[Edu-sig] re: diSessa's "computational media", and Boxer

[Arthur_Siegel@rsmi.com]

Fred writes -

>I recently read diSessa's "Changing Minds" book, based (if I recall
>correctly) on a recommendation by someone on this edu-sig list.  The
>book is excellent, with an extended argument for the value and
>possibility of "computational literacy" and "computational media"
>which should interest most edu-sig participants.

Found chapters 1& 2 online in pdf at:

http://www.soe.berkeley.edu/boxer/papers.html

Shall read at least that far.

>diSessa's practical experience comes from using software called
>"Boxer" to teach elementary and high school students principles of
>math, science, and (secondarily) programming.  

Sounds like Kirby territory.

Certainly will be interesting to see how diSessa's "Changing" and Kirby's
"Overcome" takes intersect/diverge.

>The user interface of Boxer is at once brilliant, and awkward and unfamiliar.

>Boxer applications are structured as a hierarchy of "boxes" (hence the name)
>which are displayed as nested windows on a GUI screen.  Boxer's
>command language, which appears as text statements inside boxes, is
>based on Logo.  

As usual, my own take is intuitive, and experiential -  not formal and
studied.

But I do tend to resist any approach that is GUI intensive. I posted up
a SnapPea geometry exploration tool cite quite recently.  Had a fully
developed GUI, and than developed the Python scripting.  Not
an unusual progression.  Why is this happening?  Does the availabiltiy
of Python somehow supercede the reasons behind the GUI intensive
approach.  I think, in many ways, yes.  

In a GUI intensive envrionment the GUI has the upper hand, not the student.
How do you study and measure that power relationship. I accept my inituition. 
Students undertand that they are dependant on the GUI - and enthusiasm is 
sapped.  I still like the thirty line's of straight text which can be run as a

chat program
as "python chattext.py". Or is a straight-forward IDE like a IDLE.  It works, 
and is 
"real" programming  - is better than box hierarchies, talking paperclips, and 
all
down that road.  Not purer - I am not trying to be a purist.  Just have my own

sense of what get kids excited. And this is all 95% about getting kids 
motivated 
and excited. Feeling grown-up is certainly one such thing.
.  
So it is difficult in my mind for a Python educational curriculum to pick up 
much
from what came before, because in doing so one will be tending to dilute
what Python somewhat uniquely brings to the party. 


>  2) I'm wondering if anyone else here has a similar interest in
 >    Boxer, and would like to explore the possibility of getting a
 >    Boxer-like system working on the PC, perhaps using Python as the
 >   implementation language and a system like VPython for the
 >  graphical component (which I haven't discussed).

I certainly think we should indulge and excite kids by letting them get at
good graphics in the context of both math and programming education.
And do think VPython is quite well suited for that role.

ART