A crucial difference between representations of relative error inthese equations compared withEquations 6and7 for the single-facet designs is that three sources of measurement error varianceare separately represented, withpt2ntequaling specific-factor error,po2noequaling transient error, andpto,e2ntnoequaling random-responseerror. Effects fortasks, occasions, and their interaction are includedin the denominator for the D-coefficient but not the G-coefficientbecause those effects can change the absolutemagnitude of scoresbut not their relative differences.

Central Committee man

The rhizome itself assumes very diverse forms, from ramified surface extension in all directions to concretion into bulbs and tubers.

A system of this kind could be called a rhizome. A rhi-zome as subterranean stem is absolutely different from roots and radicles. Bulbs and tubers are rhizomes. Plants with roots or radicles may be rhizomorphic in other respects altogether: the question is whether plant life in its specificity is not entirely rhizomatic. Even some animals are, in their pack form. Rats are rhizomes.

As for the war machine in itself, it seems to be irreduc-ible to the State apparatus, to be outside its sovereignty and prior to its law: it comes from elsewhere.

a problem I hadlived but not labeled, so to speak.

longitude and latitude,

‘there’s nothing to explain, nothing to understand, nothing to interpret’

‘Philosophy’s like a novel: you have to ask “What’s going tohappen?,” “What’s happened?

‘built upon the not-so-controversial ideathat how we conceive the world is relevant to how we live in it.’

is reading with love.

So you will never get to the bottom of a concept like multiplicity, you will never beable to figure out what it really means, nor, if you become the least bit Deleuzian,will you want to

Gordian rhizome

Otto Scharmer and Peter Senge

“choose your own adventure game”

An eerie quiet descended.

actual, stratified rhizomatic root ball of their territories.

My Map, Your Territory

thattheontologyoforganisationalsys-temsisemergent;

D

01).Hedealswithithoweverbysuggestingthat“...ifchangeswhicharepresent-at-handhavebeenpositedempir-ically‘inme’,itisnecessarythatalongwiththesesomethingpermanentwhichispresent-at-handshouldbepositedempirically‘outsideofme’.Whatisthuspermanentistheconditionwhichmakesitpossibleforthechanges‘inme’tobepresent-at-hand.”(Heidegger1962p.248).

ideaofreflec-tionaspartofthemethodofaction.Thenotionof“being”positsthatthe“present-at-hand”and“ready-to-hand”objectsandconceptsareusedinourdailydecisionsandactions.

‘how does it work?

riting rhizomatically; understanding texts as rhizomatic; and analyzing the rhizomatic linkages between texts and the talk of the research participants.

We are in desperate need of new concepts, Deleuzian or otherwise, in this new educational environment that privileges a single positivist research model with its transcendent rationality and objectivity and accompanying concepts such as randomization, replicability, generalizability, bias, and so forth—one that has marginalized subjugated knowledges and done material harm at all levels of education, and one that many educators have resisted with some success for the last fifty years

Todd May (1996) explains that Deleuze’s ontology is ‘built upon the not-so-controversial idea that how we conceive the world is relevant to how we live in it.’

Now you might ask what this discussion of subjectivity in Deleuze has to do with education and science, and I would respond—everything, everything. All of education and science is grounded in certain theories of the subject; and if the subject changes, everything else must as well

Rather than asking what a concept means, you will find yourself Deleuzian Concepts for Education: The subject undone 285 © 2004 Philosophy of Education Society of Australasia asking, ‘Does it work? what new thoughts does it make possible to think? what new emotions does it make possible to feel? what new sensations and perceptions does it open in the body?’ (Massumi, 1992, p. 8). You soon give up worrying about what Deleuze might have intended and use him in your own work ‘to free life from where it’s trapped, to trace lines of flight’ (Deleuze, 1990/1995, p. 141) into a different wa y of being in the world

permission to give up the pretense of signifying and ‘making meaning’ in the old way

Now you might ask what this discussion of subjectivity in Deleuze has to do with education and science, and I would respond—everything, everything. All of education and science is grounded in certain theories of the subject; and if the subject changes, everything else must as well.

haecceity

One form of resistance to the scientism produced by the old values of government functionaries involves accomplishing scholarship that critiques those values and introduces concepts that upset the established order. This essay participates in that resistance, illustrating how Deleuzian concepts keep the field of play open, becoming, rhizomatic, with science springing up everywhere, unrecognizable according to the old rules, coming and going in the middle, ‘where things pick up speed’ (Deleuze & Guattari, 1980/1987, p. 25).

We are in desperate need of new concepts, Deleuzian or otherwise, in this new educational environment that privileges a single positivist research model with its transcendent rationality and objectivity and accompanying concepts such as randomization, replicability, generalizability, bias, and so forth—one that has marginalized subjugated knowledges and done material harm at all levels of education, and one that many educators have resisted with some success for the last fifty years.

Deleuze's ontology is ‘built upon the not-so-controversial idea that how we conceive the world is relevant to how we live in it

t can also be understood as an empirical version of Gilles Deleuze’s nomadic philosophy (Deleuze and Guattari 1988).

Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari Intersecting Lives Francois Dosse; Translated by Deborah Glassman