[Its.an.education.project] From Piaget

[forster at ozonline.com.au]

Bill wrote
> This is why constructionism doesn't scale (yet) - or is dependent on a
> teacher being there who realises that what is obvious and common sense to
> them is not obvious or common sense to children. And then finds ways to
> spend time discussing and experimenting with these common sense notions with
> children - rather than just assuming that everyone "gets it". 

Bill
You have moved from questioning what constructionism might be to ascribing a single cause for its not scaling.

The best test that constructionism has had is Logo. Maybe it failed to scale because Logo was too hard. Maybe it failed because it was too foreign. It certainly seemed to fail at the level of enthusiasts teaching teachers who teach students. Maybe the missing element was ordinary teachers lack of understanding of what children found hard. But it could have been the tool (Logo) not being suitable. It could have been the system not recognising success when it happened.

Tony