[Xmca-l] Re: Play and symbolic thought --

[Larry Purss <lpscholar2@gmail.com>]

I am remembering the discussion of playworlds and the zo-ped as helping the
adults *grow up* within socratic dialogues with children.
An article was referenced which I am would like to read that was referenced
in the article:

Cheyne, J. A and Tarulli, D (1999) Dialogue ,difference, and voice in the
zone of proximal development. Theory and Psychology, 9, 5-28.

If it is possible to send a cop.y I would appreciate this..

The exploration of desire and motivation and the adult being transformed
[and developing] within the intersubjective engagement [and enactment] in
the zo-ped is what I find fascinating. This depth of *care and concern* for
the child's *voice* moving from the magisterial TO the socratic voice seems
a radical [going to the root] of the zo-ped.
Thanks,
Larry


On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 7:51 AM, Beth Ferholt <bferholt@gmail.com> wrote:

> This is very very helpful, Artin.  Monica and I are both about to fly to
> the US, me to return her for a few month, so we will have to discuss and
> respond in a couple weeks.   Thank you! Beth
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 6:52 PM, Goncu, Artin <goncu@uic.edu> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi Beth and Monica--
> >
> > Although I have quietly followed some of the posts on this issue, I don't
> > remember exactly what was said before. So, if anything I say is redundant
> > or not so relevant, just feel free to ignore it..
> >
> > In discussions of whether or how imaginative play leads to development of
> > symbols, one important issue that is often not considered is the
> > motivation for play.  A shared conviction among theorists like Freud,
> > Piaget, and Vygotsky is that children play in order to make sense of an
> > affectively significant experience, e.g., to heal a wound (Freud), to
> > develop mastery over a personal past experience (Piaget), or to
> anticipate
> > future based on partial understandings of an experience (Vygotsky.)  I
> > believe all of these to be true based on my own work with young children
> > as a former preschool teacher and some clinical experience with children
> > who had learning disabilities.  Suzanne Gaskins and I wrote about these
> > issues together before too.  Cindy Dell Clark's book on the role of play
> > in the treatment of children with asthma and diabetes supports this idea
> > too.  So, it seems to me that if we can show/understand the connection
> > between children's play activities and their antecedents, it will be
> > easier to see that even by virtue of expressing something of personal
> > significance in play, children are making an effort to symbolize that
> > experience.
> >
> > A second issue relates to how the experience gets represented.  In the
> > 1970s and 80s, Greta Fein wrote a lot about this issue.  She argued and
> > showed that the road to symbolization begins with placing a familiar
> > personal event of significance in the context of play, e.g., an infant's
> > pretending to drink from an empty bottle.  Greta called this
> > de-contextualization.  With age, a de-contextualized event gets
> > transformed through different means, i.e., objects and ideas, and
> > opportunities as afforded by their cultural/community contexts.  In other
> > words, something can be represented either through a very structured toy
> > or not using any object at all.  So, if we see symbolization taking place
> > in many different ways, it may be easier to see how play leads to
> symbolic
> > development.  (One example I can think of from the arts is how
> > representation of a tree had changed in Modigliani's paintings from tree
> > figures to geometric shapes...)
> >
> > Basically, I am suggesting that the connection between play and symbolic
> > development will be easier to see if we understand the connection between
> > play activities and their non-play antecedents, and also that there is a
> > developmental/contextual order/preference to how experiences get
> > represented in play.
> >
> > All the best, ag
> >
> > On Fri, December 13, 2013 10:34 am, Beth Ferholt wrote:
> > > We apologize for the delay responding:
> > > We have been thinking about what you all wrote, reading the suggestions
> > > and
> > > then going into the preschools to gather more data in response ...
> > > This is what we came up with, and we are working here as much from
> > > interviews with the many (35) teachers with whom we are working as from
> > > observations of teaching and learning:
> > >
> > > We think that the way we asked the question enforced some dichotomies
> > that
> > > we want to challenge, particularly between form and content -- but also
> > > between symbolic thought and play.  So, to the many of you who said
> this:
> > > what do we mean by symbolic thought? the simplest unit?: let us try a
> > > different approach to this dilemma.  Peg: Mash up -- yes!  But before
> > they
> > > mash maybe we are seeing some preparation for the mash?
> > >
> > > Gunilla Lindqvist (1995) was searching for a common denominator between
> > > art
> > > and play when she developed playworlds.  Discussions with Kiyo
> (Mizasaki)
> > > during the recent playworld conference have brought us back to this
> > > question.  So has a paper Mike suggested by Dennis Newman: Learning to
> > > Draw
> > > a Picture in Discourse Processes, 1980.
> > >
> > > It seems to us that the teachers here are creating a pivot in the way
> > they
> > > work with the children.  This is based in what they do in their art
> > > studios, guided by the artist who works with them (called an
> atelierista
> > > in
> > > the Reggio Emilia preschools).  They spend lots and lots of time with
> the
> > > children in very small groups or one-on-one, from the time the children
> > > are
> > > one, doing what they call listening to the children and helping them to
> > > look.
> > >
> > > But we think, following Newman, that what they are doing with the
> > children
> > > that is working like the pivot in play to divorce object from meaning,
> is
> > > to be found in creation of an understanding of artistic representation
> > > within the social context of the studio/building room, etc.  The
> teachers
> > > speak to the children endlessly -- and not a lecture, this is careful
> > > listening and dialogue with what the children do and say -- about how
> to
> > > represent what they see.  The bus is long -- this is why we have a long
> > > paper (lots of touching the paper and the photo of the bus (that they
> > rode
> > > that AM!) here -- ).  The bus is what color?  What paint will you use?
> > >  They also are careful to use materials that do not interfere with this
> > > process.  If it is a long piece of paper, and the question is about
> color
> > > (not lines) then they have a thick brush.  Also, the emphasis is on the
> > > children feeling proud at being able to draw what they want to draw.
>  In
> > > this the teacher is looking for that moment of understanding that the
> > > stick
> > > (picture) is a horse (bus).  (The children really do shine at this
> > moment,
> > > it is wild!)
> > >
> > > All this means that when the children are one and a half they can make
> a
> > >  blade of grass into a key in a story because they are familiar with
> > > pivots.  The  lesson was not actually about painting.  Or, it was, but
> > the
> > > social context -- the events above -- shaped what the lesson was, and
> it
> > > was a lesson about representation.
> > >
> > > A favorite example of the environment/materials supporting this
> > > pivot-creation is the toilet paper tubes with their photos laminated on
> > > them.  In the block area they and their friends -- represented by
> toilet
> > > paper tubes -- play in the block buildings they make.  When the two
> year
> > > olds start to point out that this is them, it is as if we could SEE
> that
> > > the art activities and the play DO have a common denominator.
> > >
> > > OK, we are still exploring, and we are thinking about ALL the responses
> > > you
> > > gave us although we do not yet have responses to all.
> > >
> > > To the suggestion of posting footage, we would like to but our IRB does
> > > not
> > > allow it.
> > >
> > > TO Nacho -- Hi : ) !  Great tip that as you see we followed!!!!!
> > >
> > > Very happy to have more feedback, as this back and forth between you
> all
> > > and the teachers is a wonderful social context for our development in
> > > relation to this problem!
> > >
> > > Beth and Monica
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 4:32 AM, larry smolucha
> > > <lsmolucha@hotmail.com>wrote:
> > >
> > >> Message from Francine:
> > >> Beth,
> > >> I this is what I think is going on at the preschool you describe. Over
> > >> the
> > >> past 40 years, I have observed several changes in what was deemed
> > >> ideologically fashionable in education and psychology. There was a
> time
> > >> when Piaget was cutting edge (in the USA 1960's) - the devotees were
> > >> passionate - it was like Beatlemania. The Vygotsky era in the USA had
> to
> > >> buck up against the Piagetians, but gradually, Vygotsky gained
> > >> credibility.
> > >> It is important to keep in mind the cold war politics stifling and
> then
> > >> shaping the discourse. Alongside this was the discovery of Derrida as
> a
> > >> sort of cult figure. What would be more predictable than to have a
> > >> post-modern movement whose agenda is to render obsolete all of the
> > >> towering
> > >> intellects of the 20th century to replace them with some turn of the
> > >> century Millennium figures [Dahlberg, Moss, Deluze).
> > >> Like Andy Blunden, I do see anything in the use of object
> substitutions
> > >> at
> > >> age onethat undermines anything in Vygotskian theory (blade of grass
> as
> > >> a
> > >> key). Certainly, thebehavior is precocious. Also, the precocious
> > >> recognition of alphabet letters and numbers in the second year of
> life,
> > >> does not disprove Vygotsky or Piaget.
> > >> As a play researcher, I would have a few questions about the use of
> the
> > >> blade of grassas a key: (1) What served as the lock? A real lock, on a
> > >> door
> > >> perhaps? So was the bladeof grass stuck in the lock? (2) Did the
> toddler
> > >> say anything indicating it was a key or the action was unlocking the
> > >> door?
> > >> Just sticking a blade of grass in a lock would be coded [in a
> > >> dissertation] as a proto-object substitution. Additional gestures such
> > >> as
> > >> turning the blade of grass like a key, and/or turning the handle of
> the
> > >> door and opening it, would support a 'symbolic' function.Certainly,
> > >> naming
> > >> and especially renaming the blade of grass would be evidence.From your
> > >> description of one year olds (plural) 'opening a locked door' and
> > >> describing what is inside, I suspect that the teachers were leading
> the
> > >> children in this play activity and that is was actually guided pretend
> > >> play
> > >> that was scaffolded by the adults.
> > >> In my dissertation, I observed the development of object substitutions
> > >> (and play gesturesthat suggest invisible objects) in six children from
> > >> 14
> > >> months of age until 28 months of age.In a half hour observation at 14
> > >> months, one child picked up a stacking cup and put it to her lips as
> if
> > >> to
> > >> drink  (coded as proto-object substitution with 'invisible
> substance').
> > >> The
> > >> gesture could have just been Functionlust (Karl Groos' definition of
> > >> pretend play)and that is how the stacking gesture (you describe) with
> an
> > >> imaginary 'ring' would be coded.
> > >> In 2002, I did a presentation at the ISCRAT Congress in Amsterdam, at
> > >> the
> > >> invitation of Bert van Oers. I attended a symposium on play and soon
> > >> discovered that Activity Theoryproponents were totally unaware of the
> > >> substantial research done on Vygotsky's theory of play (not associated
> > >> with
> > >> Activity Theory.) As early as 1982, Inge Bretherton edited a book
> > >> titled
> > >> Symbolic Play that included some examples of pretend play at age one
> > >> (particularlyPeggy Miller's chapter on Mother-Baby Role Play).
> > >> Beth, can you find a citation for the 2013 review of research that
> Bert
> > >> van Oers referredto when saying the research on the relationship
> between
> > >> play and symbolic developmentwas inconclusive. I bet it was a very
> > >> narrow
> > >> review of just Activity Theory based studies.
> > >> Sorry, I do not have an extra copy of my dissertation. Can you get it
> > >> on-line or on loan?It was completed in 1991 at the University of
> > >> Chicago. I
> > >> will see what I can do to makeit more readily available.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> > Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 13:47:04 +0200
> > >> > From: bferholt@gmail.com
> > >> > To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu
> > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Play and symbolic thought --
> > >> >
> > >> > Thank you for all the interesting responses, both the ones in this
> > >> chain
> > >> > and the many private responses we received -- we have been hard at
> > >> work
> > >> > thinking and reading in response!
> > >> >
> > >> > We had not read all of the things that people sent, before --
> > >> Francine,
> > >> can
> > >> > you send your dissertation? -- but we were familiar with much of it
> of
> > >> it,
> > >> > also the work on play and narrative development, language
> development,
> > >> and
> > >> > metaphor. BTW, we just heard Bert van Oers talk, a very interesting
> > >> talk,
> > >> > and he mentioned near the start that the connection was inconclusive
> > >> (a
> > >> > 2013 literature review – ).
> > >> >
> > >> > However, what made us reach out to XMCA was the following dilemma:
> > >> >
> > >> > The teachers at the preschool where we are working are generally
> > >> suspicious
> > >> > of developmental theory. Gunilla Dahlberg and Peter Moss write some
> of
> > >> the
> > >> > books they read in their training, and argue convincingly that
> > >> > developmental theory is very important to the discourse that
> supports
> > >> a
> > >> > deficit model of the child. These teachers turn to Deluze before
> > >> Piaget
> > >> and
> > >> > they are also wary of Vygotsky -- through the looking glass compared
> > >> to
> > >> > preschools in the US -- *and* these are the preschools that (because
> > >> of
> > >> > their practice) we would most want to be in if we were young
> children,
> > >> or
> > >> > would most want our kids and grandkids to be in, hand-down.
> > >> >
> > >> > In any case, many of these teachers have taken on the task of
> showing
> > >> us
> > >> > that our idea that play leads to symbolic thought is not right. They
> > >> show
> > >> > us all this amazing play -- and symbolic thought -- that one year
> olds
> > >> are
> > >> > doing. They make films and take photographs and the give hour-long
> > >> > presentations to us : ).
> > >> >
> > >> > For instance, they showed us one year olds pretending a blade of
> grass
> > >> was
> > >> > a key and "opening" a locked door and describing what they saw
> inside.
> > >> They
> > >> > showed us one year olds using letters and numbers. In fact, my own
> > >> just-two
> > >> > year old, who has been attending their preschool for almost a year,
> > >> could
> > >> > identify letters and numbers months ago, and also seems to have an
> > >> idea
> > >> of
> > >> > what these symbols mean/ are for (although I have to think more
> about
> > >> why I
> > >> > think this -- I DO think it is right, but why -- ). Many children in
> > >> my
> > >> > child's class do this, he is certainly not "gifted" when it come to
> > >> > reading, so the point is that I had to see it in a child I knew
> really
> > >> well
> > >> > to believe it ... and I did, and I do.
> > >> >
> > >> > So, we are stuck. We really are not ready to give up the
> relationship
> > >> > between play and symbolic thought. But we are confused by what we
> are
> > >> > seeing these very young children doing, and I suppose that when we
> > >> wrote
> > >> > XMCA we were sort of hoping for some impossible and longitudinal
> > >> experiment
> > >> > that showed that without play symbolic thought does not develop : )
> .
> > >> Of
> > >> > course we know from Gaskins and Goncu that this is probably not
> right?
> > >> So
> > >> > perhaps an experiment that showed children incapable of symbolic
> > >> thought,
> > >> > playing, and then all of a sudden -- presto – hmmm.
> > >> >
> > >> > Do people have further thoughts or questions for us? THey would be
> > >> much
> > >> > appreciated. We don't want to leave the teachers without defending
> > >> what
> > >> we
> > >> > still think is so important about play, but maybe children are more
> > >> capable
> > >> > of both pretend play and symbolic thought, when they are very, very
> > >> young,
> > >> > than we thought after our years of teaching in other contexts (in
> > >> which
> > >> we
> > >> > were less supported in seeing the competent child -- really the
> > >> competent
> > >> > toddler or even baby in this case) and than we though about after
> our
> > >> > reading of VYgotsky on play.
> > >> >
> > >> > Thanks to a few comments we ARE back to Wartovsky – It may be less
> > >> about
> > >> > seeing a competent child in these schools, than about their emphasis
> > >> on
> > >> the
> > >> > arts?  Or maybe it’s both?
> > >> >
> > >> > THank you all again for the help with this, Beth and Monica
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 3:18 AM, larry smolucha <
> > lsmolucha@hotmail.com
> > >> >wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > Message from Francine Smolucha:
> > >> > > Beth,
> > >> > > I would not hesitate to say that play is essential for
> > >> > > development(cognitive, social, emotional,and neurological).
> > >> > > Elena Bodrova and Deborah Leong's Tools of the Mind Preschool
> > >> > > Curriculumhas also provided supporting evidence that spans these
> > >> four
> > >> > > domains.They have an ongoing study with the University of
> > >> Chicago.While
> > >> > > their focus is on self-regulation which itself courses all four
> > >> > > domains,they also teach the preschool teachers how to teach the
> > >> children to
> > >> > > use object substitutions in pretend play. There is much potential
> > >> here
> > >> for
> > >> > > a systematic study of the role of object substitutions in learning
> > >> to
> > >> use
> > >> > > symbol systems.
> > >> > > > Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2013 10:34:28 +0200
> > >> > > > From: bferholt@gmail.com
> > >> > > > To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu
> > >> > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Play and symbolic thought --
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > We will look at your dissertation, from 1991, this is helpful.
> > >> And
> > >> yes,
> > >> > > > this is what we are thinking about.  Your response makes me
> think
> > >> more
> > >> > > > broadly about the challenge the teachers we are working with are
> > >> posing
> > >> > > to
> > >> > > > our conception of the importance of play in child development
> ...
> > >> I
> > >> think
> > >> > > > we must be more clear about this before we can answer my
> question,
> > >> above.
> > >> > > >  I don't think we want to say play is essential, so then we need
> > >> to
> > >> ask
> > >> > > why
> > >> > > > we want to say it is hard to replace, or particularly efficient
> at
> > >> what
> > >> > > it
> > >> > > > does -- The response will not be found in one experiment. Thank
> > >> you!
> > >> > >  Beth
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 3:01 AM, larry smolucha <
> > >> lsmolucha@hotmail.com
> > >> > > >wrote:
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > > Message from Francine Smolucha:
> > >> > > > > Beth,
> > >> > > > > According to Vygotsky, object substitutions in pretend play
> > >> (such
> > >> as
> > >> > > > > riding on a stick as if it were a  horse) are the pivot for
> > >> separating
> > >> > > > > meaning from object. The ability to make the gesture with a
> > >> non-replica
> > >> > > > > object leads to more abstract symbols such as using pictorial
> > >> > > > > representation (such as stick people and stick animals in
> > >> drawings, i.
> > >> > > e.,
> > >> > > > > line drawings) to words made out of alphabet letters and
> > >> numerical
> > >> > > > > notations. I do not know of any one longitudinal study that
> > >> documented
> > >> > > this
> > >> > > > > progression, but there are certainly studies thatfocused on
> > >> specific
> > >> > > > > components. My doctoral dissertation University of Chicago
> > >> > > 1991documented
> > >> > > > > how objects changed their names and functions in pretend play
> (a
> > >> > > > > longitudinal study of toddlers aged 14- to 28- months.) Isn't
> > >> that
> > >> the
> > >> > > > > basic definition of a symbol - that one object can stand for
> > >> another
> > >> > > > > (re-present another)???
> > >> > > > > Are you thinking of something along these lines?
> > >> > > > > > Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2013 12:31:41 +0200
> > >> > > > > > From: bferholt@gmail.com
> > >> > > > > > To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu
> > >> > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Play and symbolic thought --
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > We are wondering if there is anything actually showing that
> > >> play
> > >> > > allows
> > >> > > > > for
> > >> > > > > > the development of symbolic thought ... we do not have an
> idea
> > >> what
> > >> > > this
> > >> > > > > > experiment could look like : ) ... anytime it was done is
> > >> fine!
> > >> Beth
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 7:18 PM, Hansen, Monica <
> > >> > > > > > monica.hansen@vandals.uidaho.edu> wrote:
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > Beth,
> > >> > > > > > > What specifically about Vygotsky's claims and the
> > >> relationship
> > >> > > between
> > >> > > > > > > play and symbolic thought are you looking for research to
> > >> > > > > substantiate? Are
> > >> > > > > > > you looking for contemporary research? What kind of
> > >> research?
> > >> The
> > >> > > path
> > >> > > > > is
> > >> > > > > > > not always easy or direct because Vygotsky's thoughts
> > >> encompassed
> > >> > > > > larger
> > >> > > > > > > ideas within which a myriad of approaches to research on
> > >> this
> > >> topic
> > >> > > > > can be
> > >> > > > > > > framed and approached. At least this has been my
> experience
> > >> in
> > >> > > hunting
> > >> > > > > it
> > >> > > > > > > down :)
> > >> > > > > > > --The other Monica
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > >> > > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:
> > >> > > > > > > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Beth
> Ferholt
> > >> > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 10:06 AM
> > >> > > > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> > >> > > > > > > Cc: xmca-l@ucsd.edu
> > >> > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Play and symbolic thought --
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > Monica and I have been talking about Vygotsky's work on
> the
> > >> > > > > relationship
> > >> > > > > > > between play and symbolic thought and been being
> challenged
> > >> by
> > >> > > Swedish
> > >> > > > > > > preschool teachers.  Is there an experiment that shows
> > >> Vygotsky was
> > >> > > > > correct
> > >> > > > > > > in his claims about this relationship?  We can't find any!
> > >> > > > > > > Tanks,
> > >> > > > > > > Beth
> > >> > > > > > > --
> > >> > > > > > > Beth Ferholt
> > >> > > > > > > Assistant Professor
> > >> > > > > > > School of Education
> > >> > > > > > > Brooklyn College, City University of New York
> > >> > > > > > > 2900 Bedford Avenue
> > >> > > > > > > Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu
> > >> > > > > > > Phone: (718) 951-5205
> > >> > > > > > > Fax: (718) 951-4816
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > --
> > >> > > > > > Beth Ferholt
> > >> > > > > > Assistant Professor
> > >> > > > > > School of Education
> > >> > > > > > Brooklyn College, City University of New York
> > >> > > > > > 2900 Bedford Avenue
> > >> > > > > > Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu
> > >> > > > > > Phone: (718) 951-5205
> > >> > > > > > Fax: (718) 951-4816
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > --
> > >> > > > Beth Ferholt
> > >> > > > Assistant Professor
> > >> > > > School of Education
> > >> > > > Brooklyn College, City University of New York
> > >> > > > 2900 Bedford Avenue
> > >> > > > Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu
> > >> > > > Phone: (718) 951-5205
> > >> > > > Fax: (718) 951-4816
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > --
> > >> > Beth Ferholt
> > >> > Assistant Professor
> > >> > School of Education
> > >> > Brooklyn College, City University of New York
> > >> > 2900 Bedford Avenue
> > >> > Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889
> > >> >
> > >> > Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu
> > >> > Phone: (718) 951-5205
> > >> > Fax: (718) 951-4816
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Beth Ferholt
> > > Assistant Professor
> > > School of Education
> > > Brooklyn College, City University of New York
> > > 2900 Bedford Avenue
> > > Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889
> > >
> > > Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu
> > > Phone: (718) 951-5205
> > > Fax: (718) 951-4816
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > Artin Goncu, Ph.D
> > Professor Emeritus,
> > University of Illinois at Chicago
> > College of Education M/C 147
> > 1040 W. Harrison St.
> > Chicago, IL 60607
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Beth Ferholt
> Assistant Professor
> School of Education
> Brooklyn College, City University of New York
> 2900 Bedford Avenue
> Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889
>
> Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu
> Phone: (718) 951-5205
> Fax: (718) 951-4816
>
Status: O