Scratch

There's always a problem with something like this,
You have to be very precise about how to get up levels,
I am a person who just loves to 'dive in' and have to work everything out, I would hate, because of my age (11) or my personal ability at programing, but that's me. Others really can't be bothered working through levels and it would be a whole new cause form of cyber bullying. I believe that this will never work
Sorry
Toasty

Last edited by Toasty (2008-03-09 14:42:23)

Fair enough, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. BUT, let's not forget that we all have different learning styles and different ways of learning.  To put it another way, what works for me as a learner may not necessarily work for Toasty and kevin_karplus and what works for them may not necessarily be true for me. Anyone who has got a fair amount of teaching experience - I've got 10 years - will agree with that.

Right then, here are three examples that I've just come up with in order to support my original 'graded Scratch' argument:

1. Assuming you know how to cook (no irony intended as I know tons of people who don't even know how to make rice or fry an egg), how would you go about teaching someone how to cook? Would you go for a simple and seasonal fruit salad OR a far more complicated recipe, such as boeuf bourguignon and perhaps served with rice and noodle pilaf with toasted almonds? Would you go for the latter recipe? Really? Surely you wouldn't expect your poor student to just "'dive in' and ...work everything out" (Toasty) for himself? Hmm... 

2. Assuming you know how to play a musical instrument (again, no irony intended), how would you go about teaching someone how to play the piano?
Would you either and first of all teach him/her some basic music theory, how to read music and play a straightforward piece with separate hands OR would you expect your poor student to just "'dive in'…and work everything out" (Toasty) for himself and learn how to play one of Beethoven's masterpieces, such as his Moonlight Sonata? Hmm...

3. Assuming you have young children, how would you go about instilling a love for reading in your children? Which titles would you pick? Certainly not a lengthy novel written by Hemingway, Hesse or Kafka but perhasp several short stories full of color and containing words, phrases, structures and sounds (phonics) that match their developmental stage? Hmm…

Last edited by kpmichelsen (2008-03-11 16:49:42)

kpmichelsen wrote:

Right then, here are three examples that I've just come up with in order to support my original 'graded Scratch' argument:

The difference is that you can quite easily put together working projects in scratch ven if you don't know what everything does, by ignoring anything that isn't intuitive.

A better comparison to your cookery one would be whether or not to provide a fully stocked kitchen or not.  You can provide a kitchen with cupboads full of ingredients, and it does not stop the hungry from just grabbing the bread and cheese and making a sandwich.  And maybe they will see the pickle on the counter and decide to add that too.  They might also spot the grill and realise they can have a grilled cheese sandwich, or see all the other ingredients and set out to learn something more about them froma good cook-book.

They won't do that if all you provide them with is the bread and cheese.

*************

Anecdotal evidence also suggests that students continue to engage with scrach even if they are not fully aware of what they are doing.   Unlike conventional typed programing languages, Scratch is extremely forgiving of trial and error.


Cooking, less so 

There was a reference to typed programming langauges.  There should be a way to convert scratch into a more type-able programming languages for people who need more advanced mathematics for their projects.  Also, it might simple easier just to type "forever instead of getting the actual block and doing a lot of mousing.  In microsoft word, for example, there  are shortcuts  for virtually everything.  Why not in scratch?  We can still retain the mousing abilties, because of simplicity, and that beginneers may get many syntax errors.

I think you've got a good and valid point there, kpmichelsen, especially for traditional methods of teaching in a school classroom. However, I personally find it much more motivating and intellectually stimulating to explore and discover a safe environment on my own than being spoon fed with pre-digested knowledge-bites at the speed of the slowest class member.

To me, Scratch is less like a kitchen, and more of a well equipped sandbox. It gives you all kinds of shovels, buckets, moulds and water to dig tunnels and pile up castles. You can't wander off too far, because the walls are wide but secure. You can't do any harm, because there's only sand to manipulate. And while someone might start digging with their bare hands others might just as well start with a shovel right away, whereas more creative or daring ones might discover that can even (ab-)use a mould for digging.

I'm not a children's instructor myself (I only teach adults, and not full-time), but I do belive that the satisfaction that comes out of mastering a problem or implementing a design on one's own is a much stronger learning experience and imprints that lesson much deeper into memory than anything a teacher can convey. So I think it's really all about motivation and less about methodology. In that respect I'd hate to see Scratch being broken up into didactical digestible bites. Just my 2c.

I disagree. It's pointless to make 4-5 versions of Scratch, when everything it offers is already on the main version. As some ppl have probably already stated, Why can't "newbies" just use features they understand? If anything, we don't need to separate scratch by level, we need to set up some sort of tutoring program for newbies, taught by "masters". Just some more Food for Thought