John,

I don't have specific references you seek, and am not
really against computer modeling, but I have myself
been questioning the role of computers in education
in general. I think there are studies related to the
negative effects of certain kinds of computer learning,
likely for younger kids like elementary through high
school. My brother teaches elementary and uses
computers a lot and sometimes he says kids that can
do well on the computers can't do well in other arenas.
This suggests to me that the context of learning is
important and that if the computer does too much to
make the context rare, special, glitzy, "inter-active" in
bad ways (providing graphics and multiple choice,
walking kids through by the hand, spoon feeding, like
TV almost, taking away the creative and struggle
and internal work parts) - then the learning may be
dependent on that specialized computer context and
may not be transferable or "embodied" via true
mastery.

Most of this would be moot in a typical undergrad
class where computers and/or computer modeling
are only one part, since the other parts would create
a more general and rich context. But I thought I
would mention it.

Beyond that I think it important to examine that
computers themselves are not sustainable. Thus I
am reluctant to invest lots of blood, sweat and tears
into them for any purpose, as I don't think they will
be here, in this same form, in 100 or 1000 years.
Without an open-ended evolutionary future they
seem a dead-end to me, and I want to contribute to
aspects of science and culture and education that
can "live long and prosper". This is a highly biased
view and also minority view. I think it interesting to
imagine modeling systems that *are* sustainable
over the very long term (i.e., run on renewable
energy and recycling materials, like all life systems).
Such self-examination could perhaps add a neat,
complex, self-reflexive element to computer modeling
- could we model our own modeling process? Where
would computer ecological modeling fit in to an
ecosystem model of a town or university in terms of
energy, materials, information stocks and fluxes and
transformations? Can computer modeling pay its
way, justify its own existence, more than
compensate for what it consumes and degrades?

Some thoughts...

Dan Fiscus

John Petersen wrote:

>Back in September of ’05 I sent out an announcement about a conference 
>at Oberlin College that would focus on the role of computation and 
>modeling in the undergraduate curriculum. I was very interested when 
>several colleagues responded on this list-serve expressing a rather 
>negative view regarding the value of teaching modeling to 
>undergraduates. To summarize, the arguments seemed to focus on the 
>notion that the development of specialized and technical computer skills 
>involved in modeling represents a counterproductive distraction. Has 
>anyone seen this argument made anywhere in any literature? I would 
>greatly appreciate references to papers or book chapters that adopt this 
>view or otherwise criticize the value of modeling education for 
>undergraduates. Beyond that I would appreciate suggestions for 
>literature that takes any position on the pedagogical role of modeling 
>in the undergraduate curriculum.
>
>Thanks!
>John Petersen
>Associate Professor of Environmental Studies and Biology
>Oberlin College
>
>
>  
>

Reply via email to