Re: [xmca] Access to articles and discussion

From: Andy Blunden <ablunden who-is-at>
Date: Tue Dec 02 2008 - 14:44:42 PST

I'm certainly a case in point of someone who has learnt
their CHAT almost exclusively through participation in xmca,
and has no academic or research knowledge of the subject,

It's great to hear from you, and clarifying questions are
exactly what is needed. Much better than bouncing one
opinion off another opinion. And if those who speak assume a
certain level of knowledge in their listeners, so listeners
who don't think they share that level of knowledge remain
silent, then this tends to become a self-fulfilling
prophecy. If there are no clarifying questions, I must
presume everyone understands.


Jennifer Langer-Osuna wrote:
> I didn't vote and have never participated in the discussions. I am
> working on my dissertation that makes use of activity theoretic
> principles and so certainly benefit from these discussions. What keeps
> me from participating is that there is a level of expert/assumed
> knowledge among the active participants that I am not yet fluent in.
> Sometimes that means that the discussions go in a direction that is
> above my head. Other times, I can follow but truly have nothing to add
> because my "role" is in making sense of what you more expert
> participants are saying. If I were to try to jump in, I'd likely sound
> out of left field.
> But in the spirit of increasing novice (legitimate peripheral
> participants) voices I will read the latest Sawchunk and Stetsenko paper
> and try to respond primarily through clarifying questions. So be patient
> with me. I may not even know what needs clarifying, meaning that I get
> the sense that there are even more fundamental philosophers and such
> that are basing people's responses that I am not familiar with. But I
> will still go ahead and try to be more verbal about my confusion. I have
> no problem sounding like an idiot. Like a professor once said, "You are
> ready to earn the PhD when you come to truly realize that you know
> absolutely nothing, but understand why that is so."
> Jenny Langer-Osuna
> UC Berkeley doctoral student
> Math Education
> On Dec 1, 2008, at 6:30 PM, Andy Blunden wrote:
>> Thanks Tamara.
>> Yes, I think the acknowledgment of new voices, when they speak, is
>> vital. Mike always does this, but I think it is quite wrong for the
>> rest of us to just leave that role to Mike, who has enough to do. So,
>> thanks!
>> Andy
>> Tamara Ball wrote:
>>> My humble suggestion is this: that those of you more experienced and
>>> comfortable with the XMCA discussion forum keep vigilant watch for
>>> new voices whenever they do emerge and then respond. Use the response
>>> also as a space for your own assertion, to be sure(perhaps one you
>>> would have made anyway), but even the notation of "re:" as the
>>> slightest acknowledgment of that new voice is alluring and
>>> validating. Any thoughtful response will do - but in my opinion,
>>> better if it is not only "sweet", encouraging or gentle but rather
>>> truly responsive and generative. In my own novice experience,
>>> intimidation is linked to a feeling of irrelevance which comes with
>>> the frayed edges of a thread that is not continued in some way or
>>> another. As Andy suggests, workload is always an issue of course, but
>>> I do understand that there are ways that participation in the
>>> parlance of this forum can actually *decrease* workload by creatively
>>> and expeditiously negotiating ideas or problems central to the work
>>> each of us has in front of us. For instance I am in heat of writing a
>>> grant proposal that I hope will lead to a multi-year post-doc
>>> position that will allow me to expand the work I am already involved
>>> with at the Center for Adaptive Optics ( electro-engineering,
>>> astronomy and optometry research center with a strong education
>>> component). I can imagine exploring more powerful ways to shape the
>>> structure of that work through conversations here that are also
>>> linked to the more central debates at hand. Tamara
>>> On Nov 30, 2008, at 5:40 PM, Andy Blunden wrote:
>>>> Well I'm not one of those who vote and don't discuss but I am
>>>> willing to have a guess at issues here, and maybe people will be
>>>> provoked into correcting me?
>>>> I have had brief discussions with several people either offline or
>>>> via FaceBook who have expressed an interest in xmca discussions but
>>>> say (basically) they are not clever enough to contribute. Having
>>>> been assured that this is absolutely not the case, they later go on
>>>> to become contributors. For some, it is that fear of speaking up and
>>>> maybe getting their heads bitten off. In other cases, I am sure, it
>>>> is a simple matter of the insanity of academic workloads already
>>>> driving people to the edge.
>>>> I have racked my brain and failed to come up with a viable means of
>>>> resolving this, other than being civil and respectful in
>>>> discussions. When I asked about Bobath, someone who had never spoken
>>>> before spoke up saying "At last something I feel qualified to speak
>>>> on." Likewise, when I asked for help for my brother with his
>>>> daughter's maths problems, loads of really helpful and knowledgeable
>>>> people spoke up. But the general debate, people seem to find
>>>> intimidating. And yet, in my experience, unjustifiably so.
>>>> Andy
>>>> Mike Cole wrote:
>>>>> I fear that at present the article to be made available free for
>>>>> discussion
>>>>> at Taylor and Francis
>>>>> has not been released. The ever-lengthening duration of
>>>>> Thanksgiving holiday
>>>>> has probably not
>>>>> helped matters. Consequently, many, probabaly most, members of xmca
>>>>> do not
>>>>> have access to the
>>>>> article in question by Stetsenko and Sawchuk. We are working on it.
>>>>> The issue of discussion of article in MCA that are not made
>>>>> available free
>>>>> is even more difficult and we
>>>>> are working on that too. We have a situation where often two or more
>>>>> articles are ones that people want
>>>>> to discuss but we are unlikely to get T&F to offer the journal for
>>>>> free. So
>>>>> we are discussing with them
>>>>> the cost of electronic versions so that acces to people without the
>>>>> financial means to get access can
>>>>> be handled in a viable way.
>>>>> Simultaneously, I would not that more than 30 people voted to
>>>>> discuss the
>>>>> Sanino article, but to date, very
>>>>> few people have availed themselves of the opportunity they obtained
>>>>> for the
>>>>> group by their votes. I take
>>>>> this to be a problem and would appreciate suggestions for making
>>>>> XMCA a more
>>>>> multi-voiced forum for
>>>>> discussion. Might the overwhelming majority of people who voted for
>>>>> discussion of this article but who have
>>>>> failed to comment on it help me and others understand what is a
>>>>> foot. Is it
>>>>> amplification or amputation, perhaps some productive
>>>>> transformation, that is
>>>>> required
>>>>> The academic semester/quarter draws to a close in the United
>>>>> States. The
>>>>> stock market is open in Asia. The people of Mumbai, Peshewar, Ramadi,
>>>>> Eastern Congo, flood raviged Brazil and elsewhere bury their dead.
>>>>> The polar
>>>>> bears, I hear, are enjoying a cool winter, but word is sparse from
>>>>> that part
>>>>> of the world. The future beckons. What is that she is holding in
>>>>> her hand?
>>>>> Or is it behind our backs?
>>>>> mike
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>>> <>
>>>> --
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Andy Blunden +61 3 9380 9435 Skype
>>>> andy.blunden
>>>> Hegel's Logic with a Foreword by Andy Blunden:
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>> <>
>> --
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Andy Blunden +61 3 9380 9435 Skype
>> andy.blunden
>> Hegel's Logic with a Foreword by Andy Blunden:
>> _______________________________________________
>> xmca mailing list
> _______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list

Andy Blunden +61 3 9380 9435 
Skype andy.blunden
Hegel's Logic with a Foreword by Andy Blunden:
xmca mailing list
Received on Tue Dec 2 14:45:21 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Jan 06 2009 - 13:39:38 PST