On the Compatibility of Dialogism and Dialectics: The Case of Mathematics Education and Professional DevelopmentCitation formats

Standard

On the Compatibility of Dialogism and Dialectics: The Case of Mathematics Education and Professional Development. / Williams, Julian.

In: Mind, Culture, and Activity, Vol. 27, No. 1, 27.11.2019, p. 70-85.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Author

Bibtex

@article{4f199a1b5dd148e3aaabf48a0d31ce3b,
title = "On the Compatibility of Dialogism and Dialectics: The Case of Mathematics Education and Professional Development",
abstract = "We argue that the distinction between dialogue (after Bakhtin) and dialectics(after Hegel, Marx, Vygotsky), is of key importance to learning-teaching and tomathematics education. Some followers of Bakhtin have argued that theseconcepts are irreconcilable, or incompatible, since dialectics implies anddialogism implicitly denies the requirement of telos (i.e., a targeted endpoint). Onthe contrary, we argue for compatibility; dialogism can allow for the progressimplied by dialectics, but its teleology is inherent in its efficacy in practice ratherthan in any pre-defined endpoint. We show how a mathematical or professionaldialogue can involve dialectical negations and supersession, thus providing forprogress or development, without loss of dialogism. Our case is taken from alesson study in which progress emerging from classroom and staffroom dialoguesis interpreted in dialectical terms as developmental. The connection withVygotsky{\textquoteright}s theory of concepts in learning-teaching and the possiblegeneralization of the argument are discussed. We conclude that the key momentson which concept development turns are: (1) the negation by multiple, livedpractices, and (2) the creative, speculative, supersession of inadequate concepts,in appropriate dialogues.",
keywords = "Dialogism, Bakhtin, Dialectics, Hegel, Vygotsky",
author = "Julian Williams",
year = "2019",
month = nov,
day = "27",
doi = "10.1080/10749039.2019.1686026",
language = "English",
volume = "27",
pages = "70--85",
journal = "Mind, Culture, and Activity",
issn = "1074-9039",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - On the Compatibility of Dialogism and Dialectics: The Case of Mathematics Education and Professional Development

AU - Williams, Julian

PY - 2019/11/27

Y1 - 2019/11/27

N2 - We argue that the distinction between dialogue (after Bakhtin) and dialectics(after Hegel, Marx, Vygotsky), is of key importance to learning-teaching and tomathematics education. Some followers of Bakhtin have argued that theseconcepts are irreconcilable, or incompatible, since dialectics implies anddialogism implicitly denies the requirement of telos (i.e., a targeted endpoint). Onthe contrary, we argue for compatibility; dialogism can allow for the progressimplied by dialectics, but its teleology is inherent in its efficacy in practice ratherthan in any pre-defined endpoint. We show how a mathematical or professionaldialogue can involve dialectical negations and supersession, thus providing forprogress or development, without loss of dialogism. Our case is taken from alesson study in which progress emerging from classroom and staffroom dialoguesis interpreted in dialectical terms as developmental. The connection withVygotsky’s theory of concepts in learning-teaching and the possiblegeneralization of the argument are discussed. We conclude that the key momentson which concept development turns are: (1) the negation by multiple, livedpractices, and (2) the creative, speculative, supersession of inadequate concepts,in appropriate dialogues.

AB - We argue that the distinction between dialogue (after Bakhtin) and dialectics(after Hegel, Marx, Vygotsky), is of key importance to learning-teaching and tomathematics education. Some followers of Bakhtin have argued that theseconcepts are irreconcilable, or incompatible, since dialectics implies anddialogism implicitly denies the requirement of telos (i.e., a targeted endpoint). Onthe contrary, we argue for compatibility; dialogism can allow for the progressimplied by dialectics, but its teleology is inherent in its efficacy in practice ratherthan in any pre-defined endpoint. We show how a mathematical or professionaldialogue can involve dialectical negations and supersession, thus providing forprogress or development, without loss of dialogism. Our case is taken from alesson study in which progress emerging from classroom and staffroom dialoguesis interpreted in dialectical terms as developmental. The connection withVygotsky’s theory of concepts in learning-teaching and the possiblegeneralization of the argument are discussed. We conclude that the key momentson which concept development turns are: (1) the negation by multiple, livedpractices, and (2) the creative, speculative, supersession of inadequate concepts,in appropriate dialogues.

KW - Dialogism, Bakhtin, Dialectics, Hegel, Vygotsky

U2 - 10.1080/10749039.2019.1686026

DO - 10.1080/10749039.2019.1686026

M3 - Article

VL - 27

SP - 70

EP - 85

JO - Mind, Culture, and Activity

JF - Mind, Culture, and Activity

SN - 1074-9039

IS - 1

ER -