Contra logo clasico, en pro de MicroWorlds (y Squeak)

> "Why then should computers in schools be confined to 
> computing the sum of the squares of the first twenty-odd 
> numbers and similar so-called problem solving uses? Why not 
> use them to produce some action? There is no better reason 
> than the intellectual timidity of the 
> computers-in-education community, which seems remarkably 
> reluctant to use the computers for any purpose that fails 
> to look very much like something that has been taught in 
> schools for the past centuries."
> (Papert and Solomon. 1972)
>
> More than twenty years later, in the introduction to the 
> second edition of Mindstorms , Papert expresses his concern 
> that "programming had become structured to meet the 
> conditions of work in school, leading many to question 
> whether programming was worth the trouble." Papert also 
> supports my argument that neither the designer use of Logo 
> was to remain static. He describes the development of Logo 
> from "Classic Logo" through LogoWriter and LEGO TC logo to 
> MicroWorlds by stating that "each of these steps lowered 
> the effort of learning to program and raised the interest 
> and complexity of what could be done with a given level of 
> skill." (Papert. 1993) Who could argue with that?


http://gsep.pepperdine.edu/~gstager/classiclogo.html


Daniel

_______________________________________________
GLEDUCAR mailing list
[email protected]
http://listas.lunix.com.ar/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gleducar