ivan said: <div style="margin-left: 40px;">As far as I know, there is no real study anywhere that demonstrates constructionism works at scale. There is no documented moderate-scale constructionist learning pilot that has been convincingly successful; when Nicholas points to "decades of work by Seymour Papert, Alan Kay, and Jean Piaget", he's talking about theory. </div> <div class="gmail_quote">javier responded: <div style="margin-left: 40px;"> I agree.  But... there is a huge place to test how construccionism has work in the last 8 years: Peru. </div> I think ivan's challenge here is important - why hasn't constructionism scaled? - but the proper foundations to have that discussion still have to be made - in terms of what is it and its history ivan's history is v selective (Senegal, Project Headlight and then a "fast forward" NN's Kampuchea experiment) Javier's response does not help to clarify the meaning of constructionism. eg. in my state (South Australia) the official department curriculum is described as "social constructivist" but that is just jargon for fuzzy process skills delivered in obscure language (edu-speak). Without further detail the information from javier that "8 years ago (aproximately) the peruvian goverment decide to follow the construccionist method for the education" doesn't mean very much. The particularly point I'd contradict ivan on is his use of the word "theory" in the above quote. The work of Seymour Papert, Alan Kay, and Jean Piaget includes a lot of theory *and* practice. Some very good PhD studies, supervised by Papert and others, did come out of the Media Lab. eg. the Instructional Design Software Project by Idit Harel was one outstanding contribution to educational theory and practice. Work such as this did have a big influence in Australia, it became the framework of some schools here (eg. Methodist Ladies College circa 1990 - there are other examples) Ivan has made a valid point about constructionism not yet scaling but I'd seek clarification on his use of the word "theory" There are a number of issues arising that could be dealt with more fully: <ul><li>a more detailed and fair history</li><li>the need to clarify what constructionism actually is (it is not just making and doing) </li><li>discussion of the scaling issue</li></ul>Seymour Papert said consistently that logo and constructionism would challenge traditional School and it was inevitable that School would fight back against this intruder. In that sense "failure" has to be seen in the wider social context and the particular learning paradigms that battle it out daily in School. From what I have observed in Australia it works fine with an informed teacher in a protected niche situation but for whole school change inspired leadership at the admin level is required (usually not forthcoming and often when the leadership changes the innovation collapses). ie. significant transformation (scaling) is not easy without ongoing systemic support In general these sorts of questions keep coming up and won't go away - as we move closer to the actualisation of one laptop per child, ie. the decreasing cost keeps putting the question forward -- if we achieve immersion then what software, learning environments and computer usage become optimal. (applies to industrialised countries too) -- Bill Kerr <a href="http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/">http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/</a> On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 12:07 PM, <a href="mailto:info@olpc-peru.info">info@olpc-peru.info</a> <<a href="mailto:info@olpc-peru.info">info@olpc-peru.info</a>> wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Ivan et al, Just giving you plain info. In your essay you tell us... "As far as I know, there is no real study anywhere that demonstrates constructionism works at scale." I agree.  But... there is a huge place to test how construccionism has work in the last 8 years: Peru. Las weekend I have been talking with my sister in law and another friend, both are teachers and have small kids in the school.  One of them teach in top high school (rich schools) and the other in public schools (poor schools).  Both told me the next: 8 years ago (aproximately) the peruvian goverment decide to follow the construccionist method for the education (here is as easy as one person in charge deciding this or that... then the whole system will move in that sense).  They (the teachers) got order to take a special course about "new education methods" that was basically construccionism.  The course was obligatory.  Both teachers are from the coast and for the coast area (I don't have information about Andean teachers... but I suppose it must be the same because the education is managed as a whole system... it shouldn't be... but.. it is!). I can continue telling about all the questions that I have ask them (to my sister in law and other teacher) but it was a long 4 hours conversation and, of course, was not a scientific or statistical study.  I don't have very clear IF the construccionism has bring good or bad for the teachers in Peru, but at least a huge group of peruvian teachers know what it is and they have been, in some way, trained to use it in the classroom. Knowing my country, and knowing my own people, I can guess that the theories of construccionism has not been well taught, deeply learned, or are in full use in my country.  But... a statiscal work (taking aleatory data) could be done. The bad news are that our authorities take an exam (about general knowledge) to 180,000 teachers.  Just 2,100 aproved the examination with the minimum qualification (11 points over a total of 20) and just 140 aproved with a note of 14 or more (over the 20 maximum points).  So any study about construccionism should take note the "base" over what you are trying to develop construccionism.  It can sound hard but I need to give you all the information (good or bad) so serious studies can be develop taken in account all the sides and happenings. Best regards, Javier Rodriguez Lima, Peru Ivan Krstić wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c"> On May 13, 2008, at 9:46 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> Just make sure you read all the way through before trying to understand it. I needed to read it through twice as he is a very angry person and his anger seems to go at a lot of targets.. </blockquote> Do you feel that particular points were not properly supported or explained in the essay? -- Ivan Krstić <<a href="mailto:krstic@solarsail.hcs.harvard.edu" target="_blank">krstic@solarsail.hcs.harvard.edu</a>> | <a href="http://radian.org" target="_blank">http://radian.org</a> _______________________________________________ Its.an.education.project mailing list <a href="mailto:Its.an.education.project@tema.lo-res.org" target="_blank">Its.an.education.project@tema.lo-res.org</a> <a href="http://lists.lo-res.org/mailman/listinfo/its.an.education.project" target="_blank">http://lists.lo-res.org/mailman/listinfo/its.an.education.project</a> </div></div> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.16/1430 - Release Date: 5/13/2008 7:31 AM   </blockquote><div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c"> _______________________________________________ Its.an.education.project mailing list <a href="mailto:Its.an.education.project@tema.lo-res.org" target="_blank">Its.an.education.project@tema.lo-res.org</a> <a href="http://lists.lo-res.org/mailman/listinfo/its.an.education.project" target="_blank">http://lists.lo-res.org/mailman/listinfo/its.an.education.project</a> </div></div></blockquote></div>