<html><body><a href="http://infoling.org" target="_blank"><img
src="http://infoling.org/img/infoling.png" alt="Logo image by Hay
Kranen / CC-BY" width="255" height="50" align="left" border="0" /></a>
<br /><br /><br />
<br /><font style="font-size:80%"><table border="0" bordercolor="#FFF"
width="190px"><tr><td> </td><td> <a
style="text-decoration:none" href="http://www.facebook.com/infoling"
target="_blank"><img border="0"
src="http://infoling.org/img/facebook-icon.png" alt="Infoling at
Facebook" style="vertical-align:-30%;height:16px;width:16px" />
Facebook</a></td><td> <a style="text-decoration:none"
href="http://www.twitter.com/infoling" target="_blank"><img border="0"
src="http://infoling.org/img/t_small-b.png" alt="Infoling at Twitter"
style="vertical-align:-30%;height:16px;width:16px" />
Twitter</a></td></tr></table></font>
<br />Moderador/a: Carlos Subirats (U. Autónoma Barcelona), Mar Cruz
(U. Barcelona)
<br />Editoras: Paloma Garrido (U. Rey Juan Carlos), Laura Romero (UB)
<br />Programación, desarrollo: Marc Ortega (UAB)
<br />Directoras/es de reseñas: Alexandra Álvarez (U. Los Andes,
Venezuela), Yvette Bürki (U. Bern, Suiza), María Luisa Calero (U.
Córdoba, España), Luis Cortés (U. Almería)
<br />Asesoras/es: Isabel Verdaguer (UB), Gerd Wotjak (U. Leipzig,
Alemania)
<br />Colaboradoras/es: Julia Bernd (Cause Data Collective, EE.UU),
Antonio Ríos (UAB), Danica Salazar (UB)
<br />
<br />Con el patrocinio de:
<br /><table border="0" bordercolor="#FFFFFF"
width="200px"><tr><!--<td><a href="http://www.fundacioncomillas.es/"
target="_blank"><img
src="http://www.infoling.org/img/logo-comillas.png" alt="Fundación
Comillas" width="85" height="49" align="left" border="0"
/></a></td>--><td><a
href="http://www.arcomuralla.com/Arco/Shop/default.asp"
target="_blank"><img style="border:0;margin-top:10px"
src="http://www.infoling.org/img/logoarco.jpg" alt="Arco Libros"
width="62" height="34" align="left" border="0"
/></a></td></tr></table><br /><hr /><font style="font-size:90%">
<br /><b>Infoling 11.33 (2012)</b><br />ISSN: 1576-3404 </font>
<br /><font style="font-size:90%">© Infoling 1996-2012. Reservados
todos los derechos</font>
<br />
<br /><hr /><b>Tesis doctoral: </b><br />Vera López, Hortensia
Beatriz. 2012. The Scholarship of Learning Modern Languages and
Cultures. Integrating Education, Research and Human Development. The
University of Nottingham (Reino Unido), Hispanic and Latin American
Studies.<br /><b>Tesis completa en el Archivo de Infoling:</b> <a
href='http://www.infoling.org/repository/ID/85'
target='_blank'>http://www.infoling.org/repository/ID/85</a><br
/><b>Información de:</b> Hortensia Beatriz Vera López
<beatrizvera@hotmail.com><br />Compartir: <a
href="http://api.addthis.com/oexchange/0.8/forward/facebook/offer?url=http://www.infoling.org/informacion/T85.html&pubid=ra-4def7f4a7565a706"
target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><img border="0"
src="http://infoling.org/img/facebook-icon.png" alt="Send to Facebook"
title="Send to Facebook"
style="vertical-align:-30%;height:16px;width:16px"
/></a> <a
href="http://api.addthis.com/oexchange/0.8/forward/twitter/offer?url=http://www.infoling.org/informacion/T85.html&template=@infoling%20Vera,%20H.%20The%20Scholarship%20of%20Learning%20Modern%20Languages%20and%20Cultures%20{{url}}&pubid=ra-4def7f4a7565a706&shortener=bitly&bitly.login=infoling&bitly.apiKey=R_60e1d6b1cb688030e7759b835f63d0c0"
target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><img border="0"
src="http://infoling.org/img/t_small-b.png" alt="Tweet this"
title="Tweet this" style="vertical-align:-30%;height:16px;width:16px"
/></a><hr /><p><a
href="http://infoling.org/english/search/tesis/ID/85"
target="_blank">View with English headings</a></p><hr /><br
/><b>Director/a de tesis: </b>Mark I. Millington <br /><br
/><b>Descripción</b><br /><p><b>The problem</b><br /><br />The
development of personal epistemologies and their integration with
social epistemologies is not a current priority in most institutions
of higher education, which has negative consequences for knowledge
itself (its generation and re-creation), for the individuals who see
themselves restricted by limiting beliefs about learning and knowing,
and for society at large for reproducing practices that favour
alienation and fragmentation. While the transformative effect of
learning is part of a social epistemology, it is important to attest
of such a transformation in personal epistemologies. Both kinds are
necessary for a critical form of life which, according to Barnett,
“has to be construed and practiced as a form of social and personal
epistemology” (Barnett, 1997: 5). <br /><br />Personal
epistemologies, however, are generally considered as being subsumed
under social epistemologies, as if the experiential and perceptual
transformations of the individual were no more than by-products of
larger impersonal processes. However, a serious reconsideration of the
role of education in personal epistemologies can offer multiple
opportunities to investigate the experiential roots of knowledge and
ways of knowing conducive to the development of specific fields of
knowledge. This would be beneficial for disciplines in general and for
Modern Languages and Cultures in particular, in terms of gaining a
phenomenological perspective on its underpinnings, and helping
learners to enhance their autonomy and creativity. <br /><br />A
profound revision of the meaning of knowledge as connected to the
transformation of the individual and how he or she goes about knowing
is a must in all academic fields but perhaps most acutely in the
Humanities, where subjectivity is such a consistent focus of study.
Given the tendency to define knowledge in ‘objective’ terms
(Gellner, 1964), one of the most important problems in the study and
research of the Humanities is the revision of the role of subjectivity
both in the definition of its object and in its methods of study. New
forms of scholarship that construct flexible and generative objects
and ways of knowing that bring learners, collectively and individually
conceived, into being are necessary. We need forms of scholarship for
which the human development of those who practise them is not
indifferent. <br /><br /><b>The core idea</b><br /><br />By taking
learning as the axis of scholarship, personal and social
epistemologies have a common ground: experience and reflective action.
I am not considering learning as a vehicle whose success is measured
to the extent that a portion of the external world is appropriated,
but as a qualitatively different way to see, understand and handle
experience. A scholarship of learning is tightly bound to the
experiential roots of objects of study that keep on changing in
individual and collective histories. Therefore, a scholarship of
learning is not a set of context-free skills but a complex process of
transformation of its practitioners’ identity and agency over
themselves and their object of study. Such two-fold construction
orientates a discipline no less than the ways of knowing, acting and
being of those engaged in its investigation. I propose that the object
of study of Modern Languages and Cultures should be literacy in the
multilayered symbolic codes (some of which are tacit) that make
intercultural interchanges intelligible and effective. The scope of
this dissertation, however, is restricted to the investigation of deep
learning in literacy. <br /><br />My thesis is that Modern Languages
and Cultures should not be limited to objects of study, such as
language, discourse, texts, films, etc. but has to include the
processes of agentification of the learner and making sense of his or
her experience in a foreign language and culture. I advocate the
investigation of the experiential roots of language and culture in a
scholarship of learning which seeks to integrate research and
education, on the one hand, and language and content, on the other.
Experience and learning are subjective-objective processes, and so I
advise the epistemological revaluation of subjectivity. I propose
that subjectification (i.e. the construction of the subject) is not
only relevant for human development and social well-being, but is a
source of knowledge in the Humanities.<br /><br /><b>The
argument</b><br /><br />Three general statements derive from the
argument that a scholarship of learning languages and cultures is
constructed and practised as a form of social and personal
epistemology that transforms the agency and the identity of its
practitioners: <br />A. Learning is the most comprehensive form of
communication: with the mediation of the world, we learn from and
educate each other in ways of thinking, acting and being that
construct intersubjectively validated worldviews without which not
even disagreement would be possible. Different conceptions of learning
account for surface or deep approaches to it and, consequently,
underlie different representations of knowledge, knowing and knowers.
<br />B. Variability, generativeness, and being
experiential-transformative are characteristics of deep learning.<br
/>C. According to the previous characteristics of deep learning, the
study of languages and cultures has to change its gravitational centre
from its current impersonal and collective orientation (which is
distinctive of surface learning) to personal experience and the active
construction of identities and agentive voices.<br /><br />Each one of
the previous general statements is respectively broken down into three
more specific ones, thus making nine steps for the argument and
mirrored in the nine constitutive chapters of this dissertation:<br
/>1. Disciplines have an educational genesis which is generally
neglected. I am proposing that it is necessary to acknowledge this
origin by investigating the meaning of deep understanding leading into
educational practices that are integral to the way of conceiving of
the disciplines themselves. The term I use for this investigation and
practice of the disciplines is scholarship of learning.<br />2. The
concept of a scholarship of learning derives originally from the
diversification of the notion of scholarship and then from the
critical revision of its historical antecedent: the scholarship of
teaching. I suggest that the scholarship of learning is the most
comprehensive form of disciplinary construction because it is not
limited to knowledge as a product but includes the processes of
knowledge formation.<br />3. The characteristics of deep (as opposed
to surface) learning are the benchmark of good scholarship
interconnected with sound educational practices. Therefore, the
critical revision of a discipline needs to inquire into this double
connection, asking: how do these basic assumptions posit learning and
learners? What kind of educational practices are necessary to improve
the construction of this discipline? <br />4. The contextual and
self-induced variation of the aspects of experience considered by the
learner is foundational for discernment and hence for deep learning.
<br />5. Deep learning is heuristic and creative.<br />6. Through
deep learning, individuals transform themselves.<br />7. The cultural
experience of language is the matrix of generativeness and
self-transformation in language and culture. <br />8. The ability to
shift languages in narrated events and narrative actions scaffold
literacy in a foreign language. <br />9. The meaning of understanding
in a discipline unites social and personal epistemologies.</p><br
/><b>Área temática:</b> Ciencia cognitiva, Español como lengua
extranjera (ELE), Español como segunda lengua (EL2), Filosofía del
lenguaje, Lingüística cognitiva, Otras especialidades, Pragmática,
Psicolingüística, Semántica, Teorías lingüísticas<br /><br
/><b>Índice</b><br /><p>THE SCHOLARSHIP OF LEARNING MODERN LANGUAGES
AND CULTURES: INTEGRATING EDUCATION, RESEARCH AND HUMAN
DEVELOPMENT <br />THE PROBLEM <br />THE CORE IDEA <br />THE
ARGUMENT <br />THE PLAN <br /><br />PART ONE: SCHOLARSHIP AND ITS
METAMORPHOSES <br /><br />CHAPTER 1 THE EDUCATIONAL GENESIS OF THE
DISCIPLINES <br />OVERVIEW <br />1.1 DISCIPLINES AND
DISCIPLINARITY <br />1.2 EDUCATION AND THE SCHOLARSHIP OF LEARNING <br
/>1.3 LEARNING AS THE FOUNDATION OF SCHOLARSHIP <br />1.3.1 Learning
and research reconsidered <br />1.3.2 Institutional epistemology <br
/>1.4 MAIN CONCERNS OF A SCHOLARSHIP OF LEARNING MODERN LANGUAGES <br
/>1.4.1 Disciplinary identity <br />1.4.2 Principled socialising
practices <br />1.4.3 Human development <br />1.4.4 Foreignness <br
/><br />CHAPTER 2 FROM THE SCHOLARSHIP OF TEACHING TO THE SCHOLARSHIP
OF LEARNING <br />OVERVIEW <br />2.1 LEARNING AND DIFFERENT MODELS OF
UNIVERSITY <br />2.2 MULTIPLE FORMS OF CONSTRUCTING THE
DISCIPLINES <br />2.3 CURRENT ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT TEACHING AND
RESEARCH <br />2.4 TOWARDS A SCHOLARSHIP OF LEARNING <br />2.4.1 The
transition from the scholarship of teaching <br />2.4.2 Dealing with
uncertainty and complexity <br />2.4.3 The turning point from teaching
to learning <br />2.4.4 The learning experience amid the
disciplines <br /><br />CHAPTER 3 CHARACTERISTICS OF A SCHOLARSHIP OF
LEARNING <br />3.0 LEARNING, KNOWING AND BEING <br />3.0.1 Surface
learning <br />3.0.2 Deep learning <br />3.1 VARIABILITY <br />3.1.1
Variation for discernment <br />3.1.2 Practice and experience <br
/>3.1.3 To see in order to act –to act in order to see <br />3.2
GENERATIVENESS <br />3.2.1 A focus on knowledge formation <br />3.2.2
Generative practice <br />3.3 TRANSFORMATION <br />3.3.1 Transforming
perspectives <br />3.3.2 Ontological shifts and changes in
understanding <br />3.4 INTEGRATIVE CONNECTIONS <br />3.4.1
Connections with other disciplinary fields <br />3.4.2 Connections
with the community at large <br /><br />PART TWO: DEEP LEARNING IN
LANGUAGES AND CULTURES <br /><br />CHAPTER 4 VARIABILITY IN LEARNING
LANGUAGES AND CULTURES <br />4.0 LEARNING AND VARIATION <br />4.1
CONTEXTUAL VARIABILITY: THE MONOLINGUAL BIAS OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE
STUDIES <br />4.1.1 Reifying concepts and practices <br />4.1.2 The
native speaker <br />4.1.3 Towards ‘de-reification’ <br />4.1.4
Linguistics and foreignness <br />4.2 LANGUAGE FROM A THIRD PLACE <br
/>4.2.1 Plurilingualism and bilingualism <br />4.2.2 Multilingualism
and Plurilingualism <br />4.2.3 Multilingualism and plurilingualism in
ML disciplinary scope <br /><br />CHAPTER 5 LANGUAGE LEARNING AND
GENERATIVENESS <br />5.0 SOME DEFINITIONS <br />5.1 SELF-INDUCED
VARIABILITY <br />5.2 ANALOG AND DIGITAL FORMS OF SYMBOLIZATION <br
/>5.3 MEANINGS “FOR ME” <br />5.4 GENERATORS <br />5.4.1
Generators of consistency <br />5.4.2 Generators of
diversification <br />5.4.2.1 Crosslinguistic Influence <br />5.4.2.2
Similarity <br />5.4.2.3 Blending <br />5.4.2.4 Feeling <br />5.4.2.5
Genre <br />5.4.2.6 Metaphors <br />5.5 GENERATORS’ ROLE IN SLA <br
/><br />CHAPTER 6 TRANSFORMATIVE INVESTIGATION OF THE LANGUAGE LEARNER
IDENTITY <br />6.0 AGENCY AND IDENTITY <br />6.1 FROM OBJECTIFICATION
TO THE RE-DESIGN OF SUBJECTIVITIES <br />6.2 EMIC AND ETIC <br />6.3
STAGES OF A PLURILINGUAL EMIC INVESTIGATION <br />6.4 PERSONA
DESIGN <br />6.4.1 Grammaticalisation of linguistic agency <br />6.4.2
Cultural agency and the self-inventing subject <br />6.5 GUIDELINES OF
LANGUAGE LEARNING ACTIONS <br />6.5.1 Taking up multiple roles <br
/>6.5.2 Taking up multiple readings and multiple writings <br />6.5.3
Learning journals <br />6.5.4 Learning language as a cooperative
undertaking <br /><br />PART THREE: CULTURAL STUDIES OF THE PERSON <br
/>CHAPTER 7 THE CULTURAL EXPERIENCE OF LANGUAGE <br />7.0 OTHERNESS
AND FOREIGNNESS: TWO THRESHOLD CONCEPTS <br />7.1 CULTURAL STUDIES IN
THE PARTICIPANT’S PERSPECTIVE <br />7.2 THE MEANING OF “CULTURAL
EXPERIENCE” <br />7.3 THE PROBLEM WITH CULTURAL STUDIES: ISSUES OF
DISCIPLINARITY <br />7.4 ONOMASIOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS OF CULTURE <br
/>7.4.1 Knowledge transfer: an onomasiological project <br />7.4.2.
Linguistic mapping to mental concepts <br />7.4.3 Onomasiological
investigations with lexis and syntax <br />7.4.3.1 Dictionaries <br
/>7.4.3.2 Semantic syntax <br />7.5 CULTURAL STUDIES CENTRED IN THE
PERSON <br />7.5.1 Language learner autonomy <br />7.5.2 Knowledge as
design <br />7.5.3 Self-narratives <br /><br />CHAPTER 8 A DESIGN
APPROACH TO LITERACY<br />8.1 LITERACY AND ITS AVATARS <br />8.1.1 The
social turn in literacy studies <br />8.1.2 The concept of literacy
practices <br />8.2 THE ONTOLOGICAL BIAS OF LANGUAGE STUDIES <br
/>8.2.1 The object of language studies <br />8.2.2 Literacy’s
centres <br />8.2.3 Literariness and language acquisition <br />8.2.4
Symbolic waves of language acquisition <br />8.3 LANGUAGE
MATERIALITY <br />8.3.1 The materiality of language representation <br
/>8.3.2 The narrative mimetic paradigm <br />8.3.3 Narrative
materiality <br />8.4 THREE STAGES OF LITERACY STUDIES <br />8.4.1
Literacy reified <br />8.4.2 Literacy objectified <br />8.4.3 Literacy
subjectified <br /><br />CHAPTER 9 LEARNING FOR UNDERSTANDING: NEXUS
OF SOCIAL AND PERSONAL EPISTEMOLOGIES <br />9.0 THE MEANING OF
UNDERSTANDING ML&CS <br />9.1 EDUCATIONAL PRACTICES TO ADVANCE A
SHARED BODY OF KNOWLEDGE <br />9.2 SOCIAL EPISTEMOLOGIES <br />9.2.1
Crossdisciplinary connections <br />9.2.2 Transdisciplinary
perspectives <br />9.3 PERSONAL EPISTEMOLOGIES <br />9.3.1 The design
of self-narratives <br />9.3.2 Textual identity<br />9.3.3 Action and
awareness in personal knowledge <br /><br />CONCLUSION: HIGHER
EDUCATION & HUMAN DEVELOPMENT</p><br /><b>Fecha de lectura o
defensa:</b> 2 de julio de 2012<br /><br /><b>Número de págs.:</b>
338<br /><br /><b>Correo-e del autor/a:</b>
<beatrizvera@hotmail.com><br /><br /><b>Información en la web
de Infoling:</b><br /> <a
href="http://www.infoling.org/informacion/T85.html" target="_blank">
http://www.infoling.org/informacion/T85.html</a></body></html>