silent discussion in ed class calling up questions of economics...

In Ed class on Wed., we had a silent discussion in response to quotes from our readings.  As I read over all of our rich, provocative writings (I love the way 'silent discussion' stays in place for a minute!), I started to notice language that seemed related to economics... and decided to highlight these in a post, hoping to prompt more cross-disciplinary talk, including "difficult conversations" within and across our 360 classes!

Here are some quotes from our language ('representation') on the silent discussion poster pages (with my italics added):

Is referring to (certain urban spaces) as "denatured" good - what if they reflect the nature of the community they are located in or hold a certain value to the community?

I'm wondering is these (manufactured playground structures) cost less overall -- less upkeep?  More economically affordable...

...is it necessary that we get the voices of urban kids and adults?  Do they want more access to nature and wildlife?  What spaces are valued and where (for example) could a park go?

But also in the name of money, because the same people who forbid these environmentally harmful activities (restrictions placed on children climbing trees, etc.) allow things like mountaintop removal and fracking...

*** One of our posters included a lively exchange -- including a graph like the one David used Wed. morning! -- about how/whether economic ways of thinking could help us with the questions we're grappling with.  (Sorry, I don't seem to have that poster and will check the room on Monday, but does anyone have a photo of it?)

Looking forward to further work with all this...