[Squeakland] Squeak 'non-starter' in [U.K.] schools?

[Nancy Head]

Here are a couple of strategies that maybe we can use to get Squeak into
more classrooms (including our own):

Strategy #1
Find areas of the curriculum that are already getting national attention and
piggyback on that. For those concerned with literacy, focus on ways to use
Squeak to target those goals. If the big concern is math, focus on that.

Some buzzwords in education are "multiple intelligences," "project-based
learning," can you think of others? Squeak directly addresses things that
classroom teachers are already trying to do.

Use the national curricula, media "hot topics" and professional "buzzwords"
as "hooks" on which to hang an argument for using Squeak locally.

Strategy #2
Arguments for computer science education are articulated in ACM's Draft K12
Model Curriculum (http://www.acm.org/education/k12/curriculum.html). Much of
this proposed US curriculum is based upon the Ontario, Canada, Curriculum
standards for Technological Education
(http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/document/curricul/secondary/grade1112/tech/tec
h.html). These standards can be referenced as to inform others of the value
of computer science education.

If not seen as valuable for everyone, maybe the public can begin to see that
K12 (general education age 5-18) schools are emphatically not meeting the
needs of the student "computer experts" (who often enter the university
lacking the skills they need to be successful in their chosen program of
study).


Perhaps others will be able to add to this list. The result might make a
nice addition to the squeakland site as a resource we can use in persuading
our local tech folks to allow Squeak to be loaded on computer systems, and
then in explaining to our curriculum folks how we're meeting required
curriculum standards with the tool.

Nancy

> -----Original Message-----
> From: squeakland-bounces at squeakland.org
> [mailto:squeakland-bounces at squeakland.org]On Behalf Of Darius Clarke
> Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2003 8:03 PM
>
> To say that "Squeak won't get taught" is like saying "books & magazines
> won't get taught", or "overhead projectors & transparencies won't get
> taught", or "surfing the web won't get taught". The same could be said
> of any teaching medium. The medium is not really ever _in_ the
> curriculum. More efficient use of the medium might be in it, such as
> video editing, library use, referencing magazines in bibliographies,
> etc. but not the medium themselves. Their use is already assumed.