4 ms·

I was trying to be careful not to do that, and you'll see that I didn't. So long as we're not in conflict it's okay, and certainly Scratch is more than cats and

by unabst 10y ago

I was trying to be careful not to do that, and you'll see that I didn't. So long as we're not in conflict it's okay, and certainly Scratch is more than cats and barns. But my point remains that cats and barns could be interpreted as "fun because they're kids" since no CS prof in their right mind would teach students that way at, say, MIT. Maybe robots. The problem isn't with teachers who teach the magic of computers with cats and barns. It's with the teachers who confuse the fun with cats and barns and underplay the real magic, which then leads the students to be confused and unimpressed as well. Whenever I saw educational games as a child I'd immediately sense the "adults intent to entertain" through boring characters and ugly art. Now, that isn't to discredit their effort, but when you're a kid obsessed with Super Mario Brothers, it's tough competition. Needless to say, educational NES/Famicon games did not fair well on the market. Everyone loved Mario.

kevhito 10y ago
Yes, perhaps I was being a bit unfair. However, bad teachers will always be with us, and won't start teaching the magic of computers just because you give them a c64 or basic. They'll just make kids write endless employee pay calculator programs and other drudgery. I do agree with your general sentiment about the transparency of "intent to entertain". But I really don't see it with scratch. There's a silly cat on the front page, and comic-book logos. But 5 minutes after first being introduced to that, kids are already looking at Griffpatch's latest multi-player cloud-based platformer, or the cool 3d render program, or the interactive fractal, or the simulated ice-cream shop factory, then 5 minutes later they are staring at code trying to figure out how they did it so they can make their own. Really. On the frontpage right now, the top-featured studio (i.e. a collective hacking club) is called "Lindenmayer Systems!" [1], showing their latest L-system fractal fern generator [2]. I really don't see a lot of "forcefully tailored" entertainment here. Just a site filled with projects made by kids and adults on a huge range of topics, from lipstick, fashion and silly greeting cards, to mathematical and engineering. Incidentally, I'm assuming you know scratch was designed at MIT, and many aspects were deliberately designed to teach advanced concepts. And that it has, in fact, been used in college classrooms (Harvard [2], others I believe). Still, I contend that my kids with no formal CS education have a far better concept of an abstract data type because of scratch sprites, and this has carried over very naturally to other languages (Java objects, smalltalk message passing, etc.). [1]: https://scratch.mit.edu/studios/1677151/ https://scratch.mit.edu/studios/1677151/ [2]: https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/1318150/#editor https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/1318150/#editor [3]: http://paradox1x.org/2011/11/introducing-programming-in-college-with-scratch/ http://paradox1x.org/2011/11/introducing-programming-in-coll...
- unabst 10y ago
  Yes, made at MIT for kids, not students. Building Scratch was the assignment, and it was probably a lot of fun. I in no way wish to discredit the efforts of those who use and maintain Scratch. The only meaningful point I might add would be that kids love to compete with adults. They want the real thing. Of course, most can't handle the real thing, so we give them what we think they can handle. Except, for the smart kids, the bar is always too low because it has to be adjusted for the averages. So they feel like they're being treated like kids, and that their intelligence is being undermined, and they may even feel discriminated against. Basically, they don't think of themselves as kids. We the adults think of them as kids. Not that they aren't kids of course, but we should never limit their intelligence based on what we think they can handle. It's a shame modern video games are so complex and cinematic. To Scratch's credit, here is mario: https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/31583772/#editor https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/31583772/#editor and: https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/71455048/ https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/71455048/

by unabst 10y ago

kevhito 10y ago

Yes, perhaps I was being a bit unfair. However, bad teachers will always be with us, and won't start teaching the magic of computers just because you give them a c64 or basic. They'll just make kids write endless employee pay calculator programs and other drudgery. I do agree with your general sentiment about the transparency of "intent to entertain". But I really don't see it with scratch. There's a silly cat on the front page, and comic-book logos. But 5 minutes after first being introduced to that, kids are already looking at Griffpatch's latest multi-player cloud-based platformer, or the cool 3d render program, or the interactive fractal, or the simulated ice-cream shop factory, then 5 minutes later they are staring at code trying to figure out how they did it so they can make their own. Really. On the frontpage right now, the top-featured studio (i.e. a collective hacking club) is called "Lindenmayer Systems!" [1], showing their latest L-system fractal fern generator [2]. I really don't see a lot of "forcefully tailored" entertainment here. Just a site filled with projects made by kids and adults on a huge range of topics, from lipstick, fashion and silly greeting cards, to mathematical and engineering. Incidentally, I'm assuming you know scratch was designed at MIT, and many aspects were deliberately designed to teach advanced concepts. And that it has, in fact, been used in college classrooms (Harvard [2], others I believe). Still, I contend that my kids with no formal CS education have a far better concept of an abstract data type because of scratch sprites, and this has carried over very naturally to other languages (Java objects, smalltalk message passing, etc.). [1]: https://scratch.mit.edu/studios/1677151/ https://scratch.mit.edu/studios/1677151/ [2]: https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/1318150/#editor https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/1318150/#editor [3]: http://paradox1x.org/2011/11/introducing-programming-in-college-with-scratch/ http://paradox1x.org/2011/11/introducing-programming-in-coll...

unabst 10y ago
Yes, made at MIT for kids, not students. Building Scratch was the assignment, and it was probably a lot of fun. I in no way wish to discredit the efforts of those who use and maintain Scratch. The only meaningful point I might add would be that kids love to compete with adults. They want the real thing. Of course, most can't handle the real thing, so we give them what we think they can handle. Except, for the smart kids, the bar is always too low because it has to be adjusted for the averages. So they feel like they're being treated like kids, and that their intelligence is being undermined, and they may even feel discriminated against. Basically, they don't think of themselves as kids. We the adults think of them as kids. Not that they aren't kids of course, but we should never limit their intelligence based on what we think they can handle. It's a shame modern video games are so complex and cinematic. To Scratch's credit, here is mario: https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/31583772/#editor https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/31583772/#editor and: https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/71455048/ https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/71455048/