These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,
and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving.
Content on this site may not meet current digital accessibility standards.
If you require an alternative, accessible format of any information found on this site,
please contact Bruce Jones, bjones@ucsd.edu to request an accommodation.
These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,
and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving.
Content on this site may not meet current digital accessibility standards.
If you require an alternative, accessible format of any information found on this site,
please contact Bruce Jones, bjones@ucsd.edu to request an accommodation.
Colette asked for a concept "that it be best read/understood/accepted by educationalists (more specifically, science education researchers) in such a case it seems that "Extension of psychological mediatory function" does not fit the context Bella Kotik-. On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 5:00 PM, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>wrote: > On 13 February 2012 12:09, Bella Kotik-Friedgut <bella.kotik@gmail.com > >wrote: > > > Dear Colette my off-list note returned rejected by your server, so: > > > > I use "higher mental functions" or sometimes "higher psychological > > functions", but the first is preferable. > > -- > > Sincerely yours Bella Kotik-Friedgut > > > > On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 1:47 PM, Colette Murphy <c.a.murphy@qub.ac.uk > > >wrote: > > > > > Dear All > > > I'd be very interested to hear your views on how to edit/reword/rewrite > > > the phrase "higher psychic function" in relation to Vygotsky's CH > theory > > so > > > that it be best read/understood/accepted by educationalists (more > > > specifically, science education researchers)? > > > > > Perhaps it would be better to use a term that pointed to the phenomena, > such as "Extension of psychological mediatory function". "Higher" relates > the phenomena to other psychological theories but points away from the > phenomena -- one is left considering why one function is higher than > another whilst embedding the ideas in an (unnecessary) analogical framework > of "height = abstraction" or "higher as in high church" in which case one > is even further removed from a precise formulation using a metaphorical > frame. > > > > I'm happy to engage off-list > > > if this query is better treated that way. > > > > This is clearly on-topic in many ways. > > Kind regards, > Huw > > > > > > Thanks a million > > > Colette > > > > > > Dr Colette Murphy > > > Senior Lecturer > > > School of Education > > > 69 University St > > > Queen's University > > > Belfast BT7 1HL > > > > > > tel: 02890975953 > > > > > > “Why is it, in spite of the fact that teaching by pouring in, learning > by > > > passive absorption, are universally condemned, that they are still so > > > entrenched in practice?” > > > > > > John Dewey Democracy in Education 1916, Page 46 > > > ________________________________________ > > > __________________________________________ > > > _____ > > > 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 > -- Sincerely yours Bella Kotik-Friedgut __________________________________________ _____ xmca mailing list xmca@weber.ucsd.edu http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca