<html><head><style type="text/css"><!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --></style></head><body><div style="font-family:times new roman,new york,times,serif;font-size:12pt"><div>That's a pretty funny comment. (I hope you were being humerous ...)<br><br>Cheers,<br><br>Alan<br></div><div style="font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif; font-size: 12pt;"><br><div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;"><font size="2" face="Tahoma"><hr size="1"><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">From:</span></b> David Farning <dfarning@sugarlabs.org><br><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">To:</span></b> Maria Droujkova <droujkova@gmail.com><br><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Cc:</span></b> Alan Kay <alan.nemo@yahoo.com>; K. K. Subramaniam <subbukk@gmail.com>; iaep@lists.sugarlabs.org<br><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Sent:</span></b> Wednesday, July 1, 2009 9:08:18 AM<br><b><span style="font-weight:
bold;">Subject:</span></b> Re: [IAEP] Comments on David Kokorowski, David Pritchard and "Mastering" Educational SW<br></font><br>
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 10:55 AM, Maria Droujkova<<a ymailto="mailto:droujkova@gmail.com" href="mailto:droujkova@gmail.com">droujkova@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 11:29 AM, Alan Kay <<a ymailto="mailto:alan.nemo@yahoo.com" 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>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<br><br>>><br>>><br>>> ________________________________<br>>> From: Maria Droujkova <<a
ymailto="mailto:droujkova@gmail.com" href="mailto:droujkova@gmail.com">droujkova@gmail.com</a>><br>>> To: Alan Kay <<a ymailto="mailto:alan.nemo@yahoo.com" href="mailto:alan.nemo@yahoo.com">alan.nemo@yahoo.com</a>><br>>> Cc: K. K. Subramaniam <<a ymailto="mailto:subbukk@gmail.com" href="mailto:subbukk@gmail.com">subbukk@gmail.com</a>>; <a ymailto="mailto:iaep@lists.sugarlabs.org" 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 ymailto="mailto:alan.nemo@yahoo.com" 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 ymailto="mailto:subbukk@gmail.com" 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><span>>> <a target="_blank" href="http://thisisindexed.com/">http://thisisindexed.com/</a>). What comes of it? When the 5yo math club members</span><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>>><br>>> Cheers,<br>>> Maria Droujkova<br>>><br>>> Make math your own, to make your own math.<br>>><br><span>>> <a target="_blank" href="http://www.naturalmath.com">http://www.naturalmath.com</a> social math site</span><br><span>>> <a target="_blank" href="http://groups.google.com/group/naturalmath">http://groups.google.com/group/naturalmath</a> subscribe now to discuss future</span><br>>> math
culture with parents, researchers and techies<br><span>>> <a target="_blank" href="http://www.phenixsolutions.com">http://www.phenixsolutions.com</a> empowering our innovations</span><br>>><br>>><br>><br>><br>> _______________________________________________<br>> IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)<br>> <a ymailto="mailto:IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org" href="mailto:IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org">IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org</a><br><span>> <a target="_blank" href="http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep">http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep</a></span><br>><br><br><br><br>-- <br>David Farning<br>Sugar Labs<br><a target="_blank" href="http://www.sugarlabs.org">www.sugarlabs.org</a><br></div></div></div><br>
</body></html>