| |
In lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc, tking@together.net (Terry King) writes:
> I will be teaching several 5th to 8th grade students how to build Lego-based
> Robots and how to program them in RcxCODE and NQC. We're located in Rural
> Vermont (!tm) in the NorthEast U.S.
>
> I was privileged to get to MindFest on Sunday at MIT, and although I'm sure I
> missed great stuff on Saturday, I was greatly encouraged and motivated by the
> energy and inventiveness all around me, and the dedication of people like Dave
> Baum and Michael Gasperi who went way out of their way to share their ideas
> and tools with others. And Seymour Papert motivated me, as he has over the
> years, to Do Something with young people and technology, with or without the
> welcome of the Educational System.
I was moved and motivated too -- and had a great time overall. (And I
didn't even get to see half of everything!)
> Here in Vermont, I have had a pretty good welcome from the local Educational
> System, even if I am an old Longhaired Engineer recently escaped from IBM.
> Actually, some of my best friends are (insert vilified minority), Educators
> and Principals, and so are some of my closest relatives. I've learned
> something about it over the years, and Yes, there is Something To Be Learned
> about teaching.
>
> At the Town Meeting concluding MindFest, it was mentioned, ruefully by some,
> that there had been no specific get-to-gether or discussion for 'Educators'.
> I feel that there are some unique interests, relevant information, and skills
> to be shared among adults who are working primarily with young people, and
> trying to enable youngsters to learn about technology and put it in a viable
> perspective.
Hmm, so there was no panel "by educators, for educators" to discuss
meta-topics? How about workshops?
I missed the "Robotics in the Classroom" panel 2:30-3:30 on Saturday. Did
anyone catch it? Richard Wright and Janis Kam & Jenni McNally were to be
among the panelists, and AFAIK they are "modern" educators.
Say, Terry, by any chance were you the person who, at the Town Meeting,
asked about the possibility of creating a MindFest group on LUGNET to
continue these sorts of discussions, etc.? (If not, does anyone know who
did ask that question?)
> MindFest probably just reflected Dr. Papert's disenchantment with the
> Educational System. I share much of his dislike of Education As It Is. I
> want to be part of Education As It Will Become. I know there are many people
> who share an enthusiasm for working with young people. MindFest had the
> strongest focus on what young people could do, and on enabling them to do it.
>
> But we NEED the collaboration and synergy and encouragement and comradeship of
> many people if we are to make more than a local one-school-at-a-time
> difference.
>
> I'm not an "Educator". I have too much of a mongrel "Educational" background,
> too many careers, too many credits in disparate areas, to qualify for that
> Title. But every job I've had since the day after I was 16 has had the word
> "Engineer" in it (Transmitter Engineer at WELI in New Haven, in the first
> case), so I'll stick with that. But I'd like to share with, steal from, and
> collaborate with other people who are working with, or want to work with,
> young people and technology.
>
> So, where should this discussion continue?? I do not find the group I have in
> mind on any current forum I know about. It's not really bit.listserv.edtech
> OR k12.ed.tech OR k12.ed.comp which are very Education oriented. It's not the
> broadbased comp.robotics.misc (although there is an occasional education
> question there). And there is no LUGNET group I see with "educat*" or
> "teach*" or "school" in it. So, how about:
>
> lugnet.robotics.teaching
>
> ??
OK, cool, now is a perfect time to return to this topic. The last time it
came up was in January:
http://www.lugnet.com/admin/general/?n=910
when Franz-Michael S. Mellbin proposed lugnet.robotics.education. Before
that, going back to the primordial ooze stage more than a year ago, a couple
of other possibilities under consideration were lugnet.off-topic.edu,
lugnet.robotics.edu, and just plain lugnet.edu -- but at the time, we
couldn't forsee any way that educators would ever show up on a primarily
LEGO focused site (that was before MindStorms was such a hit). The reason
for the abbreviation 'edu' rather than 'education', BTW, is to plan ahead
and leave room for potential growth into more subgroups someday. As an
abbreviation, it also has multiple meanings -- "educate," "educators,"
"education," "educational," "educating," etc.
> I'd like to see a fusion of Educators, Engineers, OldTime Hackers, Hobbiests,
> Kids and everyone who wants to learn stuff and then pass it along to others.
I think that would be majorly cool! And even if there weren't a whole mix
of different types of people, I think it still would be immensely helpful
for all the Richard Wrights and all the Janis & Jennys and Terry Kings of
the world simply to have a focused place to share thoughts and experiences.
(How come there aren't mailing lists or newsgroups for that already? Hmm.)
> PLEASE give me feedback!!!! :
>
> ISTHERE an existing Newsgroup or other facility that is close to doing this??
> ISTHERE a good reason to have this NOT on the LUGNET server, but elsewhere??
> ISTHERE a focus or perspective I'm missing??
(I can't answer those. Skipping...)
> ISTHIS .. , um, a Stupid Idea?? Why??
Aw heck no, not at all. Even if two or three or four people like yourself
were able to benefit from such a group, then it would be totally worth it.
> Take a look at the website my partner Mary Alice Osborne and I have at:
> http://homepages.together.net/~tking
> to get an idea of what we've BEEN doing..
I'm not really "qualified" to judge this, but I *love* your paper on
Computer Demolition! I wish I had had that sort of experience as a kid!
Interesting BTW that your pages are on together.net and not at your school.
Another sign that the tide is turning?
> I am heading in the MindStorms direction because it's the only way I can see
> to get a LOT of kids going on the same platform and share lots of ideas. I
> want to continue to promote reuse of Old Technology, and want kids to progress
> to making their OWN robots from MATERIALS they learn about, with TOOLS they
> learn about, with KNOWLEDGE they acquire. But this is a good place to start.
>
> Thanks for listening, and I REALLY want feedback!
I'm 100% for it -- except for the word "teaching." Here's why: I've always
thought of "teaching" as "instructing" or the "pushing" of knowledge, while
I've always thought of "learning" as the "discovering" or "pulling" of
knowledge. As much as I believe that people generally love to learn things,
I don't believe that people generally love to be "taught" things.
(Does that make any sense? Feel free to disagree!)
So, while from the teacher's point of view it might be said to be all about
finding new and better ways of teaching, I think what it's really all about
is actually finding new and better ways of enabling learning. And if the
combination of teaching and learning (both points of view) is educating or
the realm of education, then '.edu' seems like the right suffix to me.
The only question in my mind at this point would be where to put the group?
How many educators use LEGO but not robotics? (I know Richard Wright has
been using LEGO in his cirriculum for years -- long before MindStorms.)
What about a focused edu group for robotics and MindStorms, i.e.
lugnet.robotics.edu
and a more general, less-focused, "meta" group for the larger issues about
reforming education and all that, i.e.
lugnet.edu
How does that fit the bill?
--Todd
>
> Regards,
>
> Terry King ...In The Woods In Vermont
> http://homepages.together.net/~tking
> --
> Terry King ...In The Woods In Vermont
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
11 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
