> differences. First, drawing with a drawing program involves using a
> mouse. A mouse is a rather blunt instrument. Six-year-olds can draw
> with it, but what they produce looks like what a three-year-old could
> do with a crayon. Still, we print it out and make a fuss over it as if
> it were better than anything they could do themselves with actual art
> supplies. I'd rather have my kids learn that what they create with
> their own hands is worthwhile in its own right. I'd also rather have
> young children working with three-dimensional, physical art supplies
> that have texture. But that's just me.

I'm not an artist but I have opposing thoughts on this.  On the one hand,
I can't draw without a computer.  I can do SOME visual art with a
computer.  On the other hand you are correct about using the computer
prematurely, I believe that you will better develop a young child's sense
of art using real tools instead of virtual tools.  Art has evolved from
the primitive need to imitate real life - most artists, whether they are
realists or abstract artists, draw on <i>experience</i>, thus working with
real materials creates experience whereas computers don't create that
understanding.
> But during my school tours last year, I found that computer use is not
> left up to the teachers. Computer time is a scheduled part of the week,
> whether or not the teacher has an academic objective that s/he believes
> can be best achieved with computers.

Well, this is part of an overall problem of trying to dictate curriculum
from too high a level.  If that were possible, the computers would BE the
teachers.
>
> if its newness makes it better. Some new software is useful, but much
> of it isn't, and you can't really tell until you've bought it and sunk
> The other thing that bothered me during school tours was that so many
> principals sounded like sales reps for software companies.

The educational environment imitates corporate life... See Dilbert for
more information.
>
> And about teaching programming: I tried to teach programming in Basic
> to third graders, believing it was a neat idea. It was a complete waste
> of time. They don't think that way yet. I think in setting policy, we
> have to bear in mind that children really are children, and that they
> have developmental stages.

Well, granted - if you are responding to an earlier post of mine, I was
really thinking about high school or better.  Besides, BASIC is pretty
limited.  It would be interesting to try your experiment again with an
object-oriented language and really robust component library. - Heck, try
using Lego mindstorms, you'll accomplish a similar objective with
potentially interesting effects.

_______________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls

Reply via email to