Beginning today, September 2, we will start our online discussions. Although we will vary the format of these discussions throughout the semester, we will always work to use our discussions to connect the class readings to classroom experiences, as well to other resources in our field. My hope is that the discussions will serve to help students create the meaning around the readings and to relate the readings to their prior experiences (......as Bransford suggests is important!). I hope that students will ground their comments in the readings and begin to use the works of our authors to illustrate and expand thinking about technology use in classrooms.Papert's work creates a nice backdrop for our reflections on technology use. In 1980, Papert was almost a prophet of later technology use in schools and some of the challenges this use would create. One of my favorites quotes from Papert comes from the Introduction to Mindstorms: "In many schools today, the phrase "computer-aided-instruction" means making the computer teach the child.....in my vision, the child programs the computer and in doing so, both acquires a sense of mastery over a piece of the most modern and powerful technology and establishes an intimate contact with some of the deepest ideas from science, from mathematics and from the art of intellectual model building." Although Papert was talking about Logo here, his idea could also be useful in thinking about Web 2.0 uses of the computer in classrooms where students are building and creating blogs, wikis, videos, podcasts.....
Unfortunately, Seymour Papert was in a serious accident in Vietnam last year and is currently still recovering. He will always be remember, however, as the visionary who helped guide our early use of computers in classrooms.
For this week, I am hoping that students will begin to use readings to illustrate examples and vice versa. If we get off to a good start in this area, we will have a model for the rest of the semester. Evrim and I will be working to guide these initial discussions, without dominating them. We will see how it goes.
And the picture if of Seymour Papert!
9 comments:
Honestly, I would rather read Bransford and Richardson than Papert.
All the "math" talk gets confusing at times. I'm starting to get it though.
So much to do in such little time... gotta go plug away.
Could you explain the Web 2.0 terminology? I have not come across it as of yet (was it in the readings?) and was wondering what it was referencing. I would speculate that it refers to "modern" uses of technology such as wikis, blogs, podcasts, etc.
I would think controlling your learning environment as a student would do in logo and controlling a blog demonstrating your learning are close to the same thing. Many tools are available but I have not seen anything online that rivals the thought and problem solving invoked in me via logo.
Interesting that Bob would say that he felt most engaged by a program that seems to be quite old. I wonder what is out there to engage children in the same way. I also agree with Kim the math talk gets confusing for me, but I also know that the more I try to expose myself to it maybe the patterns will get easier to recognize. The Richardson book seems more practical because it talks about specifics of the read/write web. However, I do enjoy the philosophy of the Bransford book and his emphasis on research. The Papert book is a such a prophetic book for that time it's interesting to read.
Unlike Kim, I'd rather read Papert and Richardson. :-) I really like the "math" talk and reading the vision that Papert has for schools.
I understand that Papert's "math talk" can get a little detailed---especially in Chapter 3. Recall that you are reading for the big picture and his ideas about the STRUCTURE of Logo, not the details of variables and recursion.
Do we have a little bit of Papert's "mathophobia"?
Answer to coach:
Web 2.0 refers to the newer web tools that encourage users to contribute and create on the web rather than to just find information on the web. Wikis, blogs, podcasts, are all examples.
I also agree that Papert is a little much, at least for me. It seems like he takes a while to say something, I guess that would be the math talk. I do like the Richardson book though. Very interesting.
For Coach:
Visit Richardson's Webblogg-ed site or YouTube him; there is a 9 min video on him explaining Web 2.0.
Hope this helps.
Post a Comment