Re: [xmca] The Evolution of CHAT

Here's something that may be of interest:
Moretti, Franco. Graphs, Maps, Trees: Abstract Models for a Literary
History. London: Verso, 2007.
http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/154707529

It's an interesting and peculiar book. The author has been criticized
within Lit Studies for promoting a quantitative alternative to
interpretive literary study. He says that is not at all what he's about:
He's only exploring ways of thinking about relationships that seem to
resemble the kinds of relationships that we're interested in here.

Anyway, this could be of interest for this project, or otherwise.

On Sun, 16 Sep 2007, 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
>

Tony Whitson
UD School of Education
NEWARK DE 19716

twhitson@udel.edu
_______________________________

"those who fail to reread
  are obliged to read the same story everywhere"
                   -- Roland Barthes, S/Z (1970)

_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
Received on Sun Sep 16 12:38 PDT 2007