You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Education’ category.

PES website

74th Annual Meeting 2018

The 74th Annual Meeting of the Philosophy of Education Society (PES) will take place from March 22-26, 2018 in Chicago, Illinois, at the Palmer House Hilton:

The Program Committee invites papers to be submitted for presentation at the Annual Meeting and for subsequent publication in the PES yearbook, Philosophy of Education 2018.  The Committee also invites proposals for: (1) alternative sessions; and (2) work-in-progress sessions designed to bring participants together to collaborate on developing ideas not yet ready for the regular paper submission process.  Papers and proposals that address the conference theme are specifically encouraged, but all submissions will be considered on an equal basis.

PES 2018 THEME: Education as Formation

In J.M Coetzee’s recent novel, The Schooldays of Jesus, a seven-year old child, Davíd, is delighted to discover upon his return to the Academy of Dance that the school’s pet lamb, Jeremiah, has “grown small” (Coetzee, 2016, p. 238).  David’s parental-figure, Simón, explains what has really happened:

No one in this world grows small, Davíd.   If he has turned small, it is not because Aloysha hasn’t been feeding him, it is because he is not the real Jeremiah.  He is a new Jeremiah who has taken the place of the old Jeremiah because the old Jeremiah has grown up and turned into a sheep.  People find young Jeremiahs endearing, but not old Jeremiahs.  No one wants to cuddle old Jeremiahs.  That is their misfortune (Coetzee, 2016, p. 238).

Here, Simón sums up the fate of all animals: as we age we grow and our growth makes us less adorable and charming.  In the case of human beings, however, aging and growth are accompanied by maturation and wisdom.  With the passage of time comes experience, perspective and, ideally, wisdom.  Life effectively teaches us how to live.  Thus, humans desire to grow up because maturity and wisdom are marks of improved judgment, autonomous self-determination, and the full realization of our humanity.

It is tempting to subordinate youth to maturity, that is, to conceive of the present as a mere preparation for the future.  Yet, as John Dewey demonstrates, the only adequate preparation for the future is to live fully in the present.  Generally speaking, children live in the present more than adults do.  Such an appreciation of childhood, however, can tempt us to devalue maturity: youth is associated with vitality, naiveté and idealism, whereas maturity is associated with lethargy, resignation, and cynicism.  Ultimately, the relation between youth and maturity is more complex; youth and maturity co-exist in the lives of all evolving individuals.  Most of our experiences must be lived before we can understand them.  Given that we can only know retrospectively how current experiences will live on in future ones, we can only discover who we truly are by reflecting on, and seeking to recognize ourselves in, our youthful searching.   We are formed by experiences, and we give form to ourselves through memory, understanding and narrative.

Although the social sciences dominate our understanding of human maturation, philosophy has much to contribute.  For example, philosophers question developmental models proposed by psychologists; they illuminate the problematic process of having to make significant life choices on behalf of one’s future, transformed, self; they ask how it is possible to educate for a more equitable and just society when the educators and educational institutions themselves are a part of the very society that they seek to reform; and they propose their own visions of formation.  Moreover, a philosophical examination of the conceptual link between formation and education has compelling implications for our understanding of and engagement in parenting, teaching, coaching, mentoring, and care-giving.  Accordingly, the Program Committee calls for papers and alternative session proposals for the 2018 PES annual conference that address all aspects of the theme of education as formation.  These include, but are not limited to:

  • Moral perfectionism

  • Formative justice

  • Bildung, Bildungsroman, and  the “coming of age” film

  • Existential, progressive and/or liberal education

  • Democracy and citizenship education

  • Critical theory and critical pedagogies

  • Potentiality, character, growing up, maturity, cultivation, transformation, and/or upbringing

  • Metaphors for human formation such as growing up, circles, narrative, and/or journey

  • Repetition, routine, regimentation, ritual, habit, practice, and training

  • Philosophical biography and/or autobiography

  • Philosophy of/as the art of living

  • Philosophies of childhood, aging, parenting, and/or intergenerational relationships

  • Philosophies founded upon concepts of natality, fate, and/or mortality

  • Psychoanalytic concepts of remembering, regression, irony, mourning, and melancholia

Submissions do not have to address the theme explicitly.  We also encourage submissions that attend to gaps within the field, and/or propose novel ways of thinking about perennial educational concerns.  All papers will go through a formal review process overseen by the program committee.  Papers may be deemed unacceptable on grounds of quality, but they will not be automatically excluded because they do not address the conference theme.


The Program Committee will review only submissions made in accordance with the instructions below. Papers reviewed and accepted by the Program Committee, and invited responses to them, will be published online in the society’s annual yearbook, Philosophy of Education 2018. Past issues can be viewed here:

Program Committee members: Kal Alston, Jason C. Blokhuis, Bob Davis, Kevin Gary, Tal Gilead, David T. Hansen, Chris Higgins, Mark Jonas, Duck-Joo Kwak, Natasha Levinson, Stephanie Mackler, Jennifer Morton, Naoko Saito, Paul Standish, Susan Verducci, David Waddington, Rachel Wahl, Quentin Wheeler-Bell and Douglas Yacek. (Thanks in advance to these colleagues for their service to the Society.) Graduate Assistant: Sara Hardman, Teachers College, Columbia University.

Deadline: Papers and proposals must be submitted electronically to no later than November 1, 2017.

Submission instructions appear below:

Submission Formats

Paper Submissions: Papers may not exceed 4,500 words, including footnotes, and must be written in proper PES form (see the  Style Guide). The 4,500-word limit will be strictly enforced. Papers that modestly exceed the 4,500-word limit will be subject to editing. Papers that exceed this limit excessively will be subject to rejection without review or to not being published in the PES yearbook.

Multiple reviewers will review papers blindly. Final decisions on manuscripts rest with the Program Chair. Criteria for review include quality of argument, links to philosophical and philosophy of education literature and to education policy and practice, quality of expression, and significance of the contribution. Please make sure that references to your name, institutional affiliation, or work (e.g., “As I have argued on many occasions…”) are omitted from the paper, including the notes. Your identifying information will not be available to reviewers.

Alternative Presentation Submissions: Proposals may not exceed 1,000 words, including references. If the session being proposed involves multiple presenters, please specify the contribution of each presenter.

Alternative presentation proposals take two general forms:

Alternative Sessions: Examples include roundtables, author meets critics panels, performances, interviews, and panel conversations on issues. Criteria for review include originality and clarity of motivating question or idea, potential interaction with session attendees, and relevance/ importance to educational philosophy and educational policy and practice. Alternative sessions may be scheduled concurrently with paper sessions or in separate time slots.

Work-in-Progress Sessions: These sessions will group scholars with work-in-progress in an informal collaborative setting. Proposals should detail the question or claim being investigated, relevant sources/ resources, likely direction, and mode(s) of analysis. Criteria for review include clarity and significance of the question/ claim, suitability of sources/ resources, suitability of mode(s) of analysis, and potential for thinking anew about issues in the field of educational philosophy.

Submission Process: Submit papers or proposals as a Word attachment to  by November 1, 2017. In the body of your e-mail, please provide the following contact information:

  • Name
  • Institutional Affiliation
  • Email address
  • Phone number
  • Mailing address

Submissions will be accepted beginning September 15, 2017. An e-mail confirmation that your submission has been received will be sent within two business days.

Note: If you do not receive an email confirmation within two business days of your submission, please contact Megan Laverty

Respondents and Chairs

Members of PES who are interested in serving as session chairs or respondents are invited to contact the Program Chair, Megan Laverty,  Please specify your areas of expertise and provide your full contact information (mailing address, email address, and phone number). For questions concerning the program, please contact Megan Laverty at We look forward to receiving your submissions.

A note on A/V:

Due to prohibitive costs, PES is unable to provide data projectors, extension cords, or other A/V equipment. Presenters wishing to make use of PowerPoint or other presentation software must make their own arrangements at their own expense.

KUDOS for post go to Sam and Tracy’s blog “Fit Is a Feminist Issue”:

…As professional philosophers, it’s second nature for us to ask questions: what does it mean to be fit? What are appropriate measures for the goal? And, from a feminist perspective, in what way(s) does women’s quest for fitness and health contribute to empowerment and/or oppression?.. MORE from “About Fit” page

Sam sent me this link to a BBC article entitled “Girls say they hate their vaginas,” quoting Dr. Naomi Crouch, a gynecologist for adolescent girls. Dr. Crouch says, and I agree, “for a girl to feel that way about any part of her body, let alone a part that is intimate, is really upsetting.” The […]

via “Girls say they hate their vaginas.” WTF? — Fit Is a Feminist Issue

The NKG self-identify as a group that “focuses on the popular restorative use of urban lands based on indigenous principles, knowledge and practices”. From their ABOUT page:

All our activities are mutually supportive.  Everything we do is connected.

  • Eco-Restoration
    • We return disturbed lands and waters in Toronto to a healthy balance, in ways that restore, maintain, protect and develop historical indigenous ecosystems for future generations.
  • Plant Nurseries
    • Our nursery sites include outdoor church gardens and greenhouse spaces, serving as places to learn and grow new plants.
  • Indigenous Cultural Regeneration
    • Our activities support urban indigenous people to learn and practice our cultural traditions, as the basis for reconnecting with our communities and the natural world around us.
  • Learning Opportunities
    • We provide places to teach indigenous values and ways of life and link with certification for our stewards through accredited learning agencies wherever possible.
  • Educational Ecotourism
    • We engage with diverse local communities, tourists and other visitors.  We welcome our friends in the surrounding community to the land.
  • Landscapes for All our Relations
    • We grow edible and medicinal landscapes for the next seven generations of humans, and for all life.

Well, it turns out, Toronto’s MaRS Centre will be hosting an HTML500 event, i.e. a crash course of sorts in HTML coding for near-beginners. One way to read Marit Mitchell’s UofT News article on the subject can be an ironic

* * * We Must Surrender * * *


* * * Learn to Code * * *

Well, those who may still be resisting 🙂 🙂 🙂

(It is certainly fun to be causing “stuff” to happen on your blog, for example, even minimally)

But isn’t that the way with so many technologies??? Irresistible???

I confess

I am one of

the progressively fewer


for example

And NO, I do not deserve that much credit — I CAN STILL AFFORD IT, — for now.

  • Don’t have to get my job assignments by cell phone
  • Don’t need ongoing W3 searches for this or that
  • Don’t have to tag that way teenage kids
  • Ergo: Can still “wax environmental”

So, if you’d be interested, and happen to be in T.O.

And should you need a boost,

On the dangers of cell phones — see Dr Devra Davis’s Huffington Post article “Beyond Brain Cancer: Other Possible Dangers of Cell Phones”

So, the keywords:

  • “replenish” — term sums up human-human relationship as per Jean Vanier’s book Becoming Human
  • “heartmindfully” — term translates citta = heart + mind + not forgetting the body
  • “to the 7th generation” — metaphorizes the long-term Indigenous responsibility for thought and action

Replenishing One Another

Heartmindfully, to the Seventh Generation

To explore the question of how cross-cultural knowledges can inform the directions and modes in which the human potential of individuals and their communities could unfold, the present paper samples paradigms within the Buddhist and Native North American traditions, and further expands the “difference” taxonomy with the philosophy behind Jean Vanier’s L’Arche network of homes for the disabled. The comparative exploration of such purposefully chosen disparate epistemic-experiential spaces shows that they in fact have in common relatedness to Self, Other, and broader ecosystems. What is more, their overlap matches aspects of Western paradigmatic rebellions such as feminism, ecological and systems thinking models, critical (race/equity) theorizations, a.o., and harkens to the pragmatism of Peirce, James, and Dewey.

The noted overlap is proposed as what can make a difference in education (institutional and life-long) by orienting it toward a world-wide consciousness shift for mutually beneficial thinking-feeling-acting. This is in tune with scholarly efforts that have yielded approaches/models such as Claudia Eppert’s (2010 & elsewhere) “intercultural healing ethic”, Daniel Vokey’s (2001) “moral discourse in a pluralistic world”, Scott Pratt’s (2002) “rethinking of the roots of American philosophy”, James Tully’s (2009, 2014) Indigenous-knowledges informed “public philosophy”, or Jean Vanier’s (1998/2008) tao of “becoming human”.

Starting with Buddhism, its multiple streams (the earlier Theravada Buddhism, the later Tibetan Buddhism, or Zen Buddhism), generated over a period of more than 2,500 years, has a relatively long tradition of exchanges with the West. As far as current insights about concrete applications in educational settings, a number of scholars have engaged key notions like “mindfulness” (in Pali: sati), “heartmind” (Pali and Sanskrit: citta), or the four “divine abodes” (brahmavihāras), commonly rendered as “compassion”, “equanimity”, “lovingkindness”, “sympathetic joy” (in Pali: karunā, upekkhā, mettā, muditā, respectively).

While mindfulness, with its relatively Buddhism-independent status in e.g. current neuropsychology and psychiatry, may not even qualify as cross-cultural translation (of sati) because it misses its content (see Don Nelson, 2010, for the “scientific approach” relying on brain state neurophysiological assessments in D.J. Siegel, 2007, a.o.), there are other notions which seem to exemplify that. A good illustration is the nondualistic “heartmind [and body]” (citta, as in bodhicitta), which, being a single word in Pali, lends an extra leverage to Claudia Eppert’s (2010) de-dichotomization project, and by extension to her argument for citta-informed “heartmind literacy” that, compared to the well exercised “emotional literacy”, is, one might say, a few steps ahead on the way to restoring humans to wholeness, and education to a matching mode.  In a similar vein, Mary Jo Hinsdale (2012) proposes an “ethic of love” to guide the interactions of a professor with her students (and vice versa, I’d add), whereby she replenishes Kelly Oliver’s “theory of witnessing” with the divine abodes, foregrounding “lovingkindness”. Just as Eppert, gaining conceptual-affective traction from Buddhism, argues for a revisioned “heartmind literacy” and also opens up the understanding (Nussbaum’s, a.o.) of the closely related notion of “compassion”, so does Hinsdale enrich Oliver’s argument, and her own, for a view of Self-formation that entails “mutual subjectivity” rather than being bound by the standard, descended from Hegel, of identity-building by way of “recognition” predicated on strife/confrontation.

In a cross-cultural dialogue, the Buddhism scholars discussed above are building bridges to ultural traditions from the “third world”, whether at its original geographical location, or transposed to any other point around the globe by migrants. By giving dignity to culturally distinct knowledges, and thereby to the Others that embody them and to the embedding cultures, the authors can be thought of as contributing substantially to Eppert’s “intercultural healing ethic” project.

Similarly valuated flows can be tracked in Scott Pratt’s argument for a pre-contact “Native pragmatism”, which foreshadowed the classical pragmatism of Peirce, James, and Dewey. He conceptualizes four foundational principles that drive it, namely, interaction, pluralism, community, and growth. By closely following the historical record of exchanges between Indigenous peoples of the American North-East and European settlers, he projects a connection, however indirect, to the founders of American pragmatism, in whose later philosophies he sees the four principles resurfacing. Thus, in a radical move, he puts Indigenous knowledges and their embodying humans, not just on a par with (post-)settler America. In effect, he aligns them with the original colonizer, Europe, whose cultural elites treated the New World as an intellectual clone at best, and first peoples as epistemologically (and even bodily) invisible, only giving grudging (if any) recognition to pragmatism as the first properly American philosophical approach. Taking a look at the West Coast, Richard Atleo, among a growing number of Indigenous scholars, has shown that the Nuu-chah-nulth worldview of tsawalk, or “ontological unity” (a.k.a. interconnectedness), can go far in suggesting an ecologically oriented way of being in the world, informing public activism and state policy (cf. Tully’s public philosophy). As is well known, a number of Indigenous nations pledge responsibility for the world, as the idiom goes, “to the seventh generation”.

Switching situatednesses from the ethnic-political to the embodied, through his work with L’Arche homes for the disabled, Jean Vanier develops a philosophy that is very much in line with the deeper relatedness message of the previous theorizations. “Becoming human” shapes up as the process that teaches one to love difference and its presumed uncanniness/inferiority as well as, and, conversely, to believe in oneself and in the possibility and reality of being loved despite one’s difference.  Far from surprisingly, Vanier shares that the able-bodied and privileged can learn how to give love to the least attractive, in what can aptly be described as the “to and fro” of relationship that is mutually replenishing.

To conclude, in establishing a common denominator the juxtaposition of concordant “old” and “(re)new(ed)” knowledges of relatedness to Self, Other, and the rest of (a)biotic Nature may be downplayed as a cliché (cf. the so-called Golden Rule of loving one’s neighbour that is cross-culturally pervasive). However, I propose to treat the established convergence as an affirmation of a “real would-be” (in Peircean terms) and an opportunity for a turning point in human history. By this token it becomes a promising, edifying (in Rorty’s 1979 terms), formal and public education agenda for the directions and modes in which to think, feel, intuit, act,… and ultimately live-with, and live on.



Atleo, E. Richard a.k.a. Umeek (2004) Tsawalk: A Nuu-chah-nulth Worldview. Vancouver and Toronto: University of British Columbia Press.

———- (2011) Principles of Tsawalk: An Indigenous Approach to World Crisis. Vancouver and Toronto: University of British Columbia Press.

Eppert, Claudia (2010) “Heartmind Literacy: Compassionate Imaging and the Four Brahmavihäras”, Paideusis 19, no 1 (2010), pp. 17-28.

Eppert, Claudia and Hongyu Wang, eds. (2008) Cross-cultural Studies in Curriculum: Eastern Thought, Educational Insights. Mahweh, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum/Routledge, Taylor & Francis.

Hinsdale, Mary Jo (2012) “Choosing to Love”, Paideusis 20, no 2 (2012), pp.  36-45.

Nelson, Donald (2010) “Implementing Mindfulness: Practice as the Home of Understanding”. Paideusis 19, no 1 (2010), pp.  4-14.

Nhat Hanh, Titch (1998) Interbeing: Fourteen Guidelines for Engaged Buddhism. Berkeley: Parallax Press.

Oliver, Kelly (2001) Witnessing: Beyond Recognition. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Pratt, Scott L. (2002) Native Pragmatism: Rethinking the Roots of American Philosophy. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.

Rorty, Richard (1979) Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1979).

Tully, James (2009) Public Philosophy in a New Key. Volume I: Democracy and Civic Freedom, Volume I I: Imperialism and Civic Freedom. Cambridge University Press.

———- (2014) On global citizenship: James Tully in dialogue. London: Bloomsbury Academic.

Vanier, Jean (1998/2008) Becoming Human. CBC Massey Lectures Series. Toronto, ON: House of Anansi Press.

Vokey, Daniel (2001) Moral Discourse in a Pluralistic World. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.

Well, no, Dr Jagger did not go all the way back to the City of the Sun, but the way I interpreted her PES2014 Kneller Lecture earlier this year, there was a clearly discernible implication to expect more and better from how theory can “reasonably” translate into practice.

Dr Jagger’s Kneller Lecture “Designing Realistic Educational Utopias Using (Mainly) Non-Ideal Reasoning”: 1 page handout .

The intro paragraph there reads:

In Anglo-American political philosophy, the terms “ideal theory” and “non-ideal theory” currently refer to competing methodological approaches for justifying normative conclusions. Each term is used in multiple ways. This talk will disentangle several versions of ideal and non-ideal theory with a view to determining which elements may be helpful in designing models of real-world justice that are contextually relevant, morally adequate, and practically feasible.

Tommaso Campanella (b. 1569, Stilo, Italy – d. 1639, Paris, France), was a Dominican monk, straddling the c. 1600 divide, when some expected a major (you might say metaphysical) world change, not unlike the radical-change expectations at the turn of the 2nd millenium in our time. In addition to a number of treatises, a good number of which produced during 27 years of incarceration, he wrote “A Poetical Dialogue between a Grandmaster of the Knights Hospitallers and a Genoese Sea-Captain, his guest”, known as The City of the Sun.

This (what I’d term) “civic-governance-by-knowledge utopia”, is perhaps Campanella’s most famous work. Some might find it difficult to attach the qualifier “realistic” to  it, but many might be fully able to relate to the “Tell on, I pray you! Tell on! I am dying to hear more” refrain in the recurring paraphrases of the “Grandmaster”.

To give you a taste of Campanella’s epistemological imagination:

On the interior wall of the first circuit all the mathematical figures are conspicuouslypainted — figures more in number than Archimedes or Euclid discovered, markedsymmetrically, and with the explanation of them neatly written and contained each in alittle verse. There are definitions and propositions, etc. On the exterior convex wall is firstan immense drawing of the whole earth, given at one view. Following upon this, there are tablets setting forth for every separate country the customs both public and private…

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy article on Campanella HERE

City of the Sun in English: HERE

In her response to the Presidential Address at PES 2014, Dr Shuffelton engagingly shares:

    Like thousands of other Chicago children, my two daughters took the admissions exams for Chicago’s public gifted and talented schools when they were four years old.  After my elder daughter, a precocious reader, took the test, I asked her “how was it?” and she recalled words she’d read correctly and logical puzzles she’d solved.  When she got home, she threw up.  Six weeks later, we were informed that she had a spot in a gifted program.  When it was time to enroll my younger daughter in kindergarten, she also took the exam, though at age four she was more interested in playing with her toy animals than in learning how to read.  “So,” I asked her in the car afterwards, “how did it go?” “THAT was stupid,” she said
    Unlike her sister, she did not qualify for a place in the gifted and talented schools.  But I have to ask: who is smarter?…
                                                                                                                                                                                              (“How Dear the Gift of Laughter”)

Perhaps, as per the multiply challenged whole-child education project (if I am reading the author’s implications correctly), one should also unpack “smarter” as — ultimately — HAPPIER, BETTER OFF with peers and non-peers… 🙂 🙂 🙂

More on PES coming up…

on the streets of downtown Toronto…

In case you haven’t come across it, the URL is FYI, the archive contains lectures in several file formats.

Among the speakers is Perimeter’s director, Dr Neil Turok, who qualifies for titles in the range of mathematician,  theoretical/mathematical physicist, cosmologist. In his interview with CBC Radio Ideas host Paul Kennedy he confesses to trying “to connect things like love and hope with physics” (2012 CBC Massey Lectures, lecture 1). Paul Kennedy invites him to explain a quote from his layperson-friendly book The Universe Within: “We are analog beings, living in a digital world, facing a quantum future”

(Note the bridge from Turok’s Love-Hope-Physics nexus to the title of one of the best-known collections of Charles Sanders Peirce’ works Chance, Love and Logic)

Turok’s 2008 TED Prize talk:

Youtube credit: Uploaded on Mar 20, 2008, TEDtalksDirector

Sharing with you a person I “met” through his site. Have emailed, inviting him to “visit” ES with photos, of which he has a whole lot of wealth. From orchids, to how to make Middle Eastern yoghurt, and … [the reason I found the site… ] what the “reflex arc” (in physiology and psychology) is all about. About the last one of which founder of educational philosophy John Dewey had a number of memorable things to say.

He responded, YES!!! So more coming up.

Update: Jan 25, 2012

Happy to introduce a rich life through a website’s photographic eye: pix 1-3 below from site, #4 is my screen shot. CLICK on image to go there.

reflex arc page:


some lived American history–1960s:

How’s this for a teaching record–complete with photos!!!:

My exchanges with Prof Fankhauser, to my greatest delight ecosonic, if I may make the claim.

Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 04:32:17 -0500
From: lynne.alexandrova
Reply-To: lynne.alexandrova
Subject: Re: Use of my web material on your blog on the reflex arc
To: Fankhauser, David
Cc: [cc-ed person’s name & email edited out]

Dear Prof Fankhauser,

If I may, “Joy to the world!” to your reply. By “find” I meant your
life, as reflected by your site. Since all I do, think,… breathe, if
you like, is potentially research, I am posting this exchange–as an
illustration of ecosonic communication–editing out anything (except
David B. Fankhauser, PhD) in the way of “personal info,” even what can
be found by following the link to your site–if a visitor to ES
opts to make the effort.

The part below I can edit back in, with your permission:
[giving here sig file info]

I’ll be in touch–
Lynne Alexandrova

Quoting “Fankhauser, David (fankhadb)” <>:

> Dear Lynne Alexandrova:
> I am happy to have my work used for educational purposes, with
> appropriate citation of my page(s) from which the material was
> derived.
> Thank you for your warm communication, and asking for permission to
>  use my material.  You were ecstatic?!  You made my day!  😉  If I
>  get a degree of this reaction from my students, I think I have more
>  that done my job!
> Could you let me know when you have made use of the material, and
> provide the URL to your blog?  I am eager to see how you use it.
> David B. Fankhauser, PhD
[signature file edited out]
> ________________________________________
> From: lynne.alexandrova@***
> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2012 7:41 PM
> To: Fankhauser, David
> Subject: invitation for virtual presence
> Dear Prof Fankhauser,
> I recently came across your website while doing research on the reflex
> arc in psychology, and was
> ecstatic about the find.
> If at all possible, I’d like to invite your virtual visit to my blog
> in the form of posting a few of your images, with credits to you(r
> website).
> THANK you for sharing your life–rewarding to take a glimpse of it,
> even for the chance visitor!
> I do look forward to your reply–certainly at your convenience.
> Kind regards–
> Lynne Alexandrova
> _____________________
> doctoral student
> University of Toronto
> T.O. M5S 1V6


February 2020
« Aug    


© CreativeCommonsLicense

Creative Commons License Img

accurate quoting proper attribution by/on ES & of ES