On 27 Jun 2006 at 4:30, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I always viewed Logo as a means to introduce programming within
> > Logo's environment ... but not really practical outside of this
> > (unlike Python). I may have been prejudiced due to ignorance there.
>
> I don't think Papert is interested at all in Logo as a "language"
> but only as a possible vehicule for the maths and exploration
> concepts behind it (to produce "hard-fun" "tools to think with"/
> microworlds / differential/kinesthesic approach, etc ). That's
> why I think it could have a great future with Python inside the
> "turtles" concepts.
I'm guessing that you are correct in this. Papert has never shown
much interest in Logo as a language. I've only seen him write to
the LogoForum once (a couple of weeks ago) and in the OLPC project
he is not pushing for Logo in it, but has started a section in the
wiki called "Learning learning".
Daniel
_______________________________________________ Edu-sig mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
