Mailman 3 June 2003 - Edu-sig

re: book: Head First Java
by ajsiegel＠optonline.net Sept. 6, 2003

Sept. 6, 2003

Jason writes - >http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/hfjava/chapter/index.html >This might make some of you cringe.. Judging from the online samples it >looks like it might be a good book to hand to kids [us all] who are just >getting into programming. >Would be cool if a Python version were available. >I'd love to hear your reactions. Have not looked much at the samples chapter, but did look at the author interviews at http://www.onjava.com/pub/a/onjava/2003/06/18/head_first.html I am sympathetic with much of it. Especially that there does seem to be a true effort is defy expectations about how this kind of thing might be done. And in emphasizing: """We've known forever (at least since Socrates anyway) that learning is at its weakest when the learner is a passive receiver of information. The learner has to be engaged and actively flexing some neurons""" I translate this into an objection to doing *too* much for the student. I don't want a GUI doing too much of the "thinking" - for example. It might help a student get to a satisfying end result that can be called a "program", but how much did they actually *learn* in getting there. I won't press this point as to programming, but will limit my point to to the GUI based dynamic geometry applications - where I am more confident about my point. But I admit I suspect the point translates somehow to programming education. On the other hand, I get a little queasy when the author go to: """Perhaps the worst of all assumptions a teacher or an author can make is to assume the learner is intrinsically motivated and intellectually curious about the content.""" I guess I am stubborn on this point, or arrogant, or something. In that I have the luxuxry of having no interest in presenting material to learners who have no intellectual curiosity about the subject matter I am presenting. One nice thing about the development of the Net (and which I associate with Open Source), is that one can contribute by making the exactly opposite assumption. That one's effort will be found by those motivated by a curiosity. And one can assume that curiosity as a starting point. I, at any rate, have learned much from resources that assumed that from the beginning,therefore forgoing the seduction, and getting on with it. "It", being the transfer of knowledge. An act of generosity, really. If one has something to teach, and is willing to teach it - one should hold one's ground, it seems to me. I like to think Socrates might agree. Art

6 9

looking for help with Jython...
by luby liao July 25, 2003

July 25, 2003

Jeffrey, try this: 1. change first line to public class Vehicle { 2. shell> javac Vehicle.java 3. shell> jython [liao@zen tmp]$ jython Jython 2.1 on java1.3.1 (JIT: null) Type "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information. >>> import Vehicle >>> v = Vehicle(3,5,6) >>> v Vehicle@3f1179 >>> cheers, Luby > I'm in the middle of learning some Java to get ready for next year's AP > CSC course. I would like to make good use of the Python my students > already know, and I was thinking that Jython might offer some > interesting educational opportunities. > > What I would most like to be able to do is to import Java classes into > Python in order to be able to "play around" with them in the > interpreter. So far, I have not been able to make this work. I'm > starting with a simple example from our book: > > > class Vehicle { > public int passengers; > public int fuelcap; > public int mpg; > > public Vehicle(int p, int f, int m) { > passengers = p; > fuelcap = f; > mpg = m; > } > > public int range() { > return mpg * fuelcap; > } > > public double fuelneeded(int miles) { > return (double) miles / mpg; > } > } > > (Actually, I added all the "public"s because otherwise Jython couldn't > see them when I did: > > import Vehicle > > How can I create a Vehicle object inside of Jython? > > Thanks! >

6 8

re: Terminology question: just operator overriding?
by Arthur July 1, 2003

July 1, 2003

I had asked >But then, why do you raise this? Ah. OSCON, I'm thinking. Do we get a preview? Personally I feel it's not right to highlight PyGeo quite as much as you intend ;) Art

3 10

re: Interactive learning: Twenty years later
by Arthur June 30, 2003

June 30, 2003

Terry writes - >In as much as the human computer interface* is important to the >student's experience of the computer, I think we still are. I agree >that the textual interface is critical to something like programming, >where logic and a linear progression of steps are fundamental to >the subject. But if you were teaching 2- or 3-D concepts, the ability >to simply point and select objects, and express your intent in a >visual-tactile mode is just essential. It shouldn't surprise you that I want to strongly disagree with this. Or strongly disagree with my perhaps incorrect interpretation of what you are saying, which is more likely as these things go. PyGeo's design is deliberate, in essentially limiting one to "logic and a linear progression of steps" in creating 3d structures, i.e. in teaching 3d concepts. In other words, it is deliberately insisting on deliberation. True, once created, the fact that the structures can be manipulated interactively - but holding the deliberately established relationships invariant - is also essential to it, as it is with any dynamic geemetry app. On second thought, I don't fully disagree, in that the place, at the moment, where I am probably most dissatified with PyGeo is exactly the limitations of the interface for picking and moving points in 3d space. The limitation there is firstly my own. I've not got my mind around the trackball concept and the mouse - partly, I think becuase it seems to have enough of its own limitations that I can't get fully motivated to make the effort. A better interface would be wonderful. I offically back off ;. Art

1 0

re: Interactive learning: Twenty years later
by Arthur June 30, 2003

June 30, 2003

>For me, the point of these fancy input devices is *not* to replace >the role the keyboard plays in existing computer interactions so >much as it is to make it possible to do new stuff with the computer >that the text interface just can't handle. For a programmer, >I'm a pretty visually oriented person, as am I. >and these things are really interesting to me. and to me. Are we still talking about education, directly or indirectly? Art

2 1

Interactive learning: Twenty years later
by Arthur June 29, 2003

June 29, 2003

I find the articles here quite interesting. An article from 20 years ago predicting the effect of computers on education, and the same author's comments on this article form the perspective of now. http://www.citejournal.org/vol2/iss4/seminal.cfm """ Why was my prediction wrong? I can see a number of reasons. One, already mentioned, is a tremendous fascination with the Internet, in spite of the fact that there is little empirical evidence to show it is effective in helping learning. Another is the rise of the mouse as a computer device. People had the peculiar idea that one could deal with the world of learning purely by pointing. An even more important factor is the lack of research in learning with computers, effective research professionally done with very large numbers of students. """ I disagree about the Internet. My son would be much less "educated" without this exposure. Though I guess the fact is that it was all non-classroom time. There is in fact an entire child peer culture on the Internet. The beauty is it has no particular educational intent. But it so, as a byproduct. My son learned how to write glibly and entertainingly, keeping up with the wits in a group chat setting. I know quite well he would be much less comforatble with the keyboard and and his ability to express himself with the written word, were it not for the Internet. I agree about the mouse. As I have repeated ad infinitum. Art

5 5

RE: [Edu-sig] Interactive learning: Twenty years later
by Seabrook, Richard June 29, 2003

June 29, 2003

-----Original Message----- From: Jason Cunliffe [mailto:jason.cunliffe@verizon.net] Sent: Sat 6/28/2003 3:14 PM To: Arthur; edu-sig(a)python.org Cc: Subject: Re: [Edu-sig] Interactive learning: Twenty years later > Another is the rise of the mouse as a computer device. > People had the peculiar idea that one could deal with the world of learning > purely by pointing. hmm.. I don't think the idea of mice was that could 'do everything by pointing'.. ============================= Of course not -- I'm sure you remember the initial development back in the 60s -- NASA/Ames? -- that created the mouse for one hand and the chord-player for the other. We were supposed to learn one-handed typing with a set of 5 or 6 double-detent keys so one hand would always be on the keyboard -- never happened! Somebody re-invents the chord player about every 10 years or so -- you can find a half-dozen for sale over the Internet for those with two-hand difficulties. The mouse never was intended to be paired with the standard keyboard. Dick S.

4 3

re: Interactive learning: Twenty years later
by Arthur June 29, 2003

June 29, 2003

Gerrit wrote - >Introducing myself: http://groups.google.nl/groups?selm=36DD9F9B.26DE96C%40pobox.com >I am now, as you may have guessed, 17 years old, just finished my exams and >having progress with my first real game (http://pybrian.sf.net/). I have heard >a lot of programmers started with game(s) :)... Sounds like we've been at Python for about the same amount of time. And with me, as it seems with you, coming to Python grew somehow from experimenting in Linux. I suspect I would have much to learn by reading your code, I am particularly intrigued by the fact that it is dependent on 2.3 features. As much as I kvetch (complain) about featurism, I do like to try to understand them as they arrive. Could you say a few more words about what in 2.3 you have explored and utilized in your work, and why. Seems to me this is a perfectly appropriate forum for such a discussion. Art

1 0

OT: Good idea - [reading source code]
by Arthur June 28, 2003

June 28, 2003

Danny writes - >Yes, I also agree that code should be treated as literature. As writers, >we have a responsibility to do our fair share of reading good code! I'm >not sure if Microsoft Access qualifies, but it must be better than >nothing. *grin* And this from the Eric Raymond entry on Agile Porgramming that Jason pointed to a few posts back. """ Working software over comprehensive documentation. That's us, too. In fact, the radical hacker position is that source code of a working system is its documentation. We, more than any other culture of software engineering, emphasize program source code as human-to-human communication that is expected to bind together communities of cooperation and understanding distributed through time and space. In this, too, we build on and amplify Unix tradition. """ And I can't help making this related point, as much as I am sure folks are uninterested in hearing me talk about my pet project. And depsite the fact I am supposed to be uninterested in the uninterested. But a key idea behind PyGeo is that the source as literature is part of the application. The concept though is not so much to expose the programming logic, but to expose the analytics. The "synthetic" geoemetry we are seeing on the screen is being driven by the analytic geometry accessbile in the code. And this synthesizes the study of geometry in a way that was not before (mass access to computers) possible in quite the same way. By having the source in Python (and accepting a bit of a performance hit) I am able to, I think, expose the analytics much more clearly to the non-specialist (in programming) than I might be able to so in any other programming language of which I am aware. >The only time I saw code reading really emphasized in high school, though, >was during the reading of test questions; we were otherwise left to our >own devices. But what kinds of good Python "literature" can educators >use? As far as I am capable, I am making that effort with the PyGeo code. The fact is that using geometric "objects" to introduce programming concepts (such as OOP inheritance), is an established tradition, almost as endemic as the "Hello World" program. I accept the fact that I am not fully capable. I find it harder to accept the fact that because there is lots of math in there, it is unfit for the purpose, as there seems to be some growing Chinese wall between math and programming education. Which is horribly misguided, IMO. Art

1 0

OT: Good idea - how come nobody else thought of it.
by Arthur June 28, 2003

June 28, 2003

this from http://www.microsoft.com/office/preview/editions/accessdav.asp """ Complete Source Code Often, the best way to learn new coding techniques is to see the source code of shipping solutions. Access 2003 Developer Extensions include the complete source code for the tools included in the product, such as the Property Scanner Add-In, Custom Startup Wizard, and the Package Wizard. Each of these tools is written in Microsoft Visual Basic® for Applications (VBA), the primary language used to develop Access solutions. By including the source code, developers can see different coding techniques, such as how to write a solution that can be easily localized into multiple languages. Developers can also create customized versions of these tools for their own benefit or to meet the needs of their enterprises. For example, the Custom Startup Wizard could be created so that it always creates an MDE file with the startup properties required by their enterprise """

2 1