[Squeakland] Panel discussion: Can the American Mind be Opened?
forster at ozonline.com.au
Wed Nov 21 15:41:06 PST 2007
> However, beyond such material, I get thoroughly confused by an
> inability to distinguish proven knowledge, accepted wisdom, and pure
> pseudo-science. It seems that a lot of educational research is done
> by anecdote rather than by controlled blind large group studies.
Thanks Mark for initiating this thread. There needs to be more discussion of
the pedagogy so that Squeak/etoys can be optimised as a learning tool.
For more criticism of Constructivism/ionism you could also read (though I
strongly support constructionism):
http://scil.stanford.edu/about/staff/bios/PDF/Cog_Effects_Prog (will open
ON THE COGNITIVE EFFECTS OF LEARNING COMPUTER PROGRAMMING
ROY D. PEA and D. MIDIAN KURLAND
Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the
Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and
Inquiry-Based Teaching Paul A. Kirschner
Controlled blind large studies are rarely done. This is because the lab
rabbits are real kids and there are real ethical concerns. We are stuck with
anecdote and assertion for the large part. We need to critically examine all
this, as there is little hard evidence.
It would be good if we could examine the large amount of teaching with Game
Maker. It has been used back to 2002 and, at least in Australia, there are
hundreds of schools using it. The pedagogy of Game Maker and etoys is
similar. This large body of data has never been properly examined because it
is just ad hoc use by teachers which has never been attached to a university
More information about the Squeakland