[Yr7-10it] Scratch, Gamemaker, VB.net, Python,
PHP and MySQL - Programming for all levels
Bill Kerr
billkerr at gmail.com
Wed Oct 3 13:05:04 EST 2007
Thanks for making the effort to read a 300+ page dissertation Rob :-)
For those with less time but are still interested then I'd recommend
starting with Ch 4 (38pp) which provides a high level overview of alan kay's
educational vision
http://thinkubator.ccsp.sfu.ca/Dynabook/dissertation
Reading up on some of the history of computing / educational computing has
altered my views of what we could / should be trying to achieve
substantially
I've read a lot of Papert's material years ago but the alan kay material
adds a whole new dimension to it IMO. Why? One possibility is that with
commercialization of computers the original educational potential became
terribly distorted - certainly Maxwell explores this theme comprehensively.
Although alan kay was strongly influenced by Papert - Kay was involved at a
more fundamental level - ie. directly involved in the invention of the PC
and the first OOPs language, Smalltalk
Etoys / squeak is a modern software synthesis of some of the best
educational computing ideas from the past 30 years - although not a final
end product.
I've compiled some rough notes, brief history and an annotated reference
list of some of alan kay's best articles and video presentations here:
http://learningevolves.wikispaces.com/alanKay+talk
cheers,
- Bill
--
Bill Kerr
http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/
On 10/3/07, Costello, Rob R <Costello.Rob.R at edumail.vic.gov.au> wrote:
>
> Thanks Bill
>
> Read Maxwells phd thesis
> (http://thinkubator.ccsp.sfu.ca/Dynabook/dissertation)
> on Alan Kay and his vision of computing - the vision of the dynabook
>
> Pretty amazing document, documentation of little known history - at
> least to me -
>
> even though his vision of real computing as childs play hasn't been
> fulfilled, he has still had a huge influence on current software
> principles etc
>
> Catalysing a deep change of thinking on technology directions
>
> Be nice if the ultranet people read something like this
>
> Thanks
> Rob
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2007 11:05:27 +1000
> From: "Bill Kerr" <billkerr at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Yr7-10it] Scratch, Gamemaker, VB.net, Python, PHP and
> MySQL - Programming for all levels
> To: "Year 7 - 10 Information Technology Teachers' Mailing List"
> <yr7-10it at edulists.com.au>
> Message-ID:
> <5d2dce520709211805x768ec01y2b78d9ad17dfef12 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> hi rob,
>
> I see what you mean by breadth (eg. web2.0 apps) versus depth (eg. look
> under the hood be it programming, RDB or internal architecture of a
> computer)
>
> Its worth pointing out that many of the early pioneers of "computing
> science" - such as Engelbart, Kay - saw things differently. They thought
> that computers could be use by children for:
> - amplification of human reach
> - expression of the creative spirit
> - as a medium for self development, not just a tool
>
> This was a vision of PC use in which the user was also seen as designer
> and
> developer, that the distinction you draw and which is "natural' to draw
> today b/w breadth and depth would be overcome through the sort of
> machines
> and software that computers could become.
>
> That early software is still available today (squeak / etoys) and has
> been
> updated to incorporate developments that happened later such as logo,
> the
> www, spreadsheets, hypercard etc.
>
> Also the whole issue of combined optimal hardware and software
> development
> is continuing through the OLPC and the NSF grant: Steps towards the
> reinvention of programming
> http://irbseminars.intel-research.net/AlanKayNSF.pdf
>
> So, the final words in this story have yet to be written
>
> The distinction b/w end-users and designers/engineers more or less did
> not
> even exist in the early days of computing. It came along later with
> commercialisation and development of a marketable commodity that
> required a
> clear definition of the end user as a user of clearly defined
> applications
>
> We can visualise the "user" as also a co-designer and developer, or,
> (different vision) visualise the "end user" for which a "user friendly"
> system has been designed by an "expert" (in which not too much is
> demanded
> of the user)
>
> Computing could have developed in the former way. And for
> education/learning
> it seems to me to be the way to go.
>
> Some have commented that it is hard to get started on learning squeak /
> etoys because it is so different from conventional systems. This is
> because
> it was designed with very different goals in mind to the user friendly
> apps
> which dominate the desktop today. (more of a difference than a
> difficulty)
>
> John Maxwell's history of the dynabook explains these distinctions in
> more
> detail
> http://thinkubator.ccsp.sfu.ca/Dynabook/dissertation
> Ch 4 and 5 for those who don't have time to read the whole thing
>
> The people who invented the PC and GUI had a very different vision of
> how
> computers should be used with children to the way we use them today in
> nearly all schools
>
> cheers
> - Bill
> --
> Bill Kerr
> http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/
>
>
> On 9/19/07, Costello, Rob R <Costello.Rob.R at edumail.vic.gov.au> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hi Bill and all
> >
> > I agree "purist vs ICT user" is not quite the right polarity - it felt
> a
> > little loose when I used it. Let me try again by substituting it with
> > "breadth vs depth".
> >
> > My feeling - and I gather its been well discussed in this forum - is
> > that "ICT" is increasingly being colonised by a "competent user"
> > (breadth) approach
> >
> > (breadth = competent user = teach kids how to blog, use wikis, use
> other
> > web2.0 tools, teach them some sort of critical literacy in this
> domain,
> > how to be productive users of software apps. In this view ICT is an
> > interdisciplinary, facilitating thing that crops up in every other
> > discipline. ICT as a stand alone discipline is seen as "old school"
> from
> > this angle - when you only touched a computer in a lab and used for
> > programming)
> >
> > Whereas a "depth" approach = IT as a technical discipline in its own
> > right - relating to computer science and programming, parallel
> > complexity to say maths - but maybe more engaging for some. Set kids
> on
> > a path where they might learn how to build their own software. ICT
> > deserves to be treated as a discipline in its own right from this
> angle
> > - and programming is an essential key to innovation, control and
> > customisation of software
> >
> > That was kind of polarity I had in my head when I said "purist vs ict
> > user" - (not really meaning "purist" as a strict computer science
> > approach versus a less rigorous programming approach - but whether its
> > worth broaching programming at all)
> >
> > I would still see Gamemaker as rather hybrid - more towards the
> "depth"
> > end , since it does build some programming skill - but enough appeal
> to
> > compete against the breadth approaches. (and with big jump into the
> > coding side, it does allow you to also go deep - though I suspect the
> > jump is not too easy)
> >
> > I'm wired towards defending programming as a worthy pursuit
> >
> > But I can see that ICT as breadth also has merit - it does fit well as
> > an enabling tool in all disciplines
> >
> > Too much depth - like forcing quadratics on every kid for the sake of
> > the few who ever manage to use that skill
> >
> > But removing programming - like removing higher maths since its too
> dry
> >
> > (and I wonder if that might be less of a problem in todays economy,
> than
> > losing programming)
> >
> > Given VELS is meant to encourage depth, and remove the "breadth" of
> > superficial coverage of half digested material, its maybe ironic its
> > used (maybe improperly) to suggest the "depth" approaches to ICT are
> > outdated
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Rob
> > PS I read this in digest mode, so sorry if truncating the subject made
> > it tricky to follow for those who use email threads properly
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > To: Year 7 - 10 Information Technology Teachers' Mailing List
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 6:55 AM
> > Subject: Re: [Yr7-10it] Scratch, Gamemaker, VB.net, Python,PHP and
> > MySQL - Programming for all levels
> >
> >
> > Hi Kevork,
> >
> > well I've tried for 2-3 days to resist responding but in the end I
> > haven't been successful :-)
> >
> > the tipping point is that rob used the word "purist" too in the
> thread
> > he started
> >
> > [quote from rob in other thread] -
> > I feel a bit like I've found a combination of ICT and philosophical
> > thinking that seems, in any given school, to be a minority (the "lets
> > just use the stuff" approach / use some app with low entry and high
> > graphics or communication payoff - seems to dominate. That whole
> tension
> > is one I'd like to investigate - I'm not unsympathetic to that
> approach
> > for lots of kids - gamemaker is a good hybrid between the two (purist
> vs
> > ICT user)
> > [/quote]
> >
> > that is one thing that intrigued me about your reply: that you used
> > the word "purist" to describe what I described as an educational
> > approach to the use of computers
> >
> > One aim is to try to get at your thinking behind this use of
> language
> > and the other language we use wrt computers in schools (?)
> >
> > Initially the thinking behind teachers introducing game maker (to
> > focus on that for a sec) was far from purist
> >
> > key words here would be - engagement, motivational
> >
> > advocates of game maker have been criticised for their lack of
> purity,
> > for their capitulation to vulgar populism eg. see Kent's comments in
> > this thread
> >
> > go back a few years and the educational flavour of the decade was
> logo
> >
> > key words here would be - epistemology or more accurately "genetic
> > epistemology" (from Piaget) and papert invented a new one,
> > "constructionism" (mmm ... not recognised by my spell checker, it has
> > become a rare beast)
> >
> > these are difficult words but do have some sort of real basis in
> > educational thinking - it's not really fair to describe this approach
> as
> > purist
> >
> > some have argued and produced research studies that logo didn't work
> > (eg. Roy Pea) in achieving its stated goals - but that's a big
> > discussion really
> >
> > My point is about the language we use in describing computer use in
> > schools - what I think is that this tends to reflect metaphors of the
> > computer we have internalised
> >
> > I see this as -
> > obstacles to introducing a child centered developmental approach to
> > the use of computers in schools
> >
> > Maybe it's "idealist" in some way because the prevailing ethos is
> very
> > much "some other way" - labels might include vocational,
> administrative,
> > data management thinking, hardware / networking focus, VELS etc.
> >
> > I like rob's approach of exploring the tension b/w existing
> approaches
> > but don't like the way rob has described the poles of the tension
> > (purist vs ICT user)
> >
> > I'd prefer something like -
> > educational versus vocational
> > or
> > epistemological versus instrumentalist
> >
> > "explore the tension" - good phrase rob
> >
> > Kevork, I liked this reality check from you -
> > "if we are looking at what is the best programming language for
> > children to learn in Period 1, and in Period 2 we are teaching
> students
> > VET IT and what they need to go out and work in industry next year and
> > the period after that we are teaching Cisco students how to set up a
> > network in the "real" world through a simulated or school based
> problem
> > then you will forgive my oversight if I stray into what is needed in
> > industry as part of what they are doing. Maybe I am suffering VET
> > fatigue."
> >
> > and there have been other such recent comments, eg
> > "I don't have time to learn a new programming language"
> >
> > cheers,
> > - Bill
> >
> > Important - This email and any attachments may be confidential. If
> > received in error, please contact us and delete all copies. Before
> opening
> > or using attachments check them for viruses and defects. Regardless of
> any
> > loss, damage or consequence, whether caused by the negligence of the
> sender
> > or not, resulting directly or indirectly from the use of any attached
> files
> > our liability is limited to resupplying any affected attachments. Any
> > representations or opinions expressed are those of the individual
> sender,
> > and not necessarily those of the Department of Education and Early
> Childhood
> > Development.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > http://www.edulists.com.au - FAQ, resources, subscribe, unsubscribe
> > Year 7 - 10 IT Mailing List kindly supported by
> > http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au - Victorian Curriculum and Assessment
> Authority
> > and
> > http://www.vitta.org.au - VITTA Victorian Information Technology
> Teachers
> > Association Inc
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> http://www.edulists.com.au/pipermail/yr7-10it/attachments/20070922/48892
> 9d9/attachment-0001.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Yr7-10it mailing list
> Yr7-10it at edulists.com.au
> http://www.edulists.com.au/mailman/listinfo/yr7-10it
>
>
> End of Yr7-10it Digest, Vol 31, Issue 35
> ****************************************
>
> Important - This email and any attachments may be confidential. If
> received in error, please contact us and delete all copies. Before opening
> or using attachments check them for viruses and defects. Regardless of any
> loss, damage or consequence, whether caused by the negligence of the sender
> or not, resulting directly or indirectly from the use of any attached files
> our liability is limited to resupplying any affected attachments. Any
> representations or opinions expressed are those of the individual sender,
> and not necessarily those of the Department of Education and Early Childhood
> Development.
>
> _______________________________________________
> http://www.edulists.com.au - FAQ, resources, subscribe, unsubscribe
> Year 7 - 10 IT Mailing List kindly supported by
> http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au - Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority
> and
> http://www.vitta.org.au - VITTA Victorian Information Technology Teachers
> Association Inc
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.edulists.com.au/pipermail/yr7-10it/attachments/20071003/ba06687f/attachment-0001.html
More information about the Yr7-10it
mailing list