<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 12:08 PM, David Farning <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dfarning@sugarlabs.org">dfarning@sugarlabs.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="im">On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 10:55 AM, Maria Droujkova<<a href="mailto:droujkova@gmail.com">droujkova@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 11:29 AM, Alan Kay <<a href="mailto:alan.nemo@yahoo.com">alan.nemo@yahoo.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> In theory, teachers are supposed to be a critical pool of significant<br>
>> adults, especially for the fields -- such as math and science -- in which<br>
>> most parents are not adept or interested. In the US, this is unfortunately<br>
>> also the case for most elementary school teachers, and (way too) many middle<br>
>> and high school teachers.<br>
>><br>
>> Serious "juvenile" science fiction stories and novels -- not TV or movies<br>
>> -- in the 40s and 50s were a great alternative. For example, those by<br>
>> Heinlein, Asimov, Clark, etc.<br>
>><br>
>> Cheers,<br>
>><br>
>> Alan<br>
><br>
> Juvenile science fiction and fantasy has been increasingly moving from<br>
> technology focus to social and psychological topics. What kids read now is<br>
> much more likely to be about touch moral choices than about fancy future<br>
> technologies. This may be a part of the general lack of math in juvenile<br>
> cultures, including social web sites.<br>
><br>
> MariaD<br>
<br>
</div>While this is an interesting topic. It is getting pretty far from the<br>
goals of Sugar Labs, to create and promote a learning platform.<br>
<br>
There are numerous forums for discussing education theory. This<br>
particular forum, and project, are geared toward turning those<br>
theories into activites and content which can used, tested, and<br>
assessed in classrooms.<br>
<br>
thanks<br>
david</blockquote><div><br>David,<br><br>Here are particular project connections for me. I have three related ones, and I am searching for ways to support them on this platform. Discussions help me think of the ways. Apologies about not sharing the connections earlier.<br>
<br>- "My young apprentice" is a framework for kids forging connections with professionals during micro-apprenticeships, while creating shareable media on a social platform.<br>- "Math 2.0" is a topic I am investigating at the moment, which includes looking at larger society trends surrounding math-rich media. What math content is naturally created and shared by kids with kids? It used to be sci-fi, but not as much anymore. Some multi-player games are promising.<br>
- Just today I had a conversation with a parent of a 3yo about larger meaning of some of our Early Algebra activities. Understanding immediate importance (rather than 12 years down the road, as Subbu said) of deep thinking is a crucial piece of activity adoption by parents and teachers. If this understanding is "packaged" with activities, they have much higher chances of surviving beyond the lab where they are developed.<br>
<br><br><br><br clear="all">Cheers,<br>MariaD<br><br>
<br><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5">
>> ________________________________<br>
>> From: Maria Droujkova <<a href="mailto:droujkova@gmail.com">droujkova@gmail.com</a>><br>
>> To: Alan Kay <<a href="mailto:alan.nemo@yahoo.com">alan.nemo@yahoo.com</a>><br>
>> Cc: K. K. Subramaniam <<a href="mailto:subbukk@gmail.com">subbukk@gmail.com</a>>; <a href="mailto:iaep@lists.sugarlabs.org">iaep@lists.sugarlabs.org</a><br>
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 1, 2009 8:18:34 AM<br>
>> Subject: Re: [IAEP] Comments on David Kokorowski, David Pritchard and<br>
>> "Mastering" Educational SW<br>
>><br>
>> On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 11:33 PM, Alan Kay<<a href="mailto:alan.nemo@yahoo.com">alan.nemo@yahoo.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>> > When I get together with other scientists, at some point I ask them how<br>
>> > they<br>
>> > got started. For most, it wasn't because of school, but because of<br>
>> > direct<br>
>> > contact with adults, often a relative who was a scientist, and some of<br>
>> > the<br>
>> > older generation got into it from reading the classic science fiction<br>
>> > stories of the 40s and 50s. (This is not a scientific survey, heh heh,<br>
>> > but<br>
>> > it would be interesting to see the results of one.)<br>
>><br>
>> I have seen results of more formal studies about the subject in several<br>
>> different areas. One of most notable areas is "survival": success stories of<br>
>> people who grew up with serious adversity, such as parental abuse or extreme<br>
>> poverty. Almost universally, people who were able to make it name<br>
>> "significant adults" as the key difference in their life.<br>
>><br>
>> I conducted some interviews at two summer camps, one for keeping girls on<br>
>> the fast math track, and another for underrepresented minorities. I asked<br>
>> kids about their decisions for college, future career, and current math and<br>
>> science activities. Personal adult friends or relatives came up as the main<br>
>> factor in these interviews.<br>
>><br>
>> My daughter is working on a parent-child-professional coop called "My<br>
>> young apprentice" for helping kids meet adults for micro-apprenticeships and<br>
>> possibly longer-term contact. It's crucial for, well, everything pretty<br>
>> much.<br>
>><br>
>> > ________________________________<br>
>> > From: K. K. Subramaniam <<a href="mailto:subbukk@gmail.com">subbukk@gmail.com</a>><br>
>> ><br>
>> > On Tuesday 30 Jun 2009 11:23:24 pm Alan Kay wrote:<br>
>> >> what is more interesting is how well certain ways of thinking work<br>
>> >> in finding strong models of phenomena compared to others.<br>
>> > This is the part that interests me too ...<br>
>> >> So, if we get<br>
>> >> pneumonia, there are lots of paradigms to choose from, but I'm betting<br>
>> >> that<br>
>> >> most will choose the one that knows how to find out about bacteria and<br>
>> >> how<br>
>> >> to make antibiotics.<br>
>> > ... and this is where I get stuck ;-), particularly in the context of<br>
>> > school<br>
>> > education (first 12 years). Unlike the 3Rs, thinking processes have no<br>
>> > external<br>
>> > manifestation that parents/teachers can monitor, assess or assist. The<br>
>> > economic value of deep thinking is not realized until many years later.<br>
>> > The<br>
>> > latency between 'input' and 'output' can be as large as 12 years and<br>
>> > 'evaluation' of output may stretch into decades!<br>
>><br>
>> I beg to differ here, Subbu. Any time you do any sort of meaningful<br>
>> project with a person of any age, deep thinking manifests itself most<br>
>> strikingly. Here are some household examples:<br>
>><br>
>> - Deep idea: random events. A toddler pushes a pet bunny off a high place.<br>
>> The mother says that unlike kittens, rabbits can break their legs this way,<br>
>> but the toddler thinks since it did not happen this once, it won't ever<br>
>> happen. The mother takes a glass outside and rolls it down the stairs,<br>
>> several times. It breaks at fourth roll. Toddler experiments with breakable<br>
>> objects more to explore the idea of "sometimes." They keep discussing this<br>
>> big idea of "sometimes" and experimenting. A few years down the road, the<br>
>> mother relates to the kid how this guy was saying, "I smoked all my life and<br>
>> I am fine" - and they laugh at it, together. Probability and statistics<br>
>> comes in later still. Meanwhile, the bunny's safe, and a whole host of<br>
>> dangers that happens "sometimes" are easy to communicate to the toddler.<br>
>><br>
>> - Deep tool: graphs. Several kids play with graphs qualitatively (a-la<br>
>> <a href="http://thisisindexed.com/" target="_blank">http://thisisindexed.com/</a>). What comes of it? When the 5yo math club members<br>
>> yell too loud, the leader makes a "yelling graph" kids follow up and down in<br>
>> volume, as it's being drawn, thereby obtaining control. When a 10yo<br>
>> experiences a strange math anxiety, she draws a graph of her mood vs.<br>
>> problem solving events, and analyzes it for possible patterns. When a tween<br>
>> and teen group discusses game design, they compare learning curves for apps<br>
>> and games they know and make design decisions correspondingly.<br>
>><br>
>> - Deep collective reasoning: kites. A 3-5 Reggio Emilia group decides to<br>
>> make kites together. Adults provide books and supplies, kids work on<br>
>> patterns and sketch and photograph their ideas. It takes listening and<br>
>> coordinating; their peacekeepers of the day resolve conflicts. Kites change<br>
>> from day to day, becoming increasingly complex.<br>
<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>