Turkle and Papert

http://www.papert.org/articles/EpistemologicalPluralism.html

... a "revaluation of the concrete."

Our central thesis is that equal access to even the most basic elements of computation requires an epistemological pluralism, accepting the validity of multiple ways of knowing and thinking.

Challenges to the hegemony of the abstract, formal, and logical as the privileged canon in scientific thought: 

- from feminist scholarship

- from social scientists who have undermined the privileged status of canonical ways of knowing through their studies of scientific and mathematical practice.

- from within computation ... Computers provide a context for the development of concrete thinking. When we look at particular cases of individuals programming computers, we see a concrete and personal approach to materials that runs into conflict with established ways of doing things within the computer culture. The practice of computing provides support for a pluralism that is denied by its social construction.

Since the prevailing image of the computer is that of a logical machine, and since programming is seen as a technical and mathematical activity, the existence of anything but an analytic approach in this area makes a dramatic argument for pluralism. But the computer's most specific contribution to the critique of canonical styles depends on something more fundamental. The computer stands betwixt and between the world of formal systems and physical things; it has the ability to make the abstract concrete. In the simplest case, an object moving on a computer screen might be defined by the most formal of rules and so be like a construct in pure mathematics; but at the same time it is visible, almost tangible, and allows a sense of direct manipulation that only the encultured mathematician can feel in traditional formal systems (see Davis & Hersh, 1981; Papert, 1980a). The computer has a theoretical vocation: to bring the philosophical down to earth.



so much to agree with, written with a style that I couldn't emulate

Slogan: The computer is an expressive medium that different people can make their own in their own way.

A radically new conception of computing is required to liberate this.

The hard science of computing is not a success story when it comes to the development of programs - nor is the attempt to complement this story with a soft-er science of software engineering, human factors, AI

epistemological issue


Lisa wants to manipulate computer language the way she works with words as she writes a poem. There, she says, she "feels her way from one word to another," sculpting the whole. When she writes poetry, Lisa experiences language as transparent; she knows where all the elements are at every point in the development of her ideas. She wants her relationship to computer language to be similarly transparent.

can you write poetry in logic - only by abusing logic
using a knife as a feather

profound conceptual mismatch - not enough to say that practical computing makes the abstract concrete - the fundamental discourse associated with computing does not support these aspects (notwithstanding HCI etc I argue  that it gives virtually no support)

why: because in poetry we are concerned first and foremost with the word as an experience, with its presence, and this has primacy over thoughts of abstract meaning and function

we only understand computers as "things that execute", as state-changing devices, not with respect to their role as sources of experience

link to black-boxing or using prepackaged programs:

A classmate, Robin, is a pianist. Robin explains that she masters her music by perfecting the smallest "little bits of pieces" and then building up. She cannot progress until she understands the details of each small part. Robin is happiest when she uses this tried and true method with the computer, playing with small computational elements as though they were notes or musical phrases.

not the scale of the bits I wish to emphasise: it is the dwelling in state as prior to the elaboration and exploration of behaviour

disclaimer re Bett

Olley as quoted in the Guardian Link document

http://education.guardian.co.uk/link/story/0,,2221088,00.html

The best maths software, in the hands of good teachers, is capable of overturning all the old "I hate maths" prejudices. It does this not just with attractive, animated presentation, but by showing some killer features.

It will show movement - so an angle, for example, is revealed as a measure of rotation. It will help personalisation by being tailored to individual needs and abilities. And perhaps most importantly, it'll be responsive to creative thinking: a child can change a number, or move a line, to see what the effect is on everything else. Chris Olley, of Education Interactive, who teaches mathematics to PGCE students at King's College, London, would like teachers to be seeking that kind of "dynamic" software. "By that I mean software that does mathematical things in an open-ended way, promoting mathematical conversations."

Consider the difference between explicitly programming a computer to make the dynamic connections, and conceiving programs in terms of such dynamic connections. Dependency as a given, but also as primary - prior to function.

Web 2.0 perception of how software will develop
	
science and computing

computer games "New tech industry with old tech habits":

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2007/feb/22/games.shopping

episodic gaming: The problem is, the traditional 18 month production schedule is burned deeply into the culture of development. A more level, less stressful approach is needed to sustain an episodic release routine. 

It's incredible really, that an industry so dependent on reacting to new technology can be so entrenched when it comes to distribution models and key launch periods. Change will come from left field - some bright spark with a crazy new way of getting games to people. Until then, it's back to launch titles, film tie-ins and retro remakes for us all.

Explanation in terms of a problem with the technology itself, rooted in a conceptual mismatch


conflict between perception of what is possible and what is conceptually endorsed by computer science

	implications for education and CS/ICT
	Papert - "magic"



Imagine Logo + dependency

spreadsheets: Baker and Sugden



sudoku?



bubblesort in procedural and definitive form

how teacher might exploit

- mathematical conversation

- consider what a program does in contrast

- constructed meaning

	blending of the teacher, learner and developer agendas

	subtlety within the interaction and interpretation
	
- possibilities of modelling misunderstandings etc

- essential importance of the concrete artefact - and of its character

- future work: interface - but what Sherry Turkle's women might have handled far better 



constructivist computing


--------------------------

Dewey

freshess of experience - incorporating contingent info, new each now

Erlkoenig --> Wedding March

dependencies in the EK model

