[Yr7-10it] Scratch, Gamemaker, VB.net, Python, PHP and MySQL - Programming for all levels

[Bill Kerr]

hi rob,

I see what you mean by breadth (eg. web2.0 apps) versus depth (eg. look
under the hood be it programming, RDB or internal architecture of a
computer)

Its worth pointing out that many of the early pioneers of "computing
science" - such as Engelbart, Kay - saw things differently. They thought
that computers could be use by children for:
- amplification of human reach
- expression of the creative spirit
- as a medium for self development, not just a tool

This was a vision of PC use in which the user was also seen as designer and
developer, that the distinction you draw and which is "natural' to draw
today b/w breadth and depth would be overcome through the sort of machines
and software that computers could become.

That early software is still available today (squeak / etoys) and has been
updated to incorporate developments that happened later such as logo, the
www, spreadsheets, hypercard etc.

Also the whole issue of combined optimal hardware and software development
is continuing through the OLPC and the NSF grant: Steps towards the
reinvention of programming
http://irbseminars.intel-research.net/AlanKayNSF.pdf

So, the final words in this story have yet to be written

The distinction b/w end-users and designers/engineers more or less did not
even exist in the early days of computing. It came along later with
commercialisation and development of a marketable commodity that required a
clear definition of the end user as a user of clearly defined applications

We can visualise the "user" as also a co-designer and developer, or,
(different vision) visualise the "end user" for which a "user friendly"
system has been designed by an "expert" (in which not too much is demanded
of the user)

Computing could have developed in the former way. And for education/learning
it seems to me to be the way to go.

Some have commented that it is hard to get started on learning squeak /
etoys because it is so different from conventional systems. This is because
it was designed with very different goals in mind to the user friendly apps
which dominate the desktop today. (more of a difference than a difficulty)

John Maxwell's history of the dynabook explains these distinctions in more
detail
http://thinkubator.ccsp.sfu.ca/Dynabook/dissertation
Ch 4 and 5 for those who don't have time to read the whole thing

The people who invented the PC and GUI had a very different vision of how
computers should be used with children to the way we use them today in
nearly all schools

cheers
- Bill
-- 
Bill Kerr
http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/


On 9/19/07, Costello, Rob R <Costello.Rob.R at edumail.vic.gov.au> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Bill and all
>
> I agree "purist vs ICT user" is not quite the right polarity - it felt a
> little loose when I used it. Let me try again by substituting it with
> "breadth vs depth".
>
> My feeling - and I gather its been well discussed in this forum - is
> that "ICT" is increasingly being colonised by a "competent user"
> (breadth) approach
>
> (breadth = competent user = teach kids how to blog, use wikis, use other
> web2.0 tools, teach them some sort of critical literacy in this domain,
> how to be productive users of software apps.  In this view ICT is an
> interdisciplinary, facilitating thing that crops up in every other
> discipline. ICT as a stand alone discipline is seen as "old school" from
> this angle - when you only touched a computer in a lab and used for
> programming)
>
> Whereas a "depth" approach = IT as a technical discipline in its own
> right - relating to computer science and programming, parallel
> complexity to say maths - but maybe more engaging for some. Set kids on
> a path where they might learn how to build their own software. ICT
> deserves to be treated as a discipline in its own right from this angle
> - and programming is an essential key to innovation, control and
> customisation of software
>
> That was kind of polarity I had in my head when I said "purist vs ict
> user" - (not really meaning "purist" as a strict computer science
> approach versus a less rigorous programming approach - but whether its
> worth broaching programming at all)
>
> I would still see Gamemaker as rather hybrid - more towards the "depth"
> end , since it does build some programming skill - but enough appeal to
> compete against the breadth approaches. (and with big jump into the
> coding side, it does allow you to also go deep - though I suspect the
> jump is not too easy)
>
> I'm wired towards defending programming as a worthy pursuit
>
> But I can see that ICT as breadth also has merit - it does fit well as
> an enabling tool in all disciplines
>
> Too much depth - like forcing quadratics on every kid for the sake of
> the few who ever manage to use that skill
>
> But removing programming - like removing higher maths since its too dry
>
> (and I wonder if that might be less of a problem in todays economy, than
> losing programming)
>
> Given VELS is meant to encourage depth, and remove the "breadth" of
> superficial coverage of half digested material, its maybe ironic its
> used (maybe improperly) to suggest the "depth" approaches to ICT are
> outdated
>
> Cheers
>
> Rob
> PS I read this in digest mode, so sorry if truncating the subject made
> it tricky to follow for those who use email threads properly
>
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   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
>
> Important - This email and any attachments may be confidential. If
> received in error, please contact us and delete all copies. Before opening
> or using attachments check them for viruses and defects. Regardless of any
> loss, damage or consequence, whether caused by the negligence of the sender
> or not, resulting directly or indirectly from the use of any attached files
> our liability is limited to resupplying any affected attachments. Any
> representations or opinions expressed are those of the individual sender,
> and not necessarily those of the Department of Education and Early Childhood
> Development.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.edulists.com.au/pipermail/yr7-10it/attachments/20070922/488929d9/attachment.html