Hi, John -
This is *so true*, and part of what makes "our job" that much more difficult. We can try to educate today's children to be in a better position to become teachers/mentors and adults tomorrow...but since today's teachers (adults in general) are often "victims of *their* education" they too remain mystified when it comes to ideas like "vectors". Many of today's adults never took a course in any physcial science, or as Alan likes to point out were never taugh mathematics, but only calculation. So, this does make it rough as you point out.
I will confess that *my* use of etoys and work in this area, has *finally* brought understanding to *me* of a few math and science concepts that remained "mysterious" until not so long ago. The good news with this experience is that I have personally seen how creating physcial models in this way can bring real learning. -- Kim
Hello Alan,
You hit it right on the mark with "vectors," but thinking back on it, the breakdown in communication may have been over the concepts themselves (despite claims to the contrary). I was discussing this with fellow computer club mentors and I seem to remember that even the illustrations you sent and your references to "weighing angle" and "'down track' forces" were greeted with blank looks. Without dwelling on this sad state of affairs, I simply want to point out that in "proselytizing" about Squeak we need to keep in mind that adults, even those in the biz, need the models just as much as kids; we can't assume an understanding even of simple math and physics.
Best,
J -----Original Message----- From: owner-squeakland@squeakland.org [mailto:owner-squeakland@squeakland.org]On Behalf Of Alan Kay Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 10:22 AM To: squeakland@squeakland.org Subject: RE: "All the Real Math To Which School (Including College) Refused Yo u Access."
Thanks John --
It would be great if you could list the "language stuff" that causes the glazing. Do you mean terms like "vectors"? What other terms are offputting? One of the reasons this stuff works so well with the kids is that they just do the models, we don't employ terminology with them.
Cheers,
Alan
At 8:29 PM -0400 4/16/03, John Voiklis wrote:
While I did not ask the original question, I thank you, Alan, for these helpful hints to the pendulum problem.
Getting back to the imagined book in the subject line and my earlier question about whether such a resource exists: the reaction I have gotten from all the people with whom I have shared this problem and the hints is that they can understand the concepts but not the terminology...at least in this instance, it is the language that makes their eyes glaze over. I don't present this as a criticism, but, as someone concerned with explaining such things to people, it is definitely an important observation; one at least that I should keep in mind.
Best,
John
--
--