[Edu-sig] Knowledge Technology Toolkit

[portal]

Art said:

<quote>
(I am)  unconvinced that technology itself can be a major factor
in achieving it.  Python points in the direction of what may be achievable.
But there is no credible evidence I have seen to indicate that teaching and
learning something like Python is not an essentially low tech endeavor,
inherently.
</quote>

Our, the BCNGroup, position is quite different.  We claim that modern
computer science is confused to the point of creating false dysfunction.  We
say "false" here because much of the IT dysfunction can not be rationally
understood based only on a shallow analysis.  One has to look at economic
and political forces to understand why our society does not distribute
control over information except in the form of shallow advertising and
political spin.  I sense that you agree with this in principle.  The
practical aspects is what is at issue.  Yes?

Education is deeply influenced by the same economic and cultural general
systems properties that have created the American TV news media.  Other than
providing a good living for a rather odd bunch of folks in TV, this
influence is mostly not healthy.

The confusion which is modern computer science is very deep, and goes to an
affinity between scientific reductionism (which leads to false science) and
computer science which is properly understood only in a 100% reductionist
paradigm (all things are reducible to bits and bytes).  So the fundamental
difference between a natural system and a computer model is a core issue
that needs to be in any knowledge science or computer science curriculum
(even in K-12).  Human action perception "cycles" leads us into cognitive
neuroscience - which is where we need new curriculum (K-12).

http://www.bcngroup.org/area3/pprueitt/kmbook/Chapter2.htm

Your position that Python is not a solution is a potentially damaging one to
my efforts, because it really is a position of inhibiting any solution from
addressing complex underlying causes of what are deeply controlled
inhibition.

We cannot and will not long suffer absolutely skepticism - as we have long
ago come to understand that there is no purpose in most skepticism

We are looking for a good solution that allows kids to control computers so
that we, the educators and the students, can talk about what is not talked
about - and these are cultural and social issues related to information
control in our modern society.  So we would include the Ontology Referential
Base (Orb) technology within a MUD (multiple user domain) and target chat
and e-forums with externally generated subject matter taxonomy so that kids
and educators can see what is the thematic structure of social discourse.

http://www.bcngroup.org/area2/KnowledgeEcologies.htm

We address a similar cultural problem that has to do with learn-ed
disability in arithmetic and algebra, where children learn to NOT be able to
do elementary mathematics because of the way it is taught and because of the
cultural conditioning that is uniformly experienced by children while in
school.

http://www.ontologystream.com/beads/QuestionOfAccess/AQA.htm

This scholarly work on an almost universally present cognitive disability,
that is conditioned by experience in school, can be also applied to the
teaching of analytic skills in the form of good computer science instruction
(and most is very poor).


So we would have the Knowledge Technology Toolkit teach the history of
mathematics, number theory, set theory, discrete mathematics, and
foundations to non-standard logics.  The purpose of the Toolkit is to train
a generation of citizens who control information for self use.

Then, we would teach arithmetic and the foundations of mathematics (not
algebra and the calculus - but the structure and nature of mathematics) in
arbitary bases so that kids would see and appreciate what the counting
numbers are and how to use them in innovative ways:

http://www.ontologystream.com/cA/index.htm  in computer science.

With respects and appreciation for your kindness, I ask that you hold off on
the discussion regarding who has signed off, etc.  I look forward to talking
with Guido.

Neither I, nor the BCNGroup, am asking for anyone's permission or
endorsement.  We are exploring the issues and would like to use the AIC
model to first establish an appreciative social field.   I enjoy Fourth
myself, and would use it over Python if I have my choice.  But we are
considering the social issues and the strength that Python has assumed
within the Open Source Software community.