Chapter+08+-+Computerists

Papert explains that computers were designed by mathematicians to perform complex calculations. They are viewed as hard, cold, calculating machines by most people outside of programming. Here is an example of how this book being written twenty years ago may be out of date. I don’t know if computers are viewed as so cold any more I know many people that just use the computer for fun. But he would like us to view the computer as “Tutor, Tutee, Tool” (p. 161). Most people will agree the computer can be a tutor, showing a problem and indicating if the response is correct or incorrect and repeating the process with increasing more difficult problems. Most will also agree that the computer is a tool, it is a word processor, a calculator, a simulator, etc. But most find it difficult to accept that the computer can be the tutee. How can we teach a computer? Is the programming he speaks of necessary now days? “School insists on the student being precisely right” (p.167), but our normal thinking is to be mostly wrong with a hint of rightness. We then observe the results, make corrections, observe the results, make further corrections until we are satisfied although personal satisfaction is relative and varies from individual to individual. “This kind of thinking is always vaguely right and vaguely wrong at the same time” (p. 167). A paradox not fully explored in schooling. To insist an exact rightness always is madness. I love the idea of working through a problem and slowly approaching what is going to work for me. This is a far more organic way of thinking then I see encouraged in school. The teaching problem is determining where in this process the person is and what advice is needed. Computers are a great way to allow ‘testing’ of the results and correction and retesting.T.D.

I would agree with Trista in this section, that I'm not sure the programming that Papert speaks of is really necessary anymore. It is definitely necessary for students wishing to get into programming. But the field of computers is so widespread that it would be impossible to include all aspects of "computing" like programming when considering learning how to use a computer. The computer has become more of the avenue for learning than what needs to be learned in and of itself. If you want to learn about dinosaurs -- use the computer for research, simulations, data gathering, etc.

Papert talks about a boy who, through trial and error, gets a computerized turtle to walk in a circle. Essentially, the boy is programming the computer and by doing so is having to do problem solving and higher order thinking. However, I think there are many other things, other than programming, that can be done with or without a computer to tap into this type of knowledge and foster its progress. Programs are so user friendly today, and I think that the more intuitive the program, the better it is. We don't need to be programmers, but rather than feeling like the computer is doing it for us, it allows us to think more deeply about the subject which we are researching or reporting on and we can use the computer as a tool in order to manipulate that knowledge into meaningful displays.

Papert talks about the early computer culture in the hard and analytic shape that for most peopole remains even today snonymous with the word computer. I wonder how he thinks about today's computer culture compared to when he wrote the book 20 years ago. Does it differ between then and now as much as it did from the invention of the computer to Papert's writing? He talks about the mathematical culture in which prescise calcualtion plays the dominant role and the technical and anlytic have more weight than the intuitive and the experiential -- and we have moved more and more in that direction since the writing of this book.

-Carol

_

I would agree with both of you that this chapter had little relevance to our computer in education now days. We don't spend time programming computers, we spend time playing games and navigating the internet. I had a lot of troble reading this chapter and the next chapter because I couldn't find the relevence and it seemed slow to read. Due to the troubles I had connecting with this chapter I don't have much to say about it. We need to use computers to make learning meaningful and use technology for higher level thinking, but building programs is nolonger how we do this. ~MK.

This chapter is a historical look at computers and the dominant style of thinking that computer culture first gave us. Papert also traces some of the first departures from that first dominant computer culture where we move from computers used to program students to students programing computers. Papert also goes on to make a distinction between instruction and learning. I can instruct all I want, but learning takes place more deeply when students are more engaged in the project.

When Papert wrote about "relationships" and the need for students to make connections with a subject. This line of thought is similar to a lot of the writing in the literacy field. In that realm there is lots of writing about "transactions" between learner and the material, and Papert seemed to making the same argument here. A student isn't deficient, he just hasn't developed a relationship between the new material and his existing fiels of knowledge.

As with many of his chapters, Papert is not a fan of schools who want one-dimensional "right" answers from students. He seems much more attracted to putting students in situations where they can use computers to be "playful" and creative in learning about the subjects we feel are important.

I wonder if Papert feels there is a "core" of knowledge or skills that students ought to have and beyond that we ought to free students to explore what subjects most interest them.