Mailman 3 December 2003 - Edu-sig

Re: Python Programming: An Introduction to Computer
by Toby Donaldson 14 Dec '03

14 Dec '03

> I wasn't doing that though. I realize there are lots of worthwhile > languages out there and it pays to move on from Python. But it also pays > to come back to it later, and if all the Python you ever get is in CS1, > then you might not realize some of its power. > > This is equally true for some other languages. Which begs the question: why Python instead of these other languages? Given the choice between teaching CS students more Python or teaching a new language (such as Prolog, Scheme, ML, or Haskell), I would decide to teach a new language. Anyways, I think that many students who continue to program will simply continue to use Python when it makes sense. That's been my experience so far. > How is this different from discussing "neat features"? That you can use > such simple syntax to do file I/O, or don't need a lot of type > declarations, > are *features* which lead to higher productivity. I guess that's true. When I think about it, for me the question is "How do I convince my department to change CS1 from Java to Python?", and listing language features isn't the answer. Neat language features are a dime a dozen in CS. By the way, I am in "Zelle's camp": http://tonka.iat.sfu.ca/toby/pythoned/pp4e. I don't think Perl, Ruby, or Scheme (or VB, PHP, JavaScript, Tcl/Tk, ActionScript, etc.) have any hope of becoming popular CS1 languages the way Python does. Toby -- Dr. Toby Donaldson Assistant Professor School of Interactive Arts and Technology Simon Fraser University

3 3

Re: [Edu-sig] re: Python Programming: An Introduction toComputerScience
by Laura Creighton 14 Dec '03

14 Dec '03

In a message of Sat, 13 Dec 2003 16:19:06 PST, "Kirby Urner" writes: >Laura wrote: >> I think that a problem we have is that programming is seen to be tied t >o >> math, and numeracy, (as is problem solving in general) rather that >> literacy, and the arts and humanities in general. > >Yes, I agree. Another way of saying it, however, is that numeracy skills >have application in the humanities. > >I like Kappraff's 'Connections: The Geometric Bridge Between Art and >Science' (2nd edition) as a source of good programming ideas.[1] > >Kirby > >[1] http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/9810245866/ -- too bad >it's so spendy. Oooh, thank you! I am getting this out of the library and reading it over Christmas. One good turn deserves another: http://www.cambiumbooks.com/books/design/0-9643999-1-1/ http://www.cambiumbooks.com/books/design/0-9643999-0-3/ David Pye -- the Nature and Aesthetic of Design + the Nature and Art of Workmanship David Pye was a professor of Architecture and a woodworker. But these books are about the creative process, and the creating of anything. Laura

3 3

RE: [Edu-sig] re: Education Arcade
by Arthur 14 Dec '03

14 Dec '03

Kirby - >Well, this is the kind of thing I'm trying to get a feel for -- scientific >evidence is not of interest at the moment. I just want to get where you're >coming from. >I understand you don't like black boxes which simply dazzle without >providing insights. You don't like bread and circuses, designed to keep >the masses dumbed down, the better to be taken advantage of by those >puppet-masters with the cynical know-how. >You see bells and whistles as so much science fiction scenery designed to >create an illusion, to fool, to hoodwink on some level, and so arcade >games,for you, are the antithesis of real education. >How 'm I doing? Fair, at best. Somewhat of a trivialization. I hope my other posts this morning communicate my feelings better. Art

1 0

RE: [Edu-sig] re: Education Arcade
by Arthur 14 Dec '03

14 Dec '03

Kirby - >Where I think you might be mixing a couple of ideas is when you talk about >how video games don't provide much insight into how they actually work (are >mystifying in this regard). And, again, the most important and least escapable point: the medium *is* the message. Art

1 0

re: Education Arcade
by Arthur 14 Dec '03

14 Dec '03

Jim writes - >And I don't buy the machine:power/kid:schmuck scenario. When kids can >manipulate a simulation to produce a result, they feel empowered. If the >result doesn't honor the parameters of the simulation, the kids immediately >label the developer/machine "lame" -- not themselves. The medium is the message. And if "busting out" is not even a possibility, remind me: why am I learning to program? A great learning environment game idea = the goal is to bust out of the learning environment. We need to make kids *want* to bust out, not stay in. I've never seen that made part of the game. Nor expect I will. First message of all these environments: there is no way out. Art

1 0

Re: Python Programming: An Introduction to Computer Science
by Toby Donaldson 14 Dec '03

14 Dec '03

> I think that we could make a tremendous push for the number of people who > are programming at all if we made courses on 'data mining for the > humanities' and the like. How to write programs to take the information > from some website and do something useful with it. One approach for getting "non-nerds" to do programming is to tie a scripting language to an application, like Flash or Director. The application does all the tricky technical stuff, while the scripting lets the user concentrate on the task logic. I guess you could do the same thing with Python and libraries, but nice GUI environments are friendlier. Toby -- Dr. Toby Donaldson Assistant Professor School of Interactive Arts and Technology Simon Fraser University > -----Original Message----- > From: edu-sig-bounces(a)python.org [mailto:edu-sig-bounces@python.org] On > Behalf Of edu-sig-request(a)python.org > Sent: December 13, 2003 3:33 PM > To: edu-sig(a)python.org > Subject: Edu-sig Digest, Vol 5, Issue 14 > > Send Edu-sig mailing list submissions to > edu-sig(a)python.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > edu-sig-request(a)python.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > edu-sig-owner(a)python.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Edu-sig digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Re: Python Programming: An Introduction to > ComputerScience (John Zelle) > 2. RE: re: Python Programming: An Introduction to > ComputerScience (Kirby Urner) > 3. Re: re: Education Arcade (Jim Harrison) > 4. Re: re: Education Arcade (Laura Creighton) > 5. RE: Re: Python Programming: An Introduction to > ComputerScience (Kirby Urner) > 6. Re: re: Python Programming: An Introduction to > ComputerScience (Laura Creighton) > 7. Re: re: Education Arcade (Laura Creighton) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 14:59:56 -0600 > From: John Zelle <john.zelle(a)wartburg.edu> > Subject: Re: [Edu-sig] Re: Python Programming: An Introduction to > ComputerScience > To: Kirby Urner <urnerk(a)qwest.net> > Cc: edu-sig(a)python.org > Message-ID: <3FDB7DCC.4000107(a)wartburg.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed > > Hello all, > > I've been reading the thread about my book with great interest. All > feedback is helpful, even when I don't necessarily agree. Let me just > say that I thought Kirby's initial posting was right on target. My book > is intended as a CS1 book, not a book on Python. Because of that, I have > been a little fearful about how the book might be received in the Python > community. Kirby clearly understands the distinction being drawn, and I > appreciate the way his remarks are framed. > > I am much less concerned than others about how the more advanced and/or > indiosyncratic features of Python are/might be taught. The truth is that > the tradtional core computer science sequence CS1 (Intro to > programming), C2 (Data Structures and Design), CS3 (Advanced Data > structures and Algorithms) have not been "about" language for a long > time. Even a student that goes through this sequence using a single > language, whether that be C++, Java, or Python will not acquire expert > knowledge of the language. That's simply not what these courses are > about. The point is that once a student has completed CS1/CS2, they can > pick up a good technical book and have the foundation to learn the > complete feature set of any language. > > Students continue programming throughout their CS programs and in future > careers. They are constantly changing tools. With some serious early > exposure to a variety of tools (say dynamic and static languages) they > are in a better position to pick tools that are best suited for the job > at hand. A move to Java or C++ in CS2 should not be seen as "abandoning" > Python. In fact, seeing Python side-by-side with Java ususally leads my > students to want to do more Python projects (and hence learn more about > Python) in their upper-level classes. Without seeing a statically typed > language, it's hard to appreciate the elegance and flexibility of > Python. For example, when we talk about polymorphism in CS1, the > students say "of course, what's the big deal." Only when they see the > complexity of doing similar things in C++ or Java do they really > appreciate the concept. > > Whatever approach one takes to the first classes, it is important to > realize that our students do not begin programming with the same > background that we have. Most of my students are not particularly > mathematically or scientifically oriented (at least at the start). And > they are concrete, not abstract thinkers. It's important that we try to > meet them where they are so that they can learn and grow with minimal > frustration. Packing more into CS1 is probably not the way to do that. > > Along similar lines, Kirby's comment on abstracting geometric objects > from their realizations (see below) are absolutely right on track as a > matter of design principle. I do address this sort of decoupling toward > the end of the book (model-view architectures). However, the goal of the > graphics package is somewhat different. The purpose is to introduce > objects in a very concrete way. It is a graphics library, not a geometry > library. A Point doesn't really represent an abstract geometric point, > but a postion _in_a_window_. Similarly, the Rectangle is not a general > mathemetical abstraction, but an actual box on the screen (maybe I > should have called it "box"). Now an object on the screen has inherent > properties such as color and outline width as instrinsic properties; > whereas the mathematical abstraction does not. This is most evident in > the Line class. A Line on the screen is not really a line in the > mathematical sense---at best it would be a line segment. If you were > designing an application around the mathematical concepts you could use > the primitives of the graphics library to visually realize some of those > (so the graphics package would be analogous to the backend, not the > front). > > Of course, I do use the graphics package to get my students to do things > like calculating points of intersection and computing coordinate > transformations. The beauty of it is that they think they are just > drawing pretty pictures :-). > > My thanks to all of you who have given me both encouragement and > criticism on this project. > > --John > > Kirby Urner wrote: > > >Earlier I wrote: > > > > > >>When considering option (e), my attention goes to the Point class. If > all > >>a Point does is hold x and y coords, then a class implementation seems > >>like overkill in Python. You could get by with built-in tuples. > >> > >> > > > >Now that I have the student CD, I see that the Point class is not just a > >holder for (x,y) values. It has some knowledge of Tk, is in fact a > subclass > >of GraphicsObject, which is very Tk aware. > > > >This brings up a design pattern thread for me. My tendency over the > years > >has been to write the geometric objects, such as vectors and polyhedra, > in > >such a way as to deliberately keep them ignorant of any output apparatus. > > > >Then I define a "writer" that's customized to say Tk, or VRML, or POV- > Ray, > >and pass the geometric objects to the writer. The writer squeezes pure > >geometric information from the things, and translates them into output > >appropriate to its medium. > > > >You can see evidence of this strategy going all the way back to 1998, > when I > >was still doing this stuff in FoxPro (I hadn't learned of Python yet): > >http://www.4dsolutions.net/ocn/oop.html > > > >A consequence of this design is I've been putting what philosophers used > to > >call "secondary attributes" (color, texture) in the writer, instead of in > >the geometric objects. So if I want a red tetrahedron, say, I change to > >"edge color" and "face color" properties in the writer, before passing a > >tetrahedron object to it. > > > >E.g.: > > > > >>> povwriter = povray.Povray("outfile.pov") > > >>> povwriter.cylcolor = 'Red' # secondary attribute > > >>> obj = rbf.Tetra() # get a tetrahedron > > >>> obj.draw(povwriter) > > > >But internally to obj.draw(povwriter), I'm invoking povwriter on the > various > >edges, vertices and faces of my obj: > > > > def draw(povwriter): > > > > for e in self.edges(): > > povwriter.edge(e) > > > > ... > > > >and like that. > > > >The upside of this design is if I go obj.draw(vrmlwriter), then the same > >object gets output in VRML syntax. > > > >In sum, when writing geometric objects to output media, there's a way to > go > >wherein anything specific to the medium is saved to the "writer" object, > >while anything purely geometric, and common to all media, is saved in the > >geometric object. The pure geometry is kept separate from the messy > details > >of I/O. > > > >I'm just bringing this up as a by the way. I'm not saying Zelle should > have > >done this in his text book. > > > >It'd be a fruitful discussion for CS2 level course -- when we're talking > >about design patterns. > > > >Kirby > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Edu-sig mailing list > >Edu-sig(a)python.org > >http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig > > > > > > > > > > -- > John M. Zelle, Ph.D. | Wartburg College > Associate Prof. of CS | Dept. Math/CS/Physics > john.zelle(a)wartburg.edu | Waverly, Iowa > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 13:09:10 -0800 > From: "Kirby Urner" <urnerk(a)qwest.net> > Subject: RE: [Edu-sig] re: Python Programming: An Introduction to > ComputerScience > To: "'Edu-sig'" <edu-sig(a)python.org> > Message-ID: <E1AVH0a-0002cX-NY(a)mail.python.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: edu-sig-bounces(a)python.org [mailto:edu-sig-bounces@python.org] On > > Behalf Of Jeffrey Elkner > > Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 12:28 PM > > To: Edu-sig > > Cc: Toby Donaldson > > Subject: Re: [Edu-sig] re: Python Programming: An Introduction to > > ComputerScience > > > > I completely agree with Toby on this. I've already managed to make > > Python the CS1 language at Yorktown High, but it hasn't reached beyond > > the hard core geek community. If we really want to popularize it to a > > broader audience, it needs to fill the space taken by VB (at the high > > school) or what Logo used to do (at the middle school). > > I guess I don't see how Logo makes a good case. It never went anywhere > much > beyond middle school. No Hubble stuff is done in Logo. > > I guess my question is, what's being used outside the "hard core geek > community" that CS1 doesn't reach? VB? Or is it just that programming > itself is still not a very widespread activity, using any language? > > In my view, we need more programming in the mathematics curriculum, which > means recognizing that writing programs is likewise a way of writing > mathematics. Or, more accurately, I'd say both kinds of writing are > similar > kinds of symbolic activity which deserve a prime spot in K-12 education. > > In the math curriculum, the real competition is not some other language, > but > calculators (I guess the TI programming language might count -- but my > impression is more HS math teachers than students actually bother with the > programming part). > > Numeracy, the equivalent of literacy with regard to prose and poetry, > involves programming, mathematics, data visualizations, puzzle solving, > logic, simulations, and other such. Numeracy and literacy connect at many > levels. > > Kirby > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 16:14:38 -0500 > From: Jim Harrison <jhrsn(a)pitt.edu> > Subject: Re: [Edu-sig] re: Education Arcade > To: edu-sig(a)python.org > Message-ID: <BC00EB6E.2D208%jhrsn(a)pitt.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" > > on 12/13/03 2:57 PM, Arthur at ajsiegel(a)optonline.net wrote: > > > Learning is about demystification. I would probably not go as far as > the > > Waldorf folks and deny kids a great magic show. But that's precisely > what a > > good video game is. In some sense it is the opposite of a learning > > experience. > > > > And the power relationship is perverse. The machine has the power, the > > developer has the power. The kid is a shmuck. Exactly the wrong lesson. > > In the early stages of learning, kids are expected to take a great deal on > faith about the way in which the world and society works, and we typically > start the demystification process with relatively easy, middle of the road > examples with a lot of unstated assumptions. That's true for any kind of > instruction with any kind of instructional material. Explorations of the > difficult boundary conditions and underlying assumptions are left until > later, both in the sciences and the humanities. So a lot remains > un-demystified for a long time in traditional instruction. > > For example, elementary physics typically includes macroscopic solid body > problems, not quantum mechanics. There are a lot of assumptions inherent > in > those problems that ultimately need demystification, but initially we > concentrate on the most obvious issues and work toward the others > incrementally over a significant period of time. > > Instructors often illustrate physics problems with a small physical > apparatus that represents what happens in the wider world, and kids watch. > It would be substantially beneficial if the kids each had their own > apparatus for experimentation, but that's usually not possible. > > In the absence of that, I don't see the harm (and do see benefit) in > providing kids with a video simulator of the same problem that provides > responses that appear to be identical to those occurring with the physical > apparatus, and that allows experimentation. I don't believe the kids have > any problem isolating the display from the non-demystified computer behind > it and understanding that within the confines of the simulation the > actions > they see represent real-world responses. As an aside, the greater problem > is > going the other way--convincing them fully that what they see in some > cases > does not represent the real world. > > Similarly, I have no problem with starting kids learning > computing/programming in a GUI (a form of simulator) to allow them to > acquire a basic skill set rapidly under reinforcing conditions, then > progressing from there to the command line ('cd is just like opening a > folder'). I've seen this work fine. > > And I don't buy the machine:power/kid:schmuck scenario. When kids can > manipulate a simulation to produce a result, they feel empowered. If the > result doesn't honor the parameters of the simulation, the kids > immediately > label the developer/machine "lame" -- not themselves. > > Jim Harrison > Univ. of Pittsburgh > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 23:56:35 +0100 > From: Laura Creighton <lac(a)strakt.com> > Subject: Re: [Edu-sig] re: Education Arcade > To: "Kirby Urner" <urnerk(a)qwest.net> > Cc: edu-sig(a)python.org, 'Arthur' <ajsiegel(a)optonline.net> > Message-ID: <200312132256.hBDMuZ9D026648(a)ratthing-b246.strakt.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 > > In a message of Sat, 13 Dec 2003 12:26:44 PST, "Kirby Urner" writes: > >Imagine an arcade game wherein you're running for president of some > country. > >You have money concerns, issue concerns, perception concerns. Donor X > >promises you big bucks, but not if you appear to side with Y in your > >statements. Different versions of a stump speech appear on screen. You > >have to decide which one you'll go with (advisors weigh in with pros and > >cons, perhaps audibly, using emotional language). Money sources appear > or > >dry up as a result of your choices. In the meantime, your competition is > >doing likewise. Negative ads appear, about your accepting funds from > >Donor X. > > > > Kirby, this is an example of the problem. When you teach children > using a simulation, you teach them, in addition to everything else, > to think within the system that the simulators were using. > > So here we have, as unchallenged assumption -- it costs big bucks to > become president. The fix for that would be to pass campaign finance > reform -- forbid spending beyond a certain amount. Every version > of those stump speeches come with the biases of the people who > authored them. Their results have the outcomes that somebody > programmed in as well. You have now taught the children how to > use emotional language to criticise people and get them to change > their positions based on how well you can manipulate them. Your > funding base, presumably, is either the White, Prosperous Middle > class, or Big Business -- since you are campaign contribution based. > Does your simulation reflect the fact that poor people do not vote > in the USA? Negative ads are now a fact of life .... it goes on, > and on. > > I don't want another generation of Americans conditioned to view the > system as something that can not be changed, but can only be worked. > I don't know what the best way to teach children how to question > authority, recongnise opportunities, and strive to improve the society > they are in, but I suspect that this is a step in precisely the wrong > direction. > > Laura > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 15:18:42 -0800 > From: "Kirby Urner" <urnerk(a)qwest.net> > Subject: RE: [Edu-sig] Re: Python Programming: An Introduction to > ComputerScience > To: "'John Zelle'" <john.zelle(a)wartburg.edu> > Cc: edu-sig(a)python.org > Message-ID: <E1AVJ1x-0007qS-84(a)mail.python.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > > I appreciate your comments John. > > One of many things I like about your book is how you jump into chaos right > away. > > I think that's good on a number of levels, one being that people new to > computers might think they're entering a brave new world of deterministic > Laplacian engines and are perhaps just ten short chapters away from being > able to simulate the stock market or global weather. > > However, as the chaos examples show, computer simulations are limited by > mathematical principles. This is a useful lesson in humility. > > I also really like the approach you've taken with Tkinter. > > You're quite right that students are crazy about computer graphics and > want > this component. > > I've used POV-Ray for similar reasons. > > But whereas POV-Ray will spit out nice three dimensional polyhedra, the 2D > canvas has the advantage of doubling for a GUI-style interface, with > buttons > and other widgets. > > In keeping it 2D, you're keeping it simple, and also connecting to the > whole > business of GUI design (e.g. your calculator example). > > And since Tk is there if IDLE is there, your approach also minimizes the > need for extra software and installation. > > Kirby > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 00:21:11 +0100 > From: Laura Creighton <lac(a)strakt.com> > Subject: Re: [Edu-sig] re: Python Programming: An Introduction to > ComputerScience > To: "Kirby Urner" <urnerk(a)qwest.net> > Cc: 'Edu-sig' <edu-sig(a)python.org> > Message-ID: <200312132321.hBDNLB6F026743(a)ratthing-b246.strakt.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 > > In a message of Sat, 13 Dec 2003 13:09:10 PST, "Kirby Urner" writes: > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: edu-sig-bounces(a)python.org [mailto:edu-sig-bounces@python.org] On > >> Behalf Of Jeffrey Elkner > >> Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 12:28 PM > >> To: Edu-sig > >> Cc: Toby Donaldson > >> Subject: Re: [Edu-sig] re: Python Programming: An Introduction to > >> ComputerScience > >> > >> I completely agree with Toby on this. I've already managed to make > >> Python the CS1 language at Yorktown High, but it hasn't reached beyond > >> the hard core geek community. If we really want to popularize it to a > >> broader audience, it needs to fill the space taken by VB (at the high > >> school) or what Logo used to do (at the middle school). > > > >I guess I don't see how Logo makes a good case. It never went anywhere m > >uch > >beyond middle school. No Hubble stuff is done in Logo. > > > >I guess my question is, what's being used outside the "hard core geek > >community" that CS1 doesn't reach? VB? Or is it just that programming > >itself is still not a very widespread activity, using any language? > > I think the second. > > > > >In my view, we need more programming in the mathematics curriculum, which > >means recognizing that writing programs is likewise a way of writing > >mathematics. Or, more accurately, I'd say both kinds of writing are > similar > >kinds of symbolic activity which deserve a prime spot in K-12 education. > > > >In the math curriculum, the real competition is not some other language, > >but > >calculators (I guess the TI programming language might count -- but my > >impression is more HS math teachers than students actually bother with th > >e > >programming part). > > > >Numeracy, the equivalent of literacy with regard to prose and poetry, > >involves programming, mathematics, data visualizations, puzzle solving, > >logic, simulations, and other such. Numeracy and literacy connect at > many > >levels. > > > >Kirby > > I think that a problem we have is that programming is seen to be tied to > math, and numeracy, (as is problem solving in general) rather that > literacy, and the arts and humanities in general. I think that we > could make a tremendous push for the number of people who are programming > at all if we made courses on 'data mining for the humanities' and the > like. How to write programs to take the information from some website > and do something useful with it. The problem I see when teaching > non-technical people how to program, is how little their expectation > of 'what programming would be good for' has to do with the sort of > problems that they have in their lives. But I have a small following > of 'grandmothers who have taught themselves some python'. They needed > a computer program to take a list of their friends and then make > mime attatchments of the digital pictures they had made of their > grandchildren, and mail them to everybody on their mailing list > without having to mouse click and do things by hand, which takes hours. > But not too many non-nerds know that programming is good for repetative > tasks like this. > > Laura > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 00:32:35 +0100 > From: Laura Creighton <lac(a)strakt.com> > Subject: Re: [Edu-sig] re: Education Arcade > To: Jim Harrison <jhrsn(a)pitt.edu> > Cc: edu-sig(a)python.org > Message-ID: <200312132332.hBDNWZSg026815(a)ratthing-b246.strakt.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 > > In a message of Sat, 13 Dec 2003 16:14:38 EST, Jim Harrison writes: > > > >And I don't buy the machine:power/kid:schmuck scenario. When kids can > >manipulate a simulation to produce a result, they feel empowered. If the > >result doesn't honor the parameters of the simulation, the kids > immediately > >label the developer/machine "lame" -- not themselves. > > > >Jim Harrison > >Univ. of Pittsburgh > > This may sometimes be a problem. There is a difference between 'being > empowered' and 'feeling empowered'. Some studies of children who > 'play video games too much' indicate that they do this is because they > like feeling empowered -- and it feels better to be the Pokemon > champion than a mediocre student. > > Laura > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Edu-sig mailing list > Edu-sig(a)python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig > > > End of Edu-sig Digest, Vol 5, Issue 14 > **************************************

1 0

PowerPoint Makes You Dumb
by Jason Cunliffe 14 Dec '03

14 Dec '03

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/14/magazine/14POWER.html?ex=1071982800&e…

1 0

Re: [Edu-sig] re: Education Arcade
by Laura Creighton 14 Dec '03

14 Dec '03

I think that most educational material in the hands of an extremely well motivated and gifted teacher can work wonders. But I worry about the same materials in the hands of the average teacher, and the struggling teacher. Part of the problem here is that it would be very easy for a well meaning teacher to mistake children who are learning for children who are being amused. If your lessons are poor, you generally bore your students. If they are learning, they aren't bored. So I used boredom as a pretty good indicator of where my lessons were good, indifferent, and lousy. I'd worry if this connection was broken. How would I tell if my students were enjoying themselves and still not learning much? >I'd like students to develop a critical eye w/r to educational games. > >Ideally, we play the games, then talk about what assumptions they embody. > >I don't necessarily want to cushion them either, by making the simulations >too unreal. As a matter of fact, it does cost big bucks to become >president >in many countries, and emotional language is used manipulatively all the >time. It's better to develop and awareness of this than to pretend it >doesn't exist. My simulation is, in a way, a parody. Ah, that didn't come across to me the first time. I am all for the development of critical thinking, but I don't think that our choices are limited to pretending it doesn't exist, and running simulations. For instance, I had classes in that, for years, as well as classes in how the advertising media manipulates you. That was deemed crucial for 11 12 and 13 year olds. It was a very popular series of classes, well loved by pretty much every student, as opposed to the usual fair. I think that teaching such things by making the students help program the simulation -- writing the manipulative texts, and program how jerks with a lot of money can make your poor political leader spend all of his time speaking on issues he doesn't care about, while the ones that he does care about get little or no coverage. Teaching a course where the students got to hack the system, change the parameters, and change the outcomes would be a lot of fun. But I think having them able to modify the code, or at least the rules would be essential. Otherwise they will end up being too passive, passengers in their own lives. >I think a first step towards creative change is simulating something >accurately. A simulation that focused on the influence of big money in >political affairs might well be an agent for exactly the kind of change >you'd support. Maybe, but I write simulations, and so I know that the question isn't whether or not to make it accurate, but how much innacuracy are you willing to tolerate. I worry about teachers' ability to recognise innaccuracy when they see it. > >> I don't know what the best way to teach children how to question >> authority, recongnise opportunities, and strive to improve the society >> they are in, but I suspect that this is a step in precisely the wrong >> direction. >> >> Laura > >I think it might be in the right direction. Did you like 'Wag the Dog'? >How about 'Senator Bullworth'? Those are movies, correct? I've never seen them. 'Movies' is one of my great chasms of ignorance. > >Kirby Laura

1 0

Re: [Edu-sig] re: Education Arcade
by Laura Creighton 13 Dec '03

13 Dec '03

In a message of Sat, 13 Dec 2003 16:14:38 EST, Jim Harrison writes: > >And I don't buy the machine:power/kid:schmuck scenario. When kids can >manipulate a simulation to produce a result, they feel empowered. If the >result doesn't honor the parameters of the simulation, the kids immediately >label the developer/machine "lame" -- not themselves. > >Jim Harrison >Univ. of Pittsburgh This may sometimes be a problem. There is a difference between 'being empowered' and 'feeling empowered'. Some studies of children who 'play video games too much' indicate that they do this is because they like feeling empowered -- and it feels better to be the Pokemon champion than a mediocre student. Laura

1 0

re: Education Arcade
by Arthur 13 Dec '03

13 Dec '03

Kirby writes - >So far, I'm no further educated as to your specific objections. When you >come up with something (that's specifically yours), let me know. I don't >really want to read long essays. Just give the gist. On second thought let me say this much. Learning is about demystification. I would probably not go as far as the Waldorf folks and deny kids a great magic show. But that's precisely what a good video game is. In some sense it is the opposite of a learning experience. And the power relationship is perverse. The machine has the power, the developer has the power. The kid is a shmuck. Exactly the wrong lesson. This is the part that gets me worked up and I better stop before I get myself too worked up. I am, BTW, 4000% percent *for* helping kids, as part of their education, demystify their games. That in part is what PyGeo could be about. But there is very little point and click to it, a good deal of math to it, and it is not a game. Art

3 2