Re: [xmca] schools-without-computers-by-choice-and-conviction-that-they-dont-help-kids

[Linda Polin <linda.polin@pepperdine.edu>]

why does the discussion of constructivism jump us to programming (Papert, aside for the moment).

there are some terrific possibilities in significantly more playful spaces, e.g., Minecraft and Arduinos:

Minecraft goes from a sort of virtual Lego buiding experience 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWJqCWetH-c&feature=relmfu

... to logic gates and advanced construction of working machines.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lB684ym3QY4

Arduinos involves very simple programming as well, but it is a more tangible interface, literally:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xCY2K9kQz4


Lindax

ps
anyone going to Minecon in Vegas?

On Oct 26, 2011, at 12:47 PM, Huw Lloyd wrote:

>> 
>> I would be very interested to hear about various people's encounters with
>> Scratch. Its a terrifically interesting enterprise that xmca o philes
>> should
>> a variety of equally interesting
>> opinions about.
>> 
>> mike
>> 
>> 
> Scratch uses smalltalk.  I found this page interesting:
> 
> http://wiki.scratch.mit.edu/wiki/Squeak_Tutorial
> 
> I've had a quick look at Scratch.  It looks like a GUI language for
> animating 'sprites'.  Looks fun.
> 
> I'm familiar with Alan Kay's Squeakland.  I think the entry time (entry
> level) is more significant with Squeakland -- the interface is more
> abstract.  Though this also gives much more depth of expression and
> creation.
> 
> The Squeakland depth seems like a good intermediary between Scratch and
> vanilla smalltalk.  I suspect kids would struggle to get beyond the
> immediate limits of Scratch.  Is there a meta-scratch too for adding their
> own functions?  Though perhaps the idea is that when they know what a
> function they expand into other programming languages?
> 
> Huw
> 
> 
> 
>> On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 4:37 AM, Bill Kerr <billkerr@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> The constructionist use of computers in schools as developed by Seymour
>>> Papert and allies is still a fruitful one. The modern incarnation of the
>>> software is scratch from MIT http://scratch.mit.edu/ but it remains true
>>> that to understand its educational philosophy fully you need to read some
>>> books. One idea is "hard play". Another is "low entry, high ceiling".
>> This
>>> was modified a little in scratch to "low floor, wide walls".
>>> 
>>> Moreover, the one laptop per child (OLPC) as developed by Negroponte and
>>> allies remains a worthwhile experiment to kick start learning for third
>>> world children.
>>> 
>>> Peter, all the link shows is that mediocre use of computers leads to
>>> mediocre results.
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 8:24 PM, Peter Smagorinsky <smago@uga.edu>
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> http://blogs.ajc.com/get-schooled-blog/2011/10/26/schools-without-computers-by-choice-and-conviction-that-they-dont-help-kids/?cxntfid=blogs_get_schooled_blog
>>>> __________________________________________
>>>> _____
>>>> xmca mailing list
>>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>>> 
>>> __________________________________________
>>> _____
>>> xmca mailing list
>>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>> 
>> __________________________________________
>> _____
>> xmca mailing list
>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>> 
> __________________________________________
> _____
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca

__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca