4 ms·

Schools should teach Lego and such mechanics in particular as mandatory classes. Starting from first year with increasing complexity. Of course alongside class

by larodi 2y ago

Schools should teach Lego and such mechanics in particular as mandatory classes. Starting from first year with increasing complexity. Of course alongside classes for graph networks and their applications.

meristohm 2y ago
Counterpoint (from the perspective of a science teacher who has used LEGO as part of teaching, and who still has about 70 pounds of LEGO): LEGO pieces reinforce "blocky" engineer mindset, reinforcing the idea that we can "fix" climate change with technology. We're up against a population boom enabled by access to fossil fuels. Our nigh-insatiable appetite for energy conversion has serious consequences for life on earth. I'd far rather teach basketry & other fiber arts, foraging for food & medicine, land stewardship, how to hunt kill and process animals for food, and other primitive (using this word non-pejoratively) skills done as a tight-knot group (such as what a classroom can be with good leadership- not saying I provided that to the degree I value now, but if/when I go back to teaching, I will). LEGO is a distraction, a luxury enabled by the Industrial Revolution. We don't have plastic interlocking bricks without coal and petroleum and long (and easily-disrupted) supply chain. Until a few years ago my LEGO collection, amassed in childhood, was a prized possession. Now I'd have sold it or given it away were it not for my wife advising we keep it for our child. In light of what I wrote above, while I can get down on the ground and immerse myself in creative parallel play, I'll also promote the old ways to plant the seeds of a wonderful, effortful, meaningful life that also has a more down-to-earth carbon footprint.
- bigstrat2003 2y ago
  Climate change is not a reason to not enjoy Legos. Life is for enjoying, not for worrying about whether one's hobby is environmentally friendly enough.

by larodi 2y ago

meristohm 2y ago

Counterpoint (from the perspective of a science teacher who has used LEGO as part of teaching, and who still has about 70 pounds of LEGO): LEGO pieces reinforce "blocky" engineer mindset, reinforcing the idea that we can "fix" climate change with technology. We're up against a population boom enabled by access to fossil fuels. Our nigh-insatiable appetite for energy conversion has serious consequences for life on earth. I'd far rather teach basketry & other fiber arts, foraging for food & medicine, land stewardship, how to hunt kill and process animals for food, and other primitive (using this word non-pejoratively) skills done as a tight-knot group (such as what a classroom can be with good leadership- not saying I provided that to the degree I value now, but if/when I go back to teaching, I will). LEGO is a distraction, a luxury enabled by the Industrial Revolution. We don't have plastic interlocking bricks without coal and petroleum and long (and easily-disrupted) supply chain. Until a few years ago my LEGO collection, amassed in childhood, was a prized possession. Now I'd have sold it or given it away were it not for my wife advising we keep it for our child. In light of what I wrote above, while I can get down on the ground and immerse myself in creative parallel play, I'll also promote the old ways to plant the seeds of a wonderful, effortful, meaningful life that also has a more down-to-earth carbon footprint.

bigstrat2003 2y ago
Climate change is not a reason to not enjoy Legos. Life is for enjoying, not for worrying about whether one's hobby is environmentally friendly enough.