I'm not sure what is meant by a "big tent" Why do some people want a big tent for learning theory but not a big tent which accepts both FOSS and proprietary software? Phrasing it that way is intended to encourage people to think about what sort of thing is learning and hopefully will not be interpreted as just being provocative for its own sake. you can have a big tent where people don't discuss learning theory because it's too hard to reach agreement you can have a big tent where people passionately argue about learning theory but actually listen to what each is saying and argue rationally when I look at minsky's theory of mind I see that he supports multiple models of thinking but also argues against models of thinking that he thinks are incorrect or which emphasise only one way of doing things, eg. although he helped create connectionism he now thinks it has too much influence that suggests another version of a big tent which I favour - cherry picking the best parts out of different learning theories / activities based on criteria (not stated here) that are substantial I don't believe that thinking people are agnostic about how people learn it seems to me that alan kay has presented a possibly strategic view of progress on these questions (that learning about bricks will not automatically lead to building arches, that we need more than just focusing on building blocks) - but that for various reasons we are not in a position to implement the learning materials based on that view in practice in the activities for me to sit in the big tent holding a strategic view feels different to "too hard basket", agnosticism or a tower of babble - teaching with an underlying strategic view is very different to just going along with the tide that would mean work to understand and implement that strategic view but also accept that we are not there yet (it will take some time) and so it is perfectably understandable and desirable that people will use and develop whatever is at hand or which they think important to develop - no one can stop that anyway accept by successful arguing someone out of a POV Does the "big tent" phrase add clarity to this conversation? <div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 4:59 PM, Martin Langhoff <<a href="mailto:martin.langhoff@gmail.com">martin.langhoff@gmail.com</a>> wrote: <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 Tue, May 5, 2009 at 3:03 AM, Walter Bender <<a href="mailto:walter.bender@gmail.com">walter.bender@gmail.com</a>> wrote: > Fair enough. I agree that *most* people on the list agree that there > is not just one right way. And to use a metaphor that has been > oft-spoken in the US news of late, Sugar Labs has to have a "big > tent." > > Sugar itself has affordances that can be used in support of many > educational approaches and virtually any content area. </div>Completely for the big tent, and wide ranging use models. It also means I have to swallow hard when people use things I build in ways that I consider... not particularly good. You might hear me mention that "that's a practise that I don't emphasize" ;-) cheers, m -- <a href="mailto:martin.langhoff@gmail.com">martin.langhoff@gmail.com</a> <a href="mailto:martin@laptop.org">martin@laptop.org</a> -- School Server Architect - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first - <a href="http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff" target="_blank">http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff</a> </blockquote></div>