3 ms·

Well I just finished reading a book: Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas ...which I found my self saying "yes" to out loud while reading it.

Well I just finished reading a book: Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas ...which I found my self saying "yes" to out loud while reading it. It's premise is that people can learn better when there is an aspect they can interact with, and computers can provide simulated environments in which to explore concepts. Some of the examples given are younger kids exploring ideas in differential geometry through the use of turtle graphics. It is hard to get across in a small snippet of text, but I kept thinking that was how I wanted to be taught back in school. You compare how kids are self motivated to learn complex tasks like walking, talking, etc. but lose a lot of motivation when required to memorize dull facts about the interior angles of triangle. There's not a lot of concrete actionable items here, other than getting that book, and maybe downloading a Logo interpreter to play with. I've just started to work with teaching my own kids programming, so I don't have a lot of advice at this point, but I hope the book is as inspirational to you, as it was to me. https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=mindstorms:+children+computers+powerful+ideas https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=mindstorms:+children+co...

hcarvalhoalves 12y ago
> You compare how kids are self motivated to learn complex tasks like walking, talking, etc. but lose a lot of motivation when required to memorize dull facts about the interior angles of triangle. Funny you mention this. I remember being taught the sum of the internal angles, the pythagorean theorem and other facts by folding paper triangles.
germinalphrase 12y ago
Seymour Papert is a big name in Constructivist learning circles and "Mindstorms" is, indeed, a great text. Constructivist learning can work wonderfully for motivated learners, but it can run into problems with low-motivation/maturity and/or a results-oriented school system (which we have in the US). In the US, students are expected to know/be able to perform a variety of standards-based tasks when they finish each grade. Constructivist learning is typically too exploratory and inefficient for these standards to be reliably fulfilled for every student within a definite period of time (and, as we know, teachers are expected to get every child over the line regardless of interest/ability/stability). Whether or not the learning is authentic, meaningful, long-lasting is besides the point - teachers are incentivized by standards-based testing to focus specifically and efficiently on those limited topics/skills. Accordingly, you are more likely to see this style of learning in the earlier grades (simply because the expectations/rigor are different for primary vs secondary ed. with the former having a stronger focus on social-emotional learning than the latter) - but most often it springs out of informal learning environments (like home, after school clubs, camps, etc.). Constructivism is great if you're trying to foster creativity, self-management, and teamwork.

hcarvalhoalves 12y ago

> You compare how kids are self motivated to learn complex tasks like walking, talking, etc. but lose a lot of motivation when required to memorize dull facts about the interior angles of triangle. Funny you mention this. I remember being taught the sum of the internal angles, the pythagorean theorem and other facts by folding paper triangles.

germinalphrase 12y ago

Seymour Papert is a big name in Constructivist learning circles and "Mindstorms" is, indeed, a great text. Constructivist learning can work wonderfully for motivated learners, but it can run into problems with low-motivation/maturity and/or a results-oriented school system (which we have in the US). In the US, students are expected to know/be able to perform a variety of standards-based tasks when they finish each grade. Constructivist learning is typically too exploratory and inefficient for these standards to be reliably fulfilled for every student within a definite period of time (and, as we know, teachers are expected to get every child over the line regardless of interest/ability/stability). Whether or not the learning is authentic, meaningful, long-lasting is besides the point - teachers are incentivized by standards-based testing to focus specifically and efficiently on those limited topics/skills. Accordingly, you are more likely to see this style of learning in the earlier grades (simply because the expectations/rigor are different for primary vs secondary ed. with the former having a stronger focus on social-emotional learning than the latter) - but most often it springs out of informal learning environments (like home, after school clubs, camps, etc.). Constructivism is great if you're trying to foster creativity, self-management, and teamwork.