Hi

Although the verbiage might have a simple, acceptable interpretation,
that is not necessarily the case.  Here is an alternative paraphrase
(just based on limited exposure to these specific ideas, and much
exposure to possibly related ideas).

The paraphrase:

"There are many equally valid ways of coming to understand the world. 
It is presumptuous of any one way to think that it has a better (i.e.,
more valid) approach.  What we need is for each way of knowing to be
equally humble about what it has to offer and to recognize the
legitimacy of diverse approaches.  The diverse approaches include
intuition, religious revelation, cultural traditions, and the like ...
oh yes, science and reason constitute another approach as well, although
not one at all superior to revealing the truth (presuming such a thing
is possible).  What we need is a dialogue or narrative that amalgamates
these alternative approaches in an egalitarian manner, rather than an
attempt by any perspective to elevate itself above the other ways of
knowing."

I don't find this translation, if valid, particularly inocuous.

Take care
Jim

James M. Clark
Professor of Psychology
204-786-9757
204-774-4134 Fax
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 11-Jan-07 9:58:07 AM >>>
Thanks Bill. Wow, that is a wonderful explanation of what on the
surface is alot of gobbledy gook. 

But why the need for all that verbiage to make a simple point? I stand
by my earlier position that ed psych folks are alienating themselves by
the use of too much jargon and their point is being lost on my readers.
They have some great points to make but they are completely buried and I
believe, ignored by most readers who are turned off by all of this
language that requires you to be in the inner circle to understand it.

My admonition to education and ed psych people is to lighten up and
open up. If I have a hard time reading their work, I imagine it's quite
the challenge for the average person-on-the-street who just wants to be
confident his kids are getting a good education. I don't have greater
confidence when I come across things I can't make sense of, I have less,
because IMHO truly great minds can communicate with anyone, c.f. Sagan,
who could teach the simplest person to think critically to Pinker, who
can put insomniacs to sleep.

And I am equally hard on psychologists, BTW.

This all smacks of politics getting involved someplace....

Annette


Annette Kujawski Taylor, Ph.D.
Professor of Psychology
University of San Diego
5998 Alcala Park
San Diego, CA 92110
619-260-4006
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 


---- Original message ----
>Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2007 18:59:51 -0500
>From: "William Scott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  
>Subject: [tips] Re: education jargon  
>To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)"
<[email protected]>
>
>The Schrag reference is:
>The Resources of Rationality: A Response to the Postmodern Challenge
>by Calvin O. Schrag (Indiana U. Press, 1992)
>
>Here's a description of Schrag's notion of transversal rationality
from
>http://theoblogy.blogspot.com/2005_03_01_archive.html 
>
>So transversal rationality acknowledges the many rationalities at
play
>in a pluralistic environment. As a method, it proposes that we look
for
>intersections between rationalities -- "transversal" means "to lie
>across" -- and enter into dialogue at those concrete, situated
moments
>... We must do so, however, with "epistemic humility;" that is, we
need
>to be open to theoretical correction. And our results will be judged
in
>moments of "praxial critique," in which the practical wisdom that
comes
>out of the situation is tested in future, real-life situations.
>
>
>Hope that helps.
>
>Bill
>
>
>
>
>
>>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 01/10/07 6:31 PM >>>
>OK: following up on a recent discussion involving jargon in
educational
>psych, I just got my latest issue of the TCR (Teacher's College
Record),
>an electronic journal devoted to educational issues. Here is the
first
>sentence of an abstract:
>
>"Employing Calvin O. Schrag's response to postmodernism-transversal
>rationality engaged through praxial critique-the constructive side of
>postmodern theories can be highlighted in higher education while at
the
>same time answering the pundits who see little to no constructive
side
>to postmodern theories."
>
>AARRGGHH--I spend inordinate amounts of time teaching my students to
>speak so that ANYONE can understand what they have to say. And, of
>course, this assumes that we ALL know who Calvin O. Schrag is, and
what
>his response is to.
>
>What is going on in the field of education?
>
>Annette
>
>
>Annette Kujawski Taylor, Ph.D.
>Professor of Psychology
>University of San Diego
>5998 Alcala Park
>San Diego, CA 92110
>619-260-4006
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>
>---
>To make changes to your subscription go to:
>http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang=english

>
>
>
>---
>To make changes to your subscription go to:
>http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang=english

>

---
To make changes to your subscription go to:
http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang=english






---
To make changes to your subscription go to:
http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang=english

Reply via email to