Here we can see that roles shift depending on the situation. The sharing of the controllers shows that they see each other as equals, but also that each has strengths which they can share with the other. This again reminds me intent participation, where there are "fluid negotiations of responsibilities" (185)

Mikey helps, but he doesn't just do it for Maddy. He explains what she did wrong, so that hopefully she'll learn from it and not make the same mistake next time.

She makes decisions for herself. She is in control of her level of participation, rather than having a "teacher" or "expert" dictate how she must participate.

Ok, pretty solid example of intent participation. Maddy remains in the periphery until she is ready to participate. She is observing and assessing what is going on before she decides to play. The existence of a third controller for Maddy shows that her brothers were anticipating that she would join the game at some point, but allow for her to begin at her own pace. (Why it is kept all the way int he basement is another question.)

(highlighting was being weird) So here it seems that the researchers do become pseudo-members of the community. Like there is almost a special category of member formed for them. Instead of being new-comer-moving-toward-old-timer, they are something else entirely.

This is an example of a time when someone joins a group or attempts LPP but will they ever get there? The hats immediately point out that they are not part of the group, really, and they never could be because of their age. The only way they could be would be by lying, and then even if they were really, really good liars, they would still be illegitimate, right? The only exception would be if they were so good at heir lies that they actually convince themselves that they belong there. Did that make sense...?

One thing I really like about Whyville is that while this space of course was originally produced by adults (I'm assuming anyway) the kids who use it are able to take control of it and make it their own. This is a lot different than Nespor's take on public spaces. Unlike with filed tirps or other visits to public spaces, the kids aat Whyville have much more fredom to intrepret the space as they please. It seems there are still rules, but the users themselves have much more control here.

Here is a very clear example of what it means to be an old-timer vs a new comer in this CoP. There is a language that comes with belonging. This importance of language has come up over and over again in our readings. It was important with AA, the hurdlers, the little leaguers, the skaters, and I'm sure more. I also really appreciate how the authors here refer to the children's language as "sophisticated". I think this opens up the possibility that children can teach adults, and maybe in other settings as well. Maybe even in a classroom??? I think it's really important for adults to give me respect and value to the knowledge that children have.

I think this kind of speaks to the multi-sited idea of horizontal forms of learning. It's not that you move from A to B and then you're done, it's not so "planned." You may move from A to G to B back to A and then to J and on and on.

This idea is very similar to the multi-sited piece. It is important to be aware of all these possible shifts (which are the same in both pieces-time, space, place) and how participants' individual histories can affect these shifts. I think both pieces argue that we have something to learn from these histories that then suggest learning is a cultural process of accumulating varying histories. This section links up really well with the multi-sited perspective that "Interpretive research, therefore, involves working to understand participants’ meaning perspectives on their own terms, rather than imposing external or normative categories" (619). I guess put really, really simply: what can we learn from others? How can we improve based on what we learn? And of course, that marginalized participant's perspectives are worth looking at.

Can the teacher become a student and the student become a teacher? Why is this idea so appalling to some?

I like this concept of the "third space" or what I've read as liminality in other pieces. I actually wrote in the margin of my notes for Lave & Wenger Ch 2 "liminality" so maybe my question before about if L&W would agree about this "horizontal" movement is answered here. No matter the situation, there is a period of liminality or existence in this "third space" as one learns to adapt to and become a member

I'm trying to determine if this is different to the AA examples in Lave & Wenger. There's a lot of discussion there about the movement from newcomer to old-timer, but do Lave & Wenger look at this movement as being vertical or are they more open to horizontal movement? I know in class we have discussed this horizontal movement (before we had a term for it) but I can't recall/find if Lave & Wenger discussed it in this way. I know they didn't use these terms, there are many times when the say something along the lines of "when the newcomer becomes an old-timer..."

This fluidity described here is reminiscent of Nasir's hurdlers. I find some similarities here between Nasir's idea that learning and identity are related, but still independent, and that the self is constantly changing due to interactions with "teachers" and through the process of learning.

so are you able to look at other users who consistently comment/re-blog, etc on these tumblr user's accounts? Do the same users constantly communicate with each other? Is there a lot of back and forth? (I really don't know this world)

I think you'll see some really interesting things here. I don't use tumblr but I see this replying to comments an re-blogging in other places. The interactions that come up are really dense and I think you'll be able to get lots of rich data.

This sounds like a really interesting study! I like this new interpretation of islands of expertise in this digital world. I don't really use tumblr myself so some of these interactions that you described I'm not familiar with, so just remember when you do your final project to really explain these "tumblr-specific" terms that you use.

I'm not sure what you mean here. Do you mean these sort of "fake" family histories that may exist between the parent-like blogger and the kid-like blogger?

Ha. Really? That's pretty funny. I guess this really plays into the whole pseudo parent role. I guess you could just expand further on this, maybe not change the term like I said before, but just make it very clear that these people are not actual parents of these young tumblr users.

you mean as opposed to just re-blogging things?

Ok, so not literally parents, right? Do you think you have to stick with this exact terminology? Maybe your work can be inspired by Crowley and Jacobs, but I don't know that you have to stick to the exact same terminology. Since they are not literally parents but they are acting in some ways similar to a parent by guiding these young bloggers, maybe you could think of another term to use to describe these parent-like guides.

Dance allows students the opportunities to express things that they may find difficult to address verbal or in any other way

I think this idea of using the body as a tool is really fascinating. I think this method of teaching and use of the body is to help students realize they can do math without traditional tools--too many people think they can't do math without a calculator, etc. Ms. Collins is teaching her students they can do math with what they've got--their bodies.

For me this is one of the key arguments in favor of incorporating kinesthetic teaching methods, as well as other varying methods. There are many different styles of learners and traditional note-taking and worksheet teaching methods only caters to one, very specific (and not even that common) type of learner. A good lesson should cater to as many different types of learning styles as possible.

Here we can see how math is perceived as only existing in a certain way, and that there is no room for variation. Math Moves! show that math can exist in everyday, natural ways.

Well put. Again, nice job articulating Rogoff.

This sounds really interesting, and completely different than what I am doing. I like that you are choosing a local where learning probably isn't typically talked about. I bet you'll observe some really interesting things. By the way, how do you have access to this site? And how did you think of this? It's really creative!

While I think it's kind of a no-brainer why you'd look at interactions between at least three people, you probably will want to explain why at some point, mostly because it might be argued that two people could potentially count

That's great. You will have access to this? It will be interesting to see what subtle mannerisms you might be able to pick up from video that you might not be able to notice just from observing, since with video you will be able to watch multiple times

This is a great description of intent participation. Great job putting it into your own words. Helpful for me too!

Can you imagine if this was a pencil and paper "final exam"? Would that even prove anything?

This is great, because it encourages learning to be done outside of the space of the workshop. I like this idea because it can soften the border between "school" and real life, it doesn't seem like homework, it's much more natural, so this type of activity (if implemented in a school) could help kids see learning as something that can happen every day and everywhere

The style of learning is so practical-not theoretical. The kids can see how what they are learning can be put into practice almost immediately, and they are learning a variety of other skills at the same time (that they may or may not be conscious of)

The space of "school" has become so separated from public spaces that there seems to be little connection between it and the public sphere. Schools also enforce spacial boundaries so rigidly

And it seems like due to all these factors, public spaces become only public by name, not by practice...is it really public if the public does not have access to it?

Full disclosure I've really struggled with this article for some reason. I find this idea of figurative borders interesting (although obviously a place like Art Quest has physical borders too). It seems like according to Nespor space is defined by these figurative borders which can then separate or connect various entities

This really stood out to me throughout the reading. Talking (much like lecturing) is not necessary for learning to occur. Behavior and actions work as teaching tools instead.

Wow. Kind of harsh. Who gets to decide how this space is used? Just a paragraph up it says "the arena was, in fact, amenable to carving." So even though the space MAY be used for that, someone and some point established the rules against carving in that space. So is that the right of the old-timer? To set and enforce rules?

So different than a classroom. Here learning is so much dependent on observation and trial and error.

Definitely seems different than intent participation, more like guided participation. There is observation but participation is almost immediate. In this context, this seems the most valuable/effective way to learn a trip.

This is really interesting to me. While I think in general the best way to learn is by doing, this "rule" doesn't allow for different learning styles. There seems to be a sense of exclusivity in this community that I imagine can be really terrifying to new-comers.

Really interesting point. I wonder if the artists themselves would agree. Would they ask why their painting doesn't have a bench in front of it? Would they disagree that their piece has quicker apprehendability?

Oh I didn't know that! That's really interesting. Very subtle way for the museum to influence the viewer, but not in an overbearing way. Nice connection to how immediate apprehendibility can work in this kind of space versus a science museum. I definitely didn't think of that!

Good connection to the readings. I like that you point out how immediate apprehendabilty may be really important in a science museum, but it's almost as if the rules change a bit with an art museum. Observation and personal reflection are much more important in this kind of setting.

Really good point. Make me curious to know if someone at the museum could actually explain to us why the bench is there, what the thought process was behind it, and what that means about the other paintings that do not receive a bench.

I discussed immediate apprehendability in my report too, but I didn't consider how a video is maybe even more so apprehendable than more traditional art pieces today. I'm sure years ago a video piece would have been confusing to some museum goers, but since technology is such an important part of every day life nowadays, the apprehenability of that kind of piece has changed. Makes me think how time and progress can affect how apprehendable something might seem.

There are so many facets to this figured world of little league. Artifacts play a crucial role, as does language and terminology. There are official sets of terminology, like the ones mentioned here, and other more slang terms, which were mentioned before (marshmallow for a ball that is easy to hit). The use of the various artifacts as well as the specialized language facilitates an identity as a little leaguer. This is similar to Nasir's hurdlers where there was specialized language and ways that the coaches spoke to the kids, and also similar to the expected behaviors in AA, and the way to deliver a narrative there. There is also specialized language within AA (12 steps, the "Big Book," hitting bottom, etc). Use of the specific terminology in all cases strengthens the conection to the figured world.

So far I've seen lots of connections to guided participation. The original interest--trains--was informed by the child, but further participation was structured by the parent. The child continues to show interest (at least for a while) and the parent provides a "facilitation approach" to guiding them, and much like the adult leaders in the youth activism groups, the parents provide guidance, resources, facilitate conversations, etc. The parents don't seem as likely to provide the apprenticeship or joint work method, probably because the interest is viewed more like a hobby--and a parent might not always see interest-based learning as quite as valuable as "highly specific forms of learning" (Azevedo) which is present in schools. So while the parent will support the child, it may not be at the level of apprenticeship/joint work method as discussed in Kirshner.

This is where Nasir would say that a combo of material, relational, and ideational identity resources would enhance connections to the CoP, thus "fueling engagement," right?

So would Nasir say this is an example of ideational identity resources? Mitchell has set a goal for himself, as well as established what he believes is worthy to be learned (what he will hone and apply).

Reminds me of Nasir and the importance placed on relational resources. These relationships with others at the star parties helps to strengthen the sense of belonging. There is continued learning as they converse and point out new things to one another, which "increases connection to the practice," as Nasir would say.

We discussed in our group the following: are you still learning if you are now teaching? We decided yes, as you are learning to take on a new identity of "teacher." Additionally, is the ability of being able to display your knowledge the final step in learning? If you can't prove you've learned (in this case by teaching) then have you really learned what you were supposed to learn?

Each activity/event/etc has impact on our lives, thus forming and re-forming our identity constantly

Here something as simple as a "gaze" can have different meaning depending on the figured world the person belongs to, although the member themselves may not have re-defined the meaning of "gaze," it could be an outsider who has re-defined the meaning, but this still affects the identity of the member.

How people understand themselves in relation to their figured world informs their identity, but certain things may have been defined differently BEFORE they were a member of this figured world. But now that they are a member, they can "revalue" events and re-define terminology to fit it into their figured world.

Again, here is a connection to retaliation identity. For student to be connected with the CoP, and function within it, it is necessary for the leaders to be a relational resource in order to "sustain participation in different learning situations"

This somewhat arbitrary cutoff is interesting to me in relation to identity (of course 18 is an arbitrary cutoff all over the country for various reasons). It makes me think of Holland and the idea of there being different roles and positions with in figured worlds, but in this kind of situation, all one needs to do is turn 18 (and probably graduate high school) to move up and acquire a different position. 18 and 24 is not a big age difference,, so what IS different between the youth and an adult? How does their identity vary that allows one to receive a higher /more prestigious role? Ans why are leaders typically close in age I think it has something to do with the fact that relational resources are stronger when the age gap is closer, especially in the opinion of youth.

Yes, in Japanese schools students take on roles that would never be allowed in the US--for example, there are no custodians at Japanese schools because the students do all the cleaning. A good example of how more responsibility is a mark of intent participation.

Well, sort of answers my question from before (if intent participation is more common) but 1997 was a long time ago...

Computer just deleted everything I typed. GRR. Is this still the style of instruction in most schools? When I was in undergrad, my school's method of preparing new teachers was a student-centered model.Either way, this helped me understand how intent participation. (I think) So it seems like intent participation is more likely present in a student-centered classroom, while a traditional classroom utilizes the teach-centered method of instruction.

I really see intent participation here. Traditional school has develop certain activities that are supposed to prepare students for the future, but the student either isn't doing an activity that has any direct correlation to something "real", or the eventual participation is so far removed from the observing that the actual knowledge gained may be forgotten by the point it could actually be used.

We face a lot of struggles simply in our everyday activities!

This is so important in schools and I think a lot of teachers are taught to consider this in their lesson planning. This point also makes me think of differentiated instruction, which means changing the instruction based on the needs/skills of the student population. It's interesting to think that museums have been asked to consider this too.

So important in everyday life and design, but often seems like it is overlooked when designing things. I think what is often forgotten is considering prior knowledge. The person writing instructions for something is most likely an employee of that place, meaning they already have prior knowledge about how to use the resource. In order to write clear instructions, the writer needs to consider the person who may come with NO prior knowledge

Maybe at this museum. But I've been to lots of places where the admissions desk especially is not "immediately apprehendable," and I think this can really ruin an experience, especially one that is voluntary. It makes me think of my every day activity of observing people buy/re-fill their metro cards. The machines are NOT apprehendable and often malfunction. The difference is riding the subway is NOT a voluntary option for most people..unlike going to a museum.

Why it's important to have student-centered activities in a classroom. If a student just listens to a lecture but isn't given the opportunity to perform the task in an authentic way, they might not remember how to do it

Interaction seems to facilitate more meaningful connections with the piece--I especially like the idea of interactions with strangers.

Perhaps co-participation is a way to strengthen over-all participation.

Interesting. So not just looking at how people respond to the art, how their interactions with others might affect that response. I wonder how often people going alone rely on the reactions of strangers to guide their experience?

So, there is a lack of research on interaction with artifacts? Is that what is being said here?

I like the use of "low-tech" artifacts, in comparison to "high-tech," I suppose people will feel more of a connection to every day items, and come to view the piece with those prior connections in mind

I wonder if this is what the teacher used as an assessment? If so, I think it's great. So much more natural than a test or even a project.

I like this--that the teacher's role is a facilitator of knowledge, rather than a lecturer or something like that. This makes the classroom more student-centered

LPP--students having natural conversations with their peers about important issues. Something that as adults is done often. Also reminds me a bit of a staff meeting.

I love that from this perspective, the children themselves have much to offer. It's great to look at children as contributors to funds of knowledge.

Funds of knowledge reminds me of Bourdieu's social and cultural capital. But in his work, working class minority families would be looked at as having "low" social capital, but here we can see that the Sanchez family has a huge network that benefits all members of the family. I guess Bourdieu was looking more at the disadvantages these families might face (such as not the best schools, lack of access to better jobs, etc). But funds of knowledge allows us to look at this concept under another light--one that shows that these social connections do have power and meaning, just a different kind than is discussed in Bourdieu's work.

the family is really dependent upon relationships and a broad social network

Reminds me of the apprenticeship example in LPP, and how it is important to learn from those around you. Octavia can show how much she's learned and how strong her identity is as a track member by replicating her coach's behavior as she teaches the elementary school students

Really important step in identity formation. Can you ever fully identify as something if you and others don't refer to that identity marker?

Reminds me of the AA example. One cannot identity as a member of AA if the other members do not accept that person as a member. Similarly the track identity here is dependent on the coach.

Slightly different then Wenger, who is mentioned in the previous page as suggesting "that learning and identity are identical processes and that to learn isthe process of becoming that is identity"

Another reminder that learning does not require teaching.

so are you a full member in a figured world if you are just "borrowing"?

unfortunately sometimes we don't have a choice as to how we are characterized

Sad that all this time invested in a figured world could lead to so much unhappiness, quite unlike AA where happiness/stability is gained

when you don't fit in within one figured world, you find another to belong to

In other words...peer pressure? And desire to be part of the in-group?

Sounds like a crucial step. The person identity has changed, so therefore he/she will do what it takes to stay in the in-group of this figured world

To be a part of this figured world the identity must change. Knowing about it isn't enough, there must be evidence. This is different than the witchcraft example from the previous chapter. Maybe an AA outsider might think someone belongs to AA if they overhear that person talking about alcoholism, but if the AA figured world members don't consider the person a member, then they don't truly belong. But this seems to contradict what was stated about the witchcraft example.

I find this really interesting. How much of our identity is formed in this way? I think this would pertain to more than just AA. I think self-reflection is a way to evaluate our behavior and then use the knowledge gained from that to improve ourselves, thus modifying our identities

Is AA the figured world and alcoholic is the identity? So this means once one become a member of AA, they take on a new identity as well

Identities will change, depending on the figured worlds one encounters.

So while we may be told, for example, that blue is for boys and pink is for girls, eventually we will be able to realize that this was just a social construct? And we can make decisions for ourselves?

Does this mean artifacts are the way we can visualize figured worlds? For example, the clothing a person wears is the artifact may be a hint to the figured world this person belongs in?

Social positions don't exist alone, the comparison to others informs the social position (you can't have a king without any subjects) and social positions greatly affect one's identity

Our membership in various figured worlds affects our identity

So it is possible to be placed in a figured world without our own intentions? Then the figured worlds we belong to are not only ones we intentionally belong to, but ones that others believe us to be belonging to?

So the figured world that has been created informs the identity of the person...they begin to include "alcoholics" within their identity, since this fits within the figured world they belong to

Does this mean that the feeling of being left out, not in the in-group is a positive, because it motivates people to work to become part of the group/community? #questions

YES school is not just understanding how to math and how to write a paper but how to function inside an institution. How to be on time, how to talk to adults, how to work in groups, etc etc. Some kids come to school already understanding this concepts, and unfortunately, since these concepts aren't always explicitly taught, kids who come with out knowledge of them are left behind (reminds me of a book I read for another class, Unequal Childhoods) #inspired

I can see why #Becker likes the idea of apprenticeships, but also why he mentions all the issues with implementing them (money issues, safety concerns, liability, etc)

So apprentices should learn from all those around them, can learn from others at same level or below them. Even helping to train a newer apprentice may be a good learning opportunity for an apprentice. According to Bloom's taxonomy, one of the highest levels of knowledge is being able to explain or teach someone else a concept. I can see how this might be a good test of an apprentice's knowledge.

becker

Resnick discussed how "the

role of schooling in directly preparing people for economic participation" (16) and #Becker states "schools do not achieve the results they set out to achieve" (86). Here we can see an example of trade school doing what it's meant to do and actually preparing apprentices to contribute to the economy successfully.

I could see #Becker adding this to the list of why trade schools are often not feasible. In today's world it seems very strange for parents to send their kids to live outside of their own home. I think this is another example of why many assume apprenticeships don't work today.

I think this is the common assumption about apprenticeships.

Also speaks to #resnick, how a collaborative environment is best. It's hardly ever considered that a student could teach a teacher, but it is possible, and should be encouraged. I think this is pointing out that even the "new comers" have something to offer the "old timers"

I like this. Idea that we can all become experts in varying ways, but that everyone must go through varying rites of passage before we can be an old-timer

Thinking about schools again even though I know I'm not supposed to...such an important skill (also huge buzz word) for teachers, to scaffold rather then just tell students how to do something

Makes me think how when you are a kid, someone often asks you "what did you learn today?" but once you are out of school, no one asks you that or you are not challenged to think about what you learned at the end of the day (maybe bc there is no homework to cause this kind of reflection?) in this way, the word "learning" is joined with schooling or lessons or formal training, not so much with #everdayactivities

Resnick again. An expanded version of the individual/shared cognition category perhaps

Resnick again. An expanded version of the individual/shared cognition category perhaps

I keep thinking about what they are saying in relation to schools, and how to bring more #LPP into schools. But maybe I should try to expand my thinking more

everydayactivities

Reminds me of the people I saw using "team-work" to re-fill their metro cards (one person holding the money or wallet while other person pushed buttons)

This makes #LPP pretty clear for me. I know there's a lot of discussion today about getting kids more involved in outside of class activities.

may depend on the type of learner. visual learners for sure would benefit from modeling or direct demonstration. I think it's a good idea for teachers to use both methods.

Another connection to #resnick and the individual/shared cognition contrast between in-school learning and out of school learning. Reminds me of how often I look at other people and observe before I do something. For example, the first time I bought a metro card I watched other people do it first before I attempted. I do this a lot, and I would even say it was one of my most important survival techniques when I lived in Japan, and attempted #everydayactivities

Reminds me of Resnick's comment about on the job training: “although there is very little teaching, there is much learning” (p 17)--reminder that learning can occur all over, and outside of the traditional classroom #resnick