1 / 13

The Beautiful Story of Logo

The Beautiful Story of Logo. Papert (1980) Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. How to approach the topic. Programming Learning by design ConstrucTIVEism ConstrucTIONism Robotics “learning without curriculum” Effects WITH versus effect OF (Soloman, Perkin & Gloverson).

palila
Download Presentation

The Beautiful Story of Logo

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Beautiful Story of Logo Papert (1980) Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas

  2. How to approach the topic • Programming • Learning by design • ConstrucTIVEism • ConstrucTIONism • Robotics • “learning without curriculum” • Effects WITH versus effect OF (Soloman, Perkin & Gloverson)

  3. Papert’s Claims • Logo provides nurturing environment for cognitive development. • Logo increases student delight in learning. • Logo allows students to create microworlds for studying math and science concepts.

  4. What is Logo? • Lisp-like language. • Capable of recursion and structured programming (modular or procedural). • Contrast with object-oriented • Turtle graphics embedded. • Usable by pre-school to college.

  5. The story unfolds: Teachers adopt Logo, believing... • Logo will promote math problem solving. • Logo makes students more interested. • Logo will improve math & science test scores.

  6. The problem • Discovery WITH Logo vs effects OF learning the Logo language. • Teaching WITH Logo vs. teaching ABOUT Logo. • Over-scaffolding learning vs. allowing discovery and “subversive learning.”

  7. The answer? • Controlled research studies of Logo • Teach a student Logo…. See if they are better problem solvers or score higher on math tests.

  8. The problem (revisited) • When done near MIT.. It works. • When done elsewhere.. Not so much.

  9. The answer (part #2) • Papert rejects research as “technocentric” thinking. • Paper argues the DVs should be about the “culture of learning” not about individual achievement.

  10. The problem (anew) • Educators attack Papert and reject Logo as just programming. • Important philosophical and measurement concerns go unaddressed.

  11. The answer (Part #3) • Lego to the rescue. • Robot programming with Logo-like language. • 40-minute, bite-sized units created for classroom use. • Lego simplifies and reduces the Logo Language. (accommodating education) • Teacher easily integrate the lessons into their curriculum.

  12. The problem (again) • Logo pulls out saying the materials do not promote the kind of learning Logo was designed for. • Issues of philosophy and measurement remain unresolved.

  13. Moral?

More Related