These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,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These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,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.
Attached is a paper on years of schooling and the formality of definitions
given by Mexican women. Part of a much larger set of papers but directly
related to earlier paper by Snow and ulvi's dissertation topic. Not sure
where/how best to respond to Andy's note because i am unsure if people
regard it as peripheral or central to Vygotskian and other theories of
culture and development.
I see this "nouns" test as well as the paper with D'Andrade as relevant, but
also as leaving plenty of room for a study that uses the "everyday/
scientific" distinction and studies it as a function of years of schooling.
mike
On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 9:02 AM, ulvi icil <ulvi.icil@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am interested on the effect of schooling on concept formation, the
> relationswhip between everyday and scientific concetps as a candidate
> research topic for my master thesis that I will start to work October 2010
> onwards !
>
> Ulvi
>
>
>
> 2010/6/26, mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com>:
>>
>> That article connects to several ongoing threads, Andy. But lets see if
>> others are interested before I directly comment.
>>
>> Instead, I think that the cover of the current issue of the New Yorker
>> magazine provides interesting food for thought one concepts and their
>> representations. It is accessible from www.newyorker.com. Try to click
>> on
>> the cover and than use control+ (on a pc) to get a larger and larger
>> imaged.
>> The different layers of meaning appear to move between the syntagmatic and
>> paradigmatic dimensions of meaning making. Besides,
>> its clever.
>> mike
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 6:38 AM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:
>>
>> > I just had a read of Mike's 1982 paper with Roy D'Andrade on the
>> influence
>> > of schooling on concept formation:
>> >
>> > http://lchc.ucsd.edu/Histarch/ap82v4n2.PDF
>> >
>> > Great paper!
>> >
>> > It occurred to me that Luria is in agreement with many others that a
>> > hierarchical system of categories, a taxonomy, is the archetype of the
>> > "abstract" concept. Luria's conception of how this relates to prior
>> forms of
>> > concept (affective and concrete) is the main point of interest in the
>> > article, but I would like to question whether this taxonomical idea is
>> valid
>> > as the archetype of the "true" concept. The article claims that
>> taxonomical
>> > practices ("true" or not) are archetypal school practices, and this is
>> an
>> > interesting and different question.
>> >
>> > An interesting counterpoint to this is Hegel's classification of 3
>> > different components which he thinks must *all* be present in the
>> formation
>> > of a true concept:
>> >
>> > The subject is (a) ascribed certain qualities; (b) seen as having having
>> a
>> > certain place in a system of social practice; and (c) taken under its
>> genus,
>> > as belonging to a certain living whole.
>> >
>> > Further, I think (c) does not actually amount to the kind of Linnaean
>> > hierarchical family tree, but could also be interpreted like genre and
>> > archetype without the implied underlying totality. Also, there is all
>> too
>> > much room for subsuming (c) under (a) as almost all of present-day
>> > philosophy and natural science are wont to do.
>> >
>> > Mike, you have done a lot of work on the role of this "taxonomical
>> > activity" in and out of school. Davydov on the other hand, emphasises
>> (b) as
>> > opposed to (a). It would be interesting to investigate concept-formation
>> on
>> > this wider frame.
>> >
>> > Andy
>> >
>> > --
>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > *Andy Blunden*
>> > Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/ <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/><
>> http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/>
>>
>> > Videos: http://vimeo.com/user3478333/videos
>> > Book: http://www.brill.nl/scss
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > 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
>>
>
>
Attachment:
Velasco.Schooling.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
_______________________________________________ xmca mailing list xmca@weber.ucsd.edu http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca