Re: [seul-edu] New-and-different approach to OSS in Education

[Manuel Gutierrez Algaba <algaba@gmx.net>]

El Dom 26 May 2002 03:53, escribió:
>
>     Have any of the schools on this list got their older children writing
>     and modifying software for each other and the younger children?
>

Hmmm, even some university students are unable to program, and just
interested in passing exams...

> One of the things which Western society lost with the demise of the
> one-room schoolhouse was a continuous and synergistic spectrum of knowledge
> and abilities. Older children would teach younger children, and in the

I was one year, when 7 years old in a one-room school, there were two rows of 
1st course, other 2 of 2nd ,... up to 8th.  We basically were isolated from 
all the courses, although of course, we could see their faces and hear them.

> teacher would. Everyone in the school would be learning to relate well with
> people of different ages and experience.

Students don't share knowledge about math, but football collectibles, games 
and insults... Generally speaking, people  share more meta-information or 
social information than pure technical information... regretfully or 
fortunately.

>
> This is one of the factors which puts homeschool students ahead, typically
> well ahead, of their institutional counterparts, 

Well, home is warm and friendly,... school may be full of hostile people, 
some with rifles, some followers of Steven Seagal... Great geniouses never 
went to school,  or got most of their education at home, Stanislav Lem comes 
to mind. School wastes half of its effort in day-to-day struggle and 
low-level violence( sometimes not so low). School is the cheapest way to 
educate children but not the most appropiate to human beings so soft and 
tender. 

> and I believe OSS has the
> potential to close that gap for at least some students.
>
> Another advantage touted - with good reason - for homeschooling is that the
> students are applying their learning to real problems in real-time and real
> life. Thoughtful use of OSS would also enable at least some students to
> employ their talents in similar real-world real-time situations.

Hmmm, in my opinion, which tends to be very mine, children are taught lexical 
analysis and syntactical analisys, that is , how to read, how to identify 
words, how to do basic maths, how to write properly "widout typos",... 
regretfully they're not taught semantical analysis, and pitifully children 
are full of "sema" ( of histories, knowledge, unstructured information) 
simply ready to be structured. Besides, in real life, you'll be requested to 
expose your ideas and to think in a structured way, to prepare understandable 
documents, with ideas that are well linked and supported,...

The best thing about programming is not the syntactical sugar, or the 
technical subtlies , how to access to a telnet port or how to fill an sparse 
array. The best thing is to see "ideas" moving. Any approach focused in 
"low-level" things or "low-level" languages is pretty bad.

And programming is real-life, real-world situation for a programmer, for a 
dentist is not.

>
> In bulleted form:
>
>  * The ability to start with a complete, working item of software to prod
>    and poke is of enormous benefit.

Hmmm, well, in my opinion, and it's my opinion again, most software is poorly 
written ( a good deal of mine  included, but at least I know it), most 
programmers are happy to "get the job done", which is good only for "getting 
the job done" and bad for the rest of things. Modular programming, clear 
design, comments, clear coding are the typical things that are missing in 
most of the programs you may face and that may make any youngster to loath 
programming in this life up to the fourth forecoming reencarnation. 

So, beware what you're feeding into a "tiny" mind... Try yourself to 
"understand" some programs,... even when reading a README file you may get 
some wonderful and marvellous surprises as the lack of information of what's 
THE PROGRAM FOR. hahaha  They say how to install  it but they don't say what 
is it. Ludicrous.

>
>  * The ability to contribute to a real, valuable project which will be
>    used by others worldwide is of incalculable motivational benefit.

In my opinion, which is active today, most software is worthless (some of 
mine included, again ), for a varied set of reasons: 

- duplication of effort, just think about the huge number of email clients,..
is it profitable any effort invested in a email client whose development is 
going to be interrupted in, let's say, 3 years...  How many email clients 
will survive ? which is the rate "birth/deaths"  in email programs ?
Which is the sector in which such effort would be longlasting ? emacs ?
Linux kernel ? hangman ? 

- unreachable effort, many many software is not known by its potential users

- coolness: some software is very interesting ( prolog interpreters, come to 
mind), but you know,... many people are just k00l . 

- outdated: (subcase of duplication effort)  somebody has done it better, 
bigger and sooner than you. 

>
>  * The potential for a student to enter the workforce with `coauthored
>    Xxx program, now in use on at least 20,000 sites worldwide' or
>    `designed artwork for Yyy system, now part of the official curriculum
>    in country, country and country' in place of `drove LOGO turtles
>    around' on their CV is worth...? (and: `the source is available for
>    inspection at http://www.gabblegabble.edu/~myname/').

Oh, well, let's say  that I've experienced that too. Incidentally, it happens 
that I am (or was) a good ( average at least)  python programmer , with lots 
of lines of code and lots of months of experience 0x1B months (more or less), 
well, I applied to some jobs in UK in python.... but regretfully, I'm 
Spanish, and my english is not native, so...
and even my GPL projects experience didn't help me to get a job, even when a 
company was doing intensive work in LaTeX , other of my (former) specialties.
My experience is that low wages and experience in the program ( version and 
subversion ) which uses the  employer to make money are the real KEYS.

Besides, making students to make program, you're incidentally, deviating them 
from more promising careers such dentist, cardiologist, or airplane pilot. 
Besides, programming will not an advantage/career in let's say 10 years. 

>
>  * The ability to have software, artwork and systems designed by people
>    who share significant context with the intended audience is priceless.

I can't understand this one.

>
>  * The ability of a school to generate their own real, useable software
>    as part of the curriculum is a real, hard saving that will delight
>    even the most unsympathetic cost accountant.

Children high-tech slavery ??? Teachers busy ? Cost saving for what ?
new weaponry ? higher wages for whom ? more investment in ads ? 

>
>  * The ability of a school to gain world reknown by publishing something
>    useful to all schools is unthinkably `cool' compared to the current
>    situation.

Well, this is one of the biggest lies of our times and a deep change in our 
lifestyles... We're constantly shown "the image of the winner": the best 
footballer, the best tennis player, the 15-year old genious that invented 
this or that programm, .... "WIN, WIN, WIN" say the chorus, media, family all 
alike.  The reality is that very few "win", 1%, 2%, 5% ? 
Can you seriously promise a class of 25 youngster that 3 of them will gain 
world recognisement ? No, you can't. Is reasonable to do such a big effort ?
Is the right thing to do with a teenager ? No, personal betterment, slow, 
steady, secure is what must be done at that age. 

>
>  * The impact on students of knowing that they can influence the systems
>    they use, rather than being a passive traveller through the process
>    is profound.

Being productive is nice,... washing the car is simpler. Modify the systems 
the use ? Yes, it's cool.  It may be interesting for "passive travellers", 
... just find them. 

>
>  * The ability to direct the energies of at least some students into
>    creative and worthwhile work instead of makework, fiction and
>    pointless exercises should have a directly measurable effect on
>    overall morale.

Well, fiction and object modelling are related. Fiction is nice. Pointless 
exercises ? Well, education is far from perfect. But, a pointless programm 
may be worse than a pointless exercise. If they like fiction and imagination, 
redirect such energies into game programming, or programms with a high 
profile of "knowledge" and "information" and a low profile of technicalities
(and other syntactic rubish) . 

>
>  * The lesson in sharing, making the whole pie bigger rather than working
>    to enlarge your slice - at least in principle at the expense of
>    others - is one not yet wholeheartedly taught and difficult to find a
>    more widely applicable means of expression for. This should be
>    singularly attractive to parochial schools.

This is true, GPL programming would have been a communist dream, pity that 
communist died in 1991,...hmmm, wait..... Linux 1991...
is Linux the reincarnation of communism in the age of information area ? 
Will linuxer be hunted by "patriot" microsofters ?

Well, back to serious speech,.... my experience, and it's mine, is that 
programmers tend to be lonely and selfish people, ... even in this share of 
effort lies a deep selfish thought: recognition and pride... 
Frankly speaking, other methods of sharing may be healthier in the long term.
Or at least, young programmers must be told what they may become  ( a Larry 
Wall or a John Ousterhout) if they don't control the "selfish" force ( I 
refuse to use the star-war-ish term "dark-side", we've had enough of that, 
haven't we ? ).

>
>  * The enormous range of already-working examples of software to start
>    from will suit all temperaments and preferences, and can in principle
>    be used with any student developed enough to understand the processes
>    involved.

Well, my opinion is that programming-like people is by itself a temperament 
and  the rest of temperaments are not suited for programming. 

>
>  * Through becoming involved in feedback, students can become useful
>    contributors from Grade 1.

Again, children slavery ? Let's the children be children. 

>
>  * Through contact with students in other places and cultures in the
>    natural course of collaboration, much real-life social studies will
>    happen en passant (although I foresee difficulty in grading this;
>    perhaps an RPL*-like process is appropriate).
>

That can be achieved without programming. 


>  * Skills potentially required in the natural course of designing,
>    building or modifying a software system include mathematics, logic,
>    art, language, dexterity/motor-skills, typing, spatials, negotiation,
>    scheduling, note-taking, trialling/scientific-method, name it.

hahaha, dexterity/motor-skills ??? do you mean TYPING ? hahaha
language ? do you mean: "this is kOOL 4 y ? lmo ,lfao, ..." ?
language , let them read classics, Homer (not the Simpson one) , Shakespeare, 
Mark Twain, Dostoievsky, Goethe,.... Bill Gates ( "How I cheated IBM  three 
times in 20 years" ).


>
>  * What can you see that I've missed...?

Yes,... all ?

>
> Cheers; Leon
>
>
> *RPL: Recognition of Prior Learning - formal accreditation validated by

Uffffff, I thought, it was a new language TO LEARN,... I can breath again. 

> simple tests or working examples rather than through a formal course with
> assignments, class attendance requirements et al.

Conclusion: let the children grasp the grapes of the programming, BUT make 
sure they don't eat too much , and that the grapes are not ....ROTTEN. 

----
MGA