[squeak-dev] Dynabook concept, critic view

Hilaire hilaire at drgeo.eu
Fri Jul 20 08:41:28 UTC 2018

Hi Dave,

Regarding the teachers, you are right they were involved :) I used Etoys
with students too, and wrote Dr. Geo for it and some other small Etoys
controllable artifacts.

What I have in mind in this latter writing is a different form of
teacher oriented support/care/attention.

By teacher support, I think about contents artifacts a teacher can use
to directly support her/his teaching, whatever the used *teaching
model*. Etoys is very constructivism oriented and I think it restrains
too much its use case. Sometime the teacher just want to demo a concept
with a computerized simulation - as it can be done in geometry with
Dr.Geo. Computerized models/micro-world like theses are very
useful/practical to teacher, to quickly set up a demo or an activity. If
it takes too much time to set up such activities, most teachers will not
do it. Some other time, a teacher may just want to build quickly a drill
activity with embarked computerized model/simulation.

All this kind of support were missing in Etoys, because Etoys is
children oriented, not teacher oriented. This is roughly what I mean in
my article conclusion. I planned to elaborate more on other writings.

Years ago (around 2010) I exposed very briefly this position to the
Etoys fellows. But I was then occupied by other activities.



Le 19/07/2018 à 18:58, David T. Lewis a écrit :
> Regarding teachers, I had the impression that teachers were very active
> and involved in the Etoys project. I recall from that mailing list
> (http://lists.squeakland.org/pipermail/etoys-dev/) that much of the
> discussions came from teachers, and the people doing development seemed
> to be focused on supporting them. Maybe someone who was involved in the
> project can comment further, but that was my impression.

Dr. Geo

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list