Arun-Kumar Tripathi (tripathi@statistik.uni-dortmund.de)
Fri, 24 Sep 1999 04:09:35 +0200 (MET DST)
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 1999 04:09:35 +0200 (MET DST) From: Arun-Kumar Tripathi <tripathi@statistik.uni-dortmund.de> Subject: Re: 'The Role of Computer Programming in Education from Young Children to Doctoral Students' (fwd)
List address to send message to everyone: ifets-discuss@LISTSERV.READADP.COM
Details of current discussion: http://ifets.ieee.org/discussions/discuss.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear IFETS Forum and Dr. Kahn --Though late, I am sending the below
thoughts and concerns of Dr. Till who is an educator and computer
scientist regarding the questions and thoughts of Dr. Kahn's discussion's
paper. I would like to request Dr. Kinshuk to add the following comments
in the Post-discussion paper.
I would like to welcome any thoughts on the below from Dr. Kahn.
Below are some nice responses from Dr. Amnon Till in Isarel. Dr. Amnon
Till is my friend.
Thanks in advance.
Sincerely
Arun Tripathi
>
>Dear Dr. Till,
>Shalom,
>
>Your thoughts are welcome!!
>
>The 1960s saw the birth of Logo and Basic,
Logo was "born" on 80 or 81 at MIT labs by Prof. Papert who was among other
things a Psychologists & mathmatician & studied Psychology at Geneve Swiss
with Peaget. A friend of mine studied with him during 1968.
programming languages designed for use by all students. The idea was that
computer programming could play an integral part in all education.
Researchers began exploring how programming
could be integrated into courses on math, physics, biology, and engineering.
But it wasnw't only hard sciences and engineering: proponents of computer
programming wrote about how the study of history, foreign languages, art,
music, and much more could be enhanced by integrating computer programming.
Some research tried to explore how very young children (5 or 6 years old)
could benefit, while other research focussed on college-level math or
physics.
Such efforts continue today (e.g. www.logofoundation.org) but they peaked in
the mid-1980s and have been declining ever since.
My experience is the Logo is a great language but not good for young kids.
It is only between the age of 12-13 (Formal Thinking) that kids could
develop in Logo.
Recently, however, new programming languages and systems have been developed
with many of the same goals as Logo or Basic. These new languages are:
>
>1. ToonTalk (www.toontalk.com) an animated game-like world for
>constructing, debugging, and running concurrent programs.
>2. Stagecast Creator (www.stagecast.com) a grid-based graphical rewrite
>system for creating games and discrete simulations.
>3. LEGO Robotics Invention System and RoboLab (www.legomindstorms.com)
>two very different visual languages for controlling LEGO s motors, lights,
>sensors and other robotic components.
There is also an easier version of Logo for kids called Logo witer. I
translated their book into Hebrew. But now nobody is using this version for
Israeli kids anymore.
>4. K NEX TechnoLogica programming system
>(www.knexeducation.com/leonardo.html)
>a visual language for controlling K NEX s Leonardo Programmable computer
>control
>interface.
>
>Questions for discussion include:
>
>1. Was the original vision behind Logo (best articulated by Seymour Papert)
>flawed?
In Israel many people think the Logo is great but the vision flawed.
Or was the vision fine but the technology inadequate? Or were the problems
more societal and political?
There was in the past a lot of activited with Logo in Israeli schools. No
more. Kids are surfing & playing computer games & dealing with multimedia.
In a way it is a step backwards but maybe kids were not ready for studing a
computer language or there isn't an good kids computer language yet!!
>2. Why did interest in programming in school drop in the last 10 to 15
>years?
See the above comments. I was one of the pioneers in Isreal in teaching kids
Graphic Basic & Logo!!
>3. All of the new programming systems include many components to aid
>learning to master the programming language ranging from interactive
>tutorials to animated demos to quasi-intelligent guide or coach characters.
>Is this what was lacking before?
I do't know.
>4. All of the new languages are visual programming languages where text
>plays only a minor role. Will this make a significant difference?
No. I used to teach the Graphic arts of Logo & Basic.
>5. Some of the new languages (those from LEGO and K NEX) are specialized
>for robotics programming. Is this a good thing? Does this limit their
>scope?
Yes.
>6. Is computer programming just too difficult? For students? For teachers?
For teachers for sure. There was a lack of teachers who could teach those
languages to kids. For kids we still have to see if there are good computer
languges.
>Best Regards
Amnon
---------------------------------------------------------
Forum website: http://ifets.gmd.de/
Forum's contact person: kinshuk@ieee.org
Info on Join/Leave List: http://ifets.gmd.de/maillist.html
---------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Fri 24 Sep 1999 - 05:44:27 MEST