slashdot: Teaching Primary School Students Programming?
http://ask.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/08/27/000248 Teaching Primary School Students Programming? Posted by Cliff on Saturday August 26, @08:25PM from the toddlers-as-coders dept. Education Programming NotesSensei asks: "Recently I was teasing the teacher who runs the computer club in my sons' primary school: 'You teach the kids only how to use software but not how to make software.' Today I got an email: 'OK, you're in: teach them programming.' Now I wonder what language should I pick? My first lesson will be the board game c-jump, but after that? The contestants are: Kids programming language KPL (ab VB.net derivate; Java using BlueJ; Greenfoot (and the BlueJ); and HTML. Does it sound like I'm on the right track or should I try something completely different? We are looking at primary 3-5 (that's 10-13 in this part of the world). Where can I find inspiration for the curriculum?" === Python is mentioned there, along with a lot of other suggestions.
When I was the computer teacher in a primary school back in 1983, I taught Logo. Everyone loved it! -Elaine --- "Paul D. Fernhout" <pdfernhout@kurtz-fernhout.com> wrote:
http://ask.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/08/27/000248
Teaching Primary School Students Programming? Posted by Cliff on Saturday August 26, @08:25PM from the toddlers-as-coders dept. Education Programming NotesSensei asks: "Recently I was teasing the teacher who runs the computer club in my sons' primary school: 'You teach the kids only how to use software but not how to make software.' Today I got an email: 'OK, you're in: teach them programming.' Now I wonder what language should I pick? My first lesson will be the board game c-jump, but after that? The contestants are: Kids programming language KPL (ab VB.net derivate; Java using BlueJ; Greenfoot (and the BlueJ); and HTML. Does it sound like I'm on the right track or should I try something completely different? We are looking at primary 3-5 (that's 10-13 in this part of the world). Where can I find inspiration for the curriculum?"
===
Python is mentioned there, along with a lot of other suggestions. _______________________________________________ Edu-sig mailing list Edu-sig@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Elaine wrote:
When I was the computer teacher in a primary school back in 1983, I taught Logo. Everyone loved it!
-Elaine
The problem might be the "progress" of Logo since 1983. When I go to: http://el.media.mit.edu/Logo-foundation/logo/programming.html I see the potential of Logo in introducing kids to programming abstraction. One types within the framework of a defined syntax, and gets immediate results, or informative errors. When I take the next step and look at major current implementations - I downloaded StarLogo and NetLogo - I am confronted with Logo environments with lots of GUI doo-dads. And lots of ambiguity about the purpose of this environment. Is its primary focus to introduce programming, or to explore computer simulations for the benefit of what it is the simulations teach us. There *is* a fundamental difference. It is hard for me not to describe these environments as "self-involved". That is always the problem with these kinds of environments - to me. One, in some sense, must "submit" to them, with a promise of rewards if one does so. But the kids most likely to excell at Logo are, IMO, also the ones least likely to be the ones comfortable with submitting to an imposed (not selected) environment. The solution is simple - simplicity, less environment. Why is this obvious to me, and lost on the MIT folks? Art
--- "Paul D. Fernhout" <pdfernhout@kurtz-fernhout.com> wrote:
http://ask.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/08/27/000248
Teaching Primary School Students Programming? Posted by Cliff on Saturday August 26, @08:25PM from the toddlers-as-coders dept. Education Programming NotesSensei asks: "Recently I was teasing the teacher who runs the computer club in my sons' primary school: 'You teach the kids only how to use software but not how to make software.' Today I got an email: 'OK, you're in: teach them programming.' Now I wonder what language should I pick? My first lesson will be the board game c-jump, but after that? The contestants are: Kids programming language KPL (ab VB.net derivate; Java using BlueJ; Greenfoot (and the BlueJ); and HTML. Does it sound like I'm on the right track or should I try something completely different? We are looking at primary 3-5 (that's 10-13 in this part of the world). Where can I find inspiration for the curriculum?"
===
Python is mentioned there, along with a lot of other suggestions. _______________________________________________ Edu-sig mailing list Edu-sig@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Edu-sig mailing list Edu-sig@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
On 8/28/06, Arthur <ajsiegel@optonline.net> wrote:
The solution is simple - simplicity, less environment.
Why is this obvious to me, and lost on the MIT folks?
Art
Is it the MIT folks behind the slick new Logo environments, with all the eye candy? I'm not up to date. I think we need to respect that people have different career goals, even when very young. To be a "prodigy" doesn't mean you're a cookie cutter copy of the "prodigy" in the seat next to you. For some, the eye candy aspect *is* the point. Just moving a stupid turtle around is boring boring boring, and we understood all about it the very first day (and so what?). Geometry, so what? Some people think that way. Do we beat them into submission then, just because "we" find Geometry beautiful all on its own? Kirby
----- Original Message ----- From: kirby urner Date: Monday, August 28, 2006 1:33 pm Subject: Re: [Edu-sig] slashdot: Teaching Primary School Students Programming? To: Arthur , "edu-sig@python.org"
On 8/28/06, Arthur wrote:
The solution is simple - simplicity, less environment.
Why is this obvious to me, and lost on the MIT folks?
Art
Is it the MIT folks behind the slick new Logo environments, with all the eye candy? I'm not up to date.
I think we need to respect that people have different career goals, even when very young. To be a "prodigy" doesn't mean you're a cookie cutter copy of the "prodigy" in the seat next to you.
Cynical Arthur suspects that much of the problem has to do with the career goals of folks at MIT, not those of the very young. I won't expand on that without being asked to. Art
On 8/28/06, ajsiegel@optonline.net <ajsiegel@optonline.net> wrote:
Cynical Arthur suspects that much of the problem has to do with the career goals of folks at MIT, not those of the very young.
Cynical Kirby thinks: if they *watch* cartoons, they probably wanna *make* cartoons. The eye candy palaces are an intro to Puppet World. One of my favorite passtimes as a kid growing up in Rome (not many kids in my building spoke American): use Piazza Navona clay puppets to entertain my sister with stories, complete with pre-recorded sound track on the cassette player. Today, I might consider doing that on my laptop (which does *not* mean I can't use the Navona Puppets, maybe to help storyboard the computerized version). You think kids don't think this way?
I won't expand on that without being asked to.
Art
Not sure if I'm asking, but I think fascination with High Church geometry ala Klein is an acquired taste, like coffee. You might call it "pandering in Panda3D" to get all cartoony like that, but against the backdrop of underground comix and ToonTown, it sounds like good ol' New York to me (plus I've got my Portland Knowledge Lab in Portland). Kirby
Today, I might consider doing that on my laptop (which does *not* mean I can't use the Navona Puppets, maybe to help storyboard the computerized version).
You think kids don't think this way?
Cynical Arthur would welcome the ability to exercise his imagination in the creation of animated cartoons that expressed his imagination, by way of computer technology. Except that his imagination is his own (everybodys' is) , and he would expect to need to wait until an appropriate age and undergo some serious study before such an ability were accessible to him. The kind of study, in fact, that I suspect college students at CMU expect to have to undertake to be able to utilize Panda3d - a serious tool for doing this kind of thing. Young cynical Arthur had a good sense of when he was been humored and indulged, and never really liked it much.. A lot of my take and talk is trying to be sensitive to young Arthur's needs - since I have no reason to believe that they were extraordinary, nor was he. Arthur Art
On 8/28/06, ajsiegel@optonline.net <ajsiegel@optonline.net> wrote:
Cynical Arthur would welcome the ability to exercise his imagination in the creation of animated cartoons that expressed his imagination, by way of computer technology.
Good. Cynical Kirby looks forward to viewing some of Cynical Arthur's cartoons.
Except that his imagination is his own (everybodys' is) , and he would expect to need to wait until an appropriate age and undergo some serious study before such an ability were accessible to him.
Yes, Arthur knows that skills come in exchange for hard work. Even prodigies need to practice. Use it or lose it.
The kind of study, in fact, that I suspect college students at CMU expect to have to undertake to be able to utilize Panda3d - a serious tool for doing this kind of thing.
Yes, Panda3d is hard and you need some adult-level patience to master the tool (which I really haven't by the way). But is that any reason to not look for *much easier* ways to the same ends? Like, if we weren't *lying* about wanting to actually see their cartoons, shouldn't we *stop* with the bait and switch? I think you're pointing to the *means* (hard work) as the worthy goal. I'm agreeing but saying: let's not lose site of the *ends* (lots of good cartoons -- some of them by kids much younger than could make them before (that in itself is new territory)). I think there will always be that next sought-after skill at the other end of some hard work rainbow. But I'm not into making kids sweat it just to do what we did, an earlier generation. I *want* them to look at all our hard work... and make it look easy (call me an optimist, but I think we're still evolving as a species). They'll have *new* hard stuff to tackle, not just the same stuff we did (like, how to make those cartoons *funny* -- a whole new ball game).
Young cynical Arthur had a good sense of when he was been humored and indulged, and never really liked it much.. A lot of my take and talk is trying to be sensitive to young Arthur's needs - since I have no reason to believe that they were extraordinary, nor was he.
Arthur
I like your young Arthur and want him to be pandered to too. :-D I think we share a certain affinity for "no frills" experiences that pack a wallop, in terms of straight information content. You want the jet boat, not the cushy cruise liner. Where I think this must be heading is towards a more individualized curriculum, with lots of trail heads. It's still a mix of live and in-the-can recordings, but you're freer to string the beads in the order you like, instead of the order some distant Kid Factory decided was best for you. Kirby
kirby urner wrote:
On 8/28/06, ajsiegel@optonline.net <ajsiegel@optonline.net> wrote:
Cynical Arthur would welcome the ability to exercise his imagination in the creation of animated cartoons that expressed his imagination, by way of computer technology.
Good. Cynical Kirby looks forward to viewing some of Cynical Arthur's cartoons.
Well this field is not totally unknown to Silly Arthur, who has a small repetoire of claymations and other animations that one can accomplish by single framing with a movie camera (Bolex 8mm, tool of choice). In the can, as we filmmakers say. And I have been collecting random vintage 16mm footage over the years - home movies, etc. from garage sales, antique stores, and such. The master plan is to find a way to economically and adequately digitize what I have (telecine is the general term for the technology) and then go play - recognizing the considerable advantage of digital editing over cut and splicing. Technology might also come into play in doing some offbeat colorization of black and white footage, and even perhaps exploring some of the technology available to 3d-ize still images. Soundtrack sync, of course. Perhaps even soundtrack production. A point is that if the point is to get imaginations exercised and realized in this general realm, for children particularly, purely digital, synthetic production is way, way the long way around. More an excuse not to do it, than an avenue towards doing it. Art
Arthur wrote:
The problem might be the "progress" of Logo since 1983.
Try this on for size: http://education.mit.edu/starlogo-tng/ I saw a demo last week and there is definitely some serious potential in it. Cheers, - Andreas
When I go to:
http://el.media.mit.edu/Logo-foundation/logo/programming.html
I see the potential of Logo in introducing kids to programming abstraction. One types within the framework of a defined syntax, and gets immediate results, or informative errors.
When I take the next step and look at major current implementations - I downloaded StarLogo and NetLogo - I am confronted with Logo environments with lots of GUI doo-dads. And lots of ambiguity about the purpose of this environment. Is its primary focus to introduce programming, or to explore computer simulations for the benefit of what it is the simulations teach us. There *is* a fundamental difference.
It is hard for me not to describe these environments as "self-involved". That is always the problem with these kinds of environments - to me. One, in some sense, must "submit" to them, with a promise of rewards if one does so. But the kids most likely to excell at Logo are, IMO, also the ones least likely to be the ones comfortable with submitting to an imposed (not selected) environment.
The solution is simple - simplicity, less environment.
Why is this obvious to me, and lost on the MIT folks?
Art
--- "Paul D. Fernhout" <pdfernhout@kurtz-fernhout.com> wrote:
http://ask.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/08/27/000248
Teaching Primary School Students Programming? Posted by Cliff on Saturday August 26, @08:25PM from the toddlers-as-coders dept. Education Programming NotesSensei asks: "Recently I was teasing the teacher who runs the computer club in my sons' primary school: 'You teach the kids only how to use software but not how to make software.' Today I got an email: 'OK, you're in: teach them programming.' Now I wonder what language should I pick? My first lesson will be the board game c-jump, but after that? The contestants are: Kids programming language KPL (ab VB.net derivate; Java using BlueJ; Greenfoot (and the BlueJ); and HTML. Does it sound like I'm on the right track or should I try something completely different? We are looking at primary 3-5 (that's 10-13 in this part of the world). Where can I find inspiration for the curriculum?"
===
Python is mentioned there, along with a lot of other suggestions. _______________________________________________ Edu-sig mailing list Edu-sig@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Edu-sig mailing list Edu-sig@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
participants (6)
-
ajsiegel＠optonline.net -
Andreas Raab -
Arthur
-
Elaine -
kirby urner -
Paul D. Fernhout