Re: [xmca] RE: Request RE tools for thought

Folks!! Use internet video for joint classes if you can wangle common times.
It really
works well. Just tested with ucmerced and will be teaching some up there
from down
here at ucsd.

For seminars even skype video is pretty effective, and even as far as
Moscow-San Diego.

In this vein, we are working on a couple of "open to all" streaming seminars
in second half
of October. More on that anon.
mike

On 8/31/07, David Williamson Shaffer <dws@education.wisc.edu> wrote:
>
>
> Hi, Ellice—
>
> I would love to have you come to the, but I agree the commute would be a
> killer!
>
> I'm taking the liberty of copying this answer to the listserv; I hope you
> don't mind. I thought others might have a better suggestion than I, or
> might
> be otherwise interested.
>
> For the audience you're interested in (MAT preservice teachers) the pieces
> that I use that would come closest, I think, would be:
>
> Brosterman, Inventing Kindergarten, pp. 30-103
> Papert, Mindstorms, pp. 19-37, 55-94, 135-155
> Cuban, Teachers and Machines, pp. 51-103
> Kalmbach, From Liquid Paper to Typewriters, pp. 57-68
> Shaffer, How Computer Games Can Help Children Learn, pp. 41-71
> DiSessa, Changing Minds, 1-28
>
> Of these, Brosterman, Cuban, and Kalmbach are historical, but really
> interesting as case studies. Cuban is the most skeptical of the lot in
> terms
> of the impact of technology on learning. Brosterman is the most engaging
> of
> the three, but geared toward younger students and is the least theoretical
> of the lot. Kalmbach is a nice short article, although not about math and
> science. The others are more current, and all look at the interaction
> between technology and thinking in the context of particular case studies
> in
> math and science ed--in particular how new cognitive tools require
> reexaming
> what we teach and how we teach it.
>
> There are many others out there, of course; these are just the ones I use.
> If I was going to pick just one I'd pick the Shaffer piece. But then I'm
> biased! ;-) No, seriously, diSessa's chapter is pretty good as a stand
> alone, especially for math/science teachers. And of course Mindstorms is a
> classic.
>
> I hope that is helpful....
>
> David
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Forman, Ellice [mailto:ellice@education.pitt.edu]
> Sent: Friday, August 31, 2007 8:06 AM
> To: dws@education.wisc.edu
> Subject: Request RE tools for thought
>
> David,
> No, I'm not asking to be admitted to your course (although I would like to
> be--but the commute is a killer). I'm working with a doc student, Eli
> Silk,who is teaching my section of a graduate Ed Psych course to MAT
> students in math and science education. We're looking for a good reading
> on
> tools for thought for preservice teachers in these disciplines. Yea, I
> know--just one reading? Any thoughts? I'm considering a chapter in the
> Kozulin book on psychological tools but taking a chapter out of context
> doesn't seem good. This course is using cases to help students apply
> theories of learning to teaching. Do you have another suggestion? (Thanks
> for your post on xmca.)
> Ellice
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
Received on Fri Aug 31 08:30 PDT 2007