JamNation: jam2jam resources and briefs for Network Jamming
Reality Check about laptops and learning
The following comes from a response/ rant I did to an article Andrew Brown sent about criticism about OLPC. My response is simply based on observing my daughters experiences with technologies in our lives. Its a rant but I think raises some questions about children, teachers and technology use.
Reality check - this from a strident critic of the OLPC project as it
now stand, who used to work for it and did see it meeting its rhetoric.
"There are three key problems in one-to-one computer programs:
choosing a suitable device, getting it to children, and using it to
create sustainable learning and teaching experiences. They're listed
in order of exponentially increasing difficulty . . . As for the last
key problem, transforming laptops into learning is a non-trivial leap
of logic, and one that remains inadequately explained. No, we don't
know that it'll work, especially not without teachers. And that's okay
— the way to find out whether it works might well be by trying . . .
As far as I know, there is no real study anywhere that demonstrates
constructionism works at scale. There is no documented moderate-scale
constructionist learning pilot that has been convincingly successful;
when Nicholas points to "decades of work by Seymour Papert, Alan Kay,
and Jean Piaget", he's talking about theory."
Source: http://radian.org/notebook/sic-transit-gloria-laptopi
Ring true more broadly I think, we need to have an answer for the
network jamming project so we can succeed where MIT Media Lab failed
(a few times if you count Logo s well - to be skeptical for a moment).
Response
Just thinking in a more Heideggerian/Piagetian way about the laptop. When Bridie encounters other technologies in her life where she makes things for example:
Sewing machine
Machine presents itself as being focused on sewing fabric.
Intrinsic pleasure of making something aesthetically pleasing to you and perhaps useful.
Bridie had lessons on how to cut patterns set up the machine and sew total 2 x 6 hours training from a dress designer.
Now she uses the same patterns and makes dresses and tops for her friends within the boundaries of the patterns offered self directed. She also mixes tops and bottoms up to be creative within the pattern book limitations. She has not reached the point of needing or wanting more patterns as the range of basic styles and endless amount of fabric designs are sufficient at this stage. Also she hasn’t a need for more technique just yet either.
Techniques: measuring, cutting out, sewing maintenance, unpicking, different fabric settings and stitches.
Coloured Pencils
Pencils present themselves as a technology with an embedded history of practice in childhood and adulthood.
Not obvious tho’ what they are used for to a Martian maybe???? Or a 2 year old until shown the basic functions and introduced to paper. Some creative children use other surfaces i.e. walls. Intrinsic pleasure of gesture resulting in colour and shape.
Relationship with pencils grows over time between functional representation and aesthetic. At the root is still the intrinsic pleasure of making something that is aesthetic or functional or both.
Some we learn thru instruction others thru exploring (modes of engagement).
Bridie combines sewing machine ideas with drawing ideas as she has an image of herself as a fashion designer and draws and copies dress designs. Her handwriting reached a functional level but is not as advanced as her free form thinking with pencils. Perhaps teacher/school judgment had an influence there.
Macbook
Presents itself as open but having known desirable functions: iTunes, MSN, iMovie, DVD player, email (only a bit more direct real time communication seems more important). Word processing, drawing programs only to assemble stuff (hand drawing is more immediate and organic), the internet/ firefox browser is the most used function by far. Used for information latest Simpson’s online- immediacy is important. Didn’t get into scratch doesn’t really engage with jam2jam.
So using a limited example of one privileged child
1) Choosing a suitable device.
To an extent she does the choosing and then sustainability of engagement depends on expressive range and success. I think in personal social and cultural ways. It is because she can get off on it solo doing it with friends and share the product with friends. Even though’ I chose the laptop she chooses which functions are important and she will use mainly because of the relational aspects of it.
2) Getting it to children.
Well that was my choice after seeing how bad school choice was I decide to get a playground that suited my daughters personality and needs. We choose computers in institutions without asking children all the time. Bride wanted a macbook and chose a black one. At primary school she was only taught powerpoint because that’s all the teachers knew how to use. She does however use powerpoint quite well and creatively. Maybe that’s an angle we can use in the idea of generative performance. Frightening I know.
So the getting it to children is economic on one hand and about familiarity for teachers on the other. Teachers do teach sewing and drawing because of a history of it. Powerpoint is a slide metaphor that is familiar so behaviour is modified and mediated not changed and expectation is almost assured an outcome except computers lose stuff.
3) Using it as a suitable teaching and learning device
Sewing machine and pencils have this history don’t they? They also have an associated pedagogy of teaching fundamental techniques using defined patterns. Even free drawing or hand sewing. I think this has to do with clarity of outcome, clarity of the activity being engaging and clarity of teaching the technique. Ok we can drop a needle and its difficult to re thread, break a pencil etc so there are established ways of dealing with that.
So really the problems are these:
1. The device itself needs to be appealing and have an obvious use, expressive range and history of metaphor of association.
2. Device has to have ways of fixing it that are established and obvious
3. Teachers need to be secure in knowing it will produce a desired outcome, have simple strategies to fix it if it breaks and be a familiar metaphor so they feel in control of it and the children’s use of it. The power thing is important despite our constructionist ideas about self-motivation. 90% of Teachers don’t know how to let students go, nor do they trust it when they do even if it works with one class. Security of control is everything for them. I don’t think we can change this behaviour!!!!!! How can we work with it without resorting to drill and practice design? I think the secret is about the qualities of computing that enable control and accountability. That’s how the Blackboard people sell their stuff: a) it uses a metaphor that’s recognizable b) it assures control and accountability- pity its crap and doesn’t work. The selling point is fine though how do we do it better?
Ok rant over LOL Regards Steve:-)
Reality check - this from a strident critic of the OLPC project as it
now stand, who used to work for it and did see it meeting its rhetoric.
"There are three key problems in one-to-one computer programs:
choosing a suitable device, getting it to children, and using it to
create sustainable learning and teaching experiences. They're listed
in order of exponentially increasing difficulty . . . As for the last
key problem, transforming laptops into learning is a non-trivial leap
of logic, and one that remains inadequately explained. No, we don't
know that it'll work, especially not without teachers. And that's okay
— the way to find out whether it works might well be by trying . . .
As far as I know, there is no real study anywhere that demonstrates
constructionism works at scale. There is no documented moderate-scale
constructionist learning pilot that has been convincingly successful;
when Nicholas points to "decades of work by Seymour Papert, Alan Kay,
and Jean Piaget", he's talking about theory."
Source: http://radian.org/notebook/sic-transit-gloria-laptopi
Ring true more broadly I think, we need to have an answer for the
network jamming project so we can succeed where MIT Media Lab failed
(a few times if you count Logo s well - to be skeptical for a moment).
Response
Just thinking in a more Heideggerian/Piagetian way about the laptop. When Bridie encounters other technologies in her life where she makes things for example:
Sewing machine
Machine presents itself as being focused on sewing fabric.
Intrinsic pleasure of making something aesthetically pleasing to you and perhaps useful.
Bridie had lessons on how to cut patterns set up the machine and sew total 2 x 6 hours training from a dress designer.
Now she uses the same patterns and makes dresses and tops for her friends within the boundaries of the patterns offered self directed. She also mixes tops and bottoms up to be creative within the pattern book limitations. She has not reached the point of needing or wanting more patterns as the range of basic styles and endless amount of fabric designs are sufficient at this stage. Also she hasn’t a need for more technique just yet either.
Techniques: measuring, cutting out, sewing maintenance, unpicking, different fabric settings and stitches.
Coloured Pencils
Pencils present themselves as a technology with an embedded history of practice in childhood and adulthood.
Not obvious tho’ what they are used for to a Martian maybe???? Or a 2 year old until shown the basic functions and introduced to paper. Some creative children use other surfaces i.e. walls. Intrinsic pleasure of gesture resulting in colour and shape.
Relationship with pencils grows over time between functional representation and aesthetic. At the root is still the intrinsic pleasure of making something that is aesthetic or functional or both.
Some we learn thru instruction others thru exploring (modes of engagement).
Bridie combines sewing machine ideas with drawing ideas as she has an image of herself as a fashion designer and draws and copies dress designs. Her handwriting reached a functional level but is not as advanced as her free form thinking with pencils. Perhaps teacher/school judgment had an influence there.
Macbook
Presents itself as open but having known desirable functions: iTunes, MSN, iMovie, DVD player, email (only a bit more direct real time communication seems more important). Word processing, drawing programs only to assemble stuff (hand drawing is more immediate and organic), the internet/ firefox browser is the most used function by far. Used for information latest Simpson’s online- immediacy is important. Didn’t get into scratch doesn’t really engage with jam2jam.
So using a limited example of one privileged child
1) Choosing a suitable device.
To an extent she does the choosing and then sustainability of engagement depends on expressive range and success. I think in personal social and cultural ways. It is because she can get off on it solo doing it with friends and share the product with friends. Even though’ I chose the laptop she chooses which functions are important and she will use mainly because of the relational aspects of it.
2) Getting it to children.
Well that was my choice after seeing how bad school choice was I decide to get a playground that suited my daughters personality and needs. We choose computers in institutions without asking children all the time. Bride wanted a macbook and chose a black one. At primary school she was only taught powerpoint because that’s all the teachers knew how to use. She does however use powerpoint quite well and creatively. Maybe that’s an angle we can use in the idea of generative performance. Frightening I know.
So the getting it to children is economic on one hand and about familiarity for teachers on the other. Teachers do teach sewing and drawing because of a history of it. Powerpoint is a slide metaphor that is familiar so behaviour is modified and mediated not changed and expectation is almost assured an outcome except computers lose stuff.
3) Using it as a suitable teaching and learning device
Sewing machine and pencils have this history don’t they? They also have an associated pedagogy of teaching fundamental techniques using defined patterns. Even free drawing or hand sewing. I think this has to do with clarity of outcome, clarity of the activity being engaging and clarity of teaching the technique. Ok we can drop a needle and its difficult to re thread, break a pencil etc so there are established ways of dealing with that.
So really the problems are these:
1. The device itself needs to be appealing and have an obvious use, expressive range and history of metaphor of association.
2. Device has to have ways of fixing it that are established and obvious
3. Teachers need to be secure in knowing it will produce a desired outcome, have simple strategies to fix it if it breaks and be a familiar metaphor so they feel in control of it and the children’s use of it. The power thing is important despite our constructionist ideas about self-motivation. 90% of Teachers don’t know how to let students go, nor do they trust it when they do even if it works with one class. Security of control is everything for them. I don’t think we can change this behaviour!!!!!! How can we work with it without resorting to drill and practice design? I think the secret is about the qualities of computing that enable control and accountability. That’s how the Blackboard people sell their stuff: a) it uses a metaphor that’s recognizable b) it assures control and accountability- pity its crap and doesn’t work. The selling point is fine though how do we do it better?
Ok rant over LOL Regards Steve:-)
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Steve Dillon on -
I have had another quite interesting insight about jam2jam and OLPC. Many non western cultures have aural/oral traditions for the storage and transfer of cultural knowledge. Computer systems are based on textual/numerical architectures. Certainly GUI interfaces use iconic means to organise and sort information but the book and library model is the metaphor for knowledge storage and transfer.
Lately we have been looking at jam2jam as software that could be used like a collaborative powerpoint presentation program where users put in their own pictures and videos and music midi files then perform them like DJ's and VJ's. This is a good real world metaphor for music/media studies.
A number of research locations however have begun to plan different kind of activities. One site is working on a 'Bullying' awareness project where students make posters and pictures around the idea of bullying in schools, discuss the approaches to it and the social justice issues and solutions. They then will make Rap's around the ideas and themes and use the mic input on jam2jam to record a series of presentations around the theme. They may also perform their best raps to a live audience.
SOSE teachers and digital storytelling producers at the state library have hinted at using jam2jam in that way also for children to construct multimedia diaries and create personal and group stories recorded using jam2jam to make the video. I could see it being used as an AV Blog diary too.
What is interesting about this is that it builds on the natural tendency to tell stories verbally with pictures and music and also access to both personal and social meaning. What is also interesting as was hinted at with our work with HITNET and Indigenous art was how naturally children and adults felt with the process. I think it is about time we learned from 40,000 year history of managing important cultural knowledge in relational, situated ways through multi media symbolic forms. To do so we do need to shift the focus of the architecture of computing more and more towards symbol systems being at the centre not text metaphors. OLPC has been forced to do that to an extent by encountering multiple language systems of users. Focusing on audio visual symbol systems however suggests that audio recording and visual recording enables immediate artefacts of the knowledge in a more immediate form without the need for translation in the language sense. The openness of such a system has many affordances. I am aware that the artefact has limitations and the absence of presence ( relational) systems is a problem in the transfer of this metaphor but the positive ideas that are presented in this are worth exploring with jam2jam on both OLPC and in the Mac environment.
About
Photos
Badge
© 2009 Created by Steve Dillon on Ning. Create Your Own Social Network
