[Yr7-10it] Scratch, Gamemaker, VB.net, Python,
PHP and MySQL - Programming for all levels
Bill Kerr
billkerr at gmail.com
Wed Sep 19 12:35:20 EST 2007
Kevork:
Here is what we covered in the "purist" academic sense:
1. Simple Data Types, primitives
2. Functions
3. User defined Objects
4. Arrays and Vectors
5. Text and Binary Files
6. User defined objects, methods, inheritance, encapsulation
7. A vector of user defined objects saved to binary files
7. OOP
Outcome for students: They found it a struggle. Only the top end managed to
survive due to a lack of time.
Reply:
Nice list. I think the question of what should go on the list for children
has been addressed by people like Seymour papert, alan kay and others (eg.
the CS unplugged site is interesting: http://csunplugged.com/ )
alan kay talks about developing an "honest childrens version" of advanced
ideas rather than trying to teach an adult version, eg. a vector form of
calculus can be taught using logo - one of Papert's original claims
certain things are more accessible to children to others, eg. the idea that
a circle is made up of a series of small straight lines is accessible - and
potentially very powerful
I didn't think so initially but now think the concepts of OOPs can be
communicated to children at least partly through the use of metaphor
(biological cell, passing messages, comparisons with parsing of sentences
into <subject><verbs, other modifiers> and then connected to visual programs
like etoys
There are other things on your list that could be looked at in this way, eg.
functions as input - output machines
So, we could look at developing a a powerful ideas list which is accessible
to children and which could be taught using computers and other devices.
I don't know much about VELS but possibly my suggestions here are
compatible. I think the main problem is persuading teachers and school
administrators that this approach is a good one - it draws on expertise from
the "hard" and "soft" curriculum areas and so is difficult to get across,
ie. it has elements of both "hard" maths and "soft" anthropology. But a lot
of the groundwork has already been done by the authors mentioned above.
Kevork:
Enrolment for 2008: Continuing decline in IT enrolments. 10 students for
VET IT in Year 11. 2 students for IT in Year 11. 10 students for Yr 12
Software Development in a school of 550. In 2009 we are unlikely to offer
SoftDev at Yr 12 for the first time in 20 years.
Tell me how we can get back to the purely academic, inquiry based approach
to teaching programming and retain our classes?
Reply:
I did write about the Enrolment issue on another thread but no one responded
- I think for starters we must develop a good analysis of why enrolments are
declining, without understanding the problem there won't be a good solution.
eg. I don't like approach of (only) saying "game maker is motivating, that
might fix the problem"
Here's the main bit:
Mark Guzdial (tertiary college, Georgia Tech, USA) has an analysis on his
blog which goes:
1) The main reason for declining enrollments are economic, the dot com
crash. Students are prepared to put up with a lot if they are going to make
a lot of $$ at the end of the road. But computer science is now tarnished
with respect to that.
This little stat is interesting - "more high school students now take the
Latin AP exam than the Computer Science AP exam" :-)
2) The secondary reason is that computing courses are seen as boring but
hard. ie. computing is seen as a dry data processing sort of thing (boring)
and the programming side of that is seen as hard. From Mark's perspective
and mine things can be done at this level but remember this is the secondary
reason, not the primary
Mark sees the declining enrollment crisis as an opportunity for curriculum
reform and they are developing new courses at Georgia Tech along those
lines. I wrote a blog recently containing lots of links to mark's blog
including links to how they are redesigning their courses. I think the
important point here is that they are looking at major integrated course
redesign not just adding something that is "fun" to what is already there.
cheers,
- Bill
On 9/19/07, Kevork Krozian <Kroset at novell1.fhc.vic.edu.au> wrote:
>
> Hi Bill,
>
> I am cross posting to IT Software Development here as there is a parallel
> thread evolving under [Programming Languages for 2008] .
>
>
> I feel I may be giving the wrong impression in some of the comments I have
> posted.
>
> Let me explain.
> Having left "formal" computer science in 1983, and having used 3G
> programming in teaching until around the late 80s I was forced to take on
> Non imperative programming in the early 90s as a requirement of the study
> design.
>
> Result: I picked up prolog and ran with it for about 5 years.
> Outcome for students: With so little time ( we also had to do an
> imperative langauge - Pascal ) the students could only fumble to reproduce
> something similar to what was in the learning.
>
> Forward to mid 90s. Prolog was thrown out and I had to pick up Visual
> Dbase.
> Outcome for students: Students also struggled with lack of time.
>
> Continue to 2000: Inspired by a colleague ( are you there Rob Ward ? ) I
> picked up Java using Borland's JBuilder. I called back an ex student who
> just finished his Ph D in Comp Sci and asked him what HE thought students
> should know by Years 11 and 12 and to "bridge the gap to Year 13" . We spent
> around 3 months devising a set of exercises and programming tasks.
>
> Here is what we covered in the "purist" academic sense:
> 1. Simple Data Types, primitives
> 2. Functions
> 3. User defined Objects
> 4. Arrays and Vectors
> 5. Text and Binary Files
> 6. User defined objects, methods, inheritance, encapsulation
> 7. A vector of user defined objects saved to binary files
> 7. OOP
>
> Outcome for students: They found it a struggle. Only the top end managed
> to survive due to a lack of time.
> Are you there Steven Baird ?
>
> In 2007 : We have moved to VB.NET in Yr 10, Python in Year 11 and PHP and
> MySQL in Year 12.
>
> The last time I felt "educationally pure" was when I did my Cisco CCNA
> Instructor Course a few years ago. It felt so good . I was at home.
> I can't wait to do my CCNP instructor.
>
> Another comment I made about VET ITwas that " as long as it works , the
> intellectual honesty doesn't matter" .
> Not competent ? An attitude of just redo it, who cares why it didn't work
> the first time. Keep doing it, and if you get it right eventually the
> teacher can tick you competent.
>
> Enrolment for 2008: Continuing decline in IT enrolments. 10 students for
> VET IT in Year 11. 2 students for IT in Year 11. 10 students for Yr 12
> Software Development in a school of 550. In 2009 we are unlikely to offer
> SoftDev at Yr 12 for the first time in 20 years.
>
> So Bill, Steven, Mark, Kent, Claudia, Maggie and others help me out.
> Tell me how we can get back to the purely academic, inquiry based approach
> to teaching programming and retain our classes?
>
>
> Best Wishes
> Kevork Krozian
> Edulists Creator and Administrator
> www.edulists.com.au
> kevork at edulists.com.au
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Bill Kerr
> To: Year 7 - 10 Information Technology Teachers' Mailing List
> Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 6:55 AM
> Subject: Re: [Yr7-10it] Scratch, Gamemaker, VB.net, Python,PHP and MySQL
> - Programming for all levels
>
>
> Hi Kevork,
>
> well I've tried for 2-3 days to resist responding but in the end I
> haven't been successful :-)
>
> the tipping point is that rob used the word "purist" too in the thread
> he started
>
> [quote from rob in other thread] -
> I feel a bit like I've found a combination of ICT and philosophical
> thinking that seems, in any given school, to be a minority (the "lets just
> use the stuff" approach / use some app with low entry and high graphics or
> communication payoff - seems to dominate. That whole tension is one I'd like
> to investigate - I'm not unsympathetic to that approach for lots of kids -
> gamemaker is a good hybrid between the two (purist vs ICT user)
> [/quote]
>
> that is one thing that intrigued me about your reply: that you used the
> word "purist" to describe what I described as an educational approach to
> the use of computers
>
> One aim is to try to get at your thinking behind this use of language
> and the other language we use wrt computers in schools (?)
>
> Initially the thinking behind teachers introducing game maker (to focus
> on that for a sec) was far from purist
>
> key words here would be - engagement, motivational
>
> advocates of game maker have been criticised for their lack of purity,
> for their capitulation to vulgar populism eg. see Kent's comments in this
> thread
>
> go back a few years and the educational flavour of the decade was logo
>
> key words here would be - epistemology or more accurately "genetic
> epistemology" (from Piaget) and papert invented a new one, "constructionism"
> (mmm ... not recognised by my spell checker, it has become a rare beast)
>
> these are difficult words but do have some sort of real basis in
> educational thinking - it's not really fair to describe this approach as
> purist
>
> some have argued and produced research studies that logo didn't work
> (eg. Roy Pea) in achieving its stated goals - but that's a big discussion
> really
>
> My point is about the language we use in describing computer use in
> schools - what I think is that this tends to reflect metaphors of the
> computer we have internalised
>
> I see this as -
> obstacles to introducing a child centered developmental approach to the
> use of computers in schools
>
> Maybe it's "idealist" in some way because the prevailing ethos is very
> much "some other way" - labels might include vocational, administrative,
> data management thinking, hardware / networking focus, VELS etc.
>
> I like rob's approach of exploring the tension b/w existing approaches
> but don't like the way rob has described the poles of the tension (purist vs
> ICT user)
>
> I'd prefer something like -
> educational versus vocational
> or
> epistemological versus instrumentalist
>
> "explore the tension" - good phrase rob
>
> Kevork, I liked this reality check from you -
> "if we are looking at what is the best programming language for children
> to learn in Period 1, and in Period 2 we are teaching students VET IT and
> what they need to go out and work in industry next year and the period after
> that we are teaching Cisco students how to set up a network in the "real"
> world through a simulated or school based problem then you will forgive my
> oversight if I stray into what is needed in industry as part of what they
> are doing. Maybe I am suffering VET fatigue."
>
> and there have been other such recent comments, eg
> "I don't have time to learn a new programming language"
>
> cheers,
> - Bill
>
>
> Kevork Krozian
> IT Manager , Forest Hill College
> k.krozian at fhc.vic.edu.au
> http://www.fhc.vic.edu.au
> Mobile: 0419 356 034
>
> _______________________________________________
> http://www.edulists.com.au - FAQ, resources, subscribe, unsubscribe
> Year 7 - 10 IT Mailing List kindly supported by
> http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au - Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority
> and
> http://www.vitta.org.au - VITTA Victorian Information Technology Teachers
> Association Inc
>
--
Bill Kerr
http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/
http://www.users.on.net/~billkerr/
skype: billkerr2006
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.edulists.com.au/pipermail/yr7-10it/attachments/20070919/05f3264f/attachment-0001.html
More information about the Yr7-10it
mailing list