Re: a little help for my master ;)
Locked
Re: a little help for my master ;)
 
|
Bruno,
Excellent question. I have run into the same problem where a child will draw a complete scene with many objects (for example two fish, some plants and bubbles) to create a fish tank all in one "Etoys object". Then they want to make the fish move, but the script moves the whole "fish tank." So in this case the "Etoys object" is the drawing of the tank or the tanks "costume" to use the Etoys specific term. But in the child's mind they are separate objects, that she simply drew all at once.
Let me try and give some definitions from an Etoys perspective (hopefully folks will chime in and make corrections as necessary): So from an "Etoys perspective" an Object is "Costume" and optionally a set of scripts and variables to manipulate that object. The "Costume" is the what is displayed on the screen. So when you "Paint" an Object using the "Paint tool" you are creating the "Costume" of a single "Etoys Object.
How an Etoys object maps to the mental models inside the child's mind is a good question. So lets say a child paints a single Costume for an Etoys object that has two fish. To the child there are two fish (and a tank, plants, etc.) but they experience Cognitive Dissonance if they try to make the fish move. I say if, because they may not care to make the fish move. Now if they try to make the fish move, but can't figure out how or better yet, try the <forward b> tile and the whole tank moves, they get frustrated. Frustration is a good thing (in my opiniion) and to be celebrated in class, because it means something doesn't match between the child's mental model and the way things work (which in this case is the way they work in the world of Etoys). I am always interested in how to create Cognitive Dissonance and try to design a lesson to increase the likely hood of this happening. I will also try to understand children's mental models and then find a situation where their mental model will break and present it to them as a problem. The challenge is creating an environment where this is celebrated and the child congratulated for finding a situation where their mental model doesn't match the "world" whether that be our physical world or the Etoys world. Unfortunately most children are taught to avoid situations where they are wrong, rather than to search them out and see them as opportunities to learn.
Now in regards to your central question "create things that work separatly and program them, step-by-step." One way to think about this is to think about the "ladder of abstraction" (see Brian Harvey's explanation of this here). Brian explains the different levels of abstraction in discussing driving a car. This is good for thinking about the different level of thinking about things and what are the useful abstractions depending on whether you are driving the car or perhaps designing a part of the car and what level of abstraction is appropriate and useful.
Bret Victor's Up and Down the Ladder of Abstraction is another excellent resource. It could be used with and to expand upon the Etoy's Challenge. Brett (to me at least,
talks not just about "The Ladder of Abstraction" but how do use wonderful visualizations and techniques (such as small multiples and graphing the time dimenstion)
allowing the user to step through the algorithm visually at their own pace and ways to see the effects of changes in variables on the algorithm. I seem to recall some things from Society of the Mind that could apply, but can't find my copy at the moment.
Hope this helps, Stephen P.S. As per an email from Alan Kay here:
While "object only able to communicate with messages" does happen in Etoys this is a bit "under the covers" and not as visible as it is in the Scratch model where they use broadcast and receive tiles to allow objects to communicate. Although I would think using Tests is also a way that objects "communicate" using <color sees> and <overlaps> tiles and then interacting with the mouse using other tiles.
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 2:25 PM, Bruno Sperb <[hidden email]> wrote:
_______________________________________________ squeakland mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.squeakland.org/mailman/listinfo/squeakland |
Re: a little help for my master ;)
|
|
Dear Bruno, In my understanding, objects are representations, therefore abstractions, of phenomenas we are trying to model and simulate. Modeling can be achieved without computers, like when you write a mathematical equation. But simulations are very hard, when not impossible, to achieve without computers. This ability of computers to allow the construction of dynamic models of phenomenas, and to translate the results in different forms of representation/visualization is what differentiated it from other medias, like paper and pencil. This allow us, humans, to have totally different points of view of the phenomenas we are struggling to understand, being them our home budget or our universe. It is possible to building models and simulations with other programming paradigms, such as procedural or functional programming. However object oriented programming is usually "easier to learn" because it builds upon our physical experience to construct abstract models, in a similar strategy with the one of LOGO, but in a very different way. After a certain age, we become used to deal with ideas of whole, parts, and interconnection of parts from our own life. So when we model a certain phenomena (whole), it's most of the time easier for us, and for kids, to think of them in terms of its parts (objects) and their relationships. It's also important that as we move through the "ladder of abstraction", that many parts are subdivided in subparts, with their own set of relationships. The chapter of Society of Mind that Steve mentioned is "Parts and Wholes" and talks about these ideas. Regarding the challenge of kids drawing whole scenes in the "world", there are two parts of it. First is that etoys builds upon drawing as a starting point for modeling. Drawing is a static representation of the world, which is usually done on a single canvas and that most kids have a lot of experience with. My hypothesis is that children might fixate on the static aspects of the phenomena when they start with drawing. Scratch chooses the metaphor of theater, which is more dynamic, and might be an easier way to focus on the dynamics elements of the phenomena. Secondly, it's not a bad thing that kids start seeing things as wholes and than start to perceive its parts and the relationships of them. Piaget used this same criteria when he was comparing how complex where concepts of different kids about the same phenomena. If we put this difficulty in the perspective of children using etoys and other languages through their school life, this is a minor obstacle that is usually quickly overcome. It can also by mitigated with some strategies of how to introduce etoys. In my point of view, the major issues I've faced using etoys with kids were with the "low ceiling" instead of the "high floor". Best, Juliano On 20/02/2013, at 00:52, Steve Thomas <[hidden email]> wrote: > Bruno, > > Excellent question. I have run into the same problem where a child will draw a complete scene with many objects (for example two fish, some plants and bubbles) to create a fish tank all in one "Etoys object". Then they want to make the fish move, but the script moves the whole "fish tank." So in this case the "Etoys object" is the drawing of the tank or the tanks "costume" to use the Etoys specific term. But in the child's mind they are separate objects, that she simply drew all at once. > > Let me try and give some definitions from an Etoys perspective (hopefully folks will chime in and make corrections as necessary): > So from an "Etoys perspective" an Object is "Costume" and optionally a set of scripts and variables to manipulate that object. The "Costume" is the what is displayed on the screen. So when you "Paint" an Object using the "Paint tool" you are creating the "Costume" of a single "Etoys Object. > > How an Etoys object maps to the mental models inside the child's mind is a good question. So lets say a child paints a single Costume for an Etoys object that has two fish. To the child there are two fish (and a tank, plants, etc.) but they experience Cognitive Dissonance if they try to make the fish move. I say if, because they may not care to make the fish move. Now if they try to make the fish move, but can't figure out how or better yet, try the <forward b> tile and the whole tank moves, they get frustrated. Frustration is a good thing (in my opiniion) and to be celebrated in class, because it means something doesn't match between the child's mental model and the way things work (which in this case is the way they work in the world of Etoys). I am always interested in how to create Cognitive Dissonance and try to design a lesson to increase the likely hood of this happening. I will also try to understand children's mental models and then find a situation where their mental model will break and present it to them as a problem. The challenge is creating an environment where this is celebrated and the child congratulated for finding a situation where their mental model doesn't match the "world" whether that be our physical world or the Etoys world. Unfortunately most children are taught to avoid situations where they are wrong, rather than to search them out and see them as opportunities to learn. > > Now in regards to your central question "create things that work separatly and program them, step-by-step." > One way to think about this is to think about the "ladder of abstraction" (see Brian Harvey's explanation of this here). Brian explains the different levels of abstraction in discussing driving a car. This is good for thinking about the different level of thinking about things and what are the useful abstractions depending on whether you are driving the car or perhaps designing a part of the car and what level of abstraction is appropriate and useful. > > Bret Victor's Up and Down the Ladder of Abstraction is another excellent resource. It could be used with and to expand upon the Etoy's Challenge. Brett (to me at least, > talks not just about "The Ladder of Abstraction" but how do use wonderful visualizations and techniques (such as small multiples and graphing the time dimenstion) > allowing the user to step through the algorithm visually at their own pace and ways to see the effects of changes in variables on the algorithm. > > I seem to recall some things from Society of the Mind that could apply, but can't find my copy at the moment. > > Hope this helps, > Stephen > > P.S. As per an email from Alan Kay here: > I thought of objects being like biological cells and/or individual > computers on a network, only able to communicate with messages (so > messaging came at the very beginning > While "object only able to communicate with messages" does happen in Etoys this is a bit "under the covers" and not as visible as it is in the Scratch model where they use broadcast and receive tiles to allow objects to communicate. Although I would think using Tests is also a way that objects "communicate" using <color sees> and <overlaps> tiles and then interacting with the mouse using other tiles. > > On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 2:25 PM, Bruno Sperb <[hidden email]> wrote: > Hi all, > > as studying for my master degree, Im trying to explain as accuratly as I can the ideas that are behind Etoys. Its funny how hard it is to explain something when you are working with it involved with it... > As a psychologist (doing a master degree in psychology department ;)), what im trying to do is to show the theory behind Etoys to people who dont know almost nothing about it. > It could sound a strange task, but what Im trying now is to explain to people the notion of "object". Then, I wonder: > What is an object in Etoys, how could we define an object? > Maybe I should better explain this. For example: while working with 8,9,10 years old children here, a curious thing im seeing is that the notion of an object (as an independent thing, that belongs to a world - wich is also an object- but works independently from it, that has its features, handles, functions, etc) is not a given thing for them. For example, even many times later then Ive shown it and explained it, children could still be drawing many things together, just to "keep" them and realize (frustrated, sometimes) they come as the same object. Of course it depends on the kid, but it could take some time after they start realizing it and creating them separatly... And even after that, I think this is a central question working on Etoys: create things that work separatly and program them, step-by-step. > Children (and this goes to many adults as well) start thinking all together, like a big idea, and to realize that programming require thinking in levels, or steps, is a major idea of the thing... > Maybe (hope not!) im being a bit confusing, but i was just wondering if you guys have some ideas of papers, researches, etc that explain or talk about these ideas, or how Etoys was thought (if was) related to the notion of object. > > all the best, > > Bruno > > > > Em 27/09/2012 12:38, Rita Freudenberg escreveu: >> Dear educators, >> >> I'm sorry but I'm stuck in the office with a print job that might take another hour and I'll not make it for our meeting in time. I'll try to start a hangout at 1 pm EDT / 10 am PDT, I hope to see you then! >> >> Greetings, >> Rita >> >> Rita Freudenberg >> [hidden email] >> >> >> >> -- >> Unless this email contains personal or other matters that need to be kept confidential, a >> PLEASE CONSIDER: Moving/Posting your questions and discussions to the [hidden email] mailing list. This will allow a wider range of folks to have input on and understand what we are doing. >> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> Groups "Etoys Education Team" group. >> To post to this group, send email to >> [hidden email] >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> [hidden email] >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/etoys-education-team?hl=en > > > -- > -- > Unless this email contains personal or other matters that need to be kept confidential, a > PLEASE CONSIDER: Moving/Posting your questions and discussions to the [hidden email] mailing list. This will allow a wider range of folks to have input on and understand what we are doing. > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Etoys Education Team" group. > To post to this group, send email to > [hidden email] > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [hidden email] > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/etoys-education-team?hl=en > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Etoys Education Team" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [hidden email]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > > _______________________________________________ > squeakland mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.squeakland.org/mailman/listinfo/squeakland _______________________________________________ squeakland mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.squeakland.org/mailman/listinfo/squeakland |
Re: a little help for my master ;)
|
|
In reply to this post by Steve Thomas
The Etoys drawing tool takes a little getting used to. Since the background defaults to transparent the parts you draw seems separated but are still one picture. I see no obvious way around learning the hard way to think about making the different parts and assemble the pieces on a stage.
There are tools to copy parts of drawings; the lasso and the grab patch tools. The Scratch way is maybe a little more obvious since it's a little more clear that you are making small parts to put on the stage.
The Etoys approach has always been authoring on everywhere, and it can be approached in many ways. There are many stumbling blocks and it can be really frustrating to get results. But there are also much flexibility and many project one can do with surprising ease.
Karl On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 4:52 AM, Steve Thomas <[hidden email]> wrote: Bruno, _______________________________________________ squeakland mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.squeakland.org/mailman/listinfo/squeakland |
«
Return to SqueakLand
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |