc.edu
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu]
>>>
>> On
>>
>>> Behalf Of Mike Cole
>>> Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 4:15 PM
>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>>> Subject: Re: [xmca] The Evolution of CHAT
>>>
>>> Do you think that broadening the project to include, for example, all
>>>
>> the
>>
>>> articles that have ever been written about or by Vygotsky would be the
>>>
>> way
>>
>>> to go, Helena? I was thinking
>>> more of people's concerns with questions like:
>>>
>>> Did Vygotsky really consider activity as a basic category or was he a
>>> semiotician at heart?
>>> Did Vygotsky really get all his ideas from the French or Shpet in
>>>
>> Russia,
>>
>>> or........??
>>> Did Leontiev elaborate or distort LSV's ideas?
>>> Was Vygotksy a Marxist? Always, never, only when forced to act like one?
>>> Do Americans routinely mis-interpret both LSV and activity theory in
>>> general
>>> and in that connection create false histories?
>>>
>>> I doubt if anyone on xmca thinks there is one right answer to be found
>>>
>> in
>>
>>> THE real history
>>> of this real of ideas. Rather, I was under the impression that there is
>>>
>> a
>>
>>> lot of interest in this and many allied questions that it might be able
>>>
>> to
>>
>>> provide materials relevant to in a systematic manner. Seems like there
>>>
>> are
>>
>>> some cool bibliographic resources to be
>>> had, cheap, at some institutions, UCSD turning out to be one of them
>>>
>> (not
>>
>>> Ithica college
>>> however).
>>>
>>> In this light, I assume that some subset of the articles in Mohammed's
>>> bibliography would
>>> be relevant, many would not. But that is only *my* take on what the
>>> discussion was pointing toward. And even that cut-down version seems
>>> pretty
>>> ambitious!!
>>> mike
>>> On 9/13/07, Worthen, Helena Harlow wrote:
>>>
>>>> Andrew, can you say more about the teacher who "abandons the alphabet
>>>>
>>> and
>>>
>>>> begins instead with a large and sustained focus on each child's name,"
>>>>
>>> and
>>>
>>>> does this following a training provided by the ministry of education?
>>>>
>>>> Helena Worthen, Clinical Associate Professor
>>>> Labor Education Program, Institute of Labor & Industrial Relations
>>>> University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign
>>>> 504 E. Armory, Room 227
>>>> Champaign, IL 61821
>>>> Phone: 217-244-4095
>>>> hworthen@uiuc.edu
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu]
>>>>
>>> On
>>>
>>>> Behalf Of Andrew Coppens
>>>> Sent: Sunday, September 09, 2007 2:10 PM
>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>>>> Subject: Re: [xmca] The Evolution of CHAT
>>>>
>>>> Hi Ana Paula,
>>>>
>>>> I would be very interested to hear more about how you
>>>> and your colleagues carry this out, especially in
>>>> terms of language learning. Well, come to think of it
>>>> I'm really interested in the whole thing!
>>>>
>>>> I currently work with local teachers in environmental
>>>> education and English classes in rural public schools
>>>> in Nicaragua, and also teach English with a group of
>>>> adolescents in the community where I live (and many
>>>> colleagues of mine in other parts of the country do
>>>> similar things). In these small communities the fact
>>>> that school curricula is so often removed from social
>>>> and community activity is (for me, being educated in
>>>> large schools in the U.S.) held in striking relief
>>>> because, for the most part, all students live very
>>>> close to each other and have long histories with thier
>>>> communities often spanning generations. It would be my
>>>> guess that these schools might especially benefit from
>>>> your developments, being able to teach not only in the
>>>> context of social activities generally common to 5th
>>>> grade boys, for example, but also to 5th grade boys
>>>> in THAT town.
>>>>
>>>> In some ways this connects with my experience in
>>>> another sense as well. The first grade teacher in one
>>>> of the schools I work with has shared with me an
>>>> approach to teaching reading and writing that she has
>>>> recently been implementing, based on training given
>>>> from the national ministry of education. It mostly
>>>> abandons the alphabet and begins instead with a large
>>>> and sustained focus on each child's name, then the
>>>> names of thier friends, and so on. She has had great
>>>> success.
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for offering to share your work. I'm excited
>>>> to learn more.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> Andrew
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --- Mike Cole wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Ana Paula--
>>>>>
>>>>> *I* want to know more!! Please!
>>>>> mike
>>>>> PS- I am (incidentally?) interested in your
>>>>> statement that " every teenager
>>>>> suffers with this process- [of first love]; What
>>>>> does the word,
>>>>> "suffer" mean:? I am a...... sort of...... well.....
>>>>> not a lot more than
>>>>> middle age (??) man and I am married to my 15 year
>>>>> old first love. You think
>>>>> teenagers know about suffering? Ask my wife!!
>>>>> :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> (and, really write more)
>>>>>
>>>>> On 9/6/07, Ana Paula B. R. Cortez
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Dear colleagues,
>>>>>> I have to be honest and tell you that I haven't
>>>>>>
>>>>> read the whole
>>>>>
>>>>>> discussion and I'm not sure if what I'll write has
>>>>>>
>>>>> to do with you've been
>>>>>
>>>>>> writing about, but I felt I could contribute with
>>>>>>
>>>>> it.
>>>>>
>>>>>> I work at a bilingual school in the city of São
>>>>>>
>>>>> Paulo, Brazil, and since
>>>>>
>>>>>> 2005 we've been teaching English and the subjects
>>>>>>
>>>>> in English (science, math
>>>>>
>>>>>> and social studies) with the help of CHAT.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Basically (and very
>>>>>
>>>>>> simplistically), we teach contents inside social
>>>>>>
>>>>> activities. Let me give you
>>>>>
>>>>>> an example: think about the subject, an age group
>>>>>>
>>>>> and their grade, let's say
>>>>>
>>>>>> language, year 6; then, the kinds of social
>>>>>>
>>>>> activities in which students
>>>>>
>>>>>> would be involved in their real lives, not school
>>>>>>
>>>>> context (I like the one I
>>>>>
>>>>>> call "my first love" - every teenager suffers with
>>>>>>
>>>>> this process); finally,
>>>>>
>>>>>> what the actions in this activity were, the
>>>>>>
>>>>> subjects involved (all the
>>>>>
>>>>>> elements of an activity and their roles: what the
>>>>>>
>>>>> teacher would say and do
>>>>>
>>>>>> to support and help adolescents in the process;
>>>>>>
>>>>> the students' roles as well
>>>>>
>>>>>> - sharing feelings and experiences with friends,
>>>>>>
>>>>> family, contacting magazine
>>>>>
>>>>>> "agony aunts" and everything else that it takes),
>>>>>>
>>>>> the language (linguistic
>>>>>
>>>>>> devices, genres,
>>>>>> whatever) needed, so on an so forth. Then, we
>>>>>>
>>>>> organise the whole
>>>>>
>>>>>> curriculum based on this process, that's it.
>>>>>> I know I might not have been that clear, but it
>>>>>>
>>>>> took me my whole master
>>>>>
>>>>>> course and my dissertation to develop it, and it's
>>>>>>
>>>>> been very successful (I
>>>>>
>>>>>> presented it in Russia and Finland last year). In
>>>>>>
>>>>> case you feel like knowing
>>>>>
>>>>>> it, I can provide more details. I've been thinking
>>>>>>
>>>>> about writing a book to
>>>>>
>>>>>> share this project and the experience, it might
>>>>>>
>>>>> help others too. Would
>>>>>
>>>>>> anybody like to help me?
>>>>>> Ana
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Worthen, Helena Harlow"
>>>>>>
>>>>> escreveu:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I second the request from Cathrene Connery and
>>>>>>
>>>>> Donald James Cunningham
>>>>>
>>>>>> to hear from some who have tried how they (you)
>>>>>>
>>>>> present CHAT. The
>>>>>
>>>>>> historical perspective (behaviorism, cognitive
>>>>>>
>>>>> science, sociocultural
>>>>>
>>>>>> perspectives) seems like a necessary one. But what
>>>>>>
>>>>> were the problems at
>>>>>
>>>>>> each point that pushed things onward?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Helena
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Helena Worthen
>>>>>> Clinical Associate Professor
>>>>>> Labor Education Program
>>>>>> Institute of Labor & Industrial Relations
>>>>>> 504 E. Armory, Room 227
>>>>>> Champaign, IL 61821
>>>>>> Phone: 217-244-4095
>>>>>> hworthen@uiuc.edu
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>>>>
>>>>> [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu]
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Behalf Of Cathrene Connery
>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 5:59 PM
>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>>>>>> Subject: [xmca] The Evolution of CHAT
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tony Whitson wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Don,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sorry for the delay in responding to this -- but
>>>>>>>
>>>>> I think it's a useful
>>>>>
>>>>>>> question for discussion in this group.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I want to respond quickly on another point
>>>>>>>
>>>>> before getting to your main
>>>>>
>>>>>>> question about teaching CHAT.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> First, you write:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I've taught the usual suspects (behaviorism,
>>>>>>>> Bandura, Piaget, cognitive information
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> processing) for years and have
>>>>>
>>>>>> a
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> pretty good idea about them but would
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> appreciate some help on CHAT.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Where I am, students have learned a story about
>>>>>>>
>>>>> how once upon a time
>>>>>
>>>>>>> the world was ruled by the behaviorists, but
>>>>>>>
>>>>> they've been vanquished
>>>>>
>>>>>>> by the (scientifically, pedagogically,
>>>>>>>
>>>>> politically, and morally)
>>>>>
>>>>>>> superior forces of Cognitive Science. They think
>>>>>>>
>>>>> that's where the
>>>>>
>>>>>>> story ends (as in the "End of History"
>>>>>>>
>>>>> celebrated since Daniel Bell in
>>>>>
>>>>>>> the early 60's, where history completes itself
>>>>>>>
>>>>> with the universal
>>>>>
>>>>>>> triumph of capitalism).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think it's important for students to learn
>>>>>>>
>>>>> about what's happening
>>>>>
>>>>>>> "beyond cognitivism." For me, this is not just a
>>>>>>>
>>>>> matter of theory or
>>>>>
>>>>>>> intellectual politics: My students just won't
>>>>>>>
>>>>> understand anything I'm
>>>>>
>>>>>>> saying or doing unless they understand that I'm
>>>>>>>
>>>>> addressing an ontology
>>>>>
>>>>>>> in which cognition cannot be understood except
>>>>>>>
>>>>> as it is embedded in
>>>>>
>>>>>>> the broader (not only cognitive) projects and
>>>>>>>
>>>>> processes of being and
>>>>>
>>>>>>> becoming. CHAT takes this stance against
>>>>>>>
>>>>> reductive cognitivism, and
>>>>>
>>>>>>> CHAT cannot be understood (IMHO) without
>>>>>>>
>>>>> recognizing this. I think
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Wenger & the Communities of Practice literature
>>>>>>>
>>>>> perhaps makes this
>>>>>
>>>>>>> point more directly and accessibly, although
>>>>>>>
>>>>> details have not been
>>>>>
>>>>>>> theorized as extensively as in CHAT. Curriculum
>>>>>>>
>>>>> theory -- my own home
>>>>>
>>>>>>> turf -- has always approached education as a
>>>>>>>
>>>>> matter of ontology, not
>>>>>
>>>>>>> merely cognition (i.e., not just Knowing, but
>>>>>>>
>>>>> Being and Becoming).
>>>>>
>>>>>>> So, I would want to tell the story of
>>>>>>>
>>>>> behaviorist hegemony giving way
>>>>>
>>>>>>> to cognitivist hegemony, which in turn is being
>>>>>>>
>>>>> challenged by a turn
>>>>>
>>>>>>> to the broader perspective of social ontology.
>>>>>>>
>>>>> This is not to say that
>>>>>
>>>>>>> the reductivist ideology of cognitivISM is
>>>>>>>
>>>>> replaced by an ideology of
>>>>>
>>>>>>> postcognitivISM (see my post at
>>>>>>>
>>>>> http://postcog.net ); Nor is it a call
>>>>>
>>>>>>> for hegemonic "postcognitivism" in place of
>>>>>>>
>>>>> hegemonic cognitivism.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> One good source is Lave, Jean. "Teaching, as
>>>>>>>
>>>>> Learning, in Practice."
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Mind, Culture, and Activity 3, no. 3 (1996):
>>>>>>>
>>>>> 149-64.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think this particular point might come through
>>>>>>>
>>>>> more strongly in
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Lave, Jean. "Learning as Participation in
>>>>>>>
>>>>> Communities of Practice."
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Paper presented at the American Educational
>>>>>>>
>>>>> Research Association, San
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Francisco 1992.
>>>>>>> (This paper is now linked from
>>>>>>>
>>>>> http://postcog.net/#Lave . This is the
>>>>>
>>>>>>> paper Jean presented in the symposium that David
>>>>>>>
>>>>> Kirshner and I
>>>>>
>>>>>>> organized, which grew into our book _Situated
>>>>>>>
>>>>> Cognition_, although a
>>>>>
>>>>>>> different piece was used as her chapter in the
>>>>>>>
>>>>> book. The MCA article
>>>>>
>>>>>>> includes aspects of the AERA paper, although its
>>>>>>>
>>>>> scope is broader and
>>>>>
>>>>>>> the social ontology argument may be less central
>>>>>>>
>>>>> to the complete
>>>>>
>>>>>>> published article.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> With regard to your main question, you write:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [I] was wondering if any of you would be
>>>>>>>> willing to share with me (and other XMCAers)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> how you present CHAT. I
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> mean, I don't think undergrads are going to be
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> too interested in the
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> distinction between action and activity or
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> working out the concept of
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "object". Or am I wrong?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This could be a very interesting discussion for
>>>>>>>
>>>>> XMCA.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> As you suggest, for an undergrad Ed Psych class,
>>>>>>>
>>>>> it might be best to
>>>>>
>>>>>>> streamline CHAT a bit. However, I don't think
>>>>>>>
>>>>> the differentiation
>>>>>
>>>>>>> among the three levels of activity, action, and
>>>>>>>
>>>>> operations is
>>>>>
>>>>>>> dispensable. I think it's necessary to see
>>>>>>>
>>>>> activities and activity
>>>>>
>>>>>>> systems emerging on a social/cultural level
>>>>>>>
>>>>> beyond consciously
>>>>>
>>>>>>> goal-oriented action, and to see the role of
>>>>>>>
>>>>> routinized operational
>>>>>
>>>>>>> activity that does not require conscious
>>>>>>>
>>>>> attention.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> It would be helpful to develop introductory
>>>>>>>
>>>>> approaches for this
>>>>>
>>>>>>> audience. Starting points could include the
>>>>>>>
>>>>> resources at
>>>>>
>>>> http://www.edu.helsinki.fi/activity/pages/chatanddwr/
>>>>
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> Roth, Wolff-Michael, and Yew-Jin Lee.
>>>>>>>
>>>>> ""Vygotsky's Neglected Legacy":
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cultural-Historical Activity Theory." Review of
>>>>>>>
>>>>> Educational Research
>>>>>
>>>>>>> 77, no. 2 (2007): 186-232.
>>>>>>> as well as
>>>>>>> pp. 27-47 in Spinuzzi, Clay. Tracing Genres
>>>>>>>
>>>>> through Organizations: A
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sociocultural Approach to Information Design.
>>>>>>>
>>>>> Cambridge, Mass.: MIT
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Press, 2003.
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> pp. 29-72 ("Activity Theory in a Nutshell") in
>>>>>>>
>>>>> Kaptelinin, Victor, and
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bonnie A. Nardi. Acting with Technology:
>>>>>>>
>>>>> Activity Theory and
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Interaction Design. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press,
>>>>>>>
>>>>> 2006.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, 29 Aug 2007, Cunningham, Donald James
>>>>>>>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And in a week or so, I will begin teaching an
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> undergraduate class in
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Educational Psychology" for future teachers.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> It has been a few years
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> since I taught such a class and was wondering
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> if any of you would be
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> willing to share with me (and other XMCAers)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> how you present CHAT. I
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> mean, I don't think undergrads are going to be
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> too interested in the
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> distinction between action and activity or
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> working out the concept of
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "object". Or am I wrong? I've taught the usual
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> suspects (behaviorism,
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Bandura, Piaget, cognitive information
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> processing) for years and have
>>>>>
>>>>>> a
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> pretty good idea about them but would
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> appreciate some help on CHAT.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Don Cunningham
>>>>>>>> Indiana University
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ancora Imparo!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Behalf Of Mike Cole
>>>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2007 6:13 PM
>>>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>>>>>>>> Subject: [xmca] mediational theories of mind:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> Suggestions requested
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Dear Xmca-ites---
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Toward the end of the month I will begin
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> teaching a grad course on
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> mediational theories of mind.
>>>>>>>> I would love suggestions for interesting
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> readings.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We will be looking in a sort of "mcLuhanesque"
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> way at the affordances
>>>>>
>>>>>> of
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> different kinds of mediators
>>>>>>>> in human action/activity/mind.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So, language and thought
>>>>>>>> writing
>>>>>>>> film
>>>>>>>> music
>>>>>>>> tv
>>>>>>>>
>> === message truncated ===
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------
>> Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today!
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
>
> __________ NOD32 2533 (20070916) Information __________
>
> This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
>

-- 
//
------------------------------------------------------------------------
/Ana Marjanovic-Shane, Ph.D./
/151 W. Tulpehocken St./
/Philadelphia//, PA 19144///
/(h) 215-843-2909/
/ana@zmajcenter.org <mailto:ana@zmajcenter.org>/
/http://www.speakeasy.org/~anamshane 
<http://www.speakeasy.org/%7Eanamshane>/
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca