• Hi Steffen, I dont have a copy of Gibson’s 1979 text – if it is possible (and easy) please let me have a scanned copy of the relevant pages.
    Where are you going with Socially Extended Mind?  Sounds fascinating. 
    I need to focus on getting current software up and running first, but if and when that is done, I want to explore the affordances in the software for collaboration on many stories at the same time, particulalry using large touch tables, to once again emphasise the ‘direct articulation’ of tacit knowledge and association (to paraphrase Gibson). Links with ideas like this one.
    You paper sounds fascinating.  I would love to find out more.  When you say ‘habitual orientations’ and higher order ‘habitual orientations’, what exactly are you describing? 
    Our narratives were much more open ended, as we wanted to see what artefacts, if any, were relevant to their learning.  A fascinating case was a student who was desperately trying to ‘read’ the books on her first reading list, and the only way she could do so was by setting up a book on a stand in front of her ironing in the evening (the only quiet time she had).  She didnt succeed, as she was ‘reading’ from beginning to end (of each book) and not selecting sections for relevance first, so she had to completely re-learn how to ‘read’ in university mode. 
    But the ironing / board had wonderful affordances, even if it was a really hard lesson to learn.
    Further …  much of what we analysed from the narratives was ‘identity work’ – in fact it dominated just about every story. So we ended up with a concept of identity as a ‘repertoire of affordances’, which might be similar to a ‘repertoire of enactment potentials’. 
    We also had to broaden out the traditional frame of the ‘affordances of things’ to affordances of acts (ironing), of ‘indicative’ objects (glass bottles in a preschool, which pointed to a radically different attitude to the preschool environment), and of spaces (the preschool itself).  This changes the ‘resolution’ or granularity of the unit of analysis completely from the focus on ‘media tools’ which was our starting point. 
    I guess we ended up following the narrators own framework for sense-making, which is their own Gestalt (links back to what you said earlier).